This week has been a busy one in terms of building out the Carolina Hurricanes 2018-19 blue line.
On Tuesday, the team announced that it had signed free agent defenseman Calvin de Haan to a four-year contract for $4.55 million per year. I initially evaluated that signing HERE, and then followed up with a second round of thoughts the next day HERE.
Then book-ending the Fourth of July with defenseman deals, the Hurricanes announced that the team had re-signed restricted free agent Trevor van Riemsdyk to a two-year deal worth $2.3 million per year. My analysis on that signing is HERE.
Finally, prior to this week, the Hurricanes added Dougie Hamilton (along with Micheal Ferland) in a draft weekend blockbuster for Elias Lindholm and Noah Hanifin. I offered initial thoughts on that deal HERE, and followed up with another round of analysis in this article on the multiple side effects from that deal.
Today’s Daily Cup of Joe looks at the 2018-19 blue line looks at the 2018-19 blue line from multiple angles.
Justin Faulk
As part of my analysis of the Dougie Hamilton addition and before Calvin de Haan even entered the mix, I said that I thought Justin Faulk was highly likely to be dealt to clear the logjam on the right side of the defense and possibly add a forward who might replace Jeff Skinner as the dominoes fall one by one. Once de Haan was signed, the probability of a Faulk trade increased. While there are always complexities to trading players with nearly $5 million of cap hit and with significant value, I will be surprised if the Hurricanes do not find a way.
Between now and when that happens, Don Waddell will do some posturing in talking about how important depth on the blue line is and his willingness to start the season with Faulk in two if a fair return does not materialize. And with Faulk having two years remaining on his contract, the possibility does exist to ride into the 2018-19 season if a fair trade does not materialize. But make no mistake – plan A is to unload Faulk ideally for proven scoring-capable forward. And when a few teams looking to add a higher-end right shot defenseman miss out on the Erik Karlsson sweepstakes, that could put Faulk front and center as the next defenseman to be dealt.
I still think Faulk for Kadri as a starting point makes sense.
And though Elliotte Friedman suggested that the Blackhawks would not give up Brandon Saad to land Faulk, just maybe it takes a bit more. The Hurricanes could take the Marian Hossa contract that the Blackhawks are looking to unload, so maybe that plus adding another future or two gets it done? As a decent all-around wing, Saad could fit on any line.
Regardless, I think best offer above some minimum probably soon after the Karlsson sweepstakes ends nets Faulk.
The pairs
One thing that surprises me in watching people piece together the lineup with the additions is the volume of people whose first jump is to split up Jaccob Slavin and Brett Pesce. That duo has obvious chemistry that goes beyond just basic familiarity from logging a good amount of ice time together. Both players are aggressive at the defensive blue line which comes with some risks, but the two read and react well off of each other such that even errors are mostly covered up. The pairings are likely to shift over the course of a long 82-game season with injuries or stretches where things become stagnant, but the obvious starting point in my opinion is to see how Dougie Hamilton and Calvin de Haan mesh together. At least in terms of basic skill set the two are a good match. Dougie Hamilton is a Joni Pitkanen-ish freelancer of sorts who loves to advance with the puck on his stick. And Calvin de Haan plays a bit more of a simple, efficient game with more of a stay-home style. At least theoretically the two newcomers are a great fit and as such should be paired in a first attempt to build out the 2018-19 top 4.
Filling out the penalty kill
The penalty kill which was a strength in 2016-17 sagged in 2017-18. There were many elements to this, but a big one was the ‘meh’ at best play on the back end defending passing lanes through the slot and the front of the net. Jaccob Slavin was on the ice for a whopping 41 goals against on the penalty kill which was the highest total in the entire NHL and 95.3 percent (41 out of 43) of the team’s total power play goals allowed. Slavin’s volume of ice time was a factor, but the numbers are still disproportional and worth considering as the team rebuilds its penalty kill. Personally, I think Slavin’s single greatest strength is defending man on man in 5-on-5 situations, so if there are better options for penalty kill perhaps his ice time is better spent there. Calvin de Haan adds another capable penalty killer.
Building the power play
Dougie Hamilton is more or less guaranteed to take one power play point position. If Faulk is traded as expected, the team will be down two power play point men in Faulk and Hanifin. I would expect the Hurricanes go with a four forwards/one defenseman mix as for most of 2017-18 which leaves the team looking for one more defenseman. I do not see Haydn Fleury, Brett Pesce or Calvin de Haan as natural fits. More likely is that either Trevor van Riemsdyk or Jaccob Slavin steps into that role on the second power play unit. Van Riemsdyk saw very little for power play ice time in 2017-18 but did play some in that role for the Blackhawks. This will be something to sort out in training camp, but my early guess is that van Riemsdyk will take this on as an additional role in his second year with the team.
The #7 slot
If/when Faulk is traded, I would not be surprised to see the Hurricanes add a veteran #7 defenseman on an inexpensive contract. The team does have options in fringe AHL veteran/older prospect Trevor Carrick, Roland McKeown and Jake Bean (whose readiness I am not as optimistic about as some others) who could fill the #7 slot. If Carrick is capable, he would be fine in this role as a player who has minimal gains to be made rounding out his game with more AHL ice time. But if not Carrick, it would not really make sense to slot McKeown, Bean or any other young prospect at #7. These young players are much better off logging 20 plus minutes per night in a leading role in the AHL than sitting in an NHL press box. As such, I think there is a decent chance that the Hurricanes add one more defenseman. Requirements would be a low price (sub $1 million) and a one-year deal. Even better would be a player on a two-way deal, but oftentimes the quality is not there for players in that contract category. In taking a quick look at what’s available, a few possibilities that jump out are:
Alexei Emelin: He is a rugged and physical veteran who should still be able to step in on the penalty kill.
Dan Hamhuis: The 35-year old is not too far removed from being a top 4. If his price falls enough, he would represent a good veteran down shifting to a lesser role.
Luca Sbisa: He has been much-maligned largely for being overslotted and overpaid for it, but as a deep depth defenseman he brings a physical element and is also capable of playing on either side which is a valuable benefit for a #7 defenseman.
The key decision is whether the team thinks Trevor Carrick can fill this role. If not, I think an addition makes sense to spare developing young players time in the press box with minimal ice time. From there, price will be key. This is the kind of role where you trust your scouts to help identify a player who is adequate but not with a price premium because of it.
What say you Canes fans?
1) Would you consider splitting Slavin/Pesce despite their track record and chemistry in the first attempt to set the defense pairings? If so, why?
2) Would you consider adding a veteran #7 to keep the kids on the ice in the AHL and out of the NHL press box? Or do you maybe think Carrick is right for this role?
3) What are your thoughts for filling the special teams slots for defensemen?
Go Canes!
1. I mean it’s always good to have versatility and chemistry with multiple players, so yes I would consider splitting up Slavin/Pesce, but let’s be honest, any time I see a chance to keep them together, with their ability to play together, I’m taking it. I agree, stick Hamilton and de Haan together first, then go from there.
2. Absolutely. I think Carrick IS right for that role but does he want to sit in a press box all year? Doubtful. Get a mid-30s vet on the cheap and let Carrick play at the A, in my opinion. A #7 d-spot is not too hard to fill. And Emelin better be taking a pay cut if I’m sticking him as my #7, but i like Hamhuis. Clayton Stoner maybe?
3. Trial and error.
I think Carrick would be 100% thrilled to sit in an NHL press box all year. There he is a tweaked muscle, flu bug for a starter or just mini-shake up away from NHL ice time.
Plus who earning a modest $80,000 salary wouldn’t do anything for a $620,000 raise.
More from the team and player development side, Carrick does not have much if anything left to learn/prove at the AHL level.
The biggest issue for me is whether he is capable as an NHLer. My read is that he is a good AHL defenseman but not really an NHLer. That said, I root for players like him to get his chance to prove he is capable, so part of me hopes he breaks camp in the #7 role.
Okay, you got me on the salary. I would argue that he’s that far away from NHL ice time in the AHL, just an extra two hour drive. I also hope he gets his chance. Were this four years ago, he’d be in our third pair by now.
Playing as #7 may, indeed, be his best chance to get NHL time – so I am rethinking my comment below. In addition to the order of magnitude salary increase he is also practicing day in and day out with NHLers. And once he has the NHL experience he will be in a much better position to stay in the NHL going forward.
See, this is just good opposing logic right here.
I see zero reason why you would split up Pesce and Slavin. This “#1 pairing” stuff is just semantics. Brent Burns does not check the other team’s top line. Is he not a top defenseman? He gets paid like one? Let Pesce and Slavin do what they do best…play defense. This allows the most accomplished offensive defenseman on the team to have a little less to worry about defensively.
Carrick is 24 years old. It’s now or never. If he or McKeown aren’t ready to be the #7 d-man then forget about them. They aren’t NHL material. The Canes shouldn’t have to spend a bunch of money on a 7th defenseman. One of these two should be up for the job.
1) At some point Slavin and Pesce need to be the veterans who help others players get better for the Canes. Last season there were good together, but not the great pairing of 16-17, so I don’t think it would be devastating to try Slavin/Hamilton and de Haan/Pesce.
2) I think Carrick would be fine. Though if Carolina could sigh Hamhuis for $1.2M or less, then that would be ideal. I think it is folly to expect de Haan to play the entire season.
3) Pesce took a few shifts on the power play last season. He looked fine. Slavin also looked ok. I am not too concerned with the defenseman on the second unit. The boost to the power play this year comes from Hamilton on the first with Svechnikov. The big addition for the second unit is Zykov (I would like both he and McGinn on that unit) creating havoc in the crease.
The penalty kill is my biggest concern. It is possible that de Haan and Pesce could be a better first unit. Then Slavin, TVR, and Fleury could backfill. At some point a forward needs to be added who can kill penalties and take draws–losing Lindholm and Ryan is a big hit in the face-off circle.
The fact you pointed out about Slavin is telling. He has been a bright point during some down times. Last year he was good but not as good as in the past. I mentioned one other time that I think he has become too enamored with dropping to one knee to block shots. The problem that occurred on several occasions last season is that if the puck gets through it screens the goalie or even when he makes a block if the puck isn’t sent to a neutral place, then Slavin is in recovery mode and the other team has a quick scoring chance. Given his skating and ability to use his stick defensively, Slavin should return to being a near elite defender this season given the two new additions to the blueline.
I totally get what you are saying about Slavin dropping to a knee blocking shots and screening the keeper. Good point cause I have noticed it too.
I don’t think he got great goaltending behind him consistently either. So I would want to see the impact with a goalie that has league average numbers.
When it comes to Faulk, pairings, and the PK I am pretty much in total agreement with you, Matt.
I think pairings may change circumstantially – and I think it is great to have such a good top-4 to allow that.
When it comes to the power play, don’t sell Fleury short. He played the point for the first PP unit in Charlotte – he has a booming shot and he is an accurate passer. He deserves a look and I expect he will impress in that role. Otherwise, I think that Slavin actually looked pretty good last season the times he was given duties at the point.
As much as I would like to see Carrick at the NHL level, I would like to see him get a legitimate shot at this level and not simply fill in as the 7th. I expect he does too. So I would opt for a veteran who wants to prolong his career and doesn’t terribly mind a sky view of the ice, knowing he has a role to play every day with the younger players and be able to step in when necessary.
Matt’s comment above on Carrick has caused me to change my thoughts on Carrick.
“Playing as #7 may, indeed, be his best chance to get NHL time – so I am rethinking my comment below. In addition to the order of magnitude salary increase he is also practicing day in and day out with NHLers. And once he has the NHL experience he will be in a much better position to stay in the NHL going forward.”
Everyone is assuming the organization thinks as much of Carrick as those in this fourm do. They’ve shown little interest in the guy recently. McKeown seems to be the more favored player. We’ll see I suppose.
Agreed, I think Carrick should have a shot at the #7 slot.
Don’t spend an extra half a million dollars on a minimal need that can be filled from within by rewarding a player who has worked hard.
Better spend that money on additional salary for a difference maker at forward or upgrade in goal.
I agree with breezy and raleightj. On the other points, those who have commented have covered them as well as I could. All have valid arguments.
I learned about the “pre-mortem” at edge.org. Basically you determine why a decision went wrong before the fact.
