Toggle sidebar

Post-Game Talk: Washington at St. Louis. 8pm EST

Status
Not open for further replies.
txpd

txpd

Registered User
Jan 25, 2003
69,649
14,131
New Bern, NC
hb11xchamps said:
I know, just found it interesting that he's still there. Must be making it tough on them to send him down.
Click to expand...

Just a guess. They may have waived him early trying to give him a chance to get an NHL spot somewhere. Sounds like he is as usual in line to be the last cut.
 
Hivemind

Hivemind

We're Touched
Oct 8, 2010
37,049
13,498
Philadelphia
Hinterland said:
The latter I guess. If he plays well, there might be interest. It's not uncommon for teams to pay picks to acquire an already waived player.
Click to expand...
No, that's extremely uncommon. Nobody pays a pick for a player they could have had for free a couple days ago, unless they're sending back dead weight in return. The only time you see it is when salary cap gymnastics are involved. And Walker isn't exactly a bloated contract, so nobody has any real salary cap concerns with acquiring him.

Nothing really to see here with Walker playing. They're continuing to give depth guys reps in the pre-season, and Walker is one of them (even if they've already waived him for purposes of re-assignment to the AHL in the near future).
 
Hinterland

Hinterland

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2016
11,812
5,517
Hivemind said:
No, that's extremely uncommon. Nobody pays a pick for a player they could have had for free a couple days ago, unless they're sending back dead weight in return. The only time you see it is when salary cap gymnastics are involved. And Walker isn't exactly a bloated contract, so nobody has any real salary cap concerns with acquiring him.

Nothing really to see here with Walker playing. They're continuing to give depth guys reps in the pre-season, and Walker is one of them (even if they've already waived him for purposes of re-assignment to the AHL in the near future).
Click to expand...

Nah. Teams have traded for waived players. Pickard for example. It does make sense because it gives you roster flexibility and organizational depth. If you claim the player, you have to keep him on the roster.
 
Hivemind

Hivemind

We're Touched
Oct 8, 2010
37,049
13,498
Philadelphia
Hinterland said:
Nah. Teams have traded for waived players. Pickard for example. It does make sense because it gives you roster flexibility and organizational depth. If you claim the player, you have to keep him on the roster.
Click to expand...
That's the exception that proves the rule in so many ways. Goalies vs skaters. Pickard had value to Toronto as a #3, and they could only assign him to the AHL after he had cleared waivers. Nobody cares about spending assets to acquire their 15th forward on the depth chart, especially given that they likely already have home-grown assets to fill that role. Additionally, Toronto was already at the 50 contract limit, so they had to send Lindberg back in order to acquire Pickard.

What you're describing is exceptionally rare, not a common occurrence.
 
Hinterland

Hinterland

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2016
11,812
5,517
Hivemind said:
That's the exception that proves the rule in so many ways. Goalies vs skaters. Pickard had value to Toronto as a #3, and they could only assign him to the AHL after he had cleared waivers. Nobody cares about spending assets to acquire their 15th forward on the depth chart, especially given that they likely already have home-grown assets to fill that role. Additionally, Toronto was already at the 50 contract limit, so they had to send Lindberg back in order to acquire Pickard.

What you're describing is exceptionally rare, not a common occurrence.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say common but it's not uncommon. It happens from time to time and waiving a player certainly does increase his value.
 
hb12xchamps

hb12xchamps

Registered User
Dec 23, 2011
8,811
5,433
Pennsylvania
francaisvolantsparis said:
Sounds to me like 'Snively outplayed Ovechkin'. A pitty Beck can't take Eller's place.
Click to expand...
Not quite understanding this post but 2 things:
1) Maybe it's a language thing, but not understanding the "Snively outplayed Ovechkin" thing because that doesn't make any sense for a huge variety of reasons.
2) Malenstyn has no business taking Eller's place because he doesn't play center, he plays LW. He also doesn't need to replace Eller's PK minutes this season.
 
txpd

txpd

Registered User
Jan 25, 2003
69,649
14,131
New Bern, NC
hb11xchamps said:
Not quite understanding this post but 2 things:
1) Maybe it's a language thing, but not understanding the "Snively outplayed Ovechkin" thing because that doesn't make any sense for a huge variety of reasons.
2) Malenstyn has no business taking Eller's place because he doesn't play center, he plays LW. He also doesn't need to replace Eller's PK minutes this season.
Click to expand...

I think that was sarcasm
 
francaisvolantsparis

francaisvolantsparis

Registered User
Nov 21, 2018
1,540
568
Nice
hb11xchamps said:
Not quite understanding this post but 2 things:
1) Maybe it's a language thing, but not understanding the "Snively outplayed Ovechkin" thing because that doesn't make any sense for a huge variety of reasons.
2) Malenstyn has no business taking Eller's place because he doesn't play center, he plays LW. He also doesn't need to replace Eller's PK minutes this season.
Click to expand...

1) What I say is if someone says 'Malenstyn outplayed Hagelin' it sounds odd to me like if someone said 'Snively outplayed Ovechkin'. It can happen but two preseason games are not enough to claim odd things like this.
2) Of course, Malenstyn doesn't play center. It is the pity. Because if it was the case, with some exageration two preseason games would be more than enough for a random AHLer to take Lars's place. Eller is so bad, you know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom