Roster Building XXVI: Picking Our Teeth Off the Ice
- Thread starter cptjeff
- Start date
TheReelChuckFletcher
Former TheRillestPaulFenton; Harverd Alum
The cap isn't always going to go up like crazy for eternity, especially with expansion on the near-horizon. There can always be another unforeseen event like COVID or a major recession that warps the marketplace again. Also, with Dundon at the helm and as long as our team is one of the best, they will spend to the cap. The teams that may not spend to the cap anymore are the teams who are on the bubble.
Also, when the cap is particularly high, the cap floor will become almost as important to league parity as the ceiling. It may end up being the case that a new inefficiency shows up when it comes to lower end teams needing to reach the cap floor while keeping the rosters bad enough to lose for draft picks.
Last edited:
Sportsnet view re free agent class:
www.sportsnet.ca
NHL's Top 11 UFAs of 2025: Latest rumours, reports
Even with franchise studs and key support players signing pocket-padding extensions, the NHL’s 2025 UFA class is still intriguing. Luke Fox has the latest buzz.
If the canes resign Hall that gives them 9 1 way forwards signed for next year. Blake and Stank are locks for roster spots. That brings them to 11 forwards. Nadeau will push for a roster spot, that is 12.
Assuming they add in the offseason which I think is a safe assumption who is out the door?
Assuming they add in the offseason which I think is a safe assumption who is out the door?
That's part of why this offseason is so intriguing.
A) We're a contending team already. If you transform Dundon into Peter Karmanos and the team loses Hall, Andersen, Roslovic, Robinson, Jost, Orlov, and Burns, we probably still are a contending team.
B) Our top 5 on D is completely set with Nikishin, and we may have our #6D in Morrow.
C) We have 10 forwards on lock for next year: Aho, Svech, Jarvis, Staal, Martinook, Carrier, Blake, Stankoven, Jankowski, Kotkaniemi. That leaves 2 open spots at F.
D) In goal, we need a #1A or #1B with Kochetkov.
E) We have $36 million dollars to spend on two forwards, a goalie, and depth.
Not only do we have the most capspace of any good team, we also have the fewest open roster spots. It's hard to fathom how we will spend $36M at this point. I'm hoping the Borg explores taking on other teams' mistakes for draft picks.
I don’t expect all of Blake, Stankoven and Nadeau to ever be on the same roster. At least one of them I think are traded this summer for upgrades.
Nadeau shouldn't be considered for a move...he's the exact same kind of elusive, seam-finding, high-volume goal-scorer Guentzel is and we need to keep him long enough to see if he has the same kind of success here.
Okay, but he hasn't shown that in the NHL. And of those three, he's clearly the odd man out if we were going to trade any of them.
Right, if he’s the piece that moves the needle for a bonafide top 6C with term improves the team, you move him.
Same with Blake or Stankoven. Too many right handed smurfs either currently on roster or in the pipeline as is.
Nah, I'm saying we're already more committed to Blake and (especially) Stankoven than Nadeau, so if the option appears for a trade and the choice comes down to those three, the organization is going to let Nadeau go 9 times out of 10
I think they’re all 3 essentially interchangeable.
Stankoven and Blake have shown well at the NHL level, but they also have a few more developmental years on Nadeau. I’d agree that Nadeau probably would be the most likely traded amongst the 3, but I’m not against trading any of them in a package that clearly upgrades the roster moving forward.
Nadeau has the benefit of having a higher tier shot than the other two as well as history at LW, which we’ve been short of for years.
so what is the best center we can get for a package of 2 of (Nadeau, Blake, Stank) and 2 firsts?
I don’t agree with the concept of “two many righties” we’ve got going on? I feel like we’ve been so short on righties for so long we’re afraid to have them at all. Out of 12 forwards we have exactly three. Part of the reason Rants didn’t work is because without Necas no remaining righty could throw Rants a seam pass on the pp. On a stacked team Stank and Blake are bottom six forwards with some hope for more in the future. Jarvis is a first liner for us but I don’t know that he is league wide.
We have room for at least one more righty plus we could really use one at center. Counting someone out because of what hand they play when we are where we are doesn’t make sense to me.
We have room for at least one more righty plus we could really use one at center. Counting someone out because of what hand they play when we are where we are doesn’t make sense to me.
Nadeau can play left wing. I can absolutely see all of Blake, Stank and Nadeau being on the team next year. Hell, even Marner too along with those guys.
Wouldn’t it be ideal to have one righty per line? I’ve never been too hung up on handedness being a huge deal but it can definitely make a difference in getting a one timer off or not
And on our god-forsaken impotent powerplay...but I'm not sure with team of McDavids at each position if we could make anything of it playing our scheme (perimeter passes, nobody in front of the net, nobody driving the net, behind the net plays)
Fair points although I think sometimes Jarvis is discounted a bit because of how RBA utilizes him.
He is certainly a top 6 guy and has produced 30+ goals despite much of the year spent with the corsi kings.
Thus, he doesn’t get as much opportunities to make him a 40 goal scorer as other top line mates league wide.
He’s an interesting case and it’s not unlike the Aho true first line center conversation that used to be more prominent. Jarvis gets the minutes because he plays exactly the way Rod wants them to play, but Rod doesn’t care about production if you’re playing the style so your place in the lineup doesn’t really reflect the level of player you are. Us playing him on the top line is a combo of Jarvis doing all the little things right and a lack of quality competition plus he’s capitalized on it all with the production you love to see.
If you take his style and skills overall he’s a middle six guy on a good offensive team. He’s not a big shooter but he beats goalies, he makes good passes but he’s not a huge playmaker, he can make some moves but he’s not a dangler. He’s just good. He’s a utility knife who can make himself equally useful with both Staal and Aho. Obviously it’s stiff competition on the 4 nations team but I think much of the league would use him as a floating middle six guy who jumps up when needed and gets both special teams minutes. I’ve never seen him as a first line guy but he can do the job, and he obviously can take advantage of the usage.
I’ve always seen Aho the same way. He was 1C by default and then being a smart/talented guy he takes advantage of the linemates and quality minutes to get production that makes him worthy of the role. At the same time I still wonder if his best role isn’t like Francis going to the Pens as an elite 2C.
They both create a bit of a “chicken or the egg” debate.
Last edited:
TheReelChuckFletcher
Former TheRillestPaulFenton; Harverd Alum
Guys, go out and get you a girl that wants you like @TheReelChuckFletcher wants pros to like one year contracts.
TheReelChuckFletcher
Former TheRillestPaulFenton; Harverd Alum
Oh, you laugh, but when the Canes have huge reserves of cap space and the crop is not that strong outside of Marner/Bennett/Ehlers, all of whom might not make it to market, then the strategy to outbid should be creative, just like what the Canes did with Orlov.
Nadeau is quite a bit different than Blake, Stankoven and Jarvis. He's more of a pure goalscorer who likes to play his off wing and find the soft shooting areas. I feel like RBA will want him in Chicago for at least another year unless he goes beast mode in the gym and completely modifies his game.
I think the main reason Blake is with us is the “beast mode in the gym” portion of your post.
Nadeau has to look more like what Rod thinks an NHL’er should look like. Didn’t he have an early season quote about how most of the guys we have in the AHL just “don’t look like NHL’ers”? That’s obviously a play style thing too but with Nadeau it’s both. He’s small, not strong and doesn’t play an NHL game at this point. If he’s goes into gym beast mode he will have taken a big step with Rod.
The more I think about it, the more likely I think it is that Marner is the one who takes them up on this opportunity. A 2-year deal for Marner gives him another UFA shot in 27-28 when the cap has gone from $95.5M this in 25-26 to $113.5M in 27-28 and more teams may have space to bid for him.
And Marner will be 30 at that point, so while Carolina may not be interested in locking him up long-term at that age, someone will be.
Would I rather have Bennett or Ehlers signed long-term? Yes. But if that's not possible, or the crazy idea of in addition to a long-term F signing, getting Marner for a couple of years would certainly be a boon for the short-term.