Last year Matt did some of that with Darling–he wasn’t a proven starter and played in front of a totally different style of defensive scheme in Chicago. Not that anyone, even the very best naysayer, could have predicted the failure level.
So my pre-mortem for the defensive is that de Haan doesn’t play more than 60 games. I read somewhere that he has had 3 surgeries on the same shoulder. That raises the importance of the 7th defenseman. Many seem to think Carrick can be a decent sub, but how about for 20 games or so? Obviously, Fleury would have to move up to 2nd pairing. In that light, I am not so sure what the best option is.
Though I agree with tj and Matt that Carrick should be rewarded for putting in the work to reach his maximum AHL potential. I know injuries happen to every team–it is just that de Haan has a more extensive history than most players.
1. I think keep them together should be the first plan and then see what shakes out with a little mix up. Brett is quietly a really good defender. Slavin is a beast. With that said… You never know what the newcomers could add to each. Both Calvin and Doggie numbers indicate that they elevate their partners play consistantly. So imagine a world where you split them up and both Slav and Pesc take steps forward in their game… I’m not opposed to seeing the potential.
2. Currently NO. We do not need to add someone. If we move Faulk… Then maybe but still Id leant towards no.. I think we can call up guys that can play a 3rd pairing role with sheltered minutes. I think you continue to look at other rosters and someone may get pushed down from another team, placed on waivers ect. Always be looking.
3. I feel Dougie will eat a ton of PP Mins. It will all shake out. We have guys that have the skills needed. Someone will step up this year and grab the 2nd PP QB role. I feel its Slavin.
1. I’ve heard the argument that the plan is to move Pesce to the left side to make room for Faulk on the right. That’s not happening. Slavin-Pesce is the whole that’s greater than the sum of its parts, and they will start the season together. I would only split them up if the D is not working well and needs a shake up. Even if that happens, they will probably end up back together eventually.
2.from what little bit I’ve seen of Carrick and McKeown, I think they are both ready for a shot at the NHL level. Either one would be fine as the #7. Carrick, I think, is a better choice for a couple of reasons, but mainly because Fleury is the biggest question mark in the 3rd pair and Carrick, as a left shot, is best to step into that position. I don’t think there’s a need to pick up a veteran for that #7 D. I think the top 4 D can provide enough veteran leadership. However, I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if they did that.
If side-by-side play in the AHL from two seasons ago makes for a worthy measuring stick, Fleury is heads-and-shoulders above Carrick.
I predict Fleury is going to surprise a lot of people this season. In a good way.
Not directly related, but here is some amusing bit of info from Hockeybuzz trade rumors:
”
On Skinner…
What we Know> For some bizarro reason the Hurricanes want to trade away the one thing they need…goal scoring.
What we think we know> Montreal, Boston, Dallas, Vegas, Minnesota, the Islanders…all have interest…but this is being held up by Karlsson and to a lesser extent Pacioretty.
What we don’t know> How Carolina plans to survive any of this with Mrazek and Darling and very little scoring punch.
On Faulk…
What we Know> Faulk is the odd man out now that they have signed de Haan…
What we think we know> The Canes love Kapanen and the Leafs like Faulk….the Leafs also liked de Haan…The Islanders and Devils also like Faulk…
What we don’t know> Why the Hurricanes signed de Haan with Faulk already there…
”
amused by the comment about Skinner and we’re not the only ones worried about goaltending, though I hope he team can prove the naysayers wrong. The Faulk situation is more obvious, he’s an RHD, we needed an LHD, Eklund is a bit of a slacker when it comes to doing his homework, at least as far as the Canes are concerned.
I hate to sound like a broken record on this: if there is not mutual interest in Skinner extending, then our choices are limited. I would not characterize it as “wanting to trade away the one thing they need.” I’d say, instead, we’re not preventing the Tavares-scenario where we let an asset walk without any return.
dmiller, where is your usual patience and calmness. You say “…we’re not preventing…” No one knows what the Canes may or may not be doing to “prevent” this potential disaster nor do we know what the demand is for Skinner, what deals that have been offered, whether Skinner has been offered an extension, etc. We know nothing. You are right to be concerned with the situation. But if the “we’re not preventing” phrase is intended to mean the Canes haven’t considered the issue and are doing whatever they think is appropriate given all the real facts and circumstances, then the statement is not factual. Patience and a steady persistence moving forward addressing the needs of the team seems to be how management has been performing THIS offseason. These IMO have been your attributes also. A steady rock of good common sense and logical analysis and good ideas. Be considerate of an aging old man who is prone to panic who comes to this site every day to get am inoculation of your trademark rational thoughts.
There is a “not” in there by mistake … I should have probably said, “we’re trying to prevent” … poor editing and proof-reading on my part. Sorry for the confusion 🙂
I like how you put amusing. Good work.
On a side note… Has Ek ever gotten one right? I mean if you throw enough randoms… then you have to get an occasional win.
Not sure how much they make from that website, but it looks alot like they cull information from social media and places like this fourm in hockey markets and regurgitate it like it is some kind of inside information. About as reliable as our predictions.
(Matt did get one right though…)
I think we all agree that it all comes down to what Skinner wants and to the price.
If the price is unlikely to help the team this year or next year )a second round pick, an average prospect or lower), it is better to keep Skinner on at least until the playoffs. There is some potential he will come around ad jel with the new chemistry, a second round pick in itself is probably a 15 to 20% shot at becoming an NHL player, granted the scouting staff has exceeded second round expectations.
If the price is higher )first round pick plus a player that fills a team need, e.g. a center, scoring or goaltending) we’d take it.
I think Eklund is primarily referring to the need (scoring) not the player (Skinner). If we trade away a potential 30 goal scorer e leave a hole in the team lineup, no matter how we can discount his contribution with other stats such as +/-.
Actually, breezy, it also gets down to what Canes O/M want. I had heard that Skinner was one of the players TD wanted moved for culture. True or not, I don’t know. But it seems to me that the way the team has shopped Skinner he is not in the long-term plans of O/M. That has the same effect as Skinner wanting to be moved or not wanting to be extended. As dmilleravid said, it has to be mutual to keep Skinner – if both are not in then he will most likely be moved.
The observation that you and dmilleravid make that it has to be mutual that both Skinner and management have the same goal (Skinner wants to stay and management wants him to stay) is the only way that Skinner stays. A no-trade clause always creates this type situation. As dmiller and others have stated, it would behoove management to give this issue a top priority for solution (which I have no reason to believe they are not doing). Since Skinner is an excellent scoring forward, it seems to me management has the first responsibility to determine if the team really wants to keep Skinner, i.e.; get off the fence and make a commitment to keep him. If they decide they want to keep him, then get down to serious private negotiations. In the negotiations hey should be able to determine whether Skinner really has any interest in staying and if so is the price he is asking within reason. If the answer to either of these is “No”, then let’s get on with moving him. The sooner the better with the proviso we get something of more value to help THIS YEAR’s team make the playoffs than keeping Skinner would. Just my opinion. Remember no one anointed me as “expert”. Heck, my wife doesn’t even trust me to make a good cup of coffee in the morning.
Regarding “…it seems to me management has the first responsibility to determine if the team really wants to keep Skinner, i.e.; get off the fence and make a commitment to keep him.” – it seems to me this has already happened and there appears to be no talk of a contract extension and only trade talk. That is a solid indicator that the O/M have decide to move past him.
If the “seems” has already happened fine. Your conclusions are valid, at least to me. But saying it seems to have already happened doesn’t indicate that we (fans..and me in particular) KNOW what has happened. I, for one, don’t KNOW what dealings management has had with Skinner, what were the FINAL results of these dealings, and whether management has finally decided to move on from Skinner. It’s that not really KNOWING that makes it difficult to for me to say let’s move on from him now or let’s wait awhile. I don’t KNOW that there is no talk of an extension and that MANAGEMENT is ONLY involved in trade talk. I know that is true that most FANS feel that is the case. You were right to include the terms “seems” and “appears” in stating your opinions and I can do nothing but agree with you if your “seems” and “appears” have in fact resulted in management’s decision to move on. I just don’t know enough to conclude that moving on is the only alternative as things stand right now but will concede that as you have stated it COULD be the case.
I would like to let Carrick have his shot at NHL ice time … If it turns out that he can’t handle it and McKeown can’t either, then a #7 depth guy shouldn’t be hard to pick up somewhere along the line.
Right on. Couldn’t agree more.
If I remember correctly there are always a few dmen put on waivers as teams get closer to the start of the season. I would like to see Carrick earn that 7th spot but there will be other options available.
At this point, I would like to see Roland McKeon in a trade. I think he has the potential to be a good NHL defenseman. He has done his time in Charlotte. Carolina has the NHL players and depth with recent signings (Swede) and the possibility of Fox to let him go. It’s not that I think he is not good enough. On the contrary, he is too good to spend another year in Charlotte.
On a side note, it seems the GM committee is working. A month ago people were salivating on other sites about how they could rip off the canes. This was not posters but actual authors of articles. So far the team has gotten stronger with smart trades and signings. Much like Novocaine- give it time, it will work. If the forward group can get solidified like the d, next season will be a lot of fun.
There’s another scenario.
Skinner wants to go somewhere else when his contract expires but the team is not getting good enough offers for him right now.
Should the team dump him forever they can get, e.g. a bag of pucks signed by Tom Wilson and a used hockey stick donated by Ovechkin, , or should the owners say “yo, Skinny dude, you play your butt of for this team for 60 games, look good, then we promise to trade you to the team most likely to win the cup at the deadline, unless it’s the canes”.
If Skinner chooses to stay and take revenge on the team by playing his worst hockey ever his value will plummit, both in terms of trade value and potential UFA dollars.
It’s in his best interest to play his butt of this year, no matter what. The canes should take note and take advantage unless the return justifies trading him.
I’m not personally attached to having Skinner on the team, but I really want the team to be serious and aim for the playoffs, not trade away anything that can be traded for more picks.
We’ve done that for 9 years, it has to stop now and the team get its excrements together.
Trading away the top goalscorer for picks is not sending that message to the fans, but trading him for another player that fills a scoring or goaltending need would.
This.
Brind’Amour’s comments about Skinner fit this perfectly. If he returns more will be expected of him. Waddell has said he hasn’t gotten any offers he likes. If the team actually wants Skinner long term or if Skinner wants to stay here they have a really funny way of showing it. A lot of the puff pieces highlighting only Skinner’s positives have to be coming from his camp. Like him or hate him, the Skinner and Canes relationship is going to come to an end unless something very unusual happens.
I listened to many Charlotte Checkers games online this past season, and Trevor Carrick was a major staple on the entertainment menu. He was always in the middle of the action, and had a powerful shot. It was like Justin Faulk Lite, except from the left side. He has earned his chance for that 7th spot, a solid player who should contribute noticeably when called.
Since we couldn’t land a starting goalie, when dealing with Faulk or Skinner, I would like to see us get a quality goalie prospect, someone who is ahead of Ned in development. At present, who will come to Raleigh if one of our two goalies go down? Other pieces can round out the deal.
If Skinner leaves, I think we will miss his best season ever. He’s playing for the biggest contract of his life, wherever he plays. He should be smokin’!
Peter Chiarelli is paying dearly for trades he made in the last couple of years. Keep in mind that Edmonton has hockey-wise, foaming at the mouth fans. A couple of years ago (while still enjoying the afterglow of the honeymoon with the fans) he made a player for player trade with the NJ Devils. He sent one of his elite scorers (Taylor Hall) to NJ and got in return a rugged shut-down defenseman (Adam Larsson). The trade was controversial and he had to withstand a lot of negative fan pressure. But the Oilers made it to the playoffs that year (first time in 9 years). Everybody was ecstatic, even though there were many who were still angry about the trade.
Now, it is difficult for even the most detached analyst to compare the performance of a rugged shut-down defenseman with that of an elite scorer. Add in a generous measure of fan emotion and it becomes impossible. Larsson did what the team expected of him, very unspectacularly. Hall led the Devils in scoring and virtually carried the team.
But the Oilers made the playoffs. Chiarelli dodged the bullet. For a time.
Jordan Eberle is also an elite scorer. But he had had a bad year. The culture of the Oilers put a lot of pressure on the forwards to draw their self image by whether or not they played on the line with Connor McDavid. Eberle spent most of his time on a line centered by RNH. Depressed, Eberle went into the playoffs and was not a factor.
After the letdown, (in Edmonton the fans get very upset if you don’t go deep into the playoffs) Chiarelli felt the heat. The honeymoon was over. The fans were already talking about divorce court. The Taylor Hall “disaster” was brought back anew.
Chiarelli decided to hold Eberle responsible for the playoffs bow out. He pulled the trigger and traded Eberle to the Islanders for Ryan Strome.
The fans were more than a bit suspicious of Chiarelli’s competence in making player trades.
Things didn’t get much better when the Islanders put Eberle on Tavares’ line. Eberle scored, a lot.
Strome was placed on the line with McDavid. And then when his start was slow, they moved him. The fans found it easy to compare Eberle with Strome. The comparison was even more stark when the entire Oilers team decided to do a perfect imitation of our beloved Canes.
This off season Chiarelli narrowly missed being canned. There is much discussion in Edmonton about not making any major trades this off season. If Chiarelli is a tad trade-shy, can you blame him?
Let’s hope that trading Skinner and/or Faulk doesn’t come back to bite DW and TD.
Edmonton had little choice but to trade Hall. He had pretty much pissed off everyone around the team. He was immature and forced their hand. Fans that don’t get that really weren’t paying attention. Even watching the way Hall played..slamming sticks, pouting…he was a gongshow. Talented, but a gong show.
Sometimes guys like that have to go. It’s better for both parties. The Whalers were faced with a similar situation with Chris Pronger. You never get full value in those situations. Waiting it out doesn’t work. The rest of the team suffers. Hall has grown up and is becoming the player Edmonton hoped he would be. “Them’s the breaks” as they say.
For the numbers folks.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChartingHockey/status/1015223836843892738
1. I’d test it out in preseason. If a combo looks awesome, maybe try it in the regular season.
2. No, we got enough guys in Charlotte, we don’t need another. Let Carrick or McKeown do it.
3. I’d try Hamilton and Slavin, at least to start.If it doesn’t work we can always go 4F/1D or try TVR, Faulk(if he’s here), or Pesce.
NHL insider Frank Seravilli of TSN commented recently on the Erik Karlsson situation trying to tie it together with the Milan Lucic and Jeff Skinner and the Justin Faulk “situations”. He went on to call the Lucic situation as “untenable”.
David Staples writing for the “Cult of hockey ” in the Edmonton Journal, took issue with Mr. Seravilli. He quoted Lucic’s agent saying unequivocally that Milan was looking forward to starting the new season as an Oiler.
Hmmm!
Erik Karlsson has been quoted as saying that he wants to be traded.
Milan Lucic’s agent has stated that Milan wants to stay.
How about Jeff and Justin? Has either player stated his desire to stay or go? Has the media bothered to ask?
We have had some hints. Right up to the last game, Skinny was the last man to leave the ice after the pre-game skate. The deadline came and went for the triggering of the NTC clause in Justin’s contract.
Does the team really want to be rid of them or is it something else?
Nobody’s talking. Unless I have missed something.
We can only read between the lines because there have been no direct quotes. The plethora of articles about Skinner’s production a few weeks ago had to have a source. Someone was stirring the pot. All positives, no negatives. I think his new agent was likely behind this. In contrast, I’ve not seen similar articles about Faulk.
The last agent to talk was Lindholm’s and he was promptly shipped to Calgary.
I would keep slaving pesce together until it did not work.
I don’t want any more D.
I know we are a young team but I would rather play our young guys and see what we have then get bottom 9 and bottom pair guys. We have leadership on this team. We may not make the playoffs, but I would be fine with that if we show a few things. ( Matt, how bout a topic of ‘im ok missing the playoffs if….’) 1. RB shows that he learns from his mistakes and can motivate players. 2. Our young guys are played and are given a true evaluation of their abilities. 3. The goalies show they are fully vested in conditioning and they don’t work, some attempt at improement is made. 4. It becomes apparent that RB (if he is worthy) really is a big voice in the MGMT team.
I would be ok with these things…. But, then again, I don’t want to see skinny leave, so what do I know!!!!!
The management has done well on defense, and the team has 5 top 4 defensemen, thumbs up!
The team has not really done much in goal, only reduced the backup goalie cost and hired another reclamation project. I”d call it a lateral move and hope RB can work his motivation magic to turn the situation around.
The management has not really done anything at forward, other than arguably subtract a bit (depends how people view Lindholm vs. Ferland), if the management trades away Skinner they have dongraded significantly at forward.
The Canes lucked out wat the draft and are ready to benefit from the RF drafting and seasoning of incoming players, and I’m excited to give them a shot, but I feel management should do anything they can to upgrade by one forward with scoring and experience, preferably at center. If Skinny is traded then either a real #1 center or a good center and a scoring wing. With that, I’d be happy to start the season.
I like the topic suggestion, next season is a success if …
“..(N)ext season is a success if …” RBA can actually coach.
With Svech and Necas, expensive moves to bring in forwards just doesn’t seem warranted. We are thin on the forward corps who have NHL experience. Of that there is no doubt. But if you want a good center and a scoring wing if Skinner is traded, you don’t need to look far. And with the right selection of picks/prospects for Skinner we can pick up a decent 1C or solid 2C at the deadline to really push the team going into the playoffs.
I’m confused by that last statement.
Teams don’t want to trade away a top center for picks and prospects at the deadline, teams need proven NHL talent at the deadline.
My understanding from the comment must therefore be that the Canes are the team in a playoff position (without Skinner) at the deadline and are able to deal away prospects for a #1 center at that point.
If my understanding is correct the big question is, how are the Canes going to get to a playoff position to make such a trade?
The prospect situation looks good. The consensus is, and I am on board with it, that the Canes drafted the best available forward at #2, but at the back of my mind is a voice that reminds me that Eric Staal was nothing special in his first year and the consensus #2012 pick, Nail Yakipov is now drifting around the parameter looking for any deal.
So trading away scoring talent and putting the teams fortunes in the hands of a bunch of guys under 20 seems a huge bet, one that is more likely than not to fail.
If the team is willing to sacrifice another season to rebuilding this is risk that can be explained.
Put young guys in a learning position and have them pick up the pieces as they start their NHL careers, but it is unlikely to yield a playoff birth for the team and it could damage the young guys aka Lindholm style.
If it fails the team is in a similar position next year with nothing to show for it, other than a better read on the forwarde prospects.
I personally am not a fan of another year of “no need to win now, let’s wait and see”, though I see the logic and admit it could possibly work out, and I’d be happy if that proved to be the case.
I want to see more urgency and I think ownership has showed it with the D core. But I’m afraid the forward core is not sound enough, it needs some more experience at forward, even if on short-term expensive contracts, letting the young guys figure it out, helping to create an environment where it’s not ok to lose today because if we lose enough we can win sometime in the future.
I think another side to starting out attempting to split up Pesce and Slavin has to do with their play from last year as well. They were phenomenal as a first pairing two seasons ago, but last year like most of the team they did not play their best. I’d argue Pesce was actually the better of the two last year on a night to night basis and overall as a first pairing they weren’t exactly the elite pairing they were from the year before.
so by adding Hamilton to the first pair and sliding pesce down you effectively upgrade TWO defensive pairings – with Pesce taking Faulks spot on the 2nd pairing being a huge defensive upgrade and De Haan also defensively being an upgrade on Hanifin – While Hamilton improves the first pairing.
If you go De haan and Hamilton which i am not opposed to you have effectively improved ONE defense pairing out of 3 rather than 2 if you try switching them around. Plus you always know if it doesn’t work you can go BACk to pesce and slavin.
I don’t disagree with your analysis at all. Things did not go as planned next year and splitting up Pesce and Slavin may be the way to go. Like you said, they could always put them back together.
In my opinion the difference last year was Slavin. He seemed determined to prove himself as an offensive threat. He skated pucks left and right with little to show for it. In fact, I believe he put more pressure on the Canes already defensively challenged forwards to make sure they were covering for Slavin when he continually jumped in the play. Slavin has a great stick, but little offensive instincts that would make his offensive forays productive. If Slavin will stay at home he can be one of the best defensive defensemen in the NHL. His skill set isn’t there to be an offensive threat.