Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
caniac82-ch1

Williams decision

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, beboplar said:

The subject is not so much about goalies, but how to create (subtract) some salary(ies) to accommodate/reward JW in what may prove to be his final season.  Subtracting Reimer's $3.4M would be EXCELLENT, but one poster mentioned getting a 1st round draft pick back in exchange, and, well, that is not going to happen.  If a trade partner was willing to take on his whole contract, I would think a 3rd or 4th round pick would deserve a "Thanks, it's been a pleasure doing business with you."

It was a point about not being worth trading him really. It depends on how the team sees his potential to provide proven NHL back up. I tend to think that the group that saw potential in Mrazek sees some in Reimer and the move to get him was not just to dump Mongo. If so, you don't trade him for a 3rd round pick, which I agree is probably closer to what you'd get, unless it is a pure salary dump and we are fully confident in Ned and Forsberg. My hunch is that we want as many options as possible, especially until we get a bigger sample size of Ned in goal and see what Reimer can do. Thus, we will not dump that salary until then, thus this will not be the move to get Williams in. (Had to add that last part to keep the thread pure). I agree it appears we can get Williams in under the bonus rule, but IF it came down to Williams or Reimer, then, and only then would I salary dump Reimer.

Share this post


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

Sending Forsling, Brown, & Gibbons down is 2.3 million in savings giving us 4.8 million. Williams at 1 million with 3.5 million performance for playing 20 games and Maenalenan at 1 million. The Canes would have 2.8 mil left to bring players up as needed and space to acquire 5 million cap hit player at the deadline, if needed.

 

 

Brown signed with Vegas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gocanes0506 said:

Sending Forsling, Bishop, & Gibbons down is 2.3 million in savings giving us 4.8 million. Williams at 1 million with 3.5 million performance for playing 20 games and Maenalenan at 1 million. The Canes would have 2.8 mil left to bring players up as needed and space to acquire 5 million cap hit player at the deadline, if needed.

 

Yeah, looks like the Canes can get it done using the performance bonus clause.  If I were Willy, at 38yo I'd want at least $2m in salary as insurance against a season (career) ending injury before the performance goals are met. 

 

Canes could go with less than a 23 man roster to free up cap space, but I don't see that happening given the players you'd think they need to protect from being claimed off waivers.  Forsling, Bishop, & Gibbons all earn between $700k and $875k.  Gotta believe Maenalenan won't get more than that when signed and McKeown? Maybe a little but not too much more? I really don't have any idea what's up with McKeown, who as a young, promising RD would appear to be a fairly valuable commodity. 

 

So I'm guessing Willy in @ $2m cap hit this season would put the roster at 21 players and give the Canes $2.8m in cap space with 2 spots to fill between Forsling, Bishop, Maenalenan, and McKeown (Gibbons not even in the conversation).   Doable, and how you shuffle those particular cards isn't going to matter much with respect to the salary cap.  But I see protecting players from being claimed off of waivers as being a bigger issue than the salary cap, which makes me think the committee will make more moves this summer even after resolving the Willy math.

Share this post


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

 

Yeah, looks like the Canes can get it done using the performance bonus clause.  If I were Willy, at 38yo I'd want at least $2m in salary as insurance against a season (career) ending injury before the performance goals are met. 

 

Canes could go with less than a 23 man roster to free up cap space, but I don't see that happening given the players you'd think they need to protect from being claimed off waivers.  Forsling, Bishop, & Gibbons all earn between $700k and $875k.  Gotta believe Maenalenan won't get more than that when signed and McKeown? Maybe a little but not too much more? I really don't have any idea what's up with McKeown, who as a young, promising RD would appear to be a fairly valuable commodity. 

 

So I'm guessing Willy in @ $2m cap hit this season would put the roster at 21 players and give the Canes $2.8m in cap space with 2 spots to fill between Forsling, Bishop, Maenalenan, and McKeown (Gibbons not even in the conversation).   Doable, and how you shuffle those particular cards isn't going to matter much with respect to the salary cap.  But I see protecting players from being claimed off of waivers as being a bigger issue than the salary cap, which makes me think the committee will make more moves this summer even after resolving the Willy math.

A lot depends on his future goals.  If it is his goal to use his playing career as a stepping stone to a role in management and/or coaching, he may be willing to sacrifice the last dollars in exchange for the promise of a future in the organization.  Personally, that sounds like a WIN/WIN to me and I hope it happens.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How are we easily moving Reimer a month later after Florida searched high and wide for a suitor? They wanted the Darling contract because it was cheaper if I'm right, so if we buy em out now it'd be dumb. I don't see his trade value having moved up without playing any NHL games and looked good doing it. I don't see how Reimer's just going to easily exit now without pulling a Toronto and attaching at least a 2nd rounder to him.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

How are we easily moving Reimer a month later after Florida searched high and wide for a suitor? They wanted the Darling contract because it was cheaper if I'm right, so if we buy em out now it'd be dumb. I don't see his trade value having moved up without playing any NHL games and looked good doing it. I don't see how Reimer's just going to easily exit now without pulling a Toronto and attaching at least a 2nd rounder to him.

