It took a while, but finally Havlat gets hurt

He's a pending UFA.... perhaps we entice him back here, at say, 3-4 million? Is it in the budget? (I'd also like to keep Comrie, so.... I would say not unless someone with big salary is leaving).

Martin Havlat has had an excellent year so far. His two way play and playmaking--as well as his skill around the net--have been first class. Very exciting player to watch.

Why did Ottawa trade him?

davetherave wrote:Martin Havlat has had an excellent year so far. His two way play and playmaking--as well as his skill around the net--have been first class. Very exciting player to watch.

Why did Ottawa trade him?

He wanted $6 million a year. There was no way that he could be kept (and everyone else ) under the cap.

He was always injured. I believe that he held out once or twice.(a la Yashin)

jawal wrote:

davetherave wrote:Martin Havlat has had an excellent year so far. His two way play and playmaking--as well as his skill around the net--have been first class. Very exciting player to watch.

Why did Ottawa trade him?

He wanted $6 million a year. There was no way that he could be kept (and everyone else ) under the cap.

He was always injured. I believe that he held out once or twice.(a la Yashin)

I did a little digging on Havlat and came up with this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Havl%C3%A1t

During the 2006 off-season, Havlát, a restricted free agent, told the Senators that he would only sign a one-year deal so he could then test the free agent market. On July 9th, 2006, Havlát was traded to the Blackhawks with Bryan Smolinski in a 3-way deal, which also involved the San Jose Sharks getting Mark Bell for Tom Preissing and Josh Hennessy. After the trade, Havlát signed a 3 year, $18 million contract with the Blackhawks.

---

I didn't get to see him play much when he was a Sen as I was working in the Southeast US during that time; and my impression of him had been, based on what I had read, that he was a talented but selfish player.

I was rather surprised to see him re-emerge this year with the Hawks as a solid team member who competes with intensity every game--and as part of a 'checking line' at that.

It's definitely intriguing, to say the least, in regards to his play of late this season, but the nihilist/pessimist in me naturally has to wonder how long until the Havlat of seasons past rears his ugly head?

Cronie wrote:It's definitely intriguing, to say the least, in regards to his play of late this season, but the nihilist/pessimist in me naturally has to wonder how long until the Havlat of seasons past rears his ugly head?

I doubt you will see that Havlat again honestly, these injuries will catch up to him as he gets older, the body just fails you after so long. I believe Havlat's injuries always seem to be the same problem area too.

SensFan71 wrote:

Cronie wrote:It's definitely intriguing, to say the least, in regards to his play of late this season, but the nihilist/pessimist in me naturally has to wonder how long until the Havlat of seasons past rears his ugly head?

I doubt you will see that Havlat again honestly, these injuries will catch up to him as he gets older, the body just fails you after so long. I believe Havlat's injuries always seem to be the same problem area too.

Sometimes players mature...this seems to be Havlat's case. Being out for a long period can have the effect of teaching a player a few things about how small the window of opportunity really is.

It's the full beard.

SeawaySensFan wrote:It's the full beard.

is there a study of the effect of a full beard on hockey performance? I would love to see the results lol.

just ask Big Joe, Im sure the beard has only helped him

Beards help. There has to be someone who's done a statistic LOL.

davetherave wrote:Beards help. There has to be someone who's done a statistic LOL.

no kidding, well there has to be a reason entire teams grow playoff beards, feel bad for crosby though, he can't get more than 2 hairs