Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
OBXer

Off-Season 2018

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, caryhurricanes said:

Darling sucked.

 

 

 

This.  We all know Cam is far from the answer but to say he was a crutch that kept the Hurricanes out of the playoffs?  Darling couldn't stop a beach ball on many nights and i don't see how using him instead of Cam would have gotten this team in the playoffs, at least not last season.  Cam's .906 was adequate-at-best, yes, and didn't do the team many favors, no.  Darling's .888, however, was considerably less-favorable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Historically Cam has blocked out some would be number one's, but mostly we just stink at finding goalies, and last year that blocking thing did not happen.

 

In the case of last year, Cam was not that great (though he did post a nice record admittedly), but Darlling was full on terrible (as in worst in the league terrible). But last year, despite the stank coming off Darling, Darling was far from blocked by Cam. Peters kept rolling him out there. And I don't blame him, in fact, I was right there asking for it. Because we knew that Cam could not carry us all the way with mega starts. We needed Darling to at least not suck. He couldn't oblige.

 

I really can't recall feeling more negative about a critical player since the Kaberle's. Even Eric Staal's drop off was not as acute of a gut punch as this. If Darling starts the year anywhere but Charlotte, another team, or bought out, it's going to be tough to handle.

 

If somehow Darling can make a miracle comeback, I'll end up cheering him on, but after what I've seen from him, he'd have to post about 6 shutouts in a row before I'd relax even a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, caryhurricanes said:

I have read some absurd stuff here but you guys blaming cam for last year is the most absurd yet.  I know you all know the numbers.  How good he was doing as a backup.  Darling if he even was average gets us in the playoffs.  And Cam is the problem????  This is really simple.  Darling sucked.  The darling pick up and not getting a goaltender once he sucked was the biggest problem we had.   

There are other issues but darling being a total bust is the by far the most outstanding.  Blaming cam for darling sucking.  Lol. I just can’t even believe I read that.  Wow 

Easy there, mojambo. I never "blamed" Cam. He's just doing what any good player does, which is compete to keep their job. The problem is that he can't handle the job anymore when he "wins" it. I define "handling it" as being a top-10 keeper, which Cam has not been for a very long time. He has not been in the top 20 for a long time, either. Most recently, in reverse chronological order, he has been 33rd, 27th, 21st, 22nd, 43rd, 35th, 34th. He last made the top 20 in 2010-11, but only just: he was 19th. He is now eight years older, and even with very solid defense in 2016-17, only managed 27th (rankings based on GAA).

 

My point, and I think ChuckBurns's point, too, is that until there is open competition among guys who are still at a stage of their careers where they can play 50-55 games as a #1, having Cam as the fallback is not going to move our goaltending forward.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect Lindholm to be dealt.  I don't think he is a Brindi type player and I just think that reading the tea leaves we dont have a spot for a netfront capable guy who won't netfront.

 

I hate that it seems like we blew that pick.  I, like everyone, just keep/kept hoping it would change.

 

Maybe he gets the Dundon "come back different and make it hard for me to replace you" grace period of a half season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting take on Lindholm hag. He certainly seems to be a guy capable of more than he consistently produces. That ridiculous goal-less streak at the end of the season surely gives me pause. I have no heartache in moving him at this point. As always, I wonder about return.

 

If not though, the key (IMO) will be a new deal that is team-friendly. He surely has not earned any kind of huge raise. Comparing to Rask would, well point out why not to do it. If we can get Lindholm in on basically high end of third line money with no NTC, he still has upside, and that would be realized here. Then he could still be moved for a bigger return.

 

He had a stretch of elite playmaking two seasons ago, and has shown the ability to score on at least a 20 goal pace. But he's never put it together over an entire season. I get that this is the rub, and a reasonable reason to trade him, but only if we get good return IMO. If he ever puts it all together for a full season he could be a 65 plus point guy. If....but that's why not to pay him for that. Then if we get it, he's a huge value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hag65 said:

I expect Lindholm to be dealt.  I don't think he is a Brindi type player and I just think that reading the tea leaves we dont have a spot for a netfront capable guy who won't netfront.

