baconandbread
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2019
- 435
- 826
Funny enough, I just swung that exact deal in NHL25....on the fence about that in real life though
Roster Building XXIV: Our Hearts Go Pitter Pattersson
- Thread starter cptjeff
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Oct 31, 2007
- 41,597
- 50,585
I think any deal we make is going to be uncomfortable. But I think a deal definitely needs to get done. EP would solidify our 2C position (hockey gods willing) and Svech has struggled to find his place in the lineup, even outside of the struggles he’s had this year. I’m not thrilled about trading him either, but I think if we want to have a shot at EP, it’d have to be him over Necas
AhosDatsyukian
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2020
- 11,691
- 34,288
EP is too much of a risk with his relatively poor play this season and huge contract to give up Svech. Way too early to give up on Svech when he's still working his way back to full confidence physically since the ACL tear. And even if Svech doesn't improve any more at this point (which I doubt), he's easily worth his contract and a great player/asset to have. I'm not so sure that'll be true for EP going forward. High upside but high risk. To me that upside potential isn't worth Svech. Necas, maybe, but only if we determine we can't get a deal done with him.
Stickpucker
Playmaka
- Jan 18, 2014
- 16,719
- 40,606
When you keep losing tight playoff games and double OTs by one goal having a guy with twice the offensive prowess for 33% more $$ is pretty damn valuable.
Those extra points could easily lead to 3-5 more wins over a season. Just enough to flip between 2 and 3 in the metro.
This can’t be good (one of the worries when he was signed was staying healthy):
39 games played last year and injured in Vegas and now 39 games into Carolina he’s hurt. Hasn’t played over 70 games since 2019 season.
Brock Anton
flames #badnwagon
I get wanting to lessen cap hits, but IDK why the hell the FO thought giving him a 6-year deal was in any way logical.
AhosDatsyukian
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2020
- 11,691
- 34,288
yep that was a real head scratcher. Also giving Walker 5 years made no sense to me either.
- Feb 23, 2014
- 27,823
- 87,109
Hmm... I wonder if this specifically means the CBA procedure where the player can get a second opinion in case he disagrees with the one given by the team physician?
Oogie Boogie
Registered User
- Apr 9, 2011
- 24,258
- 3,271
mikeyfan
Registered User
- Dec 27, 2018
- 2,890
- 3,204
Just saw some scuttlebutt about Colorado dealing Mikko Rantanen to the Canes for Necas and or a defenseman I.e Chatfield/Morrow or possibly just a first. If Chatfield is dealt it would fit under the cap. If not the Avs would have to retain, which they may balk at. QUESTION is is Morrow ready to step into a starters roll? Two would the Canes offer Mikko EP numbers to resign with the Canes
- Oct 31, 2007
- 41,597
- 50,585
Mikko allegedly wants more than EP money. He wants $14 million
baconandbread
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2019
- 435
- 826
If we were one piece away, sure you could get away with paying 6 million for a guy like him. This year, I feel we minimally could use a d-man that can clear the crease in addition to a 2C (preferably one that could mesh with Necas) and possibly a winger depending on the Carrier injury. That's why I'd be more for getting O'Reilly plus or sticking with what we have and putting all our chips in next year.
mikeyfan
Registered User
- Dec 27, 2018
- 2,890
- 3,204
Like I said scuttlebutt. Not going to say how reliable but it is an interesting thought
NHL Mock Trade: Colorado Avalanche ship Mikko Rantanen in exchange for $13,000,000 Carolina Hurricanes and more
The Colorado Avalanche and Carolina Hurricanes could become trade partners according to TSN analyst and insider Nick Kypreos.
www.sportskeeda.com
If the cap goes up to 95 to 97 million as predicted by NHL.com. We would have room to sign him
Highly highly doubt we give him 14 mill a year
To keep their cap hit down. $2M for Carrier is 4th liner money for a decent 3rd line talent, and $3.6M for Sean Walker is bottom pairing money for a #4 defenseman. To get that caphit on the open market you need to be a real attractive destination, or a lot of term, or a combination of the two.
This year was always going to be tough to squeeze in a team when factoring in the cap increases of Aho, Jarvis, Necas, Chatfield, Martinook, Drury. Adding up the '24 to '25 difference in those guys was +$15.6M. Yes, we spent almost $16 Million EXTRA just to keep these guys from how underpaid they were in the olden times.
With the reckoning of the 2024 summer behind us, I don't fault the Borg for giving a little extra term to our worker bee players to make the budget work. Remarkably, we'll be one the teams with the rosiest outlook in 2025 summer due to the expiring Burns, Orlov, Andersen, and Fast deals. That, and the big cap increase comes after we've already locked in almost our entire core. Most of the other teams have a lot of guys needing increases, or a lot of deals locked in with quite a bit of promised 35+ money.
hblueridgegal
hygge time
AhosDatsyukian
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2020
- 11,691
- 34,288
Obviously I understand that concept, I just disagree with the evaluations of the players. Carrier is a 3rd line talent but with 4th line production when taking into account the # of games he misses -- which was well known before we signed him for 6 years. Walker is a bottom pair D and I honestly don't even think he's worth 3.6, let alone for 5 friggin years. I'm generally one of this front office's biggest advocates, but I'm not a fan of either of these 2 moves, largely because of the term. Less term on either even if the cap hits were higher and I'd have been fine with them. They still may work out fine, this year hasn't been terrible and I think either could probably be traded without attaching an asset if need be, but they could wind up limiting us a bit in the future.
Svechhammer
THIS is hockey?
- Jun 8, 2017
- 26,439
- 95,571
Oh the surface, I don't mind going long term for depth guys if you think they are good fits and bring legitimate value to the team. But where I think we keep getting it wrong all over the roster is we keep going after guys with injury histories thinking either its not going to impact us here or that we will be able to weather the storm when the injuries happen. Except, now we have 3 or 4 players who are injury prone and while we have a lot of good organizational depth, you're asking a lot to have to backfill 2 goalies, a defenseman and forward plus whatever other random injuries happen over the course of the year. This year we're experiencing that we might have taken it too far.
Add to it that Nikishin comes in cheap. Everything can only flow after you have signed a goalie (which probably won't be as cheap as Freddie).
Playing GM:. Which free agent are you signing and for how much?:
Now, that you have picked your goalie, here is the most productive 22 out of the 169 free agents listed on puckpedia. Even though Canes have cap space, I don't think this is a good year for free agents that the Canes can sign:
Looks like we already signed Zucker and Granlund, so probably not much more money left anyway.
lol, my bad, transcription error in copying from puck-pedia.....so, kidding aside, what moves are you making?
I think Carrier when healthy has an edge that the Canes needed (Noesen type). Walker started out bad but his edge stats and play has improved nicely since earlier in the year. He is very fast, probably needs a steadier D to partner with him.
FWIW: I think the Ghost, Walker, Chatfield contracts are movable and that gives the Canes flexibility moving forward.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
Australian Open - Women Yulia Putintseva vs Daria KasatkinaWagers: 4Staked: $756.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
-