Haydn Fleury continues to be a regular talking point in Hurricanes circles these days. He is a young player at the fringe of the NHL/AHL cut line. But with his waiver exemption expired, he is destined to stay at the NHL level for the 2019-20 season because he would be lost for nothing if placed on waivers. Fleury received regular ice time in the third pairing early in the season with Trevor van Riemsdyk out of the lineup, but since van Riemsdyk’s return, Fleury’s ice time has been sparse and random. He has spent a few games completely out of the lineup as a healthy scratch. And he has spent a few games in the lineup in an odd #7 slot when the team went with 11 forwards and 7 defensemen. In a couple of those games, he barely saw the ice and was seemingly on the bench only because the team had the lineup slot and no one else to put in it. He did play seven minutes in Tuesday’s game.
Today’s Daily Cup of Joe offers a few more thoughts on the Haydn Fleury situation that fly in the face of common wisdom right now.
The team must play Haydn Fleury or trade him
I think this is shortsighted. Those focused solely on the here and now of the 2019-20 season suggest that giving Fleury regular ice time this season and instead punting on his future with the team are the only options. I actually think the path of a random 2019-20 season ice time-wise followed by a bigger role in 2020-21 makes a ton of sense. Both Joel Edmundson and Trevor van Riemsdyk who currently man the third pairing are set to become unrestricted free agents this summer. My hunch is that the Canes would like to retain one of these veterans, but I also think that will be dependent on price. Van Riemsdyk is making $2.3 million this year and could garner a raise if he has another steady season and a team that needs middle of the lineup blue line help sees him as a capable top 4 and bids accordingly. Edmundson is making $3.1 million. Something in a $2.5-3 million range is not impossible but is a bit steep for a third pairing defenseman especially with some of the re-signings pending in the next couple years.
So I actually think it makes sense for Brind’Amour to go with what he wants for the 2019-20 season and let the chips fall where they may for Fleury’s ice time but at the same time for the organization to have bigger plans for Fleury as an inexpensive third pairing option for 2020-21. Interestingly, tamping down Fleury’s role in 2019-20 actually helps here too as it certainly keep his next contract in the $1 million per year range.
If Haydn Fleury is not in the lineup, he is expendable as relates to 2019-20
Similarly, many also suggest that if Fleury is not going to be in the lineup that he should be automatically traded or that one of the other defensemen should be traded. The Hurricanes really do not have any proven NHL depth. Roland McKeown might work. Fredrik Claesson has some NHL experience. And Jake Bean could be ready. But I would classify all three of those options as question marks. As such, keeping Fleury or one of the veterans as a #7 makes sense to have depth available in the event of an injury. So even though it is not exciting, I think there is a case to be made that even if Fleury has limited upside long-term that he still fills a needed role as an experienced #7.
Sort of in the same vein, some suggest that choices if the team does swing a trade are Trevor van Riemsdyk or Haydn Fleury. I question how Joel Edmundson would be left out of this mix. Of the two veterans, Van Riemsdyk would seem to make more sense to keep than Edmundson. If van Riemsdyk who is a right shot is traded, that would leave two left shots in Fleury and Edmundson wit neither being especially strong as a puck mover. Van Riemsdyk has a track record as a steady #5 defenseman and would seemingly be more likely to re-sign for next season since he has been part of the team for awhile now. He is also a right shot who pairs with one of the other two. I get that Edmundson brings a different physical element, but I do not think that puts him in the must-keep category.
Ice time, confidence and attitude — the conspiracy theory plan
Another party line right now is how Brind’Amour and the team are stunting Fleury’s growtch and confidence right now by leaving him in a limited role. But here’s the thing…Fleury has had consecutive seasons with at least part of the season in a steady, regular role. I would not say that that comfortable situation has really boosted his developed. At best he has made only modest progress. So what about this conspiracy theory…First, Brind’Amour actually knows Fleury pretty well from being around him for the entirety of his NHL experience. Fleury is pretty easygoing, happy go lucky personality-wise. Is it possible that Brind’Amour’s assessment is that Fleury would benefit from finding a bit more determination, hunger or an edge that dials up the urgency in his game? Especially if Brind’Amour looks forward to 2020-21 as noted above, I do not think it is out of the question that part of what is going on right now is Brind’Amour trying to push/challenge Fleury and see if he can help find a higher gear.
What it takes in my opinion
At the most basic level, I think it is time for Fleury to go for it a bit more. Version 1.0 of Fleury seemed so focused on not making a big mistake that his style of play could aptly be described as quickly making small mistakes to avoid big ones. More than any other defender by a wide margin, the early version of Fleury was prone to quickly get the puck off his stick in defensive zone even if it just meant pitching it to the opposite blue line for a low-pain turnover. Similarly when defending, he seemed to have a propensity to just keep backing up. The result was that very rarely did someone get behind him with the puck, but the negative was that he very regularly offered up a ton of time and space instead of challenging the puck. Against good NHL forwards, this is a recipe for problems. While it might be unnatural for him at first and might come with some growing pains, I think the next step is for Fleury to play a much more aggressive brand of hockey. With the puck on his stick that means being willing to hold and/or carry the puck a bit versus chucking it away in 0.2 seconds if there is not an immediate passing option. On defense, I think it means adding a bit more Slavin/Pesce challenging the puck to his game. I have no idea if Fleury is capable of making these adjustments and what the results will be, but I think it is time to find out if now that he is acclimated a bit if he has a higher gear.
What say you Canes fans?
1) Are Haydn Fleury’s days in the Hurricanes organization numbered as evidenced by his limited current role? How do you think this all ends?
2) Do you buy the possibility of Fleury having a light role in 2019-20 but still being part of a longer-term plan?
3) Everyone seems to have thoughts on the Haydn Fleury situation right now. What are yours? Go!
Go Canes!
It’s pretty clear RBA is sheltering Fleury, and probably the biggest reason for this is where he is at maturity-wise. Matt, you’re right in that the “fire” just isn’t there with him yet. This could be an ongoing test by both player/coach to get him there. The team knows way more about him and this situation than we do, including The Athletic, which is why that article suggesting one or the other is likely a false narrative.
Millennials are a different breed, especially physically mature 1st rounders, and this is one of RBA’s bigger challenges. The result could still bode well and Fleury ends up being a top 4D. RBA is trying to build that fire from within by having Fleury watch others, but he will have to rotate regularly.
That said, I think TVR is trusted because of his maturity and skill combined. Maybe the same reason Gibbons is our AHL call-up right now. They bring a more determined element to the team. In the end, I believe we will use an asset or two to bring on a top line forward, and who we send the other way may still surprise.
A trade for an established NHL forward will be tough. The Canes only have around $1M in salary cap. They are going to have to send away more than a prospect to get a top-9 forward. I’m not sure that’s what they need at this point anyway.
Fleury is in a tough spot personally, but it’s a luxury for the team to have a solid defenseman ready to go in case of injury. Trading him now makes no sense. Someone will get injured. I have no interest in seeing McKeown play or any of the other d-men in Charlotte.
I think Fleury’s play has been fine. Not great, but not bad either. He seems more aggressive skating. I would like to see him get more aggressive on the boards. Seems to play like he isn’t strong enough, but I think he is.
My suggestion is this: Fleury in, Gardiner out. Gardiner is the weak link on D. The guy is mistake prone and is producing squat. He has all of one point more than Fleury with the additional playing time including on the PP. Slavin can do what Gardiner is doing on the PP, which isn’t much.
I find “conspiracy theorists” a bit insulting to be honest. WE’re all allowed to have opinions on the team and individual players without being labeled as lunatics.
We all have the same amount of information, .e. not the insider info (or I presume so).
I think that sitting a player for the vast majority of a season is unlikely to do much for his development, and that a #7 D man slot is better handled by a player on a two-way contract that can play big minutes down in Clt when not required to play with the big club.
We’ve seen how well the team plays with 11 forwards and 7 D, i.e. the record is 1 3 so far.
I also find it at least equally in he vain of a conspiracy theory that RBA/management is purposely keeping Fleury on the bench to ensure he has a cheap D man contract for next season.
RBA knows his players and we trust him to get the most out of them.
I think the Canes could trade for a top 9 forward whose cheap contract expires in the sumer, provided the team is high enough on that individual to commit some of the freed up salary cap to that player.
But a player like AA from Detroit, if he finds consistency, could be great and totally worth it.
Fleury is never going to be more than a third pairing D man, or at least I have difficulty seeing him in a higher role, though I think he could be a solid third pairing D man and would be better served playing meaningful minutes.
You can overripen assets in the NHL, and I think Fleury is on his way to spoilage.
Athanasiou would be a value add on the top two lines. He’s got speed and fire to his game.
Love to have the guy, but two questions. First, why would Detroit trade a young guy during a rebuild? Second, how are the Canes going to send $2M in salary to get him? Who do you want to lose?
Not sure, but we have other young assets and picks that could restock their cupboard. Detroit is not close to being a playoff team so they may bite? Trading Reimer to another team would open salary. Donnie knows how to deal.
End of the day, Canes won’t beat the Bruins or Washington, maybe not even the Islanders unless they stop looking for the cute plays and start sacrificing for the right plays. The losses have been preventable so far.
