After writing a mini-novel on the removal of Ron Francis from the general manager position for Thursday, today’s Daily Cup of Joe returns to the ice with a short ‘pros and cons’ series for a few players.
Elias Lindholm as a center
Pros: I touched on this in my game recap for Thursday’s 3-2 win over the Blackhawks. I continue to like Lindholm’s game at the center position. He is generally sound in terms of positioning and decision-making without the puck, and I think his game actually benefits from the increased responsibility. Whereas I much preferred Lindholm as a right wing entering this season, his play as a center at least has me considering the possibility of Lindholm as a center.
Cons: But even if capable there are a couple reasons why I think right wing might continue to be the better option for Lindholm. First is the team situation. Teuvo Teravainen has settled in nicely on on the right side which provides on top 6 scoring right wing. But past that the team is thin on the right side when one looks out a couple years. Lee Stempniak figures to depart this summer when his contract expires, and Justin Williams will be approaching 38 years old before the start of the 2019-20 season when his contract expires. There are a couple possibilities in the prospect pool, but I would consider right wing the strongest position in terms of filling a top 9 slot soon. As such, Lindholm fills the biggest gap on the right side. In addition, I think Lindholm is redundant in terms of skill set at the center position at least with the current makeup of the roster. Combined with Jordan Staal and Victor Rask, Lindholm would add another defensively capable but probably offensively light center on a team that desperately needs more of an offensive catalyst at the center position. On a roster minus Rask, I think the prospect of slotting Lindholm at center becomes more interesting. I think that scenario leaves an opening for Sebastian Aho or Martin Necas to be an offense-leaning center from within or for an offensive catalyst to be added from outside.
Joakim Nordstrom as a depth forward
Cons: On the surface, Joakim Nordstrom is quickly thrown into the heap of underperforming depth forwards by virtue of his meager scoring totals. His 2 goals and 2 assists in 62 games are a negative and do limit his usefulness in an NHL lineup. That is the obvious con for Nordstrom’s potential to help a 2018-19 team improve.
Pros: But from the group of Phil Di Giuseppe, Marcus Kruger and Josh Jooris (who is already gone), Nordstrom could be the one who still fits even in a revamped lineup that goes younger and aims for more offense from the fourth line. I think he could be a perfect #13 forward. Coming off a $1,275,000 contract, he prices about right for that slot. And a veteran is preferred for the #13 slot. With younger players who are still developing, their development is better served by playing 18-20 minutes per game in the AHL versus being a healthy scratch at the NHL level. In addition, because of his defensive acumen especially on the forecheck and in the neutral zone, Nordstrom is the kind of plug and play player who could step into the lineup and at least not be a defensive liability as a short-term fill in.
Cam Ward as a backup goalie
Pros: Lost in the struggles of intended starter Scott Darling and another tough year overall for the goalie position for the Hurricanes is the fact that Cam Ward’s transition to backup actually went incredibly well. Peters and/or the team are sometimes (falsely in my opinion) accused of not giving Darling enough of a chance to get his feet under him and play his way up to a higher level. Darling received every starter type start for more than two months and 31 games into the season before Peters finally turned to Ward. Through 30 games of normal spot starts as a backup, Ward was 5-2-1 with decent underlying statistics. Since being pressed into service as a starter he is 14-9-3 despite fading a bit of late. Ward’s .907 save percentage and 2.70 goals against average are not particularly impressive, but his 19-11-4 record is more than good enough for a backup. What’s more, with three or more days rest (kind of the norm for a backup), Ward’s record is a stellar 11-3-2, and his other statistics improve to .915 for save percentage and 2.70 for goals against average. And along the way, he has proven capable of taking the reins if necessary. In short, Ward has been more than one could hope for in his transition into the backup role.
Cons: Considered in a vacuum by itself, the choice to bring Ward back as a backup goalie for the 2018-19 season seems like an easy one. But the situation becomes significantly more complicated when the considered as part of the broader goalie situation. Despite rating him highly as a backup, I do not see Ward as viable as a starter. At 34 years old, I think 20-30 starts in a backup role is a better fit. If the new general manager agrees with my assessment, that makes for a really interesting situation this summer. If the team retains Scott Darling (he is signed for 3 more years and not going to be easy to trade right now), I think it is incredibly risky to spend the other goalie slot on a player who is not at least potentially capable of being the starter. Or put another way, given the 2017-18 season, I would not feel comfortable entering the 2018-19 season in a situation where Darling must be the starter. The hope is that he rebounds and becomes the starting goalie that was envisioned when he was signed. But if I was going to go that route, I would definitely want to have a plan B in house given the risk. In my Daily Cup of Joe way back on January 11, I said that the fate of Cam Ward could be significantly influenced by the play of Scott Darling. I think that could become a reality. If Darling stays, it will be hard to justify keeping Ward instead of using that slot for another player more likely to step into and be successful as a #1 if Darling does not recover. So in short, despite receiving high marks in a backup role in 2017-18, I am not sure it makes sense to spend a goalie slot on Ward if Darling is still the other goalie.
What say you Canes fans?
1) Who has other player pros and cons to bandy around?
2) What are your thoughts on the three that I presented?
Go Canes!
1) I know I have a bias, but I think in last night’s game one thing was obvious. Amongst all the young D, Pesce is going to be the one who will actually rise to the top. This past 15 games or so he has become much more involved in the offense without sacrificing any of his shut-down prowess. If there is a Norris trophy in the Canes’ future, it will belong to 22.
2) Your point about positional needs is accurate. Moving forward, center is less of a need than RW. With Stempniak and Williams soon to be gone, Lindholm should be more valuable at RW. Though I was heartened to hear BP mention the other night in reference to playing Ryan and Rask together that during a shift who takes center responsibility could actually interchange. The game is evolving much like basketball. Lines made up of three players who are all natural centers and seamlessly switch roles may eventually be the norm.
If Nordstrom could work improve his shot, he would be extremely valuable–just not sure it will happen.
Agree about Pesce. He keeps developing. Seems like a smart player. Great interview between periods as well. Could see him wearing a letter soon.
Agree with ct about Pesce. My concern with Nordstrom is that in any analysis his value seems to be determined by the lack of anyone better. He doesn’t seem to retain his job otherwise. This a weakness and like all weaknesses a remedy should be sought. If effort were the only criteria for a job in the NHL, he would be ahoo-in for a job.
Lindholm as C or RW is a unfortunate question to have to answer as he is not very good at either. As far as I’m concerned you play Lindholm where you need him. If you need him at either position as a top 6 forward, your team isn’t very good. You mention Necas as a potential centerman which is obvious. There are a couple young guys in Charlotte that could fit the bill as a third line centerman in Roy and Foegele. (Interestingly enough Foegele is now listed as LW. He had been listed as a F earlier in the year.) Still think the Canes should be thinking #1 Centerman in the coming draft. Trading up would be a good move.
Nordstrom is an old school fourth liner. Energy, grind and kills penalties. Points aren’t material. If you like a fourth line that is just another line to play and score, Nordstrom isn’t so great. It really comes down to the kind of fourth line the team wants to have.
Im cool with keeping Lindholm on another 2 year deal. But we need to move Rask. Lindholm can play 3C until Necas is ready, then slide on his right side for FO help.
Ward as a backup is iffy. I say do it if the following happens:
1. Darling is bought out
2. Ned isnt ready
3. Raanta is brought in
I only do a 1 to 2 year deal. We have young guys coming soon.
I say keep Nordy as the 13th forward. He has the right attitude and work ethic that is valued, to me anyways. Would be a good mentor for Wallmark and Foegele as they learn the 4th line.
Why would you want to take a guy who has scored over 20 goals his first year out of juniors in the A and make him a 4th liner? Foegele is the guy that needs to replace Lindholm and/or Rask. He has size, plays defense, and has a nose for the net. He has scored all those goals 5 on 5 or on the kill. No PP.
Who in the world would take Rask? He can’t skate, gives an inconsistent effort and makes $4M a year. He’s Carolina’s boat anchor unless they add him to the buyout list with Semin.
Who’s right side do you put him on? When off season moves are made, the forward corp will get more congested. If Lindholm, Turbo, and Williams have three RW slots spoken for, who do move out for Foegele? Both the 3rd (necas’s line) and 4th lines will be learning. No reason to believe a 4th line of McGinn, Wallmark and Foegele wont get 10 minutes a night. Plus, Foegele has proven to be a very solid PK individual. 10 minutes a night of line time, plus 3 minutes of PK time. ~13 minutes is solid. If he becomes a very solid RW after 1 year, he can take Williams spot.
The only team that might take Rask is Arizona. 1, they need high paying dudes to play to make the floor. 2, they cant get/keep players because they suck so bad. They get a forward for a long time. Hey if he comes cheap, they will bite.
Nordi as a 13th forward is good in my opinion. I hope he can do some shot clinics over the summer.
Ward would have to accept backup salary to be a backup, something in the 1.5 million range at the most, I doubt he will do that.
I think, if we can´t offload Darling, that we should use the backup goalie slot as a tryout for our prospects, bring them up when needed, expose them to the game, if we have Darling as our #1 the season is lost from the start anyway.
We have too many passengers, Rask, Darling, to some extent Faulk, this team needs a clean up, but who’s going to take those players?
Maybe Rask can be assigned to some crazy conditioning stint over the summer to work on his speed, we’ve seen players improve.
Lindholm is a decent third liner in my opinion. I like the idea of having 3 center capable guys share duties over assigning definite roles.
Agree with lessthan that Foegele has offensive upside. I like the concept of him in McGinn’s role. A Foegele/Staal/Williams line would be capable of defending against other teams’ best lines and producing a reasonable amount of goals.
Then with an off-season acquisition the “scoring” line could be JVR/Aho/Teravainen. A second offensive oriented line could be Skinner/Necas/Lindholm. With the final final line having two centers from among Rask, Ryan, Wallmark with the third player being McGinn.
This doesn’t rely on tons of call ups—Foegele and Necas. Plus an addition. It works just as well swinging a trade for Pacioretty or a similar player.
Everyone expects an addition or two this offseason. Given that and the prospects, these options seem reasonable for next season.
I like Nordy’s energy and strength on the PK, but the lack of offense just doesn’t cut it on any line in today’s NHL. If we bury weaker offensive players on the 4th line, then we won’t ever see production from that line even if centered by a more gifted driver of offense (like Wallmark, Foegele, etc.). One of the big strategic decisions the team will need to make that will certainly drive personnel decisions this offseason is this very question: will all 4 lines be built to drive offense or will the 4th line be defense- and PK-leaning? I vote for the former.
As for Lindholm, I’ve advocated him playing Center for quite some time and like him there. I think, much like Staal but to a much lesser degree, we don’t realize all the things he does until he’s missing, and he is rarely MIA when playing Center. He is still growing and has a higher ceiling but the current version is also just fine. He is not the reason we aren’t above the playoff cut line.
As for Darling, we are giving up on him way too soon. He may not ever turn into what we hoped he would, but WIN was saying the same thing about Hellebuyck this past offseason and he has rebounded nicely (with a better team, no doubt). I don’t see the downside of riding Darling hard over the remaining 14 games and see what happens to give us more information to work with. We’ve had such a poor track record with goalies, that bringing in another unproven 1B might be even worse than giving Darling another year.
I’m thinking hard about what we’re going to do with Skinner and Faulk. If we’re thinking of not resigning Skinner long-term – and that would not surprise me at all – then we should trade him during the offseason to someone who will; he’ll have excellent value. Faulk is going to be more of a Hoffman/Pacioretty situation with two years left, but I’d probably trade him, too, and given the extra year, he’d have a lot of value. Doin that would also completely change the leadership dynamics in the locker room with two of three letter-holders gone.
Your usual good sane approach to things. We put you and ct together and we would get the Nostradamas of Canes hockey.
I agree on Nordi. Evan with stellar defense you have to be able to score. Who I really miss is Stalberg. He was the one with speed that really made the PK work and he scored. I don’t know why we let him go.
Lindholm is a keeper. regardless of where you play him, great assists and net front presence. He definitely get resigned.
Darling is a tough call. If we decide to give him another year and he bombs it could kill our season again. If we move him, Cam stays as a backup. If we do not we better get a backup who is very capable, as he may be #1 because of a Darling blow-up. I do not trust Darling but I also realize things can change. I just don’t know on Darling????
Rask and Faulk are who I would move, assuming there is any market. Skinner can be a pretty prolific scorer and he has been buzzing (but not scoring lately). I wish he could get his defense going. Cheats too much and the plus minus is telling. Glad I am not a GM, not sure on that one either. When he is on, he can be very good.
Dmiller makes convincing arguments for Lindholm at center. Maybe the starting point for next season is slotting Aho, Staal, Necas, Lindholm as centers. Then only Williams and Skinner are tied to a position (and likely the acquisition). Pretty much every other forward is flexible (Teravainen, Rask, Ryan, McGinn and prospects like Wallmark, Foegele, Zykov).
Which brings me back to what I think will be Carolina’s strength —four all-around lines getting balanced ice time. Again as dmiller points out, the concept of a defense only fourth line is quickly becoming antiquated.
I think we seen how well the defense only 4th line worked this year. Agreed.
I think the Canes have to go back to Ward and Darling next year – Darling + Ned would add a whole heap of question marks I don’t think the team could stomach. Goaltending is so fickle I hate to say it but the past two seasons has almost made me come to appreciate the quietly steady level of average-ness that Ward can bring – it is more consistent than anything else the team can get goaltending wise by next season.
Lindholm I don’t worry too much about where he plays – he is a keeper moving forward and not a cap breaker either so whether he is the 3C or a RW will all depend on what the coach feels is best depending on the matchup and even what the Canes have to offer. While the center ice position is a weakness there is a dire shortage of right wingers as well so Lindy kind of fills both those needs and allows the team to flexibly add at either position knowing Lindholm can move around.
With Nordstrom – sure the guy has stone hands but lets not forget that he was on a 4th line that won a stanley cup with Chicago and while he’s definitely best as a 13/12th forward based on his offense he can play on an NHL 4th line and PK unit and cost next to nothing and help a team win a cup. So he’s not exactly the problem either.
I think someone above put it best – the team has some passengers that really hurt – for me Victor Rask is the biggest one and I cannot deny Faulk’s season has been unsatisfactory. I’m not one to say the d-corps is broken but I definitely think moving out Rask, Ryan (maybe on 4th line), Stempniak (maybe resign for 4th line), McGinn (to the 4th line), and Nordstrom (to the press-box) and replacing them with at least three 3rd line or better talents will send this team to the playoffs.
It’s possible all of JVR, James Neal, David Perron, Tyler Bozak, Rick Nash, and Paul Stastny will be available. Two of those guys would bring in another reliable 40 goals and the Canes have cap space. Furthermore depending on the options available maybe some of these players won’t be too expensive aside from JVR and James Neal.
I think the reviews are a little harsh on JoNo. He is a “glue guy” and I think teams need a guy like that. He has proven he can play first-line minutes on a possession-driven line, he is a stalwart on the PK and is unafraid of blocking a puck, he is high energy and has grit, and is responsible in all 3 zones. I think he needs the same coaching advice Turbo got earlier in the year – “Shoot the puck”.
All that said, we may already have all that in McGinn. How many “glue guys” does a team need?
As for goaltenders, I really think Wardo deserves a chance to retire with the Canes. It will be up to him if he will accept lower pay to extend his career with the same team and server as the back-up ready to step up as starter if need be.
Darling has shown a lot the last two games – looking like the goalie he was when he played in Chicago. Yeah, a couple of whoopsies on his rebound control but it didn’t shake him – he tightened it up and played solid, with some excellent saves and solid puck control. This after Tuesday when he was the best player on the ice, and probably played his best as a Cane.
I don’t know what perspective the new GM will have on Darling – and how much say Peters would have if he is retained.
I do think we will see a major change in player personnel over the summer – or, as I like to say, there may well be a lot of obsolete jerseys hanging in people’s closets next August. We certainly have parts – not just prospects but NHL-established and nearly so players. I think there is going to be a lot in play which makes me even more reluctant to speculate on players slotting where beyond (late???) April and what their roles could be next season. It is very unlike last season when you could expect a certain stability.
dmilleravid – do you think Skinner will want to sign beyond next season if he had the chance (which is maybe even more important than we decide to resign him). 8 years out (right?) and no playoffs – wouldn’t you think he would be reluctant (and naturally so) to commit a significant portion of his remaining career to a team that can’t make it to the playoffs. To me, that will be a fascinating chess match (that will go on behind closed doors) this summer between management and Skinner and his agent as they try to figure out what he wants – and as he figures out where he wants to be.
That is a very good question. I think we overestimate how sophisticated the worldview and judgement of a public figure really is. I say that having met and interacted with my fair share of them in fields ranging from business to politics to sports to entertainment. Like the rest of us, they are people first, with family, friends, homes, pets, dry-cleaning, and leftovers in the fridge. They like stability and would prefer to avoid unknowns as much as the rest of us.
My point is that Skinner only really knows what it’s like to play for CAR. Change is unsettling to most people and Skinner is still a young man that hasn’t experienced much change in his life, especially over the last eight years (ages 18-26). I would expect him to feel much more comfortable resigning with CAR than signing anywhere else, all things being equal (which they may not be).
Having said that, I don’t think the decision will be his. It will be the new GM’s.
For the record, I’m a big fan of Jeff Skinner and think he is a fantastic talent. I’m just not sure that the intersection of his value as a player and his contract status/term leads to an outcome that keeps him in CAR. It may, but it also may not. We should prepare ourselves for either outcome.
Something Darling mentioned last night, that I think is very poignant and potentially missing in this discussion is that when the Blackhawks won the Cup in 2014-15 they were a very tight unit, a ‘family’ Darling called it.
I could be wrong, as we don’t spend a lot of time in the locker room, but that is something we don’t have, and yet it is so crucial to winning. If you keep shipping guys out and bringing them in like they are product (even though they are the product) you really don’t have a chance to build that winning chemistry. Is chemistry absolutely necessary to win? No. Is it necessary to rise to a level greater than the sum of your parts? Heck yes.
