Baberham Lincoln
Registered User
So do the Canucks trade Halak now? Spencer Martin has been pretty good even with the losses he's the reason the Canucks even got a point in both games he's played so far.
Dreger: Halak available from Vancouver
- Thread starter UrbanImpact
- Start date
Canadian Canuck
Hughes4Calder
Totally! Trade Halak to the highest bidder, then if Mikey DiPietro develops quickly we can flip Spencer too, since he's probably an NHL-caliber backup himself.
I think you may be jumping the gun a bit on Spencer. That first goal he let it was so bad.
I’d like to trade Halak though, because the backup will one need to play a handful of games from now until the end of the season.
Just A Bit Outside
Playoffs??!
- Mar 6, 2010
- 17,731
- 17,458
StickShift
In a pickle 🥒
I believe it comes down to whether Halak wants to waive his NMC. The chatter has been that he won’t—but I don’t recall where exactly that was reported.
Fair enough, wonder if he just didn't cover or get to the left post quickly enough? 47/50 saves is still very strong though.
It seems easily correctable. I would try to develop him into a capable backup going forward if he continues to play well.
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,233
- 12,383
Makes sense. Get something for a guy who isn't really doing anything for the Canucks the rest of this year. Give Halak a chance to play some more meaningful games. He's exactly the sort of guy i'd want as a veteran insurance policy down the stretch. Probably going to be a case of a return that's limited by Halak picking his landing spot. But whatever. Might as well do it, just get something for him.
Kamus
Registered User
- Oct 21, 2005
- 1,318
- 978
NMC doesn’t mean he can’t send him to the press box. And if he doesn’t play more games, he won’t get his bonus.
Thats how you burn bridges and dont get any UFA for the forseeable future
WildWolfdog
Registered User
- Dec 4, 2008
- 860
- 267
Regardless of who signed the contract there is no hockey reason to not play Halak. Being petty and screwing over a player who signed a contract in good faith isn’t a message you want to send to players and agents. Rutherford knows this.
Not sure it’s pettiness, it’s business.
All they have to do is go to Halak and say, Benning got fired because he f***ed out the team and the cap and your contract with that bonus is a contributing reason to that. We can’t afford to have your bonus on the cap so we aren’t going to play you. Waive and we will trade you and you will get your bonus.
Halak did the team a favour allowing his contract to be structured using the easily hit bonuses. Without it they couldn’t have signed him. The reason he has the NMC on the contract is to protect him from the team trying to weasel out of paying him. And you didn’t phrase it like that before. You said to threaten to sit him unless he waived. Which is incredibly petty and unprofessional
Chances are the recapture cap hit for next year wont matter if they move out a bunch of older guys for younger players / prospects and picks anyways...
JarvisFunk
Registered User
It’s not recapture. It’s a bonus that slides to next years cap because Vancouver doesn’t have the cap space this year to cover it
You didn't notice lately, that... We're out of NHL caliber goaltenders?
I guess losing 8 - 2 with 1 AHL goalie and 1 ECHL goalie wasn't obvious enough.
Who cares? Montambeault is due back this weekend. And at this point wins just lower the chance of a top 3 pick. It’s a lost season. Spending assets for a fill in goalie that comes with a $1.5m bonus cap hit NEXT season is lunacy
CupInSIX
My cap runneth over
That still cracks me up, all these years later.
I still wonder if he was on Pornhub or something.
I'm almost positive the '2 granlunds??' meme was actually true.
