Cody McCormick not given qualifying offer by Avs; to become a UFA

by c0nquistad0rian on Jun 29, 2009 6:16 PM MDT Comment 31 comments

Goodbye Cody McCormick
by Adrian Dater on June 29, 2009

Cody was/is a good kid who always worked hard for the Avs. Let’s wish him the best, Av-Aholics.

Cody McCormick will not be back with the Avalanche. He was not given a qualifying offer by the Avalanche, to retain his rights, so he becomes an unrestricted free agent Wednesday.

http://blogs.denverpost.com/avs/2009/06/29/goodbye-cody-mccormick/

This is an interesting development. Cody McCormick was a restricted free agent. The Avs had to offer AT LEAST 110% his previous year's salary to retain his rights. He made $522k last year. Therefore, his minimum qualifying offer would have been $574,200k. You can't get much cheaper than that; the league minimum for this coming season raised to $500k.

Avs management must have felt very strongly about not wanting McCormick back to not even offer the minimum qualifying offer. He was arbitration eligible. Should have have elected to file and been awarded more money than his minimum qualifying offer in arbitration, the Avs simply could have walked away from the arbitor's decision and made him an unrestricted free agent at that point.

MileHighHockey.com is a fan community, allowing members to post their own thoughts and opinions on the Colorado Avalanche and hockey in general. These views and thoughts may not be shared by the editors of MileHighHockey.com.

0 recs | Comment 31 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

same time as my fanshot

What bothers me the most is with PL it used to be all about having assets and flexibility. By doing this, they aren’t just saying that they don’t want him back, but are also saying that he is absolutely not a tradeworthy commodity, even with a very low salary, which I have a hard time believing. Decent 4th liner who can hit and fight? Gotta be some takers out there for him?

MHH: Shagging Dater one contributor at a time.

by Bob in Boulder on Jun 29, 2009 6:21 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

I never know when you’re supposed to do a FanPost or a FanShot! I always forget to look in that FanShot area.

by c0nquistad0rian on Jun 29, 2009 6:26 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I promoted this one because it’s the first one I saw, although if it has the added bonus of irking Bibby…

Hyphens cause writers more trouble than any other form of punctuation, except perhaps commas.

by David Driscoll-Carignan on Jun 29, 2009 6:27 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

(although I did like Bob’s title)

Hyphens cause writers more trouble than any other form of punctuation, except perhaps commas.

by David Driscoll-Carignan on Jun 29, 2009 6:29 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

You've seen what happens when I get irked

Ask Bill over at Excluding Zetterberg.

MHH: Shagging Dater one contributor at a time.

by Bob in Boulder on Jun 29, 2009 6:32 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Salary slashing

This is the salary cut rumor that’s been flying around! Ha ha ha!

Seriously though, we don’t need him with Mcleod.

I don't believe in Peter Budaj.

by BraxtanFILM on Jun 29, 2009 6:25 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

only mildly surprised at this.

Hyphens cause writers more trouble than any other form of punctuation, except perhaps commas.

by David Driscoll-Carignan on Jun 29, 2009 6:26 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

Not very surprised, either. McCormick has never been healthy – or good – enough to stay in the line up for a whole season. And I kind of figured that the “we already have McLeod” argument would be brought up. But, that is part of the justification for the Avs not re-signing Laperriere, too. How many guys can McLeod replace? I suspect that this means that the Avs may use McCormick’s roster spot and salary try to sign a designated fighter in the off-season. While McLeod participated in the occasional bought – and was good at it, he seemed to be pretty selective. Laperriere still did most of the fighting and McCormick chipped in here and there as well.

by c0nquistad0rian on Jun 29, 2009 6:35 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Budaj reportedly re-signed
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=656604

Hyphens cause writers more trouble than any other form of punctuation, except perhaps commas.

by David Driscoll-Carignan on Jun 29, 2009 6:29 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

wow! I just wrote in jibble’s comments that I thought that Budaj would be signed for about $900k-1.25 million even though his minimum QO only had to be $840k.

by c0nquistad0rian on Jun 29, 2009 6:36 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guessed $1.4 m myself: http://www.milehighhockey.com/2009/3/11/789508/avalanche-cap-stuff

Hyphens cause writers more trouble than any other form of punctuation, except perhaps commas.

by David Driscoll-Carignan on Jun 29, 2009 6:38 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

im surprised at the amount. was he arbitration eligible?

by thedoctor on Jun 29, 2009 6:39 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes he was. Regardless, I think that that amount is about right for a goalie who played 50 games the season before.

by c0nquistad0rian on Jun 29, 2009 6:42 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow, that’s an awful lot for a guy who pretty much blew. Yes I understand the D sucked in front of him, but he didn’t help himself at all either. The fact that we can give a guy like Budaj who sucked…a raise. But can’t shell out money for Lappy (a guy who didn’t suck(…well then we are gonna tank it for one more year. Whooopee!

by chiavsfan on Jun 29, 2009 6:46 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

The D did not suck that bad

Didn’t you see the stats on “Expected Save Percentage”? If Budaj even had a respectable .910 save percentage, the Avs might have made the playoffs last year.

If that’s not bad enough…why THE FUCK give him a raise when you can have him for 840k?

I don't believe in Peter Budaj.

by BraxtanFILM on Jun 29, 2009 10:46 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sigh

The D was that bad, that expected save % stat was flawed, something we’ve covered before.

I certainly think $1.25M is too much after the way Budaj played last season, but as Doc says, that’s probably what he would have gotten in arbitration and he’s easily the Avs best/cheap option as a backup.

The 2008-2009 Colorado Avalanche: Slumpbusters

by Jibblescribbits on Jun 29, 2009 11:01 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

then it kinda makes sense. 50 games would have led to a similar amount in arbitration, if not more. and we all know the Avs pathological hate for arbitration, something i happen to agree with them about.

by thedoctor on Jun 29, 2009 6:48 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol, i was pretty free with totally wrong opinions in that thread, haha.

by thedoctor on Jun 29, 2009 6:52 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

good thing I’m never wrong like that

Hyphens cause writers more trouble than any other form of punctuation, except perhaps commas.

by David Driscoll-Carignan on Jun 29, 2009 7:53 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

YEAH!!!!

Woooooo hoooooo!!!!!!!! My goalie stays an Av and my Budaj jersey stays :)

An ounce of confidence can carry you a mile toward winning. Oh, and Red Wings suck.

by texacogirl on Jun 29, 2009 6:45 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs

And my pet bird stays in the house.

softpillowcase

by Selanne on Jun 29, 2009 8:22 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have to rec that, just because it sums up my feeling perfectly, plus I can still rock my Boods jersey in public safe in the knowledge that the .0000001% of people who see me and know who the hell this BoodAg guy is can’t talk shit abouit it.

The Savage has spoken. Let it be done

"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I took the one less travelled by, and that has made all the difference"
R. Frost

by Savage33 on Jun 30, 2009 4:05 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I liked him, and yes, it is a very small contract, but a half mil is still a half mil. Maybe that’s the difference in getting a goalie?

softpillowcase

by Selanne on Jun 29, 2009 6:30 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

Half a mil is still half a mil. But like I said, half a mil is the NHL MINIMUM next year. someone’s going to have that roster spot and be earning at least that much money.

by c0nquistad0rian on Jun 29, 2009 6:37 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think it’s more a matter of wanting someone else to have that roster spot rather than the money. the Avs had a little logjam of those types of players. Letting Lappy and McCormick go is kind of painful and we would have rather kept them both and ditch Tucker but we don’t 4 of 5 of those types of players on the roster

Hyphens cause writers more trouble than any other form of punctuation, except perhaps commas.

by David Driscoll-Carignan on Jun 29, 2009 6:40 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I see McCormick as a spare part. We would be signing someone else anyways, and keeping McCormick would not be for keeping him in a certain roster spot; instead he’d be one of a few players in and out of a rotating door for a roster spot. So the deal with McCormick is “do we want McCormick as one of these spare parts to fill holes, or not?” as opposed to “do we specifically want McCormick or [specific player X]?”.

softpillowcase

by Selanne on Jun 29, 2009 8:27 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

i liked this cody mac

but he kinda sucked at the whole hockey side of things. no big loss.

btw, im sure they did try to shop him and didn’t get any takers. if you don’t have any takers and you qualify a guy, you’re on the hook for his salary f he agrees. we didn’t want him, this is the right way to shed his salary. there was no guarantee that he’d go to arbitration.

by thedoctor on Jun 29, 2009 6:41 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

Very true.

by c0nquistad0rian on Jun 29, 2009 6:42 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I of course shelled out a measly 200 bucks for a Cody McCormick game-worn jersey…if it’s that low, then you know what kind of player he is. Oh well, it’s still a nice jersey

by chiavsfan on Jun 29, 2009 6:44 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs