Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
OBXer

Off-Season Talk 2017

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, OBXer said:

Is this true? (I'm looking at you Lake)

 

 

If it is true we could lose McGinn or DiGi anyway unless we sign them to protect them

 

Yes, they can be claimed without meeting the requirements. Also, they can be protected without being signed, as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the sake of argument, let's say we re-sign both McGinn and Digi before the expansion draft.

No-brainer protected forwards (5):

Staal, Skinner, Rask, Lindholm, TT.

 

Choose 2 more:

Stempniak, Nordstrom, McGinn, DiGi

 

No-brainer protected d-men (1):

Faulk

 

We've got 2 "open" protection spots for d-men.  Those have value, gotta believe RF uses some of our other resources to acquire a couple of desirable d-men at a discount from teams that can't protect them.  Doesn't necessarily mean that they'll end up in Raleigh next year, we could always flip them after the expansion draft (just not to the team we got them from, I think).

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

For the sake of argument, let's say we re-sign both McGinn and Digi before the expansion draft.

No-brainer protected forwards (5):

Staal, Skinner, Rask, Lindholm, TT.

 

Choose 2 more:

Stempniak, Nordstrom, McGinn, DiGi

 

No-brainer protected d-men (1):

Faulk

 

We've got 2 "open" protection spots for d-men.  Those have value, gotta believe RF uses some of our other resources to acquire a couple of desirable d-men from teams that can't protect them.  Doesn't necessarily mean that they'll end up in Raleigh next year, we could always flip them after the expansion draft (just not to the team we got them from, I think).

 

If they are a 5/6 D-man and at least one stays in Raleigh I'm all for it

 

 

Share this post


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

For the sake of argument, let's say we re-sign both McGinn and Digi before the expansion draft.

No-brainer protected forwards (5):

Staal, Skinner, Rask, Lindholm, TT.

 

Choose 2 more:

Stempniak, Nordstrom, McGinn, DiGi

 

No-brainer protected d-men (1):

Faulk

 

We've got 2 "open" protection spots for d-men.  Those have value, gotta believe RF uses some of our other resources to acquire a couple of desirable d-men at a discount from teams that can't protect them.  Doesn't necessarily mean that they'll end up in Raleigh next year, we could always flip them after the expansion draft (just not to the team we got them from, I think).

 

I was thinking down this road as well, but something at the back of my mind says we were close to the total number of contract's limit at one point, does anyone know how close to this we are and if it is a factor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, hag65 said:

 

I was thinking down this road as well, but something at the back of my mind says we were close to the total number of contract's limit at one point, does anyone know how close to this we are and if it is a factor?

 

According to https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/hurricanes Canes have 45 of 50 allowable contracts.  RF should have room to maneuver.

 

CapFriendly is a great site.  In addition to the best contract info I've seen since CapGeek, it's got expansion draft info for a team all in one spot, draft picks by round (and where you got them), buyout, waivers, and arbitration calculators, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a lot more interested in what other teams are going to have vulnerable to expose than what the Canes are going to have to expose.  Ronnie isn't going to experience a lot of heartburn worrying about who he may lose. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I'm a lot more interested in what other teams are going to have vulnerable to expose than what the Canes are going to have to expose.  Ronnie isn't going to experience a lot of heartburn worrying about who he may lose. 

 

Me too, and I'm not either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Lindholm is a bit of a hidden gem that we definitely need next year. The way he finished this past year should set him up for a real full on breakout this year, but was still a bit under the NHL radar in terms of the degree he was putting up points late.

 

Anyways, yes, losing him or him having a major injury setback would have been very bad.

 

I am also not a fan of guys playing in these tournaments. They sign contracts saying they won't do all kinds of things that they could be injured doing, then go play a tourney like this and risk injury. Not a fan. A Lindholm injury would have been a major set back for the entire team.

 

As the end of last seasons Fargo: "and for what?  A little bit of money?".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Already posted this in the IIHF thread but Lindholm has two goals against the US, two very good wrist shots. Just missed netting his third out front when he was hit from behind as he was making a deke in close.

