All Purpose Trade / Roster Building Thread Pt 11

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Not the same front office, yes... But I was always under the impression this was the first of many Tulsky moves. It pretty much ticks all the boxes of something he'd recommend, and I guess I always figured that this move is what helped him rapidly ascend through our organization.

Assumed it was one of his moves? Or heard from sources it was? I had never heard he had anything to do with it.

My impression is that under Francis, I'm not sure how much influence Tulsky had. Francis and Peters constantly said "we use advanced stats to validate the eye test" (or something like that) and Francis reportedly kept most moves close to the vest and liked to be the decision maker. I didn't see Tulsky getting a significantly bigger role until Dundon arrived.

Anyhow, I think that move firmly belongs under the Francis regime regardless.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

There were several goalies throughout training camp that passed through waivers that year, just like every other training camp. Carolina just happened to claim the best possible choice of the bunch. Yes, Carolina had to make the best of a bad situation, but a lot of FOs around the league don't and instead let the problem fester.

C'mon. The Canes had no intention of picking up a goalie in camp until Darling got hurt in the last pre-season game, so whoever passed through waivers before that is irrelevant. When that happened, they picked the best, veteran guy available when their priority slot came up in the waivers process.

Yes, they took action, but they only had 2 options:
1) Either go into the season with an inconsistent Mrazek who struggled last season and an unproven rookie (Nedeljkovic) who clearly wasn't ready, (which wasn't a great option) or
2) Pick up a vet on waivers. Those where their choices as very few teams are making trades at that point in the season.

There were two real choices when waivers came, McElhinney and Pickard (who wasn't proven at all) and the Canes chose the more proven one because they needed stability.

No need to make it out like it was some stroke of genius. It was a good move, but frankly, it was the only real logical move and I bet most teams would have done the same thing in that situation.

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

Assumed it was one of his moves? Or heard from sources it was? I had never heard he had anything to do with it.

My impression is that under Francis, I'm not sure how much influence Tulsky had. Francis and Peters constantly said "we use advanced stats to validate the eye test" (or something like that) and Francis reportedly kept most moves close to the vest and liked to be the decision maker. I didn't see Tulsky getting a significantly bigger role until Dundon arrived.

Anyhow, I think that move firmly belongs under the Francis regime regardless.

Yeah, I agree with that analysis. The moves that I see as Tulsky-inspired, IMO, started with Martinook for Kruger and then progressed from there.

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

Oh C'mon. The Canes had no intention of picking up a goalie in camp until Darling got hurt in the last pre-season game, so whoever passed through waivers before that is irrelevant. When that happened, they picked the best, veteran guy available when their priority slot came up in the waivers process.

Yes, they took action, but they only had 2 options:
1) Either go into the season with an inconsistent Mrazek who struggled last season and an unproven rookie (Nedeljkovic) who clearly wasn't ready, (which wasn't a great option) or
2) Pick up a vet on waivers. Those where their choices as very few teams are making trades at that point in the season.

There were two real choices when waivers came, McElhinney and Pickard and the Canes chose the more proven one because they needed stability.

Stop trying to make it out like it was some stroke of genius. It was a good move, but frankly, it was the only real logical move and I bet most teams would have done the same thing in that situation.

Did I say anything about it being a stroke of genius? No, I agree that it was not. What I am saying is that the difference between good and bad FOs is that the former are often able to make the best out of a bag of shit.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Did I say anything about it being a stroke of genius? No, I agree that it was not. What I am saying is that the difference between good and bad FOs is that the former are often able to make the best out of a bag of shit.

It was brought up in prior post about how savvy it was. And then you said a lot of front offices let problems fester and talked about them getting the best waiver goalie. Not necessarily "stroke of genius", but IMO, making more out of the move than it was.

My point is virtually any team that loses their projected starting goalie the last pre-season game, and only has an inconsistent guy that also struggled last year (Mrazek) and a rookie clearly not ready for the NHL (Ned) would make that same move. At least any team with playoff aspirations.

The Canes did what they had to do and I'm glad they did. I think most other teams would have done the same thing. Heck, Philly did the same thing only got Pickard instead of McElhinney. (I think we were first in priority that year? can't remember).

 

[Discipline Daddy]

I thought it was prudent. Most fans here to my recollection wanted us to pick up Pickard because he was younger. I'm so glad we got McElhinney. It had a calming influence on the team. This snowballed to help us make the playoffs and then increased the confidence of the team going into 2019-2020. The borg then did another move this offseason to move on from Mc and pick up Reimer. I think we will see a ton of movement, video game style, every season, from here on out. I personally love it, primarily because we often come out on top in these transactions. It remains to be seen whether we will trade down a lot like we did in the 2019 draft. It also remains to be seen how successful the 2019 draft will be.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I thought it was prudent. Most fans here to my recollection wanted us to pick up Pickard because he was younger. I'm so glad we got McElhinney. It had a calming influence on the team. This snowballed to help us make the playoffs and then increased the confidence of the team going into 2019-2020. The borg then did another move this offseason to move on from Mc and pick up Reimer. I think we will see a ton of movement, video game style, every season, from here on out. I personally love it, primarily because we often come out on top in these transactions. It remains to be seen whether we will trade down a lot like we did in the 2019 draft. It also remains to be seen how successful the 2019 draft will be.

Yep...I agree. It was prudent. I don't recall the Pickard vs. McElhinney discussion, but I trust you on that. HF is often about young potential vs. proven experience where-as teams don't always look at it that way. I'm sure the Canes FO (and most FO's in the situation), with no stability in goal put more value on a proven, veteran player in that situation. In the end, it worked out well.

I also have liked all the moving pieces, although sometimes it seems the team is trying to be too smart for their own good, but as long as the moves work out, I won't complain.

 

[WreckingCrew]

Yep...I agree. It was prudent. I don't recall the Pickard vs. McElhinney discussion, but I trust you on that. HF is often about young potential vs. proven experience where-as teams don't always look at it that way. I'm sure the Canes FO (and most FO's in the situation), with no stability in goal put more value on a proven, veteran player in that situation. In the end, it worked out well.

I also have liked all the moving pieces, although sometimes it seems the team is trying to be too smart for their own good, but as long as the moves work out, I won't complain.

I will say that's one thing I do like compared to Francis, this GMBC is ACTIVELY trying to make the team better, both short term (acquire players) and long term (more draft darts, non-UFA contracts). I'm glad RF helped re-stock the cupboard, and the "draft-and-develop" mindset was needed to get us out of the gutter, but "wait-and-see" gets tiring after a while, you can only spin your wheels so long before you MUST at least try something different. Of course PK was also probably a massive part of that in hamstringing RF. This group is not afraid to take a gamble. They gambled on Hamilton and it paid off (Lindholm was not likely to be a 60+ point guy here), Gardiner we lost (so far, but he's been better), Haula was good for a while, Mrazek has been a toss-up, Nino was a huge win last year but less-so this year, Dzingel so far has been a dud. We've moved a LOT of pieces around, some will work, some will fail, but we're at least trying to shake things up a bit. I don't always agree (lots given up for Trock & Skjei), but overall I think we've won more than lost. If you can continue that trend with trades, and have a good scouting and development department, you're going to see overall improvements over time. Sure, we could bomb big time on a few deals and be in trouble, but if you just "wait-and-see" constantly, well you get 10 years of no success without being bad enough to luck out into draft success.

 

[Chrispy]

It was brought up in prior post about how savvy it was. And then you said a lot of front offices let problems fester and talked about them getting the best waiver goalie. Not necessarily "stroke of genius", but IMO, making more out of the move than it was.

My point is virtually any team that loses their projected starting goalie the last pre-season game, and only has an inconsistent guy that also struggled last year (Mrazek) and a rookie clearly not ready for the NHL (Ned) would make that same move. At least any team with playoff aspirations.

The Canes did what they had to do and I'm glad they did. I think most other teams would have done the same thing. Heck, Philly did the same thing only got Pickard instead of McElhinney. (I think we were first in priority that year? can't remember).

