GDT: Carolina @ Tampa Bay 8 PM EDT USA

Status
Not open for further replies.

Big Daddy Cane

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 8, 2010
14,069
34,276
Western PA
Through 11 games in the overall series, Tampa has been held to just 13 5v5 goals. Florida gave up nearly as many (12) in the 6 games last round. Defense, forwards and going by xGA, goalies, are doing great. Continue keeping the penalty count low and the rest of the series should be decided by the bounces, even with the rash of injuries up front.
 

AhosDatsyukian

Registered User
Sep 25, 2020
11,453
33,471
It may backfire, but I'd very much like to see Geekie or (and my preference) Lorentz can do in Foegele's spot in a scoring line. Lorentz in particular can throw his weight around a bit and is able to drive offensive play from what I've seen. Put him on a line with a scorer and good things could happen.

Staal, Necas and Lorentz would be fun
 

chaz4hockey

Old man but still a PP2 Candidate
Sponsor
Jan 21, 2021
8,373
17,830
Naples, FL
Through 11 games in the overall series, Tampa has been held to just 13 5v5 goals. Florida gave up nearly as many (12) in the 6 games last round. Defense, forwards and going by xGA, goalies, are doing great. Continue keeping the penalty count low and the rest of the series should be decided by the bounces, even with the rash of injuries up front.

+1
lol: someone on the Bolts board called Canes a “boring team”. I’ll take a boring win any day.

btw: anyone have a sense on when NN or Foegle could return?

Also, I wonder if Paquette is fully healed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jstaal and DaveG

AD Skinner

Registered User
Mar 18, 2009
13,274
40,862
bubble bath
I think Paquette has been invisible at best but I wonder if its not time to move him back to center. Martinook seems neutered trying to play there and we need as many players in the best spot to succeed as we can. Maybe something like

SAT
Mcginn Staal necas
Martinook Lorentz geekie
McCormick Paquette whoever

I dont know. Knowing rod he may want to spread out the scoring but I thought SAT won us the game last night so I wouldn't break them up. But then I'm not an nhl coach
 

hblueridgegal

We'll bounce back
Sep 13, 2019
8,191
28,984
Old North State
It may backfire, but I'd very much like to see Geekie or (and my preference) Lorentz can do in Foegele's spot in a scoring line. Lorentz in particular can throw his weight around a bit and is able to drive offensive play from what I've seen. Put him on a line with a scorer and good things could happen.
Lorentz has a number of "almost" moments ala Foegele, too, but appears to get less discouraged by them.
 

Svechhammer

THIS is hockey?
Jun 8, 2017
25,483
92,926
Lorentz has a number of "almost" moments ala Foegele, too, but appears to get less discouraged by them.
Lorentz seems to be able to create chances pretty well. More so than Foegs, at least in my opinion. Put him on a line with someone like Staal or Necas and he could collect assists like candy. And him being physical could help open up some space for the other guys on that line.
 

Cardiac Jerks

Asinine & immoral
Jan 13, 2006
23,555
40,649
Long Sault, Ontario
Wearing my canes gear in Edmonton today. One guy questioned it pretty early in the day and brought up the cup finals. I just asked him who was responsible for the Roloson injury and he said MAB so I was like “ok, you’re alright”.

If anyone tells me to take off my canes sweater I’ll do so just to reveal a canes shirt underneath.
 

hblueridgegal

We'll bounce back
Sep 13, 2019
8,191
28,984
Old North State
Lorentz seems to be able to create chances pretty well. More so than Foegs, at least in my opinion. Put him on a line with someone like Staal or Necas and he could collect assists like candy. And him being physical could help open up some space for the other guys on that line.
Totally agree. He reminds me of a Lab..boundless energy with a let's do it again mentality and just keeps going for it. Whereas, Foegs can get a little downtrodden looking if he has a misstep.
 

TheReelChuckFletcher

Former TheRillestPaulFenton; Harverd Alum
Jun 30, 2011
10,961
25,009
Raleigh and Chapel Hill, NC
One thing that I will say in this series is that Tampa has considerably more assets mortgaged into these playoffs than we do. Tampa paid three draft picks, including a 1st, to get Savard at 75% retained. I believe that we're the only contender remaining in the playoffs that actually net-gained draft picks at the trade deadline (Colorado dealt a 5th for Dubnyk, Isles dealt a 1st for Palmieri/Zajac, Boston dealt a 2nd and a 3rd for Hall and Reilly, Jets dealt a 6th for Benn, the Habs dealt a 3rd, a 4th, a 5th, and a 7th for Staal/Merrill/Gustafsson, and Knights dealt three picks, including a 2nd, for Janmark). Yes, Fleury was a good young asset, however, Francis was likely ready to pick him up for free at the ED, so getting a (likely early) 6th on top of Hakanpaa was quite a decent piece of business.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG

Svechhammer

THIS is hockey?
Jun 8, 2017
25,483
92,926
Yes, Fleury was a good young asset, however, Francis was likely ready to pick him up for free at the ED, so getting a 6th on top of Hakanpaa was quite a decent piece of business.
I agree with the rest of your statement, but this part annoys me every time I hear it. I likes the Fleury for Hakanpaa trade straight up, because Hawk is a better fit for our roster than Fleury, and provides a necessary stabilizing defensive presence on the 3rd line to really shore up the defense as a whole.