 

I also mentioned before that Landeskog was obviously not pleased with the slash and took exception to it several times. He was also chirping at the German bench. At least in that instance, he was showing leadership qualities.

 

He looks like a bull on the ice at times, and I agree that is more of what we need. I would love to have him here at the right price although I would still have some consistency concerns. What I do like is the fact that he is 24 years old and fits in with what we are trying to do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LakeLivin said:

Here's an interesting question: would you rather expose Stempniak or re-sign one of McGinn or DiGi and expose them? 

Nordstrom vs. McGinn or Digi?.

 

Even though Stempniak could be viewed as much more of a short term asset, I really want to see him back next season as I see it as being particularly important for the Canes as an organization.

 

I also think this is an interesting question. I've opined on it before, but I agree that I don't want to lose Stempniak for next year. I really think next year is a must for playoffs or things are going to get hot under some seats, and Stempniak is a very solid, veteran 40 point guy, who even on a very good team can rock on a good third line. He is a proven producer. McGinn and PDG are not, at least not yet:

 

Points/Game: 16-17:

 

Stemper: .488

McGinn: .281

PDG: .194

 

This would seem to suggest signing and offering up PDG.

The only thing is that two years ago PDG put up .415 ppg, better than McGinn has managed.

 

Both McGinn and PDG have "hard to play against" qualities with offensive upside, but McGinn will deliver that bone rattling hit.

 

GM Remkin likes McGinn better, and sees tons of potential guys in the pipeline to replace a guy like PDG, and wants Stemper's 40 points NEXT year, and likes his leadership on a very young team. So I sign and offer PDG up.

 

GM Francis though, seems to really like his young guys with upside. We have yet to let one go or trade one away. So it's harder to predict, but he might just offer Stempniak.

 

 

What makes this more compelling is that whoever he decides to offer up with Nordstrom, is probably in fact the guy we lose. I just can't see them taking Nordy, Dahlbeck, Ward or Lack.

 

 

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Landeskog. Do we move Skins to the right side?  Or if we go with the Swede line, do we really push Skins to the "3rd line" with TT/Aho and an unknown center(Roy maybe). Stempniak would replace Lindholm on the Staal line.

 

based on his contract length, Skog would be a great addition.  I don't see another big addition after that.

 

Skins-???-Aho

TT-Staal-Stempniak 

Skog-Rask-Lindholm

 

Solid top 9.

Edited by gocanes0506

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Canes went after Oshie, you could look at a deal similar to Lucic's last year. Probably 7 year range at around 6 mil, give or take.

 

Landeskog has 4 more years at about 6 mil, is younger than Oshie, knows Skinner and Murphy from Kitchener days, and now Rask and Lindholm. Also a little bigger. Price would be assets instead of just cash, so certainly trading away D and picks and prospects. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we could get Cam Fowler, Trouba, or a young Dman from Minnesota to help us in our pursuit of a top line center.

 

protect then flip before FA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, caniac23 said:

If the Canes went after Oshie, you could look at a deal similar to Lucic's last year. Probably 7 year range at around 6 mil, give or take.

 

Landeskog has 4 more years at about 6 mil, is younger than Oshie, knows Skinner and Murphy from Kitchener days, and now Rask and Lindholm. Also a little bigger. Price would be assets instead of just cash, so certainly trading away D and picks and prospects.

 

I say get both. OK, OK, before I start getting giddy, I know that this is "out there" and not likely, but hey, it could happen.

 

Oshie is coming off of a great year that pro rates to 67 points and is a ppg in the playoffs.

The thing is, Oshie will cost us in contract only. Don't have to give up players.

I think 7 is a bit long, but 6 is doable.

When a team signs a guy like Oshie, who is now 30, they are really planning on getting full value in the first 4 years or so.

Yes, when he's 35 and not quite as good, he's overpaid, but that's the price for getting a stud and losing no picks, players or prospects.

 

Meanwhile, Landeskog is coming off of a 33 point, major downer year, which might drop his price.

 

So, we got Darling and gave up no picks, players or prospects.

We get Oshie and give up no picks players or prospects.

 

Leaving only one big trade: Landeskog at a value and give up picks and prospects, but still have a bunch of them.

 

It always gets dicey to say what he would cost, but what about Fleury and our first rounder, and one of our late second rounders and our late third rounder? Too much? Too little? Even if it's too much, we'd have Landeskog, and still have Slavin, Hanifin, and Bean in the pipeline.

 

I know that this still leaves 1C in question, especially since Peters doesn't really like Lindholm at center. But maybe we re-think that.

 

Oshie-Lindholm-Skinner

Landeskog-Jordan-Aho

TT-Rask-Stempniak

 

 

Just spitballin'.

 

I still prefer going for Duchene and Oshie as my crazy dream. That takes care of the 1C problem, adds more scoring, and less term to deal with in Duchene.

 

Oshie-Duchene-Lindholm

Skinner-Jordan-Aho

TT-Rask-Stempniak

 

I know it seems nuts, but does that not almost assure playoffs for years to come, especially with our good and improving D and our fixed goalie?

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another thought about keeping Stempniak.

 

I think Gauthier is going to be ready in two years at the latest, for full time NHL duty. This is when Stempniak would drop off as UFA, opening a spot in the top 9 for Gauthier to step in.

 

If not, we have a slew of others who might be ready by then.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


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

I like Landeskog. Do we move Skins to the right side?  Or if we go with the Swede line, do we really push Skins to the "3rd line" with TT/Aho and an unknown center(Roy maybe). Stempniak would replace Lindholm on the Staal line.

 

based on his contract length, Skog would be a great addition.  I don't see another big addition after that.

 

Skins-???-Aho

TT-Staal-Stempniak 

Skog-Rask-Lindholm

 

Solid top 9.

I agree that'd be a solid top 9, though the way I see it, that TT-Staal-Stempniak would be the 3rd line. Call the other two 1A and 1B if you want, but the Staal line just feels like it's a notch below the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say a 6x6 deal for Oshie is a very fair price.  He is a skilled player that has some grit and should have a lot left in the tank. His shoot out prowess alone should be a major reason to target him. We always need help in that department. (Hopefully Darling will get us a few more points in shoot outs also.) I also see Oshie as a leader and potential captain for this team.  He has way more winning seasons and playoff appearances under his belt than any other current player or potential acquisition and we desperately need a leader. Roddy was around the same age when we got him and we all know what happened there..

 

Landeskog would be my other preference as a big name to go after. Like Rem mentioned he may be had at a bit of a discount (I say first rounder and third rounder and grade A prospect, thus keeping our lineup intact, to help jumpstart the Av's rebuild.) But we get skill and grit NOW. He could help open up our undersized yet highly skilled guys and also add leadership in the form of a young guy who has been in that role before.

 

pipe dreams.... I know.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say this Law, if he's the guy we put in that unprotected slot, I'd agree, he's the guy they probably take. We're almost forcing him on them if he's left unprotected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if Lack will have a market so teams can meet the minimum requirement?

 

 Also still interested to see what the going market for exposed players will be.  Although some bargaining power is gone with the ability to "convince" LV to not take someone. I say keep Stempniak.

 

not a lot of big names on the mock expansion drafts.

Edited by gocanes0506

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good thoughts. Yeah, having that bona fide 1C would be nice. But without doing any research and nothing else coming to mind, can't think of who besides Colorado to deal with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Law-Dawg said:

I have a hard time seeing Stepniak on the team next year...very high odds he's a Las Vegas Knight. 

 

I've already noted that I'd like to see him back, but if he is taken by Vegas that would make it 8 teams in 5 seasons for Stempniak (9 if they were to take him and then deal him at the trade deadline).  I'd fear blow-back from the Hockey Gods if we dido that to the man. :P

 

I'm going to take a shot in the dark and predict that we offer Vegas a 3rd round draft pick to take Lack.  I can't see either Ward or Lack as having much trade value, and one of them needs to go.  Seems like that would be a better option then buying one out if we couldn't find a trade partner.  And it would allow us to keep Stempniak, who I think could be very important to the team next year, as well as McGinn and DiGi who imo are still somewhat raffle tickets in the longer term scheme of things, but raffle tickets I'd like to hang onto if at all possible.

