In case you were away for the Fourth of July holiday and are catching up, I wrote about the Hurricanes signing defenseman Calvin de Haan in some detail HERE.
Having yammered about signing de Haan for most of the week before the deal happened, I am obviously in favor of it. At the most basic level, the Hurricanes needed to improve its top 4 defensively. The addition of Dougie Hamilton was a step in that direction, but the team still needed a capable and steady left shot defenseman to round out and balance the top 4. De Haan should do exactly that.
The simplest justification for this deal is the most powerful one, but there are also a couple other significant angles which are the subject of today’s Daily Cup of Joe.
The price
In rough terms, I think Calvin de Haan is a bit similar to Brett Pesce as a legitimate top 4 defenseman, leans defense and is a little bit light compared to ideal in terms of generating offense. De Haan’s career high is a modest 25 points, and his point totals over all five of his full seasons similarly project to 15-25 points over an 82-game season. So Pesce signed what I think is a fair deal at $4 million per year as a restricted free agent. Rough math suggests that the average for a top 4 on defense is about $20 million, but for many teams that includes at least one player who is a stretch as a top 4. When one considers that de Haan was an unrestricted free agent, I think a fair price for him is probably pretty close to the $4.55 million that he signed for, but I also fully expected his price to be in a $5-5.5 million range simply because of the annual scarcity at the position. So in that regard, I think the Hurricanes did really well getting him for the price the did on what is maybe a perfect term of four years that locks in a good price but does not creep too deep into de Haan’s 30s when things become risky. (De Haan will be turning 31 when the contract ends.)
Bigger picture, I think those who want to debate $500,000 or so in salary or maybe a year in term are missing the bigger point. The Hurricanes defense as constructed just was not good enough. Not finding a way to upgrade it would have maybe saved a few dollars but in my opinion significantly decreased the probability of righting the ship and pushing up into the playoffs. Holding out for a better price is only viable if there is a reasonable chance it could happen. In a tight market for legitimate top 4 defenseman, the choices are twofold. Pay a bit to much to add what you need. Or pass and suffer the consequences.
The importance of slotting on defense
Calvin de Haan also makes things right in terms of personnel on the blue line. The team is now three deep on both the left and the right side. And more significantly, the move pushes a couple pretty good third pairing defenseman in Trevor van Riemsdyk and Haydn Fleury down to the third pairing. A significant part of the Hurricanes’ problems on defense have come from overslotting players and hoping it works. As a 35-year old two years ago, Hainsey was overslotted in the top 4. Last year as a rookie Haydn Fleury had to play up when Hanifin still just was not ready for that role. And all along, I just do not think Faulk has been good enough on the defensive side of the puck. So de Haan and Hamilton give the Hurricanes a bona fide second top 4 defense pairing and in the process push good players down into depth roles. In the process, the Hurricanes become better not at just one position but at four. Hamilton gets help for leading a top 4 pairing, and the Hurricanes are pretty solid down in the third pairing with van Riemsdyk and Fleury.
Cost certainty for the blue line in total
With de Haan signed for four years, the Hurricanes now have a top 4 locked in for some time with Slavin signed for seven years, Pesce six, de Haan four and Hamilton three. The total cost of the group of 4 is a very reasonable $19.6 million which leaves a bunch of money to build out the rest of the lineup and even spend a bit of money on the bottom pairing if necessary.
Another penalty killer
Calvin de Haan also adds another penalty killer to the mix. After multiple years of being a strength, the Hurricanes penalty kill struggled in 2017-18. De Haan adds another option to the mix, as the team tries to improve in this regard.
Flexibility in completing a complex plan
All indications are that the Hurricanes entered the offseason with the intent of shaking up the roster and likely trading young veterans Jeff Skinner and Justin Faulk. While it is possible that one of both of these players are still with the team when the season starts, I think the odds in both cases are against it. But in giving up players like Skinner or Faulk who occupy roles in the top half of the lineup, there is a need to back fill the slots with additions. But as I have said a couple times in other articles, one for one swaps of players of the same position are very hard to do. If a team is looking to add a player like Jeff Skinner it is likely because they want to add offense/scoring. In such a case, trading a similarly capable scorer is just two steps forward and then immediately two steps back. As such, usually the easier way to do a deal is to trade a surplus of one position for a shortage in another. But doing this for the Hurricanes was going to be tricky with the caliber of players they were looking to move, no-trade clauses and other considerations. But by adding the defensive replacement for Faulk without giving anything up in trade is a win in terms of trade cost and also offers flexibility for the deals likely to follow. With a defenseman in tow already, if the Hurricanes can add a forward in return for Justin Faulk, then trading Jeff Skinner becomes much easier. Rather than needing a defenseman, the Hurricanes could take a high-end package of futures if that is the greatest value or could even add Petr Mrazek and possibly pursue a higher-end goalie.
What say you Canes fans?
After a day to mull it over, who has additional thoughts on the move to add Calvin de Haan and in the process hopefully solidify the blue line?
Go Canes!
The biggest benefit for the Canes should be fewer breakdowns on D. This also depends on the defensive play of the forwards, but fewer turnovers from Hanifin and Faulk will be a big help. I also hope Slavin goes back to being the shutdown D that earned him the long term contract. He did a lot more skating with the puck and jumping in the play with little to show for it last season. Slavin’s shot and offensive skill level aren’t so impressive to me. Stick to your strengths son.
A secondary issue that will need to be addressed are players like McKeown and Carrick. Looks like no room at the Inn for these two. Do you trade them or let them become depth players with little to no value?
Matt. Good analysis as always. The Canes now have 4 defensemen who can play 20-21 minutes each night while being defensively sound. That should help all other aspects of the game. Although lessthanstable might be disappointed. Hamilton statistically gives away the puck more than either Faulk or Hanifin while de Haan gives it away about the same amount. Further both Faulk and Hanifin were better at takeaways. I understand that these stats are perhaps more subjective, so not a big deal.