I thought Philly had first pick, but none of the stories go into who had the waiver priority. If it was based on the 2017-18 standings Carolina should have been ahead of Philadelphia in waiver order.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I thought Philly had first pick, but none of the stories go into who had the waiver priority. If it was based on the 2017-18 standings Carolina should have been ahead of Philadelphia in waiver order.

I think that's how they base it since no games were yet played.

 

[2Minutes4Surging]

I think this offseason would have been (possibly still could be..) the best time to evaluate our management when it comes to goalie decisions. We have two relatively cheap veteran goalies and one AHL standout. We don't need to make a move, as has been stated by others, and we could stick with the status quo. However, there are 3 sure fire starters, who are upgrades to our status quo, available this summer (fall?,) and there are only a hand full of teams in need of a starting goalie. Out of those teams, only three are contenders, us included. I feel like we would be the most desirable location of the 3, although I may be bias. Regardless, we have the opportunity to secure our long term solution in goal. And with the competition being limited we should be able to get them on a reasonable deal. The kicker is, the secondary goalie market will be turning over with everybody jockeying to find their #2, of which we have 2 prime candidates. Neither Mrazek nor Reimer have negative value and would be viable 1B options for teams next season. Whichever team can take a low risk one-year trial on these guys, if it works out they can extend. We could get assets for either or all of them and come out with a markedly better goalie situation or stick with middling goalies and see where else the GMBC's focus lies. Do we grab the bull by the horns or are we forever rummaging through the scrap pile? I am interested to see how the FO handles it.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

I will say that's one thing I do like compared to Francis, this GMBC is ACTIVELY trying to make the team better, both short term (acquire players) and long term (more draft darts, non-UFA contracts). I'm glad RF helped re-stock the cupboard, and the "draft-and-develop" mindset was needed to get us out of the gutter, but "wait-and-see" gets tiring after a while, you can only spin your wheels so long before you MUST at least try something different. Of course PK was also probably a massive part of that in hamstringing RF. This group is not afraid to take a gamble. They gambled on Hamilton and it paid off (Lindholm was not likely to be a 60+ point guy here), Gardiner we lost (so far, but he's been better), Haula was good for a while, Mrazek has been a toss-up, Nino was a huge win last year but less-so this year, Dzingel so far has been a dud. We've moved a LOT of pieces around, some will work, some will fail, but we're at least trying to shake things up a bit. I don't always agree (lots given up for Trock & Skjei), but overall I think we've won more than lost. If you can continue that trend with trades, and have a good scouting and development department, you're going to see overall improvements over time. Sure, we could bomb big time on a few deals and be in trouble, but if you just "wait-and-see" constantly, well you get 10 years of no success without being bad enough to luck out into draft success.

Every team is going to win and lose trades as you mentioned, but the difference is how big are those wins and losses. Even within a certain trade there are wins and losses. Take the Hamilton + Ferland + Fox <> Lindholm + Hanifin trade

We won big on getting Hamilton for Hanifin but we lost a bit on Ferland for Lindholm. It has nothing to do with how Lindholm has done in Calgary, because like you said, he likely wasn't likely to hit that level in Carolina. I think we can all agree though that Ferland's tenure did not go as well as expected. It wasn't a total loss because he was very effective for parts of the season but even as a 1 year rental we probably didn't as much value out of him as possible. 2 x 2nds for Fox I would say is neutral to a small win. Would we have preferred Fox on the Canes and be a productive, cheap young d-man, sure but it wasn't going to happen. So, when you look at this trade it's Hamilton + 2 x 2nds + 1 year of Ferland for Lindholm + Hanifin. I'd say it's a win but it could also look different in a couple years as well.

