Confirmed with Link: Carolina sign Ryan Dzingel - 3.375 x 2

[Svechhammer]

Wallmark did a good job of playing up when the team needed it the most. He’s earned a spot

Soon, we aren't going to have enough roster spots for all the guys who have earned one for us in the recent past.

 

[MinJaBen]

Soon, we aren't going to have enough roster spots for all the guys who have earned one for us in the recent past.

First world problems.

 

[geehaad]

I'm not sitting Foegele (does too many things we need), Martinook (too valuable as a leader, physical presence) or McGinn (if he's here), so Wallmark is just the odd man out.

Wallmark is the only center in that group. In my estimation, last year Wallmark was a better center than any of the others were as forwards. I'm saying this in spite of the fact that I've never been a huge fan of his, whereas I'm a huge Foegele fan.

Trade him for something positive? Ok. But sit him? Yo, you *must* be crazy.

 

[My Special Purpose]

Wallmark did a good job of playing up when the team needed it the most. He’s earned a spot

Wallmark is the only center in that group. In my estimation, last year Wallmark was a better center than any of the others were as forwards. I'm saying this in spite of the fact that I've never been a huge fan of his, whereas I'm a huge Foegele fan.

Trade him for something positive? Ok. But sit him? Yo, you *must* be crazy.

Sorry, but I'm not getting into a "who sits between McGinn, Foegele, Wallmark and Martinook" debate in the middle of July. Yes, Wallmark is the only center, and yes, Wallmark did well last season, and yes, Wallmark probably has more development to do. But somebody has to sit, and I doubt if they re-signed Martinook for two years to be the 13th forward, and as much as Roddy likes McGinn, he freakin' loves Foegele, so he's not sitting. And as long as McGinn is on the team, he's going to be tough to sit (a la Chad LaRose).

Like I said, I'd move somebody. Even Wallmark.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

If Rod thinks you can play, he'll give you minutes. People were concernedwho would sit when j. Staal came back: Rod simply started alternating bt Foegele and Melanoma when someone wasnt on a maintenence day.

 

[Roboturner913]

You don't move Wallmark because then if Haula leaves as a UFA next offseason you're super duper f***ed at center.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Sorry, but I'm not getting into a "who sits between McGinn, Foegele, Wallmark and Martinook" debate in the middle of July.

Yes, Wallmark is the only center, and yes, Wallmark did well last season, and yes, Wallmark probably has more development to do. But somebody has to sit, and I doubt if they re-signed Martinook for two years to be the 13th forward, and as much as Roddy likes McGinn, he freakin' loves Foegele, so he's not sitting. And as long as McGinn is on the team, he's going to be tough to sit (a la Chad LaRose).

Like I said, I'd move somebody. Even Wallmark.

Hmmm...

 

[Canes]

You don't move Wallmark because then if Haula leaves as a UFA next offseason you're super duper f***ed at center.

Not really. Necas, and maybe a guy like Geekie, Suzuki, or someone entirely unexpected could be ready in a year. Wallmark is an adequate 3rd line center but unless he keeps improving I'm not sure we would miss him too much either way. So far he's basically the definition of a replacement level player, sort of like Derek Ryan. He's just one of the few we've actually drafted and developed ourselves.

 

[