Confirmed with Link: [CAR/DAL] Rantanen to DAL, Stankoven, 1sts to CAR
- Thread starter Lucky Lindy
- Start date
Nikishin al Gaib
THIS is hockey?
- Jun 8, 2017
- 27,131
- 98,083
Yeah Rod doesn't have a filter at all. What he said can absolutely be misconstrued to being that we didn't do our due diligence before the trade. Thankfully, Friedman reported last week that we had, so we know its just poor wording from Rod.
- Feb 23, 2014
- 27,948
- 87,663
- Oct 31, 2007
- 42,191
- 52,953
He did what he could. The Avalanche didn't give permission for the Canes to talk to him, but the Avalanche brought up the possibility of a trade to Carolina to Rantanen/his agent and asked if he'd be open to re-signing here. Rantanen/his agent misread the situation and thought it was a negotiation tactic. So they called the "bluff" and said "Yeah, he'll re-sign in Carolina." The Avalanche pass that along to Tulsky, and a trade is made.
What else is Tulsky supposed to do in that situation?
TheBigLetowski
Registered User
- Jul 31, 2016
- 375
- 868
I'm really curious how/if the Canes use those 2 - 1st rd picks on a player this upcoming draft. I imagine it would depend on how the season ends, but they'll go for it again and I don't mind it.
spockBokk
Registered User
- Sep 8, 2013
- 7,688
- 19,641
RBA probably was all in for getting Miller from VAN which likely could have been done without giving up Necas. Kotkaniemi ++ was probably going the other way in those discussions. RBA would have had his dream, a grizzled vet C, AND he would have jettisoned Kotkaniemi and kept Drury.
Personally, I wish they would have paid the price for Pettersson and to a lesser extent, Miller, but that’s water under the bridge. As I said as the time of the trade, I get why they went for Rantanen, he’s easily the best of those 3, but his contract situation was always scary. I would have gone for the sure thing in either Pettersson or Miller, (sure thing being they were under contract already, not whether or not either would be lighting it up here or not. I still believe Pettersson would have been the best option in the long run)
I absolutely hope they revisit Pettersson at the draft. Not sure if VAN would be interested in the very likely futures-heavy package they’d have to offer, but I tend to think what Petttersson has shown this season is the outlier and he’s closer to the player he has been vs whatever is ailing him now.
Personally, I wish they would have paid the price for Pettersson and to a lesser extent, Miller, but that’s water under the bridge. As I said as the time of the trade, I get why they went for Rantanen, he’s easily the best of those 3, but his contract situation was always scary. I would have gone for the sure thing in either Pettersson or Miller, (sure thing being they were under contract already, not whether or not either would be lighting it up here or not. I still believe Pettersson would have been the best option in the long run)
I absolutely hope they revisit Pettersson at the draft. Not sure if VAN would be interested in the very likely futures-heavy package they’d have to offer, but I tend to think what Petttersson has shown this season is the outlier and he’s closer to the player he has been vs whatever is ailing him now.
Nikishin al Gaib
THIS is hockey?
- Jun 8, 2017
- 27,131
- 98,083
The first round picks are in 2026 and 2028. We still only have 1 this year, which could potentially complicate deals over the summer.
a mangy Meowth
Registered Meowth
I'm certain you guys don't care to hear much from our end on this so I will keep brief, but I will share with you what I recently posted on our board regarding Rantanen in general as a player as I think it applies to you guys as well:
We spoke at length, for a long time, as much as for a year or more, the detriment to the roster that $12m+ to Rantanen would mean. A lot of us spoke about it being a death knell for the teams contention chances, in terms of being able to fill out quality depth.
I stand by the thought that you cannot pay wingers at that rate and expect to field a SCF level team. For that reason alone, I really didn't care where he ended up.
We spoke at length, for a long time, as much as for a year or more, the detriment to the roster that $12m+ to Rantanen would mean. A lot of us spoke about it being a death knell for the teams contention chances, in terms of being able to fill out quality depth.
I stand by the thought that you cannot pay wingers at that rate and expect to field a SCF level team. For that reason alone, I really didn't care where he ended up.
I believe that the Avs knew a lot more than what they shared re: MR’s thoughts. Avs thought they had one-upped everyone until the Canes TDL made that trade to their hated rival.
Yup, it boomeranged on them as Canes said OK how about a divisional rival for his ultimate destination.
Granted, AVS are an offensive machine right now with Necas and their other adds; question will be is their non-makar-toews defensemen and their goalies good enough to beat Dallas?
In any event, I’m now rooting for LA and minny to come out of the west even though the odds are stacked against them. I can’t get behind any of the West’s other favorites.
True but I’m sure Canes targeted 2026 as the first one because that is supposed to be a monster draft class whereas 2025 is meh.
Thus, other teams will recognize that and perhaps offer more value for that year’s picks.
What does your fan base feel about the Canes flipping MR to your competitive rival, Dallas?I'm certain you guys don't care to hear much from our end on this so I will keep brief, but I will share with you what I recently posted on our board regarding Rantanen in general as a player as I think it applies to you guys as well:
We spoke at length, for a long time, as much as for a year or more, the detriment to the roster that $12m+ to Rantanen would mean. A lot of us spoke about it being a death knell for the teams contention chances, in terms of being able to fill out quality depth.
I stand by the thought that you cannot pay wingers at that rate and expect to field a SCF level team. For that reason alone, I really didn't care where he ended up.
