Pretty sure we are stuck with Greening.

[Do Make Say Think]

Greening is not taking a roster spot away

Buying him out would not have any implications in terms of allowing us to bring up a player: he barely played last year and was sent down.

Again, there is no real point to buying out a player if isn't to create cap space.

 

[Sun God Nika]

Greening is not taking a roster spot away

Buying him out would not have any implications in terms of allowing us to bring up a player: he barely played last year and was sent down.

Again, there is no real point to buying out a player if isn't to create cap space.

Apparently there are some $$$ savings with a buy out. If thats true it would make sense to just buy him out and save whatever dollar you can.

 

[Ttracer*]

Greening was dealing with injury, he will come back and compliment the 2/3 lines nicely.

 

[Xspyrit]

Murray was WAY to quick to sign Greening to that 3 year deal.

The year he gave him that extention, Greening had a mediocre year. Murray should have waited to see Greening would have played in the last year of his contract before giving him almost 3 mil for 3 years.

No.

Greening signed an extension 1 year earlier and was still producing at a 0.40 PPG clip, which is why he got that money.

Not sure how many times we'll have to rectify the facts on this subject

 

[Do Make Say Think]

And was great in the playoffs while playing with Pageau and Condra.

 

[source]

Maybe this is a good sign. It shows management doesn't think Greening is totally worthless yet. But, it probably means losing Condra - a result that richer teams would not tolerate.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

No.

Greening signed an extension 1 year earlier and was still producing at a 0.40 PPG clip, which is why he got that money.

Not sure how many times we'll have to rectify the facts on this subject

Yep.

He was also a UFA. Which is why he got roughly 3x3.

If you read the threads from around the time of the extension, almost everybody was positive about the extension.

Who knows, maybe he'll bounce back.

A Greening buyout saving Ottawa money depends on if they are going to have him as the 13th/14th NHL forward or if they are going to assign him to the AHL. They assigned him to the AHL last year, but it was only for a short period of time.

If the intention is to have Greening in the NHL, a buyout barely saves Ottawa any money. The cheapest NHL players are usually 600k-900k. Greening makes about 6 million combined on the last two years of his contract. Ottawa owes him 4 of that 6 if they buy him out. A replacement play probably costs close to 2 million and as a 13th/14th forward is probably a lateral move, so they might as well keep Greening in hopes that he can bounce back.

 

[6stringmofo]

Just burns me that he's taking up a spot on the roster while he "seems" completely dis-interested.

 

[TheNewEra]

Just burns me that he's taking up a spot on the roster while he "seems" completely dis-interested.

he wont be taking up a roster spot, we will waive him (if by some miracle someone claims him thats great) otherwise he is going to be hanging out in bingo

as for trading greening i do believe he is tradeable its just a matter of management sucking it up and choosing a lesser evil, either retain salary on him or trade him for a worse contract but for 1 year

i still say we should suck it up and do greening for ruutu

 

[senility]

You'd think that if Edmonton truly does have mild interest in Greening and were prepared to take him in a Lehner deal instead of Legwand, the right move might have been to try to package him with Gryba in return for a lower draft pick, something like Gryba and Greening for Ewenyk and a 6th perhaps?

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

He is useless on our roster because:

Hoffman
MacArthur
Puempel

are better than him or should have roster spots ahead of him.

Then you have 1 more spot but you'd rather use that on Condra/Lazar/Michalek(depending what position they playing) cause they too are better.

Also, if we wanna add top 6 forward it's likely a LW which would push Greening out.

Conclusion: Greening truly is a useless player unless we just cared about reaching cap floor and not make playoffs.

 

[BonkTastic]

Greening was dealing with injury, he will come back and compliment the 2/3 lines nicely.

I don't even think his mother thinks he's that good.

 

[Tuna99]

When he came into the NHL he fought, he hit, he dug, he did what the coach asked. Now that he has his money he doesn't want to get knocked out and deal with that his entire life, Greening is essentially to smart to be successful in the NHL, if he's not on the top 2 lines he Doesn't want to be a tough guy on the bottom 2 lines, he's not good enough to be the player he wants to be and not willing to be the player the team wants him to be.

 

[DrunkUncleDenis]

Apparently there are some $$$ savings with a buy out. If thats true it would make sense to just buy him out and save whatever dollar you can.

Yes, when you buy a player out who is over 26, you pay them 2/3 of their salary over double the length of their contract. Cap-wise, we're still on the hook. The yearly cap hit can fluctuate - the cap hit is calculated as follows:

1. Take the actual salary due for each remaining year.
2. Take the Averaged Player Salary (cap hit) for the current contract.
3. Calculate the buyout amount (i.e. 2/3 of Greenings remaining ownings)
4. Spread the buy-out amount evenly over twice the remaining years of the contract
5. Take the number in No. 1 and subtract the number in No. 4. This is the “buyout savings.â€
6. Take the cap hit from No. 2 and subtract the buyout savings from No. 5.

