GDT: PHI@CAR - Lose them all

Canes

Registered User
Oct 31, 2017
25,029
69,569
An Oblate Spheroid
But his first round drafting has not been that bad.
We had to draft D for the first 2 years, Fleury seems decent, he can still grow and Hanifin has a lot of potential, he just have to keep playing and these 2 were ranked above others, so they are decent picks IMO. When we picked Bean he was best one available at that moment, but maybe he needed to do something differently. And last years pick - Necas - seems to be a steal. So I would say he drafted solid 7/10 in the first round considering all of the variables IMO.
The 2014 and 2016 drafts look to be pretty bad though, especially considering the players that went off the board after our picks. Fleury and Bean are looking less and less like the impact D-men they were sold as, and Gauthier basically has a long ways to go to even be a bottom 6 player in the NHL. I still think both Fleury and Bean can be NHLers, but probably not top pairing d-men. Maybe second pairing specialists (PP for Bean and PK for Fleury).

Hanfin it's hard to blame him on as he was the consensus #1 d-man by most teams, the only thing I can fault him on is bringing him to the NHL right away.

Necas still remains to be seen. While I'm excited for him, I'm going to remain very cautious. I thought Lindholm was a sure thing to be a franchise player once too.
 
Jun 21, 2016
7,216
29,654
Latvia
The 2014 and 2016 drafts look to be pretty bad though, especially considering the players that went off the board after our picks. Fleury and Bean are looking less and less like the impact D-men they were sold as, and Gauthier basically has a long ways to go to even be a bottom 6 player in the NHL. I still think both Fleury and Bean can be NHLers, but probably not top pairing d-men. Maybe second pairing specialists (PP for Bean and PK for Fleury).

Hanfin it's hard to blame him on as he was the consensus #1 d-man by most teams, the only thing I can fault him on is bringing him to the NHL right away.

Necas still remains to be seen. While I'm excited for him, I'm going to remain very cautious. I thought Lindholm was a sure thing to be a franchise player once too.
Of course, only draft we can somehow really judge right now is 2014 when we picked Fleury, but looking back at it, Fleury seems like the best choice there, I can't see any D guy better than him at this moment from the first round. And we had to take a D guy there.

2016 draft seems to be the one with most questions about our future- both Gauthier and Bean will need at least 2-3 more years to make NHL. There is even a chance that they will never make it.

Yeah, Lindy has so much potential wasted, but there is still time for him to grow. Just time is starting to run out.
 

bleedgreen

Registered User
Dec 8, 2003
23,921
38,944
colorado
Visit site
Well I think the two defensive gaffes are a microcosm of the season. Two d in the corner and somehow a winger left to defend the other teams best player who's standing by himself two feet from Ward. Our best pairing featuring two d first guys both over committing to Williams (who really shouldve just shot it with two guys going to the net) and his play. Slavin was over zealous but he was pushing it tonight so I get it, at least he cares.

Our supposedly amazing young d core rarely plays amazing. We knew we didn't have enough offense, but it's been a surprising step back year for the d in some ways, though going so young maybe it shouldn't have been a surprise. We could use another solid vet back there.
 

ndp

Hurricanes Pessimist
Oct 29, 2015
1,391
4,130
I often wondered if some of our development issues stem from Pete Friesen (I know he's gone now but isn't his replacement one of his underlings) and his oddball dietary and workout systems.
They/he used to always talk about having thinner, lean players to develop speed.
Look at a team like the Jets, who seem to completely manhandle and physically dominate the Hurricanes, as most teams in the league do. Our guys just don't have the strength to compete in front of the net.
It makes me wonder if their physical development (muscle) has been sacrificed because management has some theory about searching for speed. Most of our players aren't good enough to compete on speed and skill alone. Lindholm for example should probably be a quite a bit heavier than he currently is, same for Hannifin, who still has time to develop physically.
I've often thought our prospects havent reached their potential due to: A. Being rushed.
And
B. Someone convinced someone else that the way to win in the new NHL is with super fit trim players, sacrifice some strength to gain an insignificant amount of speed.
I call it the Derek Ryan, program. And what it does is create $h!t hockey players that aren't strong enough to compete inside the dots where most goals are scored in the NHL.
Who needs muscle when your super fit and trim hockey men are going to littelary fly around the ice? (We do, we definitely need some muscle)
 

Negan4Coach

Fantastic and Stochastic
Aug 31, 2017
5,802
14,725
Raleigh, NC
I often wondered if some of our development issues stem from Pete Friesen (I know he's gone now but isn't his replacement one of his underlings) and his oddball dietary and workout systems.
They/he used to always talk about having thinner, lean players to develop speed.
Look at a team like the Jets, who seem to completely manhandle and physically dominate the Hurricanes, as most teams in the league do. Our guys just don't have the strength to compete in front of the net.
It makes me wonder if their physical development (muscle) has been sacrificed because management has some theory about searching for speed. Most of our players aren't good enough to compete on speed and skill alone. Lindholm for example should probably be a quite a bit heavier than he currently is, same for Hannifin, who still has time to develop physically.
I've often thought our prospects havent reached their potential due to: A. Being rushed.
And
B. Someone convinced someone else that the way to win in the new NHL is with super fit trim players, sacrifice some strength to gain an insignificant amount of speed.
I call it the Derek Ryan, program. And what it does is create $h!t hockey players that aren't strong enough to compete inside the dots where most goals are scored in the NHL.
Who needs muscle when your super fit and trim hockey men are going to littelary fly around the ice? (We do, we definitely need some muscle)

I have long thought the same thing.
 

geehaad

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Aug 24, 2006
7,512
18,876
Thread review:
  1. If the players make bad decisions with the puck and it leads to something bad, it's the fault of the system/coach.
  2. If the players aren't where they are supposed to be and it leads to something bad, it's the fault of the system/coach.
  3. If the players are where they are supposed to be and it leads to something bad, it's the fault of the system/coach.
 

Justshootmore

Registered User
Mar 13, 2018
472
1,292
Can we just get rid of the 3rd period?

I took a look how we would have played without the 3rd period:

Our record would be 22-29 with 20 games going to OT. With a 50/50 record in those Overtimes (our actual record this seasons with games that go to Overtime is 5-11 (31%)), we would have 74 points, which pretty much where we are.

Our goal difference per period is +2/-21/-7.

So even if it feels like it, the 3rd period is not our biggest problem.
 

bleedgreen

Registered User
Dec 8, 2003
23,921
38,944
colorado
Visit site
I have long thought the same thing.
Or he did the best he could with smaller players. Waste time trying to bulk up or emphasize the strengths of small, quick and flexible.

We sorely lack bigger players. We couldn’t add size AND skill so we added skill in this most recent version. TT, Aho, Lindy, Skinner, Ryan, Williams, Stempniak are all leaner and/or smaller.

Rask and Nordstrom could carry more weight, but I don’t know who else could really benefit from a change away to bulkier.
 

bleedgreen

Registered User
Dec 8, 2003
23,921
38,944
colorado
Visit site
Thread review:
  1. If the players make bad decisions with the puck and it leads to something bad, it's the fault of the system/coach.
  2. If the players aren't where they are supposed to be and it leads to something bad, it's the fault of the system/coach.
  3. If the players are where they are supposed to be and it leads to something bad, it's the fault of the system/coach.
The “system/coach” has become the new Chad Larose.
 

Negan4Coach

Fantastic and Stochastic
Aug 31, 2017
5,802
14,725
Raleigh, NC
Or he did the best he could with smaller players. Waste time trying to bulk up or emphasize the strengths of small, quick and flexible.

We sorely lack bigger players. We couldn’t add size AND skill so we added skill in this most recent version. TT, Aho, Lindy, Skinner, Ryan, Williams, Stempniak are all leaner and/or smaller.

Rask and Nordstrom could carry more weight, but I don’t know who else could really benefit from a change away to bulkier.

Yeah but didnt we already see an iteration of the smurf posse under Rutherford (ie, Murphy)? Why would RF repeat that crap?

Yet when I denigrated Freissen earlier this year and blamed him for our struggles I was viciously attacked.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad