Hurricanes’ general manager Ron Francis enters the summer of 2017 in the best situation he has seen since he assumed the role in the spring of 2014. He has caught some good breaks with players including Jaccob Slavin, Brett Pesce and Sebastian Aho emerging ahead of schedule and assuming top half of the roster roles. Francis has also benefited from the expiration of time with unwieldy contracts for Eric Staal and Cam Ward coming off the books. And Francis also deserves some credit for steadfastly sticking to his original plan of building a deeper system that could eventually be the foundation of a regular playoff participant.
But now three years deep into his rebuild following five years of missed playoffs before that, I think it is officially ‘go’ time. A team cannot rebuild for forever and better but still not good enough 2015-16 and 2016-17 suggest that the team is finally close and needs the final boost top push up into the playoffs. Francis hinted that he would push more aggressively for the playoffs for the upcoming season in his post-season interviews and then followed it up fairly quickly by trading for and then signing Scott Darling to address what I ranked as the team’s top off-season priority.
From the starting point of adding Darling, Francis should have some ammunition in the form of salary budget, extra draft picks and a deeper prospect pool that could contribute to a ‘win now’ type of trade. And the expansion draft adds a significant extra shopping option to add players during the off-season.
But Francis also faces challenges. This is not like the past couple seasons where any decent roster player could be considered an upgrade for a team light on NHL level talent. Instead, Francis will be trying to fill a couple fairly specific needs in the top half of the lineup. The kind of player he needs is not generally available for some modest collection of mid-tier futures of mid-round draft picks.
That situation contributes heavily to what I think will be Ron Francis’ toughest decisions this summer:
1a) Is Francis willing to part with a young roster defenseman to add a top 6 forward capable of boosting scoring?
Same as last summer, the Hurricanes offense could really benefit from adding a true C1 or at least C2 who leans scoring and can be a catalyst not just another contributor. My version of the 2017-18 Carolina Hurricanes lineup builds around three sets of two forwards — Staal/Lindholm as a top defensive line that can also contribute offensively, Skinner/Rask as one line capable of carrying the team for stretches and Aho/____ as a second scoring threat to balance the offense. The key is ____. Regardless of whether you parse the lines like I do or differently, the job description for the forward to be added is not simply that of a serviceable top 9 depth scoring type forward.
Obtaining such a player is going to cost one of three things. Either some magic exploiting a salary cap, expansion draft or shortsighted GM situation that sees Francis grab a bargain, a king’s ransom of prospects and picks for a team looking to rebuild or maybe most likely the willingness to part with a good young roster player in return.
I voted ‘no’ on including Justin Faulk in a trade for a top 6 forward last summer and again before the trade deadline. I also have not been of the mind to peddle Noah Hanifin and his high-ceiling future. But at the same time, I get the need to add a top-tier forward and that once the hope of a desperate GM miracle fades, it could be expensive.
My 2 cents
–I would rather overpay with futures than current roster players if that is possible but acknowledge that it might not be an option.
–My ranking in order defensemen I would not want to trade currently goes Slavin, Pesce, Faulk and Hanifin with a fairly big gap between Pesce and Faulk. With Slavin and Pesce play as top pairing defensemen in 2016-17 and considering they are set to earn a tiny salary in 2017-18 and likely a reasonable salary in their second contracts after that, I just think the combination of their level of play and discounted cost too good to part with. Though I am on record as not liking Faulk’s 2016-17 season in total (gave him a B- in total and lower than that for the defensive part of his 2016-17 report card), his scoring upside is rare, and he has proven that he could at one point play at a top 4 level. That leaves Hanifin. By no means do I want to trade him. By no means have I given up on his upside. But in terms of lesser evils, I would rather trade potential than proven.
–Even with that said, I would not be willing to chuck Hanifin into just any deal that has a top 6 forward coming back. I want proven and elite if Hanifin is going the other way. The player who jumps out to me is Nathan MacKinnon. He is the forward equivalent of what we hope Hanifin will become. MacKinnon is an elite player who is good enough that Hanifin could fulfill his potential and the deal could still be a good one for the Hurricanes. But I figure there are maybe 3-4 deals that I would consider pulling Hanifin into.
–It is obviously not wise to discount the future, but looking specifically at the start of the 2017-18 season, Hanifin would easily garner the highest return relative to his expected role right now as an only somewhat proven #4 defenseman.
1b) What price range does he shop in and how much will he pay for a top half of the roster forward?
Related 1a, the single biggest remaining move (first was the goalie addition) that Francis will make this season is who he adds to bolster the top half of the forward ranks and the team’s scoring. The list of players allegedly available is a good one. But the alleged price to acquire some of these players might prove to be ludicrous. Joe Sakic allegedly wanted all of a top 4 defenseman, a first-round draft pick and an additional prospect or piece for Matt Duchene in February. Matt Duchene is a great hockey player and fits what the Canes need, but that price is ludicrous.
The difficult decision for Ron Francis is going to be sorting through a bunch of high-priced forward options and figuring out which is worth the cost both in terms of salary but more importantly in terms of trade cost and also which he might be able to negotiate better than list price terms for.
If sorting and negotiating fails to yield a player from the top of the list, the challenge then becomes figuring out how far down the ordered list he can go and still get a true difference-maker versus settling for top 9 depth that is not enough better than just plugging in youth.
My 2 cents
–I am not of the mind that Francis must buy from the top handful of options if the prices are just ludicrous. For me, there is a point where value must be considered.
–That said, adding another depth type forward who is really like a #8 or #9 and not truly capable of being a driver and difference-maker on a top scoring line might not be enough of an upgrade to significantly boost the offense.
–If Francis has any more trade magic left in his bag for this summer, here is where I would spend it.
1c) What is reasonable to expect from Noah Hanifin for the 2017-18 season?
The key words here are “count on.” I intentionally did not say “hope for.” If Francis counts on Hanifin to be a reasonably steady and capable top 4 defenseman (which he was for the last 25 games last season), he needs to add only a fairly inexpensive #5/#6 depth defenseman of which there are many options and the price is modest. If instead, Francis hopes Hanifin seizes the #4 defense slot but is not willing to count on it, his task of finding a player capable of stepping into the top 4 is much more challenging. The availability decreases significantly, and the price increases too.
My 2 cents
–I am already on record on this one in a few places. I like the potential of Noah Hanifin to seize and keep a top 4 slot. And it should be his to win.
–But especially with Justin Faulk coming off a sub-par 2016-17 season defensively in my opinion, I would not bet the 2017-18 season on Hanifin being a top 4 certainty after about 25 games in that role at the end of the season. If I was Ron Francis, I would be looking to make my one blue line addition a player who could potentially step into the top 4 if needed. Even if Hanfin makes a permanent rise to the top 4, the player still would not be wasted possibly mentoring Haydn Fleury in the bottom pairing and being capable of stepping up in the event of an injury.
A side note
Interesting is that we could get a veiled clue as to where Francis is with regard to his blue line in the first round of maneuvering around the expansion draft. If Francis decides that he wants to add more than a serviceable #5/#6 defenseman for depth, the best time to do that will be just before the expansion draft. In this time window, a few teams could be sellers simply because they have a #4 defenseman that they are unable to protect importantly also at a time when many teams that ultimately want to add a #4 or higher defenseman cannot do so yet because they too would be unable to protect the addition in the expansion draft.
So while it is far from a certainty, I think it is possible that Francis adds a defenseman in the days leading up to the expansion draft. If he does, that move could signal either that Francis is considering trading one of his other defensemen or that he wants to add some insurance in terms of building out his top 4. If Francis does not add a defenseman as part of the expansion draft maneuvering it would suggest (though definitely not assure with finality) that Francis is ready to go with the defense he has not use any of the current players to add a forward.
