Will write up in more detail in next few days, but here are my first impressions of the Hurricanes acquiring goalie Scott Darling.
Like Ron Francis seems to like to do it, just when people were settling into their lazy chairs for after dinner cocktails on a Friday evening, he dropped an unpredictable trade bomb out of the blue. After the Kris Versteeg deal went down at a similar time, I picture Francis and Blackhawks’ general manager Stan Bowman having a standing Friday cocktail hour phone chat while sitting on their back decks every Friday. Most weeks they just talk about golf, fishing, professional sports or whatever. But every once in awhile they do a deal instead.
Just after 7:30pm on Friday, Twitter went aflitter with the announcement that the Carolina Hurricanes had acquired Scott Darling from the Chicago Blackhawks for the Ottawa Senators 2017 third round draft pick they had acquired in the Viktor Stalberg trade. Scott Darling is scheduled to become an unrestricted free agent on July 1, so technically the Hurricanes acquired the right to negotiate exclusively with him through the end of June with no guarantee that he will actually suit up for the Hurricanes in October.
Scott Darling profile
Darling is a goalie from the current trend of ‘bigger is better.’ At 6 foot 6 inches tall and 232 pounds, Darling is very much in the Ben Bishop range for size. As a 28-year old who only has only three years of NHL experience and 64 starts to his credit, he is the stereotypical late bloomer that is common for the goalie position. Despite his modest experience, the opinion seems to be nearly unanimous that he is ready to become a #1 goalie. For the 2016-17 season, Darling posted a solid 18-5-5 record with a 2.38 goals against average and .924 save percentage. His career numbers are similar at 2.37 for a goals against average and .923 for a save percentage in 75 games total.
My first impression of the Hurricanes Scott Darling trade
My first reaction is that I am thrilled that Francis is making an upgrade in net, and that he is getting it out of the way early. I also like Darling and his potential to be a #1 goalie for multiple years.
If I had to note reservations about Darling in terms of risk/potential downside it would be threefold. First, he has never really been a #1 (other than as an injury fill in or player who temporarily took the job), so he has yet to carry that burden and the pressure that comes with it especially during tough stretches. Second, he has barely more than what I would consider a single season’s workload (60-65 games) under his belt. It was spread over three different seasons which helps, but I think it is fair to say that he is on the light side in terms of proven experience relative to other options. Finally, I have long been hesitant to sign goalies who look good in good situations. The Blackhawks floundered in the playoffs this season, but they have been a top of the league team during the regular season during Darling’s time. We can debate how big it is exactly and how quickly it is shrinking, but there is a gap between what he played behind in Chicago and what he will play behind in Raleigh.
I would rate Darling high for potential ceiling and in the top third at least of options based his play during the 2016-17 season. Based on his relatively low experience level and production in a great situation, I would also rate him as above average in terms of risk. That risk level increases if his deal price and term are high.
The trade for Scott Darling
The trade is interesting on multiple levels.
The third-round pick is not outlandish. Mid-round picks often trade hands for negotiating rights, but the fact that the pick is fairly high as a third-rounder and not conditional upon Darling signing with the Hurricanes is interesting. Quite normal is a deal that sends a later-round pick that conditionally upgrades if the player signs. So for example, the Hurricanes maybe could have given up a fifth-round pick that upgraded to a third or even a second-round pick if Darling signed.
So what might this mean? As I said on Twitter, my hunch is that Francis has significant reason to believe that he can get Darling signed. It could be that Chicago shared some information about what he was asking for and Francis just felt comfortable with the numbers and willing to risk it. There is also the chance that Francis was given permission by the Blackhawks to talk to his agent to get a simple idea of whether Darling would sign with the Hurricanes and for roughly how much. Indications seem to be that this did not happen which would surprise me. If Francis has no specific reason other than his goal/plan to believe Darling will sign with Carolina, the deal is aggressive and with some risk.
Another interesting upshot is the timing. If Francis really wanted to keep one of Ward or Lack to go with Darling, it would make sense to wait to sign Darling after using the Hurricanes’ expansion draft protection on the other goalie that Francis wanted to keep. But if Darling is willing/ready to sign, I do not think Francis would tempt fate by waiting a whole month and to within a week of free agency to do so. If Darling signs, I believe it is correct that he would need to be protected as a player under contract for 2017-18. I am NOT privy to Francis’ thoughts on this situation, but IF Francis was willing to consider a complete restart in net, this would be a way to make Ward available to Las Vegas without rankling feathers in the process. As a veteran who is good in the locker room and someone would could yield trade value at the 2018 trade deadline, just maybe Las Vegas takes him. That would make Lack the backup and or give Francis the ability to open up the other slot with buyout.
What say you Hurricanes fans?
Are you as amped up as I am?
Do you think is a sure thing (or close) that Scott Darling signs?
What is your wild guess for contract?
Go Canes!
Yes,Yes,Yes…FINALLY! Great signing, and because he’s not actually signed RF can pretty much do as he wishes with the current two guys! We could see a trade (or two), send one to Char., or??
What other options are available?
puckgod…It’s like your greatest wishes have been answered. I predict that it is at least Thursday before you figure out what to talk about next. 🙂
Can you also get us a top-line scoring center?
I’m on it, right now I’m working on winning the draft lottery (later today)…and if so, we’ll have our Center-of-the-future!
That should be easy, now we know that you just have to make enough noise…GRINNNNNN!!
Do you have a preference between Duchene, Landeskog, or Galchenyuk?
1. Amped up? You bet if we get him signed. We needed to make a change and he looks pretty good to me. I am going to put my faith in Ron Francis on this and will only complain if we don’t sign him.
2. I would bet he signs. I would hope that has already been pretty much taken care of. I’m sure it’s going to cost us some bucks and maybe a little more term I would have liked for a goalie with his experience, but I am willing to take that extra risk because I not only have faith in Darling, but that the defense we will be putting in front of him will really make him effective.
3. Wild guess? Either 3 years at 5 million per year or 4 years at 4 million per year.
I’m not as high on Landeskog simply because I prefer a center to solidify the center ice position and provide a partner next to Aho on a scoring line.
Between Duchene and Galchenyuk, I think Duchene is the safer bet with a higher floor even if things do not work out perfectly, but I actually think Galchenyuk could have a higher ceiling with more room to still grow.
One other thing is thinking about the trade assets required for each. Best bet is that Montreal wants NHL roster level players as they try to win now. Colorado might (not certain) be more willing to take a big package of futures.
In the end, I would be thrilled to add either of those 2 players.
Amped up, YAH, big time. This is the goalie I was hoping for. I do realize it is only the rights at this point, but gosh, knowing how conservative RF is, I have to believe there was some assurance he could be signed. I had said earlier it is always a risk with goalies because you put them in a new environment and sometimes they just do not stay the same or get better then they were. Case in point, Lack.
I have to believe FR would not have used a round 3 pick if he did not have a pretty good felling the signing would happen. We have a young defense who is really getting good. Why wouldn’t he want to come here where he is all but assured #1. We are a team on the rise.
This could make the difference. The rest of the team was good. It was the goalie position that was killing us. Agree with RR, either 3 years at 5 million per year or 4 years at 4 million per year works for me, just get him signed.
puckgod, it finally happened. Wooohooo
I forgot to add, sign him ASAP and protect him. I was good with Ward or Lack being exposed. I would not wait and play games close to UFA time.
I’m wondering what you use as a standard to come up with your salary assessments? I don’t really have a good guess, so you probably are close…but I was just curious?
In my case I was agreeing with what RR said for salary. We know he does not have experience as a full time starter but he really looks like he could be. The really good goalies are 5M to 6M and above. He could get to that level (top #1), so 3M to 4M per year sounds about right. I am sure he would want as long of a contract as he could get, maybe 6 years but RF does not do long contracts a whole lot. RF will probably go for 3 or 4 years. I am okay if it comes out a 4M per years. Anyway, not a lot of analysis when I made the comment, just seemed like a win / win for both.
Outside of him despising NC it would seem like a deal should happen. He wants to be a starter. A team which has the potential to rise is a good place to be.
Sign Darling as soon as possible – and I have to think there is a deal in place alreay, a la Anderssen with the Leafs. Expose both Ward and Lack. If neither taken (LV may be interested in Lack) try to trade Lack (Ward too important to the organization) or buy him out. That is what I see happening.
Agree, ASAP. I also believe that a deal or fairly deep discussion already happened (since 3rd round pick). Really good for both teams, Hawks cant afford the new salary and I am sure they did not want to let him go for nothing (UFA). Different division so give him to the east, and get an asset in the process.
Ward has been around forever so understand the important to the organization from a leadership standpoint. I do think Ward has had years under different goalie coaches and you get what you get. I think Lack has more upside but understand where you are coming from. I would want to keep Lack but, again, another tough call.
Might just cut and paste this into part 2 of my Scott Darling write up. 🙂
If I had to wager, I think the end result is that Lack is bought out, and the Hurricanes enter 2017-18 with Darling and Ward as the tandem.
Just saw this, Matt! 🙂
Wow. Francis was serious when he said he was going to address the goalie situation as his #1 priority. Great, early move. Sets up a secondary move at or prior to the draft to unload some picks and a back up goalie for some scoring help. This was the big move though. Well done.
Yes, amped up. I think Darling will be as good in Raleigh as he was in Chicago. Like a lot of folks, I was saying Darling was top target as early as January.
I think terms will be 4 years/$17M.
The other goalie, whether Lack or Ward, will have a better year in 17-18. In fact, if it is Lack, there will be a minor goalie controversy as Lack’s numbers will be almost identical to Darling’s (say .920 SV%, 2.40 GAA). That is not a bad problem to have. Even if it is Ward, he will be strong most of the year.
Also, whoever goes to another team (I would hedge my bets a little if it is LV) will have a solid to strong year.
Now GMRF should sign Slavin and Pesce. My one concern due to LV joining the league is that the owner/team takes on the city’s persona as a high-stakes gambler. I can see them making some outrageous bids on RFAs the next few years. And given the “patriotic” flavor of the team, I fear they might make an unmatchable offer for a young U.S.-born star.
Amped may be an understatement. Darling was my ideal option, I was jumping around, yelling for joy and contemplating my current jersey size for his new Canes one last night.
There is absolutely no reason he shouldn’t be signed. The current rumors have him getting a Talbot-esque contract (3 for $12.5M). I’d be okay with a 4x$4M myself. Unless Darling despises Carolina though, I think this gets done.
Also, given the nature of agents, I’d be shocked if that trade was made without at least a low key backdoor conversation of whether there was mutual interest but who knows. He wanted a chance to start and he’s got it.
The real question is who goes now, Ward or Lack? Or both?
I’m making my ridiculous, Go Canes prediction right now. Scott Darling is the 2nd coming of Tim Thomas. Welcome Scott and Go Canes!!!
I’ve already put my two cents in (and most people say two cents is about all it is worth), but would like to add one thing. It is nice to see the jubilation that this deal has brought to all the above Caniacs. Can’t help but think maybe some of this positivity will spill over and result in some additional fannies in the seats this year. Actually, this signing might pay for itself with increased attendance. Let’s hope so.
The deal was definitely done with a mind for building the 2017-18 roster, but I do think the timing is good for attendance. Now 3 weeks after the end of the 2016-17 season, the season ticket holders who had not renewed were straying farther away. The Darling deal is a lightning bolt that will make at least some reconsider.
I’m a little late to this party only because I’ve been busy rockin’ it at mine. Wow … fantastic news, simply fantastic.
Agree, Matt, that there is a limited sample size and with a great team so there is more risk than with a proven starter, but it’s a bold move and if it works makes us much better at lower cost. I love it.
I have to believe he’ll sign or RF would not have done the deal for a 3rd. (For reference, I believe FLA traded a 6th to the NYR for the rights to Yandle.) 4 yrs @ 16-17 seems right, especially in a more buyer-friendly market (unlike last year).
Now, RF, if you’re reading, please make all our other off-season dreams come true, too. Thx in advance.
I have been saying that there were two priorities the playoffs in 17-18 and keeping the core for the future.
If GMRF gets Darling to agree to a contract, then I think the playoffs are better than 60/40 proposition. So any trades/UFA acquisitions need to be undertaken with a 3-5 year window considered.