Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by ChuckBurns

  1. Necas certainly could be that guy we can’t send down, but for me, if he comes in and picks up the way he was doing last year before being injured, my guy for being the one who can’t be sent down is Janne Kuokkanen.
  2. Wallmark will have to earn his position, but I think he has an inside track since he plays center over Foegele, McGinn, and Menalaenen. I think Martinook is better as a right wing.
  3. Whether Williams returns or not, I think we will probably be carrying 13 or 14 forwards on the roster.
  4. I think the Checkers will be just fine next year despite the turnover. If you remember, the Checkers lost their top four scorers from the 2017-2018 season (Zykov, Wallmark, Foegele, and Miller), but they then went on to win the Calder Cup. In in addition to Kuokkanen returning, the team will also get Spencer Smallman back. So, even if Necas makes the Canes, those two plus Geekie, Gauthier, perhaps Gibbons, Bishop, Matteos, Lorentz, Luostarinen, and Pritchard will create a solid core to build around. Defense may may be more problematic as I don’t see either Fleury nor McKeown with the Checkers next season. However, with Bean, Carrick, Sellgren, Liustinari (sp?), and possibly Forsling, I think they will be alright. Goaltending with two of Nedeljkovic, Forsberg, Booth, or Helvig should be good. If Reimer can’t beat out Nedeljkovic in camp, I don’t know whether he clears waivers but if so, the Checkers will benefit.
  5. I would also include Aaron Dell from San Jose. And any of the Vegas goaltenders not named Fleury who played well last season. But, all of them would be similar to Darling, backups trying to make the jump to #1. I'm not dealing a good roster player for that situation. In most cases, those guys can be had for draft picks (not the number 2 overall, of course). I still think Hutton would be our best bet. He would only be a short-term stopgap measure, though. But, if Darling can improve, he would likely be an improvement over Ward as a backup. And if Darling doesn't and has to be waived and sent to Charlotte, he could split time with Nedeljkovic or Booth and mentor the younger goalie.
  6. Who is that "top-flight" goaltender that we can trade for using Skinner or Faulk or both? Very few number one goaltenders are traded unless they have a young understudy who is putting up great numbers and isx ready to replace said number one.
  7. You're welcome. I like Skinner and Faulk (I have a jersey while Chrissy has one of Skinner, I tend towards defensemen while she gets goalies and forwards), in fact, I wouldn't mind Ward in a backup role as long as we had someone guaranteed as a #1 next year. Given Darling's contract, I don't see that happening. Also, because of Darling's ability to bounce back from adversity, I think he will turn it around next season, but if not, I do want someone else in place who, coupled with Nedeljkovic or Booth, could at least get us to the playoffs. And, I don't want to try to make a midseason trade to find that someone. I'm not against trading Faulk or Skinner. And if either or both do not fit into the team's future plans, then they should be traded. I don't want to trade unless we get comparable players back. We have a strong prospect pool and some of those guys will be on the team next year. We keep bemoaning the fact that we have such significant roster turnover year to year, and now we're talking about making it worse with trades that don't, in my opinion, make the team better, just to trade away players who have become the whipping boys for 9 years without playoffs.
  8. Kyrule, you said that Skinner has averaged 47 points per season in the eight years that he has been in the league. That would include the lockout shortened season (42 games) as well as one year where he suffered two concessions (I think it was two) which reduced his games played to 64. And while everyone is lamenting his -27 plus/minus rating last season, he was -3 in 2016-17 and -1 in 2015-16. Trading him now would be selling low, just as it would be for Faulk. Now, it may be that a trade of one of these two players will happen this off-season, but we should not trade both. We should also wait until after we make our first round selection if we do a draft deal. And I agree we need to make a trade for NHL roster players rather than futures.
  9. I also never said we will make the playoffs if we stick with Darling. If we get last year's Darling, I expect him to be waived and sent to Charlotte by December. And if Nedeljkovic is doing good (or Booth), that goalie should be brought up to go with Hutton or Dell or Grubauer or whomever else was acquired in the off-season. For that matter, I do NOT expect Darling to be anointed as number 1 before the season starts. I hope there will be a true open competition for the spot. My opinion is that Darling will bounce back and succeed. But, I would put in place someone (or someones) if that doesn't happen so we still can make the playoffs next year. But, I don't think Cam Ward can be one of those someones.
  10. I don't disagree that we should wait to see what the new brain trust decides to do and then evaluate. But, it seems like everyone has already d3cided that Darling needs to be gone and Ward resigned without taking into account any of the repercussions of that or some of the coaching decisions last year that led to our current position. As an example, in a game if Ward was suddenly jumped on for 2 or 3 goals, whether he was at fault or not, he was usually pulled. But, when Darling struggled, even when it was the defense hanging him out to dry, they left him in to give up 8 goals and destroy any confidence he might have had due to a prior good start. I am not laying all of the blame on the coaching staff, most of the blame is Darling's. But, I continue to believe that actions taken or not taken by the coaching staff exacerbated the situation and helped destroy any of Darling's confidence. And, given what happened to Khudobin and Lack, I think the coaching staff cannot be entirely let off the hook either.
  11. top shelf is correct, I did not blame Ward for us missing the playoffs. What I said is that the coaching staff, and Brind'amour was part of that staff, leaned on Cam when Darling's game collapsed. And while they did continue to give Darling starts, he never had an opportunity, like Raanta did in Arizona, to turn it around by just going out there night after night until he either got it right or showed he will never be a #1 goalie. So now, we are in the limbo of not knowing if he can perform at that level or not. If we resign Ward and buyout Darling, name a goaltender hoping to be #1 who would sign here? If you sign Hutton or some other free agent goalie as backup/1B, then you are expecting Ward to perform at least as well as last year. And, you've added another long-term buyout which means you only have one more you can use for several years. If Darling had been signed to a two-year deal, we could go your route and maybe get someone else. And they could be as bad or worse than Darling.
  12. If you would rather resign Ward than keep Darling and try to obtain another competent backup/shared time goaltender, you are also basically saying you are willing to write off making the playoffs next season. No goaltender who has hopes to be our #1 is likely to sign here as long as Ward remains. Further, I think the coaching staff will lean on Ward as a crutch just as they did last season and that will doom our playoff hopes no matter what you do with Skinner, Faulk, etc.
  13. Team management has also said Darling is expected back. If Hutton is acquired as a free agent, he could be a backup or part of as 1A/1B with Darling. And yes, he could "pull a Darling" but so, too, could any other goalie we acquire. If you want certainty, you resign Ward and we trade Skinner no later than the trade deadline since we won't be making the playoffs. And, as far as playing behind a good defense, despite taking a step backwards last year, I still think we have a good defensive team.
  14. As long as the "fourth" line is a legitimate scoring line that gets maybe 10 minutes or so at 5v5, then he could be on that line. I think the centers next year should be Lindholm, Staal, Rask, and Wallmark. If Necas outperforms one of those in camp and preseason, then maybe Wallmark slides to right wing. But, I doubt Necas will be the first scoring line center even if he makes the team. Also, I think Rask rebounds this year, given his trajectory prior to last season was steadily upward. I still think his upper end is what would be a solid second-line center for most teams. I think we will have 2 or 3 scoring lines in the coming season with 1 or 2 balanced lines. I could see Rask center of a scoring line or the number 2 balanced line (Staal centers the first).
  15. Someone here (sorry I forgot who or I would attribute the comment to you) said they think Skinner needs a playmaking center to get him the puck in scoring areas and someone who will screen the goalie as well as be capable of scoring on rebounds of shots the goalie does stop. Well, the latter is Zykov and the former is Wallmark, who it seems like everyone has forgotten. Wallmark was the only Checker who had more than a point per game. Further he also led the Checkers in scoring the prior season. In his call ups to the Hurricanes he showed that he was an NHL player. I think this line combination would work as a strong scoring line.
  16. How many third-line players had 45 points last season? Lindholm is clearly a second-line player. As I've said before, his draft position and the comparison that was being made of him to Forsberg clearly created unrealistic expectations. The injury he suffered during prospect's camp and being rushed set his development back. Still, he did score almost 20 goals in his second season, and last year he was almost a top ten playmaker in terms of primary assists. Then, in the Worlds, on a line with Rask and Landeskog, he scored goals. If he can continue that play into this season, he might easily get 20+ goals and 55-60 points.
  17. I don't think Skinner was a consensus pick at number 7 on 2010. I remember being at a Bulls' game when he was drafted and had to look down to 10-15 to see his name. And there is no way Lindholm is Boychuk 2.0. I agree that he was rushed into the NHL, but if he's scoring second-line numbers, he's not a busy. I think expectations were set high (too high?) for Lindholm with the comparisons that were made between him and Forsberg.
  • Create New...