Halak for <Insert Name Here>?

[Oaklandblue]

Don't shoot me, I'm playing devils advocate for a second.

As devils advocate, for this post I will say that Halak is essentially Turek, the Sequel.

The particulars:

Halak carries a 4m price tag. He's running now at .900 with a 3.28 GAA, 4-7-3 and we wont ever win a shootout with him in net. The big question for us is, say Brian Elliott goes down in flames and Halak more or less continues as he has, without effective forwards and strong d we won't make the playoffs. So what can we do?

Trade him for an upgrade at forward or a two-way defenceman to a team that needs goaltending. We could go two for two and throw in a fourth-liner or a pick. In this scenario we could grab Bobby Ryan and someone else or go after a different player on a different team. We get strength up front we won't have to worry so much about netminding because we can score the goals to make up for the deficency. Fact is, I think when the team slumps, you make surgical, minute chances to remind the team that you either play or you're out. I don't believe Hitch will allow them to play like that, but he can only work with what he's got.

Whatcha think?

[cardsfan04]

If a team wants to overpay for Halak, I'd let them. But, that's about the only way I trade him.

That being said, I wouldn't try very hard to trade him.

-Why would a team overpay for a goalie with those numbers? Halak is the kind of guy that teams would try to buy low on and hope he plays more like he did in Montreal than he has in St. Louis.

-The Bobby Ryan deal you posted (Halak + 4th liner/pick) I would do in a heartbeat. But, the Anaheim GM would get fired on the spot for making that deal, so there's that.

-I think Halak is better than his record (which again goes to why we won't get the necessary return for him). And, Elliot is worse than his. Elliot has been really great. And, some people whose opinion I value have said it looks like more than just a hot streak. Maybe Elliot will prove to be a legit number 1. But, it's still not smart to trade the guy who started the year as our top goalie when it means we have to depend on somebody who has a fairly small sample size to prove he's for real.

In theory, I would trade Halak. Realistically, we won't get the offer needed.

[DaDitka]

I look at goalies this way.......

9 out of 10 times....hell, 19 out of 20 times......they (goalies) are only great for a very small period of their careers. I think you should always 'assume' it's temporary and I am always willing to deal a net minder at the top of their value (like a closer in Baseball).

That said, I don't think either of them would net great returns right now. So keep them both. I do think Elliot is the better goaltender, but he's in a contract year and Halak is signed on a longer deal. If Elliot keeps this up he may have some real value at the trade deadline and we could still bring up the hot Bishop to push Halak......but that is a long way away and personally I don't think we even start talking about moving one of them until February (if at all).

[thedoc]

I agree with DaDitka on not moving to soon. However I'm always open to a deal.

[WaukeeBlues]

I look at goalies this way.......

9 out of 10 times....hell, 19 out of 20 times......they (goalies) are only great for a very small period of their careers. I think you should always 'assume' it's temporary and I am always willing to deal a net minder at the top of their value (like a closer in Baseball).

That said, I don't think either of them would net great returns right now. So keep them both. I do think Elliot is the better goaltender, but he's in a contract year and Halak is signed on a longer deal. If Elliot keeps this up he may have some real value at the trade deadline and we could still bring up the hot Bishop to push Halak......but that is a long way away and personally I don't think we even start talking about moving one of them until February (if at all).

[cprice12]

To win in a shootout, we have to score...which we can't seem to do...so it doesn't matter who is in net for us.
We ain't scorin', we aint' winnin'.

Just sayin'.

[cprice12]

I look at goalies this way.......

9 out of 10 times....hell, 19 out of 20 times......they (goalies) are only great for a very small period of their careers. I think you should always 'assume' it's temporary and I am always willing to deal a net minder at the top of their value (like a closer in Baseball).

That said, I don't think either of them would net great returns right now. So keep them both. I do think Elliot is the better goaltender, but he's in a contract year and Halak is signed on a longer deal. If Elliot keeps this up he may have some real value at the trade deadline and we could still bring up the hot Bishop to push Halak......but that is a long way away and personally I don't think we even start talking about moving one of them until February (if at all).

We'll get a lot more information about both goalies between now and later in the season.

Right now you wouldn't get much of anything for either goalie. Few teams are looking for goaltending help right now.
Nobody would want Halak, and few would be interested in Elliot because of his numbers last year and the small sample size this year.
Anyone could have signed Elliot in the offseason for cheap...but they passed.

Neither goalie is going anywhere right now...and I'd even say that neither will be traded at any point this season.
Playoff teams don't usually trade a goaltender worth anything at the deadline...and we should be a playoff team.

[letzgoblooz]

<nobody>

[WaukeeBlues]

To win in a shootout, we have to score...which we can't seem to do...so it doesn't matter who is in net for us.
We ain't scorin', we aint' winnin'.

Just sayin'.

Score?

We can't even hit the damn net