But I cannot get on board with Fleury being expendable because Francis was going to pick him. Well, great. Now Francis gets to take someone else, so if that was the intention here, we traded for a pending UFA, gave away an asset that probably would have been leaving anyway, and are now set to lose another asset currently on the team through the ED. That... doesn't seem like good planning if that's the intention here.
 

TheReelChuckFletcher

Former TheRillestPaulFenton; Harverd Alum
Jun 30, 2011
10,961
25,009
Raleigh and Chapel Hill, NC
I agree with the rest of your statement, but this part annoys me every time I hear it. I likes the Fleury for Hakanpaa trade straight up, because Hawk is a better fit for our roster than Fleury, and provides a necessary stabilizing defensive presence on the 3rd line to really shore up the defense as a whole.

But I cannot get on board with Fleury being expendable because Francis was going to pick him. Well, great. Now Francis gets to take someone else, so if that was the intention here, we traded for a pending UFA, gave away an asset that probably would have been leaving anyway, and are now set to lose another asset currently on the team through the ED. That... doesn't seem like good planning if that's the intention here.

An important thing to consider, however, is that cap space also has a lot of value in this league. Moving Fleury has the effect of limiting Francis' options at the draft to not take an expensive contract, especially if the FO also protects Bean. The next best option for Francis, at least IMO, is Skjei, and as much as he has been of value to us this season, Seattle taking Skjei and his 5 and a quarter million in yearly cap does give extra breathing room in the Svech and Hamilton talks. As much as an outright Skjei selection by Francis may be unpopular at this moment, it may be the ideal medium-term outcome, as it would give the FO enough space to lock in Svech and Hamilton and maybe add a luxury piece, like say, a Sam Reinhart via trade or a Blake Coleman/David Krejci/Mikael Granlund via UFA.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Navin R Slavin

LakeLivin

Armchair Quarterback
Mar 11, 2016
5,119
15,106
North Carolina
At one point the issue of not losing Fleury to Seattle made sense. But after Fleury didn't continue to improve on the promise he showed at the end of last season (I'd argue he actually went backwards) that narrative is completely illogical to me.

The argument is that we needed to trade Fleury so we wouldn't lose him to Seattle. But his value is Hakanpaa + a 6th round pick (give or take). Wouldn't we be thrilled if all that Seattle ended up with was Hakanpaa + a sixth round pick? By the transitive property, we should have been thrilled if all that Seattle ended up with was Fleury, as well. I guess once we latch onto a narrative it's hard to let it go, regardless of changes.
 

TheReelChuckFletcher

Former TheRillestPaulFenton; Harverd Alum
Jun 30, 2011
10,961
25,009
Raleigh and Chapel Hill, NC
At one point the issue of not losing Fleury to Seattle made sense. But after Fleury didn't continue to improve on the promise he showed at the end of last season (I'd argue he actually went backwards) that narrative is completely illogical to me.

The argument is that we needed to trade Fleury so we wouldn't lose him to Seattle. But his value is Hakanpaa + a 6th round pick (give or take). Wouldn't we be thrilled if all that Seattle ended up with was Hakanpaa + a sixth round pick? By the transitive property, we should have been thrilled if all that Seattle ended up with was Fleury, as well. I guess once we latch onto a narrative it's hard to let it go, regardless of changes.

My statement wasn't a narrative at all. I'm saying that removing a potential low-dollar contract for Francis to take is a net-positive for this offseason, especially if the FO also protects the other major low-dollar asset in the organization in Jake Bean. UFAs like Hakanpaa don't have any value to Francis in the Expansion Draft, or at least not nearly as much value as locked-in contracts and RFAs do.
 

spockBokk

Registered User
Sep 8, 2013
7,490
18,978
It’s a lot easier to lose Skjei if the loss of his cap allows the Canes to retain Hamilton. I think they can survive the loss of Hamilton if they keep Skjei and Bean. What they can’t do, in my opinion, is lose both Skjei and Hamilton and still expect to be a contending team next year.
 

Chrispy

Salakuljettaja's Blues
Feb 25, 2009
8,760
28,522
Cary, NC
At one point the issue of not losing Fleury to Seattle made sense. But after Fleury didn't continue to improve on the promise he showed at the end of last season (I'd argue he actually went backwards) that narrative is completely illogical to me.

The argument is that we needed to trade Fleury so we wouldn't lose him to Seattle. But his value is Hakanpaa + a 6th round pick (give or take). Wouldn't we be thrilled if all that Seattle ended up with was Hakanpaa + a sixth round pick? By the transitive property, we should have been thrilled if all that Seattle ended up with was Fleury, as well. I guess once we latch onto a narrative it's hard to let it go, regardless of changes.

Frankly, as Bean continued to progress and Skjei has played well down the stretch, it seems unlikely Fleury would be Seattle's pick unless the Canes found a way to protect 4 D. Which isn't possible as it exposes Trocheck.

Given the circumstances, I'm fine moving Fleury for Hakanpaa. I think Fleury would be here next year if Francis were picking among Fleury and one of Bean/Skjei.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad