Thursday, April 17, 2008

Don't blame only Emery

"I don't take responsibility for the team losing in the playoffs, I'll tell you that much. I showed up late for practice twice this year and had an opportunity to still go on the ice and they told me to go home. When some other guys are late coming to the rink they're just fine ..."
Let's face it, Ottawa folded down the stretch and in the postseason. And more than any other player, Ray Emery's getting the blame.

This despite the fact he hasn't started a game since February.

Sure, Emery was a distraction this year, a big one, and the resulting media circus couldn't have contributed much to the dressing room. But when he's marginalized and the coaching change is made, how then can you blame him for the team's performance on the ice?

Emery had a 12-13-4 record, but after he stopped starting post-trade deadline, this team went 7-12-2.

They folded, and I don't think you can blame the goalie for that one.

But he's still likely going out the door.

Emery has two more years on his contract at a cap hit of $3.167-million, but his potential buyout is limited to only one-third of his remaining salary as long as he is under 26 years old. (He turns 26 at the end of September.)

Emery's due $3.25-million next season and 3.5-million the year after, one-third of which would equal $2.25-million, a figure that gets spread against the cap for the next four years.

Given the salary cap will rise over $56-million this off-season, it's not going to amount to much of a hit for the Senators.


07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12
1. Original contract
$2.750 $3.250 $3.500

2. Averaged amount $3.167 $3.167 $3.167

3. Buyout (1/3 of $6.75-mil)
$1.083 $1.167 (Total = $2.25-mil)
4. Buyout over twice length
$0.563 $0.563 $0.563 $0.563
5. Buyout "savings"
$2.688 $2.938 - -
6. Amount of cap hit
$0.480 $0.230 $0.563 $0.563

Not too bad at all. Emery receives $2.25-million, but only a little more than $1.8-million goes against the cap, and that's over four seasons.

UPDATE I'll be on the Team 1260 in Edmonton talking about Emery and other subjects later today.
.

Labels: ,

18 Comments:

At 3:23 PM, April 17, 2008, Blogger FAUX RUMORS said...

1) While its silly to even place one iota of blame at Emery's skates for the late season/playoff collapse, we love how Emery quickly disassociated himself from his (probably soon to be former) team mates.
Nice job Ray!

 
At 3:33 PM, April 17, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gimme a break. A buyout gets you absolutely nothing for a lot of money. And Emery has a point: he did help take this team farther than it's ever gone, farther than a lot of teams have gone. I think that should have bought him some benefit of the doubt, or at least some more starts.

 
At 3:36 PM, April 17, 2008, Blogger PPP said...

Ray graduated from the Peyton Manning School of Throwing Your Teammates Under The Bus.

I am sure his partying, (alleged) fun-time issues, and the fact that he was late for WAAAAAY more than 2 practices (and that it spanned two seasons) had nothing to do with the team's problems.

I mean, besides the fact that the whole team has no heart.

 
At 3:39 PM, April 17, 2008, Blogger Dennis Prouse said...

James, I was under the impression that the reduced buyout for players under 26 was a one-time event in the summer of '05, to help teams get ready for the new salary cap era. As such, I am pretty certain that Emery is subject to the same buyout rules as any other player now.

 
At 3:45 PM, April 17, 2008, Anonymous penaltyshots.ca said...

My favorite part of the article is where he makes the claim:

"I thought, you take a team to the finals, you're the guy until you play bad enough not to be that guy."

Ray Emery, putting the I back in team.

They will certainly get rid of him now, but the question is why they didn't sooner. I think Cherry pointed it out: If he is a distraction, why have him in the room and on the bench. Either play him or drop him. Who knows why they didn't.

 
At 3:49 PM, April 17, 2008, Anonymous b said...

"I thought, you take a team to the finals, you're the guy until you play bad enough not to be that guy."

He's mistaken: the team took him to the finals. He was never much better than average, and never had to be with the team in front of him.
I watched every game of the run, and can't say he stole any of the Sens 13 wins for them. He was solid, yes, but he sure didn't take the team to the finals.

And from all inside accounts I've heard (whatever that's worth), he was a dressing room cancer, pissing off plenty of players and causing divisions between those friends who stood up for him and the rest of the team.

It's not all his fault, but the team had some serious issues as a group and he was certainly the root of some of those.

 
At 3:50 PM, April 17, 2008, Blogger Down Goes Brown said...

"When some other guys are late coming to the rink they're just fine ..."

So will the Ottawa media ask the logical followup -- which other guys were showing up late that the team let slide?

Or will it just be all Emery's fault, and once he's bought out there's nothing more to see here.

 
At 3:55 PM, April 17, 2008, Blogger James Mirtle said...

It's been reported that the age cutoff for receiving the full two-thirds buyout is 26.

The actual CBA references the fact that players receive either one-third or two-thirds of their salary, and that players "over 26" receive two-thirds, but not specifically the one-third for players under that age requirement. If someone can see it there, feel free to let me know.

