Pastor Of Muppetz
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2017
- 26,224
- 16,126
He's been worth with every cent.Maybe Halak wanted to work with Ian Clark and signed for that reason.
He's been worth with every cent.Maybe Halak wanted to work with Ian Clark and signed for that reason.
Nah its just hindsight.The way this signing turned out was just about the most predictable thing ever.
I just saw this from capfriendly : "$250k bonus for .905+ SV%", why did no one mention it?
The whole point of Halak's deal was to defer money to the next year. That's what the Canucks wanted and Halak was agreeable to that on the basis of the various conditions that are on his contract.
Halak wasn't signing here for 1 year, $1.5M with zero trade protection. Brossoit got 2x$2.32M, Reimer got 2x$2.25M. Goalies that were bought out like Hotlby and Jones got 1x$2M.
Halak has actually been fine.
I mean, yeah?
And the whole point of deferring money to next year was that the GM was frantically trying to save his job by sneaking into 16th place. Trying to open a long-term contending window and set the team up well for 2+ years down the road was less important than selfishly trying to save his own skin.
I think they were making moves to fend off a possible offer sheet to Petey. I don't think they went in thinking that Halak gave them a better chance at sneaking into 16th place compared to Holtby?
I think they were making moves to fend off a possible offer sheet to Petey. I don't think they went in thinking that Halak gave them a better chance at sneaking into 16th place compared to Holtby?
Then don't sign a backup goalie until you secure the contracts for Pettersson and Hughes.
The order in which they did business this offseason was completely insane.
Nobody is saying do nothing before signing EP and Hughes but signing a backup goalie and a 3C Dickinson whose turned out to be useless was stupid. These were the types of moves you could attempt up until season almost started. Benning always overpaid for depth guys heaven knows why.That's easy for you to say. In reality, that can be difficult to do. It's not unusual for star level players to sign just before training camp or even after camp has started. There are different pressure points. It would be incredibly stupid to not do anything until you get Petey and Hughes sign when the team isn't aren't able to sign them before the start of free agency.
Then pay for a cheap backup while you wait. Surely you would trust demko and ian clark to be able to hold down the fort.That's easy for you to say. In reality, that can be difficult to do. It's not unusual for star level players to sign just before training camp or even after camp has started. There are different pressure points. It would be incredibly stupid to not do anything until you get Petey and Hughes sign when the team isn't aren't able to sign them before the start of free agency.
Nobody is saying do nothing before signing EP and Hughes but signing a backup goalie and a 3C Dickinson whose turned out to be useless was stupid. These were the types of moves you could attempt up until season almost started. Benning always overpaid for depth guys heaven knows why.
They pay for a cheap backup while you wait. Surely you would trust demko and ian clark to be able to hold down the fort.
We have been, but surely at this point in time Ian Clark and Demko have earned the trust that:Can Ian Clark play backup goalie? We've been sunk by bad goaltending before, whether it was Nillson, Holtby, or being forced to play Dipietro.
I don't see what the issue is. If you can't get EP and Hughes signed in time you save room and get other business done.
Halak would be hilarious because since he's over 35 they can give him 1 million bucks and then a bunch of bonuses to push into 2022-23... which would be very on-brand for the Canucks this off-season.
I like the target, though. Will wait to see term/cost though.
Who the f*** sighs a veteran backup to a multi year deal with NMC on a bottom 5 team.
the actual f***.
We have been, but surely at this point in time Ian Clark and Demko have earned the trust that:
1. Demko can carry the franchise goalie role ala Vasy in tampa.
2. Ian Clark can train any league min goalie into at least being serviceable or even better back up.
If I am reading what it being said correctly. Vancouver wants the team who trades for him to pay the bonuses--he has now played 10 games and that mean 1.25 added onto next years cap, Most teams that need a goalie are already up against the cap I do not see them taking on a bonus he earned with another team. another .250k is added if he ends up with a save % over .905--and I can see teams saying they will pay that one but not the 1.25
I agree that the fit has to be there. There's also nothing stopping from the Canucks from retaining some salary or taking a contract back. The issue is that if the Canucks are at the cap and can't fit Halak's bonuses, then it will carryover to next year. So the team is essentially trying to trade that liability away. Is it a big deal for a team looking to shore up their goaltending position come playoff time? I'm not sure, I would think not? A team like Nashville has been mentioned since they don't have a backup goalie they seem to trust (I actually like Rittich previously) and have cap space to absorb Halak's bonuses no problem.