View Single Post
03-22-2013, 04:02 PM
Change is good.
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,156
vCash: 500
Serious cognitive dissonance going on here.

Those who are questioning the move are not saying that Halpern should have been untouchable. What they're saying is "ok, I hear you - it is absolutely appropriate to can someone off the bottom 6. But if we're going to make that move, why did we pick the guy who is cheapest, will be an UFA next year anyway and who was actually playing up to expectations? If we were going to show someone the chopping block, why not pick one of the more expensive guys who have additional years on their contracts and who are underperforming what they were expected to bring?"

Presuming this is strictly a hockey decision and doesn't have to do with anything off the ice, the ONLY reasonable explanation IMO is that they need to free up a contract and had to be absolutely certain that they were cutting a guy who would get claimed.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline