At the conclusion of the first round of the 2017 NHL Playoffs, I wrote an article that listed potential impacts on the Carolina Hurricanes from the results.
All three of the Hurricanes’ acquired draft picks were downgraded by first round wins. (One of those picks, a third-rounder from Ottawa, has since been traded away.) The early exit by the Montreal Canadiens was most notable in possibly making players available because of a shake up. I actually wrote about the Canadiens’ situation separately in some detail a couple days later. And I declared the Edmonton Oilers, Toronto Maple Leafs and to a lesser degree the Calgary Flames to be the up-and-coming young teams in the lead that the Hurricanes were chasing.
With the completion of the second round of the NHL playoffs on Wednesday night, here is another set of Hurricanes-centric impacts:
Carolina Hurricanes’ draft picks
As noted above, the third-round pick obtained from Ottawa is no longer relevant since it was traded for Scott Darling. If my math is right, the 2017 second round pick obtained from the New York Rangers in the Eric Staal trade last season is now pegged at 21st in the second round (52nd overall), and the second round pick obtained from the Pittsburgh Penguins in the Ron Hainsey trade is now destined to be in the bottom four in the upcoming draft.
More wreckage to comb through
Of the second-round losers, I think there are definitely impacts to who might be available and interesting to Ron Francis as he works to build his roster for the 2017-18 season and beyond.
Edmonton Oilers
First, to be clear, the term “wreckage” is not really accurate for Edmonton. Despite losing the second round, the franchise made progress just by making the playoffs and even more by winning a round and coming really close in the second round.
But despite the positives,there are actually significant impacts that could come into play for the Hurricanes. The rising up of the Edmonton Oilers in the 2017 playoffs has only served to highlight how much the progress is also a changing of the guard. To no one’s surprise, the success is led by the youthful stars, Connor McDavid and Leon Draisatl and newer arrivals like Cam Talbot, Milan Lucic, Adam Larsson, Patrick Maroon. Gone completely is Taylor Hall who was part of a headline-making trade for Adam Larsson. Seemingly on the way out and maybe now with more urgency and a discount are suddenly aging young guns Jordan Eberle and Ryan Nugent-Hopkins. Eberle had a respectable if not eye-popping 51 points in 82 games in the regular season, but collected only 2 points (2 assists, 0 goals) in 13 playoff games and was a team low minus 6 in 13 games. Ryan Nugent-Hopkins posted a modest 43 points in 82 games in the regular season, and an only slightly better 4 points (all assists) in 13 playoff games. When things mattered most, both players were no better than underperforming depth players. With Draisatl due for a huge raise this summer and then McDavid next summer, salary cap challenges are coming in Edmonton. Both making $6 million annually on their current contracts, one or both of Eberly and Nugent-Hopkins will need to be part of the adjustments necessary to fit Draisatl’s and later McDavid’s contract into a financial structure that fits under the salary cap. Both players were destined to be shopped this summer anyway, but after sub-par playoff performances the urgency maybe increased while the trade price decreased. Better options that might be available, but when Ron Francis starts doing the complicated math that considers value relative to cost, one or both of Eberle and Nugent-Hopkins could represent a massive bargain relative to the other options even if maybe not perfect.
New York Rangers
Despite making it into the second round, the Rangers along with the Capitals clearly joined to pool of teams most likely to make a big deal or two to shake things up. The problem with the Rangers as a trade partner is that will likely be looking to pawn off expensive underperformers and retool their blue line along the way. Though it is possible, I am not sure Francis wants to either help the Rangers by giving them a good young defenseman nor take a big contract off their hands. I guess the possibility is picking up a good veteran forward if the Rangers consider moving one of them in the shake up.
Despite the likelihood that the Rangers will be dealing, I am not sure they will be a great trade partner for the Hurricanes. I am not keen on taking the last year of Nash’s $8 million contract for short-term help, and I am not sure any of the other possibilities are really the high-end scoring help that Francis is seeking. In addition, the Rangers are like the Canadiens in that they would be looking for players not picks and prospects in return as they work to quickly retool and try to figure something out before Henrik Lundqvist rides off into the sunset. That said, whenever a team goes into ‘blow it up’ mode, it makes sense to check in to see what bargains can be had.
Washington Capitals
And perhaps the most spectacular crash that should be a surprise at this point since it is an annual event featured the Washington Capitals sitting at the top of the league at the end of the regular season only to fail again in the playoffs. Only one day after their dismissal from the playoffs at the hands of the Penguins, any guess as to what direction the Capitals go from here is wild speculation, but early rumblings seem to suggest that a significant shake up with a name player or two departing is not impossible.
A portion of the Nashville Predators’ current success has been the team’s willingness to pounce quickly when unique situations with other teams suddenly made elite players available. First, Nashville acquired Ryan Johansen when things imploded in Columbus. Then Nashville was kind enough to accept P.K. Subban in his prime. It seems unlikely, but 29-year old Nicklas Backstrom would look really nice centering a first line for the next three years or more. Just like with the Rangers, I am not sure there is a great trade fit, but if they start throwing everything out like it is garbage, Francis would do well be be nearby to see if anything could be reclaimed.
Fast, attacking hockey wins
While I would not actually say that it is universal, I think the every-postseason theme of playing fast and attacking is again ruling the day. The teams that win in May and June do usually play decent defense and have at least decent goaltending, but the other commonality is the ability to skate, attack and constantly put pressure on an opponents’ defense. Gone are the days when teams could hunker down, survive in their own end and net a clutch goal here and there to win.
This ongoing trend bodes reasonably well for the Carolina Hurricanes. The team’s back end has evolved to become a bunch that is above average in terms of mobility even if still a work in process in terms of generating offense. I am not sure the Hurricanes are there yet for the 2017-18 season, but I think Peters gets this and is trending in that direction as he finally starts to get enough skill, speed and talent at the forward position.
What say you Caniacs?
From the teams toppled early and maybe looking to shake things up a bit like the Rangers, Canadiens and Capitals do any players jump out as potential targets?
Even if Jordan Eberle and/or Ryan Nugent-Hopkins are not your first choice, what kind of price in terms of modest trade assets makes them interesting as Edmonton works to fit Draisatl and McDavid’s next contracts under the salary cap?
Go Canes!
No one jumps out from among NY, Mont, Wash. Unless, as you mention, Backstrom is shopped.
I think Eberle is definitely worth pursuing, Even offering our 2017 1st makes sense. His average years are 20/50 and good ones are 25/60+. He might be the RW that makes everything fall into place. Only having two years on his contract is not ideal (especially considering 2019 presents Carolina with its own version of McDavid/Draisaitl with Skinner being UFA and Aho being RFA). So that is a negative. I don’t think RNH is valuable given current contract–his production is basically the same as Rask.
I will add my obligatory plug for Jarnkrok. It sure looks like Nashville won’t be able to protect him. He is signed for 5 more years at $2 million per. He has decent offense and is top-notch on PK. If GMRF can add someone like Eberle as scoring winger, then having a productive, defensively solid center is the missing puzzle piece.
As for the Oilers … Before McDavid and Draisaitl came along, RNH was their #1 Center and did respectably on an awful team. A change of scenery could help him. Not opposed to him but not my first choice. Eberle might be a lower risk option at the price if he walks after 2-years. He doesn’t solve the Center issue but maybe makes it easier to bring in a “bridge” guy with lower production.
As for the Rangers … Agree with your NYR analysis completely with one addition: given where they are and how much retooling they’ll need, I don’t think Lundqvist is going to win a Cup there. He has a huge salary and is aging: it would not surprise me to see he him traded. It’d free up a ton of Cap space. Having said that, there aren’t any players on that team I’d want on the Canes, definitely not Rick Nash.
As for the Capitals … this team is going to look way different: Oshie, Justin Williams, Winnick, Alzner, and Shattenkirk are all UFA’s and they have another handful of RFA’s that are due big raises. As great as Backstrom is – I’d trade for him in a second – maybe Kuznetsov becomes available instead. I’d almost rather have him; I’d be willing to pay a lot for either.
Actually, I didn’t answer the question. I don’t think a 1st is too much for Eberle. I’d give up a 1st, a roster player and a prospect for Kusnetsov, and more futures for Backstrom.
Eberle is interesting to me at the right (LOW) price.
In all of the trade speculation, people generally get concerned with short contracts (i.e. Duchene is only signed for 2 years). I agree with dmilleravid that a “bridge” type player is okay and maybe even preferred.
Such a player adds proven fire power for 2017-18 and 2018-19 and allows 2 years for a promising group of 19-21 year old prospects just moving to AHL/NHL level to either make it (or not even). And it lines up reasonably well with needing some contract flexibility for raises for players coming off ELCs (Slavin, Pesce, Hanifin, Aho, etc.) and also veterans coming off contract (Skinner, Lindholm, etc.).
It’s just my 2c, but I do not think either of the Edmonton options cost a first round pick at this point – I’m thinking a package of lesser stuff if Canes take the full salary.
The tricky part is balancing opportunistic with targeted. In an ideal world what the Canes need most is scoring top 6 center, but price in terms of trade cost and salary does matter.
I can’t answer (1) because I really don’t follow the details of other teams. But I think some combination of prospects/picks for either would be reasonable and acceptable to both parties – the Oilers need inexpensive talent and we really don’t want to give up a lot of assets.
First, it’s important to keep in mind with the Rangers. They are in significant expansion draft danger with their forwards right now. They’re going to lose someone real good if they don’t make a trade. That gives Ron some legitimate leverage in trade negotiations. I would not say no to Kreider, Zibanejad, or JT Miller. Couple that with massive salary cap issues, and the need to resign Zibanejad, Fast, and Pirri this offseason, I respectfully disagree highly with the assessment that the Rangers would not be ideal trade partners. Yes they’ll try to get as much value as they can, but they HAVE to make moves this summer. Much like Chicago in years previous. That seemed to work out for Carolina.
As for Nugent-Hopkins and Eberle I fully agree with dmilleravid. I understand many are wavering on this due to the mystical internal budget of the Hurricanes (Probably the most frustrating part of being a Canes fan, I’d say). Still, if we can afford them contractually, the trade cost of getting them should not really be ridiculously high. Nugent-Hopkins especially, after scoring just 43 points, seems like he could be had for a McKeown/2nd round pick combo. I’d pay that. Maybe he’s still Victor Rask, or maybe he just needs a change of scenery and will get back to the talented top-line player he has been. That’s a roll of the dice I’d take.
All of the above comments have some validity to an extent so I don’t discard them. But, if I am considering the ramifications of the 2nd round playoff results I start with what we have identified as our number 1, number 2, number 3, etc. needs. Virtually all of us identified a new goalie as our number 1 need. RF has apparently taken care of that already. So I move on to our number 2 need. Most all of us have identified a first line center with scoring ability. To me that means someone like Duchene, MacKinnon, Backstrom, etc. It doesn’t include players that, while good players, are not first line centers such as Eberle and the like. Expending players and assets to obtain players that do not solve our next priority (first line scoring center) diminishes our ability to obtain the type player we really need. Why spend 2 to 4 million dollars of annual salary plus whatever assets we have to give up on another player whose skills we have not identified as our next highest priority need when that money and assets can be put towards a first line center (preferably with size). Seems like a case of solving a lower priority need sacrificing the ability to fill a higher priority need. Thus I am for concentrating on getting a Backstrom, Duchene, MacKinnon, etc. caliber CENTER right now. I am not at all interested in a mediocre wing such as Eberle or any other wing (Kovalchuk) at all. If Nugent-Hopkins (or another CENTER) meets the criteria for the first line center slot in your opinion, well then I can go along with that as I accept you may just be right and I might be wrong. We would at least be addressing our next highest priority need.
By the way, Kuznetsov and Nugent-Hopkins would be fine for me. They are Centers who have outstanding abilities. Just for the record.
If we get a good (better than adequate center) I’ll be a happy camper! Who that is…I’m not sure, though TB has a couple guys who might fit the mold…
TB not a bad idea. Johnson would be a welcome addition IMO.
I have to call a BCC moment on all the talk about No. 1 center. I think it misses the point about what the needs are. We did agree that with “league average” goaltending the Canes would be in the playoffs. Darling was at least a plurality pick for best available–and most likely to be BETTER than league average. So that one move in itself solved the big problem of missing the playoffs. But I understand that the expansion draft creates an opportunity not likely to come along for another decade or more. I am all for seizing the opportunity. But if the opportunity that makes the most sense is more goal scoring from the wings, then so be it. Canes Country made a good case that J. Staal is already in the top half of NHL first line centers. But his modest goal scoring makes folks miss that.
But back to the main point. I like Matt’s point about Eberle being a bridge to the young talent in the organization. So if Carolina can get him for a reasonable cost, let’s say he has a typical year and scores 25 as RW. Added to 32 from Lindholm and Stempniak and 8 from the 4th liner, you have 65 from RW. The LW position should be good for 85 (Skinner and Aho combine for 60 again, TT steps up to 18 and the 4th chips in 7). If the D can provide 35 (Faulk 17/18, Slavin 8, Pesce 6, Hanifin 4) then centers only need to score 50 goals to get to 235, which seems like the number likely get Carolina 3-4 wins beyond the playoff cut line. What the new players need to add is goals, not specific positions. And the talk about size and grit is off target. I mentioned yesterday the I have been sucked into the world of hard-core hockey analytics. And they disagree about many points. But there is pretty much unanimity about the data around size, hits, and “grit.” The data indicate they have no value. Speed, puck control, and passing have big positive impact, but big players who make extra hits, none.
IF GMRF can get a 1C for a reasonable cost, I say great. But if Carolina makes the playoffs with Staal, Rask, Ryan, and Wallmark–who really cares.
ct, you make several good points. I would just say that when I talk about size I don’t mean at the sacrifice of speed. I just believe a fast bigger center is better than a fast smaller center given the same skill sets. Size is only one factor to consider and not because of scoring. It’s because of durability and making room on the ice for other smaller players (like Jordan does). I am not disagreeing with your desire to obtain some more scoring at whatever position. I just don’t want to pay a premium for someone who won’t fill as many needs as possible. Why use assets to obtain a lesser player (an Eberele for example) when you could use the same assets for a better player(Johnson of TB for example), if you consider Johnson a better player. Johnson would fill two needs, a number 1 center AND scoring while Eberle fills one need, scoring. I use these two players as an example to illustrate my thinking about our priorities. I will add that centers like Getzlaff, Johansen, Crosby, Malkin, Kopitar, Toews, Kesler etc. are big centers and use their size to whatever advantage it provides on the ice. One of the uses is not just to go around willy nilly hitting people. They use it to gain open ice for themselves and/or their teammates which in turn aides scoring. Why give up this dimension if you don’t have to. M y focus is on getting the best player for our needs (the top priority) IF WE CAN. IF WE CAN’T, then I’m in on settling for a player who will still improve our team. To be clear, if Nathan MacKinnon (a young, big, fast, scoring center) is available at a cost we can afford (in assets, salary, etc.) for what he brings to the team, I don’t want to pass on him to obtain a player like Eberle (an older just as fast I guess, smaller, scoring right wing) if I’m going to spend about the same number of assets and salary to get him. Let’s try to address two priorities, position and scoring, IF WE CAN. You can disagree with these thoughts, which you apparently do, and that’s fine. I just have a different opinion (and an opinion is all that it is). By the way, my opinion and a dime…excuse me, and a buck and a quarter will get you a cup of coffee (small cup of course).
Keep writing ct as I enjoy and value your input.
Quote from the new general manager for the Buffalo Sabres:
“This is a league that thrives on centermen. The fortunate thing here is we have a couple of amazing , high end centermen>”
RR. We don’t disagree. I would love a big, fast, scoring center. Though Johnson is actually small and has only had one “high” scoring year. If the Canes are going to spend big on an RFA and we could get a Mikael Granlund or Horvat, I am all in. But I don’t think RFAs are easy to pry away. So I am back to the point about the teams/players Matt mentioned in the OP. Of those, I still think Eberle is the best option to provide scoring punch. And Carolina needs an RW almost as much a center. Plus the option to get a center (admittedly for 3rd line) at a reasonable price, who would allow Saarela, Roy, and others to develop, due to expansion issues seems better than getting a scorer. For instance both Letestu and Jarnkrok might be in play. So the lines would look like:
Aho/Staal/Eberle, Teravainen/Rask/Lindholm, Skinner/Leteskrok/Stempniak. This is both a nice scoring and defensive upgrade.
And as far as the Sabres new GM, I think the quote is both his belief and his hope because Buffalo has Eichel and O’Reilly. I don’t argue that high-end centermen add many extra dimensions. But look at Ottaw and Nashville, the argument could be that offensive bluelines are essential to success. And before their collapse this playoffs, most folks thought Chicago with their overall balance was the ideal model.
Carolina seems to have a little of everything. I would love to see them add a 60-point center–just not sure who it is or at what cost.
I really enjoy the back-and-forth from everyone on C&C. It makes me think more deeply about all this. So thanks for all your insights.