Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
raleighcaniac

To Trade, or not to trade

Recommended Posts

Here's something else to consider.

 

I am all for hoping that this team, as constructed is finding it's groove and elevating it's game. But it better, because if not, things could get dicey. We are, on a points earned per game basis, overperforming our stats. Odds are this doesn't continue. Our current rankings:

 

Goals for/GP: #23

Goals against/GP: #20

Team Save %: #29 (tie)

PP #27

PK #27

 

Points earned per game played: #16

 

I think there are a couple of ways of looking at this. (I personally think it unlikely that this incongruity persists).

 

1. The team is on the rise and all of those numbers will come up to meet our ppg number.

2. The team has over-performed and will revert back to the mean if something isn't done to improve the team.

 

To me the biggest issues are the same: more goals for, better goaltending. It seems that we still have not gotten enough of either. Given our lack of scoring it is nothing short of amazing that we are where we are despite some of the worst goaltending in the league.

 

If Mongo doesn't get his act together all of this will be too hard to overcome, even though we are at the edge of the playoffs.

 

But I'd go further. To really go for it, we need Darling to at least be decent, and we still need that one more guy. Francis has signaled that he likes our group, but that group will need to continue to elevate it's play to get those key metrics in the top half of the league to keep this up.

 

Teravainen has elevated his game. Aho is coming on. But the two guys I expected more out of are Lindholm and Rask. Lindholm has upped his goals, but this guy was an assists machine for most of the back half of the year last year, and not so now. And Rask, needs to up everything, but his assists are pathetic at 3. Another wild card is Skinner. He's on a 28 goal pace, but he's streaky with only 1 in the last 8. If he heats up at the right time that could help too.

 

The thing is, the rest of the guys up front are doing pretty well, and to expect all 9 top forwards to hit on all cylinder is probably not realistic. The base team is there. Just need that one more piece near the top. Easier said than done, but that is the task IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are some eye opening stats, rem. Not much of a stats guy myself, but based on those, not sure how we are where we are? Explanation, other than the difficulty that a stat does not capture real time?

 

Thinking about it for a sec, I guess the explanation rests that the recent surge has not had time to balance out the numbers from the beginning?

Edited by KJUNKANE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, sleekfeeder said:

Saw this over the Christmas break.

Interesting that most of those mentioned are d-men.

https://cardiaccane.com/2017/12/25/carolina-hurricanes-5-players-to-trade-for-that-would-make-a-happy-holiday/

 

Anything that says we should add Karlsson is irrelevant.  Adding a big name, with injury issues, and require a huuuuge contract to a money strapped team is dumb.  What is more dumb is we are adding to our strength not adding to a weakness.  On top of that we add two more defenders to list?  Geez.  The number one I could see as he is physical but OEL and Karlsson are stars on a star lacking team.  

 

RNH is having a good season but he hasn’t lived up to his 6 million price tag, Ill pass until he does this for another year or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The old line that there are lies, damn lies and statistics has some merit here.

 

Things are not as bad on the goals/for and goals/against due to uneven blowouts. Looking at games won or lost by 3 goals or more, we give up blowouts more often and bigger. 5 blowouts against, 3 for, and only one win by more than 4 goals, but 4 losses of 4 or more, and of course the recent 1-8 drubbing in Toronto.

 

We are minus 24 in our blowout losses, and only plus 10 in our blowout wins.

 

Some of this is a function of not being a powerhouse offense, and some is a function of a few absolutely ugly goaltending outings.

 

Also, those numbers are better over the past 6 games, especially if you pull out the Toronto 1-8 game.

 

Still, the PK and PP numbers also need to be better.

 

 

Personally, I think a lot of it comes down to goaltending. I think when Darling gives up the softies it affects the team confidence and permeates everything. Note how we've won the 5 games we got decent goaltending in the last 6. 

 

I still maintain we need that one more top piece to really contend, but ironically to fix one thing to get in, it would be goaltending. Darling was the #5 goalie in the league in save % last year. What the heck?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree, I think(as if I know) that not only are the softies Darling is letting deflating to everyone, team included, but rem don't you imagine that just as perplexing is the players' inability to figure out how to help him out? I'm sure the 2 diametrically opposing styles, Athletic vs Space Blocker, presents it's own set of problems, meaning for each goalie, they have to deploy different mindsets? Does that seem reasonable. Ergo, they cannot adopt a single style of defensive shielding. 

Share this post


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

don't you imagine that just as perplexing is the players' inability to figure out how to help him out? I'm sure the 2 diametrically opposing styles, Athletic vs Space Blocker, presents it's own set of problems, meaning for each goalie, they have to deploy different mindsets? Does that seem reasonable. Ergo, they cannot adopt a single style of defensive shielding. 

This is above my paygrade. I don't really know. Why also, did Eddie Lack come in here with pretty good save % in Vancouver and look like a buffoon a lot more than we'd like? Is there something about our D system that puts more on the goalie? I don't know. Maybe. But the weird thing is that our goals allowed per game is not as bad as our save percentage ranking. It was like that last year too. Also shots allowed way lower. Do we give up more grade A chances? Maybe, but soft goals are by definition not grade A chances, and in our bad games too many grade C chances seem to go in.

 

To my eyeball Darling is just not playing well on balance (has had a couple of good games). But then Cam has looked pretty good and his save % is #24 for 12 or more games played.

 

I can tell you if we figure it out, it will make a big difference.

Share this post


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

....Is there something about our D system that puts more on the goalie?  ....soft goals are by definition not grade A chances, and in our bad games too many grade C chances seem to go in.

Believe your eyes (and the other posters).  Its not good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to "a trade", found interesting aside comments over on Canes Country, namely that "board approval for sale of Canes expected in 1-2 weeks". Add to that "Tom Dundon anxious to jump in to running the club", and I'm crossing all fingers and toes that to do so, particularly with his recent exposure to the 2 road games recently, will have demonstrated what may be needed to push us to playoff level?

Share this post


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

Here's something else to consider.

 

I am all for hoping that this team, as constructed is finding it's groove and elevating it's game. But it better, because if not, things could get dicey. We are, on a points earned per game basis, overperforming our stats. Odds are this doesn't continue. Our current rankings:

 

Goals for/GP: #23

Goals against/GP: #20

Team Save %: #29 (tie)

PP #27

PK #27

 

Points earned per game played: #16

 

I think there are a couple of ways of looking at this. (I personally think it unlikely that this incongruity persists).

 

1. The team is on the rise and all of those numbers will come up to meet our ppg number.

2. The team has over-performed and will revert back to the mean if something isn't done to improve the team.

. . .

 

I haven't looked at the data, but here's another possible explanation.  When using league rankings of stats instead of the actual quantities, some differences may look larger than the extent to which they actually effect results.  E.g., say 10 or 12 teams are within a couple tenths of a percentage point on the PP.  The difference in rankings (say, 15th vs 27th) looks large, but it's probably not significant when it comes to actual PP scoring.  Like I said, I haven't looked at the data, so I'm just floating the possibility.

 

I will say, based on the "eye test", I don't think the Canes are over-performing their current standings.  To me it's just as likely the opposite as I feel there were more games that we "outplayed" the opposition without getting a win than the reverse.

 

edit: agree on the goaltending issue and how big a difference adding one more scoring forward would probably make

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


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

 

I haven't looked at the data, but here's another possible explanation.  When using league rankings of stats instead of the actual quantities, some differences may look larger than the extent to which they actually effect results.  E.g., say 10 or 12 teams are within a couple tenths of a percentage point on the PP.  The difference in rankings (say, 15th vs 27th) looks large, but it's probably not significant when it comes to actual PP scoring.  Like I said, I haven't looked at the data, so I'm just floating the possibility.

 

I will say, based on the "eye test", I don't think the Canes are over-performing their current standings.  To me it's just as likely the opposite as I feel there were more games that we "outplayed" the opposition without getting a win than the reverse.

 

edit: agree on the goaltending issue and how big a difference adding one more scoring forward would probably make

Those are good points Lake. Things do tend to get clustered in the middle especially. Then there are seasonal variations:

 

Take goals for. We are on a better pace than last year. Good for 20 more goals on this pace. Last year that would have been good for #15. But scoring is up across the league this year. So while we are scoring more, we are scoring less relative to the league.

 

The big trick is that with us right on the edge, what matters now is what we are going to do. Where are we trending? I'd like to look at this last 6 game spread and say we're trending up, but every team has nice patches. If we can hold the line through this next 9 game slate of pain, I'd feel pretty good about our trends.

 

As to the upper echelon forward, we still don't have a top 50 point getter or a top 60 goal getter.

 

It's the very top of 2/3 most key positions: goalie and top line forward talent, that we are missing. The base of the team and the guys in the system are all better than it's been in a long long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the trade a few questions come to mind:

 

are we going to keep Lindholm and Rask?  They are close to the same player (3rd line center that plays a solid 2 way game and very streaky).  Rask scores more so far but Lindholm is asked to be a shutdown guy.

 

How many Checkers are going to make the squad next season? My guess at anticipating 4: Zykov, Wallmark as the 4th line center, Foegle as the 4th line RW, and Kuokkanen. Maybe 5 if Carrick or McKeown become our 7th defender next season.

 

Necas playing Charlotte next season?  I hope so.

 

Aho sticking at center?  

 

When do we anticipate Necas and Roy to make a play for the roster?

 

If we get a Tavares, ROR, or the like we would have to move Roy and Rask/Lindholm in a deal with the team or in another move.  A long term center, with Aho, and Staal would lock up our center ranks for a long time.  If we are sure Roy/Necas/Kuokkanen/Mattheos/who ever we draft this year is going to be a good center then a Brassard might be a decent add (1 year after this year, 50-60 point scorer).

 

A winger with more scoring potential than Lindholm would be a good addition.  Doesn’t clog the middle plus Gauthier, Saarela, and Zykov are our winger prospects with scoring potential. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you gocanes. A trade to bolster this team up front, in my mind, has to see a forward going back the other way. But who? We just have too much of a log jam up front, with commitments (and/or perceived upcoming commitments) out the wazzoo, and nowhere to put them. This also makes me believe less and less that something significant is going to happen. 

Edited by sleekfeeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can say that right now I'd take Lindholm over Rask. It will be interesting to see what Lindholm gets paid. One advantage of him not breaking out is that next year is an RFA year, and it should lower the price tag on him.

 

Lindholm has twice the points of Rask, but mainly he is on a 23 goal pace with way more playmaking ability. I still think Lindholm can be an outstanding third line center, really more of a 2b. I still think Lindholm is capable of a 65 point season more than Rask is. We could also use Rask's $4 million/year.

 

I still think that Lindholm will crank it up this year too. He has 8 points in his last 11 games.

Share this post


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

For the trade a few questions come to mind:

 

are we going to keep Lindholm and Rask?  They are close to the same player (3rd line center that plays a solid 2 way game and very streaky).  Rask scores more so far but Lindholm is asked to be a shutdown guy.

 

How many Checkers are going to make the squad next season? My guess at anticipating 4: Zykov, Wallmark as the 4th line center, Foegle as the 4th line RW, and Kuokkanen. Maybe 5 if Carrick or McKeown become our 7th defender next season.

 

Necas playing Charlotte next season?  I hope so.

 

Aho sticking at center?  

 

When do we anticipate Necas and Roy to make a play for the roster?

 

If we get a Tavares, ROR, or the like we would have to move Roy and Rask/Lindholm in a deal with the team or in another move.  A long term center, with Aho, and Staal would lock up our center ranks for a long time.  If we are sure Roy/Necas/Kuokkanen/Mattheos/who ever we draft this year is going to be a good center then a Brassard might be a decent add (1 year after this year, 50-60 point scorer).

 

A winger with more scoring potential than Lindholm would be a good addition.  Doesn’t clog the middle plus Gauthier, Saarela, and Zykov are our winger prospects with scoring potential. 

 

Looking at the future, to me Lindholm is easily > Rask.  Almost 2 years younger, more physical, faster, and I think he's got more skills. I see a lot more potential upside to Lindholm than Rask.  

 

Based on everything that happened at the start of this season, the comments from RF and BP, and Aho's path, I'm thinking that Necas is targeted for the Canes next season.  They could start him in Charlotte, but I'd think that was a short term plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im cool with a Lindholm keep over Rask. I believe that keeping both is preventing a young fellow from coming to the team.  

 

I think Necas overwhelmed the staff at how fast and advanced he was compared to his peers but realized that he wasn’t as ready against NHL players (why we didn’t see him in games). I still think a Charlotte start as the number one center is best for him.  If he goes out and kills the AHL, then being him up.  I don’t know that an Aho that can come from an extra year in Europe to scoring 30 goals is a repeatable formula.  A Saarela-Necas-Gauthier Checkers top line next year could be sick.  

 

In the end, it’s all things to consider when trying to get another offensive add to the team.  Add now but prevent congestion later.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your perspective because your take on Necas is pretty much the same one I had on Aho last year.  And I'd bet it was the Canes Brass' perspective earlier than that, until what he did in his men's league, tourneys, and camp made them accelerate the process.  So, given how they're already talking about Necas, if he matures physically at all, I'll be surprised if he doesn't at least start the season in Raleigh, up to 9 games, and more if he shows he can handle it.

 

Almost all of us think we need another scoring forward, and I at first was thinking it had to be a young player.  But, along the lines you brought up, I think picking up someone older for a year or 2, who wouldn't cost nearly as much to acquire, would make more sense given the Canes pipeline.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trade freeze now over, and with us getting some W's, and The Sale about to be finalized, I'm hoping for a "splash". I follow several of your enlightening thoughts on trying to pull in an older player with a 1-2 year deal(such as the oft mentioned Derrick Brassard), but too often in the past, and I'm including myself in this, we on here have been burned by unrealistic expectations, i.e. If this and If that, than we'll make the playoffs. This is not to say that Necas, or any of a half dozen Checkers don't seem to be knocking on the door of the NHL. But, if we have the opportunity to add an established top line guy(like a Tavares), I'd be hard pressed to turn that down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been saying how Rask can bring what Jordo does with better hands and he's five years younger. The fact is, we have another guy who is already bringing what Jordo does with better hands and he's six years younger: Elias Lindholm.

 

The major-stats line is pretty much identical. Only in hits - where Jordan leads the team with 88, twice Lindholm's total (don't get me started on how completely wrong it is for any C, let alone your best, to have to set a team's physical pace) - is there a big gap, although Lindholm is still in the top five.

 

If we all agree (and we seem to) that Tavares is that last piece, and we agree (do we?) that the Canes should go for it this season, the question becomes: Who is most likely to bring him back while hurting our chances the least?

 

The answer, I believe, is that it all hinges on when the deal is made. We're talking about two bubble teams, meaning that for both, the TD could prove too late. But the Isles have more to lose--specifically, John Tavares: The Prize in this year's FA lottery. Any team wanting him for this playoff run should expect to pay--and any team wanting him now should expect to overpay.

 

Does anyone here honestly think that, from the Isles POV, Victor Rask constitutes overpaying? He's a magic bean to them. Meanwhile, Jordan is a guy with a ring and a long-term deal: the roster equivalent of a fixed asset, and one that does not significantly decrease their odds of making the dance this year. Lindholm is a pending FA himself (i.e., also not overpaying, from an Isles POV).

 

If this team wants to markedly improve its odds of making the dance this year and going forward, Staal for JT right now is the deal that does it, IMO. Of course, Jordo would have to okay it, and I don't know if he would. 

 

  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deal has to have extension stipulations.  If we trade for TV and he doesn't re-up with us then a 1st round pick or some sort of compensation should come our way...  At this juncture, I am inclined to say we go for it this year.  Be it trading for JT or sending a 1st for ROR or something of the sort.

Edited by bluedevil58

Share this post


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

Deal has to have extension stipulations.  If we trade for TV and he doesn't re-up with us then a 1st round pick or some sort of compensation should come our way...  At this juncture, I am inclined to say we go for it this year.  Be it trading for JT or sending a 1st for ROR or something of the sort.

 

Ok, you're saying the Isles should give up one of the best centers in the league under conditions that could cost them a 1st round pick?  Why in the world would they do that? :wacko:

Edited by LakeLivin
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TS I don’t see Rask as someone who can replace Staal.  Rask hasn’t been asked to pull the same duties as Staal and Staal has scored the same points as Rask the last 2 years.  Although Staal’s scoring hasn’t upticked the way we’d hope with more O time.  He has been a .58 and.60 PPG player the last 2 seasons and this year a .61 PPG player.    Im not for a JT and JS swap.  I’d love to get JT but if GMRF covets his prospects, a Brassard move makes the most sense.

Share this post


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

 

Ok, you're saying the Isles should give up one of the best centers in the league under conditions that could cost them a 1st round pick?  Why in the world would they do that? :wacko:

Insanity! Maybe we can sell them a bridge to get to their new arena.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of thoughts.

 

The Isles will not trade Tavares this year unless they fall out of the playoffs AND JT tells them it's over. If that happens and he'd agree to a trade and sign, just open up the pocket books and send them just about anyone. This is very very unlikely. The small, but more possible chance would be that Tavares wants to test the UFA waters, and somehow we entice him in the offseason.

 

My eyeball tells me that with all due respect, some here are undervaluing Jordan Staal. No, he will not be a ppg player. But he is a rock solid 60 points player who basically does EVERYTHING else. He is a beast with the puck. He controls it. He often looks like a man among boys when the puck is on his stick. He is the one guy that simply cannot be knocked off the puck or out of position. He continues to shut down top line centers, every year sporting a top or near top of the team plus minus despite playing against the best often with d zone starts. He is plus 40 for his career despite checking elite centers night in and night out and playing on a crappy Canes team for much of it. Heck he even wins face-offs. He is not a first line center, but would instantly become one of the best second line centers in the game. Jordan taking on the 1C's of the other team allows the Rasks and Lindholms to play against lower lines.

 

I like Elias LIndholm. I would not trade Lindholm. But neither he, nor Rask bring what Jordan Staal brings. I'm as big of a Lindholm supporter as there is here, but Jordan is more valuable by a good bit. If he had better hands he'd be a top 10 center. Lindholm has the upside, but has not delivered on it yet. Frankly, if we had Tavares - Staal as our 1-2, we'd be fine with any number of guys at 3: Lindy, Rask, Aho, Wallmark, Ryan, etc etc etc.

 

Jordan is committed. He is a Captain. He can be a huge part of winning if we add the right other piece. Trading him would be a step back. Do not trade Jordan Staal.

 

Thank you and good night.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...