With the conclusion of the Stanley Cup Finals on Sunday night, we are officially in the off-season. This week has the potential to be a busy one leading up to the expansion draft.
If you are catching up, check out our “2017-18 Carolina Hurricanes Roster Building Central” which has a complete list of article links for the articles thus far.
Also check out Canes and Coffee’s Off-Season Fantasy Hockey Contest with a Tuesday entry deadline.
The expansion draft has the potential to yield a very interesting week for the Carolina Hurricanes and the NHL in total. The regular NHL draft and free agency which are on the way are a staple of every NHL off-season. But the expansion draft is unique and potentially powerful. First, the expansion draft sets a firm deadline for a unique category of trades. Second, the expansion draft puts 30-50 players into play before and after that deadline from teams considering the option of collecting a trade return for a player destined to be lost (before) and Las Vegas considering trades of players that the team just acquired (after).
So there is a straightforward analysis of what the expansion draft means for the Hurricanes in terms of who they expose and who they ultimately lose to Las Vegas. I have written about this some already and mostly stand by what I wrote on March 29. I will write an updated vanilla version of the Hurricanes’ expansion draft either Monday or Tuesday, but at a basic level, I stand by my March 29 article that suggested Francis would protect veteran Lee Stempniak and expose and lose one of Brock McGinn or Phil Di Giuseppe.
But allow me first to take the unique situation and enter the realm of creative, spit-balling with too much free time realm first and come at it from an angle of Finance and or Economics 101.
Market inefficiencies created by the NHL expansion draft
In a normal NHL off-season, there are multiple simple elements of supply and demand that play into how much players cost both in terms of salary and trade cost. Certain positions have more free agents or players theoretically available than others. The pool of free agents is richer in some off-seasons than others which can impact the cost of especially second-tier free agents. And the seemingly constant shortage of top 4 defensemen regularly drives their prices high.
But the expansion draft creates an entirely different set of supply, demand and market dynamics specifically for the rarest commodity of them all — top 4 defensemen.
Before the expansion draft
Extra supply pre-expansion draft: I count at least six teams that have more quality top 4 defensemen than they can protect. My list includes the Minnesota Wild, Winnipeg Jets, Anaheim Ducks, Nashville Predators, San Jose Sharks and New York Islanders. In a normal off-season, none of these teams would be eager at all to unload their fourth best defenseman. But facing the prospect of losing their fourth defenseman for nothing, these teams have an incentive to at least consider trading their fourth defenseman to receive a trade return instead of watching them leave for Las Vegas for nothing.
Many teams wanting a top 4 defenseman cannot shop until AFTER the expansion draft: Just the same as any other off-season, there will be no shortage of teams seeking to add a top 4 defenseman. But the expansion draft throws an interesting wrinkle into the timing of that. Teams that already have three good defenseman who they must protect in the expansion draft cannot add their fourth defenseman until after the expansion draft; otherwise they run the risk of adding a top 4 defenseman next week only to lose them less than a week later to Las Vegas in the expansion draft.
Teams that can fit another defenseman on their roster and protect the player: There are a reasonable number of teams that can fit another defenseman on their roster and protect him for the expansion draft. The Hurricanes are such a team. My quick back-of-the-envelope check suggests that most, if not all, of Dallas, Detroit, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Boston, Vancouver, Tampa Bay, Buffalo and Washington could accept a top 4 defenseman and protect him. But I think the list of teams that would even consider doing this is smaller. A couple teams like Tampa Bay and Washington have salary cap challenges to consider. A few others might not want to add a top 4 defenseman. When I add it up, my rough math says that there is roughly enough teams that could theoretically add and protect a defenseman to match up against teams that might want to unload one. So it is not such a crazy buyer’s market that players will be given away for nothing. In addition, in the event that bids were just way too low, teams could instead negotiate directly with Las Vegas to keep certain players from being selected.
Preferred currency for expansion draft-related trades: There are exceptions with rebuilding teams, but in general teams trading a top half of the roster player will want to receive a similarly good player back, not just a collection of futures. But that is not necessarily the case with pre-expansion draft trades. Just like with teams who want to add a top 4 defenseman but cannot do it because they do not have an expansion draft expansion slot left, the same is true for teams with too many defensemen who are looking to trade one. They definitely cannot take a defenseman who needs to be protected back. If they do, the team ends up right back in the same situation. Though it is possible some teams could have room to protect a forward received in exchange, many teams with depth will prefer a return of futures that do not need to be protected.
After the expansion draft
After the expansion draft, the demand side of the equation increases: Once the expansion draft concludes, another 6-10 teams will emerge on the scene looking to bolster their defense with a top 4 defenseman, and anyone who has four defensemen will mostly be happy to keep them. And the off-season will return to its usual course with not enough top 4 defensemen to go around and teams bidding crazily to land one.
So short version is that there are a few unique supply/demand situations in the pre-expansion draft time period that at least have the potential to be exploited.
The Carolina Hurricanes situation
Part 1 of my series building the 2017-18 Carolina Hurricanes roster started by identifying the team’s needs. The short version is that adding a scoring top 6 forward is the highest priority remaining after already addressing goaltending with the Scott Darling trade.
The usual price for top 6 forwards obtained via trade: Top 6 scoring forwards, especially younger ones available via trade, are rare, arguably as rare as top 4 defensemen. The prospect of obtaining such a player without giving up a good roster player in return is minimal. Whenever players like Matt Duchene, Gabriel Landeskog, Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, Jordan Eberle, Jonathan Drouin and similar is brought up, the expected return changes based on trade partner obviously but almost always includes a top half of the roster player in return.
More specifically for the Hurricanes, mention of players like Matt Duchene, Gabriel Landeskog, Jonathan Drouin, Ryan Nugent-Hopkins or similar is quite often followed by discussion about which young defenseman the Hurricanes would consider parting with.
Francis seems unwilling or at least reluctant to part with a young roster defenseman: But Francis watching Taylor Hall go to New Jersey for Adam Larsson when Justin Faulk might have trumped New Jersey’s offer suggests that Francis might not really want to trade sideways with a defenseman for forward deal. Similarly, Duchene slipping through the trade deadline still with Colorado might (no certainty) mean that Francis again held tight to his young blue line. At the same time, the Hurricanes started the off-season with a full allotment of draft picks plus two extra second round picks and two extra third round picks. In an end of season media session, Francis and Coach Bill Peters joked about how many of those picks the team planned to use. In addition, the Hurricanes suddenly have a deeper prospect pool that could be drawn upon to improve the 2017-18 roster.
It is unclear whether Francis would trade a young roster defenseman to land a top forward if he absolutely must, but I feel confident in saying that his preference would be to instead deal from the team’s cadre of draft picks and prospects if he can.
As an aside, I am on record as believing that the Hurricanes should consider adding a #4/#5 defenseman, importantly prioritized behind the forward addition. But I think what the team ideally needs is a short-term bridge that keeps the youth from being rushed but can also move aside when the time is right. More directly, I think ideal is a proven #4/#5, ideally with only one or at most two years remaining on his contract and also ideally with some ability to play on either side. Most of the players that teams might be considering trading out of expansion draft selections are higher-end players, many with fairly expensive and longer-term contracts.
Where the unique expansion draft market and Hurricanes’ needs meet
At first glance, the two situations do not seem to line up. The extra supply is top 4 defensemen. The Hurricanes ideally need a top 6 forward.
But follow me on a bit of a diversion…
Because there is a decent size collection of teams who ideally need to collect value for a top 4 defenseman before the expansion draft, and a set of teams who want a top 4 defenseman but cannot add such a player until after the expansion draft, could Francis buy low before the expansion draft and then flip the defenseman to get the forward they want after the expansion draft?
Remember that the primary desired trade asset before the expansion draft if futures. That is exactly what Francis wants to spend. There will be some competition from teams that want and can fit a defenseman now, and there could also be another team or two like the Hurricanes who take advantage of the situation. But it could still be a creative way for Ron Francis to add a high-end top 6 forward while trading only futures to do so.
How about a combination of three prospects and/or draft picks for a good top 4 defenseman like Travis Hamonic, Jonas Brodin, Ryan Ellis or similar on Wednesday who is then flipped maybe with another future to add a top 6 forward like Matt Duchene or similar within two weeks of the first trade (i.e.the end of the regular draft weekend)?
What say you Canes fans?
Too outlandish to even be possible? Interesting at least? Maybe right up Francis’ ally to creatively exploit a unique situation just like he did for the Versteeg/Nordstrom and Teravainen/Bickell trades?
Go Canes!
I do like the scenario you outline at the end. And in the end, even if are unable to flip, we still have a solid D and he will only help. But I think it is certainly the right idea.
I think your last scenario is the most likeliest to take place if anything happens. If getting a top line forward is going to require a top 4 defenseman in the deal, we need to get another top 4 by using prospects and/or draft picks.
I like it … Why stop at one? If we can get two this way, and then trade one and keep one, even better.
I like this plan, it makes a lot of sense. I agree with dmiller, why not get a couple with the full intent of flipping. The market will be there. I see little down side to this. It would be a great way to use the picks (currency).
And, of course RF could get a new(to the Canes) Dman and trade an old/current one. Not sure which one, but there are options…
Different subject… care to devulge your guess who Canes pick in 1st round? …assuming they don’t trade it!
puckgod. My guess is Suzuki. I would love Petersson–based on what I have read he is the Scheifele of this draft in that in 5-6 years he cold easily be the most productive. For a while it looked like he would fall to 12, but now it seems foregone that he goes in top 6 or 7.
Suzuki should still be around at 12 and has the most upside.
Speaking of which, I listened to a podcast from HockeyGraphs that featured a young woman who is working on an analytical draft model. She says that her research so far has uncovered two things NHL teams should understand: 1) size is overrated; 2) teams should be more willing to make high risk/reward picks because the payoff can be huge (she used Johnny Gaudreau as an example). So my favorites for the first three rounds are:
First–Suzuki (small but high scorer who doesn’t commit penalties)
Second–Heponiemi (even smaller but also scores often and tons of skill/speed)
Third–either L. Martin or Rasanen (both are bigger than average D-men would compensate for the small skill players)
CT I’ve done several mock drafts, and I come up with a different guy, practically every time.
My choices are Pettersson, Andersson, Valimaki, Suzuki, Kostin, Necas, Rasmussen, and Glass. I’ve read probably 60 different Mocks and EVEN the top two aren’t absolute. When you get to ten-15 it starts to diverge a lot. The experts tend to change a lot from April to now. They see players change (either way), and new guys stand out.
It’s a real CRAP SHOOT.
That is a really good idea… however it does have risks depending on the cost. It is really dependent on the 2nd trade happening. The forward we need may be gone by the time we can trade our new guy for him. Then we have another D that may stand in the way of one of the younger guys… Yes I know proven vs. potential. Alot of this depends on what the price for the top 4 D is. It is a very good idea, however there are some risks.
Agree completely on the risk. One way to mitigate risk is to steer more toward players that the Hurricanes could better use with shorter contracts. I actually think either Tyler Myers (2yr-$3.5M and $3.0M) or Ryan Ellis (2yr reversed-$3.0M and $3.5M) are interesting. For those middle-ish salaries Francis could add them with the intent being to use them as long as it takes for young D to be ready and then trade them. If that is October, great. If it is next summer, that is okay too.
Also for the risk reason, I am less prone to take on Vatanen’s long contract and short-term injury situation. With Vatanen scheduled to miss a chunk of the 2017-18 season, it could be that the trade market is delayed.