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

32 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

I wonder if Lack will have a market so teams can meet the minimum requirement?

 

 Also still interested to see what the going market for exposed players will be.  Although some bargaining power is gone with the ability to "convince" LV to not take someone. I say keep Stempniak.

 

not a lot of big names on the mock expansion drafts.

 

I can't see Lack (or Ward) as having value to another team for the exposure requirement because unlike skaters, goalies don't have a minimum games played requirement.  They just have to be under contract for '17-18 (or have been made a qualifying offer if they're RFAs).  And teams can still only protect 1 goalie.

 

I just posted this over on another thread, probably belongs here more than there:. 

 

24 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

 

I've already noted that I'd like to see him back, but if he is taken by Vegas that would make it 8 teams in 5 seasons for Stempniak (9 if they were to take him and then deal him at the trade deadline).  I'd fear blow-back from the Hockey Gods if we were to do that to the man. :P

 

I'm going to take a shot in the dark and predict that we offer Vegas a 3rd round draft pick to take Lack.  I can't see either Ward or Lack as having much trade value, and one of them needs to go.  Seems like that would be a better option then buying one out if we couldn't find a trade partner.  And it would allow us to keep Stempniak, who I think could be very important to the team next year, as well as McGinn and DiGi who imo are still somewhat raffle tickets in the longer term scheme of things, but raffle tickets I'd like to hang onto if at all possible.

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok the aggressive addition of Darling has got the rosterbation fluids going.  Yep.  Here are some options for the next 2 seasons (because we have to play it that way with somewhere in the ballpark of 13-14 million in additional salary re-signings to do in 2018 (and we are cheap). I don't think we'll get over 65 million.

 

Currently we have 45.6 million

Subtractions: Luck, 2.75 million & Murphy ~800k

Moves: trade murphy & a 2nd rounder to get young Dman (fowler, dumba, etc) not the normal price but they'll be exposed

             trade young dman, roy, and pick to Colorado for Duchene (I don't think Roy's value can get any higher right now)

Additions: Duchene 6 mil, TT re-sign 3.5 mil, Ryan re-sign ~ 1 mil, Sign Engelland 1 year 2.5 mil, Sign Stalberg 2 years 1.5 million AAV, re-sign PDG ~1 mil

2017-2018 Canes

Skins-Duchene-Aho

???-Staal-Lindholm

TT-Rask-Stempniak

PDG/Nordstrom-Ryan-Stalberg

 

Slavin-Faulk

Hanifan-Pesce

Engelland-McKeown

 

End salary: 58.1 million, yes we have 8 million left in my assumed ceiling but we'll need it next year.  I wonder if Versteeg would come back for a 1 year deal of 3 million to play on 2nd line.  That would be a pretty good top 9 IMO.  If not, Nordstrom plays on the 2nd line.  Added 30+ goals with Duchene and possible Versteeg, & Aho, TT, and Lindholm will improve.  Leaves one of PDG on the bench, potentially, and Dahlbeck as well.

 

2018-2019

Subtractions: Ward 3.3 mi, Stempniak 2.5 mil, Engelland 2.5 mil

Re-signs- Defensive guys +12 million, Lindholm +1.3 mil (4 mil total)

Adds to roster- Saarela, Gauthier, Fluery, & backup goalie + ~4 million

Skins-Duchene-Aho

Saarela-Staal-Lindholm

TT-Rask-Gauthier

PDG/Nordstrom-Ryan-Stalberg

Slavin-Faulk

Hanifan-Pesce

Fluery-McKeown  (an entire home grown D corp.  How many teams could say that? Yes Im counting McKeown cuz he has been in the system the last 2 years, not signed)

 

Ending Salary: 64.1 million.  Right at the my assumed ceiling.  Would love to add another 5 million to get a top 2nd line LW but I don't think we have it.

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...