All Purpose Trade / Roster Building Thread Part 5: The Jerk Store Called - It's Time to Restock

[vorbis]

When you put it that way, it's the most logical thing in the world. We are constantly talking up the importance of good, young, cost-controlled assets, aren't we?

Yeah, I'd much rather be in a system where you get them cheap on an ELC, pay them when they are actually worth it, and the older, declining players get left with the scraps.

See, I disagree. Because we were never players in the UFA market anyway, because there's no value there, so the huge UFA deals for crap players *benefited* us. Contracts like David Clarkson, Milan Lucic and Kyle Okposo are *great* for us because we didn't sign them, but those teams lost all that cap money. It's just like trying to get your opponents to overpay for players in an auction for a fantasy football league. The more money they spend on crap, the less money they have to bid against you for good players.

Now that we're being forced to pay RFAs what they're worth, we lose a huge part of our advantage.

It's still early in this process, though, so we have time to work out a response, but it may be signing more 28-32 year old UFAs. There will be value somewhere, but it won't be RFAs anymore. It *could* be in guys like Eberle (and maybe, Ferland) who aren't getting the UFA bonanza they once were, and now may be overlooked.

I agree that a reduction in the amount of crazypants contracts lessens an advantage that a well-run Carolina organization would have. but I think there are still so many poor decisions being made across the NHL when it comes to long-term contracts that the Canes shouldn't need any particular structural advantage to be well above average, even allowing for the presence of an internal budget.

at least so long as they remain sane and have a systematic approach to contract decisions, which, if you can describe the overall approach to contract negotiations in the last 12-14 months with any one word, it would be systematic.

so many other organizations are still completely flapping in the wind in the area of contract negotiations within this CBA framework. (looking at Buffalo who really could not have navigated the Skinner UFA situation with less leverage if they tried, and ended up "negotiating" themselves into a place with no movement from 53's camp on AAV, term, and NMC because they "couldn't afford" to let him go, or even dip his toes in the open market for that matter).

just by maintaining a relatively rigorous standard over the next 3-5 seasons on who you sign, for what, and for how long, you stand to maintain flexibility while still having broad prospect depth and draft resources to shuffle around parts as need be.

 

[Lempo]

Think of it this way, if you were trying to re-sign Aho, would you prefer he be RFA or UFA?

I would rather he was innocent.

 

[FreshSeabass]

Listening to Donnie on 99.9. Says he does not want to pencil Ned in as a NHL goalie. Wants to have 3 to start even if that isn't Mrazek and Mac.
Also whether Willy comes back or not they want to add to forward group.
Discussing numbers with Faulk but doesn't sound like anything will get done soon.
re:Aho: Don said he is not looking for a short term deal mentioned a bridge deal or 5 year deal specifically. Don said he wants an 8 year deal. So it sounds like Aho's camp is looking for a shorter deal for whatever reason.
When asked about both goalies said numbers were far apart as this point.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

Listening to Donnie on 99.9. Says he does not want to pencil Ned in as a NHL goalie. Wants to have 3 to start even if that isn't Mrazek and Mac.
Also whether Willy comes back or not they want to add to forward group.
Discussing numbers with Faulk but doesn't sound like anything will get done soon.
re:Aho: Don said he is not looking for a short term deal mentioned a bridge deal or 5 year deal specifically. Don said he wants an 8 year deal. So it sounds like Aho's came is looking for a shorter deal for whatever reason.
When asked about both goalies said numbers were far apart as this point.

Hmmmmmm. Interesting.

 

[MinJaBen]

re:Aho: Don said he is not looking for a short term deal mentioned a bridge deal or 5 year deal specifically. Don said he wants an 8 year deal. So it sounds like Aho's came is looking for a shorter deal for whatever reason.

Ok, sorry to be an ass here, but who are the "he"s in these quotes? Does Aho want the 8 years or Wadell?

 

[My Special Purpose]

I agree that a reduction in the amount of crazypants contracts lessens an advantage that a well-run Carolina organization would have. but I think there are still so many poor decisions being made across the NHL when it comes to long-term contracts that the Canes shouldn't need any particular structural advantage to be well above average, even allowing for the presence of an internal budget.

at least so long as they remain sane and have a systematic approach to contract decisions, which, if you can describe the overall approach to contract negotiations in the last 12-14 months with any one word, it would be systematic.

so many other organizations are still completely flapping in the wind in the area of contract negotiations within this CBA framework. (looking at Buffalo who really could not have navigated the Skinner UFA situation with less leverage if they tried, and ended up "negotiating" themselves into a place with no movement from 53's camp on AAV, term, and NMC because they "couldn't afford" to let him go, or even dip his toes in the open market for that matter).

just by maintaining a relatively rigorous standard over the next 3-5 seasons on who you sign, for what, and for how long, you stand to maintain flexibility while still having broad prospect depth and draft resources to shuffle around parts as need be.

I agree with you completely on all of this. But what you have to accept if you stick to this is that you're going to lose some players. Current management has shown that they are willing to do that, shipping out Skinner to avoid the exact situation you detail. We also look likely to lose Ferland this summer.

So yeah, we should still be able to take advantage of teams that continue to overspend, *but* we'll have to accept losing players we don't want to lose and having to pay market value to keep our own RFAs. I'm not saying we *can't* do it. I'm just saying it will be a lot harder and we're going to lose some guys we didn't want to lose.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

My recap of the same conversation @FreshSeabass mentioned

Ned: Could play here next year. DW would prefer him to be one of the three capable of starting as he has one more year of waivers eligibility.
2 UFA goalies: have exchanged numbers with both. Didnt say we were close on either. "Still have work to do on both of them."
DW hopes JW would have a better answer about playing or not over the next 2 weeks. Not necessarily signed but helps to know whether we need to add 1 or 2 guys on the roster.
DW has had several conversations with Faulk's representation about an extension. JF's reps havent given the Canes a number.
DW said that the guys we had were great this season but we werent good enough. We will look to improve goal scoring for next season
DW wants to get Aho's contract done today. We want a 8 year deal with Aho, no bridge deal or 5 year deal. Been that way since November. Will talk more at the draft. No timetable.

My recap: we are looking to add 1 guy in the goal scoring column. May go for two if Justin doesnt come back and it doesnt sound like Justin is any closer to making a decision. Based on DW's tone, I think we havent had a lot of movement in getting Aho re-signed.

 

[FreshSeabass]

Ok, sorry to be an ass here, but who are the "he"s in these quotes? Does Aho want the 8 years or Wadell?

Yeah sorry i was trying to listen and type so it was kinda spastic writings lol. I thought the last part clarified Aho is looking for the shorter deal and canes want long term deal. Don mentioned the bride and 5 year specifically as if that is what has come across his desk from Aho.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

Ok, sorry to be an ass here, but who are the "he"s in these quotes? Does Aho want the 8 years or Wadell?

DW said the Canes want to do an 8 year deal with Aho and have since the Canes first started talking to Aho in November. Bridge deal and 5 year deal (thanks Toronto) done interest DW. / the Canes.

I thought the last part clarified Aho is looking for the shorter deal and canes want long term deal. Don mentioned the bride and 5 year specifically as if that is what has come across his desk from Aho.

I wouldnt necessarily say they came from Aho's camp. A bridge deal was a common theme for ELCers. The 5 year deal was something Toronto and Matthews made possible as an option. What other ELC has done that before? It was either 8 or bridge before.

 

[FreshSeabass]

DW said the Canes want to do an 8 year deal with Aho and have since they first said something in November. Bridge deal and 5 year deal (thanks Toronto) done interest DW. / the Canes.



I wouldnt necessarily say they came from Aho's camp. A bridge deal was a common theme for ELCers. The 5 year deal was something Toronto and Matthews made possible as an option. What other ELC has done that before? It was either 8 or bridge before.

Well they asked him about Aho and his tone came across at that is what is being pitched to him repeatedly and he was declaratively saying he has no interest in either of those.

 

[vorbis]

I agree with you completely on all of this. But what you have to accept if you stick to this is that you're going to lose some players. Current management has shown that they are willing to do that, shipping out Skinner to avoid the exact situation you detail. We also look likely to lose Ferland this summer.

So yeah, we should still be able to take advantage of teams that continue to overspend, *but* we'll have to accept losing players we don't want to lose and having to pay market value to keep our own RFAs. I'm not saying we *can't* do it. I'm just saying it will be a lot harder and we're going to lose some guys we didn't want to lose.

I would even say losing players (in essence, letting them walk into UFA or cashing them in as assets in deals) is a compulsory part of that kind of approach to contracts. it puts the system in systematic in that way. if you aren't at least putting forth a cursory push against all points of leverage then you aren't really using your leverage after all. and I think the leadership council has already exhibited a pretty robust understanding of that, to the extent that that can be shown in just over a year and one full offseason.

 

[Vagrant]

it makes sense for aho to want a shorter deal. it makes sense for virtually any star player to favor a shorter deal if they're confident their production will maintain or continue to increase. contracts are getting more ridiculous on a yearly basis and to lock yourself into a contract that sets the market today is to leave money on the table in 3 years when your contract looks like a relative bargain. see also: mcdavid. as long as the money is getting exponentially better each offseason, why not sign for market value today and make bonkers money in 3 years when the contracts of today seem reasonable?

 

[spockBokk]

Sounds like CHI is interested in Faulk again, plus CDH and Hamilton:



“Secondary” forwards (as stated in the article as being offered) wont cut it for any of them tho. I’d think it’s Saad for Faulk as the ask all over again.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

Sounds like CHI is interested in Faulk again, plus CDH and Hamilton:



“Secondary” forwards (as stated in the article as being offered) wont cut it for any of them tho. I’d think it’s Saad for Faulk as the ask all over again.

I can’t see CDH being available. It wouldn’t be good for the organization to move a guy a year after signing him. I don’t see a match here.

 

[bleedgreen]

They’re interested in any of them I’m sure.

Faulk has always made the most sense for Chicago. Or TVR going back I suppose.

 

[Chrispy]

They’re interested in any of them I’m sure.

Faulk has always made the most sense for Chicago. Or TVR going back I suppose.

TVR for a secondary forward would make sense if TVR were healthy.

Injured? I don’t see Chicago taking that risk on a 1 year deal.

 

[Ole Gil]

I wonder if Strome is available at all from Chi, and what bringing him in would look like.

 

[FreshSeabass]

Custance: Examining the trade possibilities of every...

28. Carolina Hurricanes – This pick is in play. The Hurricanes are looking for more offense up front and would use this pick, or one of their three second-rounders, to help make it happen. For teams looking to get back into the first round, this is a spot to target.

 

[AeroFishOne]

I can’t see CDH being available. It wouldn’t be good for the organization to move a guy a year after signing him. I don’t see a match here.

Yeah I could understand it if it didn’t work out and he had a bad season but CDH was solid and was a real vocal guy about wanting to come be apart of the change. I know he got paid but it was a solid contract and not outside the norm when he signed it

 

[Chrispy]

I wonder if Strome is available at all from Chi, and what bringing him in would look like.

Bringing in Strome would likely mean letting go one of the top 3 D to do so. Can’t see Chicago letting him go for less after his performance post trade.

 

[bleedgreen]

Strome is exactly what they’ve been looking for, I imagine he’s a core piece already. Let’s them play the big two together, and he gels with DeBrincat.

He isn’t going anywhere I’d bet.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I recall late in the season or maybe during / after the playoffs, Vellucci stated that Jurco was an NHL player. Anyone think the Canes might offer him a deal, even if it's to have some familiarity with Necas?

The problem I see with that is the Canes already have a bunch of bottom 6 guys. Martinook, Wallmark, Foegele, McGinn, Maenalanen, and that's not counting guys like McKegg or others in the AHL so unless other moves are made, I don't see it.

 

[Unsustainable]

Which Checkers makes the Canes better by replacing other players?

 

[MinJaBen]

I recall late in the season or maybe during / after the playoffs, Vellucci stated that Jurco was an NHL player. Anyone think the Canes might offer him a deal, even if it's to have some familiarity with Necas?

The problem I see with that is the Canes already have a bunch of bottom 6 guys. Martinook, Wallmark, Foegele, McGinn, Maenalanen, and that's not counting guys like McKegg or others in the AHL so unless other moves are made, I don't see it.

Well, as much as Rod might like him, McGinn might be pricing himself out of a contract with TD/GMDW. Jurco doesn’t have the same skill set, but if he comes in cheaper, he may be given a look and they may let McGinn walk.

 

[My Special Purpose]

Which Checkers makes the Canes better by replacing other players?

I'm just glad the answer isn't "half the roster" like it was 2-3 seasons ago (The Nordstrom/Kruger Era).