• Brule Says He’s Waiver Eligible

    by  • September 15, 2009 • Uncategorized • 18 Comments

    At the 2:10 mark.

    So, if you’re scoring as home, as late as June 20, 2009, the Oilers didn’t know what Brule is publicly saying now. I’m pretty sure that their confusion ran deeper into the summer but looking for posts in the OilersNation archives is impossible, so I’ll pass but one wonders whether any decisions were made on the understanding that Brule could be sent down. It’s a small thing, but it’s relatively easy to figure out, and if they really didn’t understand this and he really is waiver eligible (I’m still holding out hope that there’s some sort of confusion somewhere, because it makes them look so bad)…well, as I said the other day – maybe the losses should be pinned to a certain degree on managerial incompetence.

    Update: Jason Gregor reports that the Oilers have conceded that Brule needs to clear waivers.


    18 Responses to Brule Says He’s Waiver Eligible

    1. September 15, 2009 at

      YOU ARE WRONG. He’s not waiver eligible because forwards that impact the second salary cap for less than $750K annually are not waiver eligible until they score 40 goals or participate in six fights.

      Brule’s deal is structured such that $600K hits the first salary cap and $200K hits the second, so he’s okay on the first mark, and he’s well below both of the statistical triggers. He can be sent down without worry.

      (I feel like I could easily be Jason Gregor.)

    2. Mr DeBakey
      September 15, 2009 at

      Uh no

      Gregor brags about hangovers, you never do.
      Also, remember – Pouliot, Potulny & McDonald aren’t good enough to make this team.

      As for the matter at hand,
      Sometimes I think hockey management is designed for the hard of thinking.

    3. kris
      September 15, 2009 at

      And the final score is…

      Guys Wearing Pajamas eating Cheetos: 1
      “Serious” Journalists with Access: 0

    4. September 15, 2009 at

      And the final score is…

      Guys Wearing Pajamas eating Cheetos: 1
      “Serious” Journalists with Access: 0

      Kris: Hehe. :D

      Speeds: Good call.

    5. Ribs
      September 15, 2009 at

      Ugh…I sure hope there is some kind of reasoning for this. Ugly.

    6. OilW30
      September 15, 2009 at

      Of course, you’re assuming that they didn’t know. As a lawyer, I’m sure you know that these things aren’t always black and white. They could’ve just maintaining their position on a contentious issue.

    7. mc79hockey
      September 15, 2009 at

      That doesn’t explain the thing about passing him through waivers last year. I don’t think that this was a particularly debatable point either, for what it’s worth. I’ll take positions at times but I try to keep them reasonable.

    8. September 15, 2009 at

      BTW, for the group of guys taking shots at Gregor, you’re way off.

      The problem isn’t Gregor – who reacted the way I think most guys listening to the assistant GM would – the problem is the Oilers. There’s no excuse that I can see for that sort of error.

    9. September 15, 2009 at

      Kris: Are you borrowing that from the Ron White routine? If so, I applaud you.

    10. mc79hockey
      September 15, 2009 at

      It’s one thing if you’re getting poorly spelled nonsense from people. When people like speeds are politely telling you that their explanation doesn’t make sense and you can’t even be bothered to check, you’re part of the problem.

      With that said, who cares about Gregor? It’s the Oilers’ side of this that’s interesting.

    11. September 15, 2009 at

      Oh, and Tyler:

      August 7th.

    12. September 15, 2009 at

      Tyler: Fair enough. I’m not going to argue that Gregor was right in how he handled this. But I think we both agree that isn’t the pressing issue here.

    13. OilW30
      September 15, 2009 at

      I forgot about the fact that they snuck him through last year. But why would they sneak maintain that he’s not waiver eligible this year, if they snuck him down last year? It just doesn’t make sense. Can a player ever be waiver eligible one year and then not waiver eligbile the next?

    14. OilW30
      September 15, 2009 at

      Sorry for the typos–I must be tired tonight.

    15. sketchy
      September 15, 2009 at

      Can we waive Jason Gregor?

    16. namflashback
      September 16, 2009 at

      I can get my head around the idea that pro-scouts, Asst GM’s, and coaches might inevitably make their player evaluations based on primarily intuitive and less analytical means.

      But one individual must appreciate the analytical and details is the GM.

      And the capologist and CBA interpreter had better be the MOST analytical and detail oriented. He’s not making the decisions — but the rest of the staff are making roster decisions based on his information.


    17. Tk10
      September 16, 2009 at

      Gregor seems to have implied he was “misled”. If so then the integrity of the organization is in issue. If he was not misled and Olczyk didn’t know, then the issue is one of competence.
      However how does one ignore the apparent Olczyk statement that Brule cleared waivers last season?
      Is this dis-information or is it Watergate?

    18. Tk10
      September 16, 2009 at

      “Brulegate” or “Olczykgate” might be better.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *