Whether you are a reader who appreciated daily Canes hockey coverage during the off-season or are someone looking forward to regular coverage during the upcoming season, please consider making a ‘buy us a cup of coffee’ size contribution to help fund Canes and Coffee. We run on a lean budget, but there website and other costs.
Click here to help fund Canes and Coffee for the 2019-20 season.
Our season preview series started on Tuesday by comparing the 2019-20 roster the 2018-19 roster. Look for part 2 in that series hopefully sometime on Wednesday.
On Tuesday, the Carolina Hurricanes announced that the team had sent Julien Gauthier, Brian Gibbons, Clark Bishop, Anton Forsberg, Gustav Forsling and Roland McKeown to the AHL. Combined with putting Trevor van Riemsdyk and Max McCormick on the injured list, the team now has a roster of 20 players. With some of the weird maneuvering that occurs this time of year, it is not out of the question that we see tinkering before the regular season starts, but the current group of 20 should be very close to what we see on the ice at PNC Arena on Thursday.
Today’s Daily Cup of Joe offers a few thoughts on these final cuts and the current roster.
A key disclaimer for all comments is that it is possible that a part or two of the moves could prove to be ‘NHL roster management’ type moves and could be undone before Thursday.
The elephant in the room — Julien Gauthier and Martin Necas
The biggest news from the moves was the decision to return Julien Gauthier to the AHL and keep Martin Necas at the NHL level. Both players are waiver-exempt, so there is no side factor in that regard. And I think it would be pretty unanimous that Julien Gauthier had a stronger training camp than Marin Necas. Necas had some moments but also also had stretches of ‘meh’ level invisibility and still exhibits some of the floating/wandering element in his game without the puck. Gauthier was the most noticeable forward in the first few preseason games and finished reasonably well too. The only knock on Gauthier’s preseason was that he despite a good effort generating shots and scoring chances he did not score and netted only a single assist for his effort. But especially with a small sample size, I think one has to put more weight in his ability make things happen offensively combined with improved intensity and effort on the defensive side of the puck.
Especially after all of the talk about earning ice time, this one was a head-scratcher to me. Both players are high pedigree players as first-round draft picks. Both had strong AHL campaigns in 2018-19. They play the same position. And significantly, both are waiver-exempt. If ever there was a chance to have a true try out that was not encumbered by waiver rules, one-way contracts and other NHL legalese, this was it. And instead the team decided to base its decision on something other than performance in preseason.
I think the tricky balance is deciding how much credit to give to a small quantity of exhibition games versus evaluation of the much longer 2018-19 regular season in the AHL. So I guess the case could be made that Necas won his roster spot by virtue of what he did last season, but in my book, I just do not like the move for the message it sends.
The other forward cuts — Clark Bishop and Brian Gibbons
Brian Gibbons is at the top of the list in terms of age and NHL experience on the forward list. He is similar maybe to Greg McKegg who was similarly a veteran with AHL experience who stuck around deep into training camp before departing but later returned to the NHL level. My best guess was that Gibbons was never likely to crack the NHL lineup for opening night, but that the coaching staff wanted to see as much as possible of the newcomer in an NHL-ish setting, so they know what they have in him as experienced depth.
Often playing with Gauthier, Clark Bishop had a strong preseason. Unlike Gauthier and Necas, he actually scored a goal, and he is as consistent as it gets in terms of bringing aggressive skating and forechecking from the wing. Maybe a bit like Gibbons, Bishop was likely to be passed over for a player with more offensive upside, but I think he did well to position himself for a recall if the kids do not work out or if injuries require the use of deep depth.
Anton Forsberg
I am on record from a ways back as saying that despite the strong play by all four goalies that the position was never really open for consideration. Partly with an aim of boosting his value for future maneuvering at the position, James Reimer was always certain to start the season in Raleigh if he was healthy. That said, I think Forsberg did as much as he could in preseason to make himself a going concern on a deep Hurricanes depth chart in net. I think the team was happy to get him from Chicago to hopefully be capable depth with NHL experience all the way down in the #4 slot. That vision was tainted a bit when he won his arbitration case and now will be paid $775,000 at the AHL level, but he still represents another option to try if injuries or goalie struggles hit.
On defense — Roland McKeown and Gustav Forsling
Starting maybe from maybe #10 or #11 on the depth chart, I think Roland McKeown had a strong preseason and boosted his status in the organization. The team sent him through waivers very early in the process, so he already has safe passage to the AHL. If I had to rank the Canes depth defenseman right now for the ability to step into the third pairing right now (so no futures), I would put Haydn Fleury ahead of him but would actually put McKeown ahead of Forsling, Bean and anyone else. McKeown is not flashy and in my opinion has a modest ceiling, but I think he could bring the kind of steady and uneventful that a team wants when plugging a depth player into the NHL lineup.
On that same note, I was not overly impressed with Forsling. He looks comfortable with the puck on his stick with time to sort things out. But he did often did not handle pressure well and had a horrible habit of losing track of opposing players behind him. That is the opposite of McKeown in terms of just being reasonably sound in a depth role.
My depth chart right now below the six NHL defensemen has: #7 Haydn Fleury, #8 Roland McKeown, #9 Jake Bean, #10 Gustav Forsling, #11 Fredrik Claesson. This does not include Chase Priskie or Jesper Sellgren who I consider prospects. I know people are enamored with Priskie, but after missing most of training camp, he is mostly just an unknown as far as the NHL depth chart at this point. That could change as the AHL season rolls along.
What say you Canes fans?
1) What did you think of Julien Gauthier’s demotion combined with Martin Necas sticking at the NHL level?
2) How would you slot the Hurricanes blue line depth chart below the six NHLers?
3) Which of the players demoted today is likely to return to the NHL level soonest? Which, if any, will make a difference at the NHL level in 2019-20?
Go Canes!
1) so much for earning your ice time. I think this is ridiculous. The goat was so far above what Necas had done. Not even close. The messaging is very very bad here.
2) the same order Matt said.
3) Goat, and I do believe he can make a difference. Energy, driving, etc. I thought he was in without question after the pre season performance. He may not had scored but it was only a matter of time. Man, I do not get that decision at all. McKewon if we need D.
I think Necas had already earned his spot with his AHL season last year. Similar to Foegele with his playoff performance.
Barring a 5 goal outburst from Goat, I don’t think it would be reasonable to weight a couple preseason games over an entire AHL season, or NHL playoffs. That being said, he is knocking on the door, and if I were Martin or Warren, I’d make sure I got off to a good start.
1. Based upon what I saw (the only thing I have to go on), Gauthier made this team no matter what Necas did or didn’t do. The Goat was dynamic on offense and in the last two or three games he really seemed to grasp his other responsibilities. He covered for his point man when the point man pinched, fought hard and effectively on the boards and back checked well. I sure hope Rod spoke with him before sending him down and encouraged him to continue to build off his excellent preseason. Icecobra has it right as far as I’m concerned. This could be a bad message if Roddie didn’t handle the demotion right.
2. Can’t argue with Matt on this.
3. Goat for all the reasons icecobra stated. If the penalty kill or forwards on defense get too loose, then Bishop. He’s tough and aggressive and know how to [play the game. Too bad he doesn’t have more offense because this guy has everything else.
Only thing that makes sense on picking Necas over Gauthier is that RBA really values what Necas’ shot brings to the power play. In Charlotte he could set up near Ovi’s spot and was deadly from that range.
Otherwise, Gauthier sure seemed like the more deserving. And he’s such a big imposing dude, his size alone brings another element that makes him hard to play against. Hopefully, when Gauthier gets a call up this year, he’s even more determined to stay and plays out of his mind.
Given their draft position, I get the sense management is not overly thrilled with where Necas and Gauthier are. I think they are more pleased with Gauthier’s preseason, certainly he had more flashes. But I think this is management’s statement to Necas by giving him first crack. If he doesn’t pan out I can see DW and company seeking fair market value.
Gauthier will see NHL time this year, it’s a matter of when.
I am disappointed to see Gauthier demoted. But I am convinced that Roddy is being consistent with his policy. His policy (earn your ice time) and its implementation, must always be based on an intensely personal give and take between coach and player. I have noticed that the Bull has distinguished himself in a shift or three and then doesn’t come back on the ice for a few shifts.
Looking back, I surmise that he and Roddy know what’s going on. The Bull being sent down likely has nothing to do with a competition with Necas. It is character building for the Bull.
How could there be a competition between Necas and Gauthier? They are such different players, from whom different strengths are evident. Roddy has his reasons for handling each of these superbly talented young men the way he does. As the season rolls out, Roddy’s brilliance as a mentor and coach will become apparent.
Insofar as the blue line depth chart is concerned, I would switch McKeown to #7 and Bean to #8 and Fleury to #9. Of course this will likely change when we have a chance to evaluate Priskie and Sellgren.
I believe that both the Bull as well as Clark Bishop will quickly return to my beloved Canes. The Bull will have a tremendous impact on the fortunes of our team, once Roddy works out the his wrinkles.
I find the situations with both Forsling and Forsberg to be interesting. Matt has summed up each more than adequately.
1) There is a lot of cognitive dissonance around “earning” a spot. If that were the case all the new players would be competing for spots. In this article Matt states one “position was never really open for consideration.” Earning a spot and predetermined roles are mutually exclusive. If NHL experience meant Reimer couldn’t lose his role, that is not competition.
