Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
OBXer

In-season trades and player moves

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

I agree he looks like he lumbers around out there, but he's not having any trouble defending, that's for sure. He led the league in +/- last year and is already at +16 this season, one less than his total scoring points. 

Samuelsson was killing the +\- for Charlotte last year but wasn’t asked to stick around. He was +44!

Share this post


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

Samuelsson was killing the +\- for Charlotte last year but wasn’t asked to stick around. He was +44!

He was also 26. His NHL ship had sailed, so why burn the roster spot?

Share this post


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

He was also 26. His NHL ship had sailed, so why burn the roster spot?

Late bloomer maybe?

 

39 days until TD, and that's not our owner's initials? Reading, as I'm sure several are, that Ferland, a UFA, may be traded, but I really, really hope not. Of course there is the issue of concussions, but talk about a step forward and two back and that doesn't even consider the now infamous trade of Lindholm/Hanifin for Ferland/Hamilton and unsigned Fox. One source I read has Pittsburgh in on Ferland, now that would be one more jab from our esteemed exGM? Please Waddell DO SOMETHING? Sign a UFA, make a trade or just send up a smoke signal so we are reassured that you still have a pulse? The faithful are dying a slow death out here, Does anyone of your vaunted committee even care?

Edited by KJUNKANE
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

I see opportunities coming up this year that weren't available last year.  So, for me, the answer is till the start of next season.  Others are obviously already fed up.

Ok,that's fair and I feel that is a realistic view based on limited options last off season but my question was directed at KJUNKANE who questioned do we need to see more actions from TD before an opinion can be formulated? How long is that time frame before an opinion is formulated? I spent many years in upper Management with a top 10 company and went through intense management training including yearly training. I can tell you that we needed to show results quickly and excuses were not tolerated. Yes I have already formulated an opinion on TD but am providing him a shot in this upcoming offseason to make drastic changes. Minor personnel changes are not going to cut it. TD's focus needs to be on the hockey team and improving the product on the ice...period. Focus on an outdoor game, new arena, increased lighting,, getting a MLS team in Raleigh is not his primary mission. He has communicated his lack of patience and his hatred for losing, but his focus thus far has not been on the primary product but on all the fluff that requires no investment from himself personally.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Ok,that's fair and I feel that is a realistic view based on limited options last off season but my question was directed at KJUNKANE who questioned do we need to see more actions from TD before an opinion can be formulated? How long is that time frame before an opinion is formulated? I spent many years in upper Management with a top 10 company and went through intense management training including yearly training. I can tell you that we needed to show results quickly and excuses were not tolerated. Yes I have already formulated an opinion on TD but am providing him a shot in this upcoming offseason to make drastic changes. Minor personnel changes are not going to cut it. TD's focus needs to be on the hockey team and improving the product on the ice...period. Focus on an outdoor game, new arena, increased lighting,, getting a MLS team in Raleigh is not his primary mission. He has communicated his lack of patience and his hatred for losing, but his focus thus far has not been on the primary product but on all the fluff that requires no investment from himself personally.

Since you directed that question at me slap, and I got distracted before answering, I'll take a shot. You are correct, as several of you have perceived of my background, that I've got no business acumen, and very little hockey sense also, but that's another story. I realize that many that post on this board, and I'm right there with all you, are very thin on patience as that is the one most constant phrase we've heard seems like forever? However slap, in Dundon's case, and please be aware that I'm in no way an apologist for him, but to this point in his ownership, whether from total ground zero knowledge of his new toy, his obvious flaunting of his new found prestige among staid values of 30 other owners or the less that stellar hires he seems to have made, I am really uncertain as to his line of thinking? And while I personally get your point, and have been just as off put as you over the contradiction of his words and his actions to this point, I"M REALLY HOPING he is learning to stand before he walks, if that makes sense. It is most distressful that Tom Dundon, to this point in his ownership, seems to talk a good game, but as yet has not walked that talk?

 

One other point however, in deference to your "upper management position", Tom Dundon seems to not have those constraints you had put on you? He unfortunately is the Manager, and if he does not care to adhere to the results, than he can pick up his product and move elsewhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And one final thought on this subject slap, now that I reread my previous comments. So I ask you, slap, how much of the "real" Tom Dundon have we seen? Seems to me that in effect "hiding" behind this mythical committee structure may be the way he prefers to run his business(es), or could be a way he hides his inner most thoughts? Now granted, the saying, "the buck stops here" will always be the bottom line,  and to be as successful as he seems to have been as a self made billionaire, he's got to have a strong, unshaken will, but again I ponder, is the man shrewd enough to get a lay of the land 1st, or headstrong in thinking that he is inerrant? 

 

So, bottom line to all my gibberish, I think that the time to give him slack is fast approaching, and as you have acceded to Lake, at the terminus of the off season and draft, I think that's where the honeymoon ends, i.e. no 10 year plan?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe if we were to put together a solid month of 19 or more out of 24 points, we could see the committe get aggressive for one or more of the pending UFAs, someone they planned on targeting in FA anyways.

 

We’ll see though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I incorrectly stated "39 days until Trade Deadline", but miscalculated? I believe it is more like 48 days, but who really cares? We have almost never done anything of substance on that day?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

One other point however, in deference to your "upper management position", Tom Dundon seems to not have those constraints you had put on you? He unfortunately is the Manager, and if he does not care to adhere to the results, than he can pick up his product and move elsewhere?

They should never be looked upon as "constraints". Either you strive to succeed and become profitable or you go out of business.If he does not care to adhere to the results,he will fail. It's tough to pick up a failed product and move it elsewhere under another name,it's still a failed product. If he wants a failed shiny toy and product without investing and giving it an honest go then he will lose millions and probably wont be given the opportunity to buy another toy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too have wondered if Tom is just laying low (getting the lay of the land so to speak) and watching to see if what he was told is true... Who decided, Lindholm and Skinner were sand bags and needed to be traded? Was that Tom or others? If it was others, they are not looking so bright at the moment.. 

Share this post


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

I too have wondered if Tom is just laying low (getting the lay of the land so to speak) and watching to see if what he was told is true... Who decided, Lindholm and Skinner were sand bags and needed to be traded? Was that Tom or others? If it was others, they are not looking so bright at the moment.. 

 

I'm only guessing but I would take a educated guess that we never looked at Lindy as a sandbag. My guess is that we wanted Hamilton to allow us to make a Faulk trade and Peters and co wanted Lindy to make it happen. With the thought Lindy wasn't going to skate center and the plan was for Necas to skate wing on the Rask line it was a price we were willing to pay. We got Hamilton but never made a move on RH Dmen, Rask got hurt and Necas was thrown into the NHL fire at center. Best laid plans and all that.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

I'm only guessing but I would take a educated guess that we never looked at Lindy as a sandbag. My guess is that we wanted Hamilton to allow us to make a Faulk trade and Peters and co wanted Lindy to make it happen. With the thought Lindy wasn't going to skate center and the plan was for Necas to skate wing on the Rask line it was a price we were willing to pay. We got Hamilton but never made a move on RH Dmen, Rask got hurt and Necas was thrown into the NHL fire at center. Best laid plans and all that.

 

 

I would tend to agree with your logic on the mechanics of the trade. But somewhere it had to be whispered in TD ears, these are the guys to move. Im just saying if that were the case (someone claiming to be a know it all) then that person isn't looking so hot now.... 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PamlicoPuck said:

Im just saying if that were the case (someone claiming to be a know it all) then that person isn't looking so hot now.... 

 

Oh for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D Renouf called up today. Interesting move. Is someone day to day that we are unaware of? Are we carrying an extra defender on the road trip because we have a deal close?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, legend-1 said:

Dunno much about em but if he were to play I wouldn't be surprised to see him fight to try to show he belongs. He's had 4 this year.

 

http://www.hockeyfights.com/players/16860

He's  6'3 210 and not afraid to drop em. My guess he's  up due to his left hand shot. He punches righty though,lol. He got put on his tail a few times and took the blunt of the skirmishes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen him play and i'm not sure i've ever heard of him before today either.  Ba-dump-bump.

 

Seriously, though, utterly underwhelming from what i've seen of him.  McKeown, Carrick, Bean, Didier, Wesley, Fleury.  I'd have brought up any of those guys before bringing up Renouf.  In fact i would have called up Cajkovsky first and he isn't even in the organization anymore.  But again, i'm not paid the big bucks to make these decisions.  I'm just this guy, you know...

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I've seen him play and i'm not sure i've ever heard of him before today either.  Ba-dump-bump.

 

Seriously, though, utterly underwhelming from what i've seen of him.  McKeown, Carrick, Bean, Didier, Wesley, Fleury.  I'd have brought up any of those guys before bringing up Renouf.  In fact i would have called up Cajkovsky first and he isn't even in the organization anymore.  But again, i'm not paid the big bucks to make these decisions.  I'm just this guy, you know...

Not one of the "committee" then realm, haha? Does anyone have a clue on this? Is some type of fight imminent in this 4th game? Or is the committee just spit balling?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, gocanes0506 said:

I believe if we were to put together a solid month of 19 or more out of 24 points, we could see the committe get aggressive for one or more of the pending UFAs, someone they planned on targeting in FA anyways.

 

We’ll see though. 

If that kind of record materializes - and that's a big if - they'll pretty much have no choice. It's very clear that Ronnie lost his job for not making a deal to reward the guys for staying relevant last year and give them a chance at the dance. If TD were to do the same thing, well...

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, gocanes0506 said:

D Renouf called up today. Interesting move. Is someone day to day that we are unaware of? Are we carrying an extra defender on the road trip because we have a deal close?  

When I first say this on the Checkers website, I thought the Checkers had called him up from Florida. I like to think I'm at least aware of the Checkers, but not this guy. He's not in the projected lineup. Maybe someone is a game time decision? It's not a trade. You know why? Because it never is.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I too have wondered if Tom is just laying low (getting the lay of the land so to speak) and watching to see if what he was told is true... Who decided, Lindholm and Skinner were sand bags and needed to be traded? Was that Tom or others? If it was others, they are not looking so bright at the moment.. 

 

I've also recently wondered if some of the committee members have lost some credibility in TD's eyes over those deals, especially the Skinner one. 

 

Speaking of which, I've started to wonder if there was an as yet un-speculated dynamic that contributed to the view that Skinner had to go NOW.   It's apparent that the committee wasn't going to re-sign Skinner and didn't want to lose him for no return.  And it's pretty well accepted here that Brindy likely had issues regarding team chemistry / Skinner's style of play / whatever you want to call it.  But I've recently started to wonder if some of the urgency to dump Skinner might have arisen from a contentious alpha male dynamic between Skinner and Williams.  I'm not thinking hostility or anything overt.  But Williams was brought in for leadership as much as for his hockey skills.  And the feeling I get is that Skinner might have been near the top of the leadership scale when it came to existing Canes (as evidenced by Peters implication that he was going to make Skinner Captain last season).  If so, I could see a dynamic between the two that might have affected the committee's decision that Skinner had to go before naming team captains and the start of the training camp.

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is our best trade since the Turbo trade is the trade for McKegg?  

 

Not sure what that says.  Either “McKegg is a nice surprise” or the more likely “thats not too good.”

Share this post


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

So is our best trade since the Turbo trade is the trade for McKegg?  

 

Not sure what that says.  Either “McKegg is a nice surprise” or the more likely “thats not too good.”

 

Martinook trade has been pretty good.

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...