Ray77 Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 By golly, he HAS changed! Wild's Matt Cooke: I've changed And I'm with Oxbow on Ballard - no thanks.
Oxbow6 Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 And I'm with Oxbow on Ballard - no thanks. In pro sports with coaches being more disposable than players, pro coaches will put up with a lot BS from players if the player can actually PLAY! Winning is paramount and pro coaches know that and they generally don't sit players what will help them win on a nightly basis. Ballard didn't play regularly in Vancouver because he can't play. So the Wild have Cooke for Cullen and we have Ballard for Gilbert basically...not sure how that improves them one bit.
Goon Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 By golly, he HAS changed! Wild's Matt Cooke: I've changed And I'm with Oxbow on Ballard - no thanks. Oh goody, he's changed....
MafiaMan Posted July 9, 2013 Author Posted July 9, 2013 MafiaMan - were you eluding to Ballard about not having interest in coming back to Minnesota? I'd like to hear where you heard this or what is the reason for that? Yes, I was referring to Ballard...probably shouldn't have said 'plenty' of folks, but my sources are a couple of people within the U of M hockey program and someone with the Wild. None gave specifics but stated that he was not happy about returning to Minnesota.
Ray77 Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 Yes, I was referring to Ballard...probably shouldn't have said 'plenty' of folks, but my sources are a couple of people within the U of M hockey program and someone with the Wild. Interesting. I guess I was figuring he'd be very happy to come back to Minnesota. If you're from there, why wouldn't you? Too high expectations playing in front of the 'home' crowd? Also, if he didn't want to come here but chose to sign here, that tells you what options he had. I was more surprised that the Wild would want to sign him, but I suppose this was more of a money issue and they could get him cheaper than the alternatives. The Wild bought out Gilbert (good move) but then sign Ballard??? Gilbert had 1 year remaining @ $4M and they signed Ballard to a 2 year, $3M contract.
hrkac Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 I found it interesting that Clutterbuck got more money than Cooke. "Buttercup" is a fraud. 1
MafiaMan Posted July 9, 2013 Author Posted July 9, 2013 Interesting. I guess I was figuring he'd be very happy to come back to Minnesota. If you're from there, why wouldn't you? Too high expectations playing in front of the 'home' crowd? Also, if he didn't want to come here but chose to sign here, that tells you what options he had. I don't know...maybe that brand-new tax bracket that just went into effect? 1
Oxbow6 Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 I'll ask Parise what he thinks of all these moves on Friday!
fightingsioux4life Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 I don't know...maybe that brand-new tax bracket that just went into effect? Whatever the tax burden is in Minnesota now, it still can't be higher than what it was in Vancouver. And I am talking both Provincial and Federal.
MafiaMan Posted July 9, 2013 Author Posted July 9, 2013 Whatever the tax burden is in Minnesota now, it still can't be higher than what it was in Vancouver. And I am talking both Provincial and Federal. Legislation passed in May 2013 established a new personal income tax bracket. This new top tier applies a 9.85 percent rate to taxable income above: • $250,000 for married people who file a joint return, or qualifying widows(ers), • $125,000 for married people who file separate returns, • $200,000 for heads of households, and • $150,000 for single people. That's a pretty good chunk of change for Mr Ballard...
Oxbow6 Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 Legislation passed in May 2013 established a new personal income tax bracket. This new top tier applies a 9.85 percent rate to taxable income above: • $250,000 for married people who file a joint return, or qualifying widows(ers), • $125,000 for married people who file separate returns, • $200,000 for heads of households, and • $150,000 for single people. That's a pretty good chunk of change for Mr Ballard... Some would say it's the socialistic trickle down in effect.
UNDBIZ Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 Some would say it's the socialistic trickle down in effect. Readying popcorn for political thread drift.....
MafiaMan Posted July 9, 2013 Author Posted July 9, 2013 Readying popcorn for political thread drift..... Steering this back in the right direction...rumor is Keith just didn't like the dumb-a** Mankato green grass green, Iron Range Red, and Moorhead Wheat colors of the WIld jerseys...
Uncle_Rico Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Not going to start posting here regularly again Outstanding! 2
Blackheart Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Not going to start posting here regularly again, but I feel obligated to educate those who are uninformed and/or misinformed about what kind of player Matt Cooke is: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/sports/ron-cook/ron-cook-matt-cookes-departure-may-hurt-penguins-694647/ People who think Matt Cooke is a dirty player simply do not understand the game of hockey and how it is played. Ironically, some of those very same people are now appalled at the fact that Cooke is going to wear the same number that was once worn by Derek Boogard. A. We're talking about Derek Boogard, not Wayne Gretzky or Gordie Howe. B. Derek Boogard was the dirty player that so many people want to believe Matt Cooke is. People who condemn the way Cooke plays the game but at the same time praise the way Boogard played the game define idiocy. I don't care who you compare hin to; HIS actions throughout his career define the type of player he is...and watching the playoffs this year show that he is still willing to take cheap shots on defenseless players...maybe his volume of questionable plays has decreased over the past few seasons, but there is no way you can defend his goonery by comparing him to other players. 1
Popular Post Redneksioux Posted July 10, 2013 Popular Post Posted July 10, 2013 Maybe his plays don't look so dirty on a standard definition tv??? 5
UNDBIZ Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Maybe his plays don't look so dirty on a standard definition tv??? Well the one blur just ran into the other blur..... what's the problem?! I didn't see any head to head contact!
petey23 Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Not going to start posting here regularly again, but I feel obligated to educate those who are uninformed and/or misinformed about what kind of player Matt Cooke is: http://www.post-gaze...enguins-694647/ People who think Matt Cooke is a dirty player simply do not understand the game of hockey and how it is played. Ironically, some of those very same people are now appalled at the fact that Cooke is going to wear the same number that was once worn by Derek Boogard. A. We're talking about Derek Boogard, not Wayne Gretzky or Gordie Howe. B. Derek Boogard was the dirty player that so many people want to believe Matt Cooke is. People who condemn the way Cooke plays the game but at the same time praise the way Boogard played the game define idiocy. Thanks Dave......................I had forgotten how little you know about hockey. 2
Goon Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Thanks Dave......................I had forgotten how little you know about hockey. Yep, no dobut.
Ray77 Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Not going to start posting here regularly again, but I feel obligated to educate those who are uninformed and/or misinformed about what kind of player Matt Cooke is: http://www.post-gaze...enguins-694647/ People who think Matt Cooke is a dirty player simply do not understand the game of hockey and how it is played. Ironically, some of those very same people are now appalled at the fact that Cooke is going to wear the same number that was once worn by Derek Boogard. A. We're talking about Derek Boogard, not Wayne Gretzky or Gordie Howe. B. Derek Boogard was the dirty player that so many people want to believe Matt Cooke is. People who condemn the way Cooke plays the game but at the same time praise the way Boogard played the game define idiocy. I read this from Dave's article and immediately thought the reason they don't want to imagine playing Cooke 3 or 4 times next season is because they don't want to risk a career ending injury. Can you imagine if Cooke had pulled a Max Talbot and signed with the Philadelphia Flyers or some other division opponent? Penguins stars Sidney Crosby, Evgeni Malkin and Kris Letang don't want to imagine that. They don't want to think about having to play Cooke three or four times next season.
fightingsioux4life Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Legislation passed in May 2013 established a new personal income tax bracket. This new top tier applies a 9.85 percent rate to taxable income above: • $250,000 for married people who file a joint return, or qualifying widows(ers), • $125,000 for married people who file separate returns, • $200,000 for heads of households, and • $150,000 for single people. That's a pretty good chunk of change for Mr Ballard... I still maintain that comparing the United States and Canada is apples and oranges. Mr. Ballard is probably more concerned with playing time than this stuff. 1
Redneksioux Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 I still maintain that comparing the United States and Canada is apples and oranges. Mr. Ballard is probably more concerned with playing time than this stuff. Couldn't he just have a permanent residence in another state to avoid these taxes anyways?
Shawn-O Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Couldn't he just have a permanent residence in another state to avoid these taxes anyways? Professional athletes are taxed in the jurisdictions in which they play(usually 15 cities/states give or take for hockey)...so half his income would be earned in MN roughly. The Panthers gig was pretty sweet for him taxwise I'm sure.... 1
charliepic Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Legislation passed in May 2013 established a new personal income tax bracket. This new top tier applies a 9.85 percent rate to taxable income above: • $250,000 for married people who file a joint return, or qualifying widows(ers), • $125,000 for married people who file separate returns, • $200,000 for heads of households, and • $150,000 for single people. That's a pretty good chunk of change for Mr Ballard... Considering that the bottom 20% pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the top 15% do maybe this will equal out the playing field.
MafiaMan Posted July 11, 2013 Author Posted July 11, 2013 Considering that the bottom 20% pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the top 15% do maybe this will equal out the playing field. Welcome to the board, Governor Dayton. So a guy who will put almost $150,000 into the state coffers isn't paying nearly his 'fair share,' is he? After all, the top 1 percent of taxpayers in Minnesota only pay 24% of the total income tax collected in the state and the top 5% only pay 41% of the total income tax collected. Since I'm not in either category, that certainly doesn't seem fair that the remaining 95% of the population has to pay 59% of the total income tax collected, right? Maybe when the top 5% is paying 99% of the income tax in Minnesota, everyone will be happy. Only problem is, that 5% will be living across the border in Hudson, WI... But let's not get bogged down in political banter...Matt Cooke is still a TERRIBLE signing for Minnesota.
Recommended Posts