HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Amnesty Buy-Outs Allowable In-Season For Redden And Gomez

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-15-2013, 02:51 PM
  #51
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
I thought I heard Olesz didn't pass his physical -so Hawks would be stuck in that case.
If it's just until the start of the season, then yeah, there likely will not be enough time to get it done this year.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:52 PM
  #52
Kid Dynamite
Pro Scout
 
Kid Dynamite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
Keeping only one player in the minors because of a ****** contract is abusing the rules? Get the hell out of here..

Now with the rule change, this is fair. I'm just not cool with getting rid of the buyout period after 2013-14.
Being able to bury contracts gives an advantage to teams that can afford it. I could care less personally but I understand the thought process behind it.

As for your 2nd point I agree.

Kid Dynamite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:52 PM
  #53
Lucbourdon
Kefka cheers for Van
 
Lucbourdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 40,711
vCash: 500
Canucks should get gomez for around 700k, would be a solid depth guy

Lucbourdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:52 PM
  #54
chuck1984
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutkowski View Post
If Montreal's GM hadn't traded for Gomez you know very well that he'd do the same there. Probably the same again if Drury wasn't done.
What a terrible GM Sather is! Giving these ludicrous contracts...

chuck1984 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:53 PM
  #55
Nizzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by General Granny View Post
No he sucks, we have better AHL players.
For under a million Redden 6 games away from a 1000 played why not

Nizzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:53 PM
  #56
Kane One
HFB Partner
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 29,109
vCash: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutkowski View Post
If Montreal's GM hadn't traded for Gomez you know very well that he'd do the same there. Probably the same again if Drury wasn't done.
And he didn't. That's like calling someone a serial killer who was sent to jail for killing one person. Even if "he'd do the same," if he wasn't in jail, he didn't.

__________________
Kane One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:54 PM
  #57
SpezDispenser
Registered User
 
SpezDispenser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 14,597
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by General Granny View Post
No he sucks, we have better AHL players.
That's hard to say. The guy signed one of the dumbest contracts in NHL history, it's not really his fault, then was shuffled around the AHL. As a 6/7th guy, I think he'd be perfect here.

SpezDispenser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:55 PM
  #58
ilikeblocks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 557
vCash: 500
I think teams will be jumping to sign these guys on league minimum or slightly above contracts. Good move NHL - helps the players out.

ilikeblocks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:55 PM
  #59
EvilCorporateLawyer
Very slippery slope
 
EvilCorporateLawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Country Roads
Country: United States
Posts: 75,107
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to EvilCorporateLawyer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutkowski View Post
If Montreal's GM hadn't traded for Gomez you know very well that he'd do the same there. Probably the same again if Drury wasn't done.
I don't think you know what the phrase "abusing the rules" means. What the Rangers did was not abuse the rules at all -- they followed them. Redden played himself off the team, therefor he was put in the minors. If he had been able to contribute, he'd of been in the NHL.

__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB
"Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
"Used to be only Twinkies and cockroaches could survive a nuke. I'd add Habs to that. I'm convinced the CH stands for Club du Hypocrisy." - Gee Wally
EvilCorporateLawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:56 PM
  #60
Habsawce
Registered User
 
Habsawce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 14,394
vCash: 671
Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

Sorry, my mistake on this year, player gets 100 per cent on buyout, not two thirds. No saving to club. My bad.

https://twitter.com/TSNBobMcKenzie/s...72205101314048

My previous post about the 2/3 buy out appears to be incorrect for this special circumstance.

Habsawce is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:56 PM
  #61
Keeping it Blue
Registered User
 
Keeping it Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 570
vCash: 500
So, full money amount this year. Normal buy rules (without cap hit) in following years.

That's the way it should be.

Keeping it Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:57 PM
  #62
JohnnyOnTheSpot
I Believe in G-Sus
 
JohnnyOnTheSpot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 1,904
vCash: 500
Makes perfect sense, win-win for both sides. Teams cut the extra fat, players don't lose a year of their career being "bubble-wrapped." Not sure how anyone can complain about the results.

And for those complaining about Redden being in the minors and burying his contract, there's nothing wrong with that. They signed him to a huge deal, he underperformed, he gets buried. He still gets his money, team still has to pay, but they can replace the roster spot. If he didn't want to get buried he shouldn't have sucked so much.

JohnnyOnTheSpot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:57 PM
  #63
Yokai
Registered User
 
Yokai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,804
vCash: 966
Why does the removal of the buyout period following the 2013/2014 season even matter? The majority of the players people would want their team to buy out are already under contract, so why not just get rid of them this up-coming summer.

Yokai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:58 PM
  #64
chuck1984
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
And he didn't. That's like calling someone a serial killer who was sent to jail for killing one person. Even if "he'd do the same," if he wasn't in jail, he didn't.
Sather gives an incredible amount of money to players who dont deserve it and thus sets a trend for other players/GMs. Oh how I hope the rangers suck for years to come!!!

chuck1984 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:58 PM
  #65
habs03
Subban #Thoroughbred
 
habs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsawce View Post
2/3 of his money remaining which is 10 million I believe. So they save 3.33 million in actual dollars.
Ok but before this rule, Gomez was going to get sent home, get paid his 5.5M to rest at home, next offseason would get bought out, he would be getting bought out with 1 year remaining at 4.5M, so basically getting 3M over 2 years. Gomez basically gets paid 8.5M out of his 10M.

But if Gomez is bought out now, his contract is at 10M over 2 years, like you said, so by the Habs buying him out, they would pay 6.66 over 4 years.

Using the old 2/3 salary, x2 term system the old buy out was under.

So basically the Habs are now saving a litte less than 2M and only have to pay Gomez his money over 4 years, not 2.

Sorry if I'm being a little confusing.

habs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:59 PM
  #66
BruinsBtn
Registered User
 
BruinsBtn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,629
vCash: 500
I guess it saves those teams 2/3 of the salary for this season.

Edit: I just saw the above post from MacKenzie... why would any team do it in that case? Gotta pay the player his full salary and he can go to a competitor.

BruinsBtn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:59 PM
  #67
Koto
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyOnTheSpot View Post
Makes perfect sense, win-win for both sides. Teams cut the extra fat, players don't lose a year of their career being "bubble-wrapped." Not sure how anyone can complain about the results.

And for those complaining about Redden being in the minors and burying his contract, there's nothing wrong with that. They signed him to a huge deal, he underperformed, he gets buried. He still gets his money, team still has to pay, but they can replace the roster spot. If he didn't want to get buried he shouldn't have sucked so much.
i think most complaints are not for redden, but for cap circumvention by the rangers.

Koto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:59 PM
  #68
habs03
Subban #Thoroughbred
 
habs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,773
vCash: 500
Ok that Bob Mac tweet just answered my question lol

habs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:00 PM
  #69
Gardner McKay
Moderator
#4parsley
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Atlanta
Country: United States
Posts: 10,906
vCash: 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
This. The way it was discussed originally was that each team would keep that cap hit for this season. We're just 'releasing' Redden so he can re-kindle his career elsewhere.

Far too many people jumping to conclusions when they clearly have no idea what they're talking about.
Also so we don't have to worry about him getting injured and therefore not being able to buy him out. Any one *****ing obviously doesn't understand the concept of grandfathering.

We still carry his cap hit. Whats the big effing deal?

__________________
"If someone offers you an amazing opportunity and you're not sure you can do it, say yes - then learn how to do it later" - Richard Branson
Gardner McKay is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:00 PM
  #70
JohnnyOnTheSpot
I Believe in G-Sus
 
JohnnyOnTheSpot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 1,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koto View Post
i think most complaints are not for redden, but for cap circumvention by the rangers.
Same thing, as in the situation as a whole. Still think it's crazy to complain about a circumvention that was basically built into the CBA.

JohnnyOnTheSpot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:02 PM
  #71
nabob
Hall for captain
 
nabob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: HF boards
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qward View Post
Sather made his bed, now he has to lay in it.
Sather made both of the beds lol.

nabob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:02 PM
  #72
isles31
Poster Excellont
 
isles31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: LI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,078
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
No, what's ******** is making buried contracts that were signed pre-2013-CBA count against the cap.
So you think the Rangers, who have managed to skirt the issue of cap circumvention with the burying of Redden on the Whale for the last few years, should be able to now buy him out and have him gone and still have no repercussions for having signed the player to an astronomically bad contract?

isles31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:03 PM
  #73
nmbr_24
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,831
vCash: 500
I guess we could say this is the dumb Ranger contract buyout period

nmbr_24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:03 PM
  #74
Big Giant Head
Registered User
 
Big Giant Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 26
vCash: 500
As nice as it would be to see Redden hit 1000 career games with Ottawa (he only needs 6), it wouldn't be fair to the rookies we have have pushing for the 5th and 6th Defence spots to lose out for a guy brought in for strictly sentimental value.

Also with a shortened season any liability is magnified and with the Senators on the playoff bubble, it's a risk we can't afford.

Big Giant Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:07 PM
  #75
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,665
vCash: 500
for those that are mad

to no one in particular



Had to know that the large market teams would be heard from in these fine negotiations.

to funny.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:17 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.