Upon returning to Raleigh today after a circuitous three-game road trip, the Hurricanes announced a series of moves.
Phil Di Giuseppe was placed on waivers (which could clear him to go to the AHL).
Martin Necas was sent to the Charlotte Checkers.
Haydn Fleury was sent to the Charlotte Checkers.
Clark Bishop was recalled from the Charlotte Checkers.
Today’s Daily Cup of Joe breaks down the series of moves
Martin Necas sent to Charlotte
In my game recap yesterday, I suggested that Necas could be headed for the AHL after the team’s return when I said:
Lost in the fact that he scored was that Brind’Amour again went away from him pulling him off the power play and sitting him when he shuffled a bit. The result was a meager 6:43 of ice time. The goal makes things interesting, but part of me thinks the return home could see Necas head to Charlotte for at least a short stint of heavy minutes.
Because Rod Brind’Amour consistently says that Necas is making progress whenever pressed on the subject and that is what the local media reports, Necas’ demotion seems to be a surprise for many in the local hockey community. But Brind’Amour’s comments on Necas just mean first of all is that he will not to take to the air waves to overly criticize a 19-year old still very much in the learning phase. Second, I think Brind’Amour’s comments are a sign of patience in the process just meaning that Necas is making progress in his own way.
But awhile back now, I think it became incredibly clear that Necas just is not quite ready to learn and play at the NHL level yet. He is 19. That is not a catastrophe. But it is something that needs to be addressed. The Hurricanes have already traveled this road once committing to the NHL for Elias Lindholm and then just completely ignoring reality in training camp and early in the season that clearly indicated that he just was not ready. Lindholm’s development was set back a year or two as he had to scratch and claw just to play his way up to ‘serviceable’. So Necas situation represented another case of choosing to act based on what the team hoped would transpire with a young player and what actually did happen.
In short, the 2018-19 version of Necas’ game just has not translated to the NHL level yet. Of no surprise is the fact that Necas has work to do in terms of his play without the puck. But what is more concerning and I think the reason this demotion was inevitable is the fact that his offensive game which is his strength also has not readily transitioned to the NHL level. Necas’ goal in Sunday’s game was the first in a combined 21 games of hockey for Necas and his line mates. Putting it bluntly, he has work to do on the offensive part of his game too.
Just before the road trip in assessing Necas’ start, I wrote:
Offensively, he is still learning how to provide a safe passing outlet for defensemen. And defensively, he still has a propensity to get focused on the puck or just let up a little and then lose track of his defensive assignment. More significant than those struggles which could have been anticipated is the fact that he is not yet producing offensively. Right now, the game just looks too fast for him. Necas too regularly skates himself into dead ends in the neutral zone and has to just push the puck to no one specifically.
The burning questions right now are whether Necas’ long-term development will be better served by NHL or AHL ice time.
Watch point:Â How the organization handles Necas. I am on record as preferring not to put high-end prospects. Especially after watching a similar situation play out with Elias Lindholm, I would be very careful pushing Necas too much.
That did not change on the road trip. As such, Necas near-term development is much better served playing 18 or more minutes per night in all situations and mastering a level that is higher than any he has played at thus far in his young career.
The Wednesday timing seemed inevitable given the path traveled the past few days. As I noted in my game recap based on the excitement of his first NHL goal was the fact that Brind’Amour played Necas only a meager 6:43 in Tuesday’s game.
No way was the team going to send the 19-year old off on a plane by himself in the middle of the road trip. But Tuesday’s game was a reasonably clear indication of what was bound to happen once the team returned.
Next up for Necas, is trying to establish his game at the AHL level and begin working on the vast assortment of details for the center position. Sometimes lost on people is the fact that the AHL is an incredibly good hockey league. Even good young players sometimes take time to adjust. Janne Kuokkanen really did not emerge until the second half of his first AHL season, and Julien Gauthier did not find his game until even later after early struggles. So it is not as simple as Necas stepping in against lower competition and immediately dominating. He has work to do in that regard.
