I have a half-written article on Martin Necas’ and his potential to make the 2017-18 Carolina Hurricanes opening day lineup, but after a hectic start to the work week, I am out of gas and do not have the energy to finish that tonight.
Today’s Daily Cup of Joe will instead collect up a few player notes from training camp that have not yet made it into other articles.
Noah Hanifin
I like where his game is right now. This might sound strange, but my positive on Hanifin is not so much about how well he has played in preseason action but rather HOW he has played. He looks to be significantly more comfortable and patient with the puck on his stick. From the very beginning I have been adamant in saying that the ceiling version of Noah Hanifin would include a Joni Pitkanen element in terms of using his skating ability to carry the puck, freelance a bit and use it to generate offense. The first days of Hanifin’s NHL experience almost 100 percent abandoned carrying the puck in favor of staying out of trouble and quickly making safe, simple plays to get the puck off his stick. So even if it comes with some growing pains, I take Hanifin playing with the puck a bit more to be a significant step in the right direction for his development.
Lucas Wallmark for Marcus Kruger
Lucas Wallmark has had a pretty solid training camp thus far and should have boosted his standing in an increasingly croweded Hurricanes depth chart. With Marcus Kruger added and Derek Ryan playing lights out, there is no room for a center right now, but I really like the way Wallmark has positioned himself to be the first call up if the Hurricanes encounter an injury at the center position. Especially if Kruger were injured, Wallmark would be a steady fill in.
Martin Necas compared to Julien Gauthier without the puck
When watching Martin Necas play without the puck, two things jump out at me. First is how much ice he covers and how easily he does it. Second s noting how consistently and aggressively he moves to engage the puck on the forecheck and in the neutral zone. The result is that he is a nuisance to play against somewhat similar to Nathan Gerbe and is always around the puck. Julien Gauthier’s game without the puck is generally focused on positioning. Staying in position is obviously not a bad thing, but overdoing it can lead to passive play that does not engage the puck enough. Back to a 2-3 instead of an umbrella with one full-time point man: There are elements to each player’s game that project well but as a core foundation, I prefer a puck hound like Necas as a starting point. Gauthier can get to where he needs to as well, but I think the adjustment will be more challenging and therefore could take longer.
Power play tinkering
With a penalty heavy preseason due to the emphasis on slashing and face-off circle violations, power play coach Rod Brind’Amour has had ample opportunities to work on the Hurricanes power play. Below are a couple observations.
A large chunk of it was during the 5-on-3 power plays on Monday, so it is not clear if the tinkering with positioning is specific to 5-on-3 or if it will also apply for 5-on-4 opportunities. In a nutshell, the setup had two traditional point men and then the three forwards all lined up across. On a 5-on-3, I do not like the idea of giving the player in the center of the ice to have the decision-making flexibility to stay at the front of the net or depart to look for a pass. I want a player whose sole responsibility is to park in front of goalie for as much time as possible and to play 4-on-3 outside of that.
Another thing that has been noticeable with at least the one unit is playing Staal and Lindholm in sort of a high/low setup that sees Lindholm up near the top of the face-off circles and Staal down by the net. I do not like it. The single place where Lindholm looked most in his element offensively was playing at side of the net on the power play. Why take that away?
Go Canes!
Matt, really agree with your assessments here. Hanifin has looked everything we expected when he was drafted. I think part of that is just maturity, too.
I think Kruger was a way to really allow Staal more an offensive role. I have a feeling that while we thought Wallmark was good, there was a concern if he could handle the big guys. No doubt in Kruger that answer is yes. I would almost like to keep him up and have a different forward go, but I think he’ll be in Charlotte and be that first injury call up.
It’s great that we seem to finally have the talent to really have camp competition. It makes for even greater anticipation of the season for me.
I think Wallmark showed last season he is NHL-ready – he is just not Kruger/NHL-ready. 😀 He will come up with a 3C or 4C injury, I would expect – but most likely 4C. We have centers-in-waiting with Lindholm and Aho such that I expect any injury to a 1-3C would be handled by shifting one of them to center and making adjustments on the wings.
I like Hanifin so far this preseason – he is doing it the right way. He may have been too careful trying not to make a mistake early on. And that is my segue to Gauthier. You may be onto something – he generally is trying to play a more positional game when his strength is movement. I wonder if he too is trying to be careful trying to avoid mistakes and that is leading to his observed passivity.
As for the power-play, as disappointing as it was last season and with effectively the same personnel this season changes have to be made in implementation. I have wondered about the effectiveness of Brind’Amour as an X’s-and-O’s coach, as sacrilegious as that may sound. 🙂
1. Noah Hanifin: Has been good in preseason. I’m pleased with his progress and like his being more aggressive with the puck on offense. Needs to continue to work on getting his shot off and reduce misfires.
2. Wallmark for Kruger: Not sure why Wallmark has to beat out Kruger or go to Charlotte. Has he beat out McGinn, DiGuiseppe, Nordstrom, and/or Jooris? To me, if the answer to this is “yes”, then he should stay and they should go. IMO he has beaten out McGinn and DiGuisepe and not Nordstrom and Jooris so he is on the cut line. My only point is, is he wins the job in the coach’s and RF’s opinion, then he should get the job. So far I have not seen anything in McGinn and DiGuiseppe that would have them winning a roster spot over Wallmark. One might say Wallmark is a center and the center position is already full. I say there is no reason Wallmark can’t play a wing at or above the level provided by McGinn and DiGuiseppe.
3. Martin Necas: Building on my comments in 2. above, if Necas has won the job in the preseason (beat out other forwards), then he should stay. IMO I agree with what many others have said in their posts and believe Necas needs a year at CHARLOTTE. I don’t know that a year playing less games, on a different sized ice, against lesser experienced opponents, in a system not related to the Canes will help him develop better than being in CHARLOTTE. Who gets the right to determine whether he goes to Charlotte or goes to Europe? I would think it would be the Canes management. Some might say we have so many forwards available for Charlotte that we should send Necas to Europe to open up a Charlotte spot for another player since we have so many prospects. My response to this is you already think Necas has beaten out all the other competition that is scheduled to go to Charlotte (he is a better prospect right now), then he is the player that is closest to being NHL ready and should be playing where his development and availability is best served.
Regarding Necas versus Gauthier. If you need goal scoring Gauthier is further along than Necas. In the skating, puck handling, and defensive proficiency right now Necas appears to be far superior. My questions are: 1) If Necas does not improve in his scoring acumen, what is his future (We know what it is if he does improve)? 2) If Gauthier does not improve his all around game but continues as an above average scorer in the minors, what is his future? My answer to both is neither will be an impact player (1st or 2nd line forward) at the NHL level. so, how do we get these two to improve in the areas they need to improve upon the quickest. CHARLOTTE is the answer playing under a coach who is teaching him how to play hockey the CANES way and under the day-to-day scrutiny of Canes management.
4. Power play. Personally, I like the one man down low near the net to provide a goalie screen or to receive a pass for a quick close in shot on the goalie as he is moving. It requires the defense to sink in towards the goalie which can result in more defense in front of the goalie possibly making it harder for outside shots to get through, but when you have a Faulk or Slavin at the points with their shots, it forces the defense to come out to protect against their shots opening up the center of the ice in front of the net so quick accurate passing can get the close in scoring opportunity. No man down low in the center, you are left with trying to get an open shot from the periphery. Understand, no one on the Canes has inquired about my services on power play tactics, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. It’s more of a “guess” than an opinion.
I like apexmakrmcanes comments above and think his opinion on Wallmark ending up in Charlotte will probably prevail despite all my discussion.
Interesting comments, Red Ryder. I absolutely agree that Wallmark is playing better than McGinn and PDG. But Wallmark is a pure center and hasn’t played any time this preseason or TC on the wing. There is a school of thought that when you have a developing center who is projected to play center moving him to the wing will down that development (I have heard the same argument applied to Necas). And if you want firepower on the wing, Kuokkanen has been much more effective in generating scoring in the preseason than Wallmark (or McGinn or PDG as well).
Early in the summer when it was presumed that Necas would enter either in Europe or juniors RF made it clear that he doesn’t interfere with the decision on the part of the player. I think Necas has definitely shown he can play on professional North American ice and I am wondering if the AHL is now considered a possibility for him by both management and the player himself. Certainly starting the season in Charlotte would offer a faster move to the NHL. But I would expect that Canes management would let Necas make his own decision in the matter. I do recall there is an agreement between the NHL and European leagues that provides the European teams a say in where the player goes if he doesn’t end up on a NHL roster. I remember it being discussed regarding Kuokkanen as to whether he would have to return to Finland if he didn’t make the Canes roster. That doesn’t appear to be an issue anymore for Kuokkanen, but I don’t know the details and if/how it might apply to others.
“I do recall there is an agreement between the NHL and European leagues that provides the European teams a say in where the player goes if he doesn’t end up on a NHL roster. I remember it being discussed regarding Kuokkanen as to whether he would have to return to Finland if he didn’t make the Canes roster. That doesn’t appear to be an issue anymore for Kuokkanen, but I don’t know the details and if/how it might apply to others.”
I believe this is only for players drafted in the 2nd round and later. The European club has more/total control with where they will play if the player is not on the NHL team. With Necas, this agreement would not be an issue as he was a 1st round selection, so we would have more options. However, I’ve heard Francis say on multiple occasions that they let the player make that decision (assuming it is not the NHL).
Thank you for that info. That is why it was a factor for Koukkanen and not Necas.
Agree with RR about Wallmark. He should be given shot if he is best player in eyes of management. If center is best place for him, then Ryan can move to RW.
I don’t agree on the advantages of Charlotte for Necas. Backstrom, Forsberg, and Wennberg all spent first season after draft in Europe. There are actually some good former NHLers over there. In fact Martin Erat is on Necas’s team. So Europe is at least equally strong for development.