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

Trade rumors and talk

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

we seem to spin circles on this discussion.  Unfortunately it seems to be the only trade topic to discuss.

 

after reading Ben Case's article on hockey buzz about trading Hainsey, I like the idea of getting Fluery and/or McKeown some PT.  I know there is risk with the potential flag going away but the reward of increased value is worth the risk.  On top of that, if they perform as expected it eases the mind on moving someone else. Make an offseason move for either MD or Skog.

 

What would Hainsey bring back?

 

I think moving Hainsey is a move aimed 100% at the future. but at a deep cost to the present. I doubt the return is worth it.

 

I think moving him off of this year's team would unhinge the defense. I could be wrong, but he is just so steady back there. Bringing Fleury up (LHD), late in the season and into the playoffs seems unwise to me. That is a move for a team that is out of it.

 

To me, trading Hainsey is throwing in the towel on this year. Assuming the team is still in it at the deadline, that would demoralize the team too.

 

If this group falls out of it, then that makes total sense.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MinJaBen said:

[...] just Duchene or just Landeskog don't change the time horizon on when/if this team becomes a consistent playoff contender. We end up plugging one hole in the lineup while creating another.

[...]

I keep thinking we have to go blockbuster and get both to push the needle on our time horizon. Here is a proposal I posted on another message board site:

 

To the Avs - Hanifin, 2017 1st, Gauthier, Roy, PDG

To the Canes - Duchene, Landeskog

I get your rationale and believe that if a report from about six weeks ago is right, RF is thinking more along blockbuster lines than "surgical" ones. That report said RF had directed our scouts at all levels to give him full reports on every player in the Avs org, a seeming indication that he'll want a return beyond one (or both) of these players.

 

I do disagree that only one of them can't have a big impact (Scog), however, for reasons I've already cited. Whomever's wing Scog would wind up on, he'd bring that element of toughness to our top lines that simply is not there right now.

 

I also get your rationale for the proposed pieces we'd send for both, but I've seen nothing in Sakic's demands for either of them about forward prospects. So why offer him any? He wants D and picks, and we've got both. So give him Hanifin (better yet Faulk), Bean, Murphy, a 2017 first and a 2018 second (or lower). Gauthier and Roy project to be the next iterations of Landeskog and Duchene (assuming we get both), so keep developing them and let them model their games - at close range - on the guys they are projected to replace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, remkin said:

 

What would Hainsey bring back?

 

I think moving Hainsey is a move aimed 100% at the future. but at a deep cost to the present. I doubt the return is worth it.

 

I think moving him off of this year's team would unhinge the defense. I could be wrong, but he is just so steady back there. Bringing Fleury up (LHD), late in the season and into the playoffs seems unwise to me. That is a move for a team that is out of it.

 

To me, trading Hainsey is throwing in the towel on this year. Assuming the team is still in it at the deadline, that would demoralize the team too.

 

If this group falls out of it, then that makes total sense.

I agree but there isn't a save to the season.  We struggle against teams with winning records and are downright awful against winning teams with their number 1 goalie. Im a pessimist but I don't see fighting for the 8th spot to be embarrassed by the Capitals.  Anything can happen but it's unlikely in a 7 game series.  I believe it's more valuable for us to give the younger guys a chance to play to see our future and needs for the future.  

Edited by gocanes0506

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, remkin said:

So have I talked myself into Hanifin and our first rounder for Duchene or Landeskog? Probably.

If the reports of what Sakic wants are right, Hanifin, a 5-6 who hasn't lived up to his draft position yet, doesn't get it done. Sakic wants a proven, young, top NHL Dman. On this team that's Faulk, Slavin, or Pesce, and that's an easy choice IMO. If Sakic balks that Faulk is a couple years older than he'd like, add Bean--and Murphy, of course, is a given. As in, give him away get him off the books. Worthless to us, but thrown in on a deal with a team that is rebuilding and that already has world-class goaltending, he could be the stop-gap #6 that he can't be here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

after reading Ben Case's article on hockey buzz about trading Hainsey, I like the idea of getting Fluery and/or McKeown some PT.  I know there is risk with the potential flag going away but the reward of increased value is worth the risk.  On top of that, if they perform as expected it eases the mind on moving someone else. Make an offseason move for either MD or Skog.

 

20 minutes ago, remkin said:

 

What would Hainsey bring back?

 

I think moving Hainsey is a move aimed 100% at the future. but at a deep cost to the present. I doubt the return is worth it.

 

I think moving him off of this year's team would unhinge the defense. I could be wrong, but he is just so steady back there. Bringing Fleury up (LHD), late in the season and into the playoffs seems unwise to me. That is a move for a team that is out of it.

 

To me, trading Hainsey is throwing in the towel on this year. Assuming the team is still in it at the deadline, that would demoralize the team too.

 

If this group falls out of it, then that makes total sense.

 

8 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

I agree but there isn't a save to the season.  We struggle against teams with winning records and are downright awful against winning teams with their number 1 goalie. Im a pessimist but I don't see fighting for the 8th spot to be embarrassed by the Capitals.  Anything can happen but it's unlikely in a 7 game series.  I believe it's more valuable for us to give the younger guys a chance to play to see our future and needs for the future.  

 

I disagree with the premise that trading Hainsey at the deadline is throwing in the towel on this season and/or won't return us something that makes this team better for this season. It would certainly be harder to find a trade that fits those goals, but not impossible. In fact, there is one I have in mind that could be very doable if management thinks the target that I would go after is worth investing in. 

 

My idea is based around the premise that Hainsey's value at the deadline is somewhere around a 2nd or 3rd round pick. If that is true, then I would target a the Penguin's MAF as the asset I would want to bring back in exchange for Hainsey. The Penguins are once again thought to be looking to bring in a defender at the deadline to go for another Cup. I would offer JR Hainsey, plus a 3rd this year with 50% retained on Hainsey for MAF at no retention. This is probably all MAF is worth given everyone knows that he has to be protected at the expansion draft and that the Penguins are in no way going to have him on the roster and lose Murray. This benefits us in that we get a 2nd/3rd round value for Hainsey vs. just letting him walk, plus we get a much better backup or 1A/1B goalie to go with Ward for the next couple of years while we wait for the prospects we have to develop. Additionally, MAF makes it much more possible for us to make a run through the gauntlet of a schedule we will have in March if we want to make the playoffs. There is no way we can just roll Ward out there every night and Lack is looking completely lost this season. I'd just buy out his remaining contract and cut bait. That would only cost us ~$1M per season in salary and cap for two years, which we can easily do at this point.

 

Then I'd do the trade for Duchene and Landeskog I outlined before...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

I agree but there isn't a save to a season.  We struggle against teams with winning records and are downright awful against winning teams with their number 1 goalie. Im a pessimist but I don't see fighting for the 8th spot to be embarrassed by the Capitals.  Anything can happen but it's unlikely in a 7 game series.  I believe it's more valuable for us to give the younger guys a chance to play to see our future and needs for the future.  

 

I disagree that we are out of it because Washington whipped us. That team is whipping everyone. They are on a superhuman run.

 

The thing is, if we are really still in it at the deadline (even if the odds were against us) and Francis pull the rug out on this team, after moving Eric and Versteeg on last year's team, the return may still not be worth it.

 

As to being out of it now, we currently sit 3 points out adjusted. Hardly out of it. But the main thing is that we are going to start a stretch where we are not playing powerhouses every night. Past Canes teams have played down to their opponents and this team could too, but I don't think so. We have yet to have a stretch where all or most forward oars are pulling at the same time. As Lindholm's game arrives, Rask's recedes. The schedule in March does get crazy in terms of no breaks. That is fair. But we have more home games than road games, no long road trips, and much more beatable opponents. I just feel a stretch of this team coming together and making a nice run in the rest of the year.

 

Overall the team game has been building. Yes, we do not match up with Washington. But then again, we're done playing them.

 

In the rest of the season there are 30 games left. There are 6 games left vs power teams, 3 at home. (BTW Washington lately has been a superpower team).  We also have 4 games vs Arizona/Colorado.

 

Yes, we are in a pack, so that automatically cuts our odds. But, if our team game keeps building we are finally in a decent stretch of games to make a move up the standings.  That is not the time to move a key veteran who would probably not return much as a rental.

 

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

If the reports of what Sakic wants are right, Hanifin, a 5-6 who hasn't lived up to his draft position yet, doesn't get it done. Sakic wants a proven, young, top NHL Dman. On this team that's Faulk, Slavin, or Pesce, and that's an easy choice IMO. If Sakic balks that Faulk is a couple years older than he'd like, add Bean--and Murphy, of course, is a given. As in, give him away get him off the books. Worthless to us, but thrown in on a deal with a team that is rebuilding and that already has world-class goaltending, he could be the stop-gap #6 that he can't be here.

 

I'm convinced that Bean is the defender we would regret losing the most down the line between Noah, Bean, Fleury and Faulk. We don't have a guy on our team on the back end that thinks the offensive side of the game as well as he appears to at this point. Including Faulk. Faulk has a cannon, but Bean is more dynamic. Different levels, of course, but I think he is going to transition better. I hate to make comparisons, but I see a lot of similarity in Bean and Karlsson in terms of offensive talent and play. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MinJaBen said:

 

I disagree with the premise that trading Hainsey at the deadline is throwing in the towel on this season and/or won't return us something that makes this team better for this season. It would certainly be harder to find a trade that fits those goals, but not impossible. In fact, there is one I have in mind that could be very doable if management thinks the target that I would go after is worth investing in. 

 

My idea is based around the premise that Hainsey's value at the deadline is somewhere around a 2nd or 3rd round pick. If that is true, then I would target a the Penguin's MAF as the asset I would want to bring back in exchange for Hainsey. The Penguins are once again thought to be looking to bring in a defender at the deadline to go for another Cup. I would offer JR Hainsey, plus a 3rd this year with 50% retained on Hainsey for MAF at no retention. This is probably all MAF is worth given everyone knows that he has to be protected at the expansion draft and that the Penguins are in no way going to have him on the roster and lose Murray. This benefits us in that we get a 2nd/3rd round value for Hainsey vs. just letting him walk, plus we get a much better backup or 1A/1B goalie to go with Ward for the next couple of years while we wait for the prospects we have to develop. Additionally, MAF makes it much more possible for us to make a run through the gauntlet of a schedule we will have in March if we want to make the playoffs. There is no way we can just roll Ward out there every night and Lack is looking completely lost this season. I'd just buy out his remaining contract and cut bait. That would only cost us ~$1M per season in salary and cap for two years, which we can easily do at this point.

 

Then I'd do the trade for Duchene and Landeskog I outlined before...

 

I have to break this into two parts.

 

1. Hainsey for a late second or even third rounder, is a terrible trade if this team is in contention. I think he is way undervalued in terms of his role for this team. We are veteranopenic (not enough older veterans). He is a calming influence on whomever he's paired with. He would have to be replaced by Hanifin, who would be replaced by Dahlbeck. Hanifin: a guy who makes lots of 19 yo mistakes and Dahlbeck a guy scratched so much he's only been in 16 games. Bring Fleury up from the AHL? See Hanifin.

 

2. Hainsey for MAF. I really don't think that deal gets done. If the best return Pittsburgh can get for MAF is an aging rental D man, and a guy with less than 5% of ever playing significant games in the NHL (third rounder), they will just keep him and have a really good back up and one more cup run. I think this board has a less favorable opinion of MAF, but I do agree he is miles and miles better than Lack, so I'd probalby make that move. I just doubt Pittsburgh would.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

If the reports of what Sakic wants are right, Hanifin, a 5-6 who hasn't lived up to his draft position yet, doesn't get it done. Sakic wants a proven, young, top NHL Dman. On this team that's Faulk, Slavin, or Pesce, and that's an easy choice IMO. If Sakic balks that Faulk is a couple years older than he'd like, add Bean--and Murphy, of course, is a given. As in, give him away get him off the books. Worthless to us, but thrown in on a deal with a team that is rebuilding and that already has world-class goaltending, he could be the stop-gap #6 that he can't be here.

 

I'm assuming your saying "pull" on Faulk for Landeskog, or even Duchene.

 

My questions are these two:

 

1. Do you think this years defense can stay in the hunt without Faulk? Losing a RHD, how would our D line up, especially if we also move Murphy?

2. Do you think we can sustain the loss of Faulk's shot, and having almost no goal scoring threat from the blueline, especially on the PP, and stay in the hunt this year?

 

If we can get by on those two issues, that move could look very very good in a couple of years, especially if our grade A yutes not traded in Faulk scenario see their potential (Hanifin, Fleury, McKeown, Bean, Roy, Gauthier, and Kuokannen).

 

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, MinJaBen said:

 

I'm convinced that Bean is the defender we would regret losing the most down the line between Noah, Bean, Fleury and Faulk. We don't have a guy on our team on the back end that thinks the offensive side of the game as well as he appears to at this point. Including Faulk. Faulk has a cannon, but Bean is more dynamic. Different levels, of course, but I think he is going to transition better. I hate to make comparisons, but I see a lot of similarity in Bean and Karlsson in terms of offensive talent and play. 

I trust you on that because I haven't delved into his numbers, but will just say that he's doing it in Juniors, not the AHL. But Fleury instead is fine with me, or whomever RF is willing to give up. I've long favored Faulk as the centerpiece of any deal with the Avs anyway, and part of me still believes his ASG appearance this year was to burnish his resume in anticipation of dealing him.

 

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not so sure we don't get better if we trade one of Faulk or Hainsey, as far as defensive play is concerned:

 

Quote

Cane-alytics ‏@Cane_alytics  2h2 hours ago

Of all d pairs w 500mins at 5v5 here's where Pesce/Slavin rank out of 32 pairs:
CA60 - 2nd
SA60 - 1st
xGA60 - 6th
SCA60 - 11th
GA60 - 20th

Here's the Faulk/Hainsey rankings from the same group of 32:
CA60 - 20th
SA60 - 24th
xGA60 - 22nd
SCA60 - 22nd
GA60 - 29th

 

 

Edited by MinJaBen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Min, I think that is a fair point, and the more I think about it, in some ways, the trading of Faulk could be more of a Francisian thing to do than at first blush.

 

The reason to do it is twofold, but the reason it fits Francis is the second reason:

 

One, is your point, and the simply butt-ugly plus/minus Faulk continues to sport and has for years now, and your SA anc GA numbers match that. The thing about Hainsey is that he doesn't score much. So his plus minus is all about his defense only. And still over the years, despite not scoring himself, his +/- is better than his long time partner's. I think Hainsey is considerably better than Faulk defensively. Plus, as a rental, Hainsey just isn't going to bring much back.

 

Anyways, the point is that Faulk's bad +/-  and further supported by your SA, GA numbers, maybe we could get by and slip into the playoffs this year without Faulk. No one really thinks we are going to take out Washington, then NYR, then Pittsburgh, then go onto win the cup this year, but we do want to get in.

 

Two, trading Faulk lets us keep all of our prospects. The ones Francis has built up. The ones he doesn't want to give up. Yes, we have to get through this year, but remember this deal would net us Duchene or Landeskog, which would help make up for the loss of Faulk this year.

 

But in the future? Wow. How bright could it look if we get to watch guys develop and move the ones that don't quite cut it?

 

Since there is a recent trend to people wanting Landeskog, let me slide him in there.

 

Over the next two years we can see what comes out of this list of

 

forwards:

 

Skinner, Landeskog, J Staal, Rask, Lindholm, Aho, Teravainen, McGinn: (Gauthier, Roy, Kuokanen), plus any of several other prospects who could rise up.

 

Lindholm's game is just now blossoming. Aho is proving to keep getting better. TT has been good at center. Landeskog has 65 point potential.

Gauthier has very high end potential, and Roy could as well.

 

defense:

 

Slavin/Pesce/Hanifin/McKeown/Fleury/Bean

 

Francis can keep making moves if one or more guys don't work out, and over time even one key UFA could make the difference.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, remkin said:

1. Do you think this years defense can stay in the hunt without Faulk? Losing a RHD, how would our D line up, especially if we also move Murphy?

2. Do you think we can sustain the loss of Faulk's shot, and having almost no goal scoring threat from the blueline, especially on the PP, and stay in the hunt this year?

1) I think Tennyson or Dahlbeck can bring everything Faulk does defensively and probably more. Dahlbeck has been playing RHD very effectively on his off-side. Murphy is a non-issue for me. He may shoot right, but he's no RHD.

 

2) Well, I'd begin by disagreeing that we'd have almost no blue-line scoring threat, especially on the PP. I think Slavin is showing signs offensively; that Hanifin clearly has the aptitude to contribute scoring; and that Rask or Jordan could take a point and we'd be fine, especially with the net-front physicality Scog would add. I think that probably does more for the PP than hanging onto Faulk does. 

 

For whatever reason, Faulk isn't finding shooting lanes anywhere near as effectively as during that crazy streak before his injury last year. I remember back then being in complete awe of his ability to backpedal and get off an absolutely blistering shot. That is no mean feat; all your mass is moving backwards and while still in motion you shift it all forward, into the shot. I've never seen anyone do it better, but I also haven't been seeing it since; he's now taking one-timers, trying to power pucks thru instead of creating openings. I don't think it's injury-related; he seems to be moving just fine. It's almost like he can't be bothered and prefers to just blast away.

 

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll make another point. There was an article on Cardiac Cane a day or two ago laying out the issues for the Canes. One issue was the fact that we lack elite, super high end talent. That teams almost always get that talent by drafting it in the top 3.

 

We are not going to be picking top 3 anytime soon barring a miraculous lottery win.

 

Landeskog and Duchene are both top 3 picks.

 

But mainly, building a team to contend for the cup annually, without a top 3 pick on the horizon, is going to take at least one bold move (maybe more). The amazing pick of Aho, has helped a lot, but a bold move is called is still for.

 

Even though I am really feeling this year's chance of grabbing the 8 slot, we are battling 5-6 teams for that slot. If it ends up that moving Faulk disrupts this year's chances, it will end up ok as long as the team feels that Francis is trying to make the team better.

 

I am moving back to the idea of trading Faulk. Of course, assuming that Colorado wants him, because it keeps all of our future plans in tact and especially Landeskog being signed for years, moves him firmly into those plans too. I just can't get past Faulk's defensive lapses.

 

If Faulk's defensive stats require sweetening the pot, I'd let go of our first round pick this year.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason to even consider Faulk in a Col trade would be because the Col asking price would have to go down. Believe what you want about Faulk, he does have some defensive liabilities but he is a 3 time all-star, proven NHL defense man, skates big minutes, can run a PP, if he hadn't been hurt could of/would have scored 20 goals, skates big minutes  and leads D-men in point production this season having skated less games.  Yea lets trade Faulk.

 

We are looking to add scoring not subtract scoring

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

1) I think Tennyson or Dahlbeck can bring everything Faulk does defensively and probably more. Dahlbeck has been playing RHD very effectively on his off-side. Murphy is a non-issue for me. He may shoot right, but he's no RHD.

 

2) Well, I'd begin by disagreeing that we'd have almost no blue-line scoring threat, especially on the PP. I think Slavin is showing signs offensively; that Hanifin clearly has the aptitude to contribute scoring; and that Rask or Jordan could take a point and we'd be fine, especially with the net-front physicality Scog would add. I think that probably does more for the PP than hanging onto Faulk does. 

 

 

 

 

If one and two can be managed this year, then it would strongly argue for moving Faulk if Colorado wants him.

 

On #2 I just point out that Faulk has 11 goals and the next guy up is Hainsey with 4. Slavin's signs have still only netted 2 goals to Faulk's 11. Slavin is there in assists though.

 

Still, I think overall I agree. I see I'm going to get on the wrong side of OBXer, but I am just looking down the road too. I can still write off Hanfin's miscues on being just removed from being a teenager. Faulk has been at this 5 years longer.

 

Another interesting thing is that Hanifin has one less assist than Faulk. While Hanifin has glaring defensive weaknesses thusfar, so does Faulk, and Hanifin just left 19 years old a couple of weeks ago. Overall I'd rather trade Faulk than Hanifin. There I said it. In a couple of years Hanifin could be what we hoped Faulk would be now: an all around defenseman.

 

Faulk's All Star rating is pure offense, combined with too many super elite forwards in the Metro, and none on the Canes.

 

In the past I could try to explain away his team worst plus-minus on him facing the league's top forwards. But this year, Slavin and Pesce do that, yet despite Faulk's scoring 11 goals himself, and slotting into the 3 slot, there he is, again, at the very bottom of the team at minus 15. At some point in the last 240-ish games, I'd have thought he could at least get to even. He cannot. Over three years running there has been an overwhelmingly higher likelihood that the opposition scores than we do when Faulk is on the ice. At some point that has to count for something.

 

Sell high.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, OBXer said:

We are looking to add scoring not subtract scoring

 

I know it is not the best stat in the world, but you don't get to a career -80 in plus/minus by being a consistent net positive on your team's scoring. Over the last two years, Faulk's +/- is -37 while the lower scoring Slavin is +10. Same team, similar utilization. One scores more...and lets in way more. I think we'd be ok net scoring if Faulk was moved.

Edited by MinJaBen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, remkin said:

In the past I could try to explain away his team worst plus-minus on him facing the league's top forwards. But this year, Slavin and Pesce do that, yet despite Faulk's scoring 11 goals himself, and slotting into the 3 slot, there he is, again, at the very bottom of the team at minus 15. At some point in the last 240-ish games, I'd have thought he could at least get to even. He cannot. Over three years running there has been an overwhelmingly higher likelihood that the opposition scores than we do when Faulk is on the ice. At some point that has to count for something.

 

Sell high.

 

I have been saying this since last year when the Oilers' fans seemed enamored with him last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we move Faulk we move Faulk. I'm ok with it but only if the deal is right and makes sense. But Faulk, our #1 pick and a prospect for one player. Lets get real. There is no one I can see that can replace Faulk in our system, yet.  Slavin and Pesce are there so they don't replace him, Hainsey is probable gone at trade deadline or in the exp. draft, Hanifin is still a couple of years off to take on the Faulk role, our prospects are just that prospects and untested. They are a calculated risk but a gamble at best for the next two seasons. Bring one or two into the lineup that sports Faulk, Pesce and Slavin and your probable alright but without his, place your bets.

 

So if you move Faulk to achieve a better forward group you probable will need a separate deal either at deadline or off-season to replace him with a proven NHL D-man

 

If you trade Faulk for either Duchene/Landeskog I wouldn't think you would throw in a first round pick too. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd pick  or a prospect. But really Faulk, a first and a prospect. I just can't see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, remkin said:

 

I disagree that we are out of it because Washington whipped us. That team is whipping everyone. They are on a superhuman run.

 

The thing is, if we are really still in it at the deadline (even if the odds were against us) and Francis pull the rug out on this team, after moving Eric and Versteeg on last year's team, the return may still not be worth it.

 

As to being out of it now, we currently sit 3 points out adjusted. Hardly out of it. But the main thing is that we are going to start a stretch where we are not playing powerhouses every night. Past Canes teams have played down to their opponents and this team could too, but I don't think so. We have yet to have a stretch where all or most forward oars are pulling at the same time. As Lindholm's game arrives, Rask's recedes. The schedule in March does get crazy in terms of no breaks. That is fair. But we have more home games than road games, no long road trips, and much more beatable opponents. I just feel a stretch of this team coming together and making a nice run in the rest of the year.

 

Overall the team game has been building. Yes, we do not match up with Washington. But then again, we're done playing them.

 

In the rest of the season there are 30 games left. There are 6 games left vs power teams, 3 at home. (BTW Washington lately has been a superpower team).  We also have 4 games vs Arizona/Colorado.

 

Yes, we are in a pack, so that automatically cuts our odds. But, if our team game keeps building we are finally in a decent stretch of games to make a move up the standings.  That is not the time to move a key veteran who would probably not return much as a rental.

 

The dallas game says otherwise.  Also we don't have much chance of getting to 7. Washington is our best case and only scenario for a playoff opponent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OBXer said:

The only reason to even consider Faulk in a Col trade would be because the Col asking price would have to go down. Believe what you want about Faulk, he does have some defensive liabilities but he is a 3 time all-star, proven NHL defense man, skates big minutes, can run a PP, if he hadn't been hurt could of/would have scored 20 goals, skates big minutes  and leads D-men in point production this season having skated less games.  Yea lets trade Faulk.

 

We are looking to add scoring not subtract scoring

 

 

The sweetener that would have to be added would break it down, but from the scoring aspect, trading Faulk who's scored 5, 15, 16. 10 goals over the past 4 seasons for Duchene who is 23, 21, 30, and 15 or Landeskog at 26, 23, 20, and 10 isn't subtraction by my math.  Yes, we'd be trading our best offensive D-man... but the fact i think he's perhaps our worst *defensive* D-man fairly cancels that out as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, winger52 said:

Since Lack seems to be banished, and the usual early season Cam has returned, can we get a goalie? 

 

Well Ben Bishop would probably be the big fish. Literally. I think Pittsburgh may want to keep MAF for another cup run, and Tampa probably would have done the same with Bishop too, but now they have a worse shot at the playoffs than we do.

 

Shake it way up. Get Duchene (or Landeskog) and Bishop (has to sign though), and we're done. Of course he's going to get paid. But he is 30 and his save % is down this year....Oh I don't know!!

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, remkin said:

 

Well Ben Bishop would probably be the big fish. Literally. I think Pittsburgh may want to keep MAF for another cup run, and Tampa probably would have done the same with Bishop too, but now they have a worse shot at the playoffs than we do.

 

Shake it way up. Get Duchene (or Landeskog) and Bishop (has to sign though), and we're done. Of course he's going to get paid. But he is 30 and his save % is down this year....Oh I don't know!!

We don't have a goalie signed past 2018. Bishop's numbers are very Camesque  this year and he will cost a small Ransom. RF's in a tough spot regarding the Goalie situation. I think RF has to make a push for GL/MD now and then focus on Goalie. IMO this is required to keep pace with the 5 year plan. Next year is year 4 of the rebuild and we know that most of our offensive/defensive yutes are at least two years away. The Goalie situation isn't very promising as well.  Ryan/McGinn/Stalberg/Nordstrom/McClement  are all under going a hiatus previous of the scheduled bye-week. I'm all for getting GL/MD now and getting either of them in the system now and better slotting our offense where they belong. RF has a lot of contract's up next year and I'm hoping that we are in a better position so that we do not have to extend some of the offensive contracts.   http://www.spotrac.com/nhl/carolina-hurricanes/.

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...