 

Or retaining a good chunk of his salary, which defeats a good portion of why we'd be dealing him in the first place.  Pretty sure buying out Reimer isn't an option as that time window has closed.  We could always go the Mongo route and pay him to play in Charlotte, but that would only save $1.075m in cap space.

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I have to think that the idea in getting Reimer was to give up one brick on the chance that a change of scene will shake him enough that he doesn't become another. He has a chance with a team that did some damage last year and is poised to do more. If he can't parlay that into the motivation necessary to play well, he's at the end of the line. 

 

He might be regardless, if Ned tears it up in camp and preseason. Waddell said something about creating competition for the crease, and getting Reimer assured that every dynamic for doing that is in place: The guy who tested the market because he thought he'd already earned it; the old cowhand making a stop at the Last Chance Saloon; and the young gunslinger trying to take the next step.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cap space vs. insurance in goal. While being able to suddenly make cap space if we moved Reimer for the proverbial bag of pucks,I don't think that is the plan. I think the plan is insurance in goal. We have two  unproven guys in Ned and Forsberg, and one guy who has proven NHL chops, if not recently. Can the proven guy get his game back or can Ned or Forsberg dominate their way to a spot?

 

Goalie is a weird position in many ways. But one of them is that we don't seem to always value it as much as we should. This is a massively important position. Good goaltending correlates very well with making the playoffs, and bad goaltending with not making it. We of all teams should know that.

 

Having a NHL goaltender in the backup fold is worth much much more than the third rounder (at best) he'd return. If we have to for cap reasons, then maybe we didn't plan so well after all. But I think we did, and part of the plan was to have multiple options in goal.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Goalie is a weird position in many ways. But one of them is that we don't seem to always value it as much as we should. This is a massively important position. Good goaltending correlates very well with making the playoffs, and bad goaltending with not

I wonder if that's true rem, OR has fate, better known as hockey gods, played a huge role in our lowly goalie competence? One bit of irony to me was that our 1st GM was a goalie. How is it that we got off on such bad footing in that area? Was it because he was from a different era, thus failed to understand modernized techniques? Or did his ego just blind him to reality? So dismal were Cam's backups, that beyond a few, I cannot begin to name them? And what's more pathetic is the fact that beyond this current crop, Ned and his understudies, I don't recall that this organization has ever developed a goalie. Anderson whom we drafted didn't even want to play here. 22 years as an organization and I'd bet we've never had a goalie finish in the top 10 in statistics, have we? Maybe Mrazek will do so this year?

Share this post


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

I wonder if that's true rem, OR has fate, better known as hockey gods, played a huge role in our lowly goalie competence? One bit of irony to me was that our 1st GM was a goalie. How is it that we got off on such bad footing in that area? Was it because he was from a different era, thus failed to understand modernized techniques? Or did his ego just blind him to reality? So dismal were Cam's backups, that beyond a few, I cannot begin to name them? And what's more pathetic is the fact that beyond this current crop, Ned and his understudies, I don't recall that this organization has ever developed a goalie. Anderson whom we drafted didn't even want to play here. 22 years as an organization and I'd bet we've never had a goalie finish in the top 10 in statistics, have we? Maybe Mrazek will do so this year?

I really don't claim to know all of the whys, but we have failed to secure a top goalie forever, and it is a big part of our problem. We can talk of culture changes and lack of top end forward talent, and in many years thin defensive talent and be right about all of it, but we also failed in goal. For all the good Ron Francis did, his failures in goal killed any chance of even intermediate success here. He firmly stood behind Cam Ward and he brought in both Lack and Mongo.

 

I think a big part of the problem was that the plan was Cam Ward, and while he flashed some very good play, and got the big money contract, he really only ever lived up to that level once after his flash in the pan SC beauty. Year after year, with one exception, Cam Ward was average at best, but we could not do better. Was it the porous D? At times, but not every year.

 

We can only imagine what this team could have done with an elite goalie over several years.

 

I do think that the committee got a bit lucky with Mrazek and completely lucky with McE last year. The original plan was to go with two of the worst goalies of the previous year. I just can't believe that the committee is such goalie geniuses that they saw Mrazek coming. If they were, they'd have seen Mongo going.

 

This year will, IMO, will without a doubt, hinge on goaltending. I have posted our historical save percentages in an old post. But basically every good year we've ever had was followed by a bad one. We need to erase that trend this year to get back in. Mrazek has to be that guy, and one of our three back up options has to take the reigns. If they do? We have the talent everywhere else on the ice to get back in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to keep this off track discussion of goalies going, but I was also referring to the general devaluation of non #1 goalies league-wide. A guy like Reimer, has not been good lately, so his value is squadoosh. Thus we are better off trying for another redemption story than getting a 3rd or worse rounder for him.

Share this post


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

I hate to keep this off track discussion of goalies going, but I was also referring to the general devaluation of non #1 goalies league-wide. A guy like Reimer, has not been good lately, so his value is squadoosh. Thus we are better off trying for another redemption story than getting a 3rd or worse rounder for him.

