Kukla's Korner

The Upper Canadien

Gomez ordered home

According to various  sources, Scott Gomez has been sent home by GM Marc Bergevin. He will not play for the Canadiens this season, and will be bought out in the summer. 

Filed in: | The Upper Canadien | Permalink
 

Comments

Chris in Hockey Hell's avatar

Bazinga!

Posted by Chris in Hockey Hell from Ann Arbor, MI but LIVING in Columbia, TN on 01/13/13 at 11:47 AM ET

42jeff's avatar

Do not pass go.  Do not collect $200 (which the owners would probably just take from you anyway).

And NO dessert tonight either!

Posted by 42jeff from The greater Howard City, MI metroplex on 01/13/13 at 11:55 AM ET

Avatar

Fat, slow and lazy is no way to play hockey.

Posted by timbits on 01/13/13 at 12:10 PM ET

Avatar

Is there some sensible reasoning behind the idea that injured players cannot be bought out, or is it as stupid as it sounds to me?

Posted by Mr. Fnytelhatt on 01/13/13 at 12:37 PM ET

NIVO's avatar

nice paycheck for sittin on the couch eh?

Posted by NIVO from underpants gnome village on 01/13/13 at 12:59 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Is there some sensible reasoning behind the idea that injured players cannot be bought out, or is it as stupid as it sounds to me?

I don’t think Gomez is hurt so much as he’s just not going to be in future plans and the Habs will basically have to drop their cap salary next season the rough amount of Gomez’s salary right now, so they might as well just use him as the buffer for that while keeping him away from the organization.

To answer your actual question, it’s basically because it looks really crappy to buy out an injured player and both the NHL and NHLPA kind of don’t want to deal with a liability questions that get brought up.

First off, buying him out means cutting him off from team medical care and many of the protections that having a contract provide an NHLPA member.
Then, cutting him loose while injured almost guarantees that you’re setting him free at a time when he has no signing value.

Sure, the guy has the (potentially) millions of dollars from the buyout, but he’s also one of what might be a big enough class of players who could consider filing suit against both the Club, the NHL, and the NHLPA for creating a system where he gets injured playing for them and then gets his career endangered as a result. It’s pretty much just easier for everybody involved if they do it like that.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 01/13/13 at 01:26 PM ET

Avatar

Sure, the guy has the (potentially) millions of dollars from the buyout, but he’s also one of what might be a big enough class of players who could consider filing suit against both the Club, the NHL, and the NHLPA for creating a system where he gets injured playing for them and then gets his career endangered as a result.

So, what’s a team supposed to do to protect themselves from that kind of lawsuit?

Are you suggesting it makes sense for a player to get a guaranteed deal, become injured through the course of play, and then sue somebody because he got injured and so couldn’t get a subsequent contract at all, or at a similar value?

Let’s set aside for the moment that I would be stunned if there wasn’t language written into either the CBA, the SPC or most likely both to prevent that kind of frivolous lawsuit from being placed… on general principle that sort of suit is nuts, IMO.

The only real way I’d think something like that might get some traction is if one player sued another player and was able to demonstrate malice or forethought in an act that injured them.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 01/13/13 at 02:49 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

So, what’s a team supposed to do to protect themselves from that kind of lawsuit?

Don’t cut or buy him out.

on general principle that sort of suit is nuts, IMO.

Then why can’t you buy out or lockout injured players?

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 01/13/13 at 03:06 PM ET

Avatar

Is the injury mental or physical?

Posted by timbits on 01/13/13 at 04:03 PM ET

Avatar

To answer your actual question, it’s basically because it looks really crappy to buy out an injured player and both the NHL and NHLPA kind of don’t want to deal with a liability questions that get brought up.

That is quite sensible, in a way.

Posted by Mr. Fnytelhatt on 01/13/13 at 04:51 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About The Upper Canadien

The Upper Canadien is your one stop shop for all things Montreal Canadiens. Since the summer of 2010, I've been providing Habs related news, notes, and most importantly, opinions. As a blogger, I don't believe it's my job to report the news, it's my privilege to comment on it. You may disagree with what I suggest. In fact, you most likely will. But that's the great part about blogging: it spurs opinion, comment and engages all involved. I've really enjoyed all the debate and commentary from readers thus far and I encourage everyone to respond with ideas on lineups, trades, logos, sweaters, mascots, whatever. The Upper Canadien is a conversation for all hockey fanatics.

I've come to Kukla's Korner with four years of campus radio and three years of sportswriting from my time at Mount Allison University on Canada's East coast. Not only do I not have any professional journalistic training, after five years in the corporate world, I've spent much of the past two years completing an MBA. Business by day, hockey by night, I'm a Canadiens fan through and through. I hope you enjoy reading as much as I do writing.

Questions or comments? theuppercanadien@kuklaskorner.com