Roster Building XXXVI: Days After The Deadline

[spockBokk]

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

This off-season? After we won the Cup? No, of course not. But that isn't the question. The question is whether we should have made that choice back when we dealt Rantanen, and as I said, that's a tougher one in my mind.

“I have a feeling in the long run things would’ve worked out better with Robertson.”

You have the opportunity to act on that feeling. Trade Stankoven, 2 1sts, and 2 3rds for Robertson. We got a Cup out of Stankoven, thank him for his contribution, but we’d have been better in the long run by picking Robertson so make that trade now.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

“I have a feeling in the long run things would’ve worked out better with Robertson.”

You have the opportunity to act on that feeling. Trade Stankoven, 2 1sts, and 2 3rds for Robertson. We got a Cup out of Stankoven, thank him for his contribution, but we’d have been better in the long run by picking Robertson so make that trade now.

The key there is the phrasing "Things would've worked out better in the long run". Acquiring him this off-season is a completely different scenario than acquiring him back then, for a variety of reasons.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

The key there is the phrasing "Things would've worked out better in the long run". Acquiring him this off-season is a completely different scenario than acquiring him back then, for a variety of reasons.

Explain. Because you’ve already dismissed the “variety of reasons” I brought up, like potentially not getting Miller, not getting Ehlers, etc. So… if things would’ve been exactly the same just Robertson instead of the Stankoven package, because you’re establishing that in your world, why is it a completely different scenario?

 

[User13452]

Until he’s traded somewhere else I think the canes will continue to be linked to him. Is the fit still there? Maybe?

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Explain. Because you’ve already dismissed the “variety of reasons” I brought up, like potentially not getting Miller, not getting Ehlers, etc. So… if things would’ve been exactly the same just Robertson instead of the Stankoven package, because you’re establishing that in your world, why is it a completely different scenario?

Well, for one, it would mean breaking up the hottest line in hockey, the one that carried us to the Cup win?

For two, it shows tremendously bad faith by signing Stankoven to that long term deal and then shipping him out a year later.

For three, we've built the current team with Stankoven on the roster. Had we picked up Robertson instead, it's possible we would have targeted other players that may have covered different holes that Robertson may have created that Stankoven didn't, or played to different strengths that Robertson has that Stankoven doesn't.

 

[Borsig]

Isn't EP WAY overpriced? as in contract?

And f*** no. I've loved Stank since I saw him play his first game in person vs us on feb 24. I would rather have Stank at his salary and heart level.

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

Isn't EP WAY overpriced? as in contract?

And f*** no. I've loved Stank since I saw him play his first game in person vs us on feb 24. I would rather have Stank at his salary and heart level.

In Vancouver, he is. I would personally trust the Canes to deploy a guy like him correctly.

 

[Not Jim Cantore]

Isn't EP WAY overpriced? as in contract?

And f*** no. I've loved Stank since I saw him play his first game in person vs us on feb 24. I would rather have Stank at his salary and heart level.

I don’t think Stank would be involved in a trade for EP

 

[chaz4hockey]

Sorry, we have a cost controlled great young guy who had led the best line in the playoffs and we want to trade him for $10M + broken EP or $12m ask/very slow Robertson.

Haven’t we as fans gone to school on the fact that players without speed are not good fits for our system?

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

Sorry, we have a cost controlled great young guy who had led the best line in the playoffs and we want to trade him for $10M + broken EP or $12m ask/very slow Robertson.

Haven’t we as fans gone to school on the fact that players without speed are not good fits for our system?

At this point, nobody is bringing up Stank for EP40. It's about KK+prospects+picks for EP40. It's not about a 2C anymore, but putting even more depth and maybe having an Ehlers-EP40 connection on the 3rd line long-term.

 

[Borsig]

At this point, nobody is bringing up Stank for EP40. It's about KK+prospects+picks for EP40. It's not about a 2C anymore, but putting even more depth and maybe having an Ehlers-EP40 connection on the 3rd line long-term.

The dude is 11.6M a year. f*** no. I dont see why we need that problem.

 

[chaz4hockey]

At this point, nobody is bringing up Stank for EP40. It's about KK+prospects+picks for EP40. It's not about a 2C anymore, but putting even more depth and maybe having an Ehlers-EP40 connection on the 3rd line long-term.

PASS… guy is washed and expensive.

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

PASS… guy is washed and expensive.

This is where I don't agree. I don't think he's washed. I think he's on a terrible team and is floating as a result.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

Well, for one, it would mean breaking up the hottest line in hockey, the one that carried us to the Cup win?

For two, it shows tremendously bad faith by signing Stankoven to that long term deal and then shipping him out a year later.

For three, we've built the current team with Stankoven on the roster. Had we picked up Robertson instead, it's possible we would have targeted other players that may have covered different holes that Robertson may have created that Stankoven didn't, or played to different strengths that Robertson has that Stankoven doesn't.

So what you’re saying is, we would not be in a better position if we picked Robertson instead of the Stankoven package, lol.

 

[chaz4hockey]

This is where I don't agree. I don't think he's washed. I think he's on a terrible team and is floating as a result.

I just don’t see him as a fit.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

So what you’re saying is, we would not be in a better position if we picked Robertson instead of the Stankoven package, lol.

Well, as I said initially, we won the Cup with the decision we made. It's hard to get in a better position than that.

 

[Unsustainable]

Hall - Stank - Blake = ~14m in cap, Robertson alone will be 12m....

We have so much flexibility with that line, no way any of them are traded.

I think we just have to look at our aging players, getting Cerrato or Ryabkin up to replace Staal in a year is what need to focus on.

 

[MinJaBen]

Hall - Stank - Blake = ~14m in cap, Robertson alone will be 12m....

We have so much flexibility with that line, no way any of them are traded.

I think we just have to look at our aging players, getting Cerrato or Ryabkin up to replace Staal in a year is what need to focus on.

Assuming Staal needs to be replaced. He could have a couple more years in him if he wants.

 

[robbieberns]

Just got back from a birthday dinner and am happy drunk reliving the euphoria of the past few days and just thinking about how stacked we are already and what a great spot we’re in moving forward.

I have maximum faith in both the moves they do chose to make as well as the ones they decide not to pursue. The best part is that coming off the back of a Cup win I can really just relax and watch what goes down with a less stressed out mindset.

Lastly, I’m hoping that achieving the ultimate goal means a guy like Jarvis can get that shoulder surgery and take all the time he needs coming back with a Nadeau in the wings to start the season. Imagine we use our depth in youth or even ship some picks/prospects out to build a borderline unfair level of depth. Give guys rest throughout the year and don’t even get close to overloading anyone with minutes. Could very well be the deepest, freshest, and healthiest squad going into the playoffs next April if they play their cards right.

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

Even as someone that’s mocked the 4C thing, that may be Staal’s final spot in the lineup before hanging them up. Not next season, but 27-28.

Being proactive about addressing the position is not illogical. It would be interesting to see how that would work. Would a Larkin or Pettersson be comfortable playing wing for a year or two? Martinook to the 4th line is reasonable. Robinson to the pressbox when Carrier is healthy is tough, but that’s how it goes sometimes.

 

[User13452]

I do wonder if they’d take a shot at John Carlson

 

[htdoc]

He was hurt most of the year and seemed to be in the dog house when he was healthy…. So I’d be curious to see if we could pry Michael Kesselring out of Buffalo for not a ton of assets…. That big 6’5”+ frame and long reach…. Skates well and has a cannon of a shot when he gets it off….. RD still young and developing…. Spend a year getting guidance from our staff…….. a RD version of Miller maybe…. A little more clunky and not as smooth as Miller but another option for third pair RD to compete with CAL… I think more upside and more nhl time for Kesselring already…. Different profile than CAL and expectations for either of them if they play 3rd pair rd for us or if one of them platoons and rotates between press box and getting time….

if we can’t convince St Louis to trade us Parayko who can play on the top 2 right d spots then curious to see what we could do developing Kesselring…

 

[David71]

what would a ep40 to carolina look like. gotta think jasperi Kotkaniemi is included in a deal. what prospect would the canes be willing to part with + a draft pick likely 1st? or 2nd..

 

[jaa]

I also think we will go HARD after McDavid — a move that could mirror the Warriors getting Kevin Durant to spring their dynasty. Obviously every team will go hard after him but I gotta think after now showing we can win it all we have even more of a chance to win those sweepstakes. I mean for a player who wants to win there just flat out isn’t any better team out there. The young championship core locked up on pretty much all sweetheart deals, plenty of cap space, still a great prospect pool and draft pick assets for a contender, Rod leading the team and an owner willing to spend. If McDavid cares about a Cup first, we are easily the best option.

Would be interesting. Also, Canes' playstyle would definitely fit McDavid, speedy and fast spaced play, getting a puck fast down middle from D, keeping hold of the puck in offensive zone etc.

But a much more Canesy thing to do would somehow acquire Larkin. Cheap deal with good term, youngish player, Staal will be gone eventually..