Am I missing something? Is someone being called a lunatic? I may fit that mold…at times…
Not sure if it read differently maybe, but my reference to conspiracy theory was a jab at my own theory that followed not someone else’s thoughts.
Well, I admit to having been particularly grumpy this morning (for reasons unrelated to hockey or this site), so take that with a dash of Carolina Reaper powder.
I also have lunatic tendencies (peacfl ones), we all question our mental well-being from time to time.
Matt has consistently produced excellence on this site and will continue to do so, in good times and in bad times, that’s the fun of it.
On Fleury, my thoght process goes like this:
You need to play to improve as a hockey player.
You need strength, speed and smarts to be good (roughly), you can improve strength without being on the ice, maybe speed (speed skating) and you can have some resemblance of smart by watching video, but I think in order to take a significant step forward you have to learn by playing, nothing compares to learning on the job.
In other words, I don’t think sitting a player for a whole year is going to make him any better.
I think “lighting a fire” may work if you sit a player out for a game or two, with the clear message that you believe he’s got what it takes to be good but needs more commitment or to address certin weaknesses in his play, so he is given an “in”, but I have a hard time seeing such a message being effective if sent repeatedly or over a long period of time.
All fires eventually burn out.
Having a player on a one-way contract parking his royal booty in the pressbox means you are wwasting salary, both actual and cap space, in the case of Fleury I think, as long as TD is fine with it (and I’m sure he gave his approval) it isn’t significant, but it’s still 700K.
So I still think it is in the Canes best interest to decide what to do with Fleury rather than using him as a pressbox cushion warmer until summer rolls around.
1. Have him play a meaningful number of games to get a better read.
2. Either trade him or send him down to Clt with the risk he can be claimed on waivers.
Whatever they do with Fleury, the team needs 12 forwards, the 11,7 formula is not good no matter who the 7th D is.
Fleury is a significant asset and they won’t risk him on waivers. I’m betting he will be playing at some point this season.
The 11 forward thing has to do with cap space, it has to. No team wants to roll 11/7. The Canes are trying to preserve cap space to either add a player (Justin Williams?) or swing a trade later in the season. It sucks, but when you buy a first round pick with cap space and then sign Gardiner…this is where you end up. Poor planning.
1. I think either TvR or Fleury will get traded before long. Well Fleury can be a 7D that is not his best utilization for the team’s benefit. Better as a 7D is an NHL-experienced d-man rather than a d-man you are still trying to develop. LeBrun seems to be thinking that we are working towards of trade of one or the other for a top-9 forward. Edmundson is not an asset that is going to get much of a return.
I agree with lts that the weak link on our top-6 D is Gardiner. What I am missing to think he is really a top-4 D-man worth $4M for 4.
2. That concept might have made sense last year but it doesn’t make sense this year. But Fleury needs to play to develop. Letting him sit for this season isn’t going to make him better for stepping in next season. We will fill any D holes next season as we did this season – with trades FA signing.
3. Give Fleury the chance to play – if not here than elsewhere. If you want to look ahead, trading TvR first nets more cap space for a top-9ish F. Fleury can step in and play RD and a 7th D can be picked up from the CLT crew as needed. Priskie is looking like he may be ready to play next season – with Edmundson gone, swing Fleury to his left side and Priskie settles into 3RD.
Everyone above does a good job explaining their positions regarding our defense. I really don’t profess to know any more about the situation than those of you above (I’m sure that is not news to anyone who has read my cr-p). I would just add the following:
1. Sitting Fleury is stunting his development AND it is lessening his trade value. That’s two negatives.
2. If Fleury isn’t good enough to play 3rd pairing sheltered minutes, then he has no market value and we are just kidding ourselves thinking we are going to get much in return for him.
3. Their salaries are going to make TVR and/or Edmundson virtually unmovable or at least will limit what teams could possibly consider adding them to their roster unless we take equivalent salaries back. Taking equivalent salaries back would mean IMO taking an under performing forward (over paid forward in other words) back hoping that he would turn out to be another Neiderreiter.
4. Other teams in the league are trying to move defensemen which makes moving any of ours more difficult.
Looking at the above, my take is play Fleury with Ron and the coaches doing their best to ignite the flame. This kid can skate extremely well and should be an offensive type defenseman paired with a more defensive type defenseman. If you can move TVR for an Athan… (the guy from Detroit) or some other forward who team wants to divest themselves of (Turris, Brassard, Spezza (Toronto appears to have a couple and they need defense), etc.,then make the move. If Fleury fails you can jettison him later and call up Priskie, Bean or Sellgren and not be any worse off.
Just read Toronto is going to put Jason Spezza on waivers. Why not send TVR to them for Spezza? Spezza is a center.
Spezza is making $700,000.