bo2shink*
Guest
He'll be 20-20 this upcoming season.
Is that 20 games, -20?
He'll be 20-20 this upcoming season.
Might as well keep him, it's not like we need the cap space to sign free agents.
If he plays well, it's a nice bonus. If he doesn't, who cares, he's off the books after next season.
For all the criticism he took for his lack of production, I still think he would have been a better fit on the PP instead of Hansen.
Is there really that much to lose, keeping Booth?
If he makes the team and contributes, he is a useful asset.
If he doesn't make the team, or becomes excess baggage as the season progresses, he can be put on waivers and sent to the AHL.
As I understand the system, he only counts towards the cap while he is on the NHL roster. So, if the coach decides to give him a shot, but changes his mind after one-third of the season has passed and ships him off to the AHL, only one-third of his salary would count against the cap.
The Booth issue is another reason I hope they can get a new coach on board sooner rather than later. The decision whether to keep Booth or toss him is something the coach should be involved with. New coach might just see something he can use.
Is there really that much to lose, keeping Booth?
If he makes the team and contributes, he is a useful asset.
If he doesn't make the team, or becomes excess baggage as the season progresses, he can be put on waivers and sent to the AHL.
As I understand the system, he only counts towards the cap while he is on the NHL roster. So, if the coach decides to give him a shot, but changes his mind after one-third of the season has passed and ships him off to the AHL, only one-third of his salary would count against the cap.
The Booth issue is another reason I hope they can get a new coach on board sooner rather than later. The decision whether to keep Booth or toss him is something the coach should be involved with. New coach might just see something he can use.
Needs to go. Right now, we have a team that missed the playoffs, couldn't win a game or score more than 2 goals when/if they got there, doesn't work hard enough, has a ton of NTC's, lacks serious depth up front and is abundant with forwards who do a lot of skating and no scoring...
...all of that lead to a demand for change from the fan base, and with ownership/management agreeing with that. But right now, what can we change? Edler's value sucks and he has a NTC, the Kesler situation looks like a soap opera in the making, the Sedins are unmovable, Higgins has a NTC, Garrison has a NTC.
So let me get this straight, pretty much we can't trade the Sedins, Edler, Bieksa, Garrison, Higgins, and other but we want change? So, we keep David Booth as well?
Someone tell me what changes then? He's not a core player, I get it. But we need to do something.
Getting rid of a non-core player that has no effect on the cap and might be a healthy scratch a lot of the time doesn't "change" anything.
We have an old, stale core whose window has closed, it needs to change. If some of those guys won't waive their NTC, well I guess we're just going to have to ride it out til their contracts expire.
And how confident are you that the core will change? If getting rid of Booth doesn't change anything then it isnt much of a loss to get rid of him. Open up a spot for someone else. Maybe the Canucks can take on another reclamation project.
They play different positions...just buy him out to give a kid a chance, like maybe gaunce
They play different positions...
Unless they first announce a big FA signing first there's no benefit to buying out booth. He could be a damn good 3rd liner at worst and very possibly net 20 goals if he stays healthy.
Booth played hard every game. That's unusual for this team. There are several guys that were much worse than Booth, too, that deserve buy-out consideration.
Booth would only leave $1.3m on the books if he was bought out using a conventional buy-out. The Compliance Buy-out could be useful elsewhere?