Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Throwing term or big money at either doesn’t make sense. Some team, like Philadelphia, might be dumb enough to throw 20+ million to Mrazek over 4 years. Anything over 2 x 2 is too much for McE. At his age a one year deal is the real way to go
  3. NHL.com reporting that BOTH Pete and Mac are heading to free agency according to DW. 😡****!!!
  4. I think there's too much trade chatter going on surrounding our draft picks for something not to happen. It's pretty rare for a person from our FO to publicly state their willingness to trade a 1st rounder, normally the "we'll consider all options that make the team better" line. My guess is we don't go to the podium at #28. Also, makes it seem like they don't want to have it go to FA. Considering Duchene's (and maybe Pavelski) is the only UFA I have any interest in, I doubt Don will fork over the money he'll want. Here are my list of players GMDW is most likely to trade for: Ehlers (would offer Faulk/1st/B prospect) Kadri (Faulk straight up) Nylander (Faulk straight up) Perry (Insist Anaheim take Darling's contract) Turris (See Perry) Kessel (See Ehlers) Toronto, Nashville, Winnipeg, Tampa, Vegas, Pittsburgh are our bargain targets.
  5. Completely agreed on Pesce. We should put Slavin and Pesce as #1 D and leave it alone.... Deal with the other guys...
  6. Considering his contract and the fact that he is one of the best defensive defenseman in the NHL, Pesce should be about as untouchable as Aho, Slavin, and Svechnikov. When you have that kind of player locked up on a good contract, you count your blessings and look elsewhere.
  7. I think we can move on from any Ehlers trade. Sounds to me like they wanted Pesce and we said no thanks......dialtone. I could be wrong.
  8. I'm guessing he's coming over to Charlotte this year? I watched him in his first World Juniors, and didn't see much. But that team was bad and he was on the 4th line I think. Then he's only put in 2 goals in 39 international team games, and 9 points. His Liiga points translate directly now into about 23 points in the NHL which is not horrendous actually. Good size. He's in the same draft class as Morgan Geekie (and Necas), who are stealing the oxygen for that draft class right now in Charlotte. It will be interesting to see what he can do as a 21 yo AHL rookie in Charlotte next year.
  9. Beboplar, I’ve been posting on here for years saying we need to be more physical, so you are preaching to the choir. Also, I was one of the very few that wanted Skinner gone. Having said that, I think we would still have enough of a physical presence if we brought in another skill guy. Then again if Necas sticks that is another player that doesn’t exactly bring the boom, so I understand your concern. Thank God Svechnikov is going to be/already is a power forward.
  10. I don't know Ehlers, but from what I am reading he does not sound like the type of player the Canes need to push them over the hump. Assuming we are losing Ferland, we need an offensive contributor who can hit and stay on the ice. Ehlers sounds too much like Skinner. The team made gains this year adding the likes of Ferland, Martinook, and Nino. Losing Skinner's goals did not hurt as much as some thought, so adding a guy who brings some scoring without the physical side of the game feels like a step backwards.
  11. Yesterday
  12. I think we’ll see some activity really pickup once the cap debate concludes. a ton of teams are really fretting the idea of a 81-82 million cap instead of 83.
  13. Rem, you forgot Eetu Luostarinen again. He was drafted 42nd overall by us in 2017. He seems to be progressing nicely. He’s listed as a 6’3 center who scored 36 points in 54 games playing for KalPa in Liiga last year. The men’s league. Although he didn’t play much, he also made the World Championship roster for team Finland as a 20 year-old. Not too bad. I’m just messing with you again, but like I said I’m anxious to see what this guy can do as a professional. Also, Ehlers lack of playoff success (like you said) and the Jets need to free up cap space is a large part of why Ehlers’ name is out there. He does have a bit of “Skinner” in him, but I think he is more defensively responsible. With the contracts that have been thrown around, 6 million per sounds awfully tempting......and it will get better with age (ideally). But what would it take...
  14. Yeah, probably not. It's so hard to know, since so few position players are traded like that. But I'd probably throw in one of our high second rounders too. So according to Tulsky's chart either of our high seconds should push us up to #16. Then Fleury...he has to be at least worth the #18 pick? He was the #7 pick and spent the years to develop. The #16 pick and our high second would equal the points to get to #7. Of course, I do agree that prices to move up, are higher than Tulsky's graph probably. But Fleury plus our second (plus our first) should move us to #10 at least, maybe higher. Historically, these moves up that far rarely actually happen, but if we could, I'd do it to get a high end forward or Spencer Knight.
  15. Just to throw out the idea of going for Spencer Knight. Yes. Yes. Yes. It is unclear how high we'd have to get. But the vast majority see him going #13, to the Panthers, or lower. So, if the Panthers want him, we'd have to go to #12 to be sure. Imagine the Panther's GMs face if they were on Knight and we sweep in and move up in a trade with the Wild and grab McKnight. This is that blue chip goalie prospect we never go for (at least since Cam Ward, but Knight is bluer). Yes, it will take him a few years to be ready for the NHL. But our team is sooooooo young. Aho, TT, Svech, Necas, Ehlers*, Foegele, Slavin, Pesce, all 26 or under. *see what I did there? And should be hitting their prime when Knight is breaking into the NHL. Given that we have the #28 pick? Package, trade, grab one of the most touted goalie prospects since Andrei Vasilevesky in 2012.
  16. Problem is Fleury doesn’t hold enough value to trade up 21 slots.
  17. If we put the two moves together: RHD for Ehlers. Fleury and our first for a high end forward prospect, say #7. We'd have a very good player cooking for when we lose a guy down the line, and we'd be set except for goal for years. Aho-Teuravanen-Ehlers-Svechnikov-Niederrieter-Staal-J Williams-Necas-Foegele-Martinook-McGinn-Wallmark. Seriously. As Svech becomes elite and Necas follows? Then you'd have a top forward cooking in the system along with Geekie, Gauthier, Saarela, Drury, et all. And we'd still have Slavin-Hamilton-Faulk (Pesce)- DeHaan - TVR - Bean on the back end.
  18. Moving up in the draft. I always want to do it, so yes. I usually I try to dig deep into the draft and really get a clear idea of the possible choices. But usually we're picking higher and usually there is a lot of down time to ponder it (since we're usually done in early April). This year? No idea. I've heard of the top 2 guys and the top goalie. That's it. But I'm hearing some things that are a bit tricky to reconcile: 1. This is reportedly a deep draft. 2. After #1 and #2 there is less agreement than just about any other year. 3. There is supposedly a big drop off after #10/11 area. 4. Most scouts really doubt the top 10-11 teams will move down. (including Vancouver). Last year, I think the freaking Islanders made off with the show vs their position getting Wahlstrom and Dobson at 11-12. But they got lucky too. Both guys dropped a lot. I like the idea of moving up, IF we have a real bead on a guy in the top 10, and get get into at LEAST the top 10. I know that draft picks are 1. unproven 2. take a few years to pan out. BUT we don't need more projects. Now if we can move our second, and Fleury and get up even higher.... But the idea is more and more elite forwards as you go up. NOT always true, but always tends to be true. I don't think we have to go up to #10 to get the goalie, the highest I've seen him go is #13, but I'd move second rounder and B prospect to move there. Thing is, we need quality, not quantity. If we see a guy at #10 and think he's elite? I'd move Fleury for him. Many on here don't really think much of Fleury anyways, and we've got Bean still.
  19. I also heard that there was a lot of smoke billowing round out interest in Nikolaj Ehlers for one of our RHD, hinting there might be some fire there. This is a very intriguing player. Very intriguing. The negatives: He does not hit. Last year he had about the same number of hits/game as TT and Skinner. This doesn't mean he doesn't battle for the puck but not a big hitter. He has struggled to score in the playoffs. Like seriously. He has zero playoff goals in 21 games. He has 7 points in 21 games and none this past year's 6 games. No points.* He is not a center.** The positives: He is a legit first line producer. For a winger, his 27 goals and 60 points proven, is on the slightly high end of average for a first line winger. He is only 23 years old. He put up 64 points as a 20-21 year old. One has to think there is even more upside. He is a solid two way player. Without delving into the stats, he is not a one way player. This is something I think we're consciously looking for. He is locked up at $6 million/year for SIX more seasons. For a two way first line winger probably capable of 35 goals/73 points? And this is with NO NTC. If, at the end of a few years it isn't working, he can be moved. *reportedly his lack of playoff prowess is part of why he's on the block. **probably lower value not being a center. Yes, I'm a bit concerned about the playoff thing. But as reasons go to be able to get a legit top half first line winger at this age? That's not the worst. Guys can turn that around with one nice run. Yes, we need a center, but the again, you take what you can get. I think Aho is good at center, as is Staal, so we'd just need to figure out 3rd line center. The question to me? Would I trade Pesce for him? Why Pesce? Because I would not trade Dougy for him, and they would not take Faulk for him (only one year left). I think I might, but I'd have to simmer on it a bit more because he's not a center, but I'm not saying no. That is a lot of proven scoring, that will probably be symbiotic with what we have here, and this is a guy still off his prime and we'd be good for 6 years. If he hits even a slight uptick and figures out the playoff thing, he'll be a bargain in a couple of years and a steal by the end. If we could trade Faulk plus (maybe Faulk and our first rounder this year, heck throw in their pick of Kuok, Roy, Saarela)? Pull the lever.
  20. He has a 15 team NTC. To add, yes he has a 1 year deal but a team could negotiate a contract extension prior to a trade. Sign him on July 1st. Trouba was going to leave the Jets so they traded him (for a low return).
  21. I'd love that but don't see it happening because Faulk only has 1 year left on his contract and a NTC to boot. Think about how much trade value has recently (presumably) been depreciated for 1 year "rental" players like Skinner and Trouba . . .
  22. Nikolaj Elhers is interesting to consider. He is lightning fast, young; has put up 199 points in 298 games; and 17% of his goals are game winners, so he's clutch. Last year he missed 20 games (still had 21 goals), but played all 82 regular season games the previous 2 years, scoring 25 and 29 respectively. Salary at 6M with term is about what a consistent 25+ goal scorer gets in this league.
  23. I wouldn't mind the number 10 pick for Fleury. Don't think that is what they had in mind, but if they would bite on that I would do it. Flipping the number 10 plus for a higher pick seems way more possible than flipping 28, and if we can't flip it we have a good shot at landing the best goalie prospect in the draft. If they are trying for anyone better than TVR, then I thank them for the offer and move on.
  24. We had better not...cause the teams beneath us in the Metro (save Columbus, which is about to become a dumpster fire) are making some solid moves this off season
  1. Load more activity
  • Create New...