slappipappi
Registered User
- Jul 22, 2010
- 4,467
- 191
G
-Wideman to the Canucks for Hamhuis
Wideman has negative value, in that he would not get claimed if put on waivers. His continuing contract and dismal play make him undesirable to pick up this year. He likely has value come next year's trade deadline.
Hamhuis does not have a continuing contract, and is considered a reliable d-man. He'll command at least a 2nd round pick come deadline day, perhaps a 1st.
And why would the Canucks trade a better d-man on an expiring contract for a lesser d on a continuing contract?
Wideman for Miller likely makes some sense for both teams.
Both teams take on 1-year of an undesirable contract, but both teams spend that undesirable contract on a better need for them.