Each week, the NHL on TSN panel voices its opinions on the hot topics of the day in the Wednesday Night Hockey Quiz.
As a follow-up, TSN.ca offers you the opportunity to chime in on all the big issues with our insiders. Read up on all the questions and answers from TSN's hockey experts, and put in your own two cents on our popular Your! Call feature.
Keith Jones: I would trade Price. In a salary cap era, having one goaltender is fine by me. Make your decision; for me, it's Halak as the number one goaltender and in the Eastern Conference, the last four playoff spots are all up for grabs. Carey Price will get you a lot more. You saw him as a first round draft choice. In trade? Price gets you more. He gets you a valuable asset, maybe a top-notch blueliner and something Montreal dearly needs.
Bob McKenzie: I would keep both. The reason, very simply, is that Halak is playing too well to trade right now. However, he's got no playoff experience other than one start. The other thing is, if the Pittsburgh Penguins gave up on Marc-Andre Fleury as quickly as people want the Canadiens to give up on Price, where would the Penguins be now?
Darren Dreger: I say trade Carey Price. I mean, the honeymoon's over. As we all know, history shows there's no such thing as having two starting goaltenders, two number one goaltenders in the National Hockey League. Halak's numbers are better so evidently he's the better goalie.
Question #2: Who has been the best high-priced free agent signing from last summer? Mike Cammalleri (26 goals heading into Wednesday), Marian Gaborik (29), Marian Hossa (27 points in just 30 games, +12)?
McKenzie: Cammalleri. Sensible money - $6 million a year, sensible term - a five-year deal. Not one of those crazy Hossa or Gaborik deals. I just think Cammalleri's delivering. He's well on his way to 30 goals. He's been money in the bank for the Canadiens this year.
Jones: For me, it's Gaborik. I think the New York Rangers are nowhere near the playoffs is Gaborik isn't lighting it up for them. I like the way he stuck up for himself the other night in fighting Dan Carcillo. Gaborik's scoring goals and he's been very reliable at both ends of the ice.
Dreger: Cammalleri. Going into Tampa Bay, he had 26 goals, twice as many as his next Canadian rival. So as Bob points out, more bang for your buck in Cammalleri.
Question #3: All Canadian athletes who win medals at the Olympic games will receive bonuses: $20,000 for a gold medal, $15,000 for a silver, $10,000 for a bronze. That includes hockey players - NHL hockey players. Should they be eligible for those bonuses?
Dreger: Yes, because of what you just said. All Canadian athletes are eligible. It doesn't matter if you're a millionaire or you're living on the stipend that you get from the Canadian Olympic Committee. It doesn't matter. The hockey team adheres to the same rules, they stay in the village. Personal wealth has no business in this discussion.
McKenzie: Yes, they should be entitled to it. No, they should not take it. Very simply, take the money and make a conscious decision ahead of time: divvy it up amongst all the Canadian athletes that don't win medals, cut them all a check based on that pool of money that the NHLers would get, and that would engender all sorts of good will for all the guys you're living with in the village who come away without a medal. And who knows? Maybe Canada won't have a medal in hockey.
Jones: I say no, just because it was put in place for amateur athletes to get money. (NHLers) are professional athletes now. I think that needs to be adjusted. I think the players would actually be embarrassed to take the money, much like the All-Star game. I think guys should be embarrassed for getting paid to try to win the All-Star game when in fact the NHL does have an All-Star game.
Question #4: Columbus Blue Jackets Scott Howson has proposed that shootout winners should receive one-and-a-half points instead of two. He says the shootout should be worth less than a victory in overtime or a victory in regulation. Do you agree with that idea?
Jones: Yes I do, and if I'm a player and I'm not involved in shootouts, I'm going to be pretty disappointed with my team if I get a loss. It should not be weighed the same when there are only a few players on each team that are actually involved in the outcome of that extra point.
Dreger: No, the shootout is entertaining, and that pains me to say that. A win is a win, be it in regulation, overtime or a shootout, and in the NHL, a win earns you two points.
McKenzie: I will say no. Right idea, wrong application. You've got to get out the abacus and if you're sitting there going, 'Half a point for this, half a point for that'. I'm way too dumb for that and so are most hockey fans. The idea of getting rid of some of the shootouts is a good idea, but go to 3-on-3 overtime and just try to end the games in overtime.
As always, have your say in the Your! Call feature below.