(Those who visited Canes and Coffee last spring when the team was imploding will get the ice cream in the picture. Could Darling/Mrazek boost local ice cream sales?)
The opening day of the free agent signing period for the NHL, the Hurricanes addressed the team’s need to add a goalie. Shortly after it was officially announced that Cam Ward had signed with the Chicago Blackhawks, the Hurricanes announced the signing of Petr Mrazek to fill the slot previously occupied by Ward.
The deal
Petr Mrazek was signed for a bargain basement $1.5 million and with an ultra low risk one-year deal. The upside is that the deal eats up pretty much minimal budget and cannot be a negative past the end of the 2018-19 season. So the deal rates incredibly high for avoiding long-term financial risks.
Petr Mrazek’s history
As for the player that the Hurricanes obtained for their $1.5 million investment, in simplest terms I would consider Mrazek to be a high risk, high reward option and even a bit of a rebound bet. After a step-wise path and some seasoning at the AHL level with a few NHL games, Mrazek burst onto the NHL scene in during the 2014-15 season with a 16-9-2 record and a .918 save percentage and 2.38 goals against average. Mrazek continued his ascension in 2015-16 by seizing the Red Wings’ starting job and posting a 27-16-6 record in 54 starts with a solid .921 save percentage and 2.38 goals against average. His 2015-16 season vaulted him over Jimmy Howard, put him on the list of promising young starters at on 24 years of age and won him a two-year contract that paid $4 million per year.
Then he immediately regressed. His save percentage plummeted to .901 in a tough 2016-17 season that saw him exit the season by pretty much handing the starting job back to Jimmy Howard. Mrazek’s 2017-18 for Detroit was somewhat better in terms of basic statistics, but the damage had already been done in the year prior. There was no way that the Red Wings were going to invest $4M plus in a qualifying offer, so when the Flyers had both of their goalies go down with injuries in the middle of a playoff push, Mrazek was obtained at the trade deadline for an emergency fill in. He started okay with the Flyers but ultimately faltered in stumbling into free agency with an .891 save percentage in 17 starts for the Flyers.
Handicapping Petr Mrazek
So if I had to handicap Petr Mrazek, it would be as follows:
–Though it was for a short period of time, basically a single season, Mrazek has played well in a starter’s role.
–But he arrives in Raleigh as a bit of a rebound/bounce back bet coming off two lesser seasons since becoming a starter and then ultimately losing that job.
–He is not big by today’s NHL standards at only 6 feet 2 inches tall, but he is athletic and agile.
–In short, I rate him above average compared to the other options for risk because of his current down swing and inconsistency. But he does have starter upside and some experience in that role.
My 2 cents on the deal
I am on record as not being overly excited about any of the free agent goalie options available. As such, I had a strong preference for signing a one-year or maybe two-year deal so as not to put a bunch more contract commitment into what I think is mostly a dice roll. In that regard, the Hurricanes score 10 out of 10.
But I also was not high on Mrazek as compared to other options simply because he is currently at a bit of a low point looking to rebound and also has been somewhat inconsistent historically.
More directly, I am both surprised and a bit worried that the Hurricanes signed arguably the riskiest of the bunch with a rebound required just to be adequate. I liked other options better for a higher probability of success, but I admittedly like Mrazek’s contract.
Considering the other options
Saturday figured to be a day of goalie musical chairs and did not disappoint. Of the many second-tier goalies being bandied around, only Robin Lehner is still unsigned as of Sunday night.
The Bruins signed Jaroslav Halak to a two-year deal for $2.75 million per year to replace a departing Anton Khudobin. Halak is an interesting case. He had been in the dog house for a couple years with the Islanders, but his basic statistics are surprisingly pretty good. He maybe capitulated finally in 2017-18 with a .908 save percentage but had stayed in the teens for save percentage despite inconsistent playing time, bouncing down to the AHL and seemingly acrimonious relations with the team. I like Halak because his game really had not fallen off despite a difficult situation, and he has also logged a high volume of time as a starter.
Speaking of Anton Khudobin, he left Boston for two years at $2.25 million per year to be a backup in Dallas. Khudobin had a solid 2017-18 season, but I would pass on a goalie who I view as a backup at his stage of his career.
The Red Wings added Jonathan Bernier on a three-year deal for $3 million per year to replace Mrazek and probably be part of a 1A/1B tandem with Jimmy Howard. Bernier has some starter experience and is coming off of a decent 2017-18 season, but I would pass on committing for three years at a medium price.
