Waived: [VAN] Canucks placing Braden Holtby on unconditional waivers for the purpose of a buyout [cleared]

wonton15

Höglander
Dec 13, 2009
18,942
26,232
In the 5 game stretch, he played like old Holtby. The rest - he was a sieve. Didn't help that the team left him out to dry but he was NOT good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pizza!Pizza!

Zippgunn

Registered User
May 15, 2011
3,984
1,676
Lhuntshi
In the 5 game stretch, he played like old Holtby. The rest - he was a sieve. Didn't help that the team left him out to dry but he was NOT good.

I agree, when the team actually showed up and he hadn't been left to rot on the bench for weeks he was quite good. However he was the textbook definition of "cannon fodder" getting almost all the really tough games while his teammates abandoned him to his fate. They had better play a LOT better in front of whomever the poor bastard is that they hire to replace him since Green's utilization of goalies is terrible...
 

boredmale

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 13, 2005
42,448
7,013
If Islanders are hard up for capspace, I would trade Varlamov and try sign Holtby to like 2.5M or less for 1 year(Varlamov has a 5M caphit). We have the Mitch Korn/Trotz connection that might make it easier to go for a cheap deal.
 

CascadiaPuck

Proud Canucks investor.
Jan 13, 2010
1,776
2,295
Vancouver
But Benning said 8 teams were interested.

What a lying piece of shit

Did Benning say that? Or was that reported by someone else? I don't doubt that there would have been many teams kicking the tires to see if retention was an option or trading a draft pick with the player.

I'm no Benning fan, but I'm not prepared to ding the guy ("lying piece of shit") if it didn't actually happen.
 

archangel2

Registered User
May 19, 2019
2,144
1,279
There's probably upwards of 15-20 teams that would like him at the right price, say $1M even, in a flat-cap world. Whether that competition will bump up his price at all is anyone's guess.


I doubt that many teams would be interested in him.
 

North Cole

♧ Lem
Jan 22, 2017
11,509
12,913
Was the second year just so they had a G that met the expansion eligibility after protecting Demko? I'm confused why they signed him to 2 years just to do this.
 

Snipes45

Registered User
May 26, 2020
14,035
13,334
Edmonton
So instead of retaining salary for this one year, they buy him out and have his cap hit impact them this year AND next year? Seems smart...
He looked really good to me the first few games of the year and then everything fell apart there. He was hung out to dry a lot, but he is declining. He stole the first game of the year for Vancouver. He kept them in a few more from what I seen, but that was just the start of the year.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad