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
Notices

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.

The Glen Sather/Gomez and Redden buyout rule. Who else get's bought out?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-16-2013, 07:04 AM
  #101
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,314
vCash: 500
Id usually come in here and suggest leino, but apparently Grigorenko has lit a fire under his ass so far in camp. Instant chemistry. The two of them seemed to click immediatly in the line of Leino - Grigorenko - Ott, which may do a nice job of recreating Leino - Briere - Hartline that he saw success in. A little skeptical but definatly interested to see more.

HiddenInLight is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 07:21 AM
  #102
Tuggy
Registered User
 
Tuggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Saint John
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
no one else will be bought out aside from these two. having it count the way it will makes it a fairly useless move. no one will benefit from doing it now.
Gomez and Redden will benefit from it. That's the main reason it's happening now instead of the offseason. The NHLPA didn't like that these guys would be forced to stay home so this is what they came up with.

Tuggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 07:24 AM
  #103
X0X0A0
Sons of Pirates
 
X0X0A0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: St.Pete, Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 29,050
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs Hotel View Post
Does anyone believe or think Lecavalier might get bought out? Just a question not saying it will.

Cause I could see it for financial reasons maybe. Then I would say he would have a long list of buyers willing to offer up some cash, just not the money he is making now.

Part of me thinks they could buy him out, but part of me finds Stevie Y is too classy to do so. But it is a business decision not personal.
Zero chance

X0X0A0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 07:25 AM
  #104
Paper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Gomez is terrible, he is barely an NHLer anymore. He would be the equivalent of us getting Brenden Morrison last year, which Canuck fans laughed at.
Meh, a lot of people said that Morrison was done a couple years ago as well. He was given a tryout with Vancouver but they didn't feel comfortable giving him a 1 way deal. About to head into the season without a contract things looked pretty bleak.

Instead he became the Flames first line center (of course not an amazing feat) and scored 43 points in 66 games while leading them in +/-.

Gomez isn't as old as Morrison and isn't coming off the same injuries. I feel like calling him done would be premature regardless of how terrible he was for the Canadiens. Had it not been for his contract he would have been traded from Montreal long ago and could have had a bit of a rejuvenation playing under different circumstances that we see not infrequently.

Paper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 07:38 AM
  #105
Paper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackJ View Post
Absolutely no motivation for either team to use the buyouts before this summer.
They would never ever be able to get away with bubble-wrapping Gomez and Redden that people incorrectly believed was going to be the case, especially now with this new clause.

Their argument that they weren't going to give their players, professional hockey players who's careers depend on them staying fit, proper training and practice time to keep them from getting injured in order to buy them out had a sliver of merit. The NHLPA would have fought and won the case but there was an argument to be made. There isn't any argument once you give them the option to buy them out now. Their hands are tied. buy them out now or risk injury in practice.

Paper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 08:04 AM
  #106
Gabe84
Bring back Bonk!
 
Gabe84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,747
vCash: 500
Gomez can still play in the NHL. He's not a liability out there.

Offensively though, it's sketchy. He can carry the puck at high speed, gain the zone, but usually, once he reaches the blue line, he'll put the breaks on, go for a low percentage pass across the zone and turn the puck over. What he needs to do is be more patient or carry the puck deeper into the zone/dump it instead of trying to make bad passes.

He still has good vision and has made some really good plays with Gionta last season. His biggest flaw--and that can't be emphasized enough--is his shot. I know it's been said often, but it's just terrible. I've seen him wind up some decent slappers, but his wrist shot is just awful. If he plays with intensity and with a chip on his shoulder, he'll crash the net and bang in some rebounds. He can definitely score some garbage goals. He just needs to play with the right people.

Defensively, he's a bit loss. Someone mentioned that he can play on the PK... Meh. You don't want him as your top choice. He's a decent PK'er, but at even strength, he's not exactly great in his own zone.

Someone should take a shot at Gomez this season if he's let go by the Canadiens. Especially a team that wouldn't have high offensive expectations out of him or that, at least, has a very strong first line that other teams will focus on so that Gomez can get some easy match-ups.

Gabe84 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 09:17 AM
  #107
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonkTastic View Post
... Other than optics.

Remember that there's really also no reason for them NOT to do this. Having the buyout available to them and them choosing not to use it would send a HUGE message to the rest of the league's players when UFA time comes around: sends a horrible message to players who might be considering signing in that city.

I can imagine that, if either the Rangers or Canadiens choose not to buy out either guy despite having this new clause tailor made for them, that they'll have the league, the PA, and fans lighting a fire under their arse about it.

Pressure put on them by the league almost guarantees that they get bought out.
The above has never had, nor will it ever have an impact on a teams ability to attract and sign UFA's.

Sorry, but that is the truth.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 09:22 AM
  #108
nally
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 836
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
We got another rule named after us. Good job Uncle Glen!
Hahahaha, so true.
Amazing

I have had my fare share of rules named after me in my keeper league. Fun fun

nally is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 09:24 AM
  #109
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paper View Post
They would never ever be able to get away with bubble-wrapping Gomez and Redden that people incorrectly believed was going to be the case, especially now with this new clause.

Their argument that they weren't going to give their players, professional hockey players who's careers depend on them staying fit, proper training and practice time to keep them from getting injured in order to buy them out had a sliver of merit. The NHLPA would have fought and won the case but there was an argument to be made. There isn't any argument once you give them the option to buy them out now. Their hands are tied. buy them out now or risk injury in practice.
they would have fought, but they would have lost.

The players had and have a choice if asked to stay home.

They can stay home and get paid which is more than fair.

OR

They can choose not to report, forefit the remaining terms of their contracts and sign with any team of their choosing.

The teams ONLY OBLIGATION under the terms of the agreement is to pay the players. THAT'S IT. If they are honoring that obligation, they can do what they feel is in the best interest of the team.

The teams (NYR & MTL) are not preventing them from working. There is NO LABOR issue here.

If you told me that the Rangers and Canadiens were somehow blockign them from walking away from the contracts and still not playing them, then there may be an issue there. But the players are free to void the remaining terms of their contracts by not reporting to the team.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 09:24 AM
  #110
nally
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 836
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by giddy up View Post
Why wouldn't the isles buy out Dipietro?

you can't buy out a player who is injured. DP is miraculously not hurt right now. He will get hurt this year at some point and if its bad Isles can't buy him out. I know we need him for the cap floor this year but if we buy him out today he will still be on the cap for this year. I know Isles never spend to the cap but we might want to some time in the next 10 years so buy him out now and be done with it. Isles have a young team with a bright future and don't need the albatross contract prohibiting them from making moves in 2016.
. There's huge risk even if it was a player who is 100% healthy. A freak accident. Anything. And we pay him for 10 more years and against the cap that could cost us a top free agent in the future. This is a one time get out of jail free card. To make his contract disappear forever. Teams with money wouldn't think twice about it but Wang will never pay rick for the next 18 years for him not to play.

Lets look at it from a hockey perspective only, and tell me if there is any reason not to do this.


Or am I missing something?
I say the Isles wait for the next CBA to buy him out...Man, can't believe I just said that...his contract goes past the next CBA

nally is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 10:19 AM
  #111
Paper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
The teams ONLY OBLIGATION under the terms of the agreement is to pay the players. THAT'S IT. If they are honoring that obligation, they can do what they feel is in the best interest of the team.
That's far too simply. The CBA would be about 2 pages and a player contract about a paragraph if you think it's as simple as that.

The facts are a player is required, under his contract, to remain fit. Skills may diminish and talent disappear but there is a minimum physical condition a player has to meet if he wants his contract honoured or to receive an NHL contract. In fact it's one of the few ways a contract can be terminated and not just get the player fined.

A club would never be able to impede a player from reasonably staying fit as it's required under his contract to do so. A player signing a contract also agrees to report to practices at reasonable times and places. The NHLPA would only have to argue that requires the Club to present reasonable practices for Gomez and the arbitrator would agree.

Otherwise, what's stopping an NHL team sending Underachieving-bloated-contract-player-X home. Prevent him from doing more or less any physical conditioning to stay in shape (the players agree no sports outside hockey etc.) and then have him come back a 2 months later out of shape and terminating his contract?

It's a moot point because the NHL clearly knew they wouldn't win and agreed to give Scott and Wade their money now.

Paper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 10:30 AM
  #112
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paper View Post
That's far too simply. The CBA would be about 2 pages and a player contract about a paragraph if you think it's as simple as that.

The facts are a player is required, under his contract, to remain fit. Skills may diminish and talent disappear but there is a minimum physical condition a player has to meet if he wants his contract honoured or to receive an NHL contract. In fact it's one of the few ways a contract can be terminated and not just get the player fined.

A club would never be able to impede a player from reasonably staying fit as it's required under his contract to do so. A player signing a contract also agrees to report to practices at reasonable times and places. The NHLPA would only have to argue that requires the Club to present reasonable practices for Gomez and the arbitrator would agree.

Otherwise, what's stopping an NHL team sending Underachieving-bloated-contract-player-X home. Prevent him from doing more or less any physical conditioning to stay in shape (the players agree no sports outside hockey etc.) and then have him come back a month later out of shape and terminating his contract?

It's a moot point because the NHL clearly knew they wouldn't win and agreed to give Scott and Wade their money now.
I agree that a club cannot impede a player from maintaining a certain level of fitness.

The player has every right to work out at home to maintain that level of fitness.

Conversely if the team is asking the player to stay home and are willing to pay him to do that, then his fitness level is not all that important to the team now is it?

The teams in this scenario seem not overly concerned about the players fitness level. If fact, the LESS they do, the better from the teams vantage point.

As for the scenario you depict, it's clear that the team sent the player home not wanting any physical activity, if that is the case then they have EVERY obligation to pay the player. The player in that instance did what the team wanted.

Same situation here. The team is sending the guys home and paying him to do so.

If he WANTS to play, send a letter to the team stating that you refuse to report, mutually agree to void the remaining terms of the contract and go your seperate ways.

These two guys have every right to excercize that option.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 11:02 AM
  #113
Paper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
The player has every right to work out at home to maintain that level of fitness.
You honestly think the an arbiter would be able to keep a face when the NHL would argue Wade Redden, a professional ice hockey player, would not be allowed on ice for half a year? He would be laughing his ass off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Conversely if the team is asking the player to stay home and are willing to pay him to do that, then his fitness level is not all that important to the team now is it?
No. It is, however, extremely important to Gomez and Redden as they know they would still be vying for an NHL contract in the future. The ability to keep their skills up is of utmost importance in doing so, and that means the chance to get on the ice and actually playing hockey (if only in practice and not an actual game).

Sather never intended to keep Redden in a bubble-wrapped room. He knew the easiest and most obvious outcome would unsurprisingly end up being this.

Paper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2013, 12:34 PM
  #114
roboninja
EYG
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,274
vCash: 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by demonsurge View Post
He is not even close to being that bad.

Gomez is still an NHL player, its just because of his contract he was put into situations that he shouldnt have been to justify the salary.

I wouldnt mind seeing him on Vancouver.

(I also live in Montreal and witnessed his misuse way too many times)
I would call him that bad. I have watched around 20-30 MTL games each of the past 2 years, and the guy is a black hole out there on the ice. We have a drinking game where we drink when makes a turnover, and we get wasted. He scored 21 goals in 3 years. That is not just bad for a highly paid player, that is bad for anyone near your top 3 lines.

In other words, this EDM fan echoes the CHI fan: please pick him up, VAN.

roboninja 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 04:26 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.