2) What will Francis do with his three-headed goalie situation before the start of the season?
With the addition of Scott Darling with Cam Ward and Eddie Lack Both still under contract for the 2017-18 season, the Hurricanes currently have three goalies which is of course one too many for an NHL roster. While there is a possibility that the expansion draft will naturally resolve this problem, that seems unlikely to me. There are too many other better goalie options available.
Instead, I think the resolution of the goalie situation will push back onto Francis’ desk after the conclusion of the expansion draft. I would expect Francis to then explore trade options, but if plan B is a buyout of Eddie Lack as I expect, Francis will need to make up his mind before the June 30 deadline.
The comments on a couple of recent articles have suggested the possibility of keeping Eddie Lack (and Cam Ward) and sending Lack to Charlotte to provide depth from below. When you net it out, the out of pocket cost would be $1 million (Hurricanes can either pay Lack $3 million for 2017-18 if the team keeps him or can pay him $2 million total spread over two years if it buys him out.)
My 2 cents
–On a team that needs help elsewhere and is working within a less than salary cap budget, I would exhaust all other possibilities first but would ultimately buy out Eddie Lack’s contract if no other way to move him materializes.
3) How many forward slots should he leave for the youth?
If Francis adds a top-tier forward as hoped, my count is eight proven top 9 forwards on the roster plus a slew of young forwards with varying levels of NHL experience. Francis must decide where the right balance is between leaving lineup slots for young players to win versus adding another proven depth player or two.
In 2016-17, Sebastian Aho showed what is sometimes possible even for rookies to argue the case for youth. At the other end of the spectrum, Viktor Stalberg and his impact made a strong case for the potential impact of quality depth players on fairly inexpensive contracts.
The challenge could be building out the penalty kill unit. During the best days of the team’s penalty kill in 2016-17, Viktor Stalberg and Jay McClement were regulars. More scoring from the fourth line would be helpful, but having a penalty killer or two there would also be helpful. And scoring only helps if the increase is more than the additional goals allowed.
My 2 cents
–I would consider adding one more depth forward if Francis can get a premium type player who is capable of killing penalties. I would actually be thrilled to have Viktor Stalberg back, but there should also be a few other options.
–But past that, I would rather leave a couple slots on the fourth line to be won by young players who might bring a bit more offensively without being a defensive liability.
What say you Canes fans?
How will shopping for an impact forward ultimately end? Will it take an NHL roster defenseman to get one good enough? Would you even do that? Who do you maybe like from a second tier who could be good enough and less expensive?
Which of these do you see as Francis’ most difficult decisions, and how do you think he resolves them?
Would you consider adding a veteran depth forward or two, or is time to leverage the young, skilled depth that the team is accumulating?
Go Canes!
1/ My best guess: we make a trade for a “bridge” Forward who has 1-3 years left on his deal that cost futures and prospects. It’ll be a proven veteran, a few notches above Stempniak, who can give Aho time to develop into the #1C. I do not think we’ll give up a roster defensemen to get this done. I do not think we’ll pull off the blockbuster trade for a McKinnon/Duchene level Center that would have to include a roster defenseman (though I agree with your analysis and d-man ordering and wouldn’t be opposed to it in the right deal). I’m thinking of a Jordan Eberle-type player.
If something like this happens, I’d be thrilled – way better than the status quo and a major improvement to the current roster without jeopardizing the future or the financials.
FYI – winning the UFA sweepstakes is another possibility you didn’t mention but I don’t see us playing/winning that game and I doubt, Matt, you do either.
2/ I think we wind up doing what I’ve proposed in #1 above because it’s going to prove too tough to get the elite Center, so getting the scoring Forward is going to be the toughest to get done.
3/ We need to save some room on the roster for at least one, possibly two rising Forwards.
dmiller, I think all your points are well taken and you have expressed my feelings to a tee (therefore, I will spare you and all the other readers another of my long-winded dissertations).