For me Hamilton’s offense is more important than de Haan’s ability to balance the D. I say this because all of the teams that won at least one round in the playoffs in 2018 received at leas 105 points from their top-3 scoring defensemen. Carolina had 93 from Hanifin, Faulk, Slavin. Correlation is not causation–but you have been writing for the past two years about the blue line adding scoring to get the Canes to the next level.
Which brings me to the other key for the coming season–special teams. Both were below league average last season. So I am glad you mentioned that de Haan will be important on the penalty kill. I am still concerned that losing Lindholm, Nordstrom, and Kruger leaves the PK below even last year’s level. Ferland, for all his being tough to play against, has never killed penalties. Expecting any of the rookies except Foegele (and I think many of us recall he struggled in his two-game call up on the PK) to take PK time is unrealistic. That is why I think a key in the Faulk/Skinner trades, if they happen, is to return a proven penalty killer.
Hamilton will improve the power play, but I was already feeling better about it with the addition of Svechnikov and (most likely) Zykov, even Wallmark if he sticks–because he showed real skills on the power play in Charlotte.
The team needs another forward; this is doubly true if Skinner is moved. That forward needs to play a complete game. Thus my preference for RNH or Pacioretty over Kadri or Simmonds or even Nylander, though I would be excited if the Canes could get him and hope they could figure out the PK.
It would be frustrating if the Canes are significantly improved, but basically are playing down 0-1 every game because they are giving up power play goals at an even higher rate than last season.
de Haan makes the Canes better. But all the work is not yet done.
Hey all, been away for a few days so I hope I’m not repeating anything.
Love the signing. Likely the best top 4 the teams ever had.
One other thing about this signing that benefits the canes is that it will potentially increase Faulks trade value since they just took the best top 4 d off the FA market. While it may seem like DW has put himself in a position of weakness where he’s going to be forced to deal someone, if he’s patient, I figure he may be able to benefit from a bidding war.
Ericiverson..agreed! Waddell is now in position of strength when it comes to Faulk, and possibly even Skinner (since Tavares signing).
If I were DW, I would trade Faulk to obtain Skinner’s replacement (2nd/3rd line wings with size and skill can be had). I won’t rehash the potential trading partners but I believe there is solid interest. After such deal, I would deal Skinner for the best picks/prospects package (in doing so grab a young goalie prospect). Having these picks could come in handy later in the year if you want to wheel and deal (think raleightj mentioned something like this the other day).
To add, I highly doubt we upgrade goaltending in a potential Skinner deal. If we do, great…but I think Mrazek has the right mindset and wants to re-prove himself. Plus he’s led a team as a starter to the playoffs before, is young and has plenty of tread left on those tires. If we do anything with goaltending I think it will be around the holidays if we are struggling (might be able to poach a starter from another struggling team then). But right now I just don’t see any team giving up their starting goalie due to the cold market.
Lessthanstable, I wouldn’t worry too much about there being a d-man logjam. Haydn Fleury is not a player who commands confidence in his competence in the NHL. I for one feel good that we can replace him easy from Charlotte. deHaan has health problems. In the last 4 years he has missed over 70 games. The turnstile between Charlotte and Raleigh will very likely be spinning like a ceiling fan.
Possibly true. I have more faith in Fleury than you do. If anyone was harmed by Bill Peter’s reign it was probably a rookie like Fleury. He had a good start last year, but stumbled and never could seem to regain his confidence. He was Charlotte’s best defenseman in the AHL playoffs, so I’m sticking with my belief that he will bounce back under the much more positive Brind’Amour. If he doesn’t, you are right that there are replacements waiting.
I agree with ctcaniac on considering special teams for future moves. The canes have the most complete top 4 defensemen that I have seen for the team ever. If DeHaan can be that calm veteran in the middle of the blueline his value is even greater. A couple of things to consider as the team moves forward-
1. Who is the Dman on the second PP unit? I think Slavin has the athleticism and calmness to be the guy. I also liked Pesce’s shot toward the end of last season. This can be ironed out easily enough. Hopefully, Hamilton, Svech or Aho have already scored on the first PP unit.
2. This is the harder part. Who are the PK forwards next season? Staal, McGinn, Foegele, Martinook and then I’m not sure. I could see Aho and TT as a third pairing who are on the ice as the PK expires but not for the tough minutes. Right now is there enough room for McGinn Foegele and Martinook. Can any of them take draws on a second PK pairing?
I would like to see the canes get someone like Charlie Coyle or Anisimov to help here. They can play wing or center. I could see Anisimov with Necas and Svech. He could play LW and also take draws. Coyle could play RW with Staal. Foegele, Staal, and Coyle would be a solid shutdown line. I am not saying the canes will get these players. Yet a player who is versatile and could take the second PK center is still needed.
The team has had a great summer so far. It will be fun to see how the rest of the offseason goes.
You are on to a serious need. A need much more pressing than scoring. Faceoff men. Losing both Lindholm and Ryan put a serious hole in the team’s faceoff ability. This applies to the PP, the PK and 5 on 5. If a forward is coming back in a trade hopefully it will be a centreman or at least someone who can win draws.
A few random thoughts:
1/ No one mentioned this explicitly, at least not today: a properly slotted D-core should theoretically help the goaltending no matter who’s in goal.
2/ We got far more experienced on the blue line – something else we haven’t talked about. Trading Haniifn (21) for Hamilton (25) gave us 4 more years of NHL experience and de Haan (27) is going to be the oldest defender we have on the roster. Experience helps in subtle ways both within a game and over a long season; we have more of it now, whether Faulk is traded or not.
3/ Carrick and McKeown seem like odd-men-out, especially if they were hoping to compete for roster spots this year, but one of them is going to spend time in Raleigh as #7 – maybe both on a rotating basis – and there is likely to be an injury or two during the season that gives them NHL ice time. Having depth of this caliber is a luxury we haven’t had before.
4/ We added a top-half-of-the-roster player when we signed de Haan without giving up an asset; I’d say the same thing is true on offense when we won the Draft Lottery. I realize it’s a little early to anoint Svetch and he likely won’t be that productive right away, but our team is significantly better when we drafted him instead of whoever we drafted at #11, who wasn’t seeing the NHL for 2+ years.
5/ I think we’re really going to miss Lindholm and I hope we don’t regret trading him. His skillset addresses many of the holes we still have to fill. Addressing the blue line issues was a higher priority so I tend to settle on being for the trade, I just think we’ve always looked at Lindholm’s point totals and used that as a proxy for value and that grossly underestimates what he does on the ice. Coyle or Kadri may be the most obtainable and similar type of player. RNH is obviously a step up and it might be worth paying extra to get him from EDM.
Here’s another idea (primary pieces only): Skinner+Faulk for Coyle+Dumba.
Is MIN on Skinner’s list? I’ll be it’s on Faulk’s.
I agree that our goaltending stats will improve because of properly slotted D.
The capfriendly chart for salary by player is somewhat remarkable
https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/hurricanes/charts
You have to look pretty far to the right to find Aho. However it does make sense. D develop slower in the NHL so you expect them to be on larger contracts while a talented forward may be on ELC for his first 3 years.
Oh and I seem to recall that Svechnikov is considered a good PK (and PP) guy.
1) Absolutely!
2) Absolutely!
3) Absolutely!
4) Absolutely!
5) We will miss Lindy for sure! Not loving the Min Trade idea.
Would do Kadri and obviously RNH would be my No.1 target. Will Ny or Marner would be a nice get but doubt we would be willing to give what they would want.
Have to think that they have a plan to replace a top 6 Center. That’s where Lindy was going to be. Unless they are certain they have it right now with Necas.
My desire, if all of you above are doing the trading, is we keep both Faulk and Skinner for now if we are going to just give them away for the lesser talents that have been suggested. First, we don’t need another defenseman if we trade Faulk. We are running over with defensemen even without Faulk. Most of you have, in the past, suggested trading Faulk for a scoring forward. That made sense IMO. But now you seem to have gotten away from that. Why?
Right now with Skinner we have potentially 30 goals. Who are we going to get that will replace 30 goals. Now if you want to suggest a Pacioretti for Skinner or something like that, I’ve got no beef, but to lose both Faulk and Skinner and end up with a Coyle type and another defenseman seems to me to indicate we are just dealing to jettison two players, not to improve this team. Where’s the Faulk for Nylander…Faulk for Pacioretti…Faulk + Skinner and/or prospect(s), draft pick(s) for Eric Staal (a center we need) and Coyle…Faulk and/or Skinner for something of more value to the Canes? Why aren’t we suggesting using any of our boat load of forwards coming up from Charlotte in any deals. What are we going to do with all of them? What happens if Necas and/or Svechnikov aren’t ready for the NHL this year? My point is we seem to be forgetting our need which is a first line center (not a pseudo first line center) if we are to give up our blue chip assets…either one or both. We don’t need more role players, more defensemen, 2nd and 3rd line centers who we have to end up over slotting on our first line because we didn’t get what we needed for Skinner and/or Faulk. You all may be more correct with your opinions and my history would indicate that is probably the case. Our difference here isn’t in the names of players to deal, it’s are we solving a need (first line capable center) or not.
RR – one issue with both Faulk and Skinner is the limited term on both contracts. If Skinner isn’t part of the long-term vision of the Canes O/M/C do we risk losing him for nothing at the end of the year? If he was viewed by Canes O/M as part of the culture problem last season (as has been suggested by some) does the team want to keep him at all?
Same with Faulk, but with an extra year.
You are not going to get high-end (or even equal) value (with term) by trading either, unless there is a sign-and-trade involved (most likely for Skinner) or unless both teams find a need being met and take on similar contract risk (i.e., Faulk for Nylander, just as an example).
As a worst case scenario are you saying we couldn’t package Skinner and/or Faulk and/or prospect(s) and/or draft pick(s) to get a first line center? If that is so, and only if that is so, then your reasoning kicks in IMO. I say the Canes try everything that the team is willing to give up to get that first line center (this first order of business…the first priority) BEFORE going to what I consider a backup plan.
So I am saying I understand your points. I stating the Canes IMO may have other options to get their number one need before going to your (and others) options, ideas, etc. In other words, let’s explore ideas about where number 1 center type talent may be available and see if our assets would get one of them. If not, then go to your plans if the Canes feel it is necessary TO JUST GET SOMETHING. It appears the majority, if not all, of the contributors feel that there are no acceptable number 1 centers out there that are obtainable for any price. If that is the case, then my question is do we jettison contracts NOW or are we better off using Skinner, Faulk, etc to try to be a Cup contender this year and then reconsider all this at or before the trade deadline if we can’t get what we need now.
See breezy below…he’s saying what I want to say, only did a better job of it.
There are very few 1Cs available in the NHL – and not enough to go around to every team. A team is not going to trade a 1C for a 1- and 2-year rental, even with picks/prospects thrown in. 1Cs are too rare and too valuable. You can’t get value and term when all you can offer is value without term. And prospects won’t fill in the loss to a team of anything approaching a 1C.
Following the CGY trade, the CdH signing has given me more confidence in the direction and competency of Canes O/M (again, I have been “from Missouri” since RBA was elevated to head coach and DW to GM). A few things I haven’t liked (I think Z came in low for how much promise he showed at the NHL level and how well he played at the AHL level, in my opinion, and I can’t imagine there should be that big a difference between the team and TvR’s camp that a resolution can’t be found that makes everybody happy – there is a larger question that I will wait to discuss in a more appropriate context).
But I like what I have seen in the trade and the signing. Not only do we have cost certainty (and at reasonable cost) but we also have roster certainty for the top 4, barring injury, going out 3 to 5 years. And that roster certainty is high end. AHL players like McKeown and Carrick are going to find the roster tough to crack through no fault of their own (as much as I like Carrick he has struck me as a career AHLer, although I hope he gets a crack at the NHL and proves me wrong).
But there is an interesting change in approach here confirmed with the CdH signing – we are no longer relying on our young D core to develop into a potent defense (the RF model). Rather, we have actively sought (and obtained) more veteran D-men to in part replace and in part supplement that young core. That is a pretty seismic shift, actually.
raleightj, what is your opinion about Matt Duchene as a trade target. For example Faulk and Skinner (or prospect(s) and or draft pick(s)to Ottawa for Duchene?
First of all, Duchene makes me shudder. When his former team becomes light years better on his departure there is bad juju there.
Second, Skinner most likely does not have OTT on his short of teams to be traded to, and I doubt very much he would agree to be moved there for his contract year.
Duchene is going to be a reclamation/redemption project after he finishes this season with OTT (or wherever he may end up if OTT tries to move him). Pick up Duchene at the deadline for prospects that we get by trading Skinner? – that could be interesting based on the type of season Duchene is having.
Is this team playing to make the playoffs this season or stil in a full rebuild mode? My assumption is that the Canes are past the decade of rebuild and into proving that winning hockey can be played in North Carolina.
Are we so afraid of having key playrs walk for nothing at the end of a season that we trade them before the season begins? Why aren’t the Penguins not trading Crossby, he might walk for nothing in 2026 or whatever.
We traded Eric Staal for futures. The futures have done little to help the team on the ice while Staal scored 60+ goals. How was that a good idea?
Are we going to do the same with Skinner, our top goalscorer? Trade him away for what, 2 second round picks and another third line type forward that gets lost in the log jam? Ok, that player can kill penalties so we have fewrr goals against, but those don’t count so much if we can’t score.
Is that any better than trading him for nothing?
Sure,we can package a second round pick or two with one of our other playrers in return for somebody, but that player is not going to be a top scorer so probably won’t yield as good a return.
Sure there are factors that we don’t know.
Skinner’s plus minus was awful last year. Was it lackof effort (can be fixed), bad line chemistry (can maybe be fixed) or that he just hates playing here (can’t be fixed)). If he hates playing here we better find out why and try to fix those things for the future.
The whole team was broken last year, was Skinner at fault or a victim?
He was a C, he shouldn’t have been. That C should be removed, he might appreciate it since he probably wasn’t comfortable with the C in the first place.
He needed the style of coaching that we think our new headcoach can bring, shouldn’t we take a gamble and see if the Brindy magic works on our top scorer?
I’m for trading Skinner for an equal caliber forward (unlikely, unless it is a winger for a center like the Skinner for RNH deal), or a top goalie prospect and a player that can fill a scoring or PK need next year, but I’m not onboard with trading Skinner away for whatever we can gget for him, and I am surprised why almost everyone is only considering that option, ignoring the goals and takeaways in favor of plus minus (these are all useful statistics but they paint an inconsistent picture).
Again, the intangibles are the key here and only people with a much more insight than our fine crew can assess those.
Breezy…IMO you have got it right. Darn good writeup and really focuses on the issues.
“He was a C, he shouldn’t have been. That C should be removed, he might appreciate it since he probably wasn’t comfortable with the C in the first place.”
He had an A, not a C. He is one of the leaders in the room and as long as he is a Cane he will be one of the leaders. That said, Everyone knows who the C was last season and he didn’t have a letter.
Skinner is fun to watch, he has an infectious attitude, when they show him on the bench smiling you cant help but like the guy. He is 2nd in takeaways in the league, a puck hawk always buzzing, shots from anywhere in the zone and can score from anywhere in the zone. I Like Skinner. BUT! He doesn’t elevate anybody he plays with, that’s a huge issue! His Plus/Minus numbers are bad, I’m completely willing to overlook that stat in favor of defending his so called lack of effort. I don’t know if Skinny’s poor D numbers are related to his effort being negative, Id say his attacking style and gambling tends to put him on the wrong side of the puck (MAN-YOU-NET.)So do you try to coach out of him what makes him dynamic? I’m not sure you want to change that aspect. But I’m also not sure you want your best winger having a negative impact on the outcomes of games. You cant win if that’s the case.
So yeah, Id take the right deal for him, not give him away. And yes, I would take futures if a Faulk trade brings a Fwd in.
FYI Wherever Jeff plays this season, he is going to score. I predict his Career year.
breezy: if you knew that Skinner was leaving after next season and was not going to sign an extension with us, would you prefer just the one remaining year of Skinner rather than exploring converting that one year into something longer term? Skinner is a premium player and, like Pacioretty or Kane or JvR, has value across the league. I have a hard time believing we’d get pennies on the dollar – no one is saying we should sell that low nor would I.
No one, especially me, wants to lose Skinner’s production. In a perfect world he’s the premium player you’d like to lock up longer term. That just doesn’t seem like it’s in the cards right now and it’s a huge risk to the organization to let all that value walk away with zero return. In that world, where we have him for a maximum of one year, we have to consider alternatives that extend past next year. That’s how success is sustained over time.
I actually think with the CdH signing we have far more options that we did to package Skinner to optimize a return. I’m actually optimistic we’re going to make a balanced decision weighing next year against future years.
dmilleravid – Spot on!
Ask Islander Fans how awesome it is to be them right now. Loosing JT for nothing when last summer you could have gotten a bunch of assets even if it wasn’t = value. Get something. Picks and prospects are a numbers game…
A text I got last night from my buddy on the Island, Context – I was asking how he liked dH as a player….
“As If the Islanders needed any more obstacles. They’ll be struggling for another Decade. I cant watch this team.”
dmilleravid…You are always pretty sane IMO in what you have to say. For that reason I always find it hard to argue with you. On this issue you point out above clearly what my and others fear. One thing I am concerned about is the tone of some writeups (maybe not yours) is Skinner IS only worth pennies on the dollar and that we SHOULD sell low and do this NOW. That approach to me is ridiculous when we still have a need for scoring and a top notch center (can be one in the same). A second concern is the attitude that if we don’t dump Skinner now (take assets of no real value to the Canes in solving a need) that we will end up losing him for nothing. Will Skinner be untradeable in September, October…at the trade deadline, etc. Or will he have scored 25 plus goals and be a plus player at the deadline and highly sought after? Who knows, but IMO there is a better chance for that type result than he will less valuable than right now. Being a playoff team this year should be our concern right now since we have put together a solid nucleus of a team. If we are failing to reach that goal this year, at some point in the season we can look at Skinner and determine whether we can and want to resign him or whether we want to and can trade him. If we are winning and in playoff contention, there is PROBABLY a better chance for resigning him just because we are winning and he wants to be part of a WINNING TEAM for a change. He is probably as fed up with losing (a good sign by the way) as all of us Caniacs are. Dumping him (essentially placing virtually all the blame for a miserable last year on Skinner, Faulk and goaltending) now and just getting something for him IMO is not the way to go IMO.
I must disagree about lack of effort (can be fixed). Long term lack of effort is a character issue. A guy can cover it up for a while, especially if things are going well, but it will always come back. It is very rare indeed for an experienced player who shows lack of effort to change.
I’m not sure lack of effort is Skinner’s issue. He works hard at certain things, but refuses to do others. For example…he will dog a puck on the forcheck, but seems unwilling to put his body on the sidewall to get a puck out of the defensive zone. Is that effort, or want to? Skinner isn’t that small. He’s listed as bigger than McGinn. The guy is such an enigma.
At the end of the day I don’t think any of the things we are talking about with Skinner really matters. It’s about where he is with the team. Was he one of the guys Staal was talking about “not being committed?” If so, he must go. Does Skinner want out of here himself? If so, he must go. If not, they probably can work with the guy. With all the noise about the Canes shopping Skinner I’m willing to bet it’s one, or both, of the two things above.
Eric Staal had to go. He was stale here. He went to the Rangers and continued to stink up the joint for them. I believe that was the wake up call for Eric Staal. Reports were he recommitted to his physical fitness that summer before he signed with Minnesota. (Amazing how that works for guys like Staal, Jeff Carter, etc.) Not sure that would have happened if he had stayed in Carolina. It also didn’t hurt that Staal has had much better linemates to play with in Minnesota. Not facing the other team’s top pairing most of the time helped, too.
“or could even add Petr Mrazek and possibly pursue a higher-end goalie.”
Matt. Come on! I love reading your write ups but, You have mentioned this a few times…. And some readers have also… This isn’t EA Sports Franchise Mode. In the history of the league have you ever hear of signing a FA then a few weeks that player is traded? The Agent, player and NHPA would have a huge issue with this. Now maybe in Jan up to the deadline that could happen but not in the summer right after you have signed.
Love the deal for de Haan. I’m shocked the deal wasn’t higher. In Free Agency crazy deals get handed out (a La Jack Johnson.) In every summer you see a bunch of overpayment. This is not one of those at all… He will be a quiet but effective player. I’m sure Darling is excited, I could see him having a bounce back this year… Well he has to be a bit better.. He couldn’t get much worse.
Here is a thought and to pose a question… Not to be negative so please everyone don’t take it that way. I’m pleased with the movement and signings so far. I’m completely underwhelmed with the Goalie position but the options were/are super limited. Last few off seasons we have made moves to improve our roster. Some worked, some didn’t… Rarely does every move work perfectly and some players have down seasons, some thrive in a new environments, different systems, change of coaching ect.
Predictions on who will be the best pickup this offseason?
Lots happening which has led to great comments.
dmiller’s points about experience and Svechnikov’s offensive input really are important. Both should help immediately. I too think Lindholm will be missed.
tj is correct that Skinner’s contract status is going to be an issue. Seems much like what is holding up a Pacioretty deal.
Though I agree with RR that selling too low on either Skinner or Faulk is a mistake. However, as I mentioned goal-scoring is not the only yardstick.
One thing I have a different opinion about is top scoring line center. Aho is that player. He was good in the games at the end of the season. He was elite in the World Championship. The only realistic concern I have is face-offs. And honestly being the best team in the league last season didn’t really help the Canes.
As far as replacing Skinner’s scoring should he get traded, I expect both Svechnikov and Zykov to get close to or more than 20 goals.
I am still concerned about culture. Last offseason the Canes added several ring owners. This year all the additions missed the playoffs last year. I was never a big believer in the winning culture concept, but others have changed my mind. So now I worry when comparing last offseason to this offseason.
“One thing I have a different opinion about is top scoring line center. Aho is that player.”
Spot on 100%
ct, as usual you make some good points and reasonable arguments IMO. You say Aho “…is that scoring center.” I can go along with that. My point is I don’t care who we trade as long as we are making a deal to better (increase our chances of making the playoffs) this team THIS YEAR.
The point you make in your last paragraph has really not been considered much by me or others as far as I know in things. I think what you point out is important. In regards to your view on this, the Canes SHOULD CONSIDER in any additional player moves of any type can we add some playoff experience (change the culture) to our mix. For example (just for example), let’s say Hainsey can be had for a Charlotte player and we could use a defenseman. Should we place any value on Hainsey’s NHL experience and his playoff experience. I think so, although it obviously would not be the only factor.
I’m not actually worried about his faceoffs that much – in a small sample size he’s always been good on the draw. What I am worried about is for his size and weight handling the rigors of playing 82 games up the middle against other teams top lines is going to be a challenge for him. As a winger I’d safely bet on him returning to the 60+ pt range, even maybe 70+. As a center the energy Aho will have to spend in the defensive zone below the faceoff circle will be a new beast compared to what he’s done on the wing. I am all for moving him into the C spot because he represents the only possible true #1C on the team but I would not be overly surprised if this transition meant he took a small step back next year.
Gentlemen (I assume), I am not advocating for trading Skinner or Faulk for just a third line PK role player. I am merely stating that in the future shaping of the team, that role should be considered. If any trades are made, contracts will have to come back. So a part of that would be a center/winger who can play 2C on PK.
I offer that we don’t need to trade for a 1C for several reasons. First, what legitimate 1C is available? Nylander(a wing) is not the answer at 1C. RNH is a C but not a 1C. I think he would be a LW on Aho’s line if the Canes got him.
1Cs are generally drafted. I got it that Tavares changed teams but that was crazy money and a trip home.
Carolina has a 1C and I would offer that they have two. Aho has the skill, hockey IQ and determination to be that guy. Necas has all the tools to be a 1C. Give them time and supporting wingers and 1C will be the least of the team’s worries.
jm97…you state your case well. All of what you say is valid IMO. As I have said already, I don’t care what player moves we make as long as the moves are made to improve the chances of this team making the playoffs THIS YEAR. The move may also solve other problems that others have correctly pointed out, but it ALSO must improve THIS YEARS team. If that criteria is met, I’m all in for whatever anyone can dream up.
I know for a fact that a few contributors are not male and also know for a fact that the female part of the Hurricanes fan base is just as knowledgeable as the male part, so let’s make sure we include everyone.
Much depends on where Rask lands. If Rask stays as a 4C, we should be looking at wing to compliment Aho/Necas (our future 1C/2C, Staal being 3C). Faulk should net us a 2nd/3rd line winger (replacing Skinner). At that time our team should be mostly set to start the year. If Rask gets dealt, we may need a Kadri/RNH type to backfill.
What we get in return for Skinner is also a crapshoot, meaning we might have a chance to upgrade at center, but might just be okay with adding 1st round draft pick and prospects for potential deadline collateral.
I know some are concerned about losing Lindy’s production or possibility of centering a line, but let’s not underestimate Ferlund. I think some will be surprised at the balance and production he can bring to our young centers in the fold. And to a lesser degree, Martinook. These guys play a brand of hockey we have lacked for so long.
The reason I like RNH is that he is capable )if borderline) 1C player who can slip into a winger role if and when Aho or Necas are ready to take on the full responsibility.
These guys should have the chance to be the number 1 center but I think the players themselves and the fans feel better if the team has a player with experience who can man that position short term if the up and comers need more time to adjust.
The Canes can’t risk damaging Aho or Necas by putting too much pressure on them too soon, Lindholm style. They are different players from Lindholm and they might handle it just fine, but I think in the perfect world the team has a plan b for the first couple of years.
I’m with you breezy. He’ll be a little bit more expensive, but he’s young, and given an escape from Edmonton, he could have a higher gear as well. Plus he’s two years younger than Kadrii. I really feel RNH should be the main effort.
I do disagree with you about NachoSvech. Given the presence of Aho/TT and especially if they can bring in that top forward as well, there is no pressure to come in and perform. If they come in and earn the spot, they will get the spot and take their lumps in the NHL. If they don’t earn it in camp, don’t think that Rod will not hesitate to send them down. I think the kids are mature and ready to take the jump, but we’ll see. We have the options to plug in regardless, and if the kids aren’t fully ready, there are always a plethora of cheap veterans lying around to fill the gap until they are.
breezy, nothing wrong with Ryan Nugent Hopkins IMO. I’m not hung up on 1C, I just want a move that would make this years team stronger. IMO RNH would do that. My reasoning (for anyone who cares) is of we trade for him he brings a decent level of scoring and plays a decent all around game.
Well there is the slight disconnect. While I am all for something that makes us better this year, I’m totally cool with getting the picks for down the road too. Everything is going in the right direction, and while my dream would be a Skinner/Faulk for RNH swap, I’m okay with multiple first round picks too. The great thing about our situation now is that there are multiple paths forward for potential success. The key is finding the balance between short-term and long-term that enables what success we find to endure and be built on. I’m guessing Coach Rod and Captain Williams will be able to figure that out on the hockey side, but Skins and Faulk present a very fun conundrum for the new management, and I see multiple scenarios in which we can win from this.
No disconnect…your ideas match up with me perfectly. Improve this year AND the future. Who’s to argue with that? Surely not me on even my worst days (of which there are many).
D-rob brings up an interesting point, but I think he is wrong. I don’t think there is anything to prevent signing a free agent to a contract and then trading him a few weeks later.
The player and his agent might put up a fuss about bad faith etc, but neither the NHL nor the NHLPA could do anything.
I don’t know if it has been done before. But I remember that when Cam Ward signed his one year contract with the Blackhawks, he had a NTC included. Hmmm!
Ward’s NTC probably had more to do with a deadline deal than something short-term. Chicago washed out of the playoffs last year and could do the same this season. Ward would be a very good pickup for a team with injured goalies ala Philadelphia this season.
I don’t know why I wrote that Skinner was a ‘C’, must have been the few brews after all (only 2 or 3).
I think the important takeaway from all the great discussion here, one which relates back to the topic, is that having signed a capable top 4 defenseman to reasonable longterm contracts puts the Canes in a great position to decide how to handle expiring or surplus contracts, such as those of Skinner and Faulk,.
The team management has sent a message to the players that North Carolina can become a winning environment again and that help is here.
This may encourage the players to be part of the solution or make up their minds as to their real intensions.
The team is also dealing from a position of strength rather than desperation, which allows the management to hold out for a bidding war for players that want to depart or do not fit in, just see what Ott paid for Duchene, as crazy as we all thought Col was at the time. Teams should stop considering the Canes as a foreclosure team putting up “everything must go” signs on any player with value.
And hopefully the new management can set new standards for players fitness and commitment.
I’m all for trading Skinner if it is definite that he doesn’t want to play here and is not willing to put up the effort, but then the Canes management must capitalize on his perceived value around the league to get a player with meaningful immediate roster impact or a collection of difference maker draft picks in return.
I’m still surprised the Canes couldn’t do better for Eric Staal (but then again he was at a very low point in his career I think), I was hoping for Kreider or at least a first round pick, not a second at the time. I think with Skinner we can and should do much better if he chooses not to stay or is not a fit for the new and improves Canes.
Good writeup. I think you and I are definitely on the same page. I’m not sure that’s necessarily a good thing for you as my track record has not been what you call by any stretch of the imagination “outstanding” or even “good.”
Call me crazy but trading Skinner now and picking up a high draft pick and a prospect may not be the worst case scenario. I’m being optimistic here, but if the Canes are buyers at the trade deadline in 2019 then they can parlay the pick(s) and prospects to a re-building team and potentially get a player and deal than it seems they are able to swing at the moment. It’s a risky move, waiting until the season is 3/4 complete to determine what is the greatest need and and hoping a deal can be worked out with a desperate and underachieving team. Oh, and somehow have the team generate 30 goals from the remaining lineup in the meantime. I’m not insinuating it is the best scenario but one that may be an option. My opinion is Skinner is by now screaming to get traded. He’s been disparaged by the organization the entire off-season and put out there as a bad teammate. I understand he’s nixed a few potential deals but it behooves both Skinner and Canes to get something done, and getting picks and prospects may serve the purpose in the long run.
That would not be a worst case scenario at all. It’s not going to be the best scenario, but its a decent scenario. That’s the ‘Let’s get Wendy’s’ of scenarios.
tenininumee, obviously from my other comments you now I’m not for draft picks and prospects RIGHT NOW. But, if management goes that route I will assume that management made that determination based upon a whole lot of factors I am not currently aware of. So, you may be right, and for sure, based on what little I REALLY know you have a real good chance of being so. If what you say pans out, I will gnash my teeth, refer to TD and DW by some other term other than Management, and spit out a few critical adjectives. I’ll probably then burden all the readers on this site with some hair brain ideas…er…brilliant ideas that I had that management did not have the foresight, intellect, or smarts to carry out. Then I will settle down and get back to reading about, digesting, and backing what has taken place. I will be looking for you, dmiller…., ct… raleightj…jm97… breezy,..fogger…powerless…lessthan—livefree…Ashville…drob…ericiv…Matt and all the rest to read about whatever comes next.
I think what the braintrust has done so far has been nothing short of spectacular. That includes what they have done with our goalkeepers. Each player we have under contract is highly motivated. The winning culture is taking shape.
The biggest test confronting our management now is what to do with Skinner and Faulk and how to do it.
And the longer it takes us to deal with TVR, the bigger that challenge looms.
Other teams in our conference face huge challenges. It will be interesting to see how they handle theirs.
The Flyers today signed a right-handed defenseman who is big and nasty. The Islanders signed Robin Lehner. And the beat goes on.
I have contended for some time now that our goalkeepers would play well if they had a team in front of them. We now have a team.
I have contended that we have a very impressive lineup of scoring talent. We have made it better.
We have a coach. We have a team which is capable of great things.
I am sanguine about our chances this year.
I concur with everything you wrote. I’m probably more bullish on Mrazek than the majority, as I think he will become our #1 and in ways push Darling to being the strong 1B partner he is capable of being (I can envision a 50/30 split in starts making our team confident no matter who is in net). The team in front of net will be far more electric, yet defensively responsible with an added element of physicality. Offseason business is unfinished on Faulk/Skinner, but so far so good.
Powerless, appreciate the comments. Every fan here at C&C wants the team to be better. We may agree or not on how they do that. Yet we seem to be in agreement that brain trust has done well so far. They have taken advantage of some opportunities in trades and signings.
I think the most compelling part of the offseason is that obvious effort is being made to make the team better. Will every move work out? We will find out. Great group here to discuss the next chapter of the Canes. I appreciate the ideas and perspective.
TvR has filed for arbitration.
When was the last time a Canes player did that?
TVR likely knows the team is attempting to trade Faulk, making the existing offer short of TVR’s perceived value. This is politics at it’s finest right now…the sooner we can trade Faulk the sooner we can give TVR a $2.5mil per year deal and make all sides happy.
My only concern is the whole keeping all sides ‘happy’, considering we are currently fixing dynamic issues from yesteryear and need players buying into the new regime while not creating other side distractions.
https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2018/07/2018-arbitration-tracker.html?fv-home=true&post-id=91038
TVR filed for arbitration. A few other players did as well.
Ok,it’s Miller time. Or how crazy is this trade scenario? Columbus is risking losing Panarin for nothing if they can’t work out a raise for him before this season begins. How about sending Skinner and Faulk to the Blue Jackets for Panarin and a second round pick? Columbus gets quality in return and the Canes get a true game changer forward. I don’t think salary is an issue, he’ll command 6.5 – 7 mil. per year. 26 yrs. old, get him for 5 years and we’re having some fun. Worry about lines later….
Not bad, and here I thought I was nuts. 🙂 Not sure if division aspect would play a part, and not sure if Skinner would allow for trade to CBJ, but the idea I like!
Larger question with TVR…can we trade a player heading to arbitration? And if so, does this open doors to some larger potential involving Skinner/Faulk/TVR to Chicago for Saad/Murphy/Hossa (cap hit)/plus pick?
We’d get a replacement 3rd pair RHD capable of top 4 minutes when needed, and bolster our top 9 forwards replacing Skinner. Hawks get scoring plus replenish D corp. Salary exchanges would be in favor of CAR, but cap in favor of CHI…or so I think?
Probably muddying the waters here but it’s been 95+ degrees and humid in New Hampshire for a week now and us northern folk start going nutty.
Never mind…TVR just re0signed for 2yrs…$2.3 mil!
In the end, best news without muddying waters…TVR back in fold for $2.3 mil and 2 yrs is probably best outcome (I was 200K short in my above guess but glad it worked out). Thumbs up!
A nice pay raise for TvR – and well-deserved. I didn’t realize he had taken a pay cut from his ELC to his standard contract.
Yes he was a VERY highly touted prospect for Chicago – many people expected him to be the long term solution at the 2nd pair right side. They also viewed him as able to play both sides.
But he disappointed pretty early on and took that pay cut. He got in Q’s doghouse quite a lot – I think many Blackhawks fans kind of felt they ran him out like they did Nick Leddy. Not that TVR is as good as Leddy – but perhaps the Blackhawks sold LOW on what was a higher quality dman than they gave credit for. I mean it baffles me how an elite coach like Quenville can be obssessed with MichaL Rosival and not play TVR 😛
Very good signing. Glad the team and player reached an agreement. If any doubted which RD will be traded, this probably helps answer that question. Hint: It’s not TVR.
Exactly. Wonder if this now green lights the official hammer on Faulk? I’ve been wrong before, but would not be surprised if this takes 48 hours or less.
All it takes is a dance partner…
Won’t be long. Everybody likes a nice ass(et).
RaleighTJ- I think the management is waiting for the Karlsson trade to happen. After that they may be the only dance in town. What do you think?
I don’t know if it is waiting, jm – I think there was more with Kovalchuk (sp?) and teams looking for a left-wing, rather than an elite D-man. I think there others waiting to see first. Rarely are things one-off. And I don’t think the teams interested in Karlsson are necessarily the teams that would be interested in Faulk – two entirely different levels of play, and styles even. But there are a number of teams that want a RHD who can shoot and play the point on the PP. So I expect there will be a solid demand for Faulk.
My thought is that teams who miss on Karlsson still want a RD. Faulk is not on that level of course but still an offense first guy. The more teams who want Faulk the more options for making a trade.
JM97, just a reminder this isn’t a personal chat room. There are plenty of contributors here you can open the same question to. Personally, I don’t care but just know individually directed questions only detracts being involved (or reading). Again, no offense, but when I ask questions it’s to the masses, not individuals.
And that goes for others as well, lets be less “clicky” and more open-ended. Plenty have opinions and not just the ones you want to hear from. I’ve said my peace, have a good night.
live_free…Addressing something to a particular individual for an opinion is not meant to slight in any way any other site contributor nor is it meant to preclude anyone else commenting on the topic at hand IMO. Jm97, who I have no idea who it is or what the person’s gender is (as is the case with all the contributors), I am sure wasn’t purposely trying to preclude anyone from answering his question. I think it is just a way one tries to compliment a contributor by seeking his or her advice. But, to acknowledge your point here, if it bothers you or any others I will make sure any comments I make where I am asking for an opinion, I will address to the entire group. I think I have been addressing my questions, if any, to all but I will make sure to do so. One thing I like about this site is the courtesy EVERYONE has shown and I know after reading some of my trash…er…insights, there might have been an impulse, at least on more than one occasion, to throw a few choice adjectives my way questioning my intellectual capacity.
I don’t think it is any different than people responding specifically to anyone’s post. If someone says something that piques your interest there is no reason (nor rule) to go back and inquire directly by name.
My piece.
” no reason (nor rule) not to go back and inquire directly by name”
Glad they re-signed TVR. He is solid in his role and can play up a pairing if needed. I think we are going to need his steadiness. de Haan has a history of injuries and gives the puck away. Hamilton is durable, but turns the puck over more than any Canes D last season. So it will be essential that TVR, Pesce, and Fleury continue to play their steady puck-control style.
Two people can strike up a conversation in a coffee shop.
As long as their talk does not get so loud and pervasive that it drowns out everyone else I don’t see the problem here.
I think we’re a good, respectful, open and fun community of posters. Let’s not get so bogged down in details and political correctness that we have to watch every word.
E.g. when I say “guys” I mean guys of any gender, sexual orientation, race, religion or roast preferences (I go for darkest coffee available myself and I just don’t do Dunkin Donuts coffee).
Y’all’s are awesome! Let the good times roll.
Breezy, good thoughts as usual and they express my feelings to a tee. I’m pretty sure EVERYONE who writes on this site feels the same as you. I have been on sites where the issue that live_free raises is a problem when there are rambling posts and counter posts between two contributors.. Where it occurs it is aggravating to some I am sure, but I really haven’t seen it as a problem from jm97 nor any other contributor on this site at all. But doesn’t hurt for live_free to raise the issue if he thinks it is important as long as he doesn’t get confrontational about it (which he didn’t).
I don’t disagree Matt that maybe people (including myself) are nitpicking the term and AAV a bit. However I just want to remind that my issue with the De Haan contract comes SIMPLY from the fact he has proven to be more injury prone than healthy through his career. I loved me Joni Pitkanen and he was a value contract and a half for the Canes – solid player too – but I can’t deny perhaps his overall value to the team was a net NEGATIVE simply because they needed him so much and he couldn’t stay healthy.
I completely agree a depth dman is needed. I like all three of the names you suggested with Hamhuis as my number 1 choice. He could slide into the top 4 in an injury scenario and not be out of his element.
I see Carrick as a better fit to play in the AHL or get a full-time roster spot (taking Haydn Fleury’s?). When I saw him in action last season he just struck me as a little nervous and more like he needed to get consistent ice time to start playing better. I think Mckeown’s game was a lot more polished in limited bursts – his skillset seems like a better fit for a 7D. Dahlbeck was good in that role because he didn’t need to play consistently to play effectively – something i’d be worried Carrick needs. He’s not known for being a highly consistent player even in the AHL and he logs big minutes there.
PLus I want Charlotte to win too! Carrick – Mckeown is a good looking number 1 pair there.