Rich

If you prorate out their current win / loss record at home and on the road for the rest of the season (they've been .647 at home and a horrible .333 on the road) it gets you to 40-36-6 or 86 points.

Last evening the website was down again. Apparently we had another hiccup with the hosting provider at the same time as the site was rebuilding its cache which corrupted it. I've been prepping the site on a new host and will be migrating over to it tonight. Getting real tired of these outages. Once the site is down and migrated, it may take up to 24 hours (it will likely be a lot less) for the internet to update itself and point to the new server.

If you are looking strictly as points... Tyson Barrie (28 points) vs. Buff 23 points) Then you take Wheeler (40 points) over Duchene (34 points)

Maybe Philly is clearing space to trade for Buff.

All the off field promotions, game day experience, etc, all fall to him to oversee. Part of his job is also to hire the right people to improve the team. As CEO, he does the hiring and firing of the GM. So if the GM is doing a bad job, he made a poor hiring choice. Typically A CEO (and a GM) will get a couple of cracks at hiring the right person if things don't turn out right away unless they are doing an absolute awful job in other areas as well, Walters was his first hire. If next season is a disaster, O'Shea will go for sure. Then Wade has to decide if Walters gets a 2nd chance at hiring a head coach. If Walters is also fired, I believe Wade will get at least another shot at hiring a new GM. If the Bombers are a non play-off team next year with a sub .500 record and Wade decides to keep Walters, it will be interesting to see what the board will do.

What is interesting is of the top six you have here (Ray and Henry are on the wrong side of 30 and 40), their ages are Jennings (23), Mitchell (25), Collaros (27), Willy (29) , Harris (29), Reilly (30),

Depends which loan you are talking about. BBB Inc is basically made up of the Bombers, the City, the Province, and the University. The $4.5M per year that the Bombers have to pay will cover $85M (and the interest) of the original loan to build IGF. That was the deal and that is what the club is on the hook for. The extra interest because the club is only making partial payments for the first 3 years while they payoff the CIBC loan, the additional $40M loan to "fix" IGF (guaranteed by the province) and the remaining money borrowed to build IGF stays with BBB Inc. BBB Inc is to pay for the other half of the stadium and the extra costs accrued through a combination of government funding (provincial and city), the sale and development of the old stadium location and the property and sales tax from the businesses developed on the area over the next 40 years. They will also realize any monies recovered through the lawsuit on the stadium since they fronted the money to fix it. The other half that BBB Inc is on the hook for isn't going so well right now. With Target vacating their building and little to no other development in the area, additional interest accruing on that side of things because of the Bombers deferring payments due to the CIBC loan, and the addition $40M loan they had to take out. So will the Bombers be able to meet their debt requirements? My guess is they probably will. Will the other half be recovered as per the original plan? Questionable at this point but it was always going to be paid for by the government anyway.

This was in a FP article I believe, but it is a little misleading. This is the cost if you include all payments and interest over the 45 years of the mortgage payments. When people say how much they paid for a house, it is usually the principle they talk about, not how much interest they will have paid by the end of it But welcome to financing and interest. Also that $167M in interest charges is accrued over time, so when they are still paying it off in 20, 30, and 40 years time, their mortgage payment remains constant but the $4.5M they are paying a year now won't seem so bad with inflation of their revenues over time. It is not $400M in present value of money.

No one was banned. He politely asked for his account to be deleted, and it wasn't instigated by any moderator action. I gave him options to just not log in, ban his account but his preference was to be deleted, so I obliged. To preserve the continuity of discussions, when a member is deleted, their posts become attributed to guest.

Read the last post, this isn't an option anymore since the upgrade. It is 1 be default. If you want to quote more, highlight the text of a post and click the "quote this" pop up and all that you highlight will get quoted.

I believe you do

If you don't care why are you posting so much in this thread? The topic title is clear. If you don't care don't read. It is the off season. He is Bomber property. People are going to talk. Never understand the encouragement of not talking about something like this on a message board. This is why the message board is here. If you don't care move along to a topic you do care about. Let those who do care talk about it in peace.

Peverley was a decent centre in his day. Good face-off guy, very good 3rd line centre. Seeing as how Boston won the cup the year that trade took place, it wasn't all bad for Boston. But yes, Wheeler was definitely the best player in that trade. Peverley was a more experienced player for where Boston was at the time.

These are the weightings: 1 20.0% 2 13.5% 3 11.5% 4 9.5% 5 8.5% 6 7.5% 7 6.5% 8 6.0% 9 5.0% 10 3.5% 11 3.0% 12 2.5% 13 2.0% 14 1.0%

It is more complicated now because they randomly draw for the first 3 picks. Everyone's chances of getting the 1st overall hasn't changed from last year (20% chance for last place), but now the draw for the 2nd and 3rd overall picks as well so that changes things. Your odds on the 2nd and 3rd overall pick are dependant on who got the 1st overall pick (they factor in who got it and take them out of the equation). So the biggest change is if you are last in points, you can now drop to 4th overall if you are unlucky. Where as before the most you could drop is 2nd overall. But your chances at the first overall hasn't changed at all. If you had the picks of both the 2nd and 3rd last teams, your combined chance for the first overall would be 25% vs 20% for last overall.

That part struck me as odd because it was so out of place with the tone of the rest of the documentary. It made me realize that the way the story was depicted was to make him look innocent even though the makers claim they just presented facts. Either way, it was a very interesting story where life is stranger than fiction. And only the people involved really know what happened. I don't think anyone believes the cops actually killed the girl to frame Avery. If it was a frame job, someone killed the girl and the cops took advantage of the situation.

The one odd part that stood out to me was in one of the last episodes when they are interviewing his lawyers years after the fact. One of the lawyers says something to the effect of ... For everyone's sake he hopes and wants to believe that Steven was in fact guilty because if he wasn't then he would have problems sleeping if the justice system had failed him twice like that. Cant remember the exact words but the way he said it made it seem like there was doubt in his mind of his clients innocence. Now I know lawyers defend guilty people all the time, but the way the story was told, it seemed like there was no doubt it was a frame job. But that one statement made it seem like even his lawyer didn't know for sure, and a part of him suspected he was guilty.

Yes it was for a prospect who was a 1st round pick, a 1st round pick, and an early 2nd round pick prospect. Which, to the point of the original post, is you can get more then a 5th / 6th D-Man and a 3rd round pick for a disgruntled player who doesn't want to play for your team.

And Lemieux. Forgot about Lemieux.

You just said in that sentence that he isn't worth it, meaning you think his worth is Stuart and a 3rd. So how is that not what you said?

Even if you consider Bogo and Myers a wash (I'd still take Myers over Bogo), they still got Stafford, Armia (former 1st), and a 1st round pick. Which is certainly more than Stuart and a 3rd which is all he suggested that Drouin was worth since he asked for a trade.

Age doesn't mean that Chevy saw him as part of his "core" going forward. Look at the money he is going to have to dish out over the next 3 years to keep Scheifele and Trouba. Is Scheifele signs for 8 anbd Trouba bridges, then you have Frolik's contract expiring as Trouba gets his long term deal. Of course all speculation on our part.

I could see him wanting to commit to Frolik for only 2 - 3 years as the expectation some of the younger prospects would be stepping into bigger roles and higher salaries in that time frame. I believe this was also his rational for the shorter Stafford deal.

The deal is more confusing then just paying for the interest on the loan. When those articles start rolling all of those numbers together, they are including the interest that is accruing that the Bombers aren't responsible for, but are still attributable to the project in whole. From this article: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/bombers-to-repay-bank-loan-first-222634991.html So they made their payment last year, this year, and assuming they make their payment next year, the CIBC loan will be gone by the time they start making their mortgage payments on the stadium debt. All the interest that is accruing is going to be the government's problem already. The Bombers are on the hook for $80M of the stadium and aren't responsible for the interest that is accruing right now while they defer their payments. That interest goes to BBB Inc / government. As I understand that BBB Inc is responsible for managing both the Bombers debt and the government's debt (I believe they are also managing the Polo Park development to collect monies from there). The government's debt is supposed to be paid for by the sale / development / and taxes on the old stadium site. The lack of development in that area is hurting the mortgage payments on the other half of the loan that the Bombers aren't responsible for (this is where the interest is accruing to as well while the Bombers pay-off the CIBC loan). So the government is already going to have to eat half the loan unless they can kick the development of the Polo Park area into over drive. When these articles talk about an accrued debt of ~$240M, that is accurate for the stadium project as a whole, but this doesn't at all affect the $80M that the Bombers are responsible for paying off. The government is already going to have to eat those overages. This is also why the PCs talk about how complex this deal is and why they would look at stream lining it. People see this $240M in debt that keep getting thrown about in these articles and how will the club ever pay it. But the Bombers are still only responsible for paying their $80M. Us tax payers are already footing the rest. The other complexity rolled into that $240M is the $35M that had to be paid to fix the structural problems with the stadium. Right now BBB fronted that money (and that is attributing to the interest accrual). At some point though, that money may be recovered with the lawsuit (or it may not be and the tax payers will be on the hook for that as well)