• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

2017-18 Miscellaneous Canes News Thread

Who is going to run the PP? Daniels obviously was not a PP guy in his playing career. Brindy supposedly was responsible for the PP as an assistant. Who 'ran the PP' when Laviolette was the head coach?

I'm reminded of a press conference that Mike Babcock gave a few years ago when somebody in the Detroit media was all over him about the Wings power play. Things were apparently going badly and the writer was basically demanding that Babcock explain "who on the staff is responsible for this mess?" Babs told him that the power play, like the penalty kill and everything else that the team did was the responsibility of everybody on the staff and that he alone was ultimately responsible. I remember Laviolette making much the same comments when he was coaching here.

Bottom line ... who cares so long as it works?
 
Decock N&O predictions:

Ward, Skinner gone , Darling stays. Might get another 1st round pick to go with #2. and other stuff

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article212962139.html

Here's the my take on that piece ...

DeCock is basically confirming what we've already heard on Darling. We're stuck with him and the contract means that they'll have to at least give him a shot at redeeming himself. And then, doing the math, that means you'll never be able to sell Ward returning as well. So, see ya Cam. DeCock, like all of our local media, over values Cam's contributions last season, but I do think that if he had been able to remain a backup then his numbers would have been better. Bottom line ... he's a bloody expensive backup and isn't capable of taking on the starting role if needed so I don't get the hand wringing.

Skinner - Luke is projecting that we move Skinner this summer, but it's no mystery that he's being shopped. Really going out on a limb with that one. Or not. He also thinks both Hanifin and Faulk will stick around. Who knows? I certainly don't think all three of them will be moved.

Draft ... Luke agrees that Svechnikov is the most likely move with the 2nd pick, but feels like we might gear up for a run at another first round pick. I assume that's where Skinner comes into play, but who knows? He speculates about Edmonton's number 10 pick, and they need D and a secondary center.

The obvious stuff ... Kaiton will be here even if we don't do radio the same way, Williams will be Captain, and we're going to take a long shot run at Kovalchuk.

Dundon ... Luke reasons that if Carolina doesn't make a big, obvious roster improvement early in the summer, then fans are going to start questioning Dundon. From where I sit, I think a lot of them already are, so ... there's that thick limb again.
 
The preseason schedule out. They’re playing 6 games, 3 home, 3 away and the 9/30 game is a Caniac Carnival freebie.

9/18 - at Tampa
9/19 - Tampa at PNC
9/21 - Washington at PNC
9/25 - at Nashville
9/28 - at Washington
9/30 - Nashville at PNC
 
The preseason schedule out. They’re playing 6 games, 3 home, 3 away and the 9/30 game is a Caniac Carnival freebie.

9/18 - at Tampa
9/19 - Tampa at PNC
9/21 - Washington at PNC
9/25 - at Nashville
9/28 - at Washington
9/30 - Nashville at PNC

The Cup Champ, and two powerhouse, likely pre-season division favorites for 2018-19...pretty solid preseason schedule for the Canes!
 
I don't know why the Canes would want to make a move to get the #10 trade from Edmonton (or another 1st round pick), because it would require that we give up quite a lot to get it. While yes, you always want prospects, what really need is a veteran player who can step in right now.
 
they might think a guy at #10 could play this year even though they would not be a veteran. Not many guys at that pick play right away but a few can make it.
 
they might think a guy at #10 could play this year even though they would not be a veteran. Not many guys at that pick play right away but a few can make it.

It's DEEPLY unlikely to get a player at 10 that would be of any use in anything more than a support role this coming season.

I think at this point, it's legitimate to question even potential moves aimed at the future at the expense of the short term ... seeing as how there really needs to be some urgency to get more competitive NOW. Especially in light of the fact that we've spent the last four years waiting for the future to pay off in the present ... for naught, as we've finished basically in the same place in the standings for that entire time. I think the club is going to find it difficult if not impossible to sell anything other than immediate improvement to the ticket buying public at this point. That goes to Luke's last point. Dundon's honeymoon is well and truly over at this point.
 
Last edited:
On the other hand, a nice high draft pick obtained in a trade, coupled with one or more of our many no-room-for-you prospects, might bring in a nice veteran addition from an org intent on shedding salary/cap and wants none of either back in return (futures only, please).

Doesn't have to always be a player-for-player trade to get what you want/need.
 
On the other hand, a nice high draft pick obtained in a trade, coupled with one or more of our many no-room-for-you prospects, might bring in a nice veteran addition from an org intent on shedding salary/cap and wants none of either back in return (futures only, please).

Doesn't have to always be a player-for-player trade to get what you want/need.

That's correct. Although I can't imagine the club that would be short enough on prospects to give away their No 10 for a handful of ours. Bean and someone else useful? Maybe. Typically though, if a club is moving a top ten pick, it's going to be for NHL help.
 
They give up the #10 because something of value is coming their way and it is a "Now" asset instead of a "Future" asset.

