And you actually think the Bell Centre crowd will all of a sudden adopt Price as a prodigee and cheer him to death after what Halak did for them a couple of months before? Come on, you know better than that.
I know that much. I don't want to trade either honestly. I'd rather go another year with both.
I know that much. I don't want to trade either honestly. I'd rather go another year with both.
This is the best way to start some crap once again... Do you think Walsh will actually let his client play for Montreal another year with Price as the other goalie?
Even if we lowball him and force him to, I know where you're coming from... This is hypocrisy. You don't want to keep both. You just hope Halak cools off a bit so trading him would be less of a shock for the Bell Centre fans. If Halak still has another miracle year, I bet you'll come back and say: "Well maybe in one year..."... **** it!
We need help now, and big time elsewhere in the lineup! I'm a big, big fan of Halak, I would rather keeping him than Price, but if the organization actually has in its head that Miracle Price is the guy we have to keep for the future, I'd rather want them to deal Halak away and get something of value, instead of being hypocrites, waiting for Halak to cool off for marketing reasons.
If Halak gets traded, so be it, I'm prepared for this, and IMHO, we'll all regret taking potential before hard work.
Halak might not be the biggest, the tallest, or the more natural goalie, but he's got some skills only him and a few players in the NHL have developed that much: The skill of hard-work. This is a skill, and it's as rare as any of Price's natural abilities.
Halak will go away and perform like a chief, we have to accept that no matter who we deal away between Halak and Price, he will perform elsewhere. However, with Halak, we have a proven goalie, and with Price, we have a guy that might never even achieve his potential here. Can you just imagine how the Bell Centre crowd will react if Halak gets traded because of the treatement he got versus Price ever since he came in Hamilton? They will never, EVER forgive Carey.
I agree with this. Ideally I want to keep both, but I'm just not sure that's possible anymore. Halak has been nothing but the complete professional since being drafted by the Habs. He has always worked hard and has had to prove he belongs at every level, even when he's been an afterthought in some places. That hard work and dedication is really valuable, it's the kind of attribute that's contagious throughout an organization. Halak has rightfully earned and deserved the starting goalie position in Montreal. Ideally I'd like to keep both because I see potential in both and think both can develop into starters, but if I have to chose one today, I'm going with Halak.
if his contract demands are ridiculous maybe deal him to SJ in a package for clowe - or the blues for backes or Dallas for benn or neal....
then sign a vet backup for price...like a biron...desjardins needs another year in the AHL.
If I'm Gauthier, I put $3M/1 yr on the table starting today... Halak can pick up the pen and sign it anytime he wants... up until June 15th. Then I file for club-elected salary arbitration if there are no negotiations going on. IIRC, the CBA deadline for a player in Halak's class is later than that, but I want to hamstring any posturing Walsh does about RFA offer sheets. It's an empty threat anyway, but on June 15th it goes in the trash bin for good, and hopefully Walsh can start focusing in on real negotiations. If not, then arbitration is probably and easy win for the Habs in this case, so no worries.
It shouldn't be a particularly difficult signing.
If all you want is sign him for one single season then yes.. it will happen.
Price said, almost verbatim, the same thing. Frankly, it's just logical. They both said it's too soon after the season to talk about it or even think about it. Halak wants to go take a vacation (can't blame him) then address his future.
Fact is, short of anything extreme, the question is kind of silly anyway. It's not really up to Price or Halak. Gauthier has to make his decision: Halak, Price or both? Once he does that, he then has to make dollars and cents work out for whoever he keeps and, if necessary, put together an appropriate trade for the other.
To me, the scenarios are as follows:
- Delay decision. Sign Halak to a multi-year deal at a reasonable rate and Price to a one year deal. Make it clear, Price has one year to take the job from Halak. If he succeeds, we move Halak on a reasonable and secure contract next summer. If he fails, Price gets traded as an RFA next summer. The upside is, they can make a far more informed decision. The downside is that by delaying a year, whoever does get moved is likely to have less value than they do now and also that short of moving Hamrlik, we likely cannot afford Plekanec, let alone a much needed top-six winger. I'd say 60% chance this is what they do.
