Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes

Kahz

Full Member
  • Content Count

    508
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kahz

  1. Absolute no to Bertuzzi. He is is lazy, horrible defensively and takes awful penalties. He is no longer a first line winger, either. I'd much rather have Afinogenov. His last two seasons have been horrible and he has had some trouble staying healthy, but he has incredible speed and stickhandling talents and is an offensive force when he is on his game. If the rumors about him not wanting to go back to Russia are true, then maybe we could pick him up on a cheap one-year deal for around $1M. No real risk involved there except some dollars.
  2. I agree that there is no way a Alberts-Wallin pairing should exist. That would just be terrible. They'd never get the puck out of the zone and would get destroyed on the forecheck. If Seidenberg is signed, then I think the second and third pairings should be Pitkanen-Alberts and Wallin-Seidenberg. Alberts isn't a Top 4 defenseman, but it makes a lot more sense to pair him with Pitkanen than to have our two slowest defensemen paired together.
  3. Agreed completely. At 29 years old, Ryan has maxed out his potential and thus it won't hurt his "development" to have him center the fourth line. Sutter, on the other hand, should be in the AHL until a third line spot opens up.
  4. We're an hour into free agency. JR's not going to fail to do anything with the amount of budget room he has available. I'm sure we will make a few signings and/or trades.
  5. Fredrik Sjostrom was not qualified by the Rangers. I'd like to see us sign him for ~$1M. He doesn't bring the "grit" we're looking for, but we could really use some PKing forwards on the lower lines with LaRose and maybe Bayda gone. Right now it looks like some of the top offensive players on the team like Staal and Cullen will be spending a lot of time killing penalties instead.
  6. Most of the guys ahead of Paradis on the team were older than him. Matthew Pistilli, who we recently signed as a free agent, played on the team and was 20 years-old. Paradis is a '91-born and all the guys ahead of him were '88-'89 born except for Labrecque. It's simply a case of being buried behind "veteran" players who are more advanced at their ages.
  7. From the 'Canes Twitter: "Dumoulin was in the stands for the Hurricanes' Game 2 victory against the Boston Bruins at TD Banknorth Garden in Boston." http://twitter.com/nhl_canes
  8. Yeah. In the '06 Playoffs it was Staal at the right point with Brind'amour at center. It didn't work the next season as they stupidly moved Staal to the left point where he wasn't as effective. I don't see why we took a LH-shooting sniper and put him on the left point where he couldn't unleash a cross-ice one timer. The powerplay was miserable when we tried it like that. I wouldn't like to see Staal on the point as I think he's best in front of the net, but I don't want him taking face-offs as we have other guys who are better than him at it. You could have Cullen play the point but line up at center, for instance. Or Jokinen on wing and taking the face-offs. Whatever it is, just please get Staal away from the circle.
  9. Agreed completely, but that might disrupt the line combinations that Francis/Maurice want on the PP. If one of those guys were to be on the same PP unit as Staal anyway, then yeah that person should take the face-off. If we don't sign/acquire anyone, we could move Jokinen up to first line LW and have him take the face-offs at ES as well as PP. He'd also fit pretty good as Staal's playmaking winger.
  10. Kind words about the Hurricanes from our second round pick: "The 6-foot-3, 197-pound native of Biddeford, Maine, is headed to Boston College in the fall as a true freshman, where he will be joined by New York Rangers top selection Chris Kreider (Boxford, Mass.). With a Sept. 1991 birthdate, Dumoulin is also one of the draft
  11. Agreed with both points. JR's draft history is not good and only in the last few years has he looked like he's been putting together with the guys you mentioned plus others like Jamie McBain. Not thrilled with the pick, but not upset about it after reading up on Paradis.
  12. A poster from Quebec wrote something on the Hurricanes' Hockey's Future board about Paradis. I am reposting it here: "ALright, I know the guy very well he is been plaing here for 2 years. I know his parents as well. Philippe Paradis is the total package. He is fast, drive hard to the net. He is a pure goal scorer. He got a really hard accurate shot. He won the hardest shot competition at the CHL prospect event. He has size, makes big hit. From the year i have been watching the LHJMQ, he is one of the best NHL prospect i have seen. This guy will make it to the NHL on a 1st or 2nd line. The only flaw in his game is that he is not mean at all. He takes big hit but he is not the kind of player that want to start a fight. He didnt have many points last year. It's mainly because he didnt had top minutes and powerplay time. HIs team was stacked as hell with some of the best scorer in the LHJMQ so he didnt play big minutes. Anyway, i would have loved if the HABS had taking him. He is a really good kid, you dont have to worry if you havent seen him play." So it turns out his numbers were low because he played on a stacked team and got little ice time/PP time. This is very encouraging IMO and I'd like to see what he can do next year with (presumably) more ice time. Remember, Bowman's numbers weren't very good in his draft year and then he exploded the next two seasons.
  13. 46% on the powerplay (154 for 335).
  14. Sutter should get better at face-offs as he gains some strength and gets older. He was supposedly very good at face-offs against other junior aged players, he just needs some time to learn how to be effective against stronger players. Another option could be having Jokinen play on Staal's line and take the face-offs. I don't like the idea of switching Staal to wing as some suggested, but you could have one of his wingers take his face-offs. I remember Sykora taking face-offs for Malkin in the playoffs in 2008 when they played together.
  15. Giveaways/takeaways, much like hits, are subjective stats that I don't trust. You know for sure when someone is out for a goal against. Things like the Corvo play on the Gionta goal are going to even themselves out over an 82 game season. The BehindTheNet adjusted +/- ranking takes into account linemates and opposition and Eaves still faired better than LaRose in that category. You'll notice that while LaRose's QUALCOMP rating was higher, his QUALTEAM was also a lot higher as well (-.03 to Eaves -.22). As for penalties, I don't think minors is necessarily an indication of defensive play. They could come from being over-aggressive, from getting roughing minors, and so forth. Ruutu was by far the worst offender among our forwards in minor penalties, but you'll notice from the BehindTheNet stats that he faced top opposition and faired well. Guys like Getzlaf, Burrows, Moreau, Moore, etc are among the league leaders in minor penalties and I don't think anyone would call them bad defensive players.
  16. There is is you look at the goals against numbers. They were +7 and +6, respectively, but Eaves only had 13 ES/SH points compared to LaRose's 30. At 5-on-5 (ES): Chad LaRose: 41 goals for/40 goals against, 2.26 goals against/60 Patrick Eaves: 22 goals for/16 goals against, 1.39 goals against/60 At 4-on-5 (PK): Chad LaRose: 4 goals for/14 goals against, 6.21 goals against/60 Patrick Eaves: 1 goal for/12 goals against, 7.12 goals against/60 So Eaves managed a much lower goals-against rate at 5-on-5 and a marginally higher goals against rate on the PK. LaRose usually played against better players at 5-on-5, but that doesn't explain having nearly one more goals against per 60 minutes than Eaves. In fact, http://www.behindthenet.ca/2008/basic_5_on_5.php?sort=6&mingp=&mintoi=&team=CAR&pos=' target="_blank">BehindTheNet.ca[/post] (link takes you the Canes' 5-on-5 page) has developed an adjusted +/- stat where it compares the player's +/- against the average on/off-ice +/- of everybody he plays against. Eaves was +.54, behind only Babchuk, Staal, Cullen, and Pitkanen. LaRose's was +.24 behind those guys, Eaves, Bayda, and Ruutu. Both were good in that department but Eaves was noticeably better. LaRose's defensive game is overrated because of the shorthanded chances he generates. He was actually taken off the PK for long stretches of the season under both coaches, and wasn't put there for good until he and Cullen started scoring shorthanded goals. In the regular season he was behind Sutter, Jokinen, Bayda, Brind'amour, Eaves, Cullen and Staal in average PK time. A "premier penalty killer" (as I've seen him described) should be getting more than 1:25/game on the PK.
  17. 47 of Ladd's 49 points were at even strength. Yeah, he played with one of the NHL's best scorers in Havlat, but so did Ruutu with Staal and he only got 37 ES points while being close to three years older. Furthermore, Ladd's center was Dave Bolland who isn't the greatest player in the world. Those two were productive together even when they were playing with Byfuglien prior to Havlat being moved to the line. At the end of the season Ladd was moved to the third line with Pahlsson and still produced. He didn't do much of anything in the playoffs, but neither did Ruutu (at least in the way of scoring). Ladd went +26 while playing against the other team's top players every night. I know he was backed by Keith-Seabrook and played with Havlat most of the time in front of good goaltending, but that's still a great number. I don't have a problem with the trade as I think Ruutu is a great player, but Ladd is a very good player now even after doing basically nothing offensively for four years from 2004-2008 in both juniors and the NHL.
  18. Eaves is good on the the PK and defensively. He averaged more shorthanded time than Chad LaRose and was second among our wingers in that category (Bayda was first). Eaves was third among forwards in +/- despite having only 14 points. Throughout the course of the regular season, he was scored on 16 times at 5-on-5. Even with his lack of ice time, that's an incredible number. I fail to see how playing on a high scoring team that year inflated his stats. If anything, they made them worse as he got less ice time to produce than he would have on a worse team. He got a short stint with Heatley-Spezza, but most of the time Eaves played with guys like McAmmond, Vermette and Kelly. Eaves averaged the 18th most minutes on the team (among regulars) at 12:12 and got the 13th most average PP time at 1:02. That was half the average PP time as Chris Neil, for example. He wasn't even a regular second unit guy. On a lower scoring team he's getting more ice time and likely producing more points. Oh, and the genius Ottawa Senators and their foresight... So smart for giving up Corvo+Eaves for two impending UFAs that failed to reverse their downward slope. Murray said he hated giving up Eaves but that Rutherford had specifically asked for him and he was needed to complete the deal. We wanted to draft Eaves with our second rounder in '03, but the Senators got him two spots ahead of us (we ended up getting Babchuk out of that pick, who we traded Richmond for). We've wanted him for a long time and I fully believe he will get a shot this season. Except two good seasons, one year where he played less than half the season due to injury and this past year. And we always hear about how "Chad LaRose has scored at every level", so what about Eaves with Boston College? 47 goals and 97 points in 84 games there. Again, he's a full two years younger than LaRose. What had LaRose "shown" or "proven" at the age of 25? That he could go ~60 games in the regular season without a goal and whiff on every scoring chance? If LaRose can magically learn how to position himself to score garbage goals, then Eaves can do the same to unleash his wrist shot. At least Eaves has the natural talent. The things being said about Eaves now are the same things that a lot of people here were saying about Andrew Ladd last year. Eaves is 1.5 years older than Ladd, but the point remains. People were 100% sure the guy was a bust and wanted him shipped out of town at the age of 22. Most people preferred the tenacity and fan favorite status of Chad LaRose over the "underachieving" Ladd, but off goes Ladd to Chicago and blows away anything LaRose has ever done with 49 points without an ounce of PP time. So, yeah, let's give up on another young kid so we can sink a bunch of money into a 27-year old third liner with a career year. When Bowman and Boychuk don't light the world on fire at a young age, maybe they can be traded too to make room for the money to re-sign the then-40-year old Ray Whitney or whoever. I'd rather have someone that can turn it on and play great at times (Samsonov) than somebody who gives you mediocrity 100% of the time (Bayda). I'm not at all concerned by someone who raises his game for the playoffs. Our elite Conn Smythe-winning goalie says Eaves has the best wrist shot on the team. That's some who I'd like to keep regardless if his "heart is in it" or not. Some players like LaRose are guys who you notice because they fly up and down the ice the entire game, others are guys who disappear and then randomly show up and score a goal. Maybe Eaves has a bit of a Kovalev syndrome, maybe he doesn't. But some guys just make things look easier than others do because of their natural skill level. Andrew Ladd basically floated his way through an entire junior season with 19 goals/45 points in 65 games the year after he was drafted, which was absolutely pathetic for a 4th overall pick playing in the WHL (by comparison, Bowman had 47 goals/83 points in 63 games this year in the same league). He had issues with his conditioning his first few seasons, but now is a very good player who you can count on to play tough minutes against good players. Some young players do not "get" that you have to work hard to succeed at this level and think they can dominate with their natural skill, so they struggle for a bit. Maybe Eaves is one of these players who will take time. Don't forget that LaRose had the very same conditioning issues that Ladd did before figuring out in the '07 offseason (when he was 25) that he needed to work harder to stay in shape the entire season. JR could easily trade a pick or a prospect. I wouldn't be that surprised if the #27 is gone. He doesn't have to weaken the roster to add somebody.
  19. I don't know about Seidenberg (as I think we need to bring in a defenseman to replace him), but we have the talent in the system and already on the roster to replace Cole and LaRose. These are nice second/third line players, but ultimately replaceable. Cole is not the player he once was. We all know that. He scored 42 points this year and his point-per-game pace has down rapidly every year since the lockout. Outside of a little hot streak when he was traded here, he has done little the past two years. He scored twice in 34 games as a Hurricane. He hasn't scored a playoff goal since 2002, spanning a total of 31 games and he only has 5 assists during that time period. Those numbers are absolutely brutal and can't be ignored. Yeah, Staal saw in an increase in scoring at the end of the year after Cole arrived, but Staal pretty much does that every season anyway. LaRose, for all his hard work and fan favorite status, is a third liner with a career high of 31 points. Anybody who thinks this guy is even a Top 6 forward - let alone a "rising star" as I saw him described in an actual news piece on WRAL - is crazy. We've got good young players like Bowman, Boychuk and Eaves ready to step into bigger roles or make the team. Jokinen, who should be back, is a guy who has been a regular 40+ point player in the past (hit that total or more each year from '05-'08). These are all guys who played in either minor roles on the team last season or weren't here at all. You do not overpay for players like Erik Cole and Chad LaRose. Why? Because when you do that, you lose money that can be used to keep significantly more important players. Everyone wants some great winger for Staal next offseason or some stud shut-down D, but that's not going to happen if we have $5+ million tied up in those two guys. We're already overypaying for Scott Walker and Rod Brind'amour, why make that list any longer? I'd even go as far as saying that even signing Cole for any price is overpayment because the guy has completely lost it as an offensive player. He is now a puck-hog who tries the same move every shift and constantly turns the puck over leading to rushes the other way. He has turned into a physical, American version of Maxim Afinogenov. These are the same complaints we had about Cole last year and are at least part of the reason being traded (the other being we really needed a defenseman like Pitkanen) and they haven't magically disappeared and aren't going to. Cole at nearly 31 years old isn't likely to change or get better. He could, however, get worse.
  20. I think Eaves' first two seasons are less likely to be a flash in the pan than LaRose's past two seasons because of the respective age they scored them at. Eaves was 21-22 in those years, LaRose 25-26. Both of LaRose's seasons came in contract years, while Eaves was still on the first/second year of his entry level deal. Also, I know LaRose didn't get the PP time Eaves got (which was barely second unit time), but look at the ice time. Eaves was buried on a great offensive team and played a shade over 12 minutes a game, while LaRose played on a team with relatively weak winger depth (at least at RW this year, where it was basically Ruutu and nobody else unless you count the games Walker/Williams ineffectively played) and got 14-15 minutes a game. Is LaRose really playing on a line with players like Whitney and Cullen on any other team? It shows a team weakness when one of your "second line wingers" is barely cracking 30 points, regardless of how much PP time he got. His 19 goals were great, but 12 assists playing with two 20+ goalscorers? I wouldn't pay LaRose anything more than the $1.7M Eaves is making in the final year of his deal. Anything more than that and you exit "third line" money and start to enter "second line" money...and LaRose is not a second liner. A budget team - especially one with a number of bad contracts already on the books - can't afford to overpay for third line talent without it coming to a detriment to their top six. I think we've all fallen in love with these hard-working bottom 6 players and want to keep them here but forget that we have a pretty average top 6 due to some players declining (Brind'amour) or being shipped out of town due to money/injury reasons (Williams). Brind'amour-Williams was basically our second line for three years and both those guys might as well be gone. Even had Williams not been traded, I don't know if he would have ever been the same. Stillman was moved so we could get a Top 4 defenseman in Corvo (who is extremely important to the team) so that trade is justified, but the other two we lost for nothing unless Cole gets re-signed. Let's look at the Top 6ers we have signed for next season: Samsonov - should be good for 50+ points based on how he played the last 2/3rds of the season and playoffs. Average second line winger when you take into account his lack of physical/defensive ability. He tries really hard but he's just too small to hurt anyone with his hits and he's clueless in the defensive zone. Whitney - scored 77 last year and led the team in that category, but is 37 and could decline. Based on his PP ability, he should be good for 60+ points assuming he stays healthy. Above-average first line winger but could see a decrease in production. Cullen - has never scored 50 points in a season before, though has been on pace for that the last two seasons. Two seasons over 20 goals in his career. Good defensive player, but in the end is an inconsistent offensive player. Average second line center. Staal - He produced a ton at the end of the regular season and in the playoffs, but in the end he scored a total of 75 regular season points. Is wildy inconsistent. He's gotten a lot better defensively, though, and now can be trusted in key defensive situations (even though he can't win a face-off). Above-average first line center. And that's it as far as legit Top 6 guys go unless I am forgetting or underrating somebody. Ruutu is RFA so I'm not listing him as what LaRose gets (or does not get) could effect what we have available to give to Ruutu. Two good first liners (one of whom is 37) and two average second liners does not make a great Top 6, even with Ruutu likely coming back. He's just another second line winger despite all the intangibles/grit he brings.
  21. Agreed that he did benefit greatly from his teammates, but he still faced top opposition every night and faired well against it. Even if he's not scoring, he'll be a pretty good defensive forward. Late in the season and in the playoffs he actually played on a line with Pahlsson after he was acquired. 10 minutes a game will do that to you. It's hard to produce when your linemates are the Adams Family or Trevor Letowski and you're getting 15 shifts a game. He was playing pretty well on a line with Samsonov right before he was traded (JR did the right thing by moving him then as he likely would have come back down to earth and lowered his trade value). I would have liked to see Ladd under Maurice's system, but I have no complaints with Ruutu.
  22. Ladd put up 49 points with very little PP time and a +26 rating this season. I agree that he wasn't worth a 4th overall, but I still think he could become a 55-60 point player given the right opportunity. Giving up on someone like that can be a mistake, but luckily we moved him when he still had high value and got Ruutu in return. I'm afraid Eaves may have killed his trade value by having two poor offensive seasons and a slightly high salary (he makes $1.7M in the final year of his deal). We might be able to get a pick of some sort in return, but I wouldn't except a Ruutu-esque player to be coming back. Ladd was very cheap, 22 years old and an RFA (so Chicago could have just walked away from him if he didn't pan out).
  23. Agreed with all of this. If he's here, I hope he comes into camp and has a great preseason. If not we may be able to trade him as you say. The Washington game and the goal against Phoenix (where he danced around the defender to create a 2-on-1 with LaRose and then sniped it past the goalie) is part of the reason that I'm still holding out hope for Eaves. He supposedly has the best wrist shot on the team (according to Cam Ward), but struggles to put everything together. A lot of young players struggle to use their tools properly and some never learn, but I think Eaves will as he's done it in the past. I also think some of his injuries in the past (shoulder in particular) may have affected his game. I would not like to give up on someone with Eaves' natural skills and have it come back to bite us. If he can put it together and find a spot on a line with a playmaking C, he'll score 25+. We already gave up on Ladd and he's playing pretty well in Chicago (got Ruutu in return so that was a even trade, but we still traded a 4th overall power forward not even four years after we drafted him).
  24. Agreed with this, though McBain is our 4th-best prospect (and best defensive prospect) according to Hockey's Future's rankings. I'd like to see him spend at least a year in the AHL to learn the pro game. I think he's got by far the most potential of any of our D prospects, but he's also by far the youngest of any of the guys we have signed. I really think our other prospects aren't that good and will merely serve as placeholders until McBain is ready. 1.5 games is not enough to show what you can do. I don't think Eaves got a fair shot throughout the season to prove himself as an offensive player. He spent a large portion of the season on the fourth line, almost never played on the powerplay, and had to play on his off-wing a lot to accommodate the other right wingers we have. Compare his treatment to that of Samsonov's. Samsonov got some 50-odd games on the top line despite doing little in the way of scoring (though his stickhandling was fun to watch!). Samsonov was never demoted until the Cole trade and always played on the powerplay. You're right that those stats came in mostly inflated scoring years and on great teams, but the most ice time he averaged in those seasons was 12:29. LaRose got 15:08/game this season and spent large portions of the season on scoring lines even though he didn't get PP time. Also, Eaves' stats were still good even if you remove his PP points; he only had 6 PP points in each of those years. It might be a bad thing because those goals could dry up. His previous career high before this season was 11. It may be just me, but nearly doubling your career high in goals during a contract year as a 26/27-year old is a bit alarming. He still did better than Eaves in that category and that can't be ignored, but I'm trying to project the future, which is very important with long term contracts. If we sign LaRose and he comes back down to earth, then his contract is just as bad as Eaves' is if he doesn't improve. When LaRose was Eaves' current age, his career high in goals was 6. Coincidentally, that was the exact number that Eaves scored this season. If you forget that Eaves ever played his first two seasons and cracked the NHL as a 23-year old instead, the last two seasons are right on track with where LaRose was at that point. Good defensive play/PKing/energy, but not much scoring. I may be overrating Eaves' offensive abilities based off a few good seasons, but the kid was a 1st round pick in a great draft, did well in his first two seasons as a 21-22 year old, and I don't think his potential has dried up at barely 25. Even if he doesn't score, he provides great defensive ability and a physical presence for his size (second among our forwards in hits last season). My dream, though, is that we acquire a real Top 6 winger so that neither of these guys are forced to play there. I have absolutely nothing against LaRose and that he could very well repeat this past season or even improve on it. I just think Eaves has a higher upside and that there's no point in paying both big dollars. The organization seemed to make a choice between Eaves/LaRose last offseason when they decided to shell out $1.4M/yr for Eaves while giving a relatively cheap one-year deal to LaRose. That may or may not have been the right decision (time will tell), but that's what happened and we have to plan accordingly.
  25. Eaves spent something like one and a half games on the top line at the beginning of the season before he got demoted. I posted this on another board and am copying it to here: People talk about LaRose's 31 points as if he had the best season ever and blows away that "****** hockey player" Eaves (as I saw him described on another 'Canes board), but forget that Eaves has seasons of 14g+18a=32pts and 20g+9a=29pts (in 59 games) while getting much less ice time than even LaRose did this season. When LaRose was 25 (Eaves' current age), his career high in goals was six. Eaves doesn't offer LaRose's speed/tenacity, but what he does bring is an actual shot rather than just the ability to collect opportunistic garbage goals...such garbage goals that I fear may dry up for LaRose and cause him to come back down to earth offensively next season. Eaves' hits actually accomplish something unlike LaRose who just bounces off most his checks. Eaves is also the smarter defensive hockey player despite LaRose's ability to generate ridiculous amounts of shorthanded scoring chances (approximately .01% of which are actually finished on). LaRose is an effort penalty killer who rushes the pointman and either causes him to turn the puck over/rush a pass, or completely loses position and causes a scoring chance for the other team. Eaves is a better positional player who doesn't chase the puck as much. Ideally neither of the two would be on the second line. That should be Justin Williams' spot. But outside of one career season for LaRose in a UFA contract year (HUGE RED FLAG!), Eaves has the better track record of producing offense while getting less ice time and being two years younger. The organization has already decided to pay Eaves $1.4M/yr, so why not give him a chance to see what he can do? Why pay LaRose similar money if you think Eaves can accomplish the same thing? Or has Rutherford given up on Eaves after one bad year? Is he destined to rot on the 4th line?
×
×
  • Create New...