Wow, I saw his play very differently, I guess. He was net front pretty consistently throughout the second half of the season, and set some very effective screens. His physicality has steadily increased, and I think turned a corner in the second half. Yeah, he's up for extension, so maybe that was the motivator. But if he brings that game consistently, I think he is our best shot at a big, slot-hogging center (from within the org) anytime soon. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He had a 27 game streak without a goal at the end of the season, so he didn't really turn that part around. Though he did score one in the last game. So there's that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, this controversy surrounding keeping vs not keeping Cam, and how if so "the coaching staff will lean on hm" is premature, forgetting in all this angst that the complexity of "the coaching staff" together with its GM influence, however much that (RF) influenced things is vastly different, and in effect, there's a new sheriff in town. What I'm suggesting is that the Waddell/Brind'Amour determinate may not be so forgiving or as compromised as their predecessors, and/or may already have a plan, not only to do away with co-captains, which was an unmitigated travesty, but also with the Ward/Darling duo that was at the least much of the same. So lets see how this plays out in the New Atmosphere of decision by committee, and keep the faith.

Share this post


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

Wow, I saw his play very differently, I guess. He was net front pretty consistently throughout the second half of the season, and set some very effective screens. His physicality has steadily increased, and I think turned a corner in the second half. Yeah, he's up for extension, so maybe that was the motivator. But if he brings that game consistently, I think he is our best shot at a big, slot-hogging center (from within the org) anytime soon. 

 

I also have a bit of a gut feel from Brindi's chalk talk I attended on the inner workings of the PP.  It seemed while he was going over it that he wasn't too pleased with how Lindy was executing... I think that also colors my feel on this.

 

We'll just have to see what happens I guess.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

top shelf is correct, I did not blame Ward for us missing the playoffs.  What I said is that the coaching staff, and Brind'amour was part of that staff, leaned on Cam when Darling's game collapsed.  And while they did continue to give Darling starts, he never had an opportunity, like Raanta did in Arizona, to turn it around by just going out there night after night until he either got it right or showed he will never be a #1 goalie.  So now, we are in the limbo of not knowing if he can perform at that level or not.

 

If we resign Ward and buyout Darling, name a goaltender hoping to be #1 who would sign here?  If you sign Hutton or some other free agent goalie as backup/1B, then you are expecting Ward to perform at least as well as last year.  And, you've added another long-term buyout which means you only have one more you can use for several years.  If Darling had been signed to a two-year deal, we could go your route and maybe get someone else.  And they could be as bad or worse than Darling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ChuckBurns said:

top shelf is correct, I did not blame Ward for us missing the playoffs.  What I said is that the coaching staff, and Brind'amour was part of that staff, leaned on Cam when Darling's game collapsed.  And while they did continue to give Darling starts, he never had an opportunity, like Raanta did in Arizona, to turn it around by just going out there night after night until he either got it right or showed he will never be a #1 goalie.  So now, we are in the limbo of not knowing if he can perform at that level or not.

 

If we resign Ward and buyout Darling, name a goaltender hoping to be #1 who would sign here?  If you sign Hutton or some other free agent goalie as backup/1B, then you are expecting Ward to perform at least as well as last year.  And, you've added another long-term buyout which means you only have one more you can use for several years.  If Darling had been signed to a two-year deal, we could go your route and maybe get someone else.  And they could be as bad or worse than Darling.

 

Darling had plenty of chances.  He just flat out sucked and is the primary reason why we did not see the playoffs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hag65 said:

I expect Lindholm to be dealt.  I don't think he is a Brindi type player and I just think that reading the tea leaves we dont have a spot for a netfront capable guy who won't netfront.

 

I hate that it seems like we blew that pick.  I, like everyone, just keep/kept hoping it would change.

 

Maybe he gets the Dundon "come back different and make it hard for me to replace you" grace period of a half season.

Hag, i disagree, Lindy spent alot of time in front of net.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dinz said:

Hag, i disagree, Lindy spent alot of time in front of net.

 

Agreed.

 

Rewatch the latter quarter of the season, and you’ll see that Lindholm was our most consistent net-front presence. I think he got the memo.

 

Having said that, even though Lindholm is my favorite Cane he needs to work on his overall consistency.

 

I said it before, Lindholm has a lot of talent but he needs to decide what type of player he wants to be. Is he happy just being in the NHL, or does he want to make the sacrifice and be something more? I’m hoping it is the latter.

 

I would be surprised if he got traded. He is still only 23 and plays in all situations. I think Brind’Amour’s comment about him being able to score more than 16 goals is a reflection of what I stated above. If he wanted him gone he probably wouldn’t have made that comment and kept it behind closed doors.

 

Also, if Lindholm commits himself, I think he is a very Brind’Amour type player.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Kyrule said:

 

Agreed.

 

Rewatch the latter quarter of the season, and you’ll see that Lindholm was our most consistent net-front presence. I think he got the memo.

 

Having said that, even though Lindholm is my favorite Cane he needs to work on his overall consistency.

 

I said it before, Lindholm has a lot of talent but he needs to decide what type of player he wants to be. Is he happy just being in the NHL, or does he want to make the sacrifice and be something more? I’m hoping it is the latter.

 

I would be surprised if he got traded. He is still only 23 and plays in all situations. I think Brind’Amour’s comment about him being able to score more than 16 goals is a reflection of what I stated above. If he wanted him gone he probably wouldn’t have made that comment and kept it behind closed doors.

 

Also, if Lindholm commits himself, I think he is a very Brind’Amour type player.

 

Aside from Dtaal and maybe Aho.  Lindy is our best all around forward when all aspects of the game are considered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lindys had 5 seasons to show us he’s a finisher and it’s an easy conclusion that he is not. He is simply not a goal scorer. Strong skater, solid playmaker but goal scoring? Not at this level. Would rather see him gone than Skinner, a perennial 20+ goal scorer on a goal starved team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, ChuckBurns said:

top shelf is correct, I did not blame Ward for us missing the playoffs.  What I said is that the coaching staff, and Brind'amour was part of that staff, leaned on Cam when Darling's game collapsed.  And while they did continue to give Darling starts, he never had an opportunity, like Raanta did in Arizona, to turn it around by just going out there night after night until he either got it right or showed he will never be a #1 goalie.  So now, we are in the limbo of not knowing if he can perform at that level or not.

 

If we resign Ward and buyout Darling, name a goaltender hoping to be #1 who would sign here?  If you sign Hutton or some other free agent goalie as backup/1B, then you are expecting Ward to perform at least as well as last year.  And, you've added another long-term buyout which means you only have one more you can use for several years.  If Darling had been signed to a two-year deal, we could go your route and maybe get someone else.  And they could be as bad or worse than Darling.

Chuck, while Brind'Amour was undeniably "part of that staff", that position neither answers what his role was in goalie deployment, nor how much he was listened to? With some of the inner workings of the Ron Francis' regime leaking out, it has caused me to question how decisions were made, particularly if Ron pulled those in that group aside, then made the final decision? Further, that's the reason that a few postings prior to yours, I suggest we see how this "decision by committee" will work in matters like this, as we may see an entirely new direction and Brindy's voice as HC might carry more weight than previously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't disagree that we should wait to see what the new brain trust decides to do and then evaluate.  But, it seems like everyone has already d3cided that Darling needs to be gone and Ward resigned without taking into account any of the repercussions of that or some of the coaching decisions last year that led to our current position.  As an example, in a game if Ward was suddenly jumped on for 2 or 3 goals, whether he was at fault or not, he was usually pulled.  But, when Darling struggled, even when it was the defense hanging him out to dry, they left him in to give up 8 goals and destroy any confidence he might have had due to a prior good start.  I am not laying all of the blame on the coaching staff, most of the blame is Darling's.  But, I continue to believe that actions taken or not taken by the coaching staff exacerbated the situation and helped destroy any of Darling's confidence.  And, given what happened to Khudobin and Lack, I think the coaching staff cannot be entirely let off the hook either.

Share this post


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

Lindys had 5 seasons to show us he’s a finisher and it’s an easy conclusion that he is not. He is simply not a goal scorer. Strong skater, solid playmaker but goal scoring? Not at this level. Would rather see him gone than Skinner, a perennial 20+ goal scorer on a goal starved team. 

 

...and Skinner has had 8 years to show that he is more than a one-dimensional, one-trick pony......and an inconsistent one at that.

 

When Lindholm isn’t scoring he still contributes in other ways. He’s good on face-offs, he kills penalties, he is more physical, wins more board battles, and he is a net-front presence, etc.. 

 

When Skinner isn’t scoring he really isn’t doing anything for the team, as Peters pointed out.

 

Lindholm also comes/will come at a lower cost. I’ll keep the much more complete, 23 year old, lower cost player.

 

Just my opinion, as always I’m sure others see things differently.

 

Hopefully, if both players are still here, Brind’Amour can get more out of both.

 

.

Edited by Kyrule

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah lets trade Skinner because we have Aho now, What team needs more than one elite scorer. One scoring line should get you the playoff right? Oh wait that hasn't worked in 9 years. Skinner will want lots of money if he were to resign next year. What team with responsible leadership will spend to the cap. Oh wait teams that make the playoffs. Well if we trade Skinner we can keep Lindy. Do they even belong in the same sentence?

 

The only reason to trade Skinner is if the return is that offer you can't refuse or if Skinner wants out and I haven't seen any indication of that yet. Otherwise get Skinner a scoring center and a speedy wing and unleash his talent.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a good reason to trade Skinner is to bring in a different type of player into your top-6.  Not advocating trading him, but there are reasons the team might do that.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Yeah lets trade Skinner because we have Aho now, What team needs more than one elite scorer. One scoring line should get you the playoff right? Oh wait that hasn't worked in 9 years. Skinner will want lots of money if he were to resign next year. What team with responsible leadership will spend to the cap. Oh wait teams that make the playoffs. Well if we trade Skinner we can keep Lindy. Do they even belong in the same sentence?

 

The only reason to trade Skinner is if the return is that offer you can't refuse or if Skinner wants out and I haven't seen any indication of that yet. Otherwise get Skinner a scoring center and a speedy wing and unleash his talent.

 

 

I hope this wasn’t in response to my post. I’ve already said that we need to see what we have in Skinner by cutting out the third-line nonsense and putting him in a position to produce. If coaching/management isn’t going to do that, then yes trade him for his, and our sake.

 

Also, nothing in my post talked about spending, or not spending to the cap. I was simply giving my opinion that Lindholm is a younger, more complete player that comes at less of a cost. 

 

How the team handles the cap has absolutely nothing to do with what I said, it’s a matter of player salary vs. return value. 

 

.

Edited by Kyrule
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I think a good reason to trade Skinner is to bring in a different type of player into your top-6.  Not advocating trading him, but there are reasons the team might do that.

 

This is what I’m thinking coaching/management is thinking.

Share this post


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

Yeah lets trade Skinner because we have Aho now, What team needs more than one elite scorer. One scoring line should get you the playoff right? Oh wait that hasn't worked in 9 years. Skinner will want lots of money if he were to resign next year. What team with responsible leadership will spend to the cap. Oh wait teams that make the playoffs. Well if we trade Skinner we can keep Lindy. Do they even belong in the same sentence?

 

The only reason to trade Skinner is if the return is that offer you can't refuse or if Skinner wants out and I haven't seen any indication of that yet. Otherwise get Skinner a scoring center and a speedy wing and unleash his talent.

 

 

He hasn't been able to develop chemistry with anyone though.  That's a concern. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Package Lindholm and Darling and retain a majority of Mongo's contract with another ahl asset.  Perhaps a 23 yr old Lindholm/a back up goalie/ahl asset  could entice someone to play ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Kyrule said:

I hope this wasn’t in response to my post.

 

NO it wasn't. It was in response to all the posts concerning Skinner. I'm pretty sure Skinner is gone but lets not kid ourselves. Skinner is a a top NHL scoring winger. I think giving him up is the foolish. We  need more offensive players not less. I'll take players that can put pucks in the net all day long over two way responsible players who can hold teams to 2 or three goals while our team can only score 1

  • Like 3

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...

×
×
  • Create New...