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

Who would you protect out of these 3?

Who would you protect out of these 3?  

17 members have voted

  1. 1. If it came down to protecting only 1 of these 3 in the ex-draft, who would you choose?

    • Nordstrom
      2
    • Stempniak
      9
    • PDG/ McGinn
      6


Recommended Posts

If you had only one protection spot for the expansion draft left, which of these forwards would you use it on?  I lumped PDG and McGinn together; consider that choice as whichever of the 2 you consider more valuable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless we hear that PDG and McGinn have signed extensions, it is a moot point. Stempniak and Nordstrom will be exposed to meet our forwards under contract exposure requirements. If all four were under contract, I would protect Nordy and Stemp. Losing either PDG or McGinn would not be ideal, but I think we need to win next year and Nordstrom and Stempniak give us a much better chance to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that Stempniak only has one more year, but I really want to protect him because this year is so pivotal. I really like Nordstrom, but as we need to float two of these guys (I think), he is on the block. Then I'd sign both PDG and McGinn and expose PDG if that is an option.

 

Even though PPG and McGinn are younger with potential 40 point upside, Stempniak is much more polished and more likely to actually put up 40 plus points. As of now, this year's team cannot afford to lose scoring. Further, the scoring upside and current abilities of McGinn and PDG are similar. They are different versions of the same idea. So losing one and keeping one seems like more of a wash.

 

To me the order of protection with protect them more at the top is:

 

1. Stemp

2. McGinn

3. PDG

4. Nordstrom

 

PDG and McGinn both have upside, and if they were flipped and McGinn exposed it would not cause me heartache, but I just think McGinn has more upside offensively and he also lays big hits.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ agreed hag65.  Since we have a chance to take a big step forward next year, I would protect the guys that can most help us next year.  That would be 

 

1. Stepniak

2. Nordstrom

3. McGinn

4. DiGuiseppe

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really believe we acquired "Suitcase" Stempniak not only for the veteran presence he could bring to the room last year, but because he satisfied the exposure requirement and is relatively easy to replace if Vegas takes him, so I expose him. That said, I don't think he's going anywhere.

 

If Cam/Lack had earned the crease last year I think Stemp is off to tinsel town. But with the Darling signing, I agree with others that we probably do a deal with McPhee to assure he takes one our two extra keepers, probably Lack. But don't surprised if it's Cam. None of us really knows which of the two is better in the room going forward. Given the number of Swedes on this team--and the extent to which RF wants to complete the org's break with the past--it might just be Eddie who stays.

 

But even if there is no deal with Vegas on taking one of our extra keepers, I still expose Stemper. He's 34--nine years older than Nordy, who really took a big step last year, adding a physical element I never expected of him. His work on the PK is easy to overlook, but it was critical. With guys like (sentimental favorite) JWilly, and Iggy, and other seasoned vets available for cheap for a year or two while our next wave of prospects develops, keeping Nordstrom is the smarter move in terms of establishing our next wave of veterans up and down the lineup--and at 25, Nordstrom is just entering the typical peak years for forwards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will agree that if Francis can go replace Stemp with say J Willy, then fine. But I think that might be harder than it looks. Then again, with expansion maybe not.

 

Nordstrom does have hidden value. At the World Cup his name was called a lot, even though he didn't score much. I just think with all the yutes pushing up, if we had to pick we pick guys that can score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly we could lose all 4 of them this summer and few of us would be crying the sky is falling.  They all bring something to the table, but we have to lose somebody and at this point none of them are the difference between making and breaking.  We probably miss Stempniak more this season and the rest more down the line, but in a quest for perennial contender i'll call it a wash.  As mentioned, PDG or McGinn bring similar elements so if given the choice who to lose i'd say one of them.  I mean hopefully RF makes a move or two that sends them to Charlotte anyway.  But who best to keep?  Meh, what happens happens.  No vote from me but if i were pressed for an answer, i'd say flip a coin between Stempniak and Nordstrom and carry on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one thing that's not being recognized in this exercise is, I sense that McG is built in a Peters' mold, and though it's totally indefensible, I really have gravitated toward PDG ,for no other reason than he has an Italian sounding name. Seriously though, I believe both PDG and McG are evolving players who will give more this year, and can evolve as some of the AHL and lower players matriculate upward. And while I love what Stemp  brings, I also agree that he is moved. Hoping we might bring JWilly back to replace him also?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Francis has mentioned the idea of a 20-25 goal guy and maybe a depth guy. If he can replace Stemp's 40 points with an expansion pick up and then go get THE guy, then I would agree with keeping the younger guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't vote in the poll, but if *I* were the GM, I'd prioritize Nordy and McGinn because they showed a little more grit last season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a clarification/ reminder: this hypothetical question is intended as much as anything to gauge this forum's views regarding the importance of next season in the context of longer term objectives as well as the relative merits of each player listed.  From that perspective I don't think there can be qualifications with regard to the actual choice as presented.  But explanations of different scenarios and opinions in the text are both insightful and appreciated.  The question has generated the type discussion I had hoped it would.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I picked Stemper for the record...

 

But my sincere hope is that all 4 of these guys are superseded by better players in the long run.  Part of getting to that point is replacing them.  So I don't care that much who goes, I want them to all go eventually.

 

Basically I view them as 3rd line ceiling guys and ultimately 4th liners in the ideal world, but the 4th line when we are finally operating where we need to be should be the hungry prospect training ground.

 

These guys are all excellent 4th liners though.  I would say Nordy and Stempniak have the greater upside.  I don't see the PDG thing, and McGinn played physical a few times and I really loved it but it wasn't consistent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think it bears repeating that PDG McGinn really aren't in the equation, even if they were signed (unless I'm reading the rules wrong). Both are only second-year players, just as Pesce and Slavin are. i.e., untouchable.

 

Since they've got five votes between them (at the moment), and assuming they in fact are not draft eligible, I'd be curious as to which of the two players actually in play (Nordy and Stemp) those five voters would choose.

Share this post


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

I do think it bears repeating that PDG McGinn really aren't in the equation, even if they were signed (unless I'm reading the rules wrong). Both are only second-year players, just as Pesce and Slavin are. i.e., untouchable.

 

Since they've got five votes between them (at the moment), and assuming they in fact are not draft eligible, I'd be curious as to which of the two players actually in play (Nordy and Stemp) those five voters would choose.

 

According to CapFriendly neither PDG nor McGinn are exempt. 

https://www.capfriendly.com/expansion-draft  (then click on the Canes logo)

 

From Wikipedia: "Only players with more than two years of professional experience — NHL or AHL as defined in the collective bargaining agreement — will be included in the draft."

 

I'm assuming the difference between our yute d-men and PDG/ McGinn is the latter's time in the AHL. 

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


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

 

According to CapFriendly neither PDG nor McGinn are exempt. 

https://www.capfriendly.com/expansion-draft  (then click on the Canes logo)

 

From Wikipedia: "Only players with more than two years of professional experience — NHL or AHL as defined in the collective bargaining agreement — will be included in the draft."

 

I'm assuming the difference between our yute d-men and PDG/ McGinn is the latter's time in the AHL. 

So as Min points out, since we haven't signed them, they are already exposed. Meaning they are not subject to our protection, meaning we've already made our decision on them. Unless they are signed between now and Saturday, there's no reason to include them in the poll.

Share this post


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

So as Min points out, since we haven't signed them, they are already exposed. Meaning they are not subject to our protection, meaning we've already made our decision on them. Unless they are signed between now and Saturday, there's no reason to include them in the poll.

 

53 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

Just a clarification/ reminder: this hypothetical question is intended as much as anything to gauge this forum's views regarding the importance of next season in the context of longer term objectives as well as the relative merits of each player listed.  From that perspective I don't think there can be qualifications with regard to the actual choice as presented.  But explanations of different scenarios and opinions in the text are both insightful and appreciated.  The question has generated the type discussion I had hoped it would.

 

See above.  I don't know how to explain what I was trying to accomplish with this poll any better than that, unless I were to bold the word "hypothetical" (and "if" in the original question).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, I'd protect Stempniak.  Scoring seems to be our biggest problem and imo he's clearly the most likely to to be the biggest contributor on that front.  I see making the playoffs next year as being of critical importance to this franchise.  Stempniak seems like the type of player we may well end up trading assets for at next years trade deadline, so why not take advantage of him for the entire year?  Given our current crop of prospects, I see PDG & McGinn as most likely ending up as very good 4th-liners on my ideal Canes team 2-3 years down the road, and as such, not worth giving up Stemp's scoring in this critical upcoming season.  Similar perspective on Nordy.  While I definitely want him back, both for this season and to see how he continues to develop, I don't see him as being worth losing Stempniak's scoring for next year.

 

If we were to lose Nordy I'd double my efforts to re-sign Stalberg.  If that's even possible; seems like there's still a question about whether a team can reacquire a player they traded after Jan 1st for a period of 1 year.  Anyone have the definitive answer to that one? :huh:

Edited by LakeLivin
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lake, now you are confusing me? Your statement "this forum's views regarding the importance of next season in the context of longer term objectives", as I would hope that most on here who've endured the agony of the past several years in a "rebuild", or whatever terminology one wants to apply, would NOT sacrifice the strides RF has made to finally position this team for "consistency "in playoffs vs making the playoffs next year AT ALL COSTS? When couched as you are, how does anyone choose the now over the universally sought after of annual playoffs?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, KJUNKANE said:

Lake, now you are confusing me? Your statement "this forum's views regarding the importance of next season in the context of longer term objectives", as I would hope that most on here who've endured the agony of the past several years in a "rebuild", or whatever terminology one wants to apply, would NOT sacrifice the strides RF has made to finally position this team for "consistency "in playoffs vs making the playoffs next year AT ALL COSTS? When couched as you are, how does anyone choose the now over the universally sought after of annual playoffs?  

My point exactly. Just because something is "hypothetical" doesn't excuse it the obligation of incorporating the facts as currently known. And at the moment, neither PDG nor McGinn can be protected--hypothetically or in the real world.

Share this post


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

Lake, now you are confusing me? Your statement "this forum's views regarding the importance of next season in the context of longer term objectives", as I would hope that most on here who've endured the agony of the past several years in a "rebuild", or whatever terminology one wants to apply, would NOT sacrifice the strides RF has made to finally position this team for "consistency "in playoffs vs making the playoffs next year AT ALL COSTS? When couched as you are, how does anyone choose the now over the universally sought after of annual playoffs?  

 

In the big scheme of things I think almost all agree that we shouldn't sacrifice the future for the present.  But, like most things, I don't see that perspective as an absolute, binary issue. The present also matters, as indicated by Bill Peters when he said we need to move some of our picks (the future) for immediate offensive help.  I view the issue as on a continuum, with decisions geared towards "the future" as being appropriately weighted more heavily than "the right now", but both taken into consideration.  Think about one example: an absolutist view would mean that we shouldn't make a trade deadline deal to boost our playoff chances, regardless of our situation at the trade deadline. 

 

My statement certainly didn't imply that I think we should make decisions to boost our playoff chances at any cost to our future.  But I do think that making the playoffs next season is particularly important to the organization.  And, given our prospects, I don't think that losing a McGinn, PDG, or Nordy hurts our future to the extent that it would outweigh the importance of maximizing our playoff chances this year by retaining Sempniak.  My statement was totally in the context of the original poll question geared towards the listed players.  Now, even in that context, some here disagree, which I understand and respect.  Everyone is going to weight the two factors according to their own particular perspectives regarding the players in question. 

 

edit: perhaps instead of using the word "critical" I should have originally said: "I see making the playoffs next year as being of particular importance to this franchise."

Edited by LakeLivin
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

My point exactly. Just because something is "hypothetical" doesn't excuse it the obligation of incorporating the facts as currently known. And at the moment, neither PDG nor McGinn can be protected--hypothetically or in the real world.

 

Yeah, no.  My poll, my rules. Now can I suggest:  :on_topic: ?

Share this post


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

 

In the big scheme of things I think almost all agree that we shouldn't sacrifice the future for the present.  But, like most things, I don't see that perspective as an absolute, binary issue.

 

I think this is a key concept to me. Just like many other debates we have. The strategy can remain in place even if specific tactics go somewhat against it. Another way of putting it is that there are exceptions so just about every rule. But the exceptions are the hard part. The rule is easy.

 

But the bigger thing is that the plan has phases and priorities begin to shift, by design and by circumstances.

 

I've argued, and still believe, that the "full on", "it's all about the future" was the plan early on. It was about accumulating picks and prospects and cap space: Never trade a 1st or 2nd round pick, and never trade a prospect, never pick up a high priced UFA, and sell at the deadline always. That's been the plan to date.  It would have required an exceptional circumstance to do otherwise, and that never materialized (moves were attempted, but they were limited by the plan). But as the plan matures, the priorities shift somewhat towards winning this year. Not win at all costs, just more to adding key pieces (or not losing them) that will help win this year so long as we are not losing a major piece of the future, or even trading the right future piece if it brings back a more needed piece.

 

Francis' stated plan last year was that Cam and to a lesser extent Eddie were as good as anything out there. But when that proved untrue Francis moved quickly to fix it. I think he is going to do the same thing up front. He is not going to go into this year with less projected scoring than last year.

 

The other thing that has changed is that our prospect pool is starting to mature. Zykov looked pretty good. Wallmark looked pretty good. PDG and McGin probably both have more offense to give, but are already decent bottom third liners.

 

So for me, this particular issue, if it comes down to it: PDG vs Stempniak, is the exception to the rule. Stempniak is proven as a point producer at 40 points with 50 point upside. PDG and McGinn are not, and as smart as his game is, neither is Nordstrom. This would not have been the plan last year, and might not be next year, but for me, is this year. Then, since PDG and McGinn are so similar, and there are the Zykovs or Saarleas out there, I'd prefer to part with PDG or Nordstrom. Again, IF GMRF has a plan to replace Stemp with a similar player off the expansion situation or UFA, AND add a bigger gun (say Duchene) then I would switch up. This is just me though. And this assumes that PDG would qualify.

 

As a bigger point though, this year we need to add some pop, and make a splash. The coach, the fans, need to see that the organization is taking a step to win. Another year of no moves followed by struggle will gut the fan base IMHO. I think he will do it. Not sure who we get, but we will get someone good. That's my opinion anyways.

Edited by remkin
  • Like 1

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...