Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
top-shelf-1

Would we? Should we?

Would we? Should we?  

27 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the Hurricanes make one or more trades to improve their chances at a playoff berth this season?

    • Yes
      10
    • No
      17


Recommended Posts

This poll assumes a reasonable move is there, regardless what "reasonable" means to you. There is plenty of discussion over on the Trade Talk thread about what constitutes a fair trade, who should be targeted, etc. With this topic, I'm hoping to start a broader discussion about the prudence/rationale of making any move (versus a particular one) in relation to the following:

 

- The pending expansion draft

- The necessity (or not) of making the playoffs this year

- Whether "the ideal trade" significantly improves the odds of a berth

- The timing of any move (for example, is a deal done after our bye-week [Feb. 12-16] too late?)

 

Suggestion: Copy/paste/bold the above four considerations into your response, and let fly with your thoughts on each.

 

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I answered no to the poll. Not because I think we shouldn't make a trade, but that I don't think trading for the purposes of making the playoffs "this season" should be factored into the decision. I think the expansion draft makes that a fools errand. Our needs are primarily centered (pun intended) on a first line forward, and a #1C as the ideal there. However, to get that talent, we would have to give up a lot AND expose one of the forwards we were planning on protecting at the expansion draft. That makes whatever we trade for that player even more costly.

 

Instead, I think the team should look for value in the trade market with the possibility of picking up a goalie or #4/5 defender from a team that can't protect one due to the expansion draft rules....the Penguins with Fleury and Murray or the Ducks with their four defenders comes to mind as targets. Get those assets now before the expansion draft, then after the draft, trade for a forward so we don't have to worry about the protection slot shuffling that getting one now would require.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, six votes in thus far and "No" takes the early lead at 4-2. I voted no.

 

My thoughts:

- The pending expansion draft

Everything MinJaBen said.

 

- The necessity (or not) of making the playoffs this year

Yeah, of course it'll be great to get in. But is it necessary?? And if you answer yes, why? I get that everyone on this board (myself included) thinks it's important that we do. But I think some believe it is a necessity, and specifically that, without a playoff berth, the team's continued presence in Raleigh is threatened.

 

But the fact is, none of us knows that. At. All. And I would submit that it's not only a leap, it is highly unlikely. 

 

When PK signed on to RF's vision for this rebuild, and to the total housecleaning (from scouting to AHL coach), and to BP as the guy to steer the on-ice product, he knew what it would mean. So while I agree that making the playoffs is important to the team in terms of getting this roster that experience as soon as possible, I don't think it's a necessity in terms of keying any existential organizational actions--no matter how many QCers troll these boards to the contrary.

 

- Whether "the ideal trade" significantly improves the odds of a berth

The easy, knee-jerk answer is "Of course it does! How could it not?!" Let me count the ways.

 

First of all, chemistry is a nutty thing. Even when it is "instant," it can disappear as quickly as it shows up. Remember how crazy good Skins-Rask-Stemp started the year?

 

The fact is, lasting chemistry doesn't happen in a week or two. Lines need anywhere from 4 to 8 weeks to gel. Sure, it's possible to catch lightning in a bottle. But is that a bet we really want to make?

 

All of that being said, and although I voted "no" on the poll, I'll include this caveat: If we can get a veteran rental who has been to the dance and can be a steadying influence on a roster that, with precious few exceptions, has never been there, sure. Why not? There's a few names on this list who would inject excitement down the stretch, whose longness of tooth is never a negative in the room--and who might just guide us up the mountain (though probably not to the peak). And best of all, an FA would have no effect re the expansion draft.

 

- The timing of any move (for example, is a deal done after our bye-week [Feb. 12-16] too late?)

Yes, at least in my opinion, if we're going to do anything, the drop-dead is the bye week. A deadline deal on top of the ridiculous schedule we'll be in the midst of by March 1 is just as likely to be a distraction as a positive.

 

So overall: I'm opposed to a deal that messes with our "keepers" for the ex draft. The core we've established is good and is only getting better. That said, if a seasoned rental is there, he could be a low-cost option that helps us get over the hump this year, without a long-term impact on what we're trying to build.

 

Edited by top-shelf-1
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not opposed to the "right" trade if it presents itself. But we shouldn't chase it and make a deal just to push for the playoffs this year. We have a marginal, at best, playoff team that is young and improving. Only make a trade if it furthers the long-term growth of the team. As to deadline deals for the sake of the current season, think Eric Staal to the Rangers. They give up 2 second round picks and got 5 points. He's proved he can still play this year, but NY has nothing to show for 2 second round picks (potential Sebastion Aho or Justin Faulk).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted no.  Any trades made should be for next year and the year after, not for the playoffs this year.  If those trades do happen to help the playoff race this year, double prizes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted yes, but, as with all trades, the cost and the return are 90% of the issue. If Francis can get the price right, then yes. Here I project a trade that I like, such as Fleury, First Rounder, prospect for Duchene. The key, of course, is that he is using this opportunity to add a piece that helps now and later, and that the price gets real. 

 

If the prices are too high, I'm fine with sitting pat. 

 

I would not trade Hainsey unless we drop out.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted no mostly on the Canes history since 06 on trade deadline day.   That, and GMRF has been pretty vocal about not getting hosed long term on this year's March 1.

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted no because I think if a trade is made, it will be a hockey trade and not a rental situation.  I think the price is too high right now on any possible moves, so ... not so much

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, bluedevil58 said:

Hainsey has really  proven to be a solid dman hasn't he Rem?

I think so. He is probably the slowest guy on the team, and he sports an unimpressive +/-, but he is a good veteran, and a professional. He knows how to make the right play. He is even more important on our young defense. I think if you take him off this year's defense, it would materially change our playoff chances.

 

Yet, what would he bring back as a rental? A second round pick, maybe? A perma third liner? Just isn't worth it unless we are out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Hainsey, how many games does he just go un-noticed?  That isn't a bad thing for a d-man.  BP puts him out there on a regular basis on the 3 on 3 overtime.  Somebody trusts him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted No because I think No. I dont plan to justify and write  diatribe supporting my opinion. We are just not ready yet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Hainsey, I agree with the sentiments of others posted here. Don't see us getting better than a third round pick, probably less. What did JML fetch last year. I would not be against bringing him back another year. He's one of our few real veterans and should be a calming influence for all our young D. Could see him drop to 3rd pair w/one of our players up from Charlotte, and losing Murphy and Dahlbeck. If we make one of the trades (Faulk, Hanifan) that has been floated for offensive help, all the more reason to keep him around.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that line up is filled with potential Faulker. But inject Duchene or Landeskog into the lineup and it's even better.

 

I have just gotten to the point where Faulk's shot is outweighed enough by his poor defense that if he can bring us a proven first line forward that is 5-7 years from hitting 30 and could be part of the team for years, I'm ready for it. I would disagree with the characterization "desperation trade". Neither Duchene or Landeskog is a rental, and both are seriously talented with high ceilings for point production, something we have historically needed, badly.

 

I must point out that if a guy named Faulker is OK with trading Faulk, maybe the time has come.

Share this post


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

I think that line up is filled with potential Faulker. But inject Duchene or Landeskog into the lineup and it's even better.

 

I have just gotten to the point where Faulk's shot is outweighed enough by his poor defense that if he can bring us a proven first line forward that is 5-7 years from hitting 30 and could be part of the team for years, I'm ready for it. I would disagree with the characterization "desperation trade". Neither Duchene or Landeskog is a rental, and both are seriously talented with high ceilings for point production, something we have historically needed, badly.

 

I must point out that if a guy named Faulker is OK with trading Faulk, maybe the time has come.

 

Sorry I moved my post to the other thread, haha

 

Felt more appropriate there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm increasingly thinking we shouldn't. Why give away a lottery pick this year? This team will not make the playoffs and it doesn't appear like it will be close given the last month. We could easily be in the running for a top 5 pick if things continue as is. No generational players at the top of this draft, but still some good players we could use, including a bunch of big centers. Stand pat for now, see what we can shake loose before the expansion draft, see what is available as UFA and due to salary cap, and then see if we want to pull the "big one".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is hard to know where we finish, I'll give you that, and if our first rounder is in there, then that is a factor. Right now, assuming no improvement from the last few weeks, yeah, that's a top 5 pick in a weak draft. Right now there is one consensus #1 guy, who is very good all around but not a super elite guy, and one consensus #2 guy. Then it gets much iffier. 

 

But odds are this team settles somewhere in maximum pain territory: misses, but gets a mid round pick in a weak draft.

 

But mainly, if we stand pat, next year's draft pick will almost certainly not be contributing meaningfully for 3.5 years from right now.

 

Duchene or Landeskog will help this year, next year, and the year after that, at least.

 

I'm getting tired of waiting for draft picks. This team doesn't have 3 years.

 

Yes, some guys like Aho and eventually hopefully Gauthier and maybe Roy work in, but unless we trade them, we have them anyways.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, super_dave_1 said:

What do you call a team that is a seller at the trade deadline with nothing much to sell?

 

Carolina Hurricanes

That is a lot less true this year than in the past, IMO.

 

I tend to agree with remkin that this TD is our best chance in years to get a piece (or pieces) that make us a playoff team next season and beyond, while buying our developing guys the time they need to be absolutely NHL ready when they are called up, a goal BP has stated on the record.

 

Though I am as disappointed as others with our sudden anemia on offense, I understand RF's approach last off-season, and until these last six weeks, it looked like our O might over-perform enough to get us in. It still could. But whether that happens or not, and especially in view of the impending ExDraft, I believe he played it prudently--and perfectly. He had to be sure Aho, TT, and Lindy could provide what we're looking for long-term. 

 

I think those questions have been answered in positive ways, and favor an aggressive move now to get the pieces we need to put us over the top on the offensive side of the puck. Whether that is Duchene and Landeskog or others, I do think it is two pieces, who ultimately push McGinn, Ryan and Rask further down the depth chart, so our top six becomes Jordan, Skinner, Lindholm, Aho, and our two new acquisitions. To get them, I'd begin discussions with these assets on the table:

 

Faulk

Hanifin

McKeown

Fleury

Bean

Carrick

Murphy

PDG

McGinn

Nordstrom

a first-round pick

 

To me at least, that is not "nothing much to sell."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, top-shelf-1 said:

 

To me at least, that is not "nothing much to sell."

 

 

You are talking about straight up hockey trades.  Usually Trade deadline deals are expiring contracts.  If it comes down to RF selling at the deadline, I guess we are looking at Hainsey and who else?  Stemp (1 year left) and Stalberg?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, super_dave_1 said:

 

You are talking about straight up hockey trades.  Usually Trade deadline deals are expiring contracts.  If it comes down to RF selling at the deadline, I guess we are looking at Hainsey and who else?  Stemp (1 year left) and Stalberg?  

You are right, but I'm a strong proponent of getting guys some time together under game conditions before the next season begins, and I think the Avs, this year in particular, probably would prefer that too. That and, though the odds are long, I do think a hockey trade now improves our odds of squeaking in this year, and that RF can use that as a bit of leverage to shake Sakic loose.

 

To your question, yeah, those guys, plus McClement, Ryan, and Tennyson.

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, top-shelf-1 said:

You are right, but I'm a strong proponent of getting guys some time together under game conditions before the next season begins, and I think the Avs, this year in particular, probably would prefer that too. That and, though the odds are long, I do think a hockey trade now improves our odds of squeaking in this year, and that RF can use that as a bit of leverage to shake Sakic loose.

 

To your question, yeah, those guys, plus McClement, Ryan, and Tennyson.

 

The squeaking in window just got slammed shut.

Edited by winger52

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...