Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes

top-shelf-1

Full Member
  • Content Count

    9,284
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    98

Everything posted by top-shelf-1

  1. Exactly, neither Waddell not Petr's agent (or the stick boy--Luke's likely "source") is going to say "They're miles apart" at this stage of things. Better to say what they did; it lets them claim, if somebody pays him, that matching or bidding up the offer "wasn't fiscally prudent." Petr was good but Mac still shouldered enough of the load that I don't have faith he can hold the crease for a whole season and a playoff run. Plus, goalie agents don't seem to have accepted that the rules have changed and teams want to two proficient keepers--at or near the cost of one great one.
  2. Unfortunately, I do too. So I will laugh and laugh when the owners lock the rinks again in a couple of years, and then come crawling back to start the process over again. Then I'll cry and cry that there's no hockey until January of that year--if we're lucky.
  3. If we're determined to hang the next 10 years of payroll on a 21-year-old kid who may or may not fill out enough to compete at the highest level in this league for the duration of his deal, that makes us even dumber. Negotiations that are limited to a single set of parameters are not negotiations at all, they're standoffs. But hey, it's TD's cow. He can milk it any way he wants. I'm just having a really hard time seeing what's the hurry. Do a deal at 7 million for each of the next three years, and assuming Aho's progress continues and he is able to stand the grind, fantastic--give him his payoff after the second year, with a 10-year extension at an 8.5 million AAV (or whatever). Now you've got a more-seasoned player that you're confident will make it--and you've locked him down until he's 33 (assuming a 10-year extension).
  4. I love Aho. I have his sweater. I think he's going to be very good. But if you guys are only looking at stats in the year prior to their contract and not player type, you're comparing apples and oranges. Draisaitl is 6-1, 214. Aho is (allegedly only) an inch shorter, and 40 pounds lighter (which, of the two, is the one that matters). Drai is a power forward. Aho is a skilled playmaker who can score if he's healthy, and has somebody else throwing around the weight he ain't got. This is why I've been comparing him to Johnny Hockey, and speculating that he's the yardstick the Canes are using with SeaBass. They are much closer in overall size, style of play, and production at the same points in their careers. If we plan to pay Draisaitl money to anyone anytime soon, my cash is on Svech. Everybody complains that Skinner was soft. Aho makes Skinner look like a freakin' power forward.
  5. We've actually paid DeHaan, Pesce, and Slavin. And on the forward side, TT. And at the moment we have no goaltender. You're right: Faulk has little value. But moving your shutdown D when your goaltending is a moving target gives you two things to worry about--scoring more than the other guys and goaltending--instead of goaltending alone. I believe in buying elite scorers from teams with cap issues (or wanting to move one for other reasons) via trade--of 4-5-6 D, bottom-six O, prospects and picks. This lines up with what cap-strapped teams can afford, and the position they are often in: staring down a rebuild. It's how we got Nino. If the cost of an elite scorer is a shutdown D, that's a wash; you're going to give up more goals at the same time you score more, and just have to hope the latter outpaces the former. I prefer having confidence that we'll keep the puck out of our own net and scoring on the power play (!) to hoping we're the better gunslingers at even strength every night out.
  6. If they move out one of the guys we want, they can. They're basically in rebuild mode, so a first would have real value, and getting Marleau back would help them keep butts in the seats while they're doing it. Just spitballin', but like someone said, he supposedly doesn't want to play anywhere else. Gotta think he's a lever in a deal with them.
  7. Probably. My guess is we move that first AND Marleau to SJ for pretty much whatever roster player we name, and retain some of Marleau's salary as a sweetener.
  8. Exactly. Again, look at Gaudreau, who put up 16 more points than SeaBass this year. If we do anything more than that with Aho at this point in his development, we dis other players and limit our ability to pay guys who can play with him. Which sounds a little too familiar for me. My guess is that Aho decided this is a nice place to develop and then see what he can get, and that's what he's doing. But why let him name his price? There's no need; he's an RFA. If we let the summer go by without signing him and nobody offer sheets him for the number he wants, we prove our point. If he does get offer sheeted at that number or higher, we can match it--or not. We hold all the cards. Why fold when we control the play?
  9. Fine. What would you like broken? I love it when other posters intentionally misrepresent what the posters they are trying to criticize have actually said. Look at Faulk's numbers, his salary, and that fact that nobody will give us anyone of value and take his contract, coastal. The market has set his value, not me. If you don't like my pointing it out, use the ignore button.
  10. No. Their agents are. Our new owner said early on he's not going to do stupid things. So far he hasn't, and has had success, so we shouldn't be surprised that he's not doing stupid things now. Anybody looking at Faulk's numbers the last five years and saying the guy deserves a raise doesn't understand the concept of rewarding performance. He got a sweetheart deal much too early, and despite bestowing the (very questionable) mantle of All-Star on him, twice, the return we've been offered has been consistent: low. We're fond of saying around here that hockey is a business. Well, if you analyze the Faulk situation as the business world would, his salary (price) is clearly out of step with his market value. Teams are offering low returns in proposed trades because of the contract he is on. When they factor in what he is still owed, they can't justify letting go of the player(s) we sought in exchange. His fans may not agree, but his fans don't have to pay him--our trading partners do. The entire business world (companies that survive, at least) gives raises based on performance, not potential. I'm glad we have an owner who actually understands that, and is determined to run things that way. Aho has been good, but he's not Crosby--yet. If he wants 8 million, that means he's doing the same thing Gaudreau did when he was an RFA: seeing how much he could get. Ultimately, he got $6.75 million for six years, and it took until October to close the deal. Even though I'd prefer a bridge deal at around six for Aho, because I think he will be worth $8 million in another three years, the team has to work with what his agent is seeking, which (as always, with agents) is "as much as possible, right freakin' now!" So I have a feeling we may see something very similar to the Gaudreau resolution play out with SeaBass, because his performance thus far has been equivalent.
  11. That may have been true last year (although I have my doubts). Regardless, I don't think it's true anymore. Guys play this game for one reason: To get a ring. They couldn't care less who they're playing for when they get it.
  12. We've been shopping Faulk since we got Dougie. It's the worst-kept secret in the NHL. Edit to add: Also, unfortunately, he's the most overrated (supposedly) offensive d-man in the league.
  13. Yup, he names 15 teams he's willing to be traded to, every July 1. Took effect last summer. He's clearly wanting us to choose between him and Doug. Eeeeeasy choice.
  14. Perry could be the short-term Ferland we hoped Ferland could be, until we can get to Goat. But even if we get him, I'll hate his Marchard/Pronger-esque ability to irritate. I prefer hockey to pro wrestling.
  15. I wouldn't go higher than $1.5 million. Toronto might.
  16. I believe Ned joins the Canes this year at backup at least. He's achieved all he can at the AHL level and he's an RFA. We ask guys to perform and tell them they'll be rewarded. Ned has learned how to win. If we plan to commit, circumstances have conspired to make this the time to do it. I think Varlamov will get a four-year deal somewhere, on the understanding that he's the #1 this year and after that he's whatever he's told he is. Giving him 50 games this year and Ned the rest, then splitting the workload in 20-21, then working Ned into the majority during the last two years of Varly's deal would give Ned a great mentor, and Booth/Helvig time to steep.
  17. Doesn't mean we should set a new standard for back-up keeper salaries.
  18. Because he plays half the season--if that--and he's older than dirt. I love what the guy did for us this year, but how many more years like that can a guy his age have? Not saying I know the answer, but $2.5 million is a pretty big bet.
  19. I really don't think this is the case. I think Mac, as a 36-year-old who just saw his first start in the SCP, would be tickled pink with a one-year, million-dollar deal. In Toronto. For about a month after we picked him up, in every interview, he looked like a deer in the headlights: Stunned.
  20. I agree, but think Roddy's (unrealistic) expectations about team cohesion and commitment and loyalty could mean the door for Petr is already closed.
  21. How about Varly? The Avs rode Grubauer in their last playoff series, albeit to elimination, but Grubs had better numbers than Varlamov on the year. Plus, the Avs just re-upped Francouz. Varlamov would give Svech a buddy from the motherland. He's 31 and a UFA. If he's seriously expecting anything like the $5.9 million/yr. he's coming off of, he's not living in the real world. And if he can give us about the same number of games he did the Avs last year (49) Ned would get a real good taste of the NHL (assuming Mraz doesn't come back). Could be a perfect and affordable transition to Ned.
  22. Or, the Canes have never had this much talent that they're going to have to pay, pretty much all at once. Budgeting is complex. There's a difference between paying someone and paying someone stupid money. IMO, paying Aho like he's already McJesus--he isn't--would be stupid at this stage. He's 21 and tiny. His heart is huge, he has the best hockey head of anybody on the team, and he wants to win, but all that--and $5--will get you a tall Frappucino. After he's got two more years of the grind under his belt, 20 more pounds of muscle on his frame, and has proven he can be what we need him to be year in and year out? Fine, let's get stupid. Paying Mraz like a #1 when he has never been anything like one, and when the league-wide trend is increasingly toward having two good keepers instead of a Lundqvist and a prayer? Also stupid. I'm surprised at how quickly many of us seem to have forgotten that this is a mid-market (at best) franchise. It can't count on gate to float the boat. If we start throwing money around like Edmonton, we'll guarantee that we're approximately as successful as Edmonton. If, on the other hand, we plan carefully and make sure guys are all in and structure contracts with the longer-term obligations coming in mind (Svech, Ned, Geekie, maybe Necas), we'll have the talent--and the money to pay it--to ensure being very good for a very long time.
  23. If recent history is any indication, they were gone the moment they decided to test the market. With the (inexplicable) exception of PDG, guys who have done so recently, or even balked at our best offer, are dead to us (i.e., Lindholm, Noah). I don't see it as devastating. For years owners have been talking tough, backing down, and ultimately rolling over. I'm glad we have one who places a priority on building something and seeing it through. Thanks for your service, and don't let the door hit you in the @$$, McE and Petr...
  24. Which is fine, too. But if we've been wanting to sign him to a long-term deal since November and it hasn't happened yet, what do you think the problem is? Maybe it's one of the things you list: Or maybe it's one of two things that you don't: NMC/NTC. Four years into his new deal, Aho is eligible for either one. Annnnnd... another argument for a bridge deal. Give him a three-year deal at the money he wants now, and a written guarantee of re-opening/extending after the second year, and it seems to me both sides get what they need now without in any way limiting their ability to get what they want later. Call me a belt-and-suspenders guy, but if we learned nothing from the Eric and Cam years, surely we learned this much?
  25. Living in the best climate in the world doesn't hurt either.
×
×
  • Create New...