PuckInTheNards
Registered User
- Feb 4, 2008
- 1,977
- 446
Holy hell this is bad. We trade Granlund for a 3rd pairing D and a first in the lat teens or 20's?
Proposal: Wild-Hurricanes (+ Carolina offseason signing )
- Thread starter jonlin
- Start date
Maybe, though players seem to prefer certainty over the chance to take another swing at it. In 4-5 years he might be primed for another big contract, or he might be coming off a down year, or he may be plagued by injuries. I can't think of many 27-30 year old players that've opted for shorter term deals, but I haven't looked at it too hard either.
Please tell me why it would be bad to have this lineup?:
Granlund-Aho-Teräväinen
Svechnikov-E.Staal-Niederraiter
Kuokkanen- J.Staal-Saarela
McGinn-Martinook-Wallmark
Foegele
Slavin-Hamilton
De Haan - Faulk
Fleury - TvR
Bean
McBackup/UFA
Kähkönen
You dealt from a position of strenght and upgraded a weakness. This lineup is 110% better than whats iced today.
Because it would end after one year when Granlund wants more money.
I think they'd probably part with Zykov.
garnetpalmetto
Jerkministrator
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
Vanek, reportedly.
Pacioretty signed for more years at 30. Not sure what his options for LT would've been though.
Yeah, and there almost have to be others. It'd be interesting to see some sort of comprehensive breakdown of term on the larger contracts signed at that age. But either way it's hard to consider opting for term and security over a chance at another big paycheck to be stupid.
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
Who knows. The owner/management claimed that Lindholm and Hanifin were moved in part because they couldn't agree on a good contract, then they go and sign what almost anyone else would say are reasonable contracts. He's looking like a tightwad's tightwad at this point.
Ofcourse you sign for more years at 30. If you are 27yrs old, you are NOT 30. At 30 a 8yr contract takes you to 38. At 27, a 8yr old contract takes you to 35. At 35 theres not many teams that offer you long contracts with good $$$. Better take a 4-5yr contract until 32-33yrs old and then add another 5-6yr contract. Cap raises and you get more years...
I understand the trade-off and I understand that the gambit's more attractive at 27 than 30. But Granlund's 5' 10" and has some history with concussions. There are risks involved for him.
LakeLivin
Armchair Quarterback
For the record, while I'm sure that the inability to easily come to terms with Lindy and Hanifin contributed to them being dealt, I don't believe that was the primary factor behind the trade. The two biggest concerns for the Canes after last season were scoring and toughness. At the time of the trade Dougie was viewed as one of the top scoring D-men in the league. And while Lindy and Ferland would have likely been viewed as having similar scoring potential, Ferland was an instant infusion of the toughness the Canes have been missing, and a good catalyst towards the change in team culture we wanted. So on the surface the trade addressed 2 of our biggest needs.
I'm not saying that TD isn't a tightwad, rather that I think the verdict is still out. He's said he'll pay for talent, but not foolishly. When I look at the available UFAs last summer, the only one I think was a smart investment was deHaan, who we picked up for $4.5m per (Tavares was never going to consider Carolina). Now, this summer should see a much better crop of UFAs and will settle the question of whether Dundon is willing to actually put his money where his mouth is, imo.
Cardiac Jerks
Asinine & immoral
Tell me more about this third pairing d because I sure as hell don’t see one involved in the proposal.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,560
- 18,898
Is he better than Dumba and Spurgeon? No, he’s not. So he’d be a third pairing D on the Wild. Regardless of what he really is, he’d be a third pairing guy on the Wild.
LakeLivin
Armchair Quarterback
When you're classifying players, there's a difference between a "third pairing D" and a "D who would play on our third pair". To illustrate the principle: which of Tavares, Matthews, Crosby, and Malkin would you rate as a "2nd line center"?
Having said that, your point that the Wild D is already set on the right side for your top 2 pair is a good one, and enough reason to reject the OP without making it sound like you're disparaging Pesce.
Last edited:
Because McBackup isn't a starter...he's at-best a 1B; the Canes don't need a KK, they need a proven zero-risk definitely league-average starting goaltender; because Slavin-Hamilton isn't a 1st-pair anybody should be comfortable with and Fleury-TVR/McKeown/Fox isn't a good idea either; because you've just ruined our team-strength defense; because we need fewer Staals, not a return of Eric; because Necas is our future 2C and has 1C upside; because I'm not sold on Granlund being the solution to much of anything for the Canes, because that's a worse team than we ice next year if we do nothing and it's a worse team than we have today.
Do you need ne to keep going? Because I can keep going, I'm just getting started on this absolutely **** proposal.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Proposal: Penguins sell-off trades (Canucks, Avalanche, Kings and Predators)- Latest: SoundwaveIsCharisma
