Proposal: Carolina - Winnipeg
- Thread starter Drew4u
- Start date
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
Johnny HFBOARDS
Trade you!
RandomJetsFan
Registered User
Boom Boom Apathy
I am the Professor. Deal with it!
- Sep 6, 2006
- 49,301
- 101,922
I don't recognize the OP as a Canes fan, but as a Canes fan myself, I can say this proposal is pretty bad for WPG.
EDIT: Quick check of OP's profile show's he's a NYR fan. Not that it matters, but just wanted to point out that this wasn't proposed by a Canes fan.
EDIT: Quick check of OP's profile show's he's a NYR fan. Not that it matters, but just wanted to point out that this wasn't proposed by a Canes fan.
JetsHomer
Registered User
- Nov 29, 2011
- 10,941
- 3,146
Is the trade rly that bad? Hanifan is a great defencemen. I believe the difference between him and trouba is Connor
Boom Boom Apathy
I am the Professor. Deal with it!
- Sep 6, 2006
- 49,301
- 101,922
I agree Hanifin (potential) is > Trouba, but look at it this way. Let's say the roles were reversed and the Jets had Hanifin and the Canes had Trouba. If someone asked the Canes for Trouba + Aho + Brock McGinn for Hanifin, pretty much every Canes fan would say hell no.
That, IMO is how the Jets fans feel about Connor. They feel he is a stud in the making and I bet a lot of them would put his value close to Hanifin. That's why I think it's bad.
Doesn't matter though. Canes have no desire to trade Hanifin and probably no desire to add anything to their D right now.
Boom Boom Apathy
I am the Professor. Deal with it!
- Sep 6, 2006
- 49,301
- 101,922
If one of the reasons Trouba is not signing and requesting a trade is because he's not getting top pairing minutes, why do people think the same issue is not going to be there in Carolina. Faulk is going to get top pairing minutes and prime PP minutes ahead of Trouba so he'll be in the same boat. On top of that, the Canes have even more depth on the LHD side so he wouldn't be moving to his off hand either.
Trouba is looking for any PP minutes he wasn't used at all last year on the PP which I personally like him on the PP ahead of Myers.The Jets used him primarily on the first PK unit which is where he logged a lot of his minutes and the first half of the year he was stuck on the bottom pairing with Stuart.I actually don't blame the guy for wanting out.The jets really should have catered to him a bit more with in 2 years he would have been our top D man.I also think he will be really close to Hanifin once both guys are in their Prime.Trouba plays with more of an edge then Hanifin probably ever will.
The only deal I think would happen for our side that would give you close to what you want would be something like this:
Trouba, (some other asset here)
Fleury (LHD), McKeown (RHD)
Both of those two are ELC and haven't played in the pros yet, so they are ELC and don't need to be protected. Both are probably ready for sheltered 3rd pairing rolls this year (won't get that here, but you may have room for one or both) and they give you a potential top four LHD (maybe top pair with development) and a bottom four RHD (maybe middle pair top end skill). Given the fact that the canes are giving up two cost controlled, non-expansion eligible defensemen with very good potential, I think that something else would be required to come back, but I'm not sure what or who.
Given that Trouba is fairly established, I think he would get his wish of top-4 minutes at Carolina and would find himself on one of the two PP units:
Slavin - Faulk
Hanifin - Trouba
Hainsey - Pesce
Murphy
Then next year Carrick could slide into that 3rd pairing when Hainsey's contract is up and we still have Bean waiting in the wings.
Trouba, (some other asset here) Fleury (LHD), McKeown (RHD)Both of those two are ELC and haven't played in the pros yet, so they are ELC and don't need to be protected. Both are probably ready for sheltered 3rd pairing rolls this year (won't get that here, but you may have room for one or both) and they give you a potential top four LHD (maybe top pair with development) and a bottom four RHD (maybe middle pair top end skill). Given the fact that the canes are giving up two cost controlled, non-expansion eligible defensemen with very good potential, I think that something else would be required to come back, but I'm not sure what or who.
Given that Trouba is fairly established, I think he would get his wish of top-4 minutes at Carolina and would find himself on one of the two PP units:
Slavin - Faulk
Hanifin - Trouba
Hainsey - Pesce
Murphy
Then next year Carrick could slide into that 3rd pairing when Hainsey's contract is up and we still have Bean waiting in the wings.
It's a horrible proposal, made worse by the fact that you evidently don't even know how to spell Hanifin's name.
Maukkis
EZ4ENCE
- Mar 16, 2016
- 10,721
- 7,597
The only deal I think would happen for our side that would give you close to what you want would be something like this:
Both of those two are ELC and haven't played in the pros yet, so they are ELC and don't need to be protected. Both are probably ready for sheltered 3rd pairing rolls this year (won't get that here, but you may have room for one or both) and they give you a potential top four LHD (maybe top pair with development) and a bottom four RHD (maybe middle pair top end skill). Given the fact that the canes are giving up two cost controlled, non-expansion eligible defensemen with very good potential, I think that something else would be required to come back, but I'm not sure what or who.