Oogie Boogie
Registered User
- Apr 9, 2011
- 24,333
- 3,353
From the bit I have read, they're generally more pissed at Rantanen and not at Carolina. Could be wrong though and only caught perhaps more of the minor ones who thought this. I think they know he screwed us.
a mangy Meowth
Registered Meowth
Majority opinion seems to be that we're happy we made the move regardless of the tertiary consequences. By trading him without allowing negotiation, this was always a possibility, and I think our FO knew that.
I do believe what I said in my previous post, and I think by that logic it makes sense to actually be happy that Dallas is going to try what I don't believe in. I think it has the potential to nuke their depth, and to be honest with you I just don't think Rantanen brings $12m of value on the ice. It was going to be a thank you contract that he retired on.
Nikishin al Gaib
THIS is hockey?
- Jun 8, 2017
- 27,131
- 98,083
I would hope they realize he was the one who forced himself there. If we had our way he'd be extended 8 years in the Eastern Conference, not inside their own division.
Jerkob Slavin
Likable Jerk
He didn't ask to be traded here but he DOES have a duty to be a professional. His lack of effort here ended up costing us games. His lack of effort here forced our hand to deal him and in the end costs us assets. His sluggishness to sign the new deal with Dallas hampered our ability to obtain other trade deadline targets. We could not allow Rantanen, an obvious locker room cancer, to fester and ruin our season by not hustling and playing the 200 foot game RBA demands.
a mangy Meowth
Registered Meowth
Specifically towards you guys and your FO I have zero animus.
2026 is supposedly a much better year. I don't want to move that pick, or ours.
If we could somehow get a 3rd 2026 1st even...I'd like to see if we could target a team with an early pick and an empty cupboard and package picks to get an very early pick to use on a top F (ideally a C) we could build around.
I don't think we will ever get a long-term superstar solution upfront through UFA or trade. We're going to have to home-grow that sh___.
AhosDatsyukian
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2020
- 12,030
- 35,488
I think that is truer for the Avs than the Canes though, just because you guys have MacKinnon and Makar, 2 elite game changing scoring talents. The Canes have none of those. Well maybe Nikishin becomes that but that's yet to be seen. Is Rantanen quite in that tier? No, but scoring talent wise he is absolutely a tier above anyone on the Canes and the Canes have been trying to find that type of talent for a while now. It's damn hard when the team never tanked or really got high draft picks other than Svech, so that's why they've taken a few shots on guys like Guentzel and Rantanen now. Talent aside though, in hindsight we've found out Rantanen definitely is not a good locker room guy or ideal teammate and I generally agree I'd rather not pay a winger like him 12+. Canes' cap situation is great and could easily handle that but unless it's a Kucherov or Ovi caliber winger I'd rather spend on center/D/scoring depth.I'm certain you guys don't care to hear much from our end on this so I will keep brief, but I will share with you what I recently posted on our board regarding Rantanen in general as a player as I think it applies to you guys as well:
We spoke at length, for a long time, as much as for a year or more, the detriment to the roster that $12m+ to Rantanen would mean. A lot of us spoke about it being a death knell for the teams contention chances, in terms of being able to fill out quality depth.
I stand by the thought that you cannot pay wingers at that rate and expect to field a SCF level team. For that reason alone, I really didn't care where he ended up.
I'm really only upset about giving away Necas ultimately for scraps, not about Rantanen not working out. I have always been higher on Necas than most Canes fans, he has his faults but he offers a dynamic that very very few players in the league offer. We should've either kept him long term or used him as the main piece in a trade to get a long term solution at position of need (center, RHD).
Borsig
PoKechetkov
2 firsts 2 thirds and Stankoven is scraps for a year of Necas? LOL
2026 picks, especially firsts, should be completely untouchable. IDC if it's 10th pick or 32nd.
ANd by 28 the Stars could be tanking. 3 years is a long time in this league. Right Boston?
Stickpucker
Playmaka
- Jan 18, 2014
- 17,076
- 41,642
Yep...I'm upset we lost mah boi Nachos for that turd biscuit and all his diva bs 
.
.
Stickpucker
Playmaka
- Jan 18, 2014
- 17,076
- 41,642
Your love of Stanky balances the force with your hate for Orlov.
DaveG
Noted Jerk
I think at least one of them will be traded for a player. We're in a position where we can re-load quickly since our core (aside from Staal) is all prime age or younger. The question is if we'll make a move on someone like Ehlers in UFA as well or if we're going to be dealing strictly from trade for guys with term
DaveG
Noted Jerk
I honestly think Necas, who'll likely come in around 8-9 long-term after next season, makes more sense for you guys and how your team is structured. He's an All Star caliber player and should still give you guys more flexibility on the Makar and Mac extensions than Rantanen at 12+ would have.I'm certain you guys don't care to hear much from our end on this so I will keep brief, but I will share with you what I recently posted on our board regarding Rantanen in general as a player as I think it applies to you guys as well:
We spoke at length, for a long time, as much as for a year or more, the detriment to the roster that $12m+ to Rantanen would mean. A lot of us spoke about it being a death knell for the teams contention chances, in terms of being able to fill out quality depth.
I stand by the thought that you cannot pay wingers at that rate and expect to field a SCF level team. For that reason alone, I really didn't care where he ended up.
Last edited:
a mangy Meowth
Registered Meowth
Luckily MacK still has like 6 years on his deal, but yes. Makar is gonna cost like 16+
- Oct 31, 2007
- 42,191
- 52,953
He’s not wrong about Stankoven. He looked very good last year, and while he’s been snakebit this year, it’s not for a lack of effort.
