HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Carolina Hurricanes
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

If your the Canes would you take this trade?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-06-2010, 02:06 PM
  #26
Anton Dubinchuk
Danny Markov
 
Anton Dubinchuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 9,711
vCash: 1505
Quote:
Originally Posted by eerodynamic View Post
but it would force Sather's hand....would Sather really turn down JRs trade offer afterwards even if it was the best offer? You'd be a dumb GM to turn down the best offer just to spite someone....though we are talking about Sather. However since JR and Slats are both old guard guys none of this would happen.

And let's be honest, Sather has already shown that he has no intention of giving Marc what he is worth. this is a case where im sure the union is hoping for an offer sheet.
The only difference is that I think that if the Rangers DO sign Staal, considering the cap issues the Rangers have, it'd have to be more on Sather's term than Staal's. If that is indeed the case, and the Rangers sign him for around $3 to $3.5 million, I think that Staal's trade value increases heavily, being already signed for a fairly cheap amount. An already signed Staal is a sure thing, and Sather certainly would have more trouble giving that away.

Anton Dubinchuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2010, 02:58 PM
  #27
Vagrant
The Czech Condor
 
Vagrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 20,010
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Vagrant
Quote:
Originally Posted by geehaad View Post
Regarding the question of being "old guard" or not...either way, that offer was made in the middle of his 4th season as GM. And who knows...maybe it was a good learning experience for him.
That move was a VERY direct shot across to Mike Ilitch handed down through Rutherford by Peter Karmanos. For those unaware, the Compuware vs. Little Caesars rivalry in Detroit hockey, where Karmanos hails from, is the Detroit hockey equivalent to bloods vs. crips up there. If you play for one, it pretty much precludes you from playing for the other.

That contract was FULL of ridiculous performance and team accomplishment bonuses that could only be hit in Detroit, realistically speaking. Thus the exclusion of those type of contracts in the next CBA.

Quote:
Only $12 million of the $38 million total is Fedorov's base salary. The rest will be paid through bonuses -- $14 million up-front and $12 million in deferred payments over the next four years, beginning in 1998-99. Here's the catch: A clause in the contract states that Fedorov will receive the entire $12 million deferred bonus -- or whatever has yet to be paid -- in a lump sum if his team reaches the conference finals.
So for essentially half a season of play, Fedorov brought home $28 million that year. The incentives were reached, and Ilitch was furious. It stands, and likely will remain, the largest lump sum ever paid to a player for a single year.

Attributing that offer sheet to Rutherford is errant thought, in my opinion. That went over his head.

Vagrant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2010, 03:45 PM
  #28
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vagrant View Post
Either of those players, Redden or Drury, would be FAR too much of a financial strain to couple with the contract of Staal for us to ever consider a move like that. Redden has possibly the most negative equity in the league on that contract. Drury is owed an astonishing $13 million over the next 2 years. Redden is owed $23 million over the next 4 years. Twenty. Three. Million.

That value is nearly enough to negate the need to send ANYTHING back in addition to getting Marc Staal in the process. When the name "Ruutu" came up, that should have been the end of the discussion.

We were *****ing about Brind'Amour coming back at $3 million but somehow we'd be okay with taking a $13 million or $23 million incentive for the RIGHT to pay Marc Staal $4.5 million a year? Bless my heart.
First of all, there's a reason I didn't say I'd be OK with taking Redden back, because as you said, he's got negative value. Drury, on the other hand, while overpaid, is still a good player. His value is lowered because of the contract, but it's still there.

The Brindamour comparison is off, because unlike the Brindamour some were "*****ing" about, Drury is competent defensively. In fact, that's pretty much all he's there for. He's not going to generate much offensively, but he's a great defensive player.

Second of all, unless JR starts drafting defensive defensemen (fat chance), we're not going to get the 2nd shutdown defenseman everyone wants without making some sacrifices. A 2nd and a low tier prospect isn't going to get one. Taking two years of a good player with an inflated contract to acquire multiple years of a young, shutdown defenseman doesn't seem like too bad of a tradeoff.

Ruutu seems like the obvious choice in trade, considering his style of play in combination with his injury troubles. Yes, he's still a good player now, which is why he's got value. If we wait too long to trade him, however, we might end up with another Cole: A powerforward that's simply a shell of his former self because his playstyle left him with glass bones.

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2010, 04:09 PM
  #29
Gr8Dan
Registered User
 
Gr8Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 879
vCash: 500
I could see a future of:

Mcbain - Staal
Sanguinetti - Gleason
Faulk - Dumoulin

Of course getting M.Staal will have to give up some good prospects in a trade. That said we have a deep pool of prospects that are good but don't have great depth at D than forwards. Like Blue bomber said, fat chance we draft 1st rounder defensemen which was proven in this years draft. This might be a good chance to get some help for Gleason, the only good (not Harrison or Alberts) shutdown defenseman since Wesley.

It would be cool to have 3 brothers play on 1 team. I for one have only ever seen 2 play on a team at a time. Carolina: Home of the Staal

Gr8Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2010, 04:17 PM
  #30
WWAD
Registered User
 
WWAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 890
vCash: 500
I guess I am the only one here who doesn't think Marc Staal is an elite defense-man. 1st pairing for sure, but I wouldn't let a #1 pick anywhere near a trade for him.

WWAD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2010, 04:26 PM
  #31
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkyMarkNC View Post
I guess I am the only one here who doesn't think Marc Staal is an elite defense-man. 1st pairing for sure, but I wouldn't let a #1 pick anywhere near a trade for him.
And that's the problem in general for HFBoards. You wouldn't take a first pairing defenseman if it cost a 1st round pick? The first round pick that, unless you're drafting in the first three spots, is usually a couple years away from making an impact, and may not even pan out at all?

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2010, 04:46 PM
  #32
Anton Dubinchuk
Danny Markov
 
Anton Dubinchuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 9,711
vCash: 1505
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkyMarkNC View Post
I guess I am the only one here who doesn't think Marc Staal is an elite defense-man. 1st pairing for sure, but I wouldn't let a #1 pick anywhere near a trade for him.
When drafting a defenseman with a first round pick, you do it in hopes that he pans out to be a 1st pairing defenseman. Now they have an opportunity to get a 1st pairing SURE THING defenseman, and you want us to keep our #1 so that we can draft a defenseman who may or may not pan out?

Seems like sound logic to me, aye fellas?

Anton Dubinchuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2010, 07:17 PM
  #33
Sens1Canes2
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jgusta21 View Post
When drafting a defenseman with a first round pick, you do it in hopes that he pans out to be a 1st pairing defenseman. Now they have an opportunity to get a 1st pairing SURE THING defenseman, and you want us to keep our #1 so that we can draft a defenseman who may or may not pan out?

Seems like sound logic to me, aye fellas?
I don't know, he seems like Tim Gleason v2.0 to me. I think Timmy can do whatever Staal does (and Gleason is still improving IMO), and that's the reason I would pay Pitkanen the money for his next contract, instead of acquiring Staal.

EDIT - I do agree, however, that if it was straight up a #1 pick for Staal, you would do it in a heatbeat (obviously financial considerations come into play here too).

However, the original proposal had Sutter/Jokinen and a 1st. That seems like too much.

Sens1Canes2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2010, 07:27 PM
  #34
Sens1Canes2
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by geehaad View Post
Serious question: is Wade Redden no longer a serviceable NHL defenseman?

Not seriously considering it question: would he fit into the top 6 in Raleigh (salary notwithstanding)?
At this point, I would probably compare him to Bryan Rodney with a better first pass. Sad, too, because (obviously) when Redden was playing well in Ottawa I was a huge fan. He singlehandedly engineered the best breakout in the NHL night after night.

Unfortunately, his last year in Ottawa he became the whipping boy for all things that went wrong (somewhat unfairly, IMO). It's true that he had lost a step, and had even lost the sense of defensive positioning that enabled him to stay in the #1 spot for so long, even though he was never a physical player. He wasn't absolutely horrible that last year, by any means, but when he was offered that crazy 6.5 million contract in NY, I said good luck and take care His diminishing skills were worth nowhere near that amount of money, and CERTAINLY not worth the term of 5 years.

So, to answer your question "would he fit in, salary notwithstanding," I would say yes, but what's the point when you have a bunch of up-and-comers who need to play and can do mostly the same things?

As an aside, I met Wade a couple of times and he was a super-nice guy, took time to ask about what I did, my family, etc. He was a great guy to have in the city representing the Senators, and pretty much taught Alfredsson how to become that guy in his place.

Sens1Canes2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2010, 07:45 PM
  #35
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sens1Canes2 View Post
I don't know, he seems like Tim Gleason v2.0 to me. I think Timmy can do whatever Staal does (and Gleason is still improving IMO), and that's the reason I would pay Pitkanen the money for his next contract, instead of acquiring Staal.

EDIT - I do agree, however, that if it was straight up a #1 pick for Staal, you would do it in a heatbeat (obviously financial considerations come into play here too).

However, the original proposal had Sutter/Jokinen and a 1st. That seems like too much.
Staal is a much better skater than gleason, and that mobility directly affects the ceilings between the two for me. I think staal is a legit top pairing guy and timmy doing the same is forcing a square peg into a round hole. I love timmay but id take staal over him long term any day. Id rather lose pitts and keep em both.

bleedgreen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2010, 09:58 PM
  #36
Sens1Canes2
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
Staal is a much better skater than gleason, and that mobility directly affects the ceilings between the two for me. I think staal is a legit top pairing guy and timmy doing the same is forcing a square peg into a round hole. I love timmay but id take staal over him long term any day. Id rather lose pitts and keep em both.
Fair enough. I was basing my opinion on a very limited number of times watching Staal. I will say this though - when the term "top pairing guy" is thrown out there, very rarely are the two best defenseman on a team playing together. Keith and Seabrook are a rarity, but it's because they don't play the same game.

Basically, what I'm saying is that if you threw Gleason out there with Pitkanen, I think they compare just fine with other teams' top pairing. They're not the best, but they're not sucking the hind tit either.

Sens1Canes2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2010, 10:56 PM
  #37
totalkev
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,513
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
Staal is a much better skater than gleason, and that mobility directly affects the ceilings between the two for me. I think staal is a legit top pairing guy and timmy doing the same is forcing a square peg into a round hole. I love timmay but id take staal over him long term any day. Id rather lose pitts and keep em both.
I also don't think Timmy is the smartest tool in the shed. Dude is all effort, but he could be a helluva lot more efficient if he didn't take the longest possible route to the puck every time. Between skating and hockey sense, I think Gleason is very limited. Yes, he seems to be improving every season, and I love his leadership, but he's just plain, flat-out not a top pairing guy on a good NHL defense. Staal is.

totalkev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2010, 11:14 PM
  #38
Vagrant
The Czech Condor
 
Vagrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 20,010
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Vagrant
I don't think Staal is offensive enough to be a first pairing defenseman without the physical element of the game that he lacks. Granted, he's rock steady in the defensive zone and his skating is excellent, but let's not over sell what he brings to the game. By the pretty biased statistics NHL.com has, Staal had 170+ hits last year which was more than Andrew Alberts made but they count just about everything as a hit at MSG. Tom Gilbert had a similar number.

He doesn't block a lot of shots. He's just your average, run of the mill defender with great skating and a good head for the position. I have no idea where this perception that he's a slam dunk 1st pairing guy comes from other than he can play minutes without hurting you, but a lot of guys can do that.

I consider a first pairing defender to be a player that has an obvious and very clear impact in the wins and loss column, not somebody that treads water. By his numbers in TOI, Joe Corvo is a first pairing guy too.

The lack of better options on a particular roster does not by default make a player a first pairing defenseman even if he plays the minutes to warrant that status.

On a strong defense, Staal is an ideal #3 in my opinion. I think he would even be a #3 here behind Pitkanen and Gleason.

I think a lot of people value skating over results at many positions and it's why a guy like Samsonov has so many fans.

Vagrant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2010, 01:46 PM
  #39
WWAD
Registered User
 
WWAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
And that's the problem in general for HFBoards. You wouldn't take a first pairing defenseman if it cost a 1st round pick? The first round pick that, unless you're drafting in the first three spots, is usually a couple years away from making an impact, and may not even pan out at all?
In certain circumstances I probably would, but I guess I just think M. Staal is over-rated by many (especially Rangers fans.)

WWAD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2010, 01:59 PM
  #40
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sens1Canes2 View Post
Fair enough. I was basing my opinion on a very limited number of times watching Staal. I will say this though - when the term "top pairing guy" is thrown out there, very rarely are the two best defenseman on a team playing together. Keith and Seabrook are a rarity, but it's because they don't play the same game.

Basically, what I'm saying is that if you threw Gleason out there with Pitkanen, I think they compare just fine with other teams' top pairing. They're not the best, but they're not sucking the hind tit either.
i dont think there are a lot of legit "top pairing" guys left in the league anymore, not by the standards we are all accustomed to anyways. it makes me think we have to redefine it a bit. thats why staal is to me a top pairing potential guy. i would never put gleason above him, in reference to vagrants comments, though i could see timmah playing a complimentary role to an offensive guy that is the top unit. i think staal is that guy as well, a complimentary guy to a top pairing, though i think a better one than gleason.

and vagrant, if you can't skate your hockey sense gets pushed to the limits, and like totalkev said im not sure gleasons hockey sense is really top notch to begin with. he is a heart on his sleeve, blood and guts guy who is making the effort to round out his game, but it seems like he is reaching his limits there. staal is a guy who has all the right tools to be a top pairing guy, and has a good head on his shoulders. will the offense come? who knows, thats why to me he is a wesley type. a high end glue guy. you can build the team on foundations like him, he isnt gonna lead the way and score the big goals but he can long term help stabilize the back end. wesley came to us with the hopes of leading the pp, but in the end he was just a rock we built everything out from. tim doesnt have enough ability to be that guy, tho he no doubt has the heart.

bleedgreen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2010, 02:33 PM
  #41
Vagrant
The Czech Condor
 
Vagrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 20,010
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Vagrant
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
and vagrant, if you can't skate your hockey sense gets pushed to the limits, and like totalkev said im not sure gleasons hockey sense is really top notch to begin with. he is a heart on his sleeve, blood and guts guy who is making the effort to round out his game, but it seems like he is reaching his limits there. staal is a guy who has all the right tools to be a top pairing guy, and has a good head on his shoulders. will the offense come? who knows, thats why to me he is a wesley type. a high end glue guy. you can build the team on foundations like him, he isnt gonna lead the way and score the big goals but he can long term help stabilize the back end. wesley came to us with the hopes of leading the pp, but in the end he was just a rock we built everything out from. tim doesnt have enough ability to be that guy, tho he no doubt has the heart.
I can certainly see the merit in the comparison to Wesley with Staal, but what was unique about Wesley was that he seemed to actually get better with age as opposed to hitting some kind of maximum potential and that is a pretty atypical career path for anyone. When he first came over from Boston, there were many that thought he was a product of Ray Bourque and the numbers kind of hashed that out. As a result of what we gave up for him, we thought he was going to be the answer to the franchise defender problem. The results and immediate returns were very mixed. He hadn't quite learned the defensive end as well as he eventually would so there were certainly growing pains experienced there.

I think that in the first two or three years, perhaps longer, that Hartford/Carolina would have turned that trade over if they had the ability to do that. I think he really started to turn the corner here when he was essentially the only legitimate blue liner on the team and was forced into all situations.

Ideally, Glen Wesley wasn't even your prototype for a first pairing defender but as his game evolved he became an elite shut down defender with finesse style game as opposed to the physical presence you think when you hear "shut down defender". I can see Marc Staal going that path, but from the Rangers fans I talked to last year he was caught between the transition of Tortarella wanting him to be more offensive and his entire game suffered.

I just prefer that bird in the hand of Gleason over the two in the bush of Staal, to be honest. Gleason is your more traditional defense first guy who is 90% blood and guts. He's a Jay McKee, Jason Smith, etc. type player. One of those guys who will probably hit his prime later than most defenders into his early 30's when he rounds out the rough edges to his game. I don't think he's done projecting especially in the defensive end of the ice.

Before giving up the farm for Staal, I would really like to see him have a complete season in one end of the ice. Give him a clearly defined role and have him play it. That's the problem with Luke Schenn in Toronto. He played a great steady game until he was asked to pick up the offense last year and faltered big time when his focus went away.

Vagrant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2010, 12:14 PM
  #42
lesclassic
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12
vCash: 500
Hate to say it, but I think Washington would be a better fit for Marc. Giving up a late 1st and 3rd wouldn't hurt them much, and the $4.6 Mil(about the max for only 1st and 3rd rounders) is more than Sather would want to pay(though he probably would anyway). Stay-at-Home Staal and Green as a tandem is dangerous.

lesclassic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2010, 12:25 PM
  #43
Jerry Lundegaard
Sutter for Captain
 
Jerry Lundegaard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 4,033
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lesclassic View Post
Hate to say it, but I think Washington would be a better fit for Marc. Giving up a late 1st and 3rd wouldn't hurt them much, and the $4.6 Mil(about the max for only 1st and 3rd rounders) is more than Sather would want to pay(though he probably would anyway). Stay-at-Home Staal and Green as a tandem is dangerous.


I agree, but i think washington is going to get willie mitchell

Jerry Lundegaard is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:29 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.