Confirmed with Link: [CAR/FLA] Scott Darling + 2020 6th Round Pick for James Reimer

MinJaBen

Canes Sharks Boy
Sponsor
Dec 14, 2015
20,927
80,746
Durm
did you miss that we traded darling in the deal? darling's contract is much worse
I didn’t miss that. Darling’s buyout is much better and Florida was desperate to move Riemer to bring in Bob. We got them out of a jam and paid to do so. The only reason to do this is to save cash, which means we are keeping Riemer ourselves, and with both the Chicago castoff and Ned as low cost backup options already, we will be starting the year with Riemer as our starter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cardiac Jerks

Do Make Say Think

& Yet & Yet
Jun 26, 2007
51,169
9,909
I was actually hoping for Optimus Reim. He is what the Forsberg addition should have been.

Here's to hoping he isn't the #1 though. And that Florida retained and paid assets.

Edit: they took Darling. Florida does this because Reiner's buyout would have costed them more next year. Allows them more flexibility and gives the Canes a true 1B.

Reimer is not a 1B. If he plays more than 15 to 20 games, you are in big trouble.
 

Blueline Bomber

AI Generated Minnesota Wild
Sponsor
Oct 31, 2007
39,304
41,489
I'd love to see Waddell try and sell that. He said a started would be added. Nobody gets a starter for Scott Darling + 6th.

I expect Mrazek/Lehner/Varlamov to still be added. Forsberg to waivers/AHL.

Wouldn't be the first time we've had bull being sold to us?

Remember when we acquired Ponikarovsky and Anthony Stewart and we were assured that they weren't replacing Ruutu (I believe) and we were still hunting for a Top 6 forward?

And then that somehow turned into "Well, we hope the two combined will provide what Ruutu did"
 

GoldiFox

Registered User
Apr 21, 2014
13,287
32,030
I didn’t miss that. Darling’s buyout is much better and Florida was desperate to move Riemer to bring in Bob. We got them out of a jam and paid to do so. The only reason to do this is to save cash, which means we are keeping Riemer ourselves, and with both the Chicago castoff and Ned as low cost backup options already, we will be starting the year with Riemer as our starter.

Hive mind isn't that stupid. I won't accept that. Let's see what Waddell says about Reimer first.

Waddell has repeatedly said the Canes will have a starter. Reimer is not that and you don't get a starter through trading a buyout. Even casual fans know that Darling was less than worthless.
 

Anton Babchuk

Registered User
Nov 3, 2005
12,913
2,438
Raleigh-Durham
twitter.com
I didn’t miss that. Darling’s buyout is much better and Florida was desperate to move Riemer to bring in Bob. We got them out of a jam and paid to do so. The only reason to do this is to save cash, which means we are keeping Riemer ourselves, and with both the Chicago castoff and Ned as low cost backup options already, we will be starting the year with Riemer as our starter.
this is all based on the assumption that the team isn't trying to sign a number one, which appears to be wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: A Star is Burns

MinJaBen

Canes Sharks Boy
Sponsor
Dec 14, 2015
20,927
80,746
Durm
how is that any worse than mrazek-forsberg-ned

i'd love to hear an argument as to why reimer is worse than mrazek, other than "last season"
Last season is an excellent argument! We know he puts up at least leagues average goaltending behind our guys and they trust him. Now we are back to square one and we will have a younger D-core looking over their shoulders wonder if this guy will be able to bail them out on some mistakes or if he will magnify them. If we aren’t bringing in a guy with bonafides or a history of good performance with us, we are risking a substantial step backwards.
 

HisIceness

This is Hurricanes Hockey
Sep 16, 2010
40,461
71,192
Charlotte
So this means Mac is gone if they're trying to get Mrazek re-signed or get Varly. On another note though I'm surprised a taker was found for Darling.
 

A Star is Burns

Formerly Azor Aho
Sponsor
Dec 6, 2011
12,385
39,531
Last season is an excellent argument! We know he puts up at least leagues average goaltending behind our guys and they trust him. Now we are back to square one and we will have a younger D-core looking over their shoulders wonder if this guy will be able to bail them out on some mistakes or if he will magnify them. If we aren’t bringing in a guy with bonafides or a history of good performance with us, we are risking a substantial step backwards.
Or you could argue he was probably worse than mediocre for half his season last year, and then lights out for his second half. Mrazek still has questions, though I'll be happy if we can have him back.
 

DaveG

Noted Jerk
Apr 7, 2003
51,270
48,842
Winston-Salem NC
how is that any worse than mrazek-forsberg-ned

i'd love to hear an argument as to why reimer is worse than mrazek, other than "last season"
He's been trending down the last two years, is on the wrong side of 30, and is a career backup.
Mrazek before coming here at least was well under 30, had shown a season of competence with more than 50 games back in 15-16 already, and was better by a decent chunk than Reimer has been the last 3 seasons. His quality starts rate in Florida was worse than Cam frigin Ward's over that same time frame.

If we get a starter from somewhere, whether that's Varly or Mrazek, we're fine. If not we're f***ed.
 

MinJaBen

Canes Sharks Boy
Sponsor
Dec 14, 2015
20,927
80,746
Durm
this is all based on the assumption that the team isn't trying to sign a number one, which appears to be wrong.
Sure they are trying. Just like they were trying to keep both Mrazek and McBackup. I bet they are trying, but using this to say to Mrazek that if you don’t accept our lowball salary/term, we will just go with this other guy. Let’s hope Petr blinks first.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad