Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
caniac82-ch1

Faulk trade?

Recommended Posts

Forsling is nothing special and certainly not in Chicago's plans as a top-4 dman.  He's also bounced back and forth from AHL to NHL the last 2 years.  They could find a cheaper alternative or play the other rookie d-man they took in the 2017 draft on their bottom pairing in the interim.  Problem solved.

Share this post


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

Forsling is nothing special and certainly not in Chicago's plans as a top-4 dman.  He's also bounced back and forth from AHL to NHL the last 2 years.  They could find a cheaper alternative or play the other rookie d-man they took in the 2017 draft on their bottom pairing in the interim.  Problem solved.

Perhaps you are correct.  However he played in 1/2 of their games last year(41) at an average ice time of 19 minutes. 

This does not "improve" their options at D man.  Have a little faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add to my long post in the Skinner trade thread, everything* that's been done this offseason comes together if we can move Faulk for Saad or similar. Suddenly we've improved the defense, held the core offense mostly on track and added Svech, Necas and then guys on the verge like Zykov and Foegele, while also adding speed and grit. 

 

Hamilton>Hanifin

DeHaan>Faulk

Saad/Ferland>Skinner

 

Add Necas/Svech plus Zykov to an already improved roster and it all looks brilliant.

 

Don't make that final trade and we end up with too much reliance on NHL unproven forwards, especially with questions in goal. Make it, and all the pieces tie together. Put that final piece into the puzzle and reveal it.

 

I know Dundon says we're probably done, but I dearly hope that is just posturing. 

 

 

*(aside from goalie, which is trying to make the best of a bad situation)

Share this post


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

Perhaps you are correct.  However he played in 1/2 of their games last year(41) at an average ice time of 19 minutes. 

This does not "improve" their options at D man.  Have a little faith.

 

It does not, but it doesn't scream we need Faulk either.  Assuming Chicago is on his list of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, coastal_caniac said:

 

It does not, but it doesn't scream we need Faulk either.  Assuming Chicago is on his list of course.

Chicago needed a top-4 d-man even before losing Forsling, I think is the larger point. His injury only makes the need more pressing. Then again, I'm not sure Faulk shores things up much on the D side. Chicago is closer to home for Justin, but you're right, you never know.

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


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

 

No.  You didn't hear about John jumping from the booth onto the ice?  :P

Stranger things are going on Lake, according to a "few"?

Share this post


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

Forsling I think you meant top?

 

3 hours ago, LakeLivin said:

No.  You didn't hear about John jumping from the booth onto the ice?  :P

Thanks, guys. Corrected in my OP.

 

Although I would like to see JF don the blades. Coming from Mass, he'd probably surprise some people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2018 at 3:51 PM, top-shelf-1 said:

 

Thanks, guys. Corrected in my OP.

 

Although I would like to see JF don the blades. Coming from Mass, he'd probably surprise some people.

 

I guess going to church helps. Would going to confession help in a Richard trophy run?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really doubt it.  At best we get a first for Faulk if we take Sekera’s cap hit too (he may not come back from this).  

 

I dont see Edmonton moving any offense. If Skinner was still here, it may be a different story.unsigned Skinner plus Faulk for RNH.  A Faulk and Rask deal maybe for RNH plus something

Share this post


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

I really doubt it.  At best we get a first for Faulk if we take Sekera’s cap hit too (he may not come back from this).  

 

I dont see Edmonton moving any offense. If Skinner was still here, it may be a different story.unsigned Skinner plus Faulk for RNH.  A Faulk and Rask deal maybe for RNH plus something

I'm not sure here gocanes? While you may be correct, there's no accounting for angst, and if their GM sees this season starting to resemble their last with the O>D, than might he sacrifice a position he's got an abundance of, to gain on the back end? Granted Skinner+Faulk for RNH would be ideal, but if he's unsettled by this turn of events, MIGHT he be tempted by a defensemen+ a little lesser than Skinner to let go a player arguably not a key cog?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RNH did really well on McDavid's wing the latter part of last season, and McDavid mentioned how much he liked having him there.  I'd wager that would trump any temptation Chiarelli might have to deal RNH for a d-man.  :(

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


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

I'd wager that would trump any temptation Chiarelli might have to deal RNH for a d-man.  :(

 

But Faulk isn't a D-man. (Sorry Lake, but if you're gonna tee it up...)

 

Seriously, Faulk might bring back Puljujarvi, who is on the last year of his ELC, straight up. It'd leave us below the cap with five open contracts, and continue the "size matters" trend up front. I just don't see the Oil wanting him, given their negative goal differential last year.

Share this post


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

 

But Faulk isn't a D-man. (Sorry Lake, but if you're gonna tee it up...)

 

Seriously, Faulk might bring back Puljujarvi, who is on the last year of his ELC, straight up. It'd leave us below the cap with five open contracts, and continue the "size matters" trend up front. I just don't see the Oil wanting him, given their negative goal differential last year.

 

That guy only scored 20 points.  Getting him would be throwing Faulk away for peanuts just like what we did with SKinner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, bluedevil58 said:

That guy only scored 20 points.  Getting him would be throwing Faulk away for peanuts just like what we did with SKinner.

 

 

Have to admit Puljujarvi has been a huge disappointment.  That said, i figure Faulk is still the odd man largely due to his being such a defensive liability, plus Pulju apparently has some chemistry with Aho.  I'd actually take those peanuts - they'd be a better return IMO than we got on Skinner.  But like top said, i don't see it happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Granted, when viewed against original expectations Puljujarvi is a big disappointment (some had him projected as being on a level with Laine).  But the kid is only 20 years old.  If his original projections hadn't been so high, wouldn't his development probably be seen as being on track, or at least not a huge disappointment?  Ignoring initial expectations, and viewing Puljujarvi going forward, I'd trade Faulk for him (with maybe small adjustments to the deal as necessary).  I mean, given Faulk's play the past 2 years, what do you expect him to return?  Certainly not a prospect on track with Puljujarvi's original projections. 

 

One problem with that deal is that the Oil are up close to the salary cap. I think they've got about $5m open with Nurse still to re-sign and 2 roster spots to fill.  Faulk would eat up most of Sekera's LTIR, so replacing Puljujarvi (ELC of $925k) would likely make the cap space even tighter.  Plus, they'd be giving up years of control over a young player, something that does have value,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, bluedevil58 said:

Might is well go for a Lucic.  Contract be damned.  We want to get more physical then there it is.

No Thanks, not wanting a pylon any time soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd trade Faulk for Puljujarvi straight up right now. I really doubt the Oilers would, but who knows? If they would: do it.

 

As Lake mentioned this was a guy in the conversation to go #2 for a good while. On the one hand, Columbus did famously pass on him at #3, and I'm sure Winnipeg is beyond happy that they went Laine, but this is still a guy with massive upside. And if the Oilers are ready to give up on him this would be a moderate risk, very high reward move for us. If Skinner was addition by subtraction (which I don't totally buy) certainly Faulk could be. We flat out don't need Faulk, so what a perfect chance to swing for the fences. 

 

Yes, a guy like RNH or Saad has more proven NHL cred, but the long term upside of Puljujarvi is huge.

 

Here is an article from the end of last year, that includes some thoughts from Craig Button and Craig Simpson, that makes the case that it is far far far too early to give up on him, and that really he wasn't bad:  

https://edmontonjournal.com/sports/hockey/nhl/cult-of-hockey/craig-button-blasts-edmonton-oilers-for-failure-to-properly-develop-jesse-puljujarvi

 

Bottom Line: The guy got around 50% bottom 6 minutes yet produced a lot of chances while limiting mistakes, and was very good at creating grade A chances, all at 19, and far from where he will be as he settles in.

 

These tables (from the article above) are really interesting to me. They get at the idea of what I think our guys are actually looking at that are far far better than plus minus: Major Contributions over Major Mistakes and grade A chances adjusted for ice time: (I would LOVE to see these stats on our guys, especially Faulk).

 

gra-201718-78g.png

 

And even strength scoring chances, and overall contributions to scoring vs. mistakes leading to scoring chances against.

 

nn-201718-78g.png

 

In both of these boxes, even as a 19 year old finding his way, and burried on the bottom 6 much of the time, the guy's actual contribution to the things the lead to winning (creating more chances than responsible for) were very good. 

 

And the reason for getting a guy like this on a team already full of prospects is offensive ceiling. The grade A chances created per 15 by Puljujarvi (first box far right) was only bested by McDavid, Draisaitl, and Maroon, and given his bottom six role 50% of the time, he's really pretty close to Draisaitl and Maroon on that, while far from his prime.

 

I highly doubt the Oilers would make this move, but if they would, and if Puljujarvi really started coming into his own (also playing with our Finns) this is a potential elite scorer. Put him with Aho, TT, Svech, Necas, Puljujarvi...this could really get potent offensively.

Share this post


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

People beeched and moaned about the Skinner return but now their happy with some project in return for Faulk.  So fickle.

FOGN?  Fear of getting nothing?

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...