Given that Trouba is fairly established, I think he would get his wish of top-4 minutes at Carolina and would find himself on one of the two PP units:
Slavin - Faulk
Hanifin - Trouba
Hainsey - Pesce
Murphy
Then next year Carrick could slide into that 3rd pairing when Hainsey's contract is up and we still have Bean waiting in the wings.
We would need someone who's ready now. That would be Slavin or Hanifin, which makes this pointless.
Also, Faulk is kind of blocking Trouba's way, so... I doubt he wants to put in the effort to take his spot in the top pairing.
Boom Boom Apathy
I am the Professor. Deal with it!
- Sep 6, 2006
- 49,301
- 101,922
The only deal I think would happen for our side that would give you close to what you want would be something like this:
The problem with this proposal from the Canes side is cost (salary). Signing Trouba will be likely cost $6M for long term. And in 2 years, Hanifin, Fleury and Pesce will all be up for new contracts and while is cap hit is low, Faulk will also be getting $6M / year in real money.
I really like Trouba, but IMO, If the Canes are trading D, they should be only doing in where they can get a Forward in return, not another, more expensive D. I also still think if the problem is how he's used in WPG, he's not going to be happy behind Faulk in Carolina.
Given these factors the only deal that makes sense to me, which would require Francis having a very high opinion of Trouba's potential, is trading Faulk + smaller add (let's say Bean on the very high-end or Carrick on the low-end) for Trouba + Connor. It would be a downgrade on D that the Canes would hope to overcome with depth while adding a potential monster offensive piece.
I do think that Trouba brings a physical aspect that the Canes D (and system) sorely lacks.
I think Connor is great, but if we are giving up Faulk (or Hanifin or Slavin), we'd better be getting back a #1C for the loss. Anything less I think is counter productive.
I'd agree if it were straight up. If you are adding a guy that could conceivably replace Faulk (albeit a lesser version) with more guaranteed years then it gives the deal more flexibility. It would all depend on Francis's opinion of Trouba and Connor's upside.
Yeah, the cost will go up from this. I've heard the salary numbers in the range that you've said, but I think with the push for the trade and the holdout threat, I think he takes less to go to a place where he will be utilized the way he wants. I'd hope that if both sides considered this trade, that some initial contract negotiations take place before the trigger is pulled. If the contract was in the range of $4.5 to $5M for 5 years, would that fit more with our budget?
Unless Trouba's contact demands have fallen massively, no interest in him. Faulk has the #1RHD and #1PP spots locked up, while making 4.8 a year. So we're gonna bring in a guy that's not as good as Faulk, playing behind Faulk, and yet pay him more? That's a slap in the face to the All-Star/Olympian, plus it'll hurt negotiations when our other ELC defensemen come up for new contacts. Oh, and we'll lose the spot Murphy had for expansion draft purposes this year, and have nobody to expose. No thanks. I'm fine giving Pesce the chance to progress, while having McKeown not far away.
GoJetsGo55
Registered User
There are no public demands.
Fair enough, nobody knows for sure what he may be asking. But if Francis and Trouba's agent were to talk and he's not willing to take less than Faulk, my point still stands and I wouldn't be interested. If he were indeed okay with less than that there's probably something the Canes would look and. My expansion draft concern would still be valid though.
Boom Boom Apathy
I am the Professor. Deal with it!
- Sep 6, 2006
- 49,301
- 101,922
Just for clarification. In reality, Faulk isn't "making" $4.8M a year, that's his cap hit. Actual salary is what's important to the team, and going forward, the player also.
Faulk makes $5.5M a year for the next 2 years and $6M a year the 2 after that. Now, Cap hit IS important to big market teams or teams that spend to the cap, but that isn't the case for the Canes.
That's true, I used cap hit because I assume Trouba's contract will be similarly structured to Faulk and most RFAs, with actual salary increasing as they approach UFA age. So to me cap hit is easier for a direct comparison. Trouba could be signed to a contract that pays 7 mil a year by the end and that's fine, but if AAV is close to 7 that's a problem. To me the optics of having Trouba with a higher cap hit than Faulk aren't good, and I think it can be used as leverage by Hanifin, Slavin etc in the future as well. The D will be expensive enough in a few years without Trouba.
Plus again, expansion draft. I don't think it's as easy as assuming the Canes can sign or trade for someone to fill the exposed slot without having to give up something of value. Teams aren't gonna line up to do the Canes a favour in a trade, and vets aren't gonna sign bargain contacts knowing they'll be exposed. So you either give up a valuable pick or prospect, or over pay a guy like Hainsey. And since real money is more important than cap hit, that's not something that's just easy to stroke him a cheque. It just creates an unnecessary headache this year that I'd rather avoid.
Plus again, expansion draft. I don't think it's as easy as assuming the Canes can sign or trade for someone to fill the exposed slot without having to give up something of value. Teams aren't gonna line up to do the Canes a favour in a trade, and vets aren't gonna sign bargain contacts knowing they'll be exposed. So you either give up a valuable pick or prospect, or over pay a guy like Hainsey. And since real money is more important than cap hit, that's not something that's just easy to stroke him a cheque. It just creates an unnecessary headache this year that I'd rather avoid.
