Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About remkin

  • Rank
    Carolina Hurricanes Admin

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

6,202 profile views
  1. Yeah the way Pittsburgh is playing JR would seem to be in place for a while.
  2. Update. Williams was signed before TD. But it was under Francis. I said that bringing back old players was a JR thing, and it was, but I should probably extend that to a JR and a PK thing. Under TD I don't think we've done it. But of course, I could be forgetting someone.
  3. Instead of calling this thread "Scoreboard Watching", just put this as the Title:
  4. Williams is a good point. Yes, somehow I missed the most important exception to the rule. Williams was a UFA and he was a guy who had been gone a long long time from a different regime, and he had won some cups etc, but we did bring him back. Also, it was very early in the committee's reign I think (or was it PK?). I do think though that he is an exception though and not the likely rule. But really my opinion on bringing guys back is a general notion, not a hard and fast rule. I do think fairly hard and fast on E. Staal though. Also all speculation on the tendencies of the committee have to be couched in the fact that the track record is still pretty short.
  5. Previously known as Z Pizza. Now a chiropractor's office.
  6. The theme of bringing back old players was a JR thing. We don't have a single player on the roster that moved elsewhere and then came back. If you push the definition to include Mrazek and Williams who went "out there" and came back, but that's not the same as going to another team, playing, and then coming back. I never say never, but TD is a forward looking guy, and once a player is moved on from or moves on from us, I don't see much interest in bringing them back. Eric. I was fortunate enough to meet Eric a couple of times. He used to be a customer of one of my pizza restaurants (now gone) up in North Raleigh. He was (and presumably still is) a very approachable guy. He stood and reminisced about the cup year for about 10 minutes with my brother who brought him a pizza. I like Eric. There is talk of Eric and possible HOF one day. But I would never bring him back here. It wasn't just the fact that he was Captain of all of those mediocre, malaise teams. It wasn't just that he was captain when Justin Faulk was not playing any defense. It wasn't just that he was part of the leadership that let Skinner just float around. It wasn't just the fact that his numbers fell off every year until we finally moved him. It was also the unholy alliance with his brother leaving far too much "power" in the hands of two players. OK, unholy is way too strong because I think both Staals are quality guys. But even now we have another Staal underperforming offensively with the C sewn on. Having them back together is just too much of a throwback to the days that Brind'Amour has, more than any single person, turned completely around. He is not going to want to go back. And that's why I know, without fear of contradiction, that it will never ever happen, at least for real (not just for the old retire as a Cane thing). Brind'Amour loves Jordan to a fault, but he is 100% aware of what happened to the team with two Staals on NMC's and huge contracts did to the larger team. He will not allow it again. The exception could be if we traded rentals Haula for Eric and made it clear it was a one year thing. But Eric has another year on his deal after this year. So I'm pretty confident saying this will not happen. Also, unless we move Haula out, we don't need more forwards.
  7. remkin

    Kobe Bryant

    These things just keep changing early on, now 8 other passengers, 9 total including the pilot. Stunning.
  8. WARNING. I'm coming off a night shift, with some time to burn. As such this one gets a bit long. If you're reading on the phone, it will look even longer! I think you made a good case. I wasn't really just responding to just you, but used your post to expand some thoughts. I don't think there's a right answer every time, but I have tended to drift away from the buying at the trade deadline. But for the fan, buying is way more fun. Again, my response here, while I'm quoting you, is really more into the ether out there than a direct response as I drift into a broader, theoretical discussion since I'm sleep deprived after a night shift and so this happens.... Most fans want the player. Most fans don't want a draft pick. It makes sense as most fans are not particularly interested in looking very long down the road. Draft picks that are not top 3 picks especially, but even those sometimes, either don't pan out, or take a long long time to pan out. First, you are getting a marker. The draft doesn't even take place until after the season and playoffs are over. Then you are getting an 18 year old kid, essentially graduating high school. The In the Canes System part of the board is lightly traveled by viewers. The Juniors and Europeans thread has been up since October 22 and has 406 views. The average game day thread gets 3,000 views in a few days. Just not much broad interest in prospects (and that's on a board of superfans). But if we got a name NHL player at the deadline? That would get thousands of views. I guess it's hard enough to keep track of the guys in the sightless eye jersey than to worry about picks that might never amount to anything. But the draft and develop model is the time honored way to build a juggernaut long-term cup contender, but especially in this small market. And that means a continuous, steady stream of high upside prospects competing for limited NHL slots. And that means drafting and even when you're putting together a very competitive team? Keep compiling picks and some prospects because you cannot be sure which one will become Aho or Slavin or Pesce or Necas. The rare Svech at #2 is the only one that is obvious to most fans. After that, you draft upside and hope for the best. Luckily this team has been drafting WAY better of late. If one looks from 1997-2008 at our second round picks. That's 12 drafts, second round, one viable NHL player: Jamie "own goal" McBain, who had some skill, but was never really that good. Since 2008 we've picked second rounders including: Faulk, Doumalin, Rask, McGinn, Ned, and Aho in consecutive years, then some guys that could still arrive (Kuok, Loustarinen), and especially IMO, Jack Drury, Jamison Rees and the goalie Kotchetkov. If those last three hit like I think they will, add them to a long list of second round hits. (The general hit rate for even a decent NHL career is about 1 in 4 for second rounders. We have been annihilating that mark, and the three we took in the past two drafts are looking very good so far). So, draft and develop is much more fun when your organization is good at them, which we are. I fully agree that nearly every team needs to round out the picks with trades and even UFA's. My main concern at the deadline is pure rentals. The long view IMO favors selling. Oddly, possibly even selling when your team is good. That's because the deadline carries a massive bias or premium for buying. It is a seller's market. Draft picks, that in July no GM will trade for any reason, fly out the door for that shiny "final piece". Lately GM's are realizing the mistake a bit more and prices for the rentals have come down a little, but still favoring selling. There's also the historical fact that by far most rentals don't actually get their team across the line. The Recci (and Weight) situation is the outlier. So from that JR move that worked to many attempts after that which didn't work to now, I simply love where this team has gotten to as an organization. Gone are the days where the only decent picks are the obvious high first rounders. We have scouts and a draft committee that is very good if not excellent. Francis started this, but the committee has quietly kept it going compiling more picks and prospects along the way. While most fans out there don't look too deep into the cupboard (not those on this board of course), those that do will see that not only have we put together a fun, fast, talented, young NHL roster but we've compiled a prospect pool that is mega deep. My latest attempt at ranking the prospects went 17 deep with guys that had a real NHL upside shot, some of whom are killing their leagues even now or had great showings at the WJC. It doesn't seem that long ago that our best forward prospects were these three guys with no one below them: Zach Dalpe, Zack Boychuk, and Drayson Bowman. We now have guys at #15 that are better than all of them. BUT we have also compiled 2 first round and 2 second round picks in this year's deep draft. Unless we win the lottery again, or somehow pull off the very rare move up, we will pick guys who will have to incubate for around 4 years or more. It will excite a handful of us, but most will be blissfully unaware of our continued packing of our depth in the system. But then, when a Martin Necas, questioned even this year, arrive on the NHL scene? Or a second rounder with a really weird name (who is Aho?) starts to make noise. Then the excitement meter will peg to high for those guys and the team. And like Tampa, casual fans will ask "how do the Canes keep reloading? Where do they find those players? But we'll know. Last thing. As we become a cap team, and especially if we start winning a lot, we will be frequently up against the cap. We will have to start moving some key, named veterans out rather than pay them. This is where we can re-load with our high end, now much more developed (because there was no room to rush them) prospects. This is where all of that depth can allow us to continue to succeed for years. That's the plan, and luckily TD and the committee are sticking with it.
  9. That last part is endemic to the All Star game no matter the format. IMO back when it was 5 on 5 it was even worse to watch the low intensity, no defense skate in the park. At least with the 3 on 3 you can see some dangles and toe drags and fancy stickwork that while still not game-real seems slightly less out of place than watching that same thing 5 on 5. But yes, the idea of an All Star game in a contact sport has always diluted the game farther from it's form than in non contact games. That said, no one's playing much D in NBA All star games. Still it's more evident in hockey when the announcers are stunned by and off sides call or joke about the one hit being registered as the 17th hit of all time. I find the 3 on 3 watchable. But fully agree that it is devoid of the excitement of even a single real 3 on 3 regular season OT. I would point out though that there is very little hitting in regular season 3 on 3 with all that ice. So it's a bit closer to the real thing than 5 on 5. The thing that makes it less watchable to me is the obvious step slow and casual stride nature of the ASG. They are clearly going about 75% on offense and 50% on D. As you mention though, I doubt that will ever change, so at least IMO the 3 on 3 is the best option. But that's just me. At least the NHL is willing to mix things up. I was able to somehow sneak in at the convention center in Raleigh to witness the captains pick their teams live. Didn't stick with that, but it was interesting at least for a little while. But the real take home for me is that the All Star game is really interesting once. When it's in your home town and you have tickets. So I wait for another 30 years....
  10. We have 2 of the top 7 scorers in NCAA in points per game: #5: David Cotton: 1.40 ppg #7: Jack Drury: 1.36 ppg I hope we can talk Cotton into signing with us, but he seems like a classic "Senior goes UFA" guy, especially with the depth of our prospect pool. By the same token, we probably need to get Drury signed ASAP (see Adam Fox). I do have to think that getting that Harvard degree is enticing too as far as finishing up in college. I do start to wonder if teams with deep pools of prospects should shy away from NCAA picks.
  11. remkin

    New movie reviews

    Great idea for an off topic topic CC. I do want to see that one.
  12. I gotta say, the 3 on 3 tourney makes the All Star game watchable. It's also added to making OT far more interesting during the regular season. Might actually watch a bit before my night shift.
  13. So having gone through a few trade deadlines with this team, I have developed some thoughts. My first real exposure to the deadline was when this team added Mark Recchi an hour before the deadline. (And Doug Weight about this time of year before that). To get Recchi we traded a second rounder who ended up being a non NHL player and a couple of guys who never really amounted to much. This was a coup for us, and we all know how that ended. So that was the early influence on my idea of buying at the deadline. Add to that, that this team was missing on a lot of draft picks before that, and it made even more sense. But over time I've cooled on buying at the deadline, especially with draft picks and very especially with first rounders. There seems to be a predictable cycle in the perceived value of draft picks. The closer to the draft, the more GM's hold them tight. Of course it depends on other trends (how good is your NHL team, how low/high do you anticipate picking, how rich is the draft predicted to be, and just a longer term trend of younger players being key). But outside of that, the distance from the draft combined with the intensity of the perceived need affects GM's willingness to move picks out. The trade deadline and the first day of UFA are too silly seasons where the itch to get a proven player shoots up. UFA is after the draft and all about money, not picks, but the trade deadline is about trades and draft picks get moved. As the itch to add that last piece goes up, the perceived value of picks tends to go down. But get near the draft? Get near the draft and GM's suddenly guard their picks like the Hope Diamond. Every year we think picks will get swapped and players moved for picks at the draft, and every year it ends up with a parade of GM's stepping up and just making their pick. So....the time to GET draft picks, is away from the draft decreasing until the trade deadline when the opportunity pops it's head up one more time. The time to trade draft picks would be at the draft. But by then GM's have developed plans for those picks and rarely move them. So, we bought Toronto's first rounder before the season even began. Way away from the draft. It was just a cost of their cap problems. No big deal, heck they won't be picking early and they protected a top 10 pick. While admittedly that does dilute the value, just wait to see who we end up actually getting. Or, for the first time in modern drafting history, maybe we package our two first rounders and move up the board to richer territory. This team is stocked with obvious young talent. Obvious now. Outside of Svech, I can tell you that very few of us were touting Aho very early. Now it seems that everyone is, but not when he was drafted. Or Necas. Or especially Slavin, or Pesce? Even those of us who like to follow prospects mostly did not see Slavin coming at all. 4th rounder. (our second 4th rounder after Trevor Carrick, so yeah Cane's scouts cool the jets on drafting genius). Of course I wrote after Slavin was drafted: "Mark my words. One day Jacob Slavin will not only make the team, but he will go to the All Star game, and not only that, he will win the sharp shooters contest. Write it down."........O.K. I didn't. Anyway, the point is that you can't compile too many draft picks. The other side of that buying at the deadline is that those moves working out (Recci) are the exception to the rule. Most often those guys have trouble adjusting and don't give full value. First round picks have a 50-50 chance of becoming decent or better NHL players, but the higher the better. Second rounders 1/4 and the higher the better. So, yes, the odds are against them. But then again, the odds of winning the cup after you make the playoffs is 6.25% overall, and that assumes you don't have to play Tampa, Washington, Pittsburgh, Boston, et all to get there. That also assumes that your cutline team gets in which currently sits at 72%. So, our odds of winning the cup are under 4.5%. That first or second rounder has a massively better chance of a nice NHL career than that. And those cup odds are not the real equation. The real equation is the amount that the deadline addition increases those odds. For the vast majority of available players that is a small number indeed. If our cup odds are say 4%, then maybe that guy pushes those odds up to 4.25%. The numbers favor adding more and more picks to adding a rental. Even though the picks mostly don't pan out.
  14. I agree that it's unlikely we are sellers unless we just collapse. I don't see that happening, but with a 99-100 point cut line a team could drop out fast. If that happens, we might move a couple of guys. Again, don't see it happening, but if we drop back by 8-10 points...yes, we could use more picks. We can always use more picks. If we don't fall out and we move Haula it would be for another player. Rumors are that could be a D man. I don't see it unless we move Gardiner out, but the committee never rests. I liked the idea of sniping Lehner, but unless both Chicago and one of our goalies swoon, can't see that deal being there. TBH I still think our most likely move is no significant move. I don't see a gaping need that there would be an obvious guy to fill in. Of course, we are going to miss Dougies goals from the blueline, but guys who can get even halfway close to that are generally not available. Sure, moving Gardiner's massive minus out could help, but can't imagine many teams clamoring for him. TD has said he doesn't like trading the future unless the return is special and fits in longer term. That is smart IMO. More to follow on that. Trade deadline moves are often sucker bets. More on that to follow.
  15. Not sure why I thought Bean was R. Ah. Well, Fleury can play his off side I guess.
  • Create New...