Waived: Chris Higgins (Update: Clears)
- Thread starter GetFocht
- Start date
- Status
VanillaCoke
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2013
- 25,410
- 11,856
keslerburrows
Registered User
KeninsFan
Fire Benning already
- Feb 6, 2012
- 5,489
- 0
ginner classic
Dammit Jim!
How can this be Benning's fault- if not one of 29 other teams want him?
I would say there are three key factors here, and none of them have anything to do with Benning:
1) Father time
2) Exceptionally poor performance by Chris
3) His contract being what it is and for another year
What this does say pretty clearly that there is no asset there any more... Thanks for your service Chris, but this has come to an end now. We will remember you as we do other former players.
Intangibos
High-End Intangibos
If he clears, then it was the right choice and nobody wanted him. If he gets picked up, then we probably made an oopsie.
I don't really feel strongly either way about this, it's not nearly as bad as waiving Corrado and Markstrom.
To be honest though, I'd rather Higgins on this team than Dorsett, but that's not going to happen and isn't a huge deal either way.
I don't really feel strongly either way about this, it's not nearly as bad as waiving Corrado and Markstrom.
To be honest though, I'd rather Higgins on this team than Dorsett, but that's not going to happen and isn't a huge deal either way.
PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 63,020
- 24,251
just because a team grabs him off the waiver wire doesn't mean there was a trade available
Jimson Hogarth*
Registered User
- Nov 21, 2013
- 12,858
- 3
I still don't think he gets claimed. Very few teams have the cap space to claim him, and it doesn't help that he has been very underwhelming this year and signed for another year after this. Lots of players have passed through waivers this year who would have normally been claimed 2-3 years ago, but this year has been something special.
I think the question we should be asking is do we buy him out in the off-season? It would give us a $833,333 cap penalty for two more years, as opposed to his $1.55M cap hit in the AHL for only one more year.
I think the question we should be asking is do we buy him out in the off-season? It would give us a $833,333 cap penalty for two more years, as opposed to his $1.55M cap hit in the AHL for only one more year.
ginner classic
Dammit Jim!
VC
Registered User
Take the one year hit over two. Much the same as I would loath the team to eat salary and give a pick to move him.
D0ctorCool
Registered User
I don't mind how we handled Higgins over the last 48 hours. But I really hate losing an asset for nothing. A trend that I fear will continue under Benning.
Reason 1. Mentorship
Reason 2. Who will get into useless fights
Reason 3. Perhaps the most important of them all. Who will intimidate the rest of the league from Twitter.
VC
Registered User
Prust will have value at the deadline as his cap hit will be at its lowest. Dorsett has too much term left to just waive, it would kill any value he may have. Better off trying to work though it if a trade couldn't be worked out. Higgins is in the in-between, having a off year and shorter term. Not adding anything to the current team and not diminishing his current value.
SillyRabbit
Trix Are For Kids
- Jan 3, 2006
- 8,118
- 7,292
There is absolutely no excuse to get 0 assets back for Higgins.
If Brandon Prust can return a project player and a 5th round pick, Higgins can at least return the same.
Of course Trader Jim destroyed any value Higgins had left so now we end up with nothing.
If Brandon Prust can return a project player and a 5th round pick, Higgins can at least return the same.
Of course Trader Jim destroyed any value Higgins had left so now we end up with nothing.
Pip
Registered User
Is Higgins actually an asset though? Doesn't the word asset imply providing some positive value? Can't quite recall much of anything Higgins has provided this year for $2.5 bones...
I find it outstanding that we're watching certain player that have been dynamite the last few seasons all the sudden hit the wall and decline. Higgins, Burrows, Bieksa, Hamhuis...Vrbata to a lesser extent too. I smell interference here, be it by coach, management, ownership or divine. Higgins was a middle six forward, Burrows was easily top six, Bieksa was a top four and Hamhuis was easily our top D...and now Burrows is a bottom six grinder with zero offense and Hamhuis is a borderline top four, with Bieksa and Higgins no longer on the team.
Well, I have a feeling Higgins will start playing better in a new environment. No pressure, likely taking a mentorship role, and more over a fresh off ice team. I just hope he doesn't become one of these "waivers to 30 goal scorer" stories.
Well, I have a feeling Higgins will start playing better in a new environment. No pressure, likely taking a mentorship role, and more over a fresh off ice team. I just hope he doesn't become one of these "waivers to 30 goal scorer" stories.
- Status
