jackp Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 Jackp and hab29, you can agree with each other's take as much as you like. I'm going to continue reading you both, however, just be ready, because Halak is gonzo. He'll get a nice raise in arbitration this summer, and we can't afford that. Let's hope we get something good for him. I think jackp mentioned a reluctance to trade him to Philadelphia, now that I agree with. Philly's way too close to us, and he can come back to haunt us in future playoff series. Because I think both our young goalies have great futures. One other thing, ya, Gomez makes alot of money. If we didn't have his contract, we might be able to afford both goalies. But he's here, so I say let's see what he does with a healthy Gionta. We have no other choice. Well, I hope you're wrong. I personally think that trading away Halak will turn out to be Gainey's worst move in his tenure here. All of us here will just have to wait and see... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 Jackp and hab29, you can agree with each other's take as much as you like. I'm going to continue reading you both, however, just be ready, because Halak is gonzo. He'll get a nice raise in arbitration this summer, and we can't afford that. Let's hope we get something good for him. I think jackp mentioned a reluctance to trade him to Philadelphia, now that I agree with. Philly's way too close to us, and he can come back to haunt us in future playoff series. Because I think both our young goalies have great futures. One other thing, ya, Gomez makes alot of money. If we didn't have his contract, we might be able to afford both goalies. But he's here, so I say let's see what he does with a healthy Gionta. We have no other choice. This point is interesting. In the eventuality that we trade Halak (and I do think it will happen this season), should we go for a lower return in the West or a higher return in Philly (East) ?? For my part, I'd say that we should go with the highest return possible, no matter where it is (maybe except North East). We never know : A) Halak could be traded again in the East anyway. Why give another team the chance to get the kind of return we could get ourselves ? and the most important B) Our return could possibly haunt Halak and his new team as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 As usual it all comes down to the fans. We do not accept not making the playoffs! If Halak is dealt for a 2nd or a prospect, I will be surprised. If Halak is dealt, I'm not sure Price can carry the load, and get the team to the playoffs. We will rip Bob either way. Traded the wrong goalie and missed the playoffs... Don't trade him and lose an asset. I still think that based on his numbers, Halak will not draw top RFA dollars in arbitration, so as Jackp said, take the savings from Price if he is still inconsistent and apply it to Halak's contract. You have the assset for another 1.5 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 (edited) Jackp and hab29, you can agree with each other's take as much as you like. I'm going to continue reading you both, however, just be ready, because Halak is gonzo. He'll get a nice raise in arbitration this summer, and we can't afford that. Let's hope we get something good for him. I think jackp mentioned a reluctance to trade him to Philadelphia, now that I agree with. Philly's way too close to us, and he can come back to haunt us in future playoff series. Because I think both our young goalies have great futures. One other thing, ya, Gomez makes alot of money. If we didn't have his contract, we might be able to afford both goalies. But he's here, so I say let's see what he does with a healthy Gionta. We have no other choice. Well, I see one of two things happening here, and really it's up to Price. If Carey can bolt his head on right, Halak will be traded. I wouldn't trade him before the deadline, because there isn't enough time to determine if Price can handle it. 1. Carey learns to battle every game and stops being inconsistent...gets raise, Halak dealt. 2. Carey remains inconsistent....does not get raise. Halak get's the money Carey would have got. Edited December 25, 2009 by BCHabnut Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 Well, I see one of two things happening here, and really it's up to Price. If Carey can bolt his head on right, Halak will be traded. I wouldn't trade him before the deadline, because there isn't enough time to determine if Price can handle it. 1. Carey learns to battle every game and stops being inconsistent...gets raise, Halak dealt. 2. Carey remains inconsistent....does not get raise. Halak get's the money Carey would have got. That would lead to a HUGE mess in the lockeroom, never good in any situation. Worse scenario is that we still have a goalie fight/problem next season cuz both remain with the team. One has to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 That would lead to a HUGE mess in the lockeroom, never good in any situation. Worse scenario is that we still have a goalie fight/problem next season cuz both remain with the team. One has to go. good point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 Put both on the market, look for which brings the biggest return, trade that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted December 26, 2009 Share Posted December 26, 2009 I honestly believe both will still be here at the start of next season unless some GM offers more than a 2nd rounder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackp Posted December 26, 2009 Share Posted December 26, 2009 Don't trade him and lose an asset. I still think that based on his numbers, Halak will not draw top RFA dollars in arbitration, so as Jackp said, take the savings from Price if he is still inconsistent and apply it to Halak's contract. You have the assset for another 1.5 years. As of this morning in the Gazette: "Halak has cracked the top 10 in the NHL save percentage standings with a .923 mark for the season." We should not get rid of him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForumGhost Posted December 26, 2009 Share Posted December 26, 2009 He's also played less than half the games then most people in the top 10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted December 26, 2009 Share Posted December 26, 2009 As of this morning in the Gazette: "Halak has cracked the top 10 in the NHL save percentage standings with a .923 mark for the season." We should not get rid of him. If you look at his career stats in junior and minor hockey, Halak always had high save percentage, often leading whichever league he was playing in. He said it himself anyway, he loves to face tons of shot. Not like he has a choice with the way the Habs play right now!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zowpeb Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 If you look at his career stats in junior and minor hockey, Halak always had high save percentage, often leading whichever league he was playing in. He said it himself anyway, he loves to face tons of shot. Not like he has a choice with the way the Habs play right now!!! It is worth noting that many goalies who face high shot counts often have good save percentages...most of those extra shots don't come in the form of scoring chances. I like Halak a lot but I want to see this team stop making manic decisions with prospects and commit to Price. I have no problem platooning the two goalies as part of the developmental plan, or showcasing Halak leading to the trade deadline if they prefer to deal one...I don't even have a problem re-signing both and platooning Halak/Price through next season too (not that I think this will happen). IMO Price is the guy the team needs to try and develop...with Halak around or not...age, background, development to date are all on Price's side of the equation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomh009 Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 age, background, development to date are all on Price's side of the equation. There is little enough difference between the two goalies in any of those categories. The big question is what is Price's real potential (it certainly was seen to be high when he was drafted) as of today. We are paying him far more than Halak for a similar level of play, essentially based on that future potential. Is he developing as expected or not? And none of us has the insight that the Habs coaching team does into this. If they think Price will be a franchise player, Halak may be on his way out. But if his potential is now seen as not much better than Halak's, then it may be that Price gets traded, especially as he would also free up some cap room for whoever we would get in return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zowpeb Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 There is little enough difference between the two goalies in any of those categories. Really? I think there are big differences... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 As of this morning in the Gazette: "Halak has cracked the top 10 in the NHL save percentage standings with a .923 mark for the season." We should not get rid of him. This is what I would call a perfect opportunity to "sell high." Normally, e.g. in the case of Plekanec, I would say sign the guy. Not with Halak - he will only stay if he can play (as he is right now), which is fine, but we have a better prospect to give the games to. Keep him and there will come a time when he is no longer top 10 in save percentage, no longer playing 5+ games in a row, no longer 24 years old. So "Sell high!" I say! We now find ourselves with a nice bargaining chip in our lap. This may be our chance to upgrade the forwards - although I would wait until we're sure Pouliot on the G-G line doesn't work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trizzak Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 So say a goaltender gets traded... do you want another goalie coming back in the deal, or does either Sanford or Desjardins belong in the NHL as of this moment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trizzak Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 This is what I would call a perfect opportunity to "sell high." BTH, Habs fans don't "sell high." They prefer to take someone who is at their lowest value and package them with a 2nd to bring in a star player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 So say a goaltender gets traded... do you want another goalie coming back in the deal, or does either Sanford or Desjardins belong in the NHL as of this moment? It isn't necessary. I think Sanford is a passable back-up. May come down to whether we can find a comparable goalie with a lower cap hit. BTH, Habs fans don't "sell high." They prefer to take someone who is at their lowest value and package them with a 2nd to bring in a star player. No, we just offer Halak, Ryder and a 2nd for every decent player rumored to be on the block. Well, Ryder is gone now, but Halak we still have - and now teams will actually want him! Halak, D'Agostini, Laraque + 2nd for Frolov! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackp Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 It isn't necessary. I think Sanford is a passable back-up. May come down to whether we can find a comparable goalie with a lower cap hit. No, we just offer Halak, Ryder and a 2nd for every decent player rumored to be on the block. Well, Ryder is gone now, but Halak we still have - and now teams will actually want him! Halak, D'Agostini, Laraque + 2nd for Frolov! You know what's really interesting? This forum is the only place I read, where a lot of people still want to trade Halak. In the past week, both TSN and the Gazette have people commenting that they should NOT trade him. One place (Gazette, I think) suggested trading Price instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaos Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 It isn't necessary. I think Sanford is a passable back-up. May come down to whether we can find a comparable goalie with a lower cap hit. No, we just offer Halak, Ryder and a 2nd for every decent player rumored to be on the block. Well, Ryder is gone now, but Halak we still have - and now teams will actually want him! Halak, D'Agostini, Laraque + 2nd for Frolov! And you need a salary dump as well to fit in Frolov's contract Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitforming Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 So say a goaltender gets traded... do you want another goalie coming back in the deal, or does either Sanford or Desjardins belongs in the NHL as of this moment? Fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 You know what's really interesting? This forum is the only place I read, where a lot of people still want to trade Halak. In the past week, both TSN and the Gazette have people commenting that they should NOT trade him. One place (Gazette, I think) suggested trading Price instead. Under normal circumstances you don't trade away your hottest goalie - even when your second hottest goalie has higher potential. But when your hottest goalie wants to be traded if he isn't getting the games, then I say trade him. Offering Halak the long-term starter's job if he'll agree to stay is too much for me. And you need a salary dump as well to fit in Frolov's contract I wasn't being serious. I don't see how we could ever fit in Frolov's salary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackp Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Under normal circumstances you don't trade away your hottest goalie - even when your second hottest goalie has higher potential. But when your hottest goalie wants to be traded if he isn't getting the games, then I say trade him. Offering Halak the long-term starter's job if he'll agree to stay is too much for me. Halak was asking to be traded when he sat for 10 games in a row. He probably feels differently now (as long as he continues to be treated fairly). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Halak was asking to be traded when he sat for 10 games in a row. He probably feels differently now (as long as he continues to be treated fairly). Really? I doubt it. I'm sure he realizes this will be Price's team and still wants out. Maybe it's not as pressing, but I'm sure that's what it boils down to. As much as it would be great to platoon two guys for 41 games to keep them both sharp and competing, I don't think it really works in the financial world of this NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackp Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 (edited) Really? I doubt it. I'm sure he realizes this will be Price's team and still wants out. Maybe it's not as pressing, but I'm sure that's what it boils down to. As much as it would be great to platoon two guys for 41 games to keep them both sharp and competing, I don't think it really works in the financial world of this NHL. Well, I think thing's have changed. Maybe he thinks he now has a chance to win the starting job. Who knows? But don't you feel that things have changed now as far as the goaltending situation is concerned? I no longer feel that the team is ready to hand the job to Price strictly on expectation. I feel that management is now waiting to see how things turn out between the two of them, and if Price doesn't work out, he might be the one to go instead of Halak. For the first time since they traded Huet away, I think Price has to earn the job. It's no longer his by divine right. And that's the way it should be. Edited December 30, 2009 by jackp 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.