The Buffalo Sabres inked Carter Hutton for three years at $2.75 million per year. I actually thought he might be even more expensive as the option many considered to be the best. I was not at all high on a long-term commitment to yet another player trying to transition from backup to starter.
Given a menu of all of the goalie contracts signed on Sunday, I would begrudgingly stretch to two years to net the volume of starter experience that Halak brings and to upgrade over Mrazek in terms of recent trajectory.
In conclusion
I stand by my assessment of the whole set of choices mostly being a high stakes dice roll. As such, I like the Hurricanes low cost and commitment. But at the same time, I would have considered spending a bit more for a veteran like Halak.
The position is SO important for the Hurricanes long-awaited rebound, and I feel like the team is entering the 2018-19 season with two fairly low probability dice rolls both with really low floors if things do not go well.
What say you Canes fans?
1) What are your initial thoughts on Petr Mrazek?
2) If given the chance to take any goalie/contract from Sunday’s signings, which would you choose and why?
3) With a Scott Darling/Petr Mrazek combination, what do you think the odds of goalie success are for the 2018-19 season?
Go Canes!
1. Like you said, a roll of the dice. But not he year to find a good starter.
2. Halak. Average goaltending probably gets us to the playoffs, and 2 years gives us the flexibility to extend him ,or promote Ned, depending on performance.
3. 50/50. But Darling is trying to be ready ,so it should be better than last season.
1. I like the deal for Mrazek. I saw Kevin Weekes(sp?) on NHL tonight talking on Mrazek a week or so ago. He said Mrazek has all the tools, just has to put it together. We shall see in the days ahead.
2. None of the goalies available were perfect. That is why they were available. Great tryout contract, so no other goalie I would prefer that was available.
3. I lived in Highland Park during the 16-17 NHL season. Just north of Chicago. Darling was in several local commercials. Kinda like Laco Taco. He looked like a cuddly teddy bear. He played well in cuddly bear shape. Yet in the video last week at prospect camp he looked like an extra for Sons of Anarchy. I think he is putting in the work. He wants to be successful. I think the goal tending will be better. New system, better dmen, and team first attitude will help.
Jm97, I agree with your thoughts. Mrazek, of all the available free agent goalies, has the highest upside. Bales just has to get him to play at the level he is capable of more consistently.
1. Mrazek is, like Darling, on a mission looking for redemption. His recent trajectory has not been encouraging – I view him entirely as a rebound candidate.
2. I have been in favor of Khudobin – he is a great guy and he was solid for a while with the Canes, plus he has shown he can successfully handle a starting role for an extended period. All for $2.25M?? Doby told the Russian that all it would have taken was $50,000 more on the Boston offer, which was very close to what he will be getting, to keep him there. But I thought he would have been the perfect candidate to compete for the spot – and rather than being a designated back-up he knew he would have a chance at the 1 or 1B roles here.
3. We have two players with previous success looking to redeem themselves after a poor year – what are the odds both players fail? Because we only need one to succeed to improve from last season and reach that mythical standard of “league-average goaltending”. 🙂
I’m fine with this. Maybe it’s just me being tired of being upset and wanting to be optimistic, but Mrazek and Darling both have had success at the NHL level. One of them almost HAS to rebound and have a good year. Right? For the sake of my mental health?
Regardless, there wasn’t some obvious option that would have come in and solved the franchise’s future. The team in front of these two will be better, there will be a new system in place, and I think Darling will bounce back now that he doesn’t have to look over his shoulder at the guy the most notable goalie in franchise history.
bwstanley, i’m with you 100% solely on both your, my and even their mental health. One of them has to rebound. My money is on Darling right now, but word is Mrazek is coming in with a chip on his shoulder which is also good.
My initial thoughts were… we should have kept Cam, and that our new owner will ALWAYS take the lower cost vs. help the team approach! I didn’t think any of the available goalies would be an upgrade. Then looking at Mrazeks age, contract (half of Cam’s) $ and length, and the fact he said he wanted a “prove it” contract… that changed my mind. I realized that bringing Cam back had too many “here we go again” issues and that maybe there is something to what Cole said about Cam’s shadow…. and I realized that maybe I am being too hard on the TD. It does make sense to save money, to me Mzarek really was the only option.
As I said above, I think the age, $$, and term was too high for all of the other goalies, so we got the best we could.