I understand the argument that neither Necas nor Gauthier had NHL experience, so it was closer to a true competition. But if history, whether NHL or not, is a consideration (and everyone seems fine that it is—incidentally Haula didn’t earn anything as a new player so his default role is totally based on history) then Necas was starting significantly ahead of Gauthier. Necas was better last season on the same team. Necas is on most expert/analysts list of top 10 NHL prospects, Gauthier is not among the top 100. Sure Gauthier was more noticeable, so was Lorentz—in fact, Lorentz looked better defensively than Gauthier. No one is mentioning the 7th rounder. Having said all that, I would not have been concerned if Gauthier was kept instead of Necas. However, all “earn a spot” focus misses the fact that there is a bigger picture in which keeping Necas is equally reasonable. In reality, these decisions have many more components than who was more noticeable in preseason.
By the way I too like Gauthier and think he will make a difference at some point this season (more below).
2) I think Bean is actually 8, but McKeown being a right-shot and natural right-side D gives him an edge with TVR out.
3) Bishop. He is the easiest call up if one of the forwards is injured. He can plug into the bottom line and one of Martinook, Wallmark, or Foegele can move up.
Early yesterday the Canes were $5million over the cap, today they are $1million under. Placing TVR and McCormick on LTIR only accounts for $3million of the $6million reduction. Given 1.) the mechanics of the salary cap are quantum physics for me; 2.) that players can move in a NY minute from Charlotte to Raleigh and ;3.) there are 36 hours until tomorrow nights puck drop, I find me myself wondering how to make anything of yesterday’s moves that matter today. The six pre season games have left me unconvinced the summer personnel moves improved 5v5 or PP offense. None of the players sent down displayed the ability to change improve either. Color me concerned.
Some reactions to above comments:
darth: You apparently know more about Necas’ abilities than I and I hope you are right about his shot and possible help on the PP.
red ryder: Where’d you come up with all that c__p?
live free: I think your prediction of Gauthier’s return will pan out. Don’t think Necas will be traded during the season. Maybe afterwards if he has mediocre year.
pwrless: I think you are right in your analysis of the differences in Necas’ and the Goats games. The switch of McKeon and Bean I have no problem with. Sure hope you are wrong with your evaluation of Fleurysince Roddy apparently is counting on him in a 5 or 6 role.
ctcaniac: As usual after I read your stuff I ask myself “Why didn’t I think of that?” (I’d prefer no one answer that question. My feelings are easily hurt.)
surgalt: Your last two sentences express what maybe I should be thinking. I am worried that I am overly optimistic about this team. Did we really improve and even if we did get better, did we improve as much as our competition did? Did we get worse in some areas that are more important than the areas where we think we improved? For example, did William’s retirement diminish both our leadership and our scoring? Did we lose our “grit” by not keeping or replacing Ferland? Did we diminish our defense corp which ends up having a negative impact on our goaltending?
RR. You and surgalt are expressing legitimate concerns. A tool I love is the pre-mortem, which tries to explain why things could go wrong. For me the biggest concerns are coaching turnover. How much of the goalie improvement was Bales. Did having a winning team in Charlotte breed good habits in prospects? If so, does losing Vellucci change that?
ct, I had completely forgotten about Bales and Vellucci. Any effect from their departures are another unknown. You keep this up you are going to change me from an eternal optimist to Chicken Little. Looking forward to the season reading your and all the other’s comments. I did notice that 7:00 AM posting time. You getting a little lazy in the AMs. Used to be somewhat earlier and I could always paraphrase (ahem…I prefer “paraphrase” over “plagerize”) from what you had written.
All of the questions asked above are valid. I certainly ask myself those questions.
Willy saw us through a major change in culture as well as the baptism of fire for several new kids. Bale was a great coach. But we now must make do. Such is the nature of the beast called the NHL.
Grit? Boy do I ever miss Ferland. But do I miss the Ferland that is, or the Ferland that was before his spate of injuries?
Have we replaced him with adequate grit? Well, we got Eddy. He is a bona fide enforcer. Who else? We have Max McCormick. He is an agitator who can fight. He survived the last cut. Who else? We have Cedrick Lacroix. Yes. He has a contract with the Checkers. But I am sure that can easily be corrected if necessary. So I believe we have things covered. Including reserves in case of injury. Is it enough? Who knows? Of course late last season as well as in the playoffs, we did not have Ferland at all. Let’s face it, having one guy to fill the role of agitator and enforcer isn’t enough. Ferland’s style made him prone to injuries. I think we spent sufficient resources to equip ourselves in that department. Goal scoring? Defense? Who knows?
In the Fall of 2005, I happened upon Jimmy Rutherford in the halls of the then RBC center. He had been wheeling and dealing for a couple of years to make my beloved Canes better. We were coming off the lockout season and getting ready for the coming season. Jimmy was doing what he could, given Mr. K’s stranglehold on the team’s purse.
I expressed my sanguine feelings about our prospects for winning the Cup. He smiled and cautioned me against getting my hopes up too high. He said that all the other teams in the NHL were spending a lot of money to improve their teams. We might not be good enough, he said. And then he winked at the three of us who were there as he entered the elevator.
The rest is history. Our rag tag group of has beens, never wases, and wannabes sprung from the gate like a rocket and never looked back.
Here’s hoping.