Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
raleighcaniac

To Trade, or not to trade

Recommended Posts

Why would we deal with a team that's within striking distance in the standings unless we were absolutely winning the deal hands down? Which isn't Hagelin. 

 

Rasks looking like a career low tier 2nd liner currently having a rough season, Hagelin's looking like why the hell's he still in the NHL?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The key sentence in the story is the last

Quote

It would definitely be an interesting trade for Pittsburgh, but they'd have to make it worth Carolina's while.

 

They (the Pens) would have to add a lot more for us to bite on this IMO

Share this post


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

The key sentence in the story is the last

 

They (the Pens) would have to add a lot more for us to bite on this IMO

True but it would have to be picks.  We are maxed out on contracts.  Unless GMRF gives them a way down the DC guy (like that dman in the Calgary trade).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for trying to come up with trade proposals, but this one? Really? 

 

I could see us including Rask in a trade for a legit center. Say a deal with Buffalo for O'Reilly: Faulk and Rask for O'Reilly and somebody or something like that. 

 

But trading a struggling guy with big upside at his lowest trade value makes little sense, and the last thing we need is another 3rd-4th liner. We need quality or forget it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we have given up on Rask. Peters indicated trying to find a way to get him going. You can never rule out a trade and Francis does like to stock up on picks.

I suspect we are kicking tires like most teams do around this point in the season. Not sure we are ready to buy yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point IMO we need to be upgrading. But an upgrade over Rask and Ryan means at least a 50 point guy, and ideally better. If that's not there, then no. For the first time in a long time we are pretty deep with good prospects, so I just can't see bailing on a guy like Rask for picks. The only thing would be his contract. Rask has 4 more years after this at $4 million per. IF the brain trust thinks Rask will not find his game again, I guess we might want to dump the salary. That said, I can't see trading Rask until we are strong down the middle and definitely not for picks. 

 

Also, the Rask we saw the first couple months of last year was pretty dang good. So I don't give up on him either. Maybe if we somehow trade for a really good center, but not otherwise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rask has been close to 50 the last two years so a different 50 pt guy would have to be younger and cheaper. It's been to short a period of Rask being in the crapper to give up on him at this point. If there is a 50 pt guy out there right now that is cheaper and younger we are going to have to give up more than Rask to make that happen and more likely a DMAN.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True that he hit close to 50 the past two years, but hidden in there is his current 23 point pace combined with a similar pace for the back half of last year. I still don't trade him, but we do need him to get his mojo back.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would we trade for Hagelin? Our 4th line has done well mostly. Where we need help is on the top lines. I’m glad to see Turbo and Aho get going, but Skinner has gotten lost lately. Nothing against Ryan, but should he be centering the line with our best scorer most of the year? And now, Jeff is playing with PDG. No offense to PDG, but he just moved up from Charlotte and now he’s on a line with our best scorer. If we make a trade, it needs to be for someone who belongs on a scoring line, preferably a center.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the trade discussion, I wish someone on here could please explain  to me the rationale for RF hanging on to Faulk. For at least the last half dozen games, I've focused on him, and I readily admit that I have soured on this player for several years, but just trying to keep an open mind with so many that seem to take up for him. Routinely while AT HOME and I can see the entirety of the ice, I see bad passes, missed assignments, shots no where near the goal, and all around lackadaisical play. For years ,the rational I've seen defending him is either his heavy shot, especially on the power play, or that he is our "only All Star". I submit on that latter statement, as several others before me have tried(apparently unconvincingly to many), that the accolade "All Star" is relative, each team has to be represented by at least one player, and thus he was RELATIVELY the best on an otherwise mediocre team for the past several years. Further, I suggest that if this player were put on at least 1/2 of the teams in the NHL, he wouldn't be a 1 or 2,and in fact, he no longer is that here. I say, RF should find a trade partner, package Faulk with either another active player, an AHLer or a pick and get us a top 6 scorer.

Share this post


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

On the trade discussion, I wish someone on here could please explain  to me the rationale for RF hanging on to Faulk.

 

 

I'd like to see that as well.  From a defensive perspective, personally i was more-comfortable with Murphy out there.  Faulk's only benefit was his scoring, and while he's at least managed a few cheap assists over the past week or so, he's still contributing nowhere near enough to make up for his ****-poor defense, IMO.  I'm utterly clueless as to why he's still here, much less the road Captain, and much less a perennial All-Star.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've come to see Faulk as a high risk D man. I think that is only acceptable if that guy produces serious offense. At times Faulk looks extremely high skilled with nice, quick-up plays out of the zone and in the neutral zone. But at times it looks like his rush to make plays either on D or O lead to miscues, and in our own end those routinely end up on the other guy's forward's stick in front of our goal.

 

His bomb is not working so far this year. I've pointed it out a bunch, but it can't be good when the #2 shot taker on your team is shooting under 2%.

 

I've gone back and forth on Faulk due to his apparent locating of his D game at the end of last year. But at this point the only things that hold me back is finding the right return and his right-handed-ness. (Previously I was hesitant because we don't get many goals from other D men, but unless Faulk starts getting a few of his multiple shots past the goalie, that is not an issue. Of course that could, ironically drop his trade value.)

 

The return is key because I'm still not convinced that we are better with Pesce-TVR-McKeown on the right. We will need the return to offset this. However, McKeown looked decent in his debut, so I think that opens the door to this move. (Dahlbeck on his off side, not so much, and injury depth in RHD would still be an issue).

