Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
OBXer

In-season trades and player moves

Recommended Posts

Ferland was mentioned in Friedman's 31 thoughts as a possible trade candidate. It was noted that Ferland hasn't been the same since he has returned from the concussion and that could impact both our plans and his trade value.

Share this post


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

Ferland was mentioned in Friedman's 31 thoughts as a possible trade candidate. It was noted that Ferland hasn't been the same since he has returned from the concussion and that could impact both our plans and his trade value.

Its shocking that a player isn’t the same coming back from a concussion.

 

With that being said, concussion concerns is why I wouldn’t go more than 4 years with him. 4 years 14-16 million, depending on how he does the remaining of the season.

Share this post


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

Its shocking that a player isn’t the same coming back from a concussion.

 

With that being said, concussion concerns is why I wouldn’t go more than 4 years with him. 4 years 14-16 million, depending on how he does the remaining of the season.

 

At this point I have no idea what is the best route to take. I don't think this organization can go through another full rebuild. I think the speculation on Ferland being available is just that. Hockey writers looking at our roster and trying to see who another team might want for a playoff push.I won't be surprised either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Fox doesn't sign and we lose Ferland to FA the Lindholm trades quickly looking as bad as the other trade that can't be mentioned.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty soon we can shut Ferland down for a while if we need to. Concussions are a real concern. There are some guys who are never the same or even retire. But most guys have an offseason and come back eventually. Skinner eventually did. Some thought Landeskog would never be good again after concussion. Both of those guys are doing pretty well (understatement of the year).

 

We need a guy like Ferland IMO. We've been trying to find this guy for years. He is not the elite skill guy we need, but he's a key complementary piece. Grit, character, but CAN put the puck past an NHL goalie, unlike every single grit and character forward I can remember on this team since Scott Walker. Martinook too. You are not going to win a cup building around these guys, but it's a lot easier if these types of guys are built around the elite core. 

 

Normally I would say we shouldn't make a move just to make a past trade look better, and I sign Ferland for what he brings, but the committee's one big trade might be hard to forget if we end up with only Dougie Hamilton from it, and since fans are still processing what to think of the committee, it's not a good look.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Dougie is sandbagging to get traded to a contender. Maybe he didn't want to come here in the first place. 

On the Buy or Sell/Trade or Not to Trade front, I think it all boils down to how management assesses the team in terms of their closeness to future Playoff/Championship contention. I've said this before, and I'll say it again, I don't believe in rebuilds. Sure young guys take a few seasons to really peak, but IMO, you either go for it or you don't. The rebuild thing is just meant to string you along on a hope and a belief. If they want to go for it next season, then yes you hang on to McE's and Ferlands of the world and sign or trade for skilled high talent forwards. If you don't, sure players like Martinook and McE are fantastic pieces, but pieces of what? Those guys get you over the hump, not get you there. If they plan to "rebuild" rev 5.2 for next season, then make teams overpay for someone like Martinook. The committee needs to learn how to sell high and the value that this team is sitting on isn't players that are -17, look disinterested, and constantly make lazy ill advised mistakes. It's players like Martinook that we love and agree he is great, but not great for us unless the meat of a real Playoff Caliber team is there. No you can't put a Fantasy Team out there every year, but  you ALWAYS want to put your best effort out there. And for TD to scoff at Free Agency like he has, makes me weary. This may get me smacked. 

Edited by sleekfeeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be fine with trading Dougie. I'd say the guy is an idiot if he's intentionally sandbagging though. This is his third team, and his subpar play just lowers his trade value. The problem with a deadline type deal with a contender is that they are not likely to give up what we want. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really really want this team to sign Ferland. But it takes two. If he doesn't want to sign, or we can't sign him, what do people think he'd fetch as a rental or trade and sign? I doubt it's a first rounder, but that would be tempting. Otherwise, sign the man.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be wrong, but I don't think Ferland has played with Aho and TT since he's been back. Based on his last season at Calgary and this season before his concussion, he seems to thrive as being the heavy on a line with two more skilled players. I'd like to see what he can do playing with Aho and TT again before assessing his post-concussion play.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, spyglass88 said:

I may be wrong, but I don't think Ferland has played with Aho and TT since he's been back. Based on his last season at Calgary and this season before his concussion, he seems to thrive as being the heavy on a line with two more skilled players. I'd like to see what he can do playing with Aho and TT again before assessing his post-concussion play.

I just posted the same thing on the game day thread. The way our team is being run now, I’m not sure he will even want to re-sign here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Serious question regarding lines and hockey strategies. I have never played hockey I cant skate on anything. With that being said is there some old hockey thought that if you dont have a top guy you spread out your scorers? I ask because we lost 2 solid guys this off season in Skinner and Lindholm and they are both going off with their current teams. Now they both have been put on lines with much more talented mates around them, but PB is coaching Lindholm and never put him on lines with top talent here. So I dont understand why with 2 coaches, 2 GMs that this never happened here. Same with Skinner now we dont have a Eichel but Skinner never sniffed top line mates when he was here.

 

Is this a carry over from long time NHL men like RF and now Roddy? Or is this just one of the "things you do" in hockey culture? 

Edited by Derailed75

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Derailed75 said:

Same with Skinner now we dont have a Eichel but Skinner never sniffed top line mates when he was here.

You could put Rask with Eichel and Reinhart and he’d have at least 15-20 goals by now too.  I seriously think Skinner is benefitting from being on the top line with top line talent.  Just like whomever plays with McJesus and Draisaitl or Matthews and Marner. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AWACSooner said:

You could put Rask with Eichel and Reinhart and he’d have at least 15-20 goals by now too.  I seriously think Skinner is benefitting from being on the top line with top line talent.  Just like whomever plays with McJesus and Draisaitl or Matthews and Marner. 

That's sorta my point. Skinner and Lindholm never spent much time with Aho or Turbo. Why? Why isnt Svech not playing with the top talent we do have? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, AWACSooner said:

I seriously think Skinner is benefitting from being on the top line with top line talent. 

So would anybody. But you might want to watch these highlights. Eichel wasn't in the lineup.

 

On both his goals, Skinner literally did everything himself; the assist to Reinhart on the first, five minutes in, was a total gift. Then, with less than four minutes left in the third, he scored what looked like an insurance goal but proved to be the game winner - and he scored that unassisted. Both absolute snipes that made Luongo look clueless. 

 

Of course Skinner benefits from the guys he's playing with. So has Lindholm. But you say it as if to justify this org's crappy player management. The fact is those other orgs DID WHAT THEY HAD TO DO to get those guys and let them play to their strengths. Not this one. Not "team grit and team grind." 

 

Benefitting from your teammates' talents, and helping them benefit from yours, is what team sports are all about. You think the constant threat Skinner presents in the Ozone hasn't helped Eichel and Rinehart too?

 

Think about the games he kept us in for years, without any help, or the confidence that his teammates had his back. And why? Because some know-it-all, hyperactive, legend-in-his-own-mind coach former Captain refused to call out team softness, and chose instead to call out Skinner for not playing more like he did.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the ideal is to have enough talent to spread it out and make it hard to defend. The problem is that you need the talent to do it. It is a mistake to look at successful teams full of talent: Pittsburgh, Tampa, now Toronto, etc, see that they have credibly dangerous scoring through line 3, and think, "we just need to spread our scoring out", when we don't have that depth of skill. 

 

Looking back on all of our failed teams of the last decade and we've had anemic offense. Most coaches have tried to get scoring onto the 3rd line to "spread it out". The theory was that most teams only have a limited number of true shut down D pairings and putting Skinner on the third line would get him away from the big D men. That and his intermittent tendency to be soft defensively, and his unconventional style seemed to make him difficult to pair up with lots of forwards. 

 

The problem IMO with spreading the talent out, is that you spread it too thin and you lose two other things; synergy and multiple threats on the same line being hard to defend. Skinner was and is a singularly amazing talent. Think back to the guys that could make you just smile at the skill on display. Not many. Skinner could. But putting Skinner on a line with not just low threat, but frankly in some cases "no threat" players, created: 1. No high level synergy. 2. One target for the D to key on. 

 

I think #1 leads to player burn out. What was Skinner last year but burned out? His uncharacteristic year both in terms of scoring and defense last year, combined with his ebullient rise this year, surely suggest that. It is more fun to play with high level guys if you are skilled. The synergy not only creates scoring, but almost on ice art, that is fun. #2 leads to any D pair and forwards to just smothering Skinner. The old 1 on 4 that became pretty normal. 

 

It seems pretty clear that for whatever his shortcomings, Skinner was a tough nut for conventional hockey coaches to crack, but for the most part, our braintrust failed to do it. Then moved him on for nothing. 

 

I hope as a fan that this is not a sign of a fatal flaw in our braintrust. He is a unique case. But that they botched it with him clearly killed this year. We shall see if it also created some sort of opening to create a more competitive team in the long run. Still, this team that is woefully short on offensive talent, and desperately needs to trade good D men for more of it, gave away it's singularly most talented forward of the pre-Aho era. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to back up this year's team's dirth of offensive skill, look at the stats, and reflect on where guys are in their careers. 

 

Once you get below Aho and TT, you are out of even arguable top line talent.

 

Svech is going to be a beast. That power move he made last night in Philly was off the hook. But he's 18, and on a 40 point pace. Great for an 18 yo, but not top line for this year. Justin Williams. He was an elite offensive talent over most of his career, and somehow he keeps going, but he is well past prime. He is also a 40 point guy at this point, and frankly making a fair number of mistakes too. Michael Ferland has shown 20 plus goals is not a fluke. He is a very nice player, but he is complementary at the NHL level. Jordan Staal is out, but even when in is a marginal offensive producer. 

 

And that is it. Our next best offensive forward is Martinook, who I really really like, and think has 20 goal potential, but he is not going to be Mr Offense. Walmark? Potential, but even though he's all assist, no goals, he is only producing at a 27 point pace. PDG (now gone), McGinn, Rask, Foegele, Bishop, Kuok? I think Foegele, Kuok, and even Bishop still have third line upside maybe next year, but right now all of them are 4th liners. Throw in Maenalenen too if you want.

 

Again, I have high hopes for Necas (he'd be back up here if talent were the only consideration) and you can put it down in ink that Svech is going to be a star. But that's next year. 

 

As much of a dagger to the heart as it is, one more year of drafting high, and 2-3 offseason moves for forwards, and the future could be very bright. But so long I have waited. And so I wait. For now at least.

Share this post


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

PDG (now gone), McGinn, Rask, Foegele, Bishop, Kuok? 

In a perfect world the only guy I would keep is Foegele. He has the chops and surround him with better talent and he is a good NHLer. The rest can go to the KHL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, slapshot02 said:

In a perfect world the only guy I would keep is Foegele. He has the chops and surround him with better talent and he is a good NHLer. The rest can go to the KHL.

I mostly agree. I don't think Kuok has had quite enough of a shot though. I just remember some Aho-lite slick plays out of him last year, and he's an AHL All-Star. I'd keep McGinn on a 4th line salary because of the hits, attitude and little things, but his offense, that seemed third line potential, has flow the coop. 


I do think Foegele has more scoring in him than we've seen. I'd have sent him back down to Charlotte to work on the offense, but I seem to be the only one. 

 

Rask needs to be gone. I've seen enough. Yes, he can back check and he's not terrible as a possession sort of guy, but he has zero offensive game anymore. Gone. Send him to Calgary or Buffalo so he can put up 25 goals, but he needs to be gone from here IMO.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, spyglass88 said:

It has become painfully obvious that trading Skinner was a BIG mistake. 

Sometime such stuff happens. On the other hand if Canes were in a playoff spot nobody would have rehashed that trade for so long on this board. So I think it is mostly current results and not the trade itself that generates disappointment.

Share this post


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

Once you get below Aho and TT, you are out of even arguable top line talent.

 

Yep. We don't make the playoffs because we're not talented enough to make the playoffs. It's just that simple.

 

The off-season will tell us whether things will be different or just more of the same. Whether through UFAs or trades, we MUST acquire two skilled top-6 forwards, preferably one of whom will be an elite talent. To get that we may first need a skilled GM and perhaps an established NHL head coach (e.g., Quennneville). 

 

One big concern re trades is whether some of TD's initial moves have caused other GMs to be more hesitant to trade with us or to think that our novice-owner-guided "committee" can be more easily fleeced.

Share this post


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

Sometime such stuff happens. On the other hand if Canes were in a playoff spot nobody would have rehashed that trade for so long on this board. So I think it is mostly current results and not the trade itself that generates disappointment.

 

But the trade may be one reason why we're not in the playoffs.

  • 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...

×
×
  • Create New...