I had a rare extended chunk of time this weekend in an empty house. My wife was out with a friend visiting from out of town and my three children were dispersed about the neighborhood with friends. I managed a wonderful nap and then spent the rest of rare weekend quiet time going full geek mode on hockey for a couple hours. I spent a chunk of time going roster by roster on CapFriendly looking at salaries, depth charts and potential expansion draft challenges.
Some of my research has already founds its way into my writing. Part 4 of my series at the front part of the week detailed the handful of interesting, Canes-friendly contracts that I found. Part 5 for Tuesday listed the toughest decisions that Francis had to make this summer and honed in on the potentially interconnected web of adding a top 6 scoring forward, potentially trading a roster defenseman to do so and also building a solid top 4 on defense. And Part 6 yesterday netted out considering probably a couple dozen forward options and whittled the big list down to a single top forward target and a plan B that might/might not be possible at all.
Along the way, here are a couple other thoughts that did not make it into the other articles at least in detail.
1) Expansion draft maneuvering as tea leaves for how Francis plans to add a forward
What, if anything, Ron Francis does in terms of shopping for/adding a defenseman prior to the expansion draft could say a lot about Francis’ plan to add a forward and also about what he is willing to trade to do so.
No doubt, Francis has had a good number of conversations already and has a reasonable idea of what the cost will be to add different forwards. Short answer is that the good ones will not come cheap. It could be that they cost a boat load of futures, or it could be that the table stakes are a young roster defenseman.
If Francis decides that to get what he wants, he will need to move a roster defenseman, it will create another hole to be filled. And short of wishing and hoping that Fleury pulls a Slavin/Pesce and just parachutes right into such a role, the Hurricanes really do not have top 4-capable depth past the four players currently slotted there (Slavin, Pesce, Faulk, Hanifin). So if Francis has intentions of parting with one of his four young NHL-level forwards, he will most certainly need to add some kind of replacement.
The time to do that is prior to the expansion draft because of the weird supply/demand situation that the expansion draft creates. Before the expansion draft, there is potentially fairly significant extra supply because 5-6 teams have four capable top 4 defensemen but only the ability to protect three. In addition, demand for top 4 defensemen should be similarly low before the expansion draft because teams with three solid defensemen looking for a fourth are not able to add the fourth until after the expansion draft. This is because they would not be able to protect the player before the expansion draft and therefore run the risk of adding a solid fourth defenseman only to have him lost a few days later in the expansion draft.
So before the expansion draft, the Hurricanes are one of only a few teams who could both add and protect another defenseman.
If Francis knows he is going to need another top 4 defenseman, because of his trade plans, the time to add one is pre-expansion draft.
So while there is a chance that Francis is just shopping opportunistically for a player he will keep, a move for a defenseman pre-expansion draft could hint at how Francis plans to add a top-end forward and what assets he plans to spend to do so.
2) Lee Stempniak and Teuvo Teravainen as potentially interesting trade pieces
First, to be clear, I am not keen on unloading Lee Stempniak. In an early article on the expansion draft on March 29, I differed from the broader hockey media in saying that the Hurricanes could and would protect Lee Stempniak and instead risk and lose one of younger players Brock McGinn or Phil Di Giuseppe. I think Stempniak is a solid veteran top 9 forward with some flexibility who fits in the 2017-18 top 9.
Teravainen is younger and therefore with longer-term upside too, but I view him similarly. He is serviceable top 9 who could fit in a few places.
And for a Hurricanes team that is finally reaching the point where it can fill out a top 9 without having to reach too much, the team needs players like Stempniak and Teravainen to provide depth.
But that same depth could be valuable to other teams too especially when you consider Stempniak and Teravainen’s salaries. Stempniak is slated to make $2.5 million in 2017-18, and restricted free agent Teuvo Teravainen figures to re-sign for a similar annual salary.
One of the most common trade possibilities for Ron Francis is the story whereby a team has salary cap challenges and therefore needs to get rid of a higher-end forward primarily with the goal of cutting salary. But when these salary cap-strapped teams trade a forward, they must replace him with something. Once salary cap hit is factored in, Stempniak and/or Teravainen could be perfect for some of these teams. One of these players will not be enough to get a deal done by himself, but just maybe one of them is enough to be packaged with futures to avoid needing to part with a young NHL defenseman.
If Tampa Bay trades Jonathan Drouin because the team cannot fit his new salary, Stempniak or Teravainen could back fill the slot for $3 million or more less.
If Montreal makes a push for Matt Duchene and decide to unload Alex Galchenyuk to make room, the Habs could find themselves then pushing up against the salary cap ceiling but needing another forward. Galchenyuk’s new contract likely to be $5 million or more might not work, but perhaps Stempniak or Teravainen’s does. One of those players does not get Galchenyuk by himself but maybe sending a good even if slightly less roster player plus a decent package of futures gets a deal done with the blue line still intact. It does create a hole at forward, but the hope would be that Francis could again find a decent bargain for a third line type forward
Same could be true in any other situation where the trade of a forward to the Hurricanes creates a hole and where salary cap is an issue.
3) Nathan MacKinnon
It was the focus of yesterday’s article, but in comparing the options thought possibly to be available, he stands out to me. At his age and level of play, I just think that the balance of high upside with modest downside is tremendous given his contract.
4) The expansion draft and salary cap double whammy for generating options
When I look at the number of teams and players potentially impacted by the expansion draft and then go back and look at the number of teams and players potentially impacted by salary cap challenges, I really think this summer is unprecedented for volume of possibilities. Going through CapFriendly team by team seemed to turn up a situation every other team and then a couple more players here and there until the potential list of options was pretty big. I think that bodes well for Ron Francis and the Hurricanes. He has shown a knack for pulling good deals out of thin air by leveraging unique situations. He just needs to pull off one more of those deals but on a bigger scale this time.
Go Canes!
Matt. Thanks for your dedication (affliction). To plagiarize, CapFriendly is a giant vampire squid. It can suck up time in ungodly amounts.
You hit the bulls eye by stating that RF’s moves prior to expansion will largely determine where he and the team are headed. As I said yesterday, the next few weeks will be nearly manic for the organization and its fans.
Count me in the corner as another person that thinks TT is a good trade piece in a trade.
My logic is this: he is talented with some upside, and I think if he’s put on a line with two big players that drive possession and give him space he can be very successful.
I’m not sure he has that here, or even if we do get there, if he’s the best option.
For his strengths (puckhandling, accurate shot, excellent vision) he is very easily pushed to the edges of the rink and does not seem to drive dmen back to create space for himself or others. He tends to work the perimeter; and he’s most successful finding a quiet space when dmen are focusing on someone else. He could have some 30 point seasons, he might have a couple 50 point seasons.
To me, he’s a complimentary 3rd line winger with offensive upside. He’s a great player to have for this, because he can slot higher when needed, but he’s not a critical part of the team.
In fact, he’s the sort of player that may be fighting for a role in another year or two with all of the young forwards coming up through the system.
If TT is a part of a deal to land a higher end forward I’m all for it. It would certainly be a loss, but it’s a loss the Canes can afford.
Agree. I think you summarized my long-winded rambling very well when about Teravainen you said, “He’s a great player to have for this (3rd line), because he can slot higher when needed, but he’s not a critical part of the team.”
I think we’re on the same page in that it’s not at all that Teravainen and Stempniak are not good players or are not useful. Both were capable even if not spectacular in top 9 roles last season.
But is it possible that one of them, combined with a package of futures, is enough to shop from the top shelf of available forwards without having to give up a young, roster NHL defenseman to do so? Maybe for the right team/right deal.
Teravainen back to Chicago for Marian Hossa and Trevor van Riemsdyk.
Hanifin and a 2nd rounder for Nathan MacKinnon.
Boom. Let’s go win another Cup!
Continuing the conversation about obtaining a better forward…I got curious about what players in the league had 25+ goals, and how many we had! I was shocked (just a little) to see Skinner was THE ONLY ONE on our team (though Aho was close at 24).
I then proceeded to check out the other guys. Skinner was 6th on the list (37). Pacioretty – 35 Atkinson – 35 A. Lee – 34 Oshie – 33 Kadri – 32 Eaves – 32 Panarin – 31 Arvidsson – 31
Kreider – 28 Marleau – 27 Wheeler – 26 Seguin – 26 Hossa – 25
Niederriter – 25, and this is not the whole list! One other name of note- Justin Williams – 24 goals.
Anyway this factoid PLUS THE NHL SCORING LIST – (Canes have one guy – Skins in Top 100) # 104 – Aho… Others in the Top 200 are
Rask, Staal, Lindholm…tied for 129 (w/45pts) at 150 is Teravainen – w/42 163 Stempniak – w/40 and 187 Faulk w/37
This scoring (or lack thereof) shows me WHY THE CANES NEED HELP ON THE FORWARD LINES!
Your presentation of facts is important and sure highlight our need for some additional scoring. Without improvement we throw all the pressure on our goalies and defense. While our goaltending has improved and our defense is above average, neither has been proven to be at an elite level to carry the team to the next level. Teams like Nashville, Pittsburgh (before all injuries to defense), Washington, Minnesota, Montreal, etc. all have the combination of elite defense and goaltending. This allows them to survive lulls in scoring and IMO is the major difference in winning more games. In our present state if we have more lulls in scoring than the elite teams and our defense and goaltending have not been of an elite level to “steal” many of the games where these lulls occur.
I left out Skinner had 37g 26a and 63pts, and Aho had 24 25 49…
..and Faulk was 3rd in Canes GOALS w/ 17…also 20a 37pts.
IMO we should not trade any of our top 4 D. I totally agree that picking up a good D addition prior to the expansion draft is an ideal time to do that. The fact is we still need to add a D anyhow (IMO), so if we do add a D I do not believe it means we go trade one of the original 4 D, or we have another hole to fill again. I do believe we should take advantage of the expansion draft and add a quality D prior to the expansion draft. Great timing and it is the opportunity window.
I am against trading any of the D but TT or Stempniak as a way to help other teams with cap issues makes a lot of sense. We may be able to get a real good upgrade that way. I think Colorado wants too much for their players and they are not under cap stress. We should be focused on the teams in cap hell. Drouin, TB, is a good place to look. Galchenyuk could make sense also. MacKinnon would be a grate target, I would love to have him but I believe Colorado will want too much.
You have stated my position to a tee. Re: MacKinnon in particular has been designated by Sakic (GM for AV’s) as one of two untouchables on the AV’s roster. If that is really the case, then the cost COULD be prohibitive. If that is truly the case, then we have to move on to other targets. Prohibitive to me is one of our top four defensemen. Ironcaniac feels differently and would give up Hanifin for MacKinnon. If RF made that move, I would support it (change my opinion) because I would feel RF knows more about this than I do; i.e. if it’s good enough for Ronnie, it’s okay with me.
When you really look at it, MY precluding trading a top four defenseman really narrows down the number of roster players who we could TRADE that would get us some additional scoring. TT and Stempniak are in that group, but I am not sure they together even would be enough to get a top line scoring forward of any type. Either or both of them along with prospects (Fleury, McKeown, Wallmark, etc.) and/or draft picks. The only other way is obtaining a free agent. I hope one of these alternative method will get us the scorer we need. If both fail to do this and RF has to give up Hanifin to get the job done, then I have no alternative to either toss in with Ironcaniac’s view or just hope one of our youngsters comes to camp and blows the wheels off (another Aho arrives). I currently would decide to go with hoping one or more of the youngsters comes through. Many other teams have had young players, when given the chance, come through in big ways (Sheary, Guentzel, Ardvidsson, etc.). But, in deference to Ironcaniac who is just as likely to be right as I am, if RF ships Hanifin out then to me that certifies Ironcaniac’s opinion that it is the best move and I’m all in.
Agreed RR. My comments are just opinion. RF has a ton more insight then I ever would. If RF did decide to trade one of the 4 D, there is not a doubt in my mind that it will have been well thought out with great detail, and I would be all in with his decision.
To me trading one of our 4 D is like whack-a-mole. You maybe help the scoring but at the same time you made the defense less and now your competitors can score more against you. Fix one problem, create another. RF put a lot of work into building this defense. It would be hard for me to see him trading it away. The next few weeks will be very interesting.
Amen, Cobra. “Whack-a-mole?” Where did that come from?
LOL. Whack-a-mole is something you would find in a game arcade. You have a mallet and you smack things down as they pop up. You knock one down and another one pops up in a different place. It is a reaction time game. The point was you fix one problem and another one pops up. You really do not get anywhere. Just seemed like a good analogy (but maybe not).
As IceCobra mentions, any trade involving one of the D will be a decision by RF and others that they are comfortable being in the best immediate and long-term interest of the organization. I think one of the keys they will consider is how well the player leaving the organization can be replaced.
For example, Hanifin seems to be highly valued because he can “start” the offense with his skating and passing abilities. He also has potential to quarterback the power play. Now if the decision-makers think Jake Bean provides a similar skill set with nearly as much ceiling/potential as Hanifin, it makes sense to consider the right trade. The same is true if the brain trust believes that Fleury can replace 95% of what Slavin is currently doing. My uninformed take is that this year is too early to make that call on Bean, and Slavin has displayed skills that many first pairing d-men already in the NHL lack. But what do I know.
My point is that trading a D-man surely depends as much on the quality of next in line as much as the quality of the scoring forward Carolina receives in return.
Agreed.