Letting Ferland walk as a UFA allowed us to use the cap space to sign Dzingel and bring in Haula. Haula was great at early on but then got injured and was inconsistent afterwards. Dzingel hasn't meshed super well but was low risk. However, Haula was also a piece that allowed us to trade for Trochek is a big step forward for shoring up our 2nd line and our center depth. Soooo... it's complicated right? You can evaluate things in a vacuum but often times a big win in a trade or signing might have been possible because of a small loss earlier on. It's about managing that balance and making sure that when you win, you win big and when you lose it's not critical. Darling was a big one in the L column. It hamstrung the team until this year basically. Gardiner, Dzingel might be in the L column as well right now but are they hampering the team moving forward? Not really, they've also been contributors at times and at least capable in lesser roles. Darling was just a waste of a roster spot, cap space and real money.

Anyway, that's my take on things right now. I have faith in the borg to keep moving the ship in the right direction. Maybe it's not always moving forward at all times but if you take a step back and two steps forward, ultimately it's a win. You just have to be lucky enough to have your wins line up so you can be competitive and be a contender at the right time. Even if they have a misstep I feel pretty confident that their next step will lead to a solution.

TL;DR We be playing multiple games of 4d chess and the rest of the league is playing POGS

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

I think that the return on the Dzingel and Gardiner moves have been too early to tell. I feel like before the pause, Gardiner was trending way up while Haula and Dzingel were trending way down. Trading Haula early when he wasn't meshing in the locker room and (in part) parlaying him into Trocheck really helped out when it came to the value of the first trade with Vegas, and without it, I probably would've pegged Haula for Roy as a loss for us considering Roy's solid play with Vegas to date. As far as Dzingel is concerned, I think that Dzingel's played well when Brindy's given him playing time. He needs to stop having these extended slumps interlaced with his streaks, though, because his defensive deficiencies get magnified in the eyes of two-way minded coaches like Brind'Amour and Tortorella. Hopefully he plays well again after the COVID pause is over. Same with Gardiner.

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

One major bullet that Carolina dodged this offseason was CDH. Yes, he had a great first year with us. Yes, when healthy, he's basically worth his cap hit. Yes, trading him away after his first year was, shall we say, sort of brash and cold relative to UFA precedent. And yes, I feel for the guy because he was one of the first free agents that really believed that our team could contend while he was on it. The issue was, however, that his shoulder turned out to be a ticking time bomb, to the point that some Chicago fans now have him as a potential CBO candidate if Seabrook is going to be LTIRetired (again, I highly doubt that CBOs are a thing this year, and I truly hope that they don't become a thing, however, I'm just pointing out what Hawks fans are saying RN).

 

[emptyNedder]

I understand that things are different in different places, but the repetition that Lindholm wouldn't have scored 60 points in Carolina takes that too far. I was on record as soon as the trade happened that Lindholm would score 60—at CanesCountry and even had one of the writers there bet me it wouldn't happen, though I received nothing because it was a hypothetical bet.

It was clear that Lindholm was following a fairly common pattern for top 10 picks who elevate point production at 23 or 24. Think Couturier, Mikael Granlund, Schenn, etc.

In fact, if you don't have a touch of "what if" for a second line with Necas/Lindholm in some combination of C/RW, then I think you are fooling yourself.

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

I understand that things are different in different places, but the repetition that Lindholm wouldn't have scored 60 points in Carolina takes that too far. I was on record as soon as the trade happened that Lindholm would score 60—at CanesCountry and even had one of the writers there bet me it wouldn't happen, though I received nothing because it was a hypothetical bet.

It was clear that Lindholm was following a fairly common pattern for top 10 picks who elevate point production at 23 or 24. Think Couturier, Michael Granlund, Schenn, etc.

In fact, if you don't have a touch of "what if" for a second line with Necas/Lindholm in some combination of C/RW, then I think you are fooling yourself.

The part that I will ask myself for a while is if a Hamilton deal would've been able to have been put together without Lindholm involved. Understandably, dealing a 1st round pick an offseason after yet another playoff miss would've been seen as tremendously risky at the time (no one could've predicted that our team would go all the way to the ECFs), but in hindsight, they could've held onto Lindholm by dealing that 1st round pick and Hanifin for Hamilton. At the same time, though, Calgary wanted win-now players, so maybe that trade would've completely fell apart if Lindholm was considered an untouchable. Still, I have no regrets about that deal. Hamilton was clearly the best player in the deal, and I think that both clubs now basically view that deal as a 50-50 win-win when all of the trade-offs involved balance out. The trade would've been a very clear win for Carolina if Fox wanted to play here, but unfortunately he held out for the Rangers and the Canes got 2 seconds as a consolation prize. We'll see if the players that we draft with those picks are good.

 

[bleedgreen]

Just wanted to comment on all of the Tulsky talk earlier. Someone for the love of god produce one shred of evidence that Tulsky influenced any move over another. Speculation loves to run rampant around here. Anyone saying this move or that move was Tulsky when others weren’t is just pushing a narrative they like.

Dude is smart. He’s helping I’m sure. We have no idea who pushes what in that room. The idea that the regime that hired him didn’t really use him is comical.

I myself purely speculate that the Slavin/Hamilton pairing is a Tulsky thing. They’re mediocre defensively and I assume the only reason Rod rolls with it is because the analytic people tell him it’s a good thing. I’ve got zero to back that up and it’s likely nonsense.

 

[bleedgreen]

I will say that's one thing I do like compared to Francis, this GMBC is ACTIVELY trying to make the team better, both short term (acquire players) and long term (more draft darts, non-UFA contracts). I'm glad RF helped re-stock the cupboard, and the "draft-and-develop" mindset was needed to get us out of the gutter, but "wait-and-see" gets tiring after a while, you can only spin your wheels so long before you MUST at least try something different. Of course PK was also probably a massive part of that in hamstringing RF. This group is not afraid to take a gamble. They gambled on Hamilton and it paid off (Lindholm was not likely to be a 60+ point guy here), Gardiner we lost (so far, but he's been better), Haula was good for a while, Mrazek has been a toss-up, Nino was a huge win last year but less-so this year, Dzingel so far has been a dud. We've moved a LOT of pieces around, some will work, some will fail, but we're at least trying to shake things up a bit. I don't always agree (lots given up for Trock & Skjei), but overall I think we've won more than lost. If you can continue that trend with trades, and have a good scouting and development department, you're going to see overall improvements over time. Sure, we could bomb big time on a few deals and be in trouble, but if you just "wait-and-see" constantly, well you get 10 years of no success without being bad enough to luck out into draft success.

This gets really old. Francis never waited to see. The first two years he was rebuilding. The second two years he said he was going to the draft with extra picks trying to help the team. The first year he left empty handed and said no one was wanting to make moves with him. Other teams only wanted our young players and we were in zero position to move them at that point. No other team made moves that were worth being envious of that suggested Francis could’ve made the same moves. The fourth off season he added Williams, Darling, Kruger and Jooris. Say what you want about the moves but that’s hardly “wait and see”. The guy was actively trying to make the team better under an owner that wouldn’t give him money.

This Francis sitting in his hands narrative is pure bunk and has not one shred of evidence behind it other than “well there were no player for player moves”.

What moves did people want? Who was available? Who did we have that was worth two bits on the trade market that we were cool with moving at that point? The fact he had to thank PK just for adding Williams when we were at the cap floor tells you all you need to know about RF’s ability to add a good player with salary even if you were ok with trading one of our young building blocks at the time.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Just wanted to comment on all of the Tulsky talk earlier. Someone for the love of god produce one shred of evidence that Tulsky influenced any move over another. Speculation loves to run rampant around here. Anyone saying this move or that move was Tulsky when others weren’t is just pushing a narrative they like.

Yep, my thoughts exactly.

Dude is smart. He’s helping I’m sure. We have no idea who pushes what in that room. The idea that the regime that hired him didn’t really use him is comical.

Now that's pushing a narrative. Nobody said the prior regime didn't use him. Francis and Peters both commented multiple times that they use advanced stats to (paraphrasing) "to confirm what they see with their eyes and possible identify things they don't see". Clearly they used him and nobody said otherwise, BUT...it's also apparent to me that Tulsky is more influential with the current front office and the actions of the front office show that. 1) Dundon has talked many times about making most decision automatic and that comes from data and a more collaborative approach. That's been since day one. 2) Dundon/Waddell promoted Tulsky to Vice President and when you move up in an org., you typically have more influence. 3) Dundon/Waddell hired a staff of data engineers and data scientists to work under him and beefing up a staff means they want more out of it.

How much of his influence applies to player acquisition, draft choices, on ice pairings, etc... none of us know, but I'm confident in saying that the current FO has invested more in advanced stats and it's logical to assume because of that, there's more influence.

 

[emptyNedder]

but I'm confident in saying that the current FO has invested more in advanced stats

From what I can observe, this regime focuses on different stats/tactics. Remember Peters' teams were Corsi kings. There was also a video of Peters at a conference where he discussed (with video support of Skinner scoring in 3 seconds) the importance of winning face-offs.

TRPF mentioned Martinook for Kruger. Well Kruger was better at face-offs while Martinook has great takeaway/giveaway numbers. So maybe the emphasis shifted—but Martinook's impact is not really measured statistically, he is the team's most vocal/energetic guy. That doesn't get measured by anyone.

My concern with the current front office is how they spin information. Compare the Haula trade with the Nylander trade that never happened. Several writers/bloggers reported that Haula was unhappy—so his trade was no surprise. Pretty much every source stated that the possible Nylander trade mentioned that Toronto wanted Pesce+. None indicated that Pesce desired a trade. Yet after the fact, when Nylander was struggling and Pesce was shutting down Crosby/McDavid/Seguin, Waddell told a reporter that Pesce was unhappy—but that was resolved in the beginning of December. In the beginning of December Pesce was out due to injury, he hadn't begun to play more minutes. What did happen on 12/1 was Nylander re-signed with Toronto.

There are other examples. The front office is doing fine, so they don't need to polish a mistake they didn't even make.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

From what I can observe, this regime focuses on different stats/tactics.

very well could be the case, but post Peters there was also a coaching change (and thus philosophy) and player personnel changes. So with Front office, coaches and player changes, it’s hard to dissect which part had what impact, when they all likely did.

Still, doesn’t change my point. The new front office promoted Tulsky and added to his staff and when leadership does that (in virtually any org), it signifies that they value it and are invested in it.

 

[bleedgreen]

Or....like with Rod there were new openings and they simply promoted the people they liked into them as long as they fit the pay structure. It doesn’t mean the old regime didn’t value him or wouldn’t have used him in exactly the same way. He was presumably working his way up the ladder already.

Kruger for Martinook is unlikely to be an analytics move. That was just trading dead weight for a high energy type that was younger and healthier at the time. That move was just common sense.

 

[WreckingCrew]

Or....like with Rod there were new openings and they simply promoted the people they liked into them as long as they fit the pay structure. It doesn’t mean the old regime didn’t value him or wouldn’t have used him in exactly the same way. He was presumably working his way up the ladder already.

Kruger for Martinook is unlikely to be an analytics move. That was just trading dead weight for a high energy type that was younger and healthier at the time. That move was just common sense.

Like swapping out Rask for Nino, and Darling for Reimer...when those opportunities present, YOU TAKE THEM AND RUN!! At that point, Martinook played his role perfectly, and Kruger was pretty much completely worthless wasn't he?

 

[bleedgreen]

Like swapping out Rask for Nino, and Darling for Reimer...when those opportunities present, YOU TAKE THEM AND RUN!! At that point, Martinook played his role perfectly, and Kruger was pretty much completely worthless wasn't he?

Yup. I think AZ flipped Kruger back to Chicago in a deal that helped them further down the line so it wasn’t that bad for them in the end. Kruger made himself look good in Charlotte which helped.

Still, as you say when someone is willing to take your dead weight and give you something immediately useful you do it. Especially in Nino’s case you need the owner with an open wallet so you can add salary to make it happen. I’m sure two previous gm’s would’ve loved to have that available to them.

 

[A Star is Burns]

Is it time for pointless old regime vs new regime arguments again already? So hard to tell in coronavirus time.