BlueKross Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 The reason is, it'd be silly, unless team trading for him overpays a lot. Price is due to make say what... 1mil prolly based on his play? Halak is going to seek 4m most likely based on other goalie signings around the league. Simple math, unless they dump other players they cannot re-sign both Plek and Halak, trading Prices' 1mil salary will not be enough to balance the scales. I'm not expert at the cap, but just from what I looked at numbers, someone who's more familiar may be able to say if I'm right or not. Both goalies are Rfa's come the end of June. I have my doubts that if management were to keep both goalies that they could get away with paying one goalie more than the other. What their cap hits were this past year are irrelevant. What is important is their cap hit in subsequent years, starting in 2010-2011. I don't have a feel for what our GM might be up to, but if the purpose is just to gain cap space, my guess would be they would move defensemen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 (edited) Both goalies are Rfa's come the end of June. I have my doubts that if management were to keep both goalies that they could get away with paying one goalie more than the other. What their cap hits were this past year are irrelevant. What is important is their cap hit in subsequent years, starting in 2010-2011. I don't have a feel for what our GM might be up to, but if the purpose is just to gain cap space, my guess would be they would move defensemen. I don't think there are any easy answers to our cap problems. However, there's no question that Gill, Hamrlik, and Spacek - although I love the first two - are all past their prime and command a pile of dough. Of these, only Hamrlik will be truly hard to replace with feasible, cheaper alternatives. E.g., a Subban could probably do more for us - allowing for growth pains - next season than the Spacek we've so far seen; and O'Bryne can reasonably be asked to play a role equivalent to Gill's next season. Mara is, of course, gonzo no matter what happens. So I agree: I'd rather see Gauthier take a chance on a younger, cheaper defensive unit than try to make cap room by disposing of either of our goalies (or Andrei Kostitysn, for that matter). When in doubt, keep the young talent. Edited February 27, 2010 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted March 1, 2010 Share Posted March 1, 2010 I don't think there are any easy answers to our cap problems. However, there's no question that Gill, Hamrlik, and Spacek - although I love the first two - are all past their prime and command a pile of dough. Of these, only Hamrlik will be truly hard to replace with feasible, cheaper alternatives. E.g., a Subban could probably do more for us - allowing for growth pains - next season than the Spacek we've so far seen; and O'Bryne can reasonably be asked to play a role equivalent to Gill's next season. Mara is, of course, gonzo no matter what happens. So I agree: I'd rather see Gauthier take a chance on a younger, cheaper defensive unit than try to make cap room by disposing of either of our goalies (or Andrei Kostitysn, for that matter). When in doubt, keep the young talent. We have a glut of young talent waiting to be moved up. We would like to go the way were you move the old out and the new in as much as possible. You have to strike a balance between veterans and youth unless you are prepared to conceed the next couple of years. You will have to move some YOUTH or risk losing them. As I have said before, I see prospects being moved to top up deals with defensemen. The big problem is what are you getting in return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsy Posted March 1, 2010 Share Posted March 1, 2010 We have a glut of young talent waiting to be moved up. We would like to go the way were you move the old out and the new in as much as possible. You have to strike a balance between veterans and youth unless you are prepared to conceed the next couple of years. You will have to move some YOUTH or risk losing them. As I have said before, I see prospects being moved to top up deals with defensemen. The big problem is what are you getting in return. Sure, but that glut, your word, looks like a pack of fourth line energy guys. With the exception of PK, and maybe Pacioretty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_Boagalott Posted March 1, 2010 Share Posted March 1, 2010 Sure, but that glut, your word, looks like a pack of fourth line energy guys. With the exception of PK, and maybe Pacioretty. Well ya, but your missing the point, they look like a pack of cheap ass 4th line energy guys with more energy and skill than the current 3rd and 4th line guys. The top 2 lines were producing semi regularily. Its the bottom 2 lines that were underproducing, and all the AHL callups were out playing the regular 3rd and 4th line guys. If the newer younger cheaper 4th line guys can out produce the non producing current 3rd and 4th line guys wheres the problem exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsy Posted March 1, 2010 Share Posted March 1, 2010 Well ya, but your missing the point, they look like a pack of cheap ass 4th line energy guys with more energy and skill than the current 3rd and 4th line guys. The top 2 lines were producing semi regularily. Its the bottom 2 lines that were underproducing, and all the AHL callups were out playing the regular 3rd and 4th line guys. If the newer younger cheaper 4th line guys can out produce the non producing current 3rd and 4th line guys wheres the problem exactly? Ok, I see you working. And that I agree with. Not sure we'll save alot cap wise, but everything helps!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted March 1, 2010 Share Posted March 1, 2010 (edited) what i don't get is some of the so called "experts/analysts" in the media saying the habs should move Laps, Weber, halak/Price, Sk74, Mara and Metro. Really the only two I'd move are Mara and Metro from that list. All of the guys being suggested are cheap. The habs are up an.gainst the cap. They need to do whatever possible to fix the cap situation. I'd try and move the big salaries (Hamrlik/Gomez/Spacek), and move the older replaceable parts like Metro, Moen, Mara, Gill. The only way i'd move a guy like SK74, is if we are moving him for another young guy - who looks like he has more of an upside. With Laps, I'd move him only as part of a package to either dump salary (gomez), or as part of a package where we either get a true top 3 d-man or top 6 (BIG) forward. Edited March 1, 2010 by hab29RETIRED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bar Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 A player the habs should not move is Moen, he's cheap, is what the habs need for the 3rd line, if Moen had a twin brother they should sign him! I hope that Hammer would stay another year, him together with Subban would do wonders for PKs transition to the NHL, ala Phanuef a couple years back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.