And, as others have said, we have two goalies that are hungry (or should be). Sort of like players playing for a contract year… these guys are playing for their professional lives, so while that could go either way (too much pressure, or pressure makes pearls) I am going to go with the pressure makes pearls line of thinking because frankly… that is more fun, and I believe we have added scoring in the forwards and more importantly in the D (Hammy). Hopefully early on, that will take some of the pressure off the goalies and let them move past their early mistakes.
Going into the offseason, I thought we should do two things:
– Trade for Grubauer. I thought the UFA market was weak and he was our best shot at improving in net. Sounds like we tried but that Washington didn’t want to deal in conference.
– Put Darling on waivers and send him Charlotte to find his game. Darling was just sort of bad. He was historically bad. I would have preferred to sign 2 goalies (perhaps Ward as the backup).
I’m shocked that there’s even talk of Darling competing for the starter’s spot, but that’s where we are. It’s not good.
One of these guys could be very motivated to prove himself. I hope it works, but it’s a huge gamble.
You are right about it being a gamble, but that was the only real option we had in free agency IMO. I’m glad Ward is gone if only to give the new guys a shot at number 1 without him looking over their shoulders. Hope he really shines in Chicago and look forward one day to having him back to raise number 30 to the rafters.
I’m new here and appreciate the diversity of opinion about the Canes. I’m a fan but far from an expert. After reading messages disappointed about the Canes’ lack of free agent signings and skepticism about trades, I decided to try to figure out what we should expect if the Canes make no additional roster changes. But instead of venturing an opinion about which prospects will come through, I decided to look for odds of success based on draft position. I used odds I found on TSN. I was surprised I couldn’t select text in this editor and enter a link so here goes: tsn.https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131I
I applied the TSN odds to Canes prospects trying to figure out how many top six forwards we could reasonably expect to come from the system. I didn’t apply odds to players whose performance is known based on time in the NHL and I didn’t count Skinner, Williams and Staal as top 6 forwards. Viewing them as 3rd line players is part of what makes this exercise tough.
As a framework, I used lines with guesses about which roster players will play on which line and which prospects might fit where. For each player below, you see round, overall draft position and then odds of being a top 6 forward. Where I think someone has turned out to be a bottom 6 forward, I just wrote B6. This may sell a couple of players short. For example, McGinn is definitely improving and might have a remote chance to sneak into the top 6. Anyway, here goes:
Zykov (II-37, 12% chance T6F) Aho (II-35) Teravainen (I-18)
Ferland (V-133) Necas (I-12, 42% chance T6F) Svechnikov (I-2, 88% chance T6F)
Skinner(I-7) Staal (I-2) Williams (I-28)
McGinn (II-47, B6) Rask (II-42, B6) Martinook (II-58, B6)
Foegele (III-67, 8% chance T6F) Roy (IV-96, 5% chance T6F) Gauthier (I-21, 17% chance T6F)
Saarela (III-89, 7% chance T6F) Wallmark (IV-97, 5% chance T6F) Kuokkanen (II-43, 13% chance T6F)
Maenalanen (V-125) Di Giuseppe (II-38, B6)
To my eye, the good news is that the Canes have lots of prospects competing for the bottom 6 and should be strong there. The bad news is that there aren’t many prospects with a chance to make the top 6.
Even with the addition of Svechnikov and Necas, I think the Canes need two more top 6 forwards to emerge. A lot of guys have a slender chance to make the top 6, but history says odds are best for Gauthier, Kuokkanen and Zykov and down the road Luostarinen and Drury. Foegele, Saarela, Wallmark and Roy are real longshots. Summing the chances for all of these most promising prospects (after Svechnikov and Necas) suggests odds are good that the Canes have one more top six forward in the system and a less than 50-50 chance of having two.
For this year, if history is a reasonable guide, the Canes have to hope that two of Zykov, Gauthier and Kuokkanen blossom. Perhaps Brindamour can light a fire under Gauthier in training camp.
Svechnech welcome.
Great to have another analytics lover join the best blog in hockey!
You have inadvertently argued for my favorite point—quit referring to lines as first through fourth.
Your fourth line is a first line by the odds— two top ten picks and another first rounder. With Aho and TT on a line and Necas and Svechnikov on a line (though I am skeptical about two rookies, so wouldn’t mind them on different lies this year) the Canes can have three lines that are above average at their role— two offensive lines and a disruption line.
The only way to really change is to think differently. Time for the Canes to change.
Please keep posting. Your insight is appreciated.
I meant third line— Skinner, Staal, Williams.