I’ve gone back and forth on the trading a current d-man for a scoring forward. You always have to give up something to get something of value. However, the strength of the Canes is on the defense. Diluting that strength by trading Faulk or Hanafin (the two likeliest options) and replacing them somehow with a veteran 5-6 d-man appears to me (today) a shortsighted strategy. That’s why yesterday’s column regarding the Zetterberg style pickup was intriguing. Pick up a contract that is really only about current or near future salary and do so by trading away draft picks that aren’t likely to pay any dividends for 3-5 years. Team depth can’t be overstated and the Canes are a fairly thin group talent wise compared to the Cup teams. I’m not sure in the scenario where we get a star forward by giving up a top 4 d-man makes much sense. Tomorrow I may feel differently because there is no doubt the Canes need offense, but not at the expense of diluting the defense and negating the gains from obtaining Darling.
tenininumee, I say the same to you as I have stated to dmiller above.
I think our world-traveler is spot on. The most sensible move is to use picks/prospects to acquire a forward (C or winger) who is capable of 25+ goals. Just not sure of the timing. Because I think the expansion offers the ability to get a depth player who is strong on PK–I can see offering LV a couple picks to build their system for a player like Letestu once they select him from Edmonton.
Like Matt and dmiller, I am constantly changing my mind about trading one of the four D-men. Logically, any of the four should be available for the right deal. But it is well known that people place more value on what they already have–which is what is making me hesitant to fully support trading Hanifin or Faulk. I think, maybe too optimistically, that our top 4 D are similar to Nashville’s and look where it got them.
Ct – I have to respectfully disagree with the the Canes 4 D are similar to Nashville. Josi, Subban and Ekholm are all #1 defensemen and each is better than anyone on the Canes roster. They can be beat because they push play and gamble, but that’s Laviolette’s style of play. It is probably unfair to compare the Canes d to Nashville’s d because overall, Nashville’s may be the best in the League. As good as Slavin and Pence are, they are a step below the Preds group (at this point). Faulk is there offensively, but not as good defensively and Hanafin is another step or two away at this point in his career.
tenininumee, IMO you are spot on. I have previously stated what you stated that are defense corps is very good, but it is not ridiculously talented. When you look at what teams like Nashville, Minnesota, and Anaheim put on the ice on defense you see something that approaches ridiculously talented. That being the case (IMO), trading one of our top four defensemen will result in our defense going down a step or two.
Thanks for expressing what I feel in a more understandable manner.
“are” above should be “our” in English.
A lot of my thoughts would be duplicative of previous comments so I will try not to repeat.
The Hurricanes Facebook page had a 90-second video of RF starting the scouting meeting the other day. He talks of the 10 picks we have this year and then makes it very clear that he doesn’t expect to use all 10 (I actually didn’t know we have 6 of the first 70 or so).
So I expect picks-and-prospects to be his trading chips, more than established players. And that won’t get us a 25+ goal scorer.
And I, for one, would not want to see a trade involving any of our 4 young D, even Fleury. I think once you get past Fleury our vaunted deep, young blueline is actually rather thin (Bean is a few years out, and I really don’t think that highly of any of the others in Charlotte, including McKeown, to think they will be significant NHL contributors). So I would be very careful on trading one of them. From a different perspective, we could be riding these 4 (or 5) D-men for 6-9 years at generally favorable rates – is losing one of the long-term pieces worth a forward with 2 or 3 years left on his contract? One other consideration is the financials – picking up a $5M contract for a young D still on his ELC is a significant salary differential for the next couple of years – does it impact what we can do. And, to be honest, hockey is more than a business – I like the young guys we have.
I do see us picking up a 4/5 D-man before the expansion draft, as you suggest, Matt. And doing that with picks/prospects.
I think the most difficult decision is adding offense. I don’t see us doing that without losing one of our 4D, and I have already expressed my reservations about that.
