JCPetit Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 No hurry, really, to trade Halak. First of all, he is playing, which should be comforting for him. Secondly, his value goes up. Thirdly, we need him to make the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 Packaging Pleks with Halak is a potentially GREAT idea. You could get a terrific return. I love those Jeff Carter rumours. People aren't seeing the forest for the trees. We are almost certain to LOSE Plekanec anyway as a UFA. Therefore he should be traded. We are NOT going to keep Halak long-term. Therefore we should trade him as part of the process of addressing the lack of talent at other positions. Pretty simple if you ask me. What I love is that both players are driving up their trade value by playing great. This *could* be Bob's opportunity to make one of those franchise-defining deals whereby we acquire truly elite talent. The alternative is to trading these guys is NOT keeping them. The alternative is to lose them for nothing and then spend years bitching about how Bob 'never gets value back for his assets.' No thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackp Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 That sounds like a cool roady jackp, be careful in TX, the armadillos sit in the middle of the road. Some are big. Happy Holiday. Thanks. Happy holidays to you too. I *hate* to gloat (not really) but it's 76 degrees Fahrenheit here today. Glad to see lots of common sense springing up in this thread about the Halak situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 Packaging Pleks with Halak is a potentially GREAT idea. You could get a terrific return. I love those Jeff Carter rumours. People aren't seeing the forest for the trees. We are almost certain to LOSE Plekanec anyway as a UFA. Therefore he should be traded. We are NOT going to keep Halak long-term. Therefore we should trade him as part of the process of addressing the lack of talent at other positions. Pretty simple if you ask me. What I love is that both players are driving up their trade value by playing great. This *could* be Bob's opportunity to make one of those franchise-defining deals whereby we acquire truly elite talent. The alternative is to trading these guys is NOT keeping them. The alternative is to lose them for nothing and then spend years bitching about how Bob 'never gets value back for his assets.' No thanks. One problem with dealing Plek is that he is so good all around. If you look at his numbers, he plays more PK than any of the top scorers in the league. I do tend to think that this season's points could be an anomoly, but man that's a tough one. We also said that the only reason he was good was Kovy. He put's those Czeck sausages right on the tape. Thanks Hammer. If Bob can lock him down early for for 5 mill, he should. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackp Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 Packaging Pleks with Halak is a potentially GREAT idea. You could get a terrific return. I love those Jeff Carter rumours. People aren't seeing the forest for the trees. We are almost certain to LOSE Plekanec anyway as a UFA. Therefore he should be traded. We are NOT going to keep Halak long-term. Therefore we should trade him as part of the process of addressing the lack of talent at other positions. Pretty simple if you ask me. What I love is that both players are driving up their trade value by playing great. This *could* be Bob's opportunity to make one of those franchise-defining deals whereby we acquire truly elite talent. The alternative is to trading these guys is NOT keeping them. The alternative is to lose them for nothing and then spend years bitching about how Bob 'never gets value back for his assets.' No thanks. So... we gut our team to: 1. Get a guy who may not be as good as Plekanec. 2. Take a chance that Price turns out to be the real deal. And if he's not? Oh well... I personally prefer to try and retain both guys so that: 1. We find out who is *really* the best goalie, and 2. We keep an asset we already know we possess - Plekanec. Now if the cap numbers don't work out after we do everything we can to sign Plex, we let one of our goalies go - the one who wasn't as good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForumGhost Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 To those of you saying we should keep Halak: just remember that you forfeit your right to complain when he walks for nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 To those of you saying we should keep Halak: just remember that you forfeit your right to complain when he walks for nothing. walks as an rfa? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForumGhost Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 If he stays, it's more than likely going to go to arbitration. Halak's agent is asking for at least 2.5 million and Bob doesn't wanna pay it. Halak will get a one year and then walk after it. If we try trading him in that one year, his value will be much less due to his impending UFA status and Bob knows it. That's why he's trying to trade him. Plus, Halak has already let it known he wants to play more, here or elsewhere. He knows it won't be here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 If he stays, it's more than likely going to go to arbitration. Halak's agent is asking for at least 2.5 million and Bob doesn't wanna pay it. Halak will get a one year and then walk after it. If we try trading him in that one year, his value will be much less due to his impending UFA status and Bob knows it. That's why he's trying to trade him. Plus, Halak has already let it known he wants to play more, here or elsewhere. He knows it won't be here. he just got 3 starts in a row. but ya, i know what you mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackp Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 he just got 3 starts in a row. but ya, i know what you mean. Let's say he stays and Bob signs him as a RFA. We're in a win-win situation. If he turns out to be the real deal, we sign him again for more money and let the other guy go. If Price turns out to be better, after Halak's RFA year, he goes, but we had a great backup for 1 and a half years, (good playoff insurance) and we are keeping the better guy after all, so it's not so bad losing Halak. It comes down to: Do we get a player *now* probably from Philly and make them a much better team while getting an unknown entity. (I think you're daydreaming if you think they'd give a top 6 forward)? Do we get no player for him but have a terrific backup for a year and a half more? In other words, a 3rd line player VS an extra year and a half of solid goaltending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 Let's say he stays and Bob signs him as a RFA. We're in a win-win situation. If he turns out to be the real deal, we sign him again for more money and let the other guy go. If Price turns out to be better, after Halak's RFA year, he goes, but we had a great backup for 1 and a half years, (good playoff insurance) and we are keeping the better guy after all, so it's not so bad losing Halak. It comes down to: Do we get a player *now* probably from Philly and make them a much better team while getting an unknown entity. (I think you're daydreaming if you think they'd give a top 6 forward)? Do we get no player for him but have a terrific backup for a year and a half more? In other words, a 3rd line player VS an extra year and a half of solid goaltending. The only way we get a top 6 forward for Halak is if we package him with somebody else. If that somebody else is Pleks - I'd say forget it. Capwise that wouldn't work anyway. However if we can find a way for someone to take Gomez and Halak, or even Gionta or Halak, for a true top 6, that is actually closer to a top 3, would be the only way I'd be willing to move halak. Price needs someone to push him and we need someone who can win some games when Price is not on his game. I don't see anyone in Hamilton (despite good minor league numbers) that is NHL ready. So who do we have to move to get a backup??? I sure the heck don't want Boucher from Philly. The only other reason I'd be willing to move Halak is that if we are closer to the deadline and are far out of a playoff position, otherwise, IMO given the shots we give up, we need a solid #1A type of goalie just to get into the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForumGhost Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 I think Halak is definitely worth a top 6 but I don't think Bob will be able to get one. I would only trade Halak for a top 6, though. No use is giving up a good goalie who we may need for a playoff run if it's just going to be draft picks or spare parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 I think Halak is definitely worth a top 6 but I don't think Bob will be able to get one. I would only trade Halak for a top 6, though. No use is giving up a good goalie who we may need for a playoff run if it's just going to be draft picks or spare parts. In the NHL no goalie is really worth a top 6 forward, not even Luongo garnished one. 2nd round pick is what he is worth, I do not know why teams do not pay for goalies but they do not. 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.