Tony Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 http://www.rds.ca/canadien/chroniques/231710.html Habs didn't qualify Michael Lambert. Everyone else was. Salmelainen is on waivers so we can either assume a buy out or an AHL demotion at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smon Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Buyout; headed to Europe. What about Cullimore - has he been bought out already? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 26, 2007 Author Share Posted June 26, 2007 Yes. Apparently you first have to be placed on waivers to be bought out. That should confirm it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan24 Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Interesting....I had a feeling this would happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 http://www.rds.ca/canadien/chroniques/231710.html Habs didn't qualify Michael Lambert. Everyone else was. Salmelainen is on waivers so we can either assume a buy out or an AHL demotion at this point. Heheh... so much for the Chicago GM's saying that the Habs really wanted him. Of course, it's possible that they originally were bringing him in to trade him to another team and hten the deal fell through... I'd rather they sent him to the AHL so the money doesn't count against the cap, but they're too nice so they'll probably buy him out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Why are we wasting one of only two buyouts we're allowed to be paying at a time on a guy making $750,000 next year ($700,000 against the cap)? If we buy out both, it means next summer we don't have that option avialble to us on any of our contracts. That's why Chicago didn't buy out Cullimore or Salmalienen themselves, because they couldn't. They still have Curtis Brown and Matthew Barnaby as buyouts they have to pay off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mathieu30 Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 http://www.rds.ca/canadien/chroniques/231710.html Danis received an offer! Great news. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Why are we wasting one of only two buyouts we're allowed to be paying at a time on a guy making $750,000 next year ($700,000 against the cap)? If we buy out both, it means next summer we don't have that option avialble to us on any of our contracts. That's why Chicago didn't buy out Cullimore or Salmalienen themselves, because they couldn't. They still have Curtis Brown and Matthew Barnaby as buyouts they have to pay off. they may not be buying him out, just putting him on waivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch_Habs_Fan Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 That is great news, unfortunate i cant read that. But i'm not sure if Danis wants to be backup in Hamilton next season. (or wil Desjardins be backup??) Probably will one goalie be traded after camp?? Oh so many questions... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House11 Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Hopefully someone takes one or both of them so they don't have to be bought out B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruthMonger Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 (edited) Why are we wasting one of only two buyouts we're allowed to be paying at a time on a guy making $750,000 next year ($700,000 against the cap)? If we buy out both, it means next summer we don't have that option avialble to us on any of our contracts. That's why Chicago didn't buy out Cullimore or Salmalienen themselves, because they couldn't. They still have Curtis Brown and Matthew Barnaby as buyouts they have to pay off. Just wondering if this is actually a rule. I've heard it mentioned before (probably on here), but I was just going through the NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement and could find no mention of the two buyout rule. The only thing close was the rule that during the life of the agreement, teams could only buy out three players outside of the normal buyout period, provided that team has had at least two guy go through arbitration (and that whole scenario doesn't apply here). Edited June 26, 2007 by TruthMonger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycing Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Danis' qualification means one of two things for me: 1) Montreal will trade either Huet or Halak (or Price... but that's doubtful) 2) Montreal will keep Danis around as trade bait (Get something rather than get nothing if they don't re-sign him) In other words, Gainey is keeping his options open. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 If these waivers are being done so they can buy him out, then I think the Samsonov trade was worthless. We'll end up saving like 300,000 against the cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 I highly doubt Salmelainen will be bought out the Habs will not waste both thier buy outs on these two guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAK Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 anybody will cry the loss of lambert ?? I know I won't. I remember when he was drafted how Savard was excited of having him !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 If these waivers are being done so they can buy him out, then I think the Samsonov trade was worthless. We'll end up saving like 300,000 against the cap. If Salmelainen is being bought out... a) cost for Samsonov buyout = $1.17M x 2 b.) cost for Cullimore buyout = $633 333 x 2 c) cost for Salmelainen buyout = $250 000 x 2 b.) + c) = $833 333 a) - d) = $336 667.00 Not much of a big deal but getting rid of over 300 000 dollars in cap space for nothing is never a bad move. The main purpose of that trade was not to unload aa much salary as possible, but more to get rid of a distraction and make everybody happy. The reason we didn't just buy Samsonov out ourselves... was for $336 667. That is IF Salmelainen is being bought out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAKS-AVENUE Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Here's a thought as far as RFA's go. What do you guys think about this scenario. Yes, Ryder is good with a lot of downside. There are probably better 30 goal guys to be had if there is cap room.We may already have it in one of the kids that will get a full blown chance this year. (Laty,Pleks, ####, etc....) Ryder is hard to negotiate with so let's say a really crappy team or a team Gainey feels will end up in the bottom somewhere next year gives him an offer for 3 to 4 million which you know it will be. Do we match or take the compensation. Which would be a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round pick? I say take the picks if the draft is deep next year. By the way I have a feeling Gainey is going to sign Souray and Briere, Get Marleau and trade Kovalev for some medium level player with potential and a pick. Just a gut feeling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch_nl Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Hmmm... Why buy out Salmelainen? He's a young talented player that doesn't make big bucks. Why not try him? Maybe the only thing he needed was a change of scenery. Why not send him to Hamilton? Not sure I get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Why not send him to Hamilton? Not sure I get it. That is one possibility as to why they are waiving him, he needs to pass them to go to the minors. Then again, I'm sure he'd rather go home and play in Finland than play in Hamilton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 If Salmelainen is being bought out... a) cost for Samsonov buyout = $1.17M x 2 b.) cost for Cullimore buyout = $633 333 x 2 c) cost for Salmelainen buyout = $250 000 x 2 b.) + c) = $833 333 a) - d) = $336 667.00 Not much of a big deal but getting rid of over 300 000 dollars in cap space for nothing is never a bad move. The main purpose of that trade was not to unload aa much salary as possible, but more to get rid of a distraction and make everybody happy. The reason we didn't just buy Samsonov out ourselves... was for $336 667. That is IF Salmelainen is being bought out. Allow me to correct the numbers a little BTH. For Samsonov if bought out: $2,350,000 / 2 = $1,175,000 per season Cullimore's buyout is actually a hit of $620,667 this season, $639,667 next season (I'll spare the boring details of how that's calculated.) Salmelainen's buyout would be $200,000 this season, $250,000 next season (same as Cullimore). I'll simply say that it has to do with the variance between actual salary and cap hits for each player. Savings for this season: 1,175,000 - 820,667 = $354,333 Savings for next season: 1,175,000 - 889,667 = $285,333 Not a big difference, but I thought I'd get that out there. I've heard that there is an out clause in Salmelainen's deal that allows him to return to Finland should he clear waivers and be sent to the AHL. If this happens and he invokes the clause, there wouldn't be any buyout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easy Ryder Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Too bad we lose Benoit to Finland when we want a Finlander(Salmeleinen) to go home. Good thing if Salmeleinen goes home, we want tougher players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Too bad we lose Benoit to Finland when we want a Finlander(Salmeleinen) to go home. Good thing if Salmeleinen goes home, we want tougher players. Benoit is going over there to work on his skating, this was known even before the calder cup playoffs were over that he would more than likley had to eurpoe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Benoit is going over there to work on his skating, this was known even before the calder cup playoffs were over that he would more than likley had to eurpoe. Is the ice in Hamilton that bad? I don't really understand this move. I know, big ice surface and all, but it seems unneccesary. Do they really think he'll come back a year later NHL ready? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Is the ice in Hamilton that bad? I don't really understand this move. I know, big ice surface and all, but it seems unneccesary. Do they really think he'll come back a year later NHL ready? Possibly, it will not hurt his devlopment though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 By the way I have a feeling Gainey is going to sign Souray and Briere, Get Marleau and trade Kovalev for some medium level player with potential and a pick. Just a gut feeling. I have a feeling that's what you want Gainey to do but not what he actually will do. Would be pretty sick though but we'd be way overdeep with centers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.