Redemption at what cost? I'd take a third for him right now. If we play him, and he is the second coming of Mongo, he truly is worth nothing. A third is way better than squadoosh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, caniac6 said:

Redemption at what cost? I'd take a third for him right now. If we play him, and he is the second coming of Mongo, he truly is worth nothing. A third is way better than squadoosh.

He's clearly worth about squadoosh now. We gave up a negative for him. But remember Mrazek came off a relatively horrendous year the year we gave him a shot at redemption.

 

Reimer's last year had a .900 save percentage.  BUT the three previous years:

 

.913, .920, .938,

 

It is possible that he is just on the decline, but it is also possible that last year was an outlier. Even his .913, the worst of the previous three, was tied for #25 in the league. That's pretty good for a back up, which he would be here. And if he can regain either of the previous two?

 

I doubt his value goes much lower. TBH we don't even know if it's a 3rd rounder. A lot of goalies go for 5th rounders especially if they are underperforming their contracts.

 

2 caveats: 1. I don't know if Reimer can still play. If the scouts think he's washed up, then clearly dump the salary. 2. If we can't fit in Williams.

 

I just think there is real risk going with two unproven back ups, and that risk is lower with one more option. And keeping that option is worth more than a low draft pick.

Share this post


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

One bit of irony to me was that our 1st GM was a goalie. How is it that we got off on such bad footing in that area?

 

 

He was a goalie but was a long long way from being Ken Dryden.  That in itself could have played a large role in his inability to find solid goaltending - didn't know what to look for because he never had it himself.  And when saw one catch lightning in a bottle for a couple months, he gave him the key to the city and moved on to other methods of mortgaging the team's future.

 

Time to make a decision, Willie...

Share this post


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

 

 

 

 

 

I doubt his value goes much lower. TBH we don't even know if it's a 3rd rounder. A lot of goalies go for 5th rounders especially if they are underperforming their contracts.

 

 

 

 

Yep, 5th rounder is about right. Teams willing to take on a salary dump want more. One article had us giving up Reimer and a third rounder for a return of a 5th rounder. What a deal....right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Golies. One thing about last year was we had very few games, at key times, where you just shook your head and wondered.

 

Previously with Cam and others we always had a good 5 to 10 games with a horrible softy that just blew your mind and destroyed all will to live for both players and fans alike.

 

Here's hoping to this year that we don't go down that dark hole again.  Is Mrazek up to it?  Will there be a substitute for the calm of MacE, able to right the ship at just the needed time?

Edited by wxray1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rem, I agree with you about goalies being a weird position. While I never played in any highly organized organizations, I do know that once a goalie gets used to his defense he improves knowing how they play. Jumping onto another team takes time to figure out what the defense will do around them. Maybe Reimer will find his way here, maybe he won't. Preseason will give him, and Roddy, and good sense in how he will adapt. Ned signed a two year contract, (if I remember, 1st year is a two-way, 2nd is not), then we can see what Reimer is made of and decide maybe by end of Nov. what to do with him. Mrazek will hopefully improve his 2.39 GAA as well.

 

It's all a crap shoot. Just crossing my fingers for another great year!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2019 at 8:55 AM, remkin said:

While being able to suddenly make cap space if we moved Reimer for the proverbial bag of pucks,I don't think that is the plan. I think the plan is insurance in goal. We have two  unproven guys in Ned and Forsberg

Seeing that Toronto moved out Sparks, maybe we could interest them in Reimer if need be? I know they don't have much Cap room, but we could take someone off their hands? They owe us anyway?

Edited by KJUNKANE

Share this post


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

Rem, I agree with you about goalies being a weird position. While I never played in any highly organized organizations, I do know that once a goalie gets used to his defense he improves knowing how they play. Jumping onto another team takes time to figure out what the defense will do around them. Maybe Reimer will find his way here, maybe he won't. Preseason will give him, and Roddy, and good sense in how he will adapt. Ned signed a two year contract, (if I remember, 1st year is a two-way, 2nd is not), then we can see what Reimer is made of and decide maybe by end of Nov. what to do with him. Mrazek will hopefully improve his 2.39 GAA as well.

 

It's all a crap shoot. Just crossing my fingers for another great year!

Yeah, I surely don't know. If Reimer plays well and Ned looks good too, Reimer might be tradeable for a bit more. If Ned just rocks, maybe we just move Reimer on. 

 

I really don't know on this one. We did get Forsberg, who has killed in the AHL, and maybe we see more in him than meets the eye in the NHL so far. 

 

My main point is that unless we need the cap space to get Williams or another move, then having options at the start is better than a 5th round pick.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, KJUNKANE said:

Seeing that Toronto moved out Sparks, maybe we could interest them in Reimer if need be? I know they don't have much Cap room, but we could take someone off their hands? They owe us anyway?

Toronto already moved on from Reimer. I doubt they want him back. But then who knows? 

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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...