Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
OBXer

In-season trades and player moves

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

I agree, but would still prefer Faulk getting dealt, especially knowing what we now do about Hamilton's injury.

 

If Roddy's so dad-blame serious about changing the culture, then by-God change it. The fact that Faulk suddenly found his D game once it became clear that we were willing to move out top players only confirms (for me) that he was slacking for a long, long time. Accountability, in my mind, looks a whole lot like a place near the arctic circle... but I have a sneaky feeling Edmonton is not on his list of 15 acceptable destinations.

I agree, I just think that DH value is higher at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, iceman11 said:

There is no reason to trade Hamilton.  Although he started out the year slow, he has been very good the past 2 months.  Heating up just like the Calgary fans mentioned that he gets better as the year progresses.

 

 

I disagree with this.  I keep seeing posts (on this board as well as other places) about how we shouldn't trade Hamilton and/or Faulk now because they're playing better, but the fact they're playing better is actually the reason we should be trying to trade one (or, as much as i hate to say it, Pesce), because we have more RHD than we need and we're lacking in other areas.  If we're only trading the guys who are playing badly or the depth guys, then i guess we trade TVR or a Charlotte guy for a 4th and then sit back with a smile on our faces thinking we really did something.  Somehow i don't think that helps us much short-term or long term, beyond opening a roster spot for Fox/whoever.  If we want a Stone or an RNH or a Duchene or a (insert dream player here), it's the value guys who are playing well who are going to bring them in.  We need a 'hockey trade', and taking players off the table because they're playing better isn't going to make that happen.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I agree, but would still prefer Faulk getting dealt, especially knowing what we now do about Hamilton's injury.

 

If Roddy's so dad-blame serious about changing the culture, then by-God change it. The fact that Faulk suddenly found his D game once it became clear that we were willing to move out top players only confirms (for me) that he was slacking for a long, long time. Accountability, in my mind, looks a whole lot like a place near the arctic circle... but I have a sneaky feeling Edmonton is not on his list of 15 acceptable destinations.

Maybe a side of Queso would change his mind. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I disagree with this.  I keep seeing posts (on this board as well as other places) about how we shouldn't trade Hamilton and/or Faulk now because they're playing better, but the fact they're playing better is actually the reason we should be trying to trade one (or, as much as i hate to say it, Pesce), because we have more RHD than we need and we're lacking in other areas.  If we're only trading the guys who are playing badly or the depth guys, then i guess we trade TVR or a Charlotte guy for a 4th and then sit back with a smile on our faces thinking we really did something.  Somehow i don't think that helps us much short-term or long term, beyond opening a roster spot for Fox/whoever.  If we want a Stone or an RNH or a Duchene or a (insert dream player here), it's the value guys who are playing well who are going to bring them in.  We need a 'hockey trade', and taking players off the table because they're playing better isn't going to make that happen.

 

This. While I would like to see Faulk traded over Hamilton or Pesce, we have too many RHD and we need to get the best return. Bringing in another scoring top-six forward, especially somebody like Stone, Duchene, or RNH, could help us not only make the playoffs but give us a reasonable chance to pull off an upset and make it to the next round. Think of how much NN has helped since we acquired him. 

 

But the clock is ticking. A "hockey trade" is what we need, not a "rental trade." Get someone with term or someone we have a good chance a signing. That's a tall order in the current market, so I'm not holding my breath.

Share this post


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

 

This. While I would like to see Faulk traded over Hamilton or Pesce, we have too many RHD and we need to get the best return. Bringing in another scoring top-six forward, especially somebody like Stone, Duchene, or RNH, could help us not only make the playoffs but give us a reasonable chance to pull off an upset and make it to the next round. Think of how much NN has helped since we acquired him. 

 

But the clock is ticking. A "hockey trade" is what we need, not a "rental trade." Get someone with term or someone we have a good chance a signing. That's a tall order in the current market, so I'm not holding my breath.

