Anton Babchuk
Registered User
this market can't handle spending to the cap. it's not being "cheap" to not spend to the cap
Confirmed with Link: CDH and Saarela to CHI for Forsling and Anton Forsberg
- Thread starter DaveG
- Start date
Just a bad trade--even if de Haan is questionable. A dime-a-dozen back up goalie who still needs a contract, a defenseman who is more than arguably worse than fleury and bean--for a prospect equal to either and a solid defenseman (when healthy) who just signed with the canes when he had options. The canes get a goalie that isn't proven, a d-man who has a good chance of not cracking the line up and get to make themselves more unattractive to ufas--what's not to love?
I think Forsberg can be the backup and still give Ned some starts next season.
But the starter needs to be better. Maybe they are going to sign Mrazek.
Another thought: mentioned Carolina is in on Duchene along with Nashville. Try to sign Duchene, and acquire Turris as a cap dump if Nashville signs Duchene?
Just sticking to a budget. Canes couldn't move Faulk and they have Haydn Fleury coming up on waiver eligibility so they decide to ditch the $4.5 million salary for the cheaper one.
Canes bought a 1st for $4 million which was good value, but that $4 million now need to be made up in moving De Haan. Unfortunately exchanging De Haan for Fleury is an overall downgrad unless De Haan's shoulder was damaged beyond repair.
Anton Dubinchuk
aho
Zezima
Registered User
Anton Dubinchuk
aho
But seriously I don’t really get it. I guess it’s pretty much just de Haan is injured and makes a lot of money so I guess let’s get rid of him.
The “needed a goalie” thing is just a throw-in, it doesn’t cost Calvin de Haan to acquire a random goalie.
And I didn’t think super highly of Saarela but losing him for nothing isn’t super fun.
The “needed a goalie” thing is just a throw-in, it doesn’t cost Calvin de Haan to acquire a random goalie.
And I didn’t think super highly of Saarela but losing him for nothing isn’t super fun.
PensandCaps
Beddy Tlueger
- May 22, 2015
- 27,842
- 18,282
a steady good top 4 Dman on a good deal and a decent prospect for nothing.
Id be mad if i were a canes fan, management doesnt care about winning.
Id be mad if i were a canes fan, management doesnt care about winning.
If you have to move deHaan to acquire that late 1st, then was it actually good value? I think I'd rather have deHaan and a Meh return on Faulk, than a late 1st and possible free agent signing repercussions. Hopefully Fleury or Bean really step up, deHaan's impact defensively seems to be getting underrated
Last edited:
- Dec 6, 2011
- 12,873
- 41,765
I've already said on the surface, no. But we'll see what happens. It might be Bean or Forsling that play instead of Fleury. I think Fleury needs to improve to be a useful NHL dman, and I'm not convinced he will.Then you dont like this trade
As for people thinking this is all about the shoulder, I'm sure that's part of it, but Chicago seems to expect him to play, so he must not be crippled for life.
WreckingCrew
Registered User
- Feb 4, 2015
- 13,486
- 41,182
If there isn't more to this story, I'm going to be seriously pissed that we traded a stabilizing D-man 1 year after signing a 4 year contract and Charlotte's best scorer for 2 low-value RFAs.
I guess we're hoping to resign Mrazek or go after Lehner as a starter, then let Forsberg be backup and if Ned can outplay him for backup, he'll go to waivers for Charlotte.
Our D should at least still be solid...we're just moving Pesce permanently to the left side for now:
Slavin - Hamilton
Pesce - Faulk
Forsling/Fleury - TVR
Extra: Fleury/Forsling
It seems REALLY odd to take on Marleau and then trade a d-man to "clear cap" unless we're in serious contention for Duchene/Panarin or something like that (which seem like long shots), and we weren't expecting to be 3 days ago. Unless CDH is seriously injured and is just going to be a LTIR guy where Chicago (with more money) can pay him but doesn't get the cap hit? Chicago is paying as much for their D as we are/were...and have Kane/Toews on top of that, which makes this odd for them too (even though they "won" the value side of the trade).
In a vacuum, this individual trade blows massively, but in the grand scheme of things (if there is a more grand scheme), maybe it won't be so bad? I'll wait to see if more happens before getting too worked up over it (TOO LATE!)
I guess we're hoping to resign Mrazek or go after Lehner as a starter, then let Forsberg be backup and if Ned can outplay him for backup, he'll go to waivers for Charlotte.
Our D should at least still be solid...we're just moving Pesce permanently to the left side for now:
Slavin - Hamilton
Pesce - Faulk
Forsling/Fleury - TVR
Extra: Fleury/Forsling
It seems REALLY odd to take on Marleau and then trade a d-man to "clear cap" unless we're in serious contention for Duchene/Panarin or something like that (which seem like long shots), and we weren't expecting to be 3 days ago. Unless CDH is seriously injured and is just going to be a LTIR guy where Chicago (with more money) can pay him but doesn't get the cap hit? Chicago is paying as much for their D as we are/were...and have Kane/Toews on top of that, which makes this odd for them too (even though they "won" the value side of the trade).
In a vacuum, this individual trade blows massively, but in the grand scheme of things (if there is a more grand scheme), maybe it won't be so bad? I'll wait to see if more happens before getting too worked up over it (TOO LATE!)
Anton Dubinchuk
aho
PensandCaps
Beddy Tlueger
- May 22, 2015
- 27,842
- 18,282
looks like they only care about saving a few dollars.
only explanation.
Since when do very good Dmen get cap dumped.
Anton Dubinchuk
aho
Why would they pay $4mil for a 1st round pick just two days ago then?
The Faulker 27
Registered User
A lot of value going back to Chicago. Have to think it's part of a larger picture situation. It's an obvious lopsided trade.
PensandCaps
Beddy Tlueger
- May 22, 2015
- 27,842
- 18,282
its an expiring contract.
either that, or they dont know how to evaluate players and think DeHaan sucks.
Anton Dubinchuk
aho
Yes I forgot the new rule where contracts with one year left don’t pay actual money.
Or maybe de Haan is more hurt than we think, and this is a part of a bigger thing. Who knows, I’m confused too. But to pretend this just means that “they don’t care about winning” is absurd.
cptjeff
Reprehensible User
That's the only thing that really makes sense to me. Big UFA committed to us in the negotiating period and we're preparing.
And this is a day after reports of a scheduled in person meeting with Duchene. I'm genuinely expecting a splash on July 1 for the first time, well, ever.
Identity404
I'm not superstitious, but I am a little stitious
Boom Boom Apathy
I am the Professor. Deal with it!
- Sep 6, 2006
- 49,331
- 102,075
Not sure what to think. I’m guessing Canes were concerned about CDH’s long ability to stay healthy and contribute. Maybe CDH wanted out if he was going to be stuck on the third pairing. Maybe they like the top 4 they ended the season with and didn’t want that much tied up in defense. Kev has been saying for weeks CDH might be the guy to go.
Saarela was clearly not in our plans and he may be another Zykov, or he may become a solid NHLr, but he wasn’t going to get a shot here and probably only had value of a 4th or later round pick.
Saarela was clearly not in our plans and he may be another Zykov, or he may become a solid NHLr, but he wasn’t going to get a shot here and probably only had value of a 4th or later round pick.
Ahoy there
Always in control of my stick
Not a fan of this, but I'll reserve judgment until I see further moves.
Finlandia WOAT
No blocks, No slappers
- May 23, 2010
- 24,417
- 24,698
I was thinking that too, but in that case why not wait until they've put pen to paper and then clear salary?
Part of it is the org probably likes Forsling and Forsberg more than posters on this board and were happy to get them in exchange for de haan, for whatever reason he was dumped.
Otoh, if the plan was to dump dehaan why not do it before the draft for a 3rd?
Nikishin Go Boom
Russian Bulldozer Consultent
- Jul 31, 2017
- 23,708
- 55,334
clydesdale line
Connor BeJesus
- Jan 10, 2012
- 25,453
- 24,142
This was just your GM paying us back for giving you Teravainen. That's all.
I readily admit that I think Fleury has often gotten a bad rap here. I believe that he's more than capable to take de Haan's role....which was the left side of the 3rd pairing. As has often been said, we needed to balance out that salary structure. I love de Haan and felt he would have been great with Hamilton, but the powers that be clearly disagree. What has happened now is that we've opened up a spot for Bean/Fleury/Sellgren to compete for. We've dropped some salary for what seems to be another move coming. As I've said elsewhere, we were going to have to manage our cap given what we should anticipate Aho's salary to be. Sign JWilly and another forward and things get tight. I don't know much about Forsling, but Forsberg isn't as bad as some are making out. He'll be a capable #2. We'll likely qualify both players, sign Ned, buy out Darling, then get about the serious business of figuring the #1 goalie position out while also adding that missing scoring forward.
In the end, I neither like or dislike this move, despite my appreciation for de Haan. We are in the business of winning and we've got defensive assets that we can manipulate and turn into other assets. I don't like losing Saarela, who I think is NHL ready, but we really need one of the right shot guys to step up (or we need to sign one) more. It is unlikely that is is not a precursor to additional moves.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
How good would Demidov be in the CHL this season- Latest: HeadLiceHatty
-
