What's Preventing The Hurricanes From Taking That Next Step?

[Discipline Daddy]

I mean, I guess it'd be nice to have an Adam Fox (we did at one point), but the Hurricanes were 3rd in the league in goals scored by defensemen. I'd rather have 6 very good defenders than one elite one and a third pair we need to shelter. All 6 are excellent defensively (save DeAngelo, who is subbing for Pesce), and they scored 47, 43, 37, 26, 22, and 13 points (and 11 in 31 games from TDA). This is not a team who is very lacking in the puck moving department, they just don't have one guy who scores 80 points. Those guys are usually questionable defensively, anyway (save in the case of Adam Fox).

 

[Chrispy]

I mean, I guess it'd be nice to have an Adam Fox (we did at one point), but the Hurricanes were 3rd in the league in goals scored by defensemen. I'd rather have 6 very good defenders than one elite one and a third pair we need to shelter. All 6 are excellent defensively (save DeAngelo, who is subbing for Pesce), and they scored 47, 43, 37, 26, 22, and 13 points (and 11 in 31 games from TDA). This is not a team who is very lacking in the puck moving department, they just don't have one guy who scores 80 points. Those guys are usually questionable defensively, anyway (save in the case of Adam Fox).

When you look at the top 32 defensemen in scoring in the NHL, there are 7 teams who have 2 in the top 32.

Colorado, Dallas, Detroit, Edmonton, Pittsburgh, Vanouver...and Carolina.

Carolina is also the first team to have a 3rd defenseman on the list (Slavin at #41 with 37 points; Edmonton adds Nurse at #47 with 32 points.)

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

We have our weaknesses.

We haven’t had a contributing 2nd line for our playoff runs, even with trocheck here. Even with guys like Kuzy, Necas, and Turbo having a decent amount of points they are passengers most shifts.

Our system generates a lot of low danger chances

generally our special teams struggles in playoffs too with little to no adjustment


Even with all of this, our team has lost a couple of coin flip games with a bad power play (even by our lower standards) and a struggling PK due to 2 of our best being injured.

 

[Stickpucker]

deleted.

 

[PocketNines]

The Blues were the weakest recent Stanley Cup winner, and that's why they are always the benchmark fans use to try and claim their team could win a Stanley Cup. They are the minimum hurdle of a modern Stanley Cup winner and the biggest anomaly

Before this comment I hadn't thought you were out of your depth when it comes to hockey but:

 

[WarriorofTime]

Before this comment I hadn't thought you were out of your depth when it comes to hockey but:

View attachment 870545

Now you're just deflecting. What does showing the Blues were generally competitive throughout the 2010s have to do with anything? I was speaking of the 2018-19 Blues Stanley Cup champion specifically.

Besides, their best stretch of teams were 2011-12 through 2015-16 in terms of regular season results. 111 points, a 102.5 per 82 GP pace (short season), 111 points, 109 points, 107 points. One particular surprising thing about the Blues is they dipped below 100 points in each of the three seasons before their surprise Stanley Cup run.

Someone has to be the minimum bar of a Stanley Cup winner, and it just so happens it was that Blues team. That's why whenever anyone talks about a Stanley Cup winner needing to be "x good" in whatever area or overall, people ALWAYS point to that specific Blues team.

 

[PocketNines]

Now you're just deflecting. What does showing the Blues were generally competitive throughout the 2010s have to do with anything? I was speaking of the 2018-19 Blues Stanley Cup champion specifically.

Besides, their best stretch of teams were 2011-12 through 2015-16 in terms of regular season results. 111 points, a 102.5 per 82 GP pace (short season), 111 points, 109 points, 107 points. One particular surprising thing about the Blues is they dipped below 100 points in each of the three seasons before their surprise Stanley Cup run.

Someone has to be the minimum bar of a Stanley Cup winner, and it just so happens it was that Blues team. That's why whenever anyone talks about a Stanley Cup winner needing to be "x good" in whatever area or overall, people ALWAYS point to that specific Blues team.

You're literally making an argument that says the biggest outlier winner is the team that won the most games in its conference in the decade leading up to the win. Do you know how stupid that is? That's really really stupid.

"Dear modern teams, the benchmark of how easy it is to win a Cup is the Blues, the team that won the most games in its conference over a decade. All you have to do to match the soft, unworthy Blues is lead your conference in wins for the whole decade first, just copy that you absolute dumb idiots who have no idea what happened even though it already happened."

 

[WarriorofTime]

You're literally making an argument that says the biggest outlier winner is the team that won the most games in its conference in the decade leading up to the win. Do you know how stupid that is? That's really really stupid.

That's an... interesting spin on things. But I can tell you're getting very emotional about this, I wouldn't say that justifies throwing out insults though.

"Dear modern teams, the benchmark of how easy it is to win a Cup is the Blues, the team that won the most games in its conference over a decade.

You've done a poor job illustrating the connection here, you're just stating a fact. It would be stronger if the Cup came in the middle of the decade, which it didn't. Obviously had their playoff run synced up with their 2013-14 regular season, they would not be viewed as an anomaly. I have shown they had actually dipped for a multiple season basis (three straight sub-100 point seasons). I bet if you looked at betting odds heading into a postseason, they were the least likely of modern Stanley Cup winners. Truly don't understand your argument about why the 2010s as a whole season aggregate total is super relevant, I can't make your argument for you, maybe you think it was karmic universe to overachieve for underachievement in seasons that had already passed? Generally, that's now we look at teams in a particular season (especially as the high watermark regular season team was already five years prior, which is pretty long in a team cycle sense).

All you have to do to match the soft, unworthy Blues is lead your conference in wins for the whole decade first, just copy that you absolute dumb idiots who have no idea what happened even though it already happened."

Who said "unworthy"? Who called them "dumb idiots"? Now you're just making things up to support a victim complex.

 

[PocketNines]

I cannot believe how stupid this argument is. It rides the short bus. The St. Louis Blues were a contender for most of the 2010s. They had the right structure, a Hall of Fame caliber #1 defenseman and a ton of good pieces around him. There is no defensible reason you can pick them out and say, how did this team break through? It's absolutely bad faith works by a Blues hater @WarriorofTime

 

[Sidgeni Malkby]

In order of importance:
1) Goaltending....Andersen is okay, but not elite.
2) 1 Elite shutdown or offensive D.
3) 1 Elite F.

Aho/Svechnikov are awesome, but you need a pure goal scorer. Yeah...Guentzel is one, but he's doing okay. It may be your system.

 

[BCNate]

Canes are fine. Playoffs are hard to win, and the Rangers are a great team. Couple bounces in those OT games and the Hurricanes are in the ECF.

 

[PaulD]

I'm not saying they're definitely finished this year, but they're obviously in very big trouble.

Looking back, this team seems to have a hard time in the playoffs against other strong teams. This year they're down 3-0 to the Rangers. The Rangers also beat them in 2022, though that was a seven game series. FLA swept them last year. Tampa beat them in five en route to a second straight Cup. When Bergeron and Krejci were still around, the Bruins beat them quickly in 2019 and 2020.

The team looks very good and well-rounded on paper and is consistently good in terms of things like possession and shot differential. What's keeping the Hurricanes from reaching the next level?

Remind of the Old Sharks. When we used to say "who's turn is to take them out this year" ?

Goalie. Need a great one. Trade goalies in this series and the Rangers are golfing after 4th game.

 

[bleedgreen]

In order of importance:
1) Goaltending....Andersen is okay, but not elite.
2) 1 Elite shutdown or offensive D.
3) 1 Elite F.

Aho/Svechnikov are awesome, but you need a pure goal scorer. Yeah...Guentzel is one, but he's doing okay. It may be your system.

2)…….Slavin????

I agree we could use a pp stud but we’ve got the elite shutdown guy.

 

[Rowlet]

Their players don't win enough

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

In order of importance:
1) Goaltending....Andersen is okay, but not elite.
2) 1 Elite shutdown or offensive D.
3) 1 Elite F.

Aho/Svechnikov are awesome, but you need a pure goal scorer. Yeah...Guentzel is one, but he's doing okay. It may be your system.

Jaccob Slavin is the best shutdown defender on the planet....

 

[Sigurd]

Ray Ferraro particularly was out to lunch about what was happening in the game. And he was observing it at the ice level between the benches ffs. It's like he didn't see a goddamn thing. That might be it actually. Someone get him something to stand on.

The national announcers have made it so obvious that they're biased in favor of the Rangers.

They're not even pretending to be impartial in this series. Embarrassing really.