The NHL is a league that defines parity.  Any team can beat any team on any given day (refer to the Canes road trip, getting beat by the worst of the group and winning the rest).  The trick appears to have just enough to qualify for the playoffs (something the Canes apparently have not had enough of for 9 years), and go in with the carefree attitude that anyone can win this thing, why not us.  In my mind, the difference between this Cane team and the losers of seasons gone by are a) decent goaltending night in and night out, and b) physical play.  Ferland, Niedereiter, Martinook, and even Foegle have created opportunities for the skilled players, and one more skilled player could make a difference.  

If it is not a rental player, I am not knowledgable enough to know who we are discussing.  Will Edmonton really be willing to move RNH?  That would take a package starting with Hamilton and including draft picks and/or prospects.  As long as they are not named Necas I suppose that works.  Otherwise, I see them looking at a guy such as Kevin Hayes to upgrade at C.  In any case, don't trade Ferland.  I will accept making the playoffs as a good season and we need him to help accomplish that.

Edited by beboplar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only things we will trade for a rental are picks (which we have a lot of) and prospects (which we also have a lot of).  To trade any of our RHD will require us to get a player back with term on their contract.  One thing I do not know.  Say we were to offer Faulk and a pick for Duchesne, but the trade were contingent on Duchesne signing an extension in a 48-hour negotiation window.  Is this even possible under the CBA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, ironman87 said:

The only things we will trade for a rental are picks (which we have a lot of) and prospects (which we also have a lot of).  To trade any of our RHD will require us to get a player back with term on their contract.  One thing I do not know.  Say we were to offer Faulk and a pick for Duchesne, but the trade were contingent on Duchesne signing an extension in a 48-hour negotiation window.  Is this even possible under the CBA?

I think such conditions could apply only for picks like 1st rounder I'd signs and 6th if not. But I'm not an expert here.

Edited by Bonivan
Misprint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is always about return. But that makes me nervous because that means that the committee has to get it right. When you move a very good piece out, you need to be correct about the value of the guy you're bringing in. 

 

Still, it's true. 

 

We have 4 RHD as we sit, with one pretty serviceable bottom pair guy playing his off side, where he is not as good, and where we could just as well be playing our #7 over pick on his natural side. Long run we have too many LHD too, but with the phenom Fox sitting out there, RHD is the first move.

 

The other thing is true is the fan's ultimate dilemma we see play out over and over: selling high and buying low. It is the obvious thing to do, and also the most impossible thing to do because when a guy starts playing well....we don't want to trade him anymore. 

 

So which RHD to trade? Take TVR off because he's the prototype bottom pair who is being paid like it, and doesn't return what we need. I'll muse on each guy not TVR next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Faulk. Even with his dramatically improved play, we are probably strongest moving him because Dougie is starting to look more and more like that top pair offensive guy that we are told over and over the best teams need. But Faulk only has one year left on his deal, so that has to lower his value. Also, while he's at a whole 'nuther level overall, his offense is down a touch. So what would Faulk fetch? I don't know. RNH? Maybe. Maybe we sweeten a little, but maybe. RNH is having a very good year and his value has risen. Maybe Faulk doesn't get that done. Say Faulk brings back a 40 point 20 goal forward. Is that what we need? Of course we also have to re sign Faulk too. And do we really want to? Yes he's been solid this year, but to commit to another 6-8 years? Trading Faulk also unloads that issue. 

 

My main fear in moving Faulk is how well he's been able to move the puck this year with far less mistakes. This is an underrated skill, especially on a team that wants to move the puck and play fast. He is much better here than Fleury or TVR or even Hamilton or Pesce.

 

My main fear in keeping Faulk is that he has only one more year left and will be in Skinner's position next season. Read: either sign him for 6 plus years, or get Pu for him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pesce. The guy is home grown and solid as a rock. He is that most underrated of players that help teams win: top defensive defenseman. He's signed on a reasonable deal for a good while too. He seems to like it here and fits in. Unless you watch every play you have to look at +/- to get a sense of what he brings since he doesn't make massive hits, or put up lots of points (although his offense is coming on). He's #3 this year, clustered with Aho and TT, and a good bit up from #4. He was #1 in 2016. He's averaged about #6 on the team over 4 years despite not putting in goals himself, and historically lining up vs. top lines. 

 

He is shut down central. This is visible in his game, and those watching closely see it in more precise ways that the +/-. I am sure that he is right near the top of the stats of "things that win games". 

 

To me, like with Hamilton, it is about return. The other GM HAS to value that lock down D enough to offer a similar degree of offensive talent back. Here I wonder if that is likely. We can afford to trade Pesce for the right return, but I'm skeptical he'd return enough to not be worth a lot more to us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hamilton. Picked by some writers as a top 20 NHL D man. He was the reason that the writers that that thought we won that trade, thought that we won that trade. Because we got the best player. Well at first? Not so much. Until the last 20 or so games, I thought, "either this guy doesn't want to be here, or he's having a tough time adjusting, or something". Sure, most of us would have traded him then, but then....the last 20 games or so (correlating with the team's explosion), the guy has been an entirely different player. He's putting up goals like a decent forward, and he's much more solid on D. Reports of playing through an injury just make it even harder to think of trading him. 

 

The guy we've seen lately is not a guy to trade. 

 

Unless his return is commensurate. A top pair D man should bring a TOP line forward. A top 3. Basically one of the 90 best forwards at least, and really, higher. I'm thinking top 60, and that is very good. Think Teuravanen, or around .80 ppg. Ironically, this year RNH would qualify as being in that neighborhood...

 

Would Faulk return that? Probably not, but who knows?

Share this post


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

Hamilton. Picked by some writers as a top 20 NHL D man. He was the reason that the writers that that thought we won that trade, thought that we won that trade. Because we got the best player. Well at first? Not so much. Until the last 20 or so games, I thought, "either this guy doesn't want to be here, or he's having a tough time adjusting, or something". Sure, most of us would have traded him then, but then....the last 20 games or so (correlating with the team's explosion), the guy has been an entirely different player. He's putting up goals like a decent forward, and he's much more solid on D. Reports of playing through an injury just make it even harder to think of trading him. 

 

The guy we've seen lately is not a guy to trade. 

 

Unless his return is commensurate. A top pair D man should bring a TOP line forward. A top 3. Basically one of the 90 best forwards at least, and really, higher. I'm thinking top 60, and that is very good. Think Teuravanen, or around .80 ppg. Ironically, this year RNH would qualify as being in that neighborhood...

 

Would Faulk return that? Probably not, but who knows?

I think it would have to be Faulk + some higher level offensive prospect. They showed a goal distribution on a pie chart last night during the game talking about their lack of scoring depth. I can't remember the exact numbers but basically it showed the McJesus and Draisaitl had a disproportionate amount of goals compared to the rest of the team. If they trade RNH, if they are getting a good D man, they are going to want some offense coming back in the deal along with that I imagine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So those are some takes on our RHD for trading. One would think Hamilton would bring the best return, and if he did, there is a good argument for getting the BPA, since we will have a good D no matter who goes, and Fox would likely replace Hamilton's O. 

 

But trading Faulk removes the re-signing him issue, and leaves us with Hamilton's offense. Down the line with Fox and Hamilton putting up points and Pesce shutting down, that has a nice balance to it. 

 

Trading Pesce makes the least sense to me, but only because I'm assuming he's undervalued out there. If he is seen as a top pair guy and would return that top 90 forward, we would be ok without him. 

 

My gut is to trade Faulk unless Hamilton has explicitly told brass he'd like out, but if the return is right I'd trade any of the three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the progression in my head.

You move Faulk

Sign Fox and let him play his time in the AHL and see how he does. The 3rd RHD slot is between him and TVR.