I think that it is more likely that Francis targets the D-men you mentioned as part of a larger trade. Brodin could be part of the broader MN trade to get Niederreiter (mentioned in an earlier post). Harmonic is unlikely to come to us because of the “inside the division” thing. With Ellis being one of the best Preds in the Cup series, it isn’t out of the question that he gets protected over Ekholm. In the grand scheme of things the Preds could take the same route as the Wild and just accept the loss and move on. Maybe a Jarnkrok/Ellis type of deal might make sense, but then we use some of our “powder” for a less than ideal forward. Of course, we could then flip Ellis, but these deals are very, very rare. I still think we’ll target the forward we want (using picks/prospects) and go for him 1st. Then if that doesn’t work, maybe look at a bigger deal for both a forward and a defender, allowing us to maybe move somebody like Hanifin as part of that deal. Or failing that, Ronnie just goes for a couple of lesser moves, not super light-weight, just not earth shattering…think Michael Grabner or Tomas Tatar (I think that either Nyquist or Tatar could be in our wheelhouse). Not sexy, flashy names, but guys who could add the 20-25 more goals that we need.
With all the time RF has had to plan his moves, with options, it’s not hard to imagine he’s already made deals with teams ie. I’ll trade you X FOR YOUR Y and talk with another guy/team and arrange moving Y FOR Z… OR just a three-way…with or without other picks or players involved!
I’m sure they have a Trading-For-Dummies book available… NO DOUBT WRITTEN BY A FAN!
That all said, I’ll still be surprised if RF ACTUALLY GETS OFF HIS WALLET, and deals for a DIFFERENCE-MAKER…ie. NOT CHEAP!!
What difference maker do you think could be had? I’m not being snarky and am genuinely curious. I don’t see anybody out there worth investing in from free agency to fill out the Top 6 scorer need. Guys like Nathan MacKinnon, Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, Landeskog, Duchene, and Niederreiter have been bandied about with both sides of the argument getting pretty good air time. Sakic isn’t going to magically give in on any of his guys. Chiarelli might have made some silly moves from time to time, but he knows RNH holds significant value, so he won’t come cheap. Fletcher might be lynched if he moved Nino. I’m not saying that none of these deals will or will not happen. But what I am saying is that it won’t be the money that holds it up. We have to spend over $10 million just to get to the cap floor. The issue isn’t GMRF sitting on his wallet. The issue is making sure the team is competitive over the long haul.
Hard to say which of these players are available and for what price, but we do know a couple things with reasonable certainty.
Sakic/Colorado will do something, and it almost certainly includes one of Duchene, Landeskog or MacKinnon. There has been enough rumbling both internally and externally, and they were horrible last year.
Edmonton must do something by next summer before McDavid’s new contract, and at least one, if not both, of Eberle or Nugent-Hopkins is in the cross hairs.
Montreal, after a disappointing playoff exit, will do something and while not the only option, Galchenyuk is most likely.
Tampa Bay, with no cap increase, has no chance of fitting Johnson, Palat and Drouin. Yzerman is like the guy escaping from handcuffs, blindfolds and whatever else in a box underwater in terms of salary cap issues, but he must do something.
Shorter version, even when all of them do not move, there should still be a pretty decent list of higher-end forwards who are moved this summer.
Agreed, that some will move and some won’t. As much as I like MacKinnon, I find it hard to believe he’s going to move his 21 year old best player. That just doesn’t happen unless somebody overpays significantly. Once Eberle is moved, there’s less pressure to move RNH and I think he gets shopped until he’s dealt. As much as I’d like Nino Niederreiter, I think the Wild figure out their salary issues. Best bets in my mind are somebody with Tampa Bay, Detroit (who we never trade with, or a long shot w/Landeskog).
Notopie, I tend to agree with you. Especially if you define “difference maker” narrowly. None of the elite or potentially elite players are available. But Matt’s point below that the expansion draft might create a situation where a player one level down from the elite tier is available is also reasonable. My own expectation is that GMRF will add two or three players who are better than the current options. Probably one pre-expansion, one post-expansion/draft day, and one UFA.
I am an optimist. There were a lot of things going well the last 1/4 of the season. Aho, Lindholm, and, to some degree, Teravainen all look to have 55+ point potential this season. That, Darling combined with a goalie coaching change, and a fourth line that scores 6-8 more goals will greatly increase Carolina’s likelihood of making the playoffs. The moves in the next few weeks might not overwhelm us caniacs, but in combination they should give us real reason to believe 17-18 will bring May hockey back to NC.
We see things quite similarly. I think a lot depends on who gets exposed by the Canes. If Stempniak is exposed and then taken, then the Canes will need to absolutely add 3 or 4 players not in the system (Top 6 guy, Top 9 RW, probably a 3C, and #5/#6 RHD). The best option for getting somebody affordably (not in money sense but in a cost of assets used to acquire sense) is between now and midnight on the 16th. This is where a guy like Nyquist or Tatar could come into play as Detroit will almost certainly lose one of those guys to expansion (or maybe Ryan Sproul who I like very much).
Notopie, I can see several Difference-Makers. Zetterberg, Hossa, three from TB, three or four from NYR… more.
If RF doesn’t have the chops to get one…then you can applaud him for his frugality…BUT I’LL CALL HIM CHEAP.
The money is there, and Peters was clear about how he felt! I’m not the only one who feels he should use it.
Puckgod, you and I are using the concept of cost very differently. Let me make it clear – salary isn’t the issue both in cap terms and real dollar terms – at least as it pertains to the next two years. I think Zetterberg would be fine if he only had 2 more years on his contract. I want nothing to do with a 38 year old, oft injured, declining Marian Hossa and his 4 remaining contract years. Ron Francis isn’t being frugal; he’s taking the long view. That view includes getting us to the playoffs this season, but it also understands that he’s got 4 critical RFAs to sign next season. The season after that he’s got Jeff Skinner and Sebastian Aho up for new contracts. The next season? One Justin Faulk needs a new deal. Do the math and you’ll see that between the $12 million to $16 million (at a minimum) that Lindholm, Pesce, Slavin, and Hanifin will cost, the $6.5 million to $7.5 million that Jeff Skinner will cost, the likely $5 million (or more) Aho will cost, and the $6 million to $7 million that Faulk will cost puts this team as a cap team in 2019-20….and that’s assuming the cap rises to $75 million. Both Zetterberg’s and Hossa’s contracts are non-starters because of that simple fact. Look down the Detroit roster at guys like Nyquist, Athanasiou or Tatar. As you say, look at Tampa Bay (more Johnson or Palat). Or look to Minnesota as I’ve discussed. I’m hoping we’re not trading for late-30 year old forwards with term on their deals. It will come back and bite us hard. Then you’ll be blowing up Ron Francis for having to trade a guy like Skinner or Faulk.
Notopie Hossa is a great option…4 years at 1M/per. If he gives you ONE GOOD YEAR…the rest is gravy! I’m not sure what could be bad about that? He’s not going to be costly, IMO.
PuckGod – he’s getting old, breaking down more and most importantly, in two years the actual salary will be meaningless because the salary cap number will be debilitating. We want to stay a young team not become an old team. For the same money why not get in a bidding war for TJ Oshie? He’ll give you at least the same production. Or go ahead and make the trade for Landeskog or Duchene (as long as Hanifin isn’t involved). The point is I’d rather spend the $5.5 million + on a guy that isn’t declining. We have that room. We can realistically sign a $5 million to $6 million guy and a guy that makes between $2.5 million and about $3.25 million. We also have to assume that Teravainen get’s a similar bridge deal to Lindy. That’s $11 million to $12 million more on the books. Slavin will easily command $4.5 million to $5 million. If we sign Lindy this Fall to an extension gambling on his continued improvement, he might take something around $4.25 million to $4.75 million. We’d probably be forced to bridge Hanifin and Pesce at somewhere around $2.75 million to $3 million. That’s around $27 million on guys we currently spend less than a third of that figure on.
If Hossa’s cap number was closer to $3 million it might be doable. If his contract was only for 2 more years, it might be doable. But it is not and, I repeat, he’s 38 years old. He’s played a full season’s worth of games exactly once in the last 10 seasons. He missed 27 games over the last two seasons alone. Worst of all it remains very murky as to whether or not a buyout would give cap relief (35+ rule). There are just too many other guys who are going to get your the 40-45 Hossa would put up next season.
Great comments as always… Matt, could you add a “rec” or “like” button? Would be nice to be able to agree with a post without having to write something. Thanks!