Roster Building XXV: Winning Rantanen's Undying Love
- Thread starter cptjeff
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Posted this on the game day Op but thought it would be more relevant to roster construction page (interesting that we are going to sign Hall):
I am frustrated at the team's performance this year but I do understand RBA's approach because of the team's current roster makeup. It's hard for RBA to get orange juice out of lemons.
His challenge is that most of the roster is dominated by lunch pair guys versus skill players.
Staal-Martinook-Robinson-KK-Jost-Carrier-Rosolvic-Hall (at this point in his career he is just a higher end lunch pair guy), all D men not named Ghost (love Slavin's D game but he is not an offensive skill guy).
5/6 of our D is just not creative in zone and are just wall protectors (Morrow is different and we need that creativity).
That leaves Aho-MR-Jarvis-Svetch-Blake as the only true high end skill guys (with Blake probably a couple of years away from completely putting it together) and with Aho and Svetch under performing we get the year we are having. Necas red hot start masked the team's underlying core issues.
The other missing part is that outside of Carrier our lunch pail guys are not consistently physical and outside of Staal-Martinook-Carrier are easy to play against most nights (Robinson has retrogressed since Necas trade). Carrier getting hurt has been more impactful than I thought originally (but then again he has an injury filled track record so should it be a surprise?).
Right now, I give Tulsky a D in roster construction. We are just too small on D, our G's have not been improved and there are too many lunch pail guys on the roster. Plus, it's a roster made up of a bunch of nice guys with no toughness on the roster.
Short of some trade deadline magic this roster is not Stanley Cup Competitive with a Divisional exit.
btw: I'm waiting for but expect Burns to be team oriented and go to RBA and say drop me down in the pairings Coach.
I am frustrated at the team's performance this year but I do understand RBA's approach because of the team's current roster makeup. It's hard for RBA to get orange juice out of lemons.
His challenge is that most of the roster is dominated by lunch pair guys versus skill players.
Staal-Martinook-Robinson-KK-Jost-Carrier-Rosolvic-Hall (at this point in his career he is just a higher end lunch pair guy), all D men not named Ghost (love Slavin's D game but he is not an offensive skill guy).
5/6 of our D is just not creative in zone and are just wall protectors (Morrow is different and we need that creativity).
That leaves Aho-MR-Jarvis-Svetch-Blake as the only true high end skill guys (with Blake probably a couple of years away from completely putting it together) and with Aho and Svetch under performing we get the year we are having. Necas red hot start masked the team's underlying core issues.
The other missing part is that outside of Carrier our lunch pail guys are not consistently physical and outside of Staal-Martinook-Carrier are easy to play against most nights (Robinson has retrogressed since Necas trade). Carrier getting hurt has been more impactful than I thought originally (but then again he has an injury filled track record so should it be a surprise?).
Right now, I give Tulsky a D in roster construction. We are just too small on D, our G's have not been improved and there are too many lunch pail guys on the roster. Plus, it's a roster made up of a bunch of nice guys with no toughness on the roster.
Short of some trade deadline magic this roster is not Stanley Cup Competitive with a Divisional exit.
btw: I'm waiting for but expect Burns to be team oriented and go to RBA and say drop me down in the pairings Coach.
- Oct 31, 2007
- 41,994
- 52,173
I mean...I guess we do need Top 6 forwards. But outside of the first few games, he's not really impressed me
IMO he’s best suited as a third line guy on a good team at this point in his career
Svechhammer
THIS is hockey?
- Jun 8, 2017
- 26,927
- 97,306
Perfect Brindy guy, then
Outside of the first few games post-trade, who has?
Ouch:
www.nhl.com
Necas having fun playing with MacKinnon, Avalanche after blockbuster trade | NHL.com
Forward says deal that sent Rantanen to Hurricanes 'definitely working for my game'
www.nhl.com
Svechhammer
THIS is hockey?
- Jun 8, 2017
- 26,927
- 97,306
With The Athletic article that came out today, which absolutely scorched Dundon and the front office, I do wonder just how many agents are going to be willing to work with us in free agency, especially if there's a pool of money that most teams now have in order to sign good players. We keep saying that even if Rantanen doesn't sign here we'll fill out the cap, and we very well might, but are we going to get any of the top end talent that we think we will? Just because we will have a pool of money doesn't mean others will want to sign here, and that's historically been a big issue for us with high profile players, even with Dundon, to the point where it sometimes feels like agents take joy in stringing us along before screwing us over to have their players sign elsewhere.
bleedgreen
Registered User
Not only that but when we had an “extra” center he was the best value add in for a trade as he’s affordable and still maybe had some growth to his game in a bigger role on a different team. He’s a perfect throw in to get a deal done. We don’t really have that any more when moving forward.
bleedgreen
Registered User
Did the article scorch Dundon? If you’re talking about the Lebrun one I didn’t get that so much. Just restates that he’s very involved which may or may not play a role moving forward. You saw that different?
I agree the big cap space we have won’t mean good players necessarily. Big names aren’t picking the Canes first. That space is best used by acquiring players with term imo. On the market we’re just going to get more players like we got this past summer. Decent for filling out the roster but not the leaders. We could use more trade assets that way.
What I liked about the article is that it states we aren’t calling around offering Rants, so all the rumors about the vultures is just baseless speculation. Teams have called us, but we aren’t shopping him.
- Oct 31, 2007
- 41,994
- 52,173
NHL agent poll: Best and worst owners, Connor McDavid’s contract, future GMs
Who is the toughest team to deal with? Should the NHL have a play-in round? We polled 19 agents, who represent hundreds of players.
www.nytimes.com
This article, which does absolutely scorch Dundon
Svechhammer
THIS is hockey?
- Jun 8, 2017
- 26,927
- 97,306
Its the article that @Blueline Bomber just posted. I didn't think it spoke well of Dundon and our front office at all.
Maybe I'm reading a little too much into this part of it....
I don't say that about places I enjoy working, and working with.
TheBigLetowski
Registered User
- Jul 31, 2016
- 357
- 832
Yeah. That article isn't great. I'll just be happy if he continues to spend to the cap. Guy wants to win for sure, hopefully this article doesn't mess up any goodwill we had with Rantanens agents.
Joe McGrath
Registered User
- Oct 29, 2009
- 19,034
- 41,870
Color me shocked that a team that doesn’t like to give out big contracts to aging players isn’t liked by agents.
Brock Anton
flames #badnwagon
bleedgreen
Registered User
Well I’m talking about it in two threads, but overall I’m not concerned about what agents think. They don’t want to deal with the guy so they’re complaining. We’ve seen a lot of people leave but to me this comes down to this season and the next few as this next window opens and defines itself as this is the raw TD experience imo. Tulsky and TD are shaping this team. If they fail then this ownership is a fail to this point imo. They still have runway ahead of them here though.
- Oct 31, 2007
- 41,994
- 52,173
I wasn’t as connected to the organization when Karmanos was around, so I don’t have any comparison to go off of, but I will say that Dundon’s not exactly well liked by many members of the Canes staff. I imagine it’s very much like the CEO of a big company. If he’s in your line of sight, you’re very respectful and cordial, but no one’s happy to see him around. Much like the article says regarding Tampa Bay and their ownership, it’d be much better off if he put the right people in place and let them handle things. Give money where needed, but otherwise, go hands off.
CanesUltimate11
Registered User
Yeah, in the end if team makes an offer the agent isn't going to ignore it regardless of if they hate the owner or not as it would get them fired and probably sued if it's a better offer than what they sign elsewhere.
And it seems that the front office has learned their lesson from Guentzel if they are offering up 100million+ to Rantanen already.
TheBigLetowski
Registered User
- Jul 31, 2016
- 357
- 832
honest question - what is the advantage jack gave? and i don't mean to run him down, he was likeable and serviceable but ultimately just kind of there. he's young (~5 months older than KK), but doesn't seem to have a lot of untapped potential to reach another level.
this comment sent me down a stat-hole, some random thoughts related to drury...
Staal after 58 games this season has put up more points (10-19-29) than drury's best year (8-19-27). Jack's not trending to get to 20 points this year. so his offensive impact was riley nashian. (note - i liked nash a lot.)
his d is solid. but not really any more or less special than plenty of other canes past bottom 6 guys.
rod was so good at faceoffs, proximity to him seems to impact performance on the dot. jack was 56.5% in his canes career - and 58.8 this year! - and is sitting at 48.5 so far in his short time in colorado. on the flip side, roslovic has a career mark of 43.9 yet is somehow 56.6 as a cane.
it just occurred to me that in this trade, like in wcw, hall and nash are the outsiders. nWo music intensifies. someone had to point this out at the time, so props to them. i'm slow.
honestly, drury might be missing carolina - or at least, the system that sets everyone up for o-zone starts. his d-zone starts went from 43.7 in carolina to 72.1 with the avs. the avs and canes are like negative images of each other in zone starts - staal and martinook are the only guys (ignoring stillman's couple games) with majority starts in the d-zone and then only like 52%. in colorado, it looks like the top line is the only one that gets majority o-zone starts.
after 2 points in his first 3 games in colorado, he's on a 7 game scoreless streak. i hope he gets his feet under him.
10 games since the trade isn't enough of a sample size for anything, but i'm trying to avoid work. one bonus small sample size note - necas' scoring in colorado trends almost exactly to his 2022-2023 season with the stifling canes.
Last edited:
AhosDatsyukian
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2020
- 11,934
- 35,083
Oh no! The guys whose goal it is to get their average players massively overpaid don't like us! What ever will we do?
I liked him and as a young nhler I suspect he had room to grow.
Bigger point is that the organization is short centers. If another one goes down, Canes are cooked as there are no proficient centers in their org.
fair enough. and agreed that we need more centers. (doesn't everyone, though lol)
i think suzuki could slot in in a pinch, but i think if he's on the fourth line it is by default a different animal than a drury fourth line.
personally, i'm just going to assume lucas mercuri gets signed and after some seasoning in the ahl becomes a monster as the fourth line C we need (he's 6' 3", over 200lbs, and a righty) and feel-good 6th rounder makes it story. that is based on absolutely nothing. but hey, i believed in the holy trinity of boychuck, dalpe, and bowman so...