We could buy Greening out. The benefit is that the team saves a bit of actual salary and opens a roster spot. The down side is that we would still have a cap hit to deal with (however negligible) for 4 more years. Waiving him would take his cap hit off the books and open a roster spot, but we'd still pay his full contract assuming no one touches him.

That's why Murray has been desperately trying to unload him. Because then, the roster spot, cap hit, and actual dollars are all saved.

 

[FunkySeeFunkyDoo]

No.

Greening signed an extension 1 year earlier and was still producing at a 0.40 PPG clip, which is why he got that money.

Not sure how many times we'll have to rectify the facts on this subject

He got the money because he showed flashes in 2013 of the player he'd been in 2011/2012, had a few very good games in the play-offs ... and because Murray likes big hockey players.

But, for anyone who knows hockey and was actually paying attention, the decline in his play between 2011/2012 and 2012/2013 was quite dramatic. He was much less assertive on the ice, much less willing to go to the dirty areas and (to my eyes) he had lost a step or two of his flat out speed.

I was surprised and disappointed that they signed him to a 3 year deal.

 

[FunkySeeFunkyDoo]

When he came into the NHL he fought, he hit, he dug, he did what the coach asked. Now that he has his money he doesn't want to get knocked out and deal with that his entire life, Greening is essentially to smart to be successful in the NHL, if he's not on the top 2 lines he Doesn't want to be a tough guy on the bottom 2 lines, he's not good enough to be the player he wants to be and not willing to be the player the team wants him to be.

This is it.

 

[krapsik]

Why Sens cant terminate Greenings contract, like LA did with Richards ? Again some loyalty/fair game thing ?

 

[MisterMethos]

Why Sens cant terminate Greenings contract, like LA did with Richards ? Again some loyalty/fair game thing ?

We don't know the details yet but Richards' contract was terminated due to a "material" breach of the requirements of his contract. Some rumors are it might be connected to his poor off-season conditioning, but L.A. won't disclose what the breach exactly was.

For us, Greening is just more of an inconvenience than anything else.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Yes, when you buy a player out who is over 26, you pay them 2/3 of their salary over double the length of their contract. Cap-wise, we're still on the hook. The yearly cap hit can fluctuate - the cap hit is calculated as follows:



We could buy Greening out. The benefit is that the team saves a bit of actual salary and opens a roster spot. The down side is that we would still have a cap hit to deal with (however negligible) for 4 more years. Waiving him would take his cap hit off the books and open a roster spot, but we'd still pay his full contract assuming no one touches him.

That's why Murray has been desperately trying to unload him. Because then, the roster spot, cap hit, and actual dollars are all saved.

If he is bought out to open up a roster spot because he otherwise would be the 13th/14th forward, the team saves close to nothing on Greening. The 1/3rd the Senators save would be mostly eaten up by the salary of the player promoted in Greening's spot. This is probably why Murray won't buy him out, but it doesn't explain not being willing to retain up to a certain amount (not half).

The only way a buyout saves Ottawa money is if the intention is to assign Greening to the AHL, which given he only stayed for 12 games last year as a sort of last resort, doesn't seem to be the case.

The reason a team would buyout Greening would be cap flexibility, which is irrelevant to Ottawa right now.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Why Sens cant terminate Greenings contract, like LA did with Richards ? Again some loyalty/fair game thing ?

You can't just terminate a player.

Odds are, there'll be a legitimate incident or reason for the Kings to take that step with Richards. Not gonna speculate, but I'm sure we can all let our imaginations run wild.

 

[FlyingJ]

You can't just terminate a player.

Oh really?

 

[tony d]

He is someone that the team should definitely cut its losses with.

 

[Slack]

Greening was dealing with injury, he will come back and compliment the bench/4th line adequately.

^Had to make a minor correction.

 

[Xspyrit]

He got the money because he showed flashes in 2013 of the player he'd been in 2011/2012, had a few very good games in the play-offs ... and because Murray likes big hockey players.

But, for anyone who knows hockey and was actually paying attention, the decline in his play between 2011/2012 and 2012/2013 was quite dramatic. He was much less assertive on the ice, much less willing to go to the dirty areas and (to my eyes) he had lost a step or two of his flat out speed.

I was surprised and disappointed that they signed him to a 3 year deal.

Personally, I never liked him as a player to begin with and wasn't buying the hype when everybody was in love with him and anointing him as the next 20 goals power forward. But he was statistically efficient, even when you found that he was less assertive, he was still producing at a 0.4 PPG pace, and that was WITHOUT SPEZZA most of the time. Unfortunately for the Sens, the guy has an agent who negotiated his contract and was able to obtain $$$ based on his play and production (results). Don't forget, this is a business results oriented and (hypothetic) at least 80% of a contract is based on pure numbers obtained.

Based on what Greening did in his first 3 years, he deserved that money. Problem is that he was not able to live up to his contract. Sens management were wrong on this one. Personally, I would have traded him because I didn't have faith in him, but 95% of this board (and that includes the hypocrites) would have (hypothetically) lynched me.