Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Rumour] Canucks trying to trade Halak


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Fanuck said:

On last night's live broadcast Ian Mac said the team believes there may still be a possibility Halak waives, Mac is as close to the team as any supposed 'insider'.  Just another reason to take what is reported with a grain of salt. 

Probably waives for a good opportunity.

Probably doesn’t wave for equal to lesser role than now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Me_ said:

It just gets really old and stale. 
 

The team he built is now 21-8-5 under a new coach.

 

If you had read, my past post I ve always had a balanced approach when it comes to JB or etc.  My take on the Halak, post was mainly to poke some fun at it - but I get, where your coming from and will pick my spots 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, JM_ said:

for sure. But it is annoying, he seems content to dial in lousy efforts and collect his $ here. I'd sit him and play Martin, even if it means a 12 man F roster. 

They are at home for the next week with a back-to-back this Saturday (CGY) / Sunday (BUF).  They might decide to bring up Martin - probably need to have him practice with the team a bit. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, JM_ said:

for sure. But it is annoying, he seems content to dial in lousy efforts and collect his $ here. I'd sit him and play Martin, even if it means a 12 man F roster. 

This.

 

Pulling a Bulis…

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

I think they know the type of team he would waive for.

 

I’m not too worried. These deals can come together in a short time.

 

Deadline day they can come to him with a 2-3 teams and say will you waive to go here? And then it’s just a matter of him saying yes or no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

I don't get it. He's not going to be here next year, so refusing to waive is only buying him a few months of not having to move. Not to mention this could be a chance for him to chase a cup. Almost seems like he's intentionally trying to dick us around.

He signed a deal, in good faith.

He worked his deal to save the Canucks salary cap this season.

He has lived up to the terms of his deal.

If he chooses to stay, good on him.

If he chooses to go, also good on him.

 

Call it another reminder to be very careful about signing contracts; like a potential 8 year, big money deal,  for a guy that will be 30 before the deal starts.

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, gurn said:

He signed a deal, in good faith.

He worked his deal to save the Canucks salary cap this season.

He has lived up to the terms of his deal.

If he chooses to stay, good on him.

If he chooses to go, also good on him.

 

Call it another reminder to be very careful about signing contracts; like a potential 8 year, big money deal,  for a guy that will be 30 before the deal starts.

Yup, he's under no obligation to do management a solid. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gurn said:

He signed a deal, in good faith.

He worked his deal to save the Canucks salary cap this season.

He has lived up to the terms of his deal.

If he chooses to stay, good on him.

If he chooses to go, also good on him.

 

Call it another reminder to be very careful about signing contracts; like a potential 8 year, big money deal,  for a guy that will be 30 before the deal starts.

Are you really turning this into a Miller thread? 

 

The point of the post is that I didn't understand why he wasn't willing to waive, I wasn't questioning his right to refuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

The point of the post is that I didn't understand why he wasn't willing to waive

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact he negotiated a NMC, so he wouldn't be moved?

Vancouver is a great place to live, why move, especially if his plan is to retire here.

Or maybe he just flat out believes a deal is a deal.

That would be my decision.

I sign a NMC- you are not moving me.

Or at some point the league could negotiatesome sort of payment to people that do get moved, after signing no move deals.

How about a $5 mill payment to Halak or anyone else?

And the $5 mill counts against the next seasons cap?

 

Why should the team get a break?  They signed the deal, they get the consequences.

 

26 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Are you really turning this into a Miller thread? 

I'm pointing out the dangers of  teams signing bad contracts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, coryberg said:

Looks like Halak will play Buffalo on Sunday. Maybe he gets a 57 save a shutout on trade dealine eve and teams go all in for his services :bigblush:

More likely some Buffalo winger on a months long scoring drought gets a hatty. Lol.

  • Haha 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...