Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes

remkin

Administrators
  • Content Count

    16,689
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    82

About remkin

  • Rank
    Carolina Hurricanes Admin

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

5,667 profile views
  1. I'd probably go a bit smaller though.
  2. It may finally be time for capes. Someone has to go first.
  3. That is interesting. I'm pretty sure his end of season splits are better than the start too. If he can repeat that, I really like our group!
  4. True. Haula is a very solid two way guy from what Forslund and others have said. And Necas was plus 20. But man could those guys fly!
  5. This was my point in all of this. Skinner had two really good (for him) years where he offset his defensive liabilities at least some (not sure Brind'Amour would agree), but then regressed big time his final year. The reason it matters, IMO is because Faulk has one year left, and we have at least 3 NHL defensemen in the AHL, possibly 4, with no place to put them. It would be worth knowing if the future Faulk, the guy potentially signed to a long term deal, will be the Faulk of last year or the Faulk of the 4 before that. Those that have always liked Faulk presumably wouldn't find it much of an issue since they don't buy that Faulk was ever a liability. But to me it would be the issue if we plan on keeping him. I can get behind the Faulk of last season, but not the Faulk of the 4 before that, even with his goals. Last year was the most recent, which is good, and the team and coach are the same, so I'm not really too worried about Faulk, but 4 of the past 5 were not good enough, especially with guys pushing up. Overall, I'd still probably trade Faulk in an ideal world, (part of this is just that we have three other very good D men in Slavin, Hamilton, and Pesce to add yutes to) but...with one year left on his contract the return will not be great, and ideally the D would be in a better position to move on from him if McKeown and Fleury get some more NHL ice time, ergo next year. If we trade Faulk this year, I suspect it would be, like TVR, for futures because we really don't have room for more forwards right now. I wonder if Faulk could fetch a first rounder. Since we moved DeHaan, it could be a bit risky to move another key veteran from the D right now. Since IMO Faulk was a positive contributor to our game last year, I'd keep him, at least to start, and if he plays like he did last year, he will be a positive force. The only exception would be if we moved Faulk for a very accomplished PP quarterback, but those don't grow on trees and would be hard to find. Faulk's bomb on the PP is great, but he's not a true QB back there, yet seems to lock down that position on the first unit. Given our other potential upgrades on the PP, a really good QB could boost our PP substantially.
  6. Agree. Second rounder and prospect type of thing?
  7. One other thing from the Adam Gold podcast. Adam has texted Williams, and while he can't say anything specific, he said he would be shocked if Williams didn't play again next year. He thinks it will be for Carolina, and that right now it's a negotiating thing. Still nothing certain, but odds seem good.
  8. I was listening to the podcast with Adam Gold. I know he's not everyone's cup of tea, but there were a few good points made in almost an hour. One was the McKeown is beyond ready. His Calder playoffs were nearly flawless at a high level, and is hugely positive plus on his plus-minus is just one indication of his overall positive effect. The question in my mind is balancing the effect of bringing too many relatively inexperienced (at NHL level) D men in, too fast, vs. missing out on cheaper, effective players as well as future really good players (Bean) as they start to have to clear waivers. In my mind, there is also the potential advantage of getting a return on the more established guys in a trade. Who can be replaced? How big would the drop-off be? I personally think we should tag 3 guys to make sure we have at least that much veteran presence, and ideally 4 guys. Then bring up at least 2 guys. In my opinion the 3 guys ideally would be Slavin, Pesce, Hamilton. And the swing guy would be Faulk. I don't think we'd get much for him, but in this scenario, if Faulk stays, then TVR could be moved. I'd rather keep him, but at some point, IMO, we need to see McKeown, Fleury and eventually Bean at least. I will admit that I think moving Faulk, the Faulk of last season especially, would lead to a step back on the back end. I don't see McKeown or Fleury as able to move the puck in the D and neutral zone nearly as well as Faulk does, and that is a significant part of our game. Faulk with one year left probably doesn't return much in a trade either. I'd like to sign Faulk with no NTC, even if we pay him well, and then evaluate what to do with him, but we don't have the cap space for that at the moment. I wonder what the return would be on TVR. I like the player. I really do. But if we are to get our future guys up here, something more has to give.
  9. My question with Faulk, aside from his one year left contract, is: can we expect the Faulk of last year to be the Faulk we get? I would think that whatever one's previous opinions of Faulk, most can agree that he improved his game last year. Personally, I think it was transformative. When Faulk first got here his first year was a bit mixed, but then for the next two, to my eye he actually played pretty good defense most of the time, especially for a very young D man. But then (just my opinion) something happened, maybe the quest for offense, maybe the coaching and lack of D depth allowing it, who knows, but Faulk regressed defensively, and this went on for a long time. Again IMO 4 long seasons: 2014-2018. He has always been a confident puck mover, especially in the back two zones (I don't see elite PP QB playmaking), and we need that. We need to get the puck out and up the ice, it's a big part of the game and Justin is very good at that IMO. He's also got a big shot, especially on the PP. But last year, his D game tightened up A LOT. He stuck with guys, he was not beaten cleanly often, even the other parts of his game seemed better. I don't know if this was Brind'Amour, or our new D coach, or if Faulk just got to work in the offseason, or what, but he was very solid last year. That is a guy I would be fine with us signing and keeping. But will we see that guy, or the other guy in the future? That's the risk, IMO, of signing him to a longer deal, especially if he gets a NTC. I don't know the answer, but seeing more of him this year before signing him would help, and I'd pay him a bit more if we could limit or rid ourselves of the NTC.
  10. Listening to Canes Corner podcast. Forslund was on for a bit, and mentioned how fast Dzingle is blazing speed, and that Haula is also very fast. Later on it was mentioned that Necas is fast, ( IMO he has already shown a speed that drives back NHL D men). Dzingle is a shoot first guy with an elite shot. Necas is a playmaker, and Dzingle kind of both. Not saying that will be a line, but Necas-Haula-Dzingle could play at the speed of light.
  11. Canes social media team is awesome, but this is just nuts: Carolina Hurricanes‏Verified account @NHLCanes 19h19 hours ago MoStill the youngest team in the NHL Carolina Hurricanes‏Verified account @NHLCanes 19h19 hours ago More Still the youngest team in the NHL 66 replies152 retweets1,452 likes 2 replies18 retweets59 likes
  12. I liked a lot of what Francis did. I think it is fair to point out the continuation of the weakness this franchise has had for years in goal though. Not just Darling but Lack and the "lack" of hitting on goalies in the pipeline while praying Cam would turn it around. This is also a JR thing. I will credit them with taking Ned. 2014 high second round, there were goalies taken 4,6,7,9. Thatcher Demko was the biggest name and he went one spot ahead of us. Ned has been as good as him and far better than the other two. Time will tell on the NHL potential. But, IMVHO. I added the "very" because....goalies. But I think the committee has made 7 significant goalie decisions. 1. Mrazek. 2. Cutting bait on Mongo early. 3. McE 4. Drafting Pytr Kochetkov and 5. Mrazek again 6. Reimer 7. Anton Forsberg. The first three are proven successes. We shall see on the others, but Mrazek did his best the last 5 months he's played, so that can't be bad, and I think Kochetkov has franchise-goalie potential. Reimer and Forsberg I'm shakier on, but the committee has had a pretty good hand on goalies, so I'm staying optimistic. I will say this on Forsberg, he's had some really good AHL numbers over a long time. NHL more mixed, but there is potential there it would seem, and Reimer is coming off of a bad year, but the previous year was pretty decent and the year before that was strong. But Francis, for all his strengths was not the goalie whisperer is what I'm saying. He kept thinking we were fine in goal, and rolled Mongo out there a lot two years ago (OK the coach did technically). And I know that's tough for any GM, but getting it wrong really sets the entire team back.
  13. I can agree with the top 3. Tampa is historically loaded. Toronto is too, if maybe questionable on the back end. Boston has proven itself. But after that it seems to be legacy, large population bases, and overconfidence in being able to project improvement onto teams that failed. Florida. Seems like Florida is the constant media darling to be better every year than they somehow manage to be. I get the thesis. The problem was goaltending and they just fixed that with Bob. I'm not saying it's wrong, but that much better than our proven success? Bob was the #22 goalie in the regular season, Mrazek was slightly better. Florida is a pretty good bet to step up with Bob, they do have a good team overall, but IMO just not that much better than us. And somehow Mike Hoffman ends up on a lot of losing teams despite scoring a lot of goals. 36 goals, 70 points, yet somehow ends up -24, dead last on the team. Anyways, I like Florida, but not better than us, and not THAT much better than us. I think Pittsburgh might take a step back. They will miss Kessel's points and speed. Hard to replace those points with a better team attitude. I don't know, every year they just get inked into a playoff spot. And a team with Crosby, Malkin, Guentzel Letang and Murray in goal, should be in the playoffs, but one of these years they are going to take a step back. They were 3 points from missing the playoffs last year. Washington. OK fine. But putting all of the New York teams way ahead of us, is just IMO, a combination of legacy, big market bias and buying the story. New Jersey will be better with Hughes and Taylor Hall back, but they are still young, and they were 27 points behind us, and that takes no special count for how strong we finished, or playoffs. They trailed us in goal differential by 75 goals. Again, whole season, not most recent. And they're not putting them even with us, they're putting them AHEAD of us. It is a bit disappointing how fast the Rangers can reload since so many UFA's and College soon to be UFA's and players want to play there. Add to that getting Kakko, (and our own Adam Fox), and they will be back sooner than later. But next year? And again, closing that much in points and goal diff and being that much better than us? Same with the Flyers. Carter Hart will help them. Maybe it's enough. But that's a 59 point goal diff between us. And they have to be better not equal. The NYI baffled me. They locked it down and got otherworldly goaltending. Will they be able to do that again? I see them dropping back, but I never saw them being as good as they were, so who knows? Maybe Trots just is that good. Mainly, I see the same old undersell on us. Oddsmakers, bettors, just cannot see what's happening here. The small market, the lack of huge names, and probably some reasonable hesitancy in our goaltending, they just have to write last year off as a fluke. And if we had whiffed on getting Mrazek back, or if we had not signed Dzingle and Haula, maybe I could see it. But we have talent at the top, (Aho, TT, Svech), phenomenal scoring depth (Nino, Staal, Haula, Dzingle, even Martinook), guys on the rise: (Foegele, Svech and maybe Necas), scoring from the back end (Dougy, Faulk, even Slavin), and solid D. I get that goal is a question mark. But Mrazek finished the year strong, and had a good playoff run pre injury. And even Reimer coming off a low season has a lot to prove and we can go to Ned or Forsberg if we have to. I get the fascination with the teams in rebuild and few predict the fall of the titans when they happen, but I think they have us all wrong.
  14. The problem, if it was actual money, is that is says winning the conference. Tampa is just so stacked for the regular season, that it's hard to bet against them. That's why I wonder what the "make the playoffs" odds are. Or even win the Division. I would make that bet if the odds were good.
  15. Can't complain about being number one. Several years ago we had a discussion about contract efficiency. It correlated better with winning than total salaries did. If Martinook's salary at $2 million for a guy who put in 15 goals, hit everything that moved, and was in some ways the very beating heart of the team, is our worst salary? Pretty good.
×
×
  • Create New...