- Choose Halak. Auction off Price to the highest bidder (Possibilities: NY Isles, Washington, NJ, Ottawa, Philly, Atlanta, Tampa, Florida, San Jose, Detroit, St. Louis, Calgary, Edmonton). Sign Halak to a long-term deal, with the promise of being the top dog. Sign a veteran backup. Downside is that Price may become a star, but as both men said in their exit interviews: There's only one net. I'd prefer this option. I am a huge Price fan, but I don't think it's smart to invest so much in one position. If they are wrong, finding an Anderson, Leighton, Niemi type is not as hard as it once was. Chance of this happening? Probably 40%, but I hope I'm wrong.
- Choose Price. He signs a long term deal at a really good rate, we trust the future to him. It's a gamble, but Halak's return right now would be off the charts. We'd also need a proven backup. Downside: Rioting in Montreal. Chance of happening in my opinion? Will only happen if Halak goes to the KHL, gets a crazy offer sheet or asks to be moved, none of which are likely. Less than 1%.
This is the best way to start some crap once again... Do you think Walsh will actually let his client play for Montreal another year with Price as the other goalie?
Even if we lowball him and force him to, I know where you're coming from... This is hypocrisy. You don't want to keep both. You just hope Halak cools off a bit so trading him would be less of a shock for the Bell Centre fans. If Halak still has another miracle year, I bet you'll come back and say: "Well maybe in one year..."... **** it!
We need help now, and big time elsewhere in the lineup! I'm a big, big fan of Halak, I would rather keeping him than Price, but if the organization actually has in its head that Miracle Price is the guy we have to keep for the future, I'd rather want them to deal Halak away and get something of value, instead of being hypocrites, waiting for Halak to cool off for marketing reasons.
What if you trade halak and Price has a bad year, or you trade price and halak cools off? I'm not saying keep them the entire year but right now market for goalies is terrible. No one wants to give fair value. So waiting a bit might not be a bad option for trading price or halak. that's all.
I don't think he deserves THAT big a contract. Cam Ward actually won the Cup/Conn Smythe in 2006 and what did he get?
3 years, $2 mil, $2.5 mil, $3.5 mil (average of $2.67 mil over 3 years)
Taking inflation into consideration (2007 = 2.85%, 2008 = 3.85%, 2009 = -0.34%) and we're looking at a contract of about:
3 years, $2.13 mil, $2.66 mil, $3.73 mil (average of $2.84 mil over 3 years).
Even if he negotiates a better deal, he doesn't deserve any more than $3-3.5 mil/year. If he wants more than that, I say trade him. If we get him in the $2.5-$3.5 range, we should be able to keep both him and Price for the next 2-3 years.
What is wrong with you guys? Both goalies want to be #1. In what world are you able to sign 2 #1 goalies for 3 years without one or both being pissed off about it?
Keeping both is NOT practical. Pick one and sign or trade for a vet goalie.
However, with Halak, we have a proven goalie, and with Price, we have a guy that might never even achieve his potential here.
a proven goalie? ok, he plays goal.
but as a proven performer - this year was his closet to being a starter and he only played 45 games. yes he had a good record and a couple great playoff rounds but he has not proven to be able to carry the load of a full season or to sustain the type of play he has over multiple years.
IMO this looks like arbitration, doubt it will happen any other way. i doubt halak will want a multi year deal, when he can get 1 year 2-3mil then go UFA and fetch 5mil + multi year deals. Like pleck, they showed (to me at least) no real signs of wanting to stay with the habs. Both these players, have taken the steps to get paid, and they will.
These guys didnt come all the way from the other side of the earth, because they feel 'honored' to play for an accomplished franchise. Oportunity is the key word here, and both have expresed it in many diferent ways at many diferent times throught their early careers.
If all you want is sign him for one single season then yes.. it will happen.