Haydn Fleury sent to Charlotte
Fleury had a strong preseason and is off to a decent start during the regular season. But with Justin Faulk still in tow, the Hurricanes are seven deep on the blue line and Fleury has been the odd man out playing in only one game. As a young player who can still benefit development-wise with AHL ice time, Fleury’s demotion is very simply about getting him more game action. Yes, he is the #7 defenseman right now, but in no way is that a negative reflection on Fleury. It is simply the current numbers game. So since Fleury can go to Charlotte without needing to clear waivers, it makes perfect sense to get him a chunk of game action. Fleury will certainly play in Friday and Saturday’s Checkers games and could possibly be back with the Hurricanes as early as next Tuesday when the team travels to Detroit.
Phil Di Giuseppe placed on waivers
Di Giuseppe has had a disappointing start to the 2018-19 season. Di Giuseppe was ‘meh’ and minus 2 in 8:28 of game action against the Rangers on October 7. Then two days later, he took too bad penalties, and Brind’Amour pulled the plug on him after only 6:04 of ice time. Interesting is that even if Di Giuseppe has played his way out of the lineup, he still makes sense as a #13 as a veteran as compared to having a young player sit in the press box. As such, if he clears waivers, it will be interesting to see if the Hurricanes send him to Charlotte or if instead he just remains at the NHL level.
Clark Bishop called up to the Hurricanes
Replacing Martin Necas is Clark Bishop. Bishop will make his NHL if he plays as I would expect on Saturday. Bishop is a great story. As a fifth-rounder, he beat the odds making it to the NHL. Further, as a player who split time between the ECHL and AHL in 2016-17, I think it was fair to say that Bishop started the 2017-18 season having work to do to earn his next contract. And work he did in 2017-18. He was one of a good number of players who took a step up in 2017-18 under new Head Coach Mike Vellucci. He excelled playing on a checking line and the penalty kill alongside Warren Foegele. His game is not that of a high end scorer. Even in a great season, he had only 28 points in 68 games during the 2017-18 season. But the hope is that he can be a steady and sound defensively oriented center and fill the hole left by Necas being sent to Charlotte. It will also be interesting to see if Brind’Amour instantly gives Bishop a chance on the penalty kill that has struggled thus far. The one downside I see with Bishop is that he clearly aims for sound and solid and at least on paper gives up significant offensive upside.
Bishop will be the sixth rookie forward to play at the NHL level this season.
What say you Canes fans?
1) What are your thoughts on Martin Necas continuing his development at the AHL level?
2) Who has seen enough of Clark Bishop to have formed an opinion on him?
3) What do you think of Brind’Amour’s seeming approach to plug in a checking line center into the lineup?
Go Canes!
1)this is best for Necas development. He has many things to speed up, particularly on the defensive side. I hope to see him ready and back this season.
2) I only know what I’ve read. He is the player most like Foegele in impact to a line, without as much goal scoring.
3) I don’t like the idea of a checking line in today’s NHL. It is not clear that is what is intended, I hope we are going for a disruption line.
Not surprising. Glad to see they are willing to make changes.
My guess is that there will be some tinkering with the third and fourth lines. Wallmark/Svechnikov with be with either McGinn or Zykov and Bishop/Martinook with be the fourth line.
Hopefully this allows Brind’Amour to take some heat off the top two lines. They can’t play all those minutes long term. May help PK too.
1) I have been a Necas fan since I met him at the start of last season and I was hoping he was going to find his way on the NHL ice. But I will respect RBA – this wasn’t really a borderline decision after 6 games. I think he will find Charlotte to be a great place for his development. He will be played, pushed and taught.
As a note to self – I am glad I held off buying a Necas jersey! 😀
2 and 3) Bringing Bishop up is a head-scratcher to me. He is a grinder at the AHL level. I don’t know what they are envisioning and will wait and see. But it doesn’t make sense to me.
==========
Although sometimes a rose is just a rose, I have seen these moves described as a “paper shift” and that it is covering over something else in the works.
Anything is possible, but I’m not sure ‘something else in the works’ makes sense at least in terms of clearing roster spots. Canes already had one open slot, so unless a deal is +2 in terms of adding NHL players, there is already room.
I have a mostly written article on the Pesce for Nylander rumblings but put it on the shelf to instead write about Wednesday’s moves. Will post that tonight.
I really didn’t want to lose Lindholm and it makes me just as nervous to think about trading Pesce even to get a player like Nylander. I agree with surgalt’s quality-for-quality statement, but when you sum skill+cost, Pesce is a steal for the next 5 years especially if he continues to grow his game from here.
I don’t disagree about Pesce, but who would add the most to the team? Yes, it would be a dropoff from Pesce to Fleury, but TVR would benefit from going back to his preferred side. Adding Nylander would be a huge boost to the forward group. A trade worth considering. I’m sure TO will want more than just Pesce.
Pesce is a steal – TOR will want more than him, though, for Nylander if such be the case. I still don’t think a trade for Nylander is coming. But I would take it in a heartbeat. Pesce helps us make the playoffs – Nylander makes us a cup contender.
tj. I hope you were correct yesterday in that Toronto is not trading Nylander. Because I am confident that you are incorrect today.
I have a bias for keeping Pesce as I think he is undervalued. But even acknowledging that, I think the case for Pesce being more valuable than Nylander simply on cost is overwhelming.
* The front office is rightfully getting kudos for decisions so far. However, not signing Aho and Teravainen in July is going to cost the team $2M per year for the next 6-8 years. It seems more than reasonable to presume that Aho will end with at least 70 points playing as a center. That puts him in Ryan Johansen/Leon Draisaitl territory–$8.5M. He likely could have been signed for at least 6 years at $7.5M three months ago. Similary, TT looks like he will be around 65 points, if not over, this season. He will cost closer to $6.5M than the $5.5 that made sense in July.
*With Svechnikov, Necas, Foegele, and some others due for contracts in the next 3 seasons, the Canes are going from a salary floor to a salary cap organization.
*Pesce is signed for 6 years. If he is moved, the organization has to re-sign Faulk or Hamilton, which will cost more. It also means a gamble on Fox/Martin performing at a high enough level that the D remains the team’s strength–unless Carolina wants to revisit the “any old 3rd pairing is fine” philosophy.
*Presuming Nylander would take a long-term deal at $7M, that sets the bar for Aho and Teravainen and probably increases their ask another $1M between them.
*Netted out, losing Pesce is painful because it leaves a hole in the D and ends up costing significantly more in salary over the 6 years Pesce’s contract would run.
*Finally, adding Nylander might make Carolina a contender, but likely never a winner. Toronto with Matthews, Tavares, Marner, Kadri and a true #1 D would likely be a dynasty. I say let another team give them the missing piece, because that player will not be as good as Brett Pesce is going to be for the next 6 seasons.
I like Brett Pesce, but I can’t value his on ice performance as high as you do. Adding Pesce to TO isn’t going to totally shore up their defensive problems. No single defenseman can do that. They have a team defense issue that is partly covered up by the number of points their stars put on the scoreboard.
Adding Nylander for the next 3-6 years could make the Canes an annual cup contender if the rookies develop as you say. As the Canes stand today they are much improved, but are lacking another true star to be a contender.
The question comes down to do you want to compete for the Cup now and in the future, or do try to keep costs down, make the playoffs, and take your chances? The latter would be very Rutherford/Karmanos.
Here is a link to one of the rumblings Matt just referenced. https://mynhltraderumors.com/nhl-rumors-dubas-meeting-with-nylander-and-reps-does-kapanens-play-change-things/2018/10/17/ (see Pierre LeBrun’s comments) One thing we can be sure of: the “committee” is still looking for ways to improve the team everyday. As the trade with Calgary showed, they will trade quality to get quality to restructure the team and team culture.
Coming from someone who seems to spend a lot of time in the building, “something else in the works” has my attention.
1) I was skeptical during preseason that Necas was NHL-ready. I would not be surprised if he stays in Charlotte all season. It would good for his development and (if I am mistaken, someone who better understand please chime in) his ELC will slide if he doesn’t play two more games in Raleigh.
2) Bishop was my choice for the first call-up. I usually am a huge analytics fan and understand that I don’t see enough when I watch a game to make informed decisions. That being said, in the last two Checkers games I attended last season Bishop was the most noticeable player (more than Foegele or Zykov). He was all over the ice and making plays at top speed. Then I saw a post at HFBoards that Bishop was considered one of the top 5 skaters in the 2014 draft.
1) I was skeptical during preseason that Necas was NHL-ready. I would not be surprised if he stays in Charlotte all season. It would good for his development and (if I am mistaken, someone who better understand please chime in) his ELC will slide if he doesn’t play two more games in Raleigh.
2) Bishop was my choice for the first call-up. I usually am a huge analytics fan and understand that I don’t see enough when I watch a game to make informed decisions. That being said, in the last two Checkers games I attended last season Bishop was the most noticeable player (more than Foegele or Zykov). He was all over the ice and making plays at top speed. Then I saw a post at HFBoards that Bishop was considered one of the top 5 skaters in the 2014 draft. In that context what I saw makes sense. He plays a physical game as well. So, for me, not really surprising as Bishop should play like a Nordstrom-Martinook hybrid.
3) I am with asheville–disruption line. I think Bishop could be substituted for Necas and play with McGinn and Zykov. I can also see McGinn being slotted with Wallmark and Svech to see if McGinn can rediscover the offense he had in 17-18. Bishop could then play center or wing with Martinook at center on the other line. I would even be alright with an all-rookie line (not sure RBA would go for it) of Zykov/Wallmark/Svechnikov and an extreme disruption line of McGinn/Biship/Martinook. This is another reason I like Bishop, his combination of skating and physicality means he can play several roles.
Agree and agree and agree – I had been wondering whether Martinook is going to get a look at center so I’m glad you said it first. I’m with you and asheville in favor of more disruption but not in favor of checking line BP-style.
The difference between a checking and disruption line is pretty much semantics to me. This Hurricanes team plays aggressive. I can’t imagine any line won’t be disruptive.
I am with lessthanstable on this one. While “disruption” line is sexier and maybe new NHL ring to it, if the line lacks playmaking at center and has a really low ceiling for scoring, what’s the difference?
My cut line for old school checking 4th line versus new NHL starts with the center. If the center is not at least decent playmaking and generating offense, it becomes hard to do much in today’s NHL.
A distinction w/o a difference.
A different perspective on Bishop than I have had – I like yours better, ct! 🙂 That said, I will be surprised to see Bishop stay up here so long that considerations of his role will have much meaning.
For me the difference between disruption and checking is more than semantics.
A checking/grinding line is one that has players who can be physical and or make it difficult to advance the puck (I think of players like Nordstrom or Brad Malone). Opposing players don’t like to play against them, but they don’t have much fear that they will lose +/- to them.
A disruption line has players like Foegele or Stalberg (perhaps the best example in the league now is Blake Coleman with NJ) who both disrupt the other team from moving the puck but can quickly turn defense into offense.
With the almost non-existent production from Kruger, Nordstrom, Jooris, and DiGiuseppe last season it might seem like a bigger distinction than it really is. But I do think players like Martinook and McGinn–and I believe Bishop will fall into this category–are more my concept of disruption line players than checking line players.
I get your point. On the other hand, having a checking line that you can actually put out there and not fear that they can even compete is better than what the Canes had with the Necas line.
The reality is that Svechnikov isn’t staying on the fourth line for long. This change gives Brind’Amour a chance to increase Svechnikov’s ice time, add a more offensive player on his line, have a fourth line he doesn’t have to bench in the third period, and take the pressure of 20 minutes a night off of the Staal and Aho lines.
It may not be optimal, but it’s an improvement until the Canes have personnel that are capable of doing what you describe.
I agree with CT across the board here. In fact, part of my opinion of Bishop was based on CTs writeups on him last year.
To me a disruption line creates scoring chances off of turnovers in the opponents end, whereas a grinding line gets back, avoids mistakes, and tries to play keep away with the cycle when they do get the puck. Exciting vs boring in how opponents top players are neutralized.
I also really liked CT line suggestions and hope to see those on the ice.
I find myself in the hesitant to trade Pesce for Nylander camp.
Pesce is an affordable, steady defenseman with potential to get even better.
Nylander is not a center but a winger (maybe he can play center to I don’t know) who clearly has an extremely high opinion of himself (or his agent does). He is wicket skilled and has impressed, but he has also enjoyed a pretty impressive support cast playing with Matthews so his numbers may be artificially inflated.
Just look at dreizittel, I don’t think anyone claims he is worth the 8.5 mill price tag once he was moved away from CMD.
Also look at guys like Saad, who everyone thought would be the bees knees of the summer but is playing pretty poorly (albeit with a small sample size) and has been demoted to the 4th line.
I’d love to get Nylander on the squad but he is not an absolute slam dunk in my mind, because he is not a center, he is going to be really pricy and his impressive numbers are based on a small sample size.
IF we could get him for TVR, a good prospect and the 2019 first round pick, even throw in Faulk, then definitely.
But for Pesce – well, I’m not sure.
I hope we can see him in Carolina dn if they pull the trigger on the proposed trade there’s a chance, I’d say 40 to 50% that it will pan out awesome.
Nylander is listed as a center although he has spent a lot of time on the wing as well. His numbers have been quite good in both roles.
Originally I felt his ego was in the way but I’ve pulled back from that impression. Nylander is between a rock and a hard place. If he signs a deal of any length favorable to Toronto w/o a NMC, he immediately becomes trade bait the moment Toronto begins negotiations with Mathews and Marner. As a consequence he loses any control over where he plays. The only time Nylander can control his final destination is to play hardball now. While the optics are bad, the reasoning is sound. He wants a real commitment from Toronto, while the Leafs GM is just skipping sideways. While I usually side with ownership on player issues, I’m making an exception for Nylander.
Players have to sign with their own best interests in mind. They are foolish not to do so. And TOR is trying to short-change Nylander to be able to sign Matthews and Marner, waving the “take one for the team…like Tavares did!” flag. Except they want Nylander to sign for several million less than expectations for Matthews and Marner. That is why I think there will be a bridge deal which will take Nylander through to arbitration rights – less than ideal for both parties.
You may be right, but there are other concerns for Nylander. If he goes back to TO he is probably back on the wing which will hurt his future earning potential. He may play hardball to get out.
Sounds like December 1 is the first deadline. If he isn’t signed by then from what I heard he can’t play this season, but Toronto retains his rights.
One thing none of us has even mentioned is would Nylander even consider a trade and sign to Carolina? He grew up in the US bouncing from town to town, so who knows what kind of place he would prefer to play?
As far as the Nylander rumors go at this point I’d rather move Hamilton than Pesce if a trade is possible.
Suggestion: Eventually a chain of replies results in an unreadable column 3 letters wide. When things reach that point start a new chain and reference the person to whom you are replying. There are 2 comments above from writers who POV is always nteresting and thoughtful. The format those comments appear in is migraine inducing. There has to be a better way.
Great suggestion sugarlt. My lack of compliance, if applicable, will only be because my iPhone doesn’t display the indents.
Good point. I am guilty. Will do that in the future.
Here is one man’s opinion on a trade between the Canes and the Leafs re: Nylander and Pesce. I have no idea who the author, Dave Stevenson, is; https://puckprose.com/2018/10/18/carolina-hurricanes-william-nylander-perfect-fit/