• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Tim.D

Habs reportedly to buy out Scott Gomez's contact

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Also reported on TSN990

He's through the ridiculous part of it but no shocker really with 10 mill left on it over two years. Crazy he's made so much money.

*edit- In the ballpark of 60 Million earned and 169 goals...ouch

Edited by 13dangledangle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess not too suprising, he definelty hasn't been the Scott Gomez he was for the Devils years ago. With such a big cap hit even with buying him out you have to wonder if it would be better to just keep him and find a way for him to get his game back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess not too suprising, he definelty hasn't been the Scott Gomez he was for the Devils years ago. With such a big cap hit even with buying him out you have to wonder if it would be better to just keep him and find a way for him to get his game back.

He could always fill the water bottles and clean the jocks ? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a big mistake as it stands with the CBA right now. While they need to get rid of that albatross of a contract, they might be better served by waiting until the CBA negotiations. I've heard rumors that teams are pushing for an "amnesty clause" allowing one player to be bought out with no penalty. Buying him out now might not give the Habs that option.

That said, Bob McKenzie had an interesting idea regarding Gomez too. (Mashed together from several individual tweets).

Buying out Gomez's contract, of course, is the dumbest thing any organization could possibly do in a salary cap world. Here's why: MTL could save $3.3M cash by buying out Gomez contract but would have salary cap hits of $3.5M, $4.5M, $1.66M and $1.66M for each of 4 yrs. If MTL sends Gomez to AHL, it frees up $7.3M in cap space each of next two seasons. Price to be paid for that is Gomez's $10M in salary. No organization that has money (MTL, TOR, NYR etc) would or could justify a buyout that would create dead cap space to save a few million $.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scott Gomez: Born Dec. 23, 1979.

Johan Franzen: Born Dec. 23, 1979.

Cue Twilight Zone theme.

If we put their stats side by side too it makes the Mule's 29 goals look like 100!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They won't buy out his contract and have all that money count towards the cap when they can just bury him in the minors, pay him his salary, and have it not count towards the cap at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a big mistake as it stands with the CBA right now. While they need to get rid of that albatross of a contract, they might be better served by waiting until the CBA negotiations. I've heard rumors that teams are pushing for an "amnesty clause" allowing one player to be bought out with no penalty. Buying him out now might not give the Habs that option.

That said, Bob McKenzie had an interesting idea regarding Gomez too. (Mashed together from several individual tweets).

With the success of the amensty clause added to the NBA CBA I'm also assuming there will be a push for an amnesty clause. I doubt the NHL equivalent will be as far reaching as the NBA version. NBA teams have no expiration for their amnesty clause-- any player signed before the current CBA came into effect can be amnestied at any time in the future.

They won't buy out his contract and have all that money count towards the cap when they can just bury him in the minors, pay him his salary, and have it not count towards the cap at all.

See: Blackhawks, Chicago. I expect the new CBA will permanently close that loophole and the one allowing teams to loan undesirable contracts out to European teams with no penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the success of the amensty clause added to the NBA CBA I'm also assuming there will be a push for an amnesty clause. I doubt the NHL equivalent will be as far reaching as the NBA version. NBA teams have no expiration for their amnesty clause-- any player signed before the current CBA came into effect can be amnestied at any time in the future.

See: Blackhawks, Chicago. I expect the new CBA will permanently close that loophole and the one allowing teams to loan undesirable contracts out to European teams with no penalty.

Agreed, on both counts. I would expect that if the NHL came up with an amnesty clause, they would try and limit the number of players that could be bought out, or at the very least give a deadline (Say, a week before free agency).

If the NHL did come up with an amnesty clause, then the available free agent pool could get more interesting once Parise & Suter sign (wherever they sign).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought I saw Bob McKenzie saying/TWEETING they WERE NOT going to buy him out after all...

I sure hope you are right. We don't need a Commodore oops Gomez reclamation project going on. If someone did sign him and he turned out to be productive, I would not feel too bad because we could still start the Sean Avery Project. Better not say that too loud, don't want Kenny to hear it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought I saw Bob McKenzie saying/TWEETING they WERE NOT going to buy him out after all...

The closest I've seen is this...

Something weird going on in MTL. Habs' website, for a time this a.m., announced team was buying out Scott Gomez's contract. Not there now.

Correction, I am now told the Montreal Canadiens' website never reported the buyout. It was apparently another news outlet....in any case..

https://twitter.com/#!/TSNBobMcKenzie/status/197676677587939328

https://twitter.com/#!/TSNBobMcKenzie/status/197678051839049728

So, nothing really saying that they're not going to buy him out. More a case of crossed wires to where the report came from. McKenzie then goes on to extrapolate why buying Gomez out is a mistake at this point, but nothing that solidly refutes the report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this