We have 1 more season to see how Fox performs after that. If he performs like a scoring RHD then you have the ability to move Hamilton. If not you keep Hamilton

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fox is playing college hockey. I have no reason to believe he won't be as good as his press packet says but right now he is a college kid playing hockey.I don't see him or signing him as a factor in a trade move. The only factor I see is return.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Fox is playing college hockey. I have no reason to believe he won't be as good as his press packet says but right now he is a college kid playing hockey.I don't see him or signing him as a factor in a trade move. The only factor I see is return.

For just this year, I'd agree. But after this year, it could be a big factor. As we sit we have TVR playing his off side and a rapidly developing log jam on D while the guys being jammed up below are getting close to rotting on the vine, especially Fleury. 

 

As to Fox, the fact that we have so much D depth is exactly why, IMO, we need to make sure we close this deal. If Fox ends up fizzling, it won't kill us, but if he's even close to what he looks like, that would be a level of offensive D we've never seen here. 

 

Fox put up 1.39 ppg his freshman year. He's basically kept it up and is, ironically, 1.39 ppg this year, still good for #1 D man in NCAA. To put it in perspective, Cale Makar a guy taken #4 overall two years ago, and a guy that just oozes offensive talent to the naked eye, put up .617 ppg his freshman year and 1.14 ppg this, his sophomore year. 

 

This is not Ryan Murphy. IMO it would really sting to swing and miss at a guy with this much upside. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if it was mentioned, but reading a pretty decent piece about how Neiderrieter takes some pressure off of our trade deadline, included was a mention that we had shown some interest in Artem Anisimov. 

 

https://www.canescountry.com/2019/2/14/18225135/nino-niederreiter-has-changed-trade-deadline-outlook-carolina-hurricanes-nhl-trade-rumors-anisimov

 

(BTW if you want to re-enforce the feeling that we utterly bamboozled Minnesota in that one, read the article).

 

What is interesting to me is that after this year Anisimov has 2 years left at $4.55 million AAV. So this would not be just a short term gap fill. I haven't watched or really noticed Anisimov much. His numbers have fallen back some this year, but he's been a 20 goal, 40 point guy in the past. He's a fairly big guy, but not sure how physical he is. 

 

Again though, how are we looking at this long term? 20G/40 points is a very solid 3C, but not good 2C. And he's 30, so he's probably not getting better. So if he's the 3C? Then who's the 2C? Jordan? Someone else? 

 

Is this less likely given Jordan's apparent pending return? 

 

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've long coveted Anisimov, not sure why, but he always pops up in scoring it seems? Now, like you rem, and several others are seeming to resolve, Jordan's place appears to have returned from where we got him, a perfect 3C. Since Anisimov seems to be on the down slope, unless we hit NN magic a 2nd time which I doubt, I think that I'd leave AA be. Hopefully Waddell will search out somewhere else? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the same article.

 

No thanks on Anisimov, he seems redundant. He’s never shown the skill to put up serious production. His highest point total is 45 points. He has been with the high powered offense of the Blackhawks for years and still hasn’t posted any impressive numbers.

 

Never been impressed and he’s on the downside. We have enough “two-way centers” that don’t produce points. We need someone who can produce.

 

4.5 million per year is also nothing to sneeze at. He’s not worth that and he’s declining. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is encouraging

 

Canes’ Ferland can’t ignore persistent trade speculation as deadline approaches By Chip Alexander

 

Quote

Ferland said Thursday. “I think we’ve put ourselves in a good spot. I hope I stay here

  • Like 7

Share this post


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

Ferland said Thursday. “I think we’ve put ourselves in a good spot. I hope I stay here

 

Great to finally hear him say it. I hope it is sincere. 

 

Odd that he said he really hasn’t talked to/heard from management.

 

Good to here that he likes the area and would “like to get a deal done.” Again, is he being sincere or is this just a standard reply.

 

It is encouraging though and it’s no secret that I’d love to keep him here.

 

 

.

 

Edited by Kyrule

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ferland said he hadn’t talk to Management. I wonder how many times his agent has though, that is key.

 

Minnesota has the green light. Granlund would sure be nice.

  • 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...