All purpose trade/roster building thread part 12

[emptyNedder]

We would have to have 6 top 2 shot suppressing defensive group to support them

I wandered onto the main board and there is a fascinating discussion based on data that clearly show for individual games more shots = better sv%. It seems likely due to losing teams taking more low quality shots. Still interesting to consider in relation to shot suppression.

calgary has been reportedly shopping johnny gaudreau and that move could be a match made in heaven for this team. with the lindholm/hanifin swap being pretty win/win, i doubt either party would have trouble coming back to the table. it's going to hurt when you hear it, but what about brock mcginn and brett pesce for gaudreau?

Why not Slavin and McGinn (if the goal is to outscore the opponents and win)? All there is a surplus of LD.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

I wandered onto the main board and there is a fascinating discussion based on data that clearly show for individual games more shots = better sv%. It seems likely due to losing teams taking more low quality shots. Still interesting to consider in relation to shot suppression.

Why not Slavin and McGinn (if the goal is to outscore the opponents and win)? All there is a surplus of LD.

Im in the boat that sure save percentage looks better if there is more shots. A goal hurts save percentage more with less shots because there were less shots, not necessarily that they were better. A goal is a goal whether they faced 10 shots or 40. The difference in 10 and 40 shots is with 40 shots on goal, you have 30 more shots that something can go wrong / deflections / etc that could lead to more goals. Of course the quality of shots they are facing matters too. A defense that gives up 40 low quality shots is probably better than one that blocks 30 shots and gives up 10 high danger shots. Tripp does mention that being able to get into the game more when you face more shots.

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

Don’t be surprised if they make moves to shed salary and not replace with anything (Gardiner//Dzingle, Nino, etc). Those 3 alone could be replaced by guys on ELCs and not make the team any worse AND cut TDS losses (which are currently significantly higher than he’s stated he’d be willing to absorb) by about $10 million. Could move Reimer for a pick as well and replace with Ned.

That’s not saying it is going to happen, but Waddell just said they can’t operate without fans so I wouldn’t get my hopes up about spending to the cap.

Is shedding that much cap viable, though? The rest of the league is dealing with the same conditions: a flat cap limiting available space and a pandemic stabbing clubs in the pocket. There will be a ton of teams looking to shed contracts and a handful with the resources to take those on. Forget positive value.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

That’s an option too then. I don’t think it’s infinitely better just because Reimer had his first good season in 3 years as a backup.

Its about style of play. John Forslund mentioned this once too. You dont want to have two goalies that have similar styles. Teams will be to create plays and shots that will exploit both goalies, making preparation very easy for them. Ned and Mrazek on the same tandem will lead to a bunch of high shots and plays that exploit their need to come to the top of the crease because of their size. Both will make great glove saves with athleticism but both will be increasingly frustrating with the goals they give up with spazzy play.

 

[Joe McGrath]

Is shedding that much cap viable, though? The rest of the league is dealing with the same conditions: a flat cap limiting available space and a pandemic stabbing clubs in the pocket. There will be a ton of teams looking to shed contracts and a handful with the resources to take those on. Forget positive value.

Probably not all of them. The asking prices would be extremely low in some cases (Dzingle, Mrazek) or a pick added (Nino or Gardiner).

It’s going to be interesting this year for sure.

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

I shudder to think about what type of pick would need to be added to dump Gardiner clean. If the league sees him as say a 1 year $2 mil-type reclamation project, that's asking an acquiring team to take on an extra 2 years and $10.55 mil.

 

[LostInaLostWorld]

Don’t be surprised if they make moves to shed salary and not replace with anything (Gardiner//Dzingle, Nino, etc). Those 3 alone could be replaced by guys on ELCs and not make the team any worse AND cut TDS losses (which are currently significantly higher than he’s stated he’d be willing to absorb) by about $10 million. Could move Reimer for a pick as well and replace with Ned.

That’s not saying it is going to happen, but Waddell just said they can’t operate without fans so I wouldn’t get my hopes up about spending to the cap.

Given what we have seen from TD plus the unknown income situation and then add in the fact that we probably are still a couple years away from the youth maximizing potentential I definately could see salary dumps upcoming.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

except Reimer already got his signing bonus. He has already spent the money, trade Mrazek instead. He saves more money that way. The tandem is infinitely better too.

You think Nedeljkovic is better than Mrazek?

Why? What has Nedeljkovic done to show he is indisputably better than a mid-to-lower tier NHL starter?

 

[Stickpucker]

But Kapanen does more than score points. Does Dzingel even know what the defensive zone is?

Just convince JR Crosby could turn Dzingle into a 40g sniper. Too bad he doesn't have any assets left to send us.

 

[emptyNedder]

You think Nedeljkovic is better than Mrazek?

Why? What has Nedeljkovic done to show he is indisputably better than a mid-to-lower tier NHL starter?

Pretty sure 0506 meant Ned with Reimer was better than Ned with Mr. Azek due to aforementioned playing styles.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

You think Nedeljkovic is better than Mrazek?

Why? What has Nedeljkovic done to show he is indisputably better than a mid-to-lower tier NHL starter?