 

Right now, Faulk just seems overvalued. The number of shots he takes. The All Star slottings. The Captaincy. RHD are supposedly highly valued. Goal scoring defense are supposedly highly valued. Maybe Faulk for Ryan O'Reilly straight up?

Share this post


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

I've come to see Faulk as a high risk D man. I think that is only acceptable if that guy produces serious offense. At times Faulk looks extremely high skilled with nice, quick-up plays out of the zone and in the neutral zone. But at times it looks like his rush to make plays either on D or O lead to miscues, and in our own end those routinely end up on the other guy's forward's stick in front of our goal.

 

His bomb is not working so far this year. I've pointed it out a bunch, but it can't be good when the #2 shot taker on your team is shooting under 2%.

 

I've gone back and forth on Faulk due to his apparent locating of his D game at the end of last year. But at this point the only things that hold me back is finding the right return and his right-handed-ness. (Previously I was hesitant because we don't get many goals from other D men, but unless Faulk starts getting a few of his multiple shots past the goalie, that is not an issue. Of course that could, ironically drop his trade value.)

 

The return is key because I'm still not convinced that we are better with Pesce-TVR-McKeown on the right. We will need the return to offset this. However, McKeown looked decent in his debut, so I think that opens the door to this move. (Dahlbeck on his off side, not so much, and injury depth in RHD would still be an issue).

 

Right now, Faulk just seems overvalued. The number of shots he takes. The All Star slottings. The Captaincy. RHD are supposedly highly valued. Goal scoring defense are supposedly highly valued. Maybe Faulk for Ryan O'Reilly straight up?

That I'd do in a heartbeat, rem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The next time Faulk is on a roll for a few weeks and someone suggests that it might be a good time to sell high, and people lose their minds, I just want people to remember this point in time.  You can't want to trade him when he sucks and want to keep him when he is killing it.

 

The last time he was rolling was probably the right time to clean up on a trade.  Now is not the time.

 

Buy low, sell high!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Whaler1 said:

On a side note, in six games for the Sens, Duchene has 0 points and is a -8. Just sayin'

He will get better, but this is (yet) another reason I see no sense in adding him here. He's exactly what we already have in Aho, TT, Lindholm, Rask--with the added dimensions of having to learn a new system. And he's older.  I'm very glad we didn't get him, if indeed we were ever interested.

 

Physicality, meanwhile, is not system-specific. It works across all of them. If we're trading for a #1C, the #1 bullet point on the list of criteria should be "Lives in opposition keeper's lap, and can't be moved." 

 

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


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

The next time Faulk is on a roll for a few weeks and someone suggests that it might be a good time to sell high, and people lose their minds, I just want people to remember this point in time.  You can't want to trade him when he sucks and want to keep him when he is killing it.

 

The last time he was rolling was probably the right time to clean up on a trade.  Now is not the time.

 

Buy low, sell high!

I agree up to the point where another GM is willing to pay regardless. If that GM (and right return we want) is out there, I don't care what Faulk is doing when the trigger is pulled.

 

I don't think there's a GM in the League who thinks Faulk was the Canes' All-Star rep because of his D chops. That could make moving him easier from the "change of scene" aspect, i.e., if he's on a new team maybe it ignites his production.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, bluedevilcane said:

Why would we trade for Hagelin? Our 4th line has done well mostly. Where we need help is on the top lines. I’m glad to see Turbo and Aho get going, but Skinner has gotten lost lately. Nothing against Ryan, but should he be centering the line with our best scorer most of the year? And now, Jeff is playing with PDG. No offense to PDG, but he just moved up from Charlotte and now he’s on a line with our best scorer. If we make a trade, it needs to be for someone who belongs on a scoring line, preferably a center.

Why we have not put Willy and Skins together with Rask and just waited for it to work is bewildering to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I’ll concede for the purposes of this thread that Faulk is our most expendable player that could net the biggest return.  And although I see it as unrealistic, I would jump at the chance to trade him for O’Reilly or Marner.  But man, y’all are really have to find a new whipping boy if he ever does get traded.

 

We have a lot of systemic problems on this team.  Our goaltending is still inconsistent.  Our offense hasn’t improved at all under our coaching staff.  We essentially only have one line producing offense.  All of our defenseman except Fleury have been inconsistent, including our 2 new high dollar players no one dares call out.  Our PP still sucks.  Our PK has regressed.  We’re severely getting out-hit night in and out.  Everything about this team is bland right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, PenaltyKiller17 said:

So I’ll concede for the purposes of this thread that Faulk is our most expendable player that could net the biggest return.  And although I see it as unrealistic, I would jump at the chance to trade him for O’Reilly or Marner.  But man, y’all are really have to find a new whipping boy if he ever does get traded.

 

We have a lot of systemic problems on this team.  Our goaltending is still inconsistent.  Our offense hasn’t improved at all under our coaching staff.  We essentially only have one line producing offense.  All of our defenseman except Fleury have been inconsistent, including our 2 new high dollar players no one dares call out.  Our PP still sucks.  Our PK has regressed.  We’re severely getting out-hit night in and out.  Everything about this team is bland right now.

Man Debbie downer you just ruined everything for me.  I'm not even gonna watch the game tonight.  You are pretty much right but its really not that bad.  Every team has their list of stuff thats struggling at the moment.....except Tampa Bay.  

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...