Personally, I'd want him locked up longer than that. $3 million a year sounds fair to me though. $9 to $10 million over 3 years sounds reasonable to me. That'll give Halak a good amount of time to prove if he's the "real deal" and not just an one-year wonder, and if he is the real deal we'll up his salary accordingly after 3 years (when, conveniently, Gomez becomes moveable with only one year left on his deal).
Signing Halak to a one-year deal is not a good idea. Yeah, it gives him a chance to further "prove" himself, but it could also make him much more expensive to keep or it could cause him to leave as a UFA. If the team believes in him, now is the time they have to show it.
Signing Halak to a one-year deal is not a good idea. Yeah, it gives him a chance to further "prove" himself, but it could also make him much more expensive to keep or it could cause him to leave as a UFA. If the team believes in him, now is the time they have to show it.
im sure managment is smarter (then us) and knows that if they sign him 1 year, it wont be in the habs favor (unless they are already planning to move him, imo doubt that) because of UFA status the year after.
Way to make a non-issue over nothing. Most players say they want to take some time off after a long season before talking about contracts. This is his longest, most intense season ever. He deserves the time off.
As far as I know, if arbitration is filed, he can't be given an offer sheet, while the team and him can still discuss a deal.
Like pleck, they showed (to me at least) no real signs of wanting to stay with the habs. Both these players, have taken the steps to get paid, and they will.
These guys didnt come all the way from the other side of the earth, because they feel 'honored' to play for an accomplished franchise. Oportunity is the key word here, and both have expresed it in many diferent ways at many diferent times throught their early careers.
i hope im wrong.
Why the need to vilify either of them? They play, and they'll get paid accordingly. It's not as if either hasn't "paid his dues" to the organization - both have been here their entire careers and have been more than serviceable for that time. Just because they're not scrambling to take a big discount to stay here and waiting till things play out doesn't mean both definitely don't want to stay. I don't think the "other side of the earth" quip was necessary in making your point, either.
That aside, overreaction much? Just because nobody wants to talk contracts the day after the team gets booted from a great run doesn't mean they want to GTFO.
if his contract demands are ridiculous maybe deal him to SJ in a package for clowe - or the blues for backes or Dallas for benn or neal....
then sign a vet backup for price...like a biron...desjardins needs another year in the AHL.
Oh how I'd kill to have one of my favourite players be on my favourite team.
im sure managment is smarter (then us) and knows that if they sign him 1 year, it wont be in the habs favor (unless they are already planning to move him, imo doubt that) because of UFA status the year after.
btw does arbitration = automatic 1 year deal?
It's 1 or 2 year. Don't know if there's conditions attached to this. Jiri Hudler for instance, was offered a 2 year deal from arbitration.
Why the need to vilify either of them? They play, and they'll get paid accordingly. It's not as if either hasn't "paid his dues" to the organization - both have been here their entire careers and have been more than serviceable for that time. Just because they're not scrambling to take a big discount to stay here and waiting till things play out doesn't mean both definitely don't want to stay. I don't think the "other side of the earth" quip was necessary in making your point, either.
That aside, overreaction much? Just because nobody wants to talk contracts the day after the team gets booted from a great run doesn't mean they want to GTFO.
didnt read the article, dont care imo what he said. has no importance on my reasoning, it was already made up prior to PO.
im not trying to vilefy any of them players, im just looking at it from a personal buisness decision. its not going to be the first , nor the last time a player will choose UFA even if he LOVES the team he was with.
this thread is pure speculation discussion on what halak will do. or did i miss the point here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by vokiel
It's 1 or 2 year. Don't know if there's conditions attached to this. Jiri Hudler for instance, was offered a 2 year deal from arbitration.
thanks. so hopefully we can get a 2year.
btw i dont see how MVP of our team this season will not use that as a leverage for negotating and getting more at arbitration. unless habs will offer him a jucy contract.
also really want to clarify, im not looking down on halak (nor pleck) for doing what would be best for them, and not for the habs. its normal imo, especially after the seasons they had.
Hate to say it, but this is probably our only window where trading Halak makes sense in the overall scheme of things, due to his great value at the moment and the presence of a young, NHL-quality goaltender on our roster, the cap situation and his probable relatively high price tag.