I read it to mean that he thought the Tandem of Reimer/Ned was better than the tandem of Mrazek/Ned. The assumption in that discussion was that one goalie would be moved to save money (I think Joe brought that up).

 

[Stickpucker]

RE: shedding cap...any quotes?

I would liken the Canes franchise to Dundon like us owning a 15-20 year old track car. It's a hobby that is fun but you constantly need to replace consumables...just at a different scale. How many hobbies are profitable until you get into the upper echelons?

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Pretty sure 0506 meant Ned with Reimer was better than Ned with Mr. Azek due to aforementioned playing styles.

But Ned - a small statured, aggressive goalie- plays more like Mrazek than Reimer.

I read it to mean that he thought the Tandem of Reimer/Ned was better than the tandem of Mrazek/Ned.

Sure, but I don’t know how you could reasonably reach that conclusion without assuming Ned>Mrazek.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

But Ned - a small statured, aggressive goalie- plays more like Mrazek than Reimer.



Sure, but I don’t know how you could reasonably reach that conclusion without assuming Ned>Mrazek.

it was based on the assumption that a goalie had to be moved to save money. Mrazek is easily better than Ned. Read the quoted post to get the back story (click red arrow)

 

[Joe McGrath]

RE: shedding cap...any quotes?

I would liken the Canes franchise to Dundon like us owning a 15-20 year old track car. It's a hobby that is fun but you constantly need to replace consumables...just at a different scale. How many hobbies are profitable until you get into the upper echelons?

No quotes, just my own speculation based on the fact that if there are no fans there is a lot of revenue disappearing while expenses remain close to the same.

 

[bleedgreen]

Waddell just did an interview within the week saying they expect to be close to the cap again next year. It was pretty direct. If you believe him at all there’s no cost cutting coming other than to cut cost to make room for someone else.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Waddell just did an interview within the week saying they expect to be close to the cap again next year. It was pretty direct. If you believe him at all there’s no cost cutting coming other than to cut cost to make room for someone else.

True, but:
1) "close" is relative
2) He can make moves that takes on cap, but is lower in real $$$. Not sure how many of those are out there, but there are always some. That falls in line with your "makes room for someone else" comment, although the "someone else" may not be as desirable.

 

[bleedgreen]

True, but:
1) "close" is relative
2) He can make moves that takes on cap, but is lower in real $$$. Not sure how many of those are out there, but there are always some. That falls in line with your "makes room for someone else" comment, although the "someone else" may not be as desirable.

I’d be surprised if we cost cut right now, with the exception of moving Jake or Dzingle because they haven’t worked out. I could see Nino if they could find a partner, but that likely isn’t saving money.

All three of those moves wouldn’t fall into a “cutting costs to be cheap” category, all three could be moved in an effort to improve the team - even if it was viewed as addition by subtraction. I don’t fully agree with that but I could see us moving those guys.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I’d be surprised if we cost cut right now, with the exception of moving Jake or Dzingle because they haven’t worked out. I could see Nino if they could find a partner, but that likely isn’t saving money.

All three of those moves wouldn’t fall into a “cutting costs to be cheap” category, all three could be moved in an effort to improve the team - even if it was viewed as addition by subtraction. I don’t fully agree with that but I could see us moving those guys.

Yeah. I agree. How aggressive they are in moving those guys and potentially what they need to do in some cases to sweeten the pot might be due to financials though.

If they "do nothing", right now, they have 17 guys listed on CF for next year and are within $9M of the cap.

18:Geekie: $760
19: Need to replace Williams (assuming he's done).
20, 21: Fleury and Foegele: may get a bit of a raise, say $1.2 for Foegele and $1.5(?) for Fleury (just a wild guess).
22: Need to re-sign or replace 1 more defensemen (bean?)

So keeping it bare minimum, they'd probably be very close to the cap just filling out the roster. Moving on from Dzingel and Gardner frees up about $7.5M, but if they replaced them with guys costing half as much, they still are within a few million of the cap.

 

[Unsustainable]

Wonder what it would cost for MAF?

 

[DougieSmash]

Wonder what it would cost for MAF?

MAF is aging guy with history of playoffs meltdowns. He's not an upgrade over Mrazek, I don't get why we should trade for him

 

[moosemeister]

What would Carolina give for Darcy Kuemper?

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

MAF is aging guy with history of playoffs meltdowns. He's not an upgrade over Mrazek, I don't get why we should trade for him

To get out of Gardiner's contract in a way that doesn't result in dead cap, which ownership doesn't appear to like.

 

[Lempo]

Necas' 16+20=36 in 64 games doesn't meet any of the forward bonus minimum (20G/35A/60P and 0.73 PpG), and he didn't have top 6 forward ice time.

Svech's 24+37=61 on the other hand is a grand slam that unlocks the needed 4 Schedule A bonus categories for maxing out on the raw production stats alone. Wasn't a league top 10 forward in any stat though to qualify for Schedule B.

Looks legit.

Btw, looks like Necas missed the performance bonus for Goals by a very close margin: the 16 Goals in 68 Game season would pro-rate to 19.29 Goals in a 82 Games long.

 

[rt]

What would Carolina give for Darcy Kuemper?

You beat me to the punch! I came here lurking to ask the same question.