Confirmed Buy-Out Korpikoski (EDM), Carle (TB), Seidenberg (BOS), Greene (LA), Jackman (NSH)
- Thread starter caley
- Start date
Ya Seidenberg was awesome while the Bruins were dismantling the Leafs in recent years so his name jumps out to me but if Bruins fans aren't up in arms over the buyout then he's definitely not the same player anymore. He could still be an interesting bottom pairing guy though. Wouldn't mind if the Leafs gave him a 1 year deal. By all accounts a great vet and mentor for the young guys.
SmokeyDuck
Registered User
fireworks
Registered User
I'm going to have to disagree with you there, at the end of the year he was scratched for pretty much the remainder of the season because he could no longer play at that level.
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
- Sep 4, 2005
- 6,791
- 3
Seidenberg, maybe because they didn't want to be forced to protect him in the expansion draft?
Greene, I don't get at all.....can you sign Luke Schenn for an amount that makes it worth it?
Update: Maybe with the Brown captaincy thing, they're cleaning house of he leadership. I believe Greene was an A.
aemoreira1981
Registered User
The surprise for me is that Matt Greene passed a physical to be able to be bought out...unless he agreed to a buyout to retire.
KingCanadain1976
Registered User
KingCanadain1976
Registered User
Rosan the kings insider said he was ahead of schedule in his rehab and would be ready for training camp
For the fifth time, my point is not only with Greene.
3 players that played a combine 10 games this year due to sever injuries were bought out as "healthy". The odds that all three of these players could pass a physical now and not near the end of the season is pretty low.
What I'm saying is, I don't buy that all three were "injured" at the end of the season. Two of them might have, but to have all three pass now after not being able to suit up when their teams were fighting for playoff spots is ridiculous. Then again, it could be a freak coincidence. The LTIR spot may be being abused here.
Hero
Uncle Leo
And this?
I already went over Stuart.
Greene apparently was ahead of schedule according to an insider.
Wisniewski was reported to being close to fully ready April 12th.
I don't remember LA's cap situation, but I believe if Greene could've came back during the season/playoffs, he would've and the Kings would've been under the cap. Colorado and Columbus both were missing the playoffs, it would've made no sense for them to play if they weren't fully recovered, even if they were close.
So 2 of them were "close to being able to play at the end of the season". That's mighty convenient.
The Kings loaded up with Versteeg, Lecavalier and Schenn using Greene's/Gaborik's cap space.
Look, there's a chance that it could be a coincidence, but I'm just not sure I buy it.
Of course it would help if teams were more transparent about injuries...
bert
Registered User
Love to see the sens sign seidenberg to a short term deal he would be great to solidify the third pair play both sides.
I can't blame him for trying to get 3M. He's never making money on an NHL contract again. He's likely a career AHLer from here on with two way deals.
Why do you keep saying he was scratched I did not see that, Colin Miller/Trotman/Morrow were the scratches
(Edit: It looks like I was wrong. They really were just buying him out to make room to take a last shot at re-signing Lucic and aren't going to be buying him out now.)
Greene isn't your typical buyout for cap purposes, IMO. If LA could expect 75+ games from him, they'd likely keep him, since they love him and he's not exactly overpaid (if you get that durability out of him). It all comes down to the uncertainty factor. Being out of action for a year, there's the chance that he might not be in the best condition and, never being a mobile guy, the speed of the game may've passed him by. Even if he can still play, there's the concern that he may be injured a lot, and that would seriously eat into the value of keeping him at his contract and could induce extra volatility in the lineup, perhaps requiring kids who aren't ready to be thrown into the lineup and have to go up and down from the minors, possibly passing through waivers.
It might be a bit like when Vancouver let Willie Mitchell walk, not because they wouldn't have preferred to keep him, but because they were afraid that he wouldn't be healthy. LA lucked out because he stayed healthy, and some other team could, similarly, luck out and get a Greene that will be surprisingly durable for another year or two. LA, being up against the cap and all, just didn't feel that they could afford to take that gamble, themselves. I hope that he rebounds and helps another team. I wonder if Edmonton might take him back.
Greene isn't your typical buyout for cap purposes, IMO. If LA could expect 75+ games from him, they'd likely keep him, since they love him and he's not exactly overpaid (if you get that durability out of him). It all comes down to the uncertainty factor. Being out of action for a year, there's the chance that he might not be in the best condition and, never being a mobile guy, the speed of the game may've passed him by. Even if he can still play, there's the concern that he may be injured a lot, and that would seriously eat into the value of keeping him at his contract and could induce extra volatility in the lineup, perhaps requiring kids who aren't ready to be thrown into the lineup and have to go up and down from the minors, possibly passing through waivers.
It might be a bit like when Vancouver let Willie Mitchell walk, not because they wouldn't have preferred to keep him, but because they were afraid that he wouldn't be healthy. LA lucked out because he stayed healthy, and some other team could, similarly, luck out and get a Greene that will be surprisingly durable for another year or two. LA, being up against the cap and all, just didn't feel that they could afford to take that gamble, themselves. I hope that he rebounds and helps another team. I wonder if Edmonton might take him back.
Last edited:
How is that convenient? You're literally ignoring all the facts.
Stuart - Back Surgery, February 1st. Average recovery time: 1-3 months.
Wisniewski - Torn ACL/Knee Injury, October. Average recovery time: 6-9 months.
Greene - Shoulder Surgery, December 1st. Average recover time: Up to 6 months.
Now let's do some simple math!
What month would it be if it took Stuart 3 months to recover?
What month would it be if it took Wisnewski 9 months to recover?
What month would it be if it took Greene 6 months to recover?
I don't expect you'll respond to this, because you know you're wrong.
Bandit
Registered User
"Back surgery" average recovery time 1-3 months? What?
Do you even know what type of back surgery he got?
Just saying "back surgery" doesn't give anyone any information.
If we're just going with any type of back surgery it can take anywhere from 1 month to a year or longer.
When there is ACL surgery there is no set recover time. It can take anywhere from 4 months to 9 months. Usually hovers around 5-7 though. I've had friends back exercising in 6 months and I have a friend that hasn't played since december.
"Shoulder surgery" is the vaguest term in the books. The most common one, shoulder stabilization after a dislocated shoulder, takes around three months to heal.
You need to be more specific.
You taking the absolute maximum amount of time for each option and rejecting all other options only proves my point. It could be a freak coincidence.
If you make up the facts, yes, I'm ignoring them.