So there is something to be said for not just finding guys, but finding the right guys. Some guys might not be performing on the ice (see Lack, Eddie and I saw Nordstrom thrown out as an example) but are so essential in the locker room, keeping it loose and keeping the team focused. A team surely can’t win if they ride the roller coaster of fan emotion, that is for certain.
I actually wonder about the chemistry of a couple individuals starting with Skinner. We all know he is immensely talented but he also isn’t a prototype for BP’s system and his actual leadership skills are…not proven at the very least. W
*We might be looking at the talented asset who can bring us a piece back more conducive to productivity in our system. Plus signing JVR.
Point is, this isn’t just stats. You can’t just throw out players because they had bad years. They call it chemistry for a reason. You can throw in a bunch of pieces and nothing happens. Throw in the RIGHT pieces, and then we have something else entirely. Ron found many talents for us over his time, but he never found the chemistry, the family, that a lot of Cup contenders build. Hopefully this is something the new GM can handle along with the statistics and the analytics, and be able to build a cohesive unit.
Lindholm’s flexibility is a definite plus (like a utility infielder in baseball); we’ll have to wait and see which other players come and go during the off-season before we see where he best slots, but I’m leaning RW just because we need a true difference-maker at the C position. I like the idea of trying to move Darling back to Chicago – I’ve seen enough to think he is not our solution. Another possibility is to hedge our bet/risk and re-sign Ward and sign another veteran goalie ($2.5M range) and let them split the duties. Ward is part of the solution, not part of the problem. Nordstrom is a good depth forward we need to keep. It seems hard to believe he just turned age 26. His penalty-killing ability, attitude and versatility are resonably priced at just over $1M.
In defense of Victor Rask – I think that expectations for him are too high – he shouldn’t be blamed for getting a $4M per year contract. He just turned 25, could be entering his prime and should put up 45+ points per year. He has good size and is a solid TWO-WAY forward with good playmaking ability; his game is strongest as a complimentary player. He’s a plus 2 for the season, doesn’t take stupid penalties, wins 55% of his face-offs and should receive credit for all of that. How much value as a forward do you have when you score 25 goals but are a minus 25? Or as a D-man when you are minus 23?
About Necas – he just turned 19 a little over a month ago! It may be premature to anoint him as our savior C next year.
blinkman. Several good points. I agree on all of them. My only clarification is that I (and many others) am not looking to Necas to be a 70 point center next year. But I do think if he makes the team, he should play center. My hope is he ends up being the Canes’ version of Scheifele. The first two years in the league he will be young and developing. But, again I say this is my hope, by his third and fourth years he is as productive as any player taken in the top 5.
If there is a breakout center next season, I would argue it will be Aho. He has shown both the strength and defensive responsibility to play center. Being the player who controls the offensive zone more will result in him being a point-a-game player. I keep thinking of the first game of the season (admittedly he wasn’t the de facto center) when he took over the third period whenever the puck was on his stick.
I only include Necas as one of next season’s centers because I think he is too talented not to have on the roster. Plus he is more than holding his own against men this season.
Just getting back to this after a busy couple days. Tremendous discussion as always with a variety of different but equally valid opinions.
I intentionally picked things that I thought were 50/50 or close splits, so I lean more like 55/45 or 60/40 on these things, but here are my quick votes.
I vote RW for Lindholm. He has convinced me that he is a capable C, but given the current makeup of the roster, I continue to vote (consistently since last May) that team needs 1 offense-leaning difference-maker in the middle.
I vote yes on keeping Nordstrom. Key caveat is that I re-sign him to a 1-year deal hoping (and giving the chance) for younger players to push him down to #13 but realizing that he is capable even if unspectacular if other players do not seize all of the 12 forward slots.
I vote yes on keeping Ward as a backup. The key part here is “as a backup” and then more significantly what that means at a broader level. Given what we have seen thus far, I would not feel comfortable retaining Ward as a backup and Darling as a hoped for starter. To be clear, I think it is possible that Darling rebounds in 2018-19, but I would not be willing to bet Canes 2018-19 season that without a plan B for starting goalie in house, and at 34 years old, I do not see Ward as a plan B for starter. …So that obviously gets complicated.
Matt. I don’t know if Jordan is still covering the checkers,or if you have connections with someone who has closely been following the Checkers this year.
It might be fun to have someone who is in the know do a series of 2 or 3 articles on which Checkers should get a shot with the big club for the rest of the season and why.