 
At 4:04 PM, April 17, 2008, Blogger Jonathan said...

Obviously, Emery isn't to blame for the Senators late-season collapse and subsequent sweep. The players who actually played in the games are responsible for that.

However, Emery is responsible for his actions. Between his mediocre play, the distraction he was to the team, and the fact he's probably a cancer in the room, he should be bought out. He's just not the only problem.

 
At 4:09 PM, April 17, 2008, Blogger Kel said...

Another point to add is that the special treatment coming out of the lockout was a one-time window in summer 05 for teams to buy out any contract (regardless of player's age) without using up any cap space. Quite a few teams bought out players with big contracts that summer. Quite a few teams couldn't afford or weren't willing to do that, also (Yashin, for example)

 
At 4:34 PM, April 17, 2008, Anonymous PPP said...

So will the Ottawa media ask the logical followup -- which other guys were showing up late that the team let slide?

Or will it just be all Emery's fault, and once he's bought out there's nothing more to see here.


Considering the rumours of the Ottawa media's complicitness in keeping very serious stories quiet I would assume that they'll go with Blame Emery.

 
At 5:23 PM, April 17, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Funny how the Ottawa Sun lard-@arses can spill buckets of ink on imaginary trades but they can't be bothered to write about what's unravelling right in front of them.

That's assuming they bother to go to games or practices. Or talk to players or management. Because it's not obvious from their "reporting."

 
At 5:26 PM, April 17, 2008, Blogger Dennis Prouse said...

There are all kinds of rumours swirling in Ottawa about the recreational habits of certain players, but that's all they are - rumours. If someone in the media publishes them without any facts to back it up, they and their media outlet will be sued for millions. That's not being "complicit" -- that is being responsible. I have no way of knowing if any of those rumours are true, and neither does anyone else here. A reporter would love to break a big story like this, but first he or she would need some kind of a smoking gun to keep from getting sued.

 
At 9:09 PM, April 17, 2008, Blogger rickibear said...

If Emery is correct in stating other guys were late and did not get punished. What does that say about double standard visible to other players. That is guaranteed to destroy a dressing room. I can just visualize the players thoughts, "team my ass."

Murray and Paddock are smart men. They should know that would happen.
I wonder whom got the preferential treatment? (someone whom was not a fringe player) Who meddled in team affairs to cause the preferential treatment? (Perhaps the person paying the bills.)

"Cancer in the room" more people to consider me thinks.

 
At 12:11 AM, April 18, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are all kinds of rumours swirling in Ottawa about the recreational habits of certain players, but that's all they are - rumours. If someone in the media publishes them without any facts to back it up, they and their media outlet will be sued for millions. That's not being "complicit" -- that is being responsible.

Mean, like, when Sports Illustrated wrote that half the Oilers dynasty squad was on blow, and the Edmonton media pretended they spelled refreshment P-E-P-S-I?

Chicken-sh!t journalism then. Chicken-sh!t journalism now.

 
At 12:16 PM, April 18, 2008, Blogger Down Goes Brown said...

Dennis...

A reporter would love to break a big story like this, but first he or she would need some kind of a smoking gun to keep from getting sued.

You're right that you can't accuse somebody of this sort of thing without evidence. Rumors aren't enough.

So why doesn't anyone in Ottawa go get that evidence? The player(s) aren't even go to any special lengths to hide anything. There have been times when a photographer with a decent lens could get all the evidence that was needed and have it on the front page the next day.

Why don't they? Well, it would displease Roy Mlakar and friends, and it sure sounds like that's just more trouble than its worth.

I have no way of knowing if any of those rumours are true, and neither does anyone else here.

Maybe.

 
At 1:40 PM, April 18, 2008, Blogger Bruce said...

Mean, like, when Sports Illustrated wrote that half the Oilers dynasty squad was on blow, and the Edmonton media pretended they spelled refreshment P-E-P-S-I?

Seems to me the Edmonton media played a major role in outing Grant Fuhr in 1990.

Odd fact: Ray Emery was born on Grant Fuhr's 20th birthday, Sept. 28, 1982.

Not-so-odd fact: 20 years ago this spring, 25-year-old Grant Fuhr won his fourth Stanley Cup, starting 94 games that season and winning 56 of them. This year at the same age Ray Emery saw his save percentage plummet from .918 to .890 and the bottom drop out of his professional career. Which goes to show that comparing the two of them is a silly endeavour from which I will desist immediately. :)

 
At 3:34 PM, April 18, 2008, Blogger heed said...

what players do in their personal lives is their business. leave those issues alone. blaming emery for this season is pathetic at best. maybe the leadership in that room should have told him to shut up and got the guys to tune it out. they didn't. seems like everyone in ottawa is willing to blame everything on one guy. a guy who didn't even play or the last 2 months. i have a feeling we haven't seen the last of emery and i'm almost certain his revenge will be sweet.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Links to this post:

Create a Link


.

Free Page Rank Checker
eXTReMe Tracker