Tim Thomas to play next year

LyndonByers

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
2,188
212
Bill, remember TT did give Chia his ok on a possability to trade him before july first?

Why would a team trade for a player who is not going to play? Going into a new CBA you would be dumb to trade for him for his caphit when you have no idea what the parameters of the new CBA will look like.

When Thomas stated he would sit out a year he basically destroyed his trade value as an asset to the Bruins. The Bruins probably would have had to add an asset in order to have a team acquire him at that point just to free up his caphit. With the new CBA looming it would have made no sense for the Bruins or any other team at that point to make that transaction.
 

Spooner st

Registered User
Jan 14, 2007
12,945
8,101
Why would a team trade for a player who is not going to play? Going into a new CBA you would be dumb to trade for him for his caphit when you have no idea what the parameters of the new CBA will look like.

When Thomas stated he would sit out a year he basically destroyed his trade value as an asset to the Bruins. The Bruins probably would have had to add an asset in order to have a team acquire him at that point just to free up his caphit. With the new CBA looming it would have made no sense for the Bruins or any other team at that point to make that transaction.


Teams would talk to TT\agent before offering a contract.

Just.let.go.
 

Dr Quincy

Registered User
Jun 19, 2005
29,351
11,643
Why would a team trade for a player who is not going to play? Going into a new CBA you would be dumb to trade for him for his caphit when you have no idea what the parameters of the new CBA will look like.

When Thomas stated he would sit out a year he basically destroyed his trade value as an asset to the Bruins. The Bruins probably would have had to add an asset in order to have a team acquire him at that point just to free up his caphit. With the new CBA looming it would have made no sense for the Bruins or any other team at that point to make that transaction.

But if his goal was to play somewhere else, why wouldn't he have just said nothing publicly, privately told the B's, "I won't play for you and I don't want to go to X. I will sit out for the year instead. However, I will play for Y. If you work out a deal there I'll report."

See, it makes no sense that Thomas said he wanted to sit out a year because he didn't want to play here but wanted to play somewhere else. You are right, he killed his trade value and kept himself from being sent to a place he wanted to go where he could be a starter.
If what he TRULY wanted was to be a starting goalie for a certain number of teams, he wouldn't have done the whole "I'm taking a year off to spend time with my family."
 

PlayMakers

Registered User
Aug 9, 2004
25,778
27,419
Medfield, MA
Bill, remember TT did give Chia his ok on a possability to trade him before july first?

Yeah I remember that, but that was after Thomas had already said he wasn't going to play the final year of his contract (and his NTC was lifting in a few weeks). The damage was done, they were never going to get value for that asset once Thomas said he was sitting out.
 

Mazzie

Registered User
Jan 19, 2006
868
0
Southwest Florida
It doesn't make any sense that Thomas would announce he was taking a year off to force a trade, or "send a message." The former kills kills your trade value, so you are basically guaranteeing that you won't be traded. The latter makes no sense because if he always intended to come back after a year, his value as a UFA takes a huge hit. I don't think any player would ever do that much damage to their value over sour grapes.

I really think he had some serious personal issues to deal with, and taking a year off was how he needed to handle it.
 

Spooner st

Registered User
Jan 14, 2007
12,945
8,101
Yeah I remember that, but that was after Thomas had already said he wasn't going to play the final year of his contract (and his NTC was lifting in a few weeks). The damage was done, they were never going to get value for that asset once Thomas said he was sitting out.

Still, it gave Chia a chance to move him before July first.
If TT really wanted pay back he could of make Chia's job much more difficult.
 

Confound

Vindication
Oct 28, 2010
17,794
1
Maine
Does Thomas's cap hit still count against our cap even if he is suspended?

What about if he retires, then we would really be ****ed from the 35+ in the last CBA.
 

Artemis

Took the red pill
Dec 8, 2010
20,860
2
Mount Olympus
Thanks GW.

I thought it was right, just wanted to make sure. Just gotta hope there's a buyer for him just so we don't have is cap on the books.

The (prorated) cap for the rest of the season is $70 million. Even with the Thomas contract, the Bruins are well below it. It's a non-issue.
 

LouJersey

Registered User
Jun 29, 2002
69,333
45,537
At the Cross
youtu.be
The (prorated) cap for the rest of the season is $70 million. Even with the Thomas contract, the Bruins are well below it. It's a non-issue.

Add that to Savard's 4 mil still on the books and that's 9 mil of used cap money on nothing...That's a pretty big issue for this season IMO.
 

Artemis

Took the red pill
Dec 8, 2010
20,860
2
Mount Olympus
Add that to Savard's 4 mil still on the books and that's 9 mil of used cap money on nothing...That's a pretty big issue for this season IMO.

They're well under $70 mil. If they have to, they can LTIR Savard, though they probably won't have to do that. If they want to trade the farm for Ilya Kovalchuk they might have a problem, but I kind of doubt that's happening.
 

JoeIsAStud

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 27, 2002
12,674
7,180
Visit site
Add that to Savard's 4 mil still on the books and that's 9 mil of used cap money on nothing...That's a pretty big issue for this season IMO.

Except they could spend Savard's money if they need to.

And honestly it did certainly impact the way they put a team together last summer, but it has limited impact on what they could do today. If they need to make a deal where they aquire a big contract they can include thomas in the deal

And with the cap dropping some next year, and a lot the year after, Boston needs to be extremely careful with every dollar they add to the cap now
 

Budddy

Registered User
Dec 9, 2008
5,827
1,702
Okanagan
Probably wants to play in the Olympics, which is likely what he means by "play next year".

I have heard that before that he wants to play in the Olympics, USA has Quick/Miller and Schneider...puzzles why he would think he would have a chance to beat those guys after sitting out for a bit...
 

PatriceBergeronFan

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 15, 2011
61,557
40,224
USA
Crazy thought, but maybe he just wanted to take a year off.

I agree. People sure do like to jump on players without knowing the real details, like family situations and whatnot. Maybe Thomas wasn't lying when he listed his friends and family as a reason to take a year off?

This a thousand times over.

The bridge is burnt Timmy, so **** off
:help:

I'll always be rooting for Timmy, unless we are facing him in the playoffs. Then I'll just be worried about our chances of scoring more than a goal per game.
 

stick9

Registered User
Aug 12, 2004
10,084
1
Add that to Savard's 4 mil still on the books and that's 9 mil of used cap money on nothing...That's a pretty big issue for this season IMO.

Just me Lou, but I think this is the last year the Bruins carry Savard. They have some key players getting bumps and with Tuukka on a one year deal, somethings gotta give.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad