Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
OBXer

2014/15 In-Season Canes News, Updates and Talk

Recommended Posts

I know in long posts things get lost. But for what it's worth I never said drafting and player development were not important. I'm saying, at least since say 2002, we have not drafted that badly. Player developement is another question, but if guys like Faulk are so good that they just touch the AHL for a few games, or Lindholm or Skinner, or Staal (due to lock out got a year), then they get developed in the NHL. 

 

I think drafting is key. I think it is even more key if you are always picking late like Detroit. But drafting is key. That is the foundation. If you miss, you don't even have a guy to trade.

 

Again, only 50% of all first rounders every play 200 games. We are hitting 80% since 2002, and 82% if you think Fleury makes it. Given that we are picking 6 or higher this year, that is likely to move up to 86%. Have we hit late rounders? Not as well. But few do.

 

in order first rounders since 2002:

 

Ward, Staal, A Ladd, Jack Johnson, B Sutter, Z Boychuk, Phillipe Paradise, J Skinner, R. Murphy, E. Lindholm, H. Fleury.

 

Two misses, and one was a #27 pick which JR swapped for Tlusty, who is over 200 games and counting. So in a way, really one miss: Boychuk. (In fairness school is still out on Murphy, and Fleury).

 

 

The UFA's are key pieces. Again, because this argument comes up again and again, I am not saying you build your team around UFA's. That is a loser's bet. But using a few key UFA's to fill needs and holes developed by the innevitable misses in the draft? Small percent of the team, but can be critical. Ask Boston how life would have been without Chara? Chicago is not the same without Marion Hossa (also got a cup with the help of UFA Brian Campbell adn Hossa). Even the vaunted Detroit Redwings got Chris Osgood and Brian Rafalski as UFAs. Scott Neidermayer helped the Ducks for years orginally as a UFA.

 

Yes, these are some of the best (I am trying to make my point afterall). But there are a lot of key guys that are below that level.

 

We need to keep drafting well. Picking in the top 1/3 of the draft will help. We need to increase our scouting staff and find a couple of diamonds in the rough in late rounds. (Though stealing them from Detroit works).

 

But right now, Francis' biggest problem is what to do with his top paid guys, and finding a few mid range guys in Free Agency to fill the gaps we now have between the top paid guys and the rest.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least the goaltending tandem is good. If this team improves their blue line via free agency, the team stands a chance to be a bubble team. With both Cam and Eric contracts coming to an end in 2016. Don't expect drastic moves until then.

Would you resign Cam and Eric at a discounted long term price? Or would you be over them? I know I would say yes to Ward at 4.5m and Staal at 6.5m. It's going to be interesting next season. That much is for sure.

Edited by bluedevil58

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BlueDevil wrote:

 

At least the goaltending tandem is good. If this team improves their blue line via free agency, the team stands a chance to be a bubble team. With both Cam and Eric contracts coming to an end in 2016. Don't expect drastic moves until then.

Would you resign Cam and Eric at a discounted long term price? Or would you be over them? I know I would say yes to Ward at 4.5m and Staal at 6.5m. It's going to be interesting next season. That much is for sure.

True on goaltending. While we have a couple of promising kids developing in goal, they are likely 2-3 years off.

 

It is a good question about discounted price for E and Ward. To me the other thing would be the NTC's. Cam at 4.5 and Eric at 6.5 would help a lot. If they would waive or limit their NTC's, then those might be movable salaries if things didn't work out. I like LA's approach to NTC's. Pretty much just say no.

 

Eric and Cam are both playing pretty well right now. 

 

I'd still listen to offers for both of them before the draft, but I would not give either away. When they are on their game, they may be overpaid but they are good players.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NHL Live covered the recent GM meetings and they interviewed (the one's I actually saw) 11 GM's.  When asked what they thought was the most important part of building a successful franchise in today's salary cap league, all 11 answered drafting well, and development of their own players.

 

So there you go you draft hanger-uppers.

 

It is the best part of building a successful franchise, just not the only.

 

I'll be sure to explain this to The Kings franchise, who's catalysts in last year's Stanley Cup run was Justin Williams and Marion Gaborik, two players brought over at the trade deadline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the best part of building a successful franchise, just not the only.

 

I'll be sure to explain this to The Kings franchise, who's catalysts in last year's Stanley Cup run was Justin Williams and Marion Gaborik, two players brought over at the trade deadline.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

50% of the Kings team is homegrown, until we reach that kind of development this will continue.

 

Good players have to actually want to come here to make deadline deals worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

50% of the Kings team is homegrown, until we reach that kind of development this will continue.

 

Good players have to actually want to come here to make deadline deals worth it.

Yup. California could be the worst thing that's ever happened to the other 27 teams in the league, in terms of marketing their cities to players.

 

Yeah, but can I surf? 

 

Great - but can I surf?

 

FANTASTIC... but CAN I SURF!!!???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since this thread has turned to "all draft talk, all the time", I'll stick this here.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/analyzing-value-nhl-draft-picks/

Some interesting info on the value of draft picks.

 

Interesting article s_d.

 

I do have a question about the methodology the author used for his anlysis, though. Any statisticians/ scientists out there who might find that discussion interesting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, I'm really not trying to come across as aggressive or troll-ish, I was just trying to emphasize the importance of other roster moves.

I'm aware of The Kings drafted the majority of their team, and I will agree that drafting is the best way to build. However, as a Canes fan, I'm more concerned with acquiring talent from other venues more than I am with the way we draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, I'm really not trying to come across as aggressive or troll-ish, I was just trying to emphasize the importance of other roster moves.

I'm aware of The Kings drafted the majority of their team, and I will agree that drafting is the best way to build. However, as a Canes fan, I'm more concerned with acquiring talent from other venues more than I am with the way we draft.

 

I know that PenaltyKiller, that was just a little humor to lighten the mood.  :)

 

I'll say this - I think the value of drafting is exponentially more important for small market teams.

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting article s_d.

 

I do have a question about the methodology the author used for his anlysis, though. Any statisticians/ scientists out there who might find that discussion interesting?

 

I'm guilty in both instances (scientist,stats guy).

 

What exactly did you have an issue with? 

 

I thought the dataset he pulled was a much better approach to interpretation of the value of draft picks than what Remkin tried to pull off  above (no offense intended) using all draftees from 2005-present, which ignored the fact the word is not out on many with existing ELC's, or college UFA's, etc.

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since this thread has turned to "all draft talk, all the time", I'll stick this here.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/analyzing-value-nhl-draft-picks/

Some interesting info on the value of draft picks.

 

There is the graphic example of my point. The elite players very strongly tend to go in the very top of the draft. Picking high is a massive advantage. You also pick higher in the other rounds. There are always exceptions. But the rule is obvious.

 

Here is the list of this year's top 25 point players by their draft number taken:

 

1,1,1,7,129,4,16,58,2,2,22,4,19,1,2,205,undrafted1,22,28,3,1,3,9,16.15.1.

 

(A number in the top 30 is first round).

 

Top 10: 15/25: 60% of the top scorers were top 10 picks

Top 2: 10/25: 40% of the top 25 point getters this year were top 2 picks.

Top 4: 13/25: 52%: over half of the top 25 point scores were top FOUR picks.

 

First round: 21/25: 84%

 

Juri Hudler at #8 was a late second rounder

 

The two big exceptions out of 25 guys:

 

Jamie Benn at #129 a fifth round diamond. And Joe Pavelski a 7th rounder!

Tyler Johnson: undrafted. (BTW undrafted due to size, Kidsky (smurfsky) comes to mind).

 

If you include top 10 goal scorers you add P Kane #1 overall, and Corry Perry late first rounder.

 

This year might be that year where those #5-9 picks can be special too. But most years it is the top 3 that are the stars of tomorrow. The exceptions are very dramatically noticible, but they are still the exceptions. IF the top 3 are the stars, then one can see that there is value to getting as high a pick as possible. It isn't a very likeable reality. But it's reality.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You missed the entire point of the remaining portions of that article, IMO, particularly as it pertains to this hockey club and drafting in general over time.

 

Everybody knows picking as high as possible is better, particularly really high.  I mean come on, that's just basic common sense.

 

The point being made was that outside the top 3-4 picks, it's better to have as many picks as possible because those picks outside the top 3 or 4 in most years are closer to 3rd rounders in overall talent.  So compiling picks is often the best strategy to consistent success, i.e. most teams don't draft in the top 3 or 4 every year unless you are Edmonton.  JR didn't subscribe to that theory.

 

Seems that's the approach Francis is taking, or at least that's what he said.  I looked but I can't come up with the interview I was referring too. 

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right at a year ago, in last season's general discussion thread, I posted this...

 

JR has done okay with selecting the low hanging fruit in the draft, but other than that, not so much.  Drafting and developing is the way to build long term success.  Look at last year's champions, the Chicago Blackhawks.  On the 23 man roster for the finals, they had 13 players that they drafted or acquired as an undrafted free agent.  Yeah, a couple of those were of the low hanging fruit variety (Kane and Toews) but there are a lot of contributors that aren't close to top of the draft status.

 

 

The Canes have currently have 7 1/2 (one is Justin Peters and JR doesn't know what to do with him) that they drafted.  Other than Bellemore and Bowman, they are mostly 1st or high 2nd rounders. 

 

Here's the main problem.

