In what has been a busy week building the blue line, the Hurricanes on Thursday announced that the team had re-signed Trevor van Riemsdyk to a two-year contract for $2.3 million per year.
Trevor van Riemsdyk in 2017-18
Shortly after the deal was announced, I said on Twitter that van Riemsdyk was the steadiest of the Hurricanes defensemen in 2017-18. (This is not saying that he was the best defenseman…just most consistent in his specific role.) He was pretty consistent from beginning to end and was the anchor for a much-improved third defense pairing with a young defenseman next to him for virtually every shift. His scoring was modest with 3 goals and 13 assists but virtually nothing for power play ice time contributed to those totals. More significantly, van Riemsdyk stood out as a consistently solid defenseman and was the driving force for the third pairing improving by leaps and bounds over the 2016-17 season.
Trevor van Riemsdyk as a mentor
On Twitter after the signing was announced, I said:
4/5 Most impressive was uncanny ability to adapt to what his young partner needed,similar to John-Michael Liles with Pesce. He did heavy lifting with Fleury and initially with Hanifin but then had good knack for when to defer and push puck to Hanifin when he was confident/going.
— Canes and Coffee (@CanesandCoffee) July 6, 2018
Trevor van Riemsdyk started the season next to rookie Haydn Fleury. Fleury acclimated quickly to the NHL without any dramatic growing pains. Van Riemsdyk played a significant role in Fleury’s positive start in the NHL. Especially early on, van Riemsdyk did the heavy lifting in terms of moving the puck and relieving pressure such that Fleury could get his feet under him and adjust to NHL speed without a complete sink or swim trial. Then when Fleury moved up to play with Justin Faulk, van Riemsdyk started anew with another young defenseman in Noah Hanifin. Again, van Riemsdyk was a steadying force, and again he had an uncanny feel for how best to utilize and support his partner. Early on, van Riemsdyk drove the line somewhat similar to when he was with Fleury while Hanifin got his feet back under him. Then as Hanifin built confidence, van Riemsdyk deferred a bit more when Hanifin dialed up the Joni Pitkanen in his game. Van Riemsdyk in 2017-18 very much reminded me of John-Michael Liles helping Brett Pesce in 2015-16.
The contract and the process
There were some rumblings in the media about issues with the negotiations between van Riemsdyk and the Hurricanes a week or so back. But the process never really veered off schedule for a player coming off of a good season and possessing arbitration rights. Rightfully so, van Riemsdyk was not going to be low-balled. And if he did not get a modest premium over the bottom numbers for third pairing defensemen, he was going to roll the dice with an arbitration hearing. But as is always the case, the player and even more so the team have an incentive to avoid arbitration which can hurt the relationship. And as I said last Sunday, I think the run of depth defensemen contracts last summer made the last steps of this negotiation pretty straightforward and easy.
And there's another depth defenseman in $2-3M range. I call it now…Trevor van Riemsdyk for 2 or 3 years at $2.4-$2.5M per year. https://t.co/qgV4ADAkYU
— Canes and Coffee (@CanesandCoffee) July 1, 2018
I posted this after third pairing defenseman signings on July 1 included Nick Holden for $2.2 million per year, Brandon Manning for $2.25 million per year, John Moore for $2.75 million per year, Thomas Hickey for $2.5 million per year and Greg Pateryn for $2.25 million per year.
Sure enough, van Riemsdyk was signed only four days later and pretty darn close to the $2.39 million average for the batch of five comparable contracts.
My wild guess is that the Hurricanes were originally hoping to re-sign van Riemsdyk for more like $1.8 to $2 million which historically has been a fair and reasonably generous contract for a third pairing restricted free agent. But his agent balked and when a bunch of comparables came in at/near what van Riemsdyk was asking for, the process became pretty easy to finalize well ahead of an arbitration date.
At a more basic level, I like the deal. The price still seems high for a third pairing defenseman, but the market is what it is. As compared to the group, I like getting van Riemsdyk at a similar price to the other five, as I think he is a better player than most of them.
As for the step-wise process with some rumor rumblings in the middle. I think too much was made of what is regularly a step-wise process that can drag out all the way to an arbitration date. In in comments on my daily post on July 4 I wrote:
I think people are overestimating the issue with Trevor van Riemsdyk.
He is a restricted free agent with arbitration rights, so he does not have the ability to leave. Worst case is that it gets a little ugly, he goes to arbitration and gets a 1 or 2-year deal for a bit too much money. That could also set the wheels in motion for him to depart, but the team controls when and how that happens as a no-trade clause would not be part of arbitration. In that worst case scenario, there is bit of work to do to make sure that van Riemsdyk stays heads down (which he must anyway if we wants to keep his value up and get traded), but that’s manageable and on Brind’Amour, the captain(s) and van Riemsdyk himself.
But to be clear, I think there is a good chance that more is being made of this than is really the case. For players with a wide range of possible values, it is quite common for these situations to stretch out right up until an arbitration date late in the summer.
As I said on Twitter, I had van Riemsdyk pegged at $1.8-2 million per year entering the summer, but the run of depth defensemen signing for $2.25-3M on July 1 probably bumped that up and further fueled van Riemsdyk’s push for a bit more coming off a strong season in a limited role. But the positive is that I think that run of consistent pricing will also aid reaching an agreement.
I am on record as saying 2 years at $2.4-2.5 million per year, and I do not think the process should be that complicated to get there given the number of comparables.
Trevor van Riemsdyk’s role for 2018-19
I think van Riemsdyk’s role for the 2018-19 season will be nearly identical to the previous season possibly with an addition. He figures to pair with Haydn Fleury and lead a solid third pairing. As a veteran, he could also be asked to step up into a bigger role in the event of an injury. Most interesting will be seeing if he gets a look on the power play. If Justin Faulk departs as many expect, both of the primary power play defensemen (Faulk and Hanifin) will be gone. Dougie Hamilton certainly figures to take one slot, but the other is up for grabs. Van Riemsdyk was serviceable in a secondary power play role with the Blackhawks, so perhaps he can win power play ice time in 2018-19.
Two working assumptions dispelled in less than 48 hours
Beneath the headlines and the player transactions, today’s deal marked the second time in less than two days that a Tom Dundon/new management assumption had been dispelled. With the signing of Calvin de Haan, the management team showed both that it would spend money on the right free agents and also that it could lure higher-end players.
Then after concerns with both Elias Lindholm and Noah Hanifin hit stumbling blocks while negotiating their next contracts and were promptly traded today’s deal to re-sign van Riemsdyk shows that the team can in fact work through contractual differences without just jettisoning everyone who does not sign on the dotted line.
Both of those are significant as we continue to learn how the new management team works.
Impact on the Justin Faulk situation
Some believed that keeping Faulk around was a necessity at least until van Riemsdyk was signed and even considered Faulk for third pairing role. But in my opinion, today’s van Riemsdyk signing has minimal, if any, impact on Faulk. As a restricted free agent due a reasonable contract even with a big raise, van Riemsdyk was never going anywhere. And though Don Waddell will likely pipe up about the willingness to keep Faulk because defensive depth is so important, this is merely posturing. I said that I thought Faulk was destined to be traded immediately after the Dougie Hamilton deal, and I still believe that to be the case irrespective of today’s signing. What could make a difference however is the resolution of the the Erik Karlsson situation. Once he officially lands somewhere, teams hoping to add Karlsson on the right side will likely look farther down their list and see Faulk somewhere on it.
What say you Canes fans?
1) What do you think about the contract?
2) How significant is new management attracting a higher-end free agent and then being able to work through an initial contract disagreement to arrive at a mutually agreeable contract for van Riemsdyk?
3) What do you see as van Riemsdyk’s role for the 2018-19? Does anything change from 2017-18?
Go Canes!
I like the deal. He’s a real good asset to have. Steady and efficient. A better than average 3rd pairing guy and really a good 2nd pairing guy with the right playing partner.
1. I think it’s nice to see that we can re-sign someone at market value instead of just letting them walk. I didn’t think it was just finances but the last week sure did make me feel a lot better about things.
2. Significant in that our team is better? I mean this seems like one of those things that the good teams in hockey are able to get done. Glad we were able to get it done. And while I HATE free agency as a means of acquisition, we got one of the most tolerable contracts out there for a youngish player, so I’m good there.
3. Unless he shows great chemistry with one of the acquisitions, just let him do his thing like last year.
Outside of the questions, if we are trying to trade Faulk, it seems dangerous waiting until Karlsson is traded because that one could take forever, e.g. Duchene. If the offer isn’t there, the offer isn’t there, but I see something happening sooner rather than later. I can’t imagine TD wanting to leave that uncertainty on the roster for too long without it eating him alive.
1) I think the money is right on, though I would have liked to see a 3rd year.
2) Not very. I am trying not to get caught up in the exceeding low expectations game. The goalie situation was the most pressing issue. Carolina moved laterally at best. I like the de Haan signing. Still, I am also tying not to get caught up in deja vu. Because last season all the commentators were indicating that GMRF had the best offseason of any GM. Honestly, I agreed. He traded for and then signed the best available goalie, he brought in a veteran who is a terrific leader and one of the best clutch players in the past two decades. GMRF used the expansion to obtain a near-elite defensive center and a decent 3rd-pairing defenseman. By any objective account, it was a great offseason. This offseason is looking good as well. I am still not convinced the new management is superior to the old, but then again I have seen too many management teams that were uninspiring in business, so I admit I may be too skeptical.
3) Much like last year. He pairs with Fleury. Though I do think TVR deserves a shot at the power play. I remember watching clips of him in Chicago after he was signed last year and thinking his shot was pretty good. Given the opportunity, he may have some goals in him.
Good signing. Good third paring defenseman. The money was appropriate. He probably would have liked a longer term, but as a RFA he didn’t hold many cards outside of arbitration, but I don’t think players get longer contracts in arbitration, just more money in the short term.
Might as well take a look at him on the PP. Can’t be worse than Hanifin. Hanifin produced 1 goal and 6 assists all season getting top PP minutes. That’s not good. I expect Van Reimsdyk can at least do that well.
1. I like the contract – both term and contract. I think it might have been a few 100K light (I like to see players who play well rewarded) but you’re right, it is in line with market and it is a substantial pay boost. I trust and hope TvR is happy with it.
2. Yesterday I wrote, “Following the CGY trade, the CdH signing has given me more confidence in the direction and competency of Canes O/M (again, I have been “from Missouri” since RBA was elevated to head coach and DW to GM).” The TvR signing is another mostly positive sign. Again, I think you reward your players who play well instead of expecting them to just be happy to be able to sign on the dotted line. It is a different part of team culture (ask the G.S. Warriors, where the team pays up – or consider your own work environment).
3. I think TvR is a solid 3rd pairing RHD – which is invaluable because of the quality of our top-4. He can move up if necessary (and we have McKeown to backfill) and he can work with the younger players (I am expecting that won’t be so necessary for Fleury this year, who I think will get the chance to show what he can do).
1. Like the contract (TVR is making a million dollars less than the Dr. in Calgary, and I think he is a better player, at least given the position).
2. Management is showing that they are willing to do what it takes. They’re still perusing the bargain bins and sale isles, but that’s what every household should be doing as long as they’re willing to pay for the things that they really need.
3. It depends on the Justin Faulk situation. Most likely TVR’s roll will be the same, but I’m not sure how they’re going to work out the right side of the D. I am pretty sure either of Faulk or TVR will be traded.
Tampa was supposedly trying to engineer a 3-way deal with the Rangers and Ott to get Carlson, Tampa sending Kucharov to the Rangers and Rangers sending something back to the Sens.
That type of 3-way deal would work with Faulk, who could be a Carlson replacement in Ottawa and the Canes could obtain one of Tampa’s forward core.
Tampa Bay in no world will move Kucherov. Why would they go all out to bring in Karlson to make a cup contender if you aren’t going to keep your best offensive player in Kucherov? They’d move Stamkos before Kucherov – and I don’t think they’d move either.
Tampa Bay’s interest in potential team leaders like Tavares and Karlsson makes me wonder about the future of Stamkos in TB. Throw in his playoff performaces, or lack thereof… Stamkos has a NMC, but you never know. I can’t see how TB could afford Tavares or Karlsson without unloading a big name or two.
Great signing from my perspective. TVR and Fleury should be a very solid pairing for the team. Perhaps TVR gets a chance at 2nd PP unit. Seems like a great teammate from what has been reported. Good deal all around.
1. I think the contract works, it looks like fair value, I wouldn’t have been upset with a little more $. I think like a bunch of you that the term was a little short. I understand the team may want some flexibility with the D in the system down the road. So it all makes sense.
2. Jury is still out. Hard to think it was all impressive. I like the de Haan signing. I don’t feel like it instilled confidence in the approach. So I am waiting to see what the roster will look like opening day. Then the performance of the product before I have confidence. We still don’t have a goalie… if one of the 2 have a good year, could happen.. then we are much improved in the standings.
3. I see it very similar to last season. being the rock on the 3rd pairing. He was the most consistent of our D last season. he could get more TOI this year. He can move up or down the lineup as needed with injury.
TVR is great. Everyone was enamored with Justin Williams but his on ice play was just OK whereas TVR was truly far and away the best acquisition on the ice from last summer. Even from game 1 in preseason all the way to the final game he was an absolute beast when it came to this word – consistency. The guy was rarely of position, gapped up, good stick play, good transition – very vanilla game which is perfect for the defense position.
1. Good deal for a solid 3rd pairing guy who can slot higher if needed.
2. We signed a free agent who was worth something, solved a solvable contract dispute, and dumped a possible non solvable one(Lindholm filed for arbitration on Cgy).
3. Same as before.