Pre-Game Talk: 2021 Training Camp

A Star is Burns

Formerly Azor Aho
Sponsor
Dec 6, 2011
12,396
39,579
While I agree, I think there was more to it. Brett Pesce has now had 3 shoulder injuries. A major one in college that required surgery. One a couple years ago where he opted not to get surgery after a second opinion. One last season where he got surgery.
And there's a not insignificant chance we regret keeping him. I've been in the open to move him in the right move camp (assuming a reasonable replacement is secured) because it's a real concern. However, it's easier to take that risk with Pesce than de Haan. Even then, I had initial issues with moving de Haan as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boom Boom Apathy

Nikishin Go Boom

Russian Bulldozer Consultent
Jul 31, 2017
22,463
52,394
Got a scrimmage today. Cant wait for the irrational feelings it will cause, like the hill I will die on "get Necas off Staal's line."
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG

Joe McGrath

Registered User
Oct 29, 2009
18,245
38,581
Got a scrimmage today. Cant wait for the irrational feelings it will cause, like the hill I will die on "get Necas off Staal's line."

Im trying to find the reasoning for this move. My best rationalization is that they want Necas to learn how to be the primary offensive driver of a line. Line 1, certainly not. Line 2 (if that’s where Svech is). Nope, he’s a passenger along for the ride with Svech and Trochek. With Staal and McLovin he is the guy with the puck and he doesn’t have to do any of the physical grinding without it.

I don’t know if that’s the best thing to do (probably isn’t), but I could live with it if that’s rationale.
 

bleedgreen

Registered User
Dec 8, 2003
24,182
39,807
colorado
Visit site
And there's a not insignificant chance we regret keeping him. I've been in the open to move him in the right move camp (assuming a reasonable replacement is secured) because it's a real concern. However, it's easier to take that risk with Pesce than de Haan. Even then, I had initial issues with moving de Haan as well.
So it’s started already?

You’re nuts. I’d have Pesce play every healthy game he has to give us and let him go for nothing than worry about what we could get in trade for him now before shoulder concerns affect his value. He’s on a ridiculous contract for what he brings, we can afford it. If we can’t we’ve had bad management elsewhere...do something about that instead of fussing over Pesce.

That guy is part of this core and in his mid 20’s. We’re a better team with him.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,446
98,310
So it’s started already?

You’re nuts. I’d have Pesce play every healthy game he has to give us and let him go for nothing than worry about what we could get in trade for him now before shoulder concerns affect his value. He’s on a ridiculous contract for what he brings, we can afford it. If we can’t we’ve had bad management elsewhere...do something about that instead of fussing over Pesce.

That guy is part of this core and in his mid 20’s. We’re a better team with him.

I know you weren't responding to me, but to clarify, I wasn't at all recommending we move on from Pesce or even wringing my hands over him. My comment was to the person that said de Hann had shoulder concerns so it was ok to move on from him (paraphrasing). I was saying Pesce has now had 3 shoulder issues, and none of us would want to move on from Pesce (rightfully so for the reasons you stated), so to me at least, it seems there was more to moving deHann than just the shoulder concerns. Granted, the same issue isn't always treated the same way with different players, but we'll never know for sure all the reasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,446
98,310
Im trying to find the reasoning for this move. My best rationalization is that they want Necas to learn how to be the primary offensive driver of a line. Line 1, certainly not. Line 2 (if that’s where Svech is). Nope, he’s a passenger along for the ride with Svech and Trochek. With Staal and McLovin he is the guy with the puck and he doesn’t have to do any of the physical grinding without it.

I don’t know if that’s the best thing to do (probably isn’t), but I could live with it if that’s rationale.

It might be as simple as he's not replacing TT on line 1, and even though it was a limited sample size, he and Trocheck didn't look good together last year, so that leaves Staal's line.
 

Joe McGrath

Registered User
Oct 29, 2009
18,245
38,581
It might be as simple as he's not replacing TT on line 1, and even though it was a limited sample size, he and Trocheck didn't look good together last year, so that leaves Staal's line.

Id like to believe there is more thought behind it than that, but you’re probably right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG

hblueridgegal

Timing is Everything
Sponsor
Sep 13, 2019
7,636
26,912
Old North State
Im trying to find the reasoning for this move. My best rationalization is that they want Necas to learn how to be the primary offensive driver of a line. Line 1, certainly not. Line 2 (if that’s where Svech is). Nope, he’s a passenger along for the ride with Svech and Trochek. With Staal and McLovin he is the guy with the puck and he doesn’t have to do any of the physical grinding without it.

I don’t know if that’s the best thing to do (probably isn’t), but I could live with it if that’s rationale.
When asked about Necas last week in one of his pressers, RBA briefly spoke of Necas needing more confidence in his abilities. I believe this has been mentioned before. Didn't exactly get the best vibe from RBA when he was speaking about him - it's pretty easy to see who his favorites are when he's interviewed.
 

MinJaBen

Canes Sharks Boy
Sponsor
Dec 14, 2015
20,974
80,977
Durm
Maybe the Canes look for a Forsling replacement. Not that they need one.

I doubt it. If you want to keep a waiver claim, they have to be on the NHL club for an extended time period. And obviously, they didn't want Forsling on the NHL squad right now. You can't just assign them to the AHL or taxi squad.
 

GoldiFox

Registered User
Apr 21, 2014
13,287
32,030
I doubt it. If you want to keep a waiver claim, they have to be on the NHL club for an extended time period. And obviously, they didn't want Forsling on the NHL squad right now. You can't just assign them to the AHL or taxi squad.

Yeah I realized that a moment after. As Forsling would be a taxi squad guy it doesn't make sense to pick up a replacement on waivers. They would need to be waived again to move down.
 

A Star is Burns

Formerly Azor Aho
Sponsor
Dec 6, 2011
12,396
39,579
So it’s started already?

You’re nuts. I’d have Pesce play every healthy game he has to give us and let him go for nothing than worry about what we could get in trade for him now before shoulder concerns affect his value. He’s on a ridiculous contract for what he brings, we can afford it. If we can’t we’ve had bad management elsewhere...do something about that instead of fussing over Pesce.

That guy is part of this core and in his mid 20’s. We’re a better team with him.
Yep, there was no nuance to what I said. I just said ship him out no matter what.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WreckingCrew

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad