PDA

View Full Version : New NHL economy, same old Bruins (writer calls out Jacobs)


swflyers25
8-26-05, 7:29 PM
Shawn P. Roarke / Special to FOXSports.com
Posted: 5 hours ago

Suddenly, Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs is a big spender.

After years of playing it close to the vest and keeping salaries reined in, Jacobs has allowed his general manager, Mike O'Connell, to tread very close to the $39 million salary cap dictated by the recently ratified CBA.

For a man that has spent the better part of a decade being vilified by fans for his penurious ways and absentee landlordship of one of the sport's marquee franchises, Jacobs believes this mere fact entitles him to a huge round of applause from the club's supporters.

He wants the fans to forget that he is merely playing by the rules he himself brought into being. Because, let's not forget, Jacobs was one of the biggest hawks among the owners, insisting that salaries be brought under control across the National Hockey League ? no matter the cost. After more than 300 days of NHL darkness, the owners achieved their goal of having a revenue-based salary cap in place to limit the cost of obtaining and holding onto players.

A well-supported, big-market team with an up-to-date arena and a good cable TV package, the Bruins can afford to dole out $39 million in salary without even coming close to affecting the franchise's ability to turn a profit under the new system. And Boston fans, for the most part, are smart enough to understand all of this. After all, they have been conditioned to watching star players leave the franchise over money issues and playoff pushes submarined by management's unwillingness to take on salary at the trade deadline even though it appeared economically feasible.

Yet, Jacobs appears to think that a few dollars splashed at a handful of players this summer in a controlled environment ? designed to limit the risk of economic loss ? is enough to forgive the sins of the past.

Perhaps it would be if the team had gone out and locked up the premier free-agent talent on the market, but they have not even come close to doing that.

Sure, the team somehow signed franchise center Joe Thornton to a long-term deal, which was a necessity, but also appeared unlikely after the front office questioned the big center's fortitude during last year's playoffs. O'Connell also got a number of the team's other free agents, headlined by Glen Murray, under contract. But, as far as marquee imports, there are still huge questions about what has been brought into the fold.

Center Alexei Zhamnov was brought in to pair with Thornton and give the Bruins a bonafide 1-2 punch at center. Thursday's articles dealing with Jacobs comments suggested that Bruins owner believes that Zhamnov, because of his durability, may well be a better acquisition that Philadelphia's signing of Peter Forsberg.

For the record, Zhamnov has missed more than 20 percent of a season four times in his 12-year career and played just 43 regular-season games last year. Forsberg, considered by many to be the best center of his generation, has played at least 80 percent of the season in seven of the 10 years he has been in the league.

And, by the way, Forsberg has two Stanley Cup titles, a Hart Trophy and 133 postseason games on his resume. Zhamnov? Thirty-five playoff games, more than half of which came during last year's run with the Flyers to the Eastern Conference Finals.

Then there is defenseman Brian Leetch, brought in as the big-ticket addition on the blue line. In his prime, Leetch was among the best puck-moving defenseman the game has ever seen. But, at 37, Leetch is no longer in his prime. It would be tough to argue, in fact, that he was among the top five defensemen on the market this summer. And, a clear, and concise, argument can be made that he is not worth the $4 million the Bruins will pay him this season.

Then there are the acquisitions of Dave Scatchard, Brad Isbister (obtained in a trade with Edmonton) and Shawn McEachren ? all fine players, but lacking the credentials to set them apart from the vast majority of middle-of-the-road free agents that flooded the market.

Jacobs also admitted in his comments that he has been surprised at how volatile the free-agent market has been so far, but says he was willing to meet higher-than-expected salary demands of targeted players because he wants to make Boston a winner. He went so far as to say that he may well have sold the team's short-term future for success out of the chute.

Star forward Sergei Samsonov signed a one-year deal and will be an unrestricted free agent next year. Current restricted free agents like goalie Andrew Raycroft and defensemen Hal Gill and Nick Boynton, meanwhile, are unlikely to get multi-year deals as ownership has already committed as much money as they are comfortable with without knowing where the revenue-tied cap will stand going forward.

''We may well be negatively impacted," Jacobs said in Thursday's edition of the Boston Globe. ''We're near the top (of the cap), and that is a position we find ourselves in because of the market. Depending on how this goes on, we may not be nearly as flexible as we'd hoped to be after this year. We may have committed a lot more this year than we should have.

"A lot of other teams laid back and didn't do anything. You can't do that in Boston. You can't do that in Philadelphia. They expect a lot from us."

In reality, Boston fans have come to expect very little recently from their ownership.

There is no doubt that Boston and Philadelphia are great hockey towns, perhaps two of the best among American cities. But for Jacobs to compare his franchise to that of the Flyers is pure folly.

Philadelphia owner Ed Snider and GM Bobby Clark have been nothing but aggressive, often to a detrimental extreme, in their quest to win the franchise's first Stanley Cup since 1975.

Bruins ownership, meanwhile, has stuck blindly to a conservative course, no matter the circumstances. In fact, the team's unwillingness to allocate resources to make a legitimate run at the franchise's first Stanley Cup since 1972 was the main reason legendary defenseman Ray Bourque forced his way out of town not too long ago.

With a cap in place, Jacobs proudly and loudly says he is willing to go toe-to-toe financially with any of his fellow owners in the pursuit of a title. Now, if he could just learn to spend his money a little more quietly and less pompously, Bruins fans might truly have reason to finally celebrate.

Fox (http://msn.foxsports.com/nhl/story/4813184)

Mel
8-26-05, 8:52 PM
Jacobs was a shmuck before and he's a shmuck now. I don't pay much heed to what he says to reporters... but I'm looking forward to watching Boston this season. They still have Thornton and Murray. Andrew Raycroft looks like the real deal. Being a Ranger fan, I love to watch Brian Leetch - even way past his prime. I'm also a big Scatchard fan.... why I'm not really sure, I've just always admired his gritty game, even on the Islanders.

Throw Zhamnov in the mix, and don't forget Samsonov and Patrice Bergeron... They have a lot of assets. I can't wait to watch them on Center Ice.

On the other hand, I don't want them winning the Stanley Cup either! The Patriots have a dynasty going... the Red Sox won last year. Between that and the fact that the Bruins do about 80% attendance... Boston doesn't deserve a cup !!! :)

Amoroq
8-30-05, 11:07 AM
More on Jaccobs, here (http://hockeyrumors.blogspot.com/). Its the second story down at the moment. Yes, its Eklunds site but it was not written by Eklund, and over the past few days he has added a fine bunch of writers for his new site.

But I still refuse to pay for it ;)

KB in Kelowna
3-26-06, 3:57 PM
I thought I would post here rather than create a new thread. As we head into the stretch run of the season I find it mildly amusing that two of the teams with most conservative and tight fisted ownership under the old CBA are both out of the playoffs, namely Boston and Chicago. Both Wirtz and Jacobs used to bemoan the escalation of player salaries and despite owning storied franchises in big markets,where their teams were top attractions 25-35 years ago, and playing in relatively new state of the art buildongs, complained that could not make any money. Now in a more level playing feild of the CBA, their teams are not competative. Why? Well I think it is their reliance on cronyism and yes men in thier key hockey operations departments. Harry Sinden and Mike O'Connell (until yesterday) in Bean town and Bob Pulford and Dale Talon in Chicago. In Boston they went into the lockout with only 5 players under contract, and in some anti-union quarters were applauded for thier hardline, but after the settlement had only 2 weeks to put together a team. In Chicago Wirtz has admitted they underestimated the impact of the new rules and obstruction crackdown. Meanwhile previous free spending villans of the old era New York Rangers, Detroit and to a lesser extent Philadelphia, made shrewd decisions on who to resign, who to buy out, and who to bring in from thier farm teasm which were well stocked due to thier earlier investemts in scouting and player development. In fact if the Wings win the Presidents Trophy Ken Holland might get Executive of the Year honours. It pains me to write this praise for Bob Clarke and Glen Sather, but they did their jobs well. Will Sinden and Pulford still have thier jobs and influence this time next year, probably and both thier teams may well be on the outside looking in at the playoffs races.