Jump to content

Gomez sent home (update: early compliance buyout official)


Recommended Posts

Why can't the Habs buy-him out Wednesday and sign him for 1$ ?

There's a rule in the new CBA that says they can't. :) I actually touched on that rule in my CBA article; Gomez can't come back to the Habs for the entire season, no matter what.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It make sense. If he gets injured, they won't be able to buy him out. Just playing it safe.

I love this move; since his buyout is a MUST, the team simply couldn't gamble on him getting through the season without an injury. I also think you could plug just about anyone into his position and

NO EXCUSES.

Why can't the Habs buy-him out Wednesday and sign him for 1$ ?

One of the rules with a compliance buyout is that the player cannot play for the team buying him out for at least 1 year. We can't sign him and we can't trade for him until that year waiting period is over. Maybe the accelerated buyout means we can get him back a year earlier than if we compliance buy him out in the summer?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would the Habs release Gomez to see him play with another team while still paying his salary? No advantage to the Habs whatsoever, if not that he could hurt them if he is in the Eastern conference. They'd be better to let him sit the winter.

Why in the first place didn't the Habs wait the Summer to buyout Gomez? They didn't want him to be injured this winter and prevent them from buying him out in the summer. Now with the new rule, he can play with the Habs and break all his limbs if he wants.

This new rule is a plus for both the Habs and Gomez:

- Gomez will be able to play and show what he is worth and get a new contract this Summer (on top of his buyout deal, wow lucky guy)

- The Habs won't have the hands tied. They will be able to say to Gomez: We'll let you play and show the league your worth, but play with us. This new rule will allow Gomez to be bought-out and sign for 1$ this Wednesday and play with the Habs the remainder of the year. Injury or not this winter, he'll be bought out as planned for next year's dreaded budget situation.

Gomez will play with the Habs this year. I think someone lost his bet.

No chance the Habs take him back, without buying him out.... because if he gets hurt, we could end up ed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares? I'd rather sign Subban and play Galchenyuk next season than have Gomez playing again. He was also very respectful the whole time. Very classy player and I guess much of Lars Eller's development was due to Gomez mentoring him. Most casual fans will still boo and jeer him but he was a good Hab (despite sucking it the last two seasons).

I'm expecting either Vancouver to sign him for more than $1M (Booth and Kesler are both hurt, they need center depth) or New Jersey to pick him up.

I expect him to go to New Jersey and put up 30-35 points in the 48 game schedule.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the rules with a compliance buyout is that the player cannot play for the team buying him out for at least 1 year. We can't sign him and we can't trade for him until that year waiting period is over. Maybe the accelerated buyout means we can get him back a year earlier than if we compliance buy him out in the summer?

Theoretically, yes. They could get him back following this season; I'm pretty sure the rule is one full season and not one full calendar year. But I highly doubt that would happen anyways.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, for a player, sucking means you get all your money, and if you find a new sucker, get a second salary too. Even if its a million, its more then he deserves. Nice. If I was the habs, I would put him in the Ahl with instructions that he is a healthy scratch every game until the buyout.

Someone not ing around with him, and actually allowing him to find a new team to play for was the purpose of the threatened grievance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect him to go to New Jersey and put up 30-35 points in the 48 game schedule.

Can you imagine the fuss if this happens and we finish 9th 2 points behind NJ?

I really wonder if it is worth the risk to buy him out now rather than just send him home as planned. Maybe he'll sign in the West?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What would Bergevin gain by letting him walk off Wednesday?

Not busting next season's cap by signing Subban multi-years. I believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not busting next season's cap by signing Subban multi-years. I believe.

Plus ensuring $900,000 in space this year (towards a replacement), one more open spot in the 50-contract limit, and guaranteeing he won't get hurt which would jeopardize the buyout.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not busting next season's cap by signing Subban multi-years. I believe.

Don't we have plenty of room under next years cap right now?

I don't see how using an accelerated compliance buyout affects Subban's contract at all (provided we send Gomez home for the year).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't we have plenty of room under next years cap right now?

I don't see how using an accelerated compliance buyout affects Subban's contract at all (provided we send Gomez home for the year).

We are commited for aprox. 59M$ of cap for next season, EXCLUDING Galchenyuk.

Excluding as well : Subban, Desharnais, a backup goalie, White and Armstrong (most likely not with us anymore)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone not ing around with him, and actually allowing him to find a new team to play for was the purpose of the threatened grievance.

He is free to turn down the rest of his contract. You sure are a big defender of the players.... Last time I checked, Gomez wasn't earning his money. They have to pay him, why are they responsible for his audition with other clubs? Does he bear any responsibility for his poor production?

I understand why they are doing it, but I also understand why the Habs didn't want to get screwed over by an injury. They were not ing him, they were following the best option available to them by the CBA. There is no real penalty in this league for a player who doesn't meet expectations, expectations he used in his negotiations for the contract. The CBA is very generous to the players and puts all the risk on the teams.

You can union rattle all you want, I think this would be a better league if players shared a bit more performance risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus ensuring $900,000 in space this year (towards a replacement), one more open spot in the 50-contract limit, and guaranteeing he won't get hurt which would jeopardize the buyout.

Bang on... I have no doubt Gomez will get a contract with someone this year, maybe NJ. The 900k is what the team gets in the new deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus ensuring $900,000 in space this year (towards a replacement), one more open spot in the 50-contract limit, and guaranteeing he won't get hurt which would jeopardize the buyout.

I thought we already had all those before this afternoon's new rule, maybe except the spot on the 50-list

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought we already had all those before this afternoon's new rule, maybe except the spot on the 50-list

I don't think we got that this year if he sat home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are commited for aprox. 59M$ of cap for next season, EXCLUDING Galchenyuk.

Excluding as well : Subban, Desharnais, a backup goalie, White and Armstrong (most likely not with us anymore)

Yes but buying Gomez out a year early doesn't change this. He won't be on the 2013-2014 cap in either case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't we have plenty of room under next years cap right now?

I don't see how using an accelerated compliance buyout affects Subban's contract at all (provided we send Gomez home for the year).

It depends on what the transition rules are for tagging. If the Habs weren't allowed to have committed contracts beyond $64.3M for next year while Gomez was still part of the team (at home but on the reserve list still and even though they had verbally committed to the buyout, he wouldn't come off next years' cap until it actually happened), that may have affected their ability to go long-term with Subban. I've found nothing about what the transition rules are for this issue so it's speculative on my end.

I thought we already had all those before this afternoon's new rule, maybe except the spot on the 50-list

Well Gomez could've slipped off his deck and hurt himself long-term sitting at home...but yes, the only other benefit directly from this if it happens (he'd have to be waived by Thursday so watch for that) is the spot on the 50.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you imagine the fuss if this happens and we finish 9th 2 points behind NJ?

I really wonder if it is worth the risk to buy him out now rather than just send him home as planned. Maybe he'll sign in the West?

You don't buy him out now... after the NHL and NHLPA did this deal, and send him home instead? The NHLPA will file a grievance so fast, and this will be one they are extremely likely to win.

We are commited for aprox. 59M$ of cap for next season, EXCLUDING Galchenyuk.

Excluding as well : Subban, Desharnais, a backup goalie, White and Armstrong (most likely not with us anymore)

We are closer to 53 million because with Gomez we were at 60

Link to post
Share on other sites

What would Bergevin gain by letting him walk off Wednesday?

No distraction to the team.

Plus its now been agreed by the NHL and NHLPA.... you don't let him walk and send him home instead... you've ed yourself in front of the arbitrator.

He is free to turn down the rest of his contract. You sure are a big defender of the players.... Last time I checked, Gomez wasn't earning his money. They have to pay him, why are they responsible for his audition with other clubs? Does he bear any responsibility for his poor production? I understand why they are doing it, but I also understand why the Habs didn't want to get screwed over by an injury. They were not ing him, they were following the best option available to them by the CBA. There is no real penalty in this league for a player who doesn't meet expectations, expectations he used in his negotiations for the contract. The CBA is very generous to the players and puts all the risk on the teams. You can union rattle all you want, I think this would be a better league if players shared a bit more performance risk.

And you are a big supporter of saying the players are overpaid in every post I've read from you.... so yes I agree we are on opposite sides.

But the fact is the NHL and NHLPA agreed to this deal so players won't be sent home to rot... but will instead get the opportunity to find teams who will let them play. If you send him home, you are inviting a union grievance, and one that they are sure to win.

Note that before the NHL and NHLPA agreed to this deal I felt that the NHL was very likely to win the grievance... however once they made the settlement everything changes. The league can't agree to settle the issue, and then have the team send the guy home and not play him. Its not bargaining in good faith on the grievance issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No distraction to the team.

Plus its now been agreed by the NHL and NHLPA.... you don't let him walk and send him home instead... you've ed yourself in front of the arbitrator.

And you are a big supporter of saying the players are overpaid in every post I've read from you.... so yes I agree we are on opposite sides.

But the fact is the NHL and NHLPA agreed to this deal so players won't be sent home to rot... but will instead get the opportunity to find teams who will let them play. If you send him home, you are inviting a union grievance, and one that they are sure to win.

Note that before the NHL and NHLPA agreed to this deal I felt that the NHL was very likely to win the grievance... however once they made the settlement everything changes. The league can't agree to settle the issue, and then have the team send the guy home and not play him. Its not bargaining in good faith on the grievance issue.

Technically I don't think the players are over paid. I think they were getting too big a slice of the pot vs the owners. If the growth continues, the cap will keep rising and the salaries will keep going up. I have no problem with that as long as the league is healthy. I also think the contract terms are very favourable to the players and needed adjustment.

I think the league would win the grievance too. I don't think they settled due to that as it was the nhlpa that wanted the original delay in the buy outs. I suspect they will be happy to see Gomez gone as soon as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=413602

Not sure if anyone has mentioned this but we could see Gomer bought out before the season starts.

That's what the last page and a bit of discussion have been about, this agreement between the league and the PA that would allow the Habs to use a buyout now although the cap hit/payout would remain the same for this season only before following the original amnesty rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...