Say Skinner or Faulk, or even Hanifin.

You trade with an org that has all the Futures it needs and wants some Now...like Edmonton, for example.
 
They give up the #10 because something of value is coming their way and it is a "Now" asset instead of a "Future" asset.

Say Skinner or Faulk, or even Hanifin.

You trade with an org that has all the Futures it needs and wants some Now...like Edmonton, for example.

Yeah ... I get that. Problem being that we're in the same boat. We need "now" not "future" and frankly, we need it worse than Edmonton does.
 
If the #10 pick isn't likely to contribute at the NHL level, then a move for a quality prospect is reasonable - like a Bean... maybe not a Bean plus... Why would you give more than Bean?

I think you'd need to get more back for 53 than the 10, and the 10 plus a marginal prospect isn't really more. You might end up with 53 plus for the 10 plus.

I think they'd like to get back in the first round high - but 10 seems too low. Maybe 53 to get back in the top 6?

I personally would only be trading 53 if the return was exceptional unless I know I can't get him resigned. In that case, you make the best deal you can.

I don't think Dundon is looking at the situation as more urgent because of the last X years. I think he wants to turn it around as fast as he can, but I also think he won't discard all of the good that RF has done in building up the system making bad deals for the future to win now. Happily I think he can win now and keep building for the future because of the way RF built up the system over the past several years especially with the addition of the #2 pick.
 
If the #10 pick isn't likely to contribute at the NHL level, then a move for a quality prospect is reasonable - like a Bean... maybe not a Bean plus... Why would you give more than Bean?

I think you'd need to get more back for 53 than the 10, and the 10 plus a marginal prospect isn't really more. You might end up with 53 plus for the 10 plus.

I think they'd like to get back in the first round high - but 10 seems too low. Maybe 53 to get back in the top 6?

I personally would only be trading 53 if the return was exceptional unless I know I can't get him resigned. In that case, you make the best deal you can.

I don't think Dundon is looking at the situation as more urgent because of the last X years. I think he wants to turn it around as fast as he can, but I also think he won't discard all of the good that RF has done in building up the system making bad deals for the future to win now. Happily I think he can win now and keep building for the future because of the way RF built up the system over the past several years especially with the addition of the #2 pick.

I agree, the return should be exceptional for 53 and I would prefer a player for player transaction if the Canes feel he must be moved. I’m thinking in the vein of Skinner for Mike Hoffman or Skinner for Alex Galchenyuk.
 
I agree, the return should be exceptional for 53 and I would prefer a player for player transaction if the Canes feel he must be moved. I’m thinking in the vein of Skinner for Mike Hoffman or Skinner for Alex Galchenyuk.

Mike Hoffman is one of those guys I'd like to see here, but the criminal behavior the girlfriend is accused of is not what we need here.
 
Mike Hoffman is one of those guys I'd like to see here, but the criminal behavior the girlfriend is accused of is not what we need here.

I sure hope we have not reached the point where a hockey player is being crucified based on a girlfriend's alleged behavior...let's judge the player based on his game on the ice and his own behavior.

That mess in Ottawa is very unfortunate, and who knows what is true and not true, but what has Mike Hoffman done that warrants a "we do not need that here"? I just think a pro athlete's girlfriends activity should not be just cause to throw the guy under the bus that quick.
 
Last edited:
Back to the issue of the No 10 pick. Know what I'm wary of? That we justify moving Skinner for that pick by taking on a "name" veteran to "even things out." That being freaking Lucic. He of the cement filled legs and the stupid contract.

I've got a creeping dread of that happening. Kind of like I had a creeping dread of Jeff Daniels getting hired. Let's hope my gut is off base with this one.
 
That mess in Ottawa is very unfortunate, and who knows what is true and not true, but what has Mike Hoffman done that warrants a "we do not need that here"? I just think a pro athlete's girlfriends activity should not be just cause to throw the guy under the bus that quick.

Depends on what the situation actually was up in Ottawa. WAGs can be exceptionally disruptive forces in the team dynamic. A toxic enough girlfriend can be a VERY real issue even if the player himself is fine. Bottom line ... we don't know nearly enough to comment on that.
 
Back to the issue of the No 10 pick. Know what I'm wary of? That we justify moving Skinner for that pick by taking on a "name" veteran to "even things out." That being freaking Lucic. He of the cement filled legs and the stupid contract.

I've got a creeping dread of that happening. Kind of like I had a creeping dread of Jeff Daniels getting hired. Let's hope my gut is off base with this one.

Do you think it's possible that your creeping dreads are the cause of the resulting reality. Please have a creeping dread that we trade Skinner for Tavares, and they take on a "name" veteran to "even things out" named Darling!
 
Do you think it's possible that your creeping dreads are the cause of the resulting reality. Please have a creeping dread that we trade Skinner for Tavares, and they take on a "name" veteran to "even things out" named Darling!

I just think that I'm broken. Too many years following this team too closely have rendered me a gibbering mess.
 
Back
Top