[Waivers] CBJ waives Eric Robinson

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]

[EternalCanuckFan]

Curious. They don't really need to make the move for cap reasons unless they have a large cap hit incoming

[VegasCanuck]

25 minutes ago, EternalCanuckFan said:

Curious. They don't really need to make the move for cap reasons unless they have a large cap hit incoming

I guess the other question is, how bad do you have to be in game 1 of the season to be waived before game 2?

 

[higgyfan]

Interesting.  They just put Jiricek on the roster, which gives them 5 RDs.

My bet is there will be a trade involving Boqvist, who didn't play in the season opener.

[EternalCanuckFan]

Just now, higgyfan said:

Interesting.  They just put Jiricek on the roster, which gives them 5 RDs.

My bet is there will be a trade involving Boqvist, who didn't play in the season opener.

Certainly seems plausible given prior reporting.

 

Non-trade related, they might have a player or two coming back from injury so maybe they also needed to demote someone to meet the max # of contracts.

 

Robinson has an AAV of $1.6M which is why the demotion is a bit more intriguing to me since they have cap space even after calling up Jiricek. If they just need to clear a contract for a now healthy player (no trade on the horizon necessarily), then I guess they're committed to keeping all their waiver-exempt ELCs on the roster.

[Coconuts]

Wonder if they're helping Ottawa clear room for Pinto 

[MeanSeanBean]

Huh... Wonder why. Seems like he can play

[higgyfan]

27 minutes ago, EternalCanuckFan said:

Certainly seems plausible given prior reporting.

 

Non-trade related, they might have a player or two coming back from injury so maybe they also needed to demote someone to meet the max # of contracts.

 

Robinson has an AAV of $1.6M which is why the demotion is a bit more intriguing to me since they have cap space even after calling up Jiricek. If they just need to clear a contract for a now healthy player (no trade on the horizon necessarily), then I guess they're committed to keeping all their waiver-exempt ELCs on the roster.

 

Another interesting situation is that Werenski played one game and then went back on LTIR ($9.5m).

So now they're down to 2 LDs along with the 5 RDs.

[Alflives]

Garland + Rathbone for Guddy? 

[Snoop Hogg]

31 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Garland + Rathbone for Guddy? 

I don’t know. They could have claimed Bogosion, who has a much smaller cap hit.

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, Snoop Hogg said:

I don’t know. They could have claimed Bogosion, who has a much smaller cap hit.

But claiming a guy off waivers doesn’t dumperoo all of Garland's cap. 

[Snoop Hogg]

39 minutes ago, Alflives said:

But claiming a guy off waivers doesn’t dumperoo all of Garland's cap. 

No, it doesn’t but Garland has no value, so I doubt he’s traded. They’ve tried for 8 months. 

[Bob Long]

39 minutes ago, Snoop Hogg said:

No, it doesn’t but Garland has no value, so I doubt he’s traded. They’ve tried for 8 months. 

 

Garland does have value, he'd be a nice add to CHI e.g., who could easily retain on him and flip him for an asset at the TDL or just keep him. They could get him for free from us. He's just not worth it to most teams cap wise, but for a bottom feeder who can retain and flip him, getting him for free could work. 

 

[Hammertime]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

Garland + Rathbone for Guddy? 

[Biff Tannen]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

But claiming a guy off waivers doesn’t dumperoo all of Garland's cap. 

 

And trading for Guddy who is paid almost as much for just as long doesn't really help either. Besides we can't hog all the tall, right sided, over-payed pylons.

[RawkDrummer]

Guddy doesn't solve problems, he creates problems cap wise and otherwise.

[Trebreh]

he has played nearly 300 NHL games but this is the first time I've ever heard of him. 

[MeanSeanBean]

The general consensus was the Guddy contract was a nightmare when it was signed.