 

I still stand by the importance of drafting.  This was the same discussion last season when the Hawks were defending champs. You have to be able to get at least half of your roster from your own system.  It's even more important for a small market team to be able to develop and have players (at least role players) contributing at the NHL level on modest, entry level deals.  If you can develop this type of player, then you don't always have to overpay to keep somebody around when they can be replaced internally.  Stars are always going to get paid, but the secret is trying to fill out a way to fill out the rest of the roster.

 

I hate having this discussion every year this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tlyer Johnson, and Johny Gaudreau with 67 and 60 points, the latter as a rookie, are: 5'8" 183, and 5'9" 150.

 

T Johnson went undrafted and Gaudreau, despite an illustrious college career, went #104, entirely due to their size.

 

Yes, it gets me thinking about one Sergey Tolchinsky now at 1.56 ppg, Yes.

 

But also Mitch Marner. Who at 5'11" towers over all of those guys and put up an astounding 2 points per game this year in Juniors. This is Patrick Kane with an edge.

 

Yes, we want to get bigger, but big only matters if guys use their size. But skill at speed is the killer in today's NHL.

 

If we don't win the lottery and end up at #5, and Strome and Hanifin go 3 and 4. Mitch  Marner. Oh and it will be intersting to see the smurf in camp. Imagine if he can be a Johnny Gaudreau. Never know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Show of hands. Who thinks drafting is unimportant?

 

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?

 

(crickets chirping)....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm raising my hand to correct the teacher and suggest that this is not what's being discussed, i.e. drafting isn't important. 

 

What IS being discussed is whether it's THE most critical part of building a successful franchise.  Quite a different subject

 

But yeah, it's an old argument that resurfaces every year with a different spin on it.  So I get that. ;)

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you all think of Edmonton's AHL affiliate Bakersfield Condors new logo?

 

CondorsPrank.jpg

 

While it seems a little gaudy, there's a rationale for how they came up twith it.  From the press release:

 

About the logo:

- Bakersfield becomes the first team in modern professional hockey history to list five primary colours in the team’s colour scheme
-
Inspired by the traditional primary colours of the Condors during their 17 years of existence (Green, Red, Black) and the colours of the team’s owners the Edmonton Oilers (Blue, Orange)
-
The logo keeps the Condors traditional wordmark and styling which the team has used every season
-
It is a head-on look at one of the most feared birds adorned with a “maple-leaf/stars” tuft of feathers on top to represent the uniting of the United States and Canada in Bakersfield
Features an inverted “oil-drop” beak representing the team’s owners, along with the oil tradition and influence in Kern County
- CLICK HERE to download the new Condors logo as a wallpaper for your desktop, iPhone, iPad, or mobile device

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In an era with an active salary cap drafting is hands down the most important part of any franchise being successful.  Young players who produce do not require as much salary at the start.  Thus meaning that if you draft well and find young players who produce you have cheap players playing for your team allowing you to spend money elsewhere or retain talent for a certain amount of time.

 

Forsberg is producing maybe 60 points this season?  I wonder what he gets paid compared to Jeff SKinner?  While we're at it let's look at Mohanan of Calgary's contract.

Edited by bluedevil58

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The logo looks like the poster child for an argument against natural selection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm raising my hand to correct the teacher and suggest that this is not what's being discussed, i.e. drafting isn't important. 

 

What IS being discussed is whether it's THE most critical part of building a successful franchise.  Quite a different subject

 

But yeah, it's an old argument that resurfaces every year with a different spin on it.  So I get that. ;)

 

OK. I rephrase.

 

Show of hands. ANYONE not think drafting and development are not THE most critical part of building a successful franshise?

 

Anyone?

 

Just don't think there is any disagreement there. Could be wrong.

 

 

 

That logo is hi-larious. Would be even funnier if they added some eyebrows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you all think of Edmonton's AHL affiliate Bakersfield Condors new logo?

 

CondorsPrank.jpg

 

While it seems a little gaudy, there's a rationale for how they came up twith it.  From the press release:

 

About the logo:

- Bakersfield becomes the first team in modern professional hockey history to list five primary colours in the team’s colour scheme

- Inspired by the traditional primary colours of the Condors during their 17 years of existence (Green, Red, Black) and the colours of the team’s owners the Edmonton Oilers (Blue, Orange)

- The logo keeps the Condors traditional wordmark and styling which the team has used every season

- It is a head-on look at one of the most feared birds adorned with a “maple-leaf/stars” tuft of feathers on top to represent the uniting of the United States and Canada in Bakersfield

Features an inverted “oil-drop” beak representing the team’s owners, along with the oil tradition and influence in Kern County

- CLICK HERE to download the new Condors logo as a wallpaper for your desktop, iPhone, iPad, or mobile device

 

I'm not sure about the overall effect but I love the way they incorporated both an American star, Canadian maple leaf, and an oil drop into an image of a condor.

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...