Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
remkin

Eric Staal Poll

The Eric Staal Poll  

37 members have voted

  1. 1. What do you THINK will end up happenign with Eric Staal?

    • Re-signs with Canes before the deadline.
      7
    • Traded before the deadline, not to return
      15
    • Plays out the year, goes Free Agent, not to return
      8
    • Plays out the year but still re-signs here after deadline/offseason
      1
    • Rented and returns: traded, goes UFA, re-signs back here.
      6
  2. 2. What do you WANT to see happen with Eric Staal?

    • Re-signs before the deadline, stays with team
      2
    • Traded before the deadline, not to return
      15
    • Traded as rental, returns offseason to new deal
      17
    • Plays out the year, does not return (added after 17 votes)
      3
    • Plays out the year, no trade, signs back later (added after 17 votes)
      0


Recommended Posts

It has been requested that we poll the members to find out where we stand on Eric.

 

I have made two questions because they really are different.

 

1. Predicting likely outcome.

2. What each would like to see.

 

There are more possible outcomes than people would probably choose. ie, would anyone really choose to have Eric playout his contract, then sign? If you want him here, you would choose re signs or rented resigns.

 

This is also another spot to add discussion for why you predict or wish for each thing.

 

It is similar to the other Eric Staal thread, but, this one is mainly for the specific questions addressed in the poll, and when it has run it's course, this one will unpin and fall down.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel he will have more value to us than any other team especially for the retooling of the offense to come.  But must be at an appropriate economic cost and God knows. NO NTC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the idea of two different questions, but I don't understand not offering the same set of answers to each. My choices would have been:

 

I think he will be traded before the deadline not to return.

I want him to play out the season and go free agent, not to return. Or *maybe* to resign after the season.

 

I "really would" choose one of those two outcomes b/c sometimes the only way to prove to a largely clueless, pay-attention-only-when-they're-winning fan base that a player has outlived his usefulness - especially when the team has so effectively sold his perceived value - OR to determine, as an organization, whether he might still fit in the future plans, is by giving that player every opportunity to fulfill his deal.

 

If we send Eric off with a golden ticket to contender and allow him to inflate his value, we basically price ourselves out of the Eric Staal market for a return--even though we know full well what we're going to get from him if he comes back: half a season of effort. So, playoffs or no, I'd *probably* come down on the side of play out the year, then thanks for your service and sayonara. But if we made the conference championships? Who knows?

 

Unfortunately I am unable to post my poll response because the poll requires both questions be answered using only the responses offered, so I'll settle for posting the above.

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair points Top. One of the problems with polls is that by definition you have to limit the choices. Really, you have to make choices. As one who has done a fair number of polls, I can tell you that inevitably someone doesn't like the options.

 

But that's why I left it open for comment.

 

The reason I limited the second batch is this. We don't get a ton of responses on polls these days. We have 16 so far. Other more widely read sites get 1000 responses. The second option was limited in part to focus the responses to try to tease out a clear winner for most people's wishes.

 

I really will plead guilty though to not imagining that many (if any) would take your position. My bad I guess. I really do appreciate that you are not a group think guy, but I doubt many would join you on this one.

 

The idea of letting Eric play out his days, get no return for him, then maybe re-sign him, maybe not? No, I did not think anyone would vote for wanting that.

 

Eric's value surely could be inflated if he is a contributor to a deep run team, or gets with a uber-talented linemate and just pumps some numbers. But unless he implodes, his value will jump in UFA because it is a player's market at the top. There are far more teams interested than there are quality players available. Even if Eric plays out the string with us, unless he simply implodes, he will be priced out of our market by the UFA market. Thus the only way he stays is if he signs a big hometown discount.

 

But if he is willing to sign the big home town discount, we should sign him now or rent him out and sign him after.

 

I get the notion of making him earn it, but since he has UFA coming either way, he really doesn't have to earn it that much anyway. Just keep doing what he's been doing. Go UFA and watch the bidding war. No big deal. Meanwhile we get zip.

 

The only way it makes any sense to keep Eric here past the deadline is if we are seriously gunning for playoffs. Frankly, if we are going to miss playoffs, we would be best served to find out what we have, even if we drop a bit in the standings in the process. Maybe bring Ryan up, etc.

 

To me, getting nothing and watching Eric walk is the worst scenario. A first round pick and a really good prospect could be central to the future of the team's future.

 

However, we do have the technology to change the poll half way in so....

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On further reflection, I am really fascinated by your take Top. I am very curious if anyone else thinks that way.

 

I have edited the poll to allow your option under THINK.

 

We have 16 votes at this time. We might get 10 more votes, so let's see.

 

 

Meanwhile, WOULD ANYONE WHO HAS ALREADY VOTED, VOTE FOR THIS IF GIVEN A RE-VOTE:

 

I wish Eric Staal would play out his contract, and go free agent not to return?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for the record, the WANT to see happen vote at the 17 vote mark, while limited to 3 options:

 

Re-sign now, stay with team: 1

Traded, no return: 6

Rent and return: 10

 

On the THINK will happen:

 

Re-sign now: 2

Trade, no return: 9

Play out year, no return: 3

Play out year, return: 0

Rent and return: 3

 

 

So far, my take is that the majority of voters (11/17) would like to see Eric with this team next year. But almost all (10/11) want some return for him and a rental-return scenario.

 

That said, so far about 35% want him gone and not to return, which is far more than last year's poll that included similar options.

 

On the prediction front, only 2 people (12%) think he will be re-signed before the deadline. and the majority pick that he will be traded by the deadline and not return.

 

Polls are tough because one must limit options. Sometimes serial polls can change up the options. For instance only one person (6%) wants him signed now. But what if I said Eric would take a large hometown discount and drop the NTC? I would change my vote in that case. But then that would draw votes away from other options.  Maybe we try a different poll in a  while if this is not resolved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go ahead and answer now, thanks Rem. I DO want to reiterate, however, that although I'll choose "play out/not return," that could change depending, as I mentioned in my prior post, whether we make the dance, how far we go, and the extent to which the org believes Eric was a key factor.

 

That has been the crux of my thinking since I first posted my feelings early last week, i.e., that we let him play it out - PROVIDED WE ARE SOLIDLY IN A PLAYOFF SPOT AT THE TD. If not, move him. With all the talk about accountability, it's time to put our money where our mouth is, and by "we" I mean both Eric and the org. No matter what else we do or don't know about Eric's status, we know this: He is our top-paid player and the org has every right to expect him to play like it. Conversely, as far as organizational accountability and despite JR's departure, the org is responsible for the fan perception that he is "our best," the franchise player. 

 

So the question for me is really simple (and for those who have already read my rantings on this, apologies for the repetition): Haven't we feathered this bird's nest enough?

 

If the answer is yes, mustn't we also say, "Eric, you've said you want to be part of the solution, that you love Raleigh and that you want to stay. You can do all those things, but it has to be at a price that makes sense for the organization going forward, based on your performance. So how about a gentlemen's agreement: You play out your deal these last three months. You perform at your highest-possible level. Then, whenever our season ends and before you go on the FA market, you come to us first. We give you our best offer right off the bat, based on results. No negotiation. You take it or leave it, and both of us - you and the org - go on from there." 

 

BTW, I know polls are tough Rem, and I appreciate you putting this one together.

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History here has proved that simple polls are best.  This is now over-complicated when it doesn't have to be

So it was a good (simple) poll without the same answers being offered for both questions - which any pollster will tell you is standard practice in a what-will-happen/what-should-happen poll - but following that standard makes it over-complicated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it was a good (simple) poll without the same answers being offered for both questions - which any pollster will tell you is standard practice in a what-will-happen/what-should-happen poll - but following that standard makes it over-complicated?

 

Okay, I missed the part about the same questions for what-will vs. what-should.  I see what you are saying on that, although this is not a set rule when designing a poll, as I poll hundreds of thousands of constituents all the time.

 

Pollsters will also tell you that trying to cover the entire universe of possibilities just makes a poll over-complicated and hard to interpret.  You just end up combining the answers for any meaningful analysis.

 

And thanks again for doing the poll Rem.

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my perspective the "Want" question is by definition much messier than the "Think" question because it's dependent on how the rest of the season plays out. 

 

I'd love for the Canes to do so well the rest of the year that trading E becomes really tough for RF to even consider. E.g., say we were to legitimately move into the 3rd Metro slot. Granted that's unlikely, but if it were to happen I don't know that trading for the future/ gutting the roster (because in reality, wouldn't we be doing both?) would even be a realistic option for RF.  In that case I'd want to retain E for the remainder of the season.  But I'd like to re-sign him (either in season or as a UFA) to a very Canes-friendly deal. Now I think it's questionable that E would take a deal that I'd consider Canes-friendly enough, but that's what I'd want

 

On the other hand, if we're realistically out of the playoff hunt I want some return rather than just losing E as a UFA at the end of the year.  But even if we get return for him as a rental, I'd like to see him back on that very Canes-friendly deal.

 

There are so many dependencies linked to the "Want" question that I honestly don't even remember what my original answer was.  :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how this team is in a playoff position at the TDL (too many teams to leap frog), so in my eyes, we are sellers. I see trading EStaal as essential for this organization. Being afraid to "loan him out" at the deadline because he may inflate his value is ridiculous in my opinion. He has had years to establish his value to both the Canes, and the league in general. If he is priced out of RF's range, then he'll be gone either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Being afraid to "loan him out" at the deadline because he may inflate his value is ridiculous in my opinion. He has had years to establish his value to both the Canes, and the league in general. If he is priced out of RF's range, then he'll be gone either way.

 

+1.  Letting him walk for nothing in and of itself makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1.  Letting him walk for nothing in and of itself makes no sense.

 

That's why I left it off the "want" part of the poll initially.

 

I think that serial polls can get at different questions.

 

What I am interested in really, is a different question: do people want Staal here next year? I think we might be surprised if a wider fan base voted, what the results would be. I might pose that question in binary form on a separate poll in a couple of days.

 

 

The reason I added Top's option, is that we have an n = 17 without it. The trends probably don't change much, but I am frankly interested in whether anyone else share's Top's take.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1.  Letting him walk for nothing in and of itself makes no sense.

I agree with this. 

 

But "nothing in and of itself" is the sticking point, isn't it?

 

If we're not SOLIDLY in a playoff position at the TD (i.e., not a point or two out, not a mere point or two in), I fully support moving Eric, too. That's what I think is going to happen, and that's the response I chose for the first question.  

 

But IF we are somehow in that solid playoff position, is keeping Eric on the roster on the chance that he helps us get in "nothing in and of itself"? I don't think so. 

 

IF we found ourselves in that position and IF RF can get a gentlemen's agreement where the Canes - the team Eric supposedly soooo wants to stay with - make him a take-it or leave-it offer when the season ends, doesn't that resolve all the things we've been talking about all season?

 

- Eric is given every opportunity to prove his value and lead this team.

- If he stays, it's at a price we can afford.

- If he doesn't, so be it - and everybody moves on.

 

So a whole lot depends on where we are at the TD, IMO - unless RF has already decided to make a move, which I think is very likely. Then again, we all thought the "deadline" was Thanksgiving, then Christmas. Maybe it's now the ASG--or the day before the TD?

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But "nothing in and of itself" is the sticking point, isn't it?

 

It's not a sticking point for me, it's pretty darn clear.  Particularly since Rem added the questions for your benefit.  So, there you have it - your choices are there to choose. It only becomes a sticking point if you don't vote. ;)

 

And yes, I get it - you are perfectly okay with letting him play out the season and walk.  I'm assuming your the lone vote on that in the "what do you want to see happen".  If so, I think you will continue to be the lone vote.  Interesting take though.

 

IF we found ourselves in that position and IF RF can get a gentlemen's agreement where the Canes - the team Eric supposedly soooo wants to stay with - make him a take-it or leave-it offer when the season ends, doesn't that resolve all the things we've been talking about all season?

 

No, your scenario doesn't resolve the issue of losing Staal, or any player of value for nothing, which we've talked about for many seasons going back to Ray Whitney.  Ron Francis has addressed this on several occasions about how he can't let players walk with no return.

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a sticking point for me, it's pretty darn clear.  Particularly since Rem added the questions for your benefit.  So, there you have it - your choices are there to choose. It only becomes a sticking point if you don't vote. ;)

 

And yes, I get it - you are perfectly okay with letting him play out the season and walk.  I'm assuming your the lone vote on that in the "what do you want to see happen".  If so, I think you will continue to be the lone vote.  Interesting take though.

 

 

No, your scenario doesn't resolve the issue of losing Staal, or any player of value for nothing, which we've talked about for many seasons going back to Ray Whitney.  Ron Francis has addressed this on several occasions about how he can't let players walk with no return.

coastal, what the heck? FOR MY BENEFIT??

 

I did vote. Not only that, I offered the ONLY rationale under which I think it is "okay to let him walk" - if we're solidly in a playoff position and he'll agree to give us first crack when the season ends. You don't have to agree with my answer, but it's not okay to mischaracterize it, either.

 

So what do you think? IF we're solidly in a playoff spot at the TD, do you trade him, the shot the postseason be damned? Speaking purely for myself, yeah, I might still move him, depending on what comes back. But if's not what we need to continue the run, and if he "really wants to stay in Raleigh," why not ask him to put his money where his mouth is?

Edited by OBXer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

coastal, what the heck? FOR MY BENEFIT??

 

I did vote. Not only that, I offered the ONLY rationale under which I think it is "okay to let him walk" - if we're solidly in a playoff position and he'll agree to give us first crack when the season ends. You don't have to agree with my answer, but it's not okay to mischaracterize it, either.

 

So what do you think? IF we're solidly in a playoff spot at the TD, do you trade him, the shot the postseason be damned? Speaking purely for myself, yeah, I might still move him, depending on what comes back. But if's not what we need to continue the run, and if he "really wants to stay in Raleigh," why not ask him to put his money where his mouth is?

 

Top, Rem stated that he added those particular questions to allow for your concerns answering the poll, did he not?  Personally, I thought it was pretty cool he did that, as I am also interested to see if anyone else shares your opinion. 

 

I stated I think your position is interesting, did I not?  Unless I'm just not understanding, I still think it is.

 

As far as what I think.  I think it's a great question, and a tough one.  If there isn't absolute certainty that Staal can be resigned prior to the deadline at a deal that is more in line with his production, and the term is in line with his age, then I'd hate to see GMRF risk losing him for no assets, regardless of team position at the TD.  And that allows for him to return.

 

I voted that I think he will be traded and I believe once he is gone he isn't coming back.  On the second question, I want a decent return for him, and once he leaves I'd prefer not to see him back here - the move on thing. But would a certain dollar and term change my mind, yeah, it could, but we don't know that yet.  I still see a player who has declined but still has skills, and if he is wanting term (4 years), I would likely put down the phone.  I also don't think he's going to take less than little bro.

 

And just for background, I was the member who asked Rem if he would do the poll.  I only asked for two simple questions though. Thus far, the results suggest the majority (60%) don't think he'll be back.  However, 65% want him back.  That's really all I wanted from the poll, Rem had additional things.

Edited by OBXer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Top, Rem stated that he added those particular questions to allow for your concerns answering the poll, did he not?  Personally, I thought it was pretty cool he did that, as I am also interested to see if anyone else shares your opinion.  Omniscient pollster?  That's pretty low, so feel free to take that down.

 

I stated I think your position is interesting, did I not?  Unless I'm just not understanding, I still think it is.

 

As far as what I think.  I think it's a great question, and a tough one.  If there isn't absolute certainty that Staal can be resigned prior to the deadline at a deal that is more in line with his production, and the term is in line with his age, then I'd hate to see GMRF risk losing him for no assets, regardless of team position at the TD.  And that allows for him to return.

 

I voted that I think he will be traded and I believe once he is gone he isn't coming back.  On the second question, I want a decent return for him, and once he leaves I'd prefer not to see him back here - the move on thing. But would a certain dollar and term change my mind, yeah, it could, but we don't know that yet.  I still see a declining player that still has skills, and if he is wanting term (4 years), I would likely put down the phone.  I also don't think he's going to take less than little bro.

 

And just for background, I was the member who asked Rem if he would do the poll.  I only asked for two simple questions though. Thus far, the results suggest the majority (60%) don't think he'll be back.  However, 65% want him back.  That's really all I wanted from the poll, Rem had additional things.

 

Thanks for voting.

I appreciate your conciliatory tone. That said, when I read your response, it felt like a takedown and an attempt to marginalize me simply because I requested the same responses to the "What do you think will happen" question as were offered for the "What do you want to happen." 

 

I don't know why you didn't do the poll yourself, coastal, and that's really not an issue. But the fact remains, in polls of the what could happen/what will variety, it only makes sense to include the same range of responses. When I read where you said Rem added the missing ones "for my benefit," I thought then, and I still do, that it was ridiculous. I hope he did it to make the poll better.

 

One last point: I'm not the only one here who thinks we might wind up letting Eric walk if the playoff circumstance is exactly such that it makes trading him at the deadline untenable. Page 19, Eric Staal debate thread. Hag, speaking to exactly the question I raise here, in response to rem's raising of it: "Try and trade, but if he won't, fold.  It's the only great move.  Sometimes the best move is the least lousy."

 

Have a good night.

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

.  I still see a player who has declined but still has skills, and if he is wanting term (4 years), I would likely put down the phone.  I also don't think he's going to take less than little bro.

 

 

Watch out CC.Rem thinks this is STUPID.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Irregardless of personal spats its fun to see what we (fans) are thinking. I'm enjoying the poll and enjoying seeing the results.  Thanks rem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting a little chippy in here!

 

Appreciate the kudos.

 

Sorry if I've offended with the thinking that idea that Eric would base his salary on his brother's is stupid. Probably could have worded that better.

 

I think there is a growing sense that Eric moving on might be best, but last year a poll I did, almost no one had the wish for that, and even on here, most would like to see him back.

 

Polls are tricky, but they do let us get a wider sense of how larger groups of people are thinking..

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...