You make a valid point about adding pieces for an effective PK – but I think that will be an easier get, as ctcaniac suggests. And I would also love to see Stalberg back.
As for leaving spots open – I think we have two forwards in Charlotte ready to move up (Wallmark and Zykov) with a third who may quickly be ready (Saarela). I don’t want depth forwards blocking their progress but you have to be prepared for the possibility they don’t succeed.
Ha! I think I am kind of rambling today. 🙂
raleightj, “Rambling?” Hey, have you read any of my stuff lately? While your writeup is lengthy, it covers a lot of ground and contains a lot of good ideas and thoughts. Another positive is, the other readers don’t have to read one of my never ending dissertations. I thank you on their behalf.
Hi everyone,
This is the post that finally inspired me to create a username and comment, I always enjoy reading the writing here.
I somewhat agree with some of the commenters above, though I think I disagree with Matt, we’ll see.
When dealing with young developing players like most of the Canes D, you’re dealing with a critical concept: potential. Potential is a two edged sword, and I think GMRF will play on the conservative side.
When it comes to the 4 dmen listed, I think Hanafin is the one I’d be the most reluctant to trade. He has the highest ceiling by far, the question is whether or not he’ll reach it.
I think his progression may come in big jumps, like after an offseason getting stronger, or when certain on ice situations become more common and things become instinctive.
IMO, Hanafin has the realistic potential to be a top 5 defensemen in the entire NHL. Dmen take much longer to develop than forwards. Most players his age are just getting to the AHL (see Fleury, Hayden). Even if I’m right about this, he may not become that player for another 3 years. If he does though, he’ll dominate this league for a decade. Do you really want to trade a player with that kind of ceiling?
Granted, he may not ever become that player. I do think it’s safe to assume he will be a very good top 4 defensemen for a long time.
So, if you’re considering trading him, what can you expect back?
Other teams know his potential, and it seems like he gets more respect around the league than he gets from the Canes base, which I understand, because we’re watching him every game, but it’s also frustrating, because I think giving up on him is a huge mistake.
I hope we can agree, he’s no Murphy.
To me, if you trade him, you’d better get a first line player back that you expect will be with the team for a long time – at least 5 years. It should be a forward that can lead the team, drive offense, and make the players around him better.
I don’t think the Avs have that player. There’s a reason they lost so many games. I definitely wouldn’t be packaging Hanafin with more pics or players for that player.
I do concede that you need to give value to get value. I don’t think a team is trying to trade a player worth losing what Hanafin may become this summer.
Given that, if GMRF is making a trade, he’s likely looking at moving Faulk. He’s a very good right handed offensive dman. He is worth an average (not elite) 1st line center.
Alternately, maybe you consider moving Fleury for an equally young player with 1st line upside… I think he’ll be a consistent l, but not elite, top 4 dman for many years as well.
I think it’s too early to trade Bean, we don’t know what we have yet, and you won’t get enough value back.
To shift the conversation, a prospect I would absolutely consider trading would be Gautier. I’m not convinced he has the hockey sense to be a top 6 winger: he lacks vision and awareness on the ice, and I think he’ll be a one trick pony, powering down the wing to the net, at the NHL level. He may have more value now, and I’d be much more willing to roll the dice with him than any of the dmen mentioned.
Love the perspective on potential and on COL. So? What’s the deal to us like to see us do?
Please keep contributing. A welcome addition.
There certainly has been a slight change in perception over the last year or so regarding Gautier’s potential to develop into a solid NHL player. Whether or not that is warranted I’ll leave up to more knowledgeable talent evaluators but there is no doubt expectations have been lowered and the reviews I’ve seen of his play point out exactly what you have – lack of hockey sense and vision. He may be a longer term project (what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas).
I also agree with your Hanafin comments in that he is the defenseman with the highest potential. To me he is similar in some respects to Tyler Myers. Different style of play but both came with high expectations that in the case of Noah, may be impossible to meet without the Canes surrounding him with more talent that complements his skills better than what he has been provided to date. Myers landed in Winnipeg where there is a solid defense core but still is looked at as a disappointment. I’ll take Myers on the Canes any day (if he stays healthy).
Againstthegrain, welcome, and I feel the same about Hanafin, but you expressed it much better than I could have, so THANKS! I think the quality (and potential) that you talk about, for Hanafin, is exactly what we need to acquire, on the forward lines. Easier said than done, I know, but it should be the goal. I think you’re spot on, not giving up a talent like Hanafin, for…anything (shiny object, or otherwise)!
Teams like Tampa Bay, NYR, and a few others, will have to make tough decisions on who to move, or keep… I’m hoping RF can be creative enough to get some QUALITY PLAYER(S) from them w/o losing any guy with Hanafin’s potential/ talent!
Your analysis fits right in with my feelings on the matter of Hanifin. You just did a better job expressing it. Keep contributing, will ya? You will make a good site better with your input.
I think the days I like best are the ones where I get buried in life/work and do not have time to check in on the site until later and then find a bunch of great insight to read through when I do find time.
Welcome againstthegrain! We need more Canes insights and opinions not less, so it is always a good day when someone knew shares theirs.
I think I sit firmly in the middle on Hanifin. I am not at all willing to including him in any trade for a good forward, but I do not put him in an untouchable category either. I have a half-written post that might be tonight’s DCoJ that has one player for whom I would include Hanifin. More generally, I think there is that one yes, probably 2-3 more I would consider and then everything else just ‘no’ (considering only players who might actually be available).
Matt, I’ll give you one I’d make. Hanifin for McDavid. Pull that one off and you can count on my vote.
Yah, I agree with RR, pull McDavid or Matthews into the mix and then you can count on my vote as well. I am not on the fence, do not trade any of our top 4 D. Hanifin has way to much upside. RF built the D for a reason.
Great comments by againstthegrain, welcome againstthegrain.
Use picks and prospects. I think the costs will be too high for a supper 1C. Get a strong winger or center (within reason). I also would love to have Stalberg back (he could score, really fast and great on PK) and keep a couple of spots open for the young guys.
Regarding Lack, you only get 3 buyouts. We have used 2. Do not buy him out. This could solve itself with a trade. If not, put him in the AHL. If somebody picks him up on waivers, your salary issue goes away. If not you have a good goalie who could come back who could come up for us if Ward or Darling. I do not understand the reason for pushing a buyout. We are not going to have a cap issue for a while and why waste your last buyout?
Many great comments and options here.
First. Welcome Against.
Second. All of you make me think–which as I mentioned last week usually ends badly. So here are the ideas laid out in this thread: none of our D are elite at this point, though Hanifin has the most potential (possibly followed by Bean) and the consensus is that he will step up at least to top 4 this year; none should be off-limits given an equitable return; Fleury is likely ready to make the Canes; the depth after Bean is weak; if one gets traded the replacement needs to come from available options outside the organization.
Which leads to: the sensible offer is Slavin for a scoring forward. Now, I don’t like that, but the logic seems to follow. Hanifin, Fleury, and Bean are left D–Matt even made an argument that Dahlbeck is serviceable on the left side much more so than the right. Even without trading Faulk or Pesce, Carolina needs to add another right D. Slavin might bring as much return as Hanifin while having less long-term potential.
The logic is not a perfect A = B, B = C, therefore A = C. But close enough. What it does is get back to the point that trading any of the D for less than a future star doesn’t really make sense.
I do agree the comments above regarding Gauthier. I think he can be part of an offer if another organization values him highly.
ct, while I don’t agree with your ideas about trading one of our top 4 defensemen, both you and ironcaniac who is of the same mind as you IMO (in commenting on a previous article on this site) have presented reasonable reasons for holding your positions. Your last sentence in the next to last paragraph expresses my conclusion on the issue.
Regarding Gauthier, while I have been a closet Gauthier cheerleader, it is hard for me to ignore the rather negative appraisal that you and others on this site have expressed. So I am inclined to go along with the concensus opinions you and the others.
add “have expressed” on last sentence.
Thank you so much for the warm welcome and comments everyone!
I wanted to try to respond to dmilleravid’s question about possible trades.
Super short version: Trades are going to be difficult because just about everything is a Catch-22 for the teams involved.
What I mean by that is, the Canes are dealing from a position of youth and potential, while the players we want are proven assets.
Of course, this is all a matter of degree, and some things are more certain and/or proven than others, but speaking generally, the team that has the proven/established commodity is in the position to demand more from the team offering potential and/or picks… because potential is just that – potential. Until it either is, or is not realized.
I would like to think I’m realistic. However, as a Canes fan, it’s practically inevitable that I’m going to value the potential of our players more highly than another team will.
As I said earlier (and I realize this is a HUGE projection) I think Hanifin could be one of the 5 best dmen in the league within 3 years. Maybe I should’ve said 5. Oh well, too late. That’s my personal opinion, far from fact. Nevertheless, I think he could be that special.
Certainly, other teams may think this too, but currently he is not that player. He is not even a guaranteed top 4 defenseman on next year’s roster as I type this. Maybe he becomes that elite player. If he does, there’s practically NO ONE in the league worth trading him for. However, today it’s only a possibility, and that represents risk to the team acquiring him. How much risk depends on what they give up, and how quickly they expect/need him to be that player.
Without travelling too far down the rabbit hole of speculation, I would say I just don’t think GMRF will trade Hanifin for what I am guessing teams will offer.
For example, it’s possible (though even this is a stretch) Anaheim could offer Jakob Silfverberg, or Tampa Bay could offer Jonathan Drouin in a straight up one for one hockey trade. Those players have proven they can drive play and score somewhere between 20-30 goals a year. In either case, those teams would be giving up a great player for cap/Expansion Draft protection reasons in the trade.
I would be tempted, but I’m not sure I’d make that trade. They’re both wingers, something we could use, but not as important as a center. Still, I think Hanifin’s contributions will outweigh Silferberg’s or Drouin’s to his team in short order. I also think Anaheim and Tampa could ask for more than just Hanifin because he has not yet proven himself in the way those players have.
Who would I consider trading Hanifin for? Leon Draisaitl. I still think Hanifin will be the better player over the course of his career, but that’s a give up longer term higher potential for guaranteed contributions now.
Let me say, Edmonton won’t do this. Draisaitl makes their team. He’s the modern Messier to Gretzky. They will do whatever it takes to make sure he’s with them for the next decade. I’m just giving this as an example of what I would be willing to part with.
I think a much more realistic trade would be the type dmilleravid alluded to. A player on the outs for one reason or another, who has top 6 potential but is likely a middle 6 player, like Ryan Nugent-Hopkins or Jordan Eberle… both players with expensive contracts and a poor playoffs.
These types of players are ones teams need to deal because they can’t afford to pay them to underperform when they need to dedicate $ to another player that is contributing more on the ice.
So then, what do I think a realistic/fair trade would be for say, RNH?
How about Roland McKeown or Julien Gauthier plus our 2nd (42 overall)?
We give up a good but not blue chip prospect, plus a pick with value, for a player that admittedly isn’t a star, but who could slot on our 1st line next year. I don’t LOVE this trade, nor do I particularly want RNH, but IMO this would be a fair deal for both sides.
Thanks for the response. Really happy to hear a new voice and please keep contributing.
So to all you readers out there on-the-fence about contributing – I read for almost a year before I delved into commenting and it’s quite a bit of fun (and humbling at the same time). If I can do it (having no idea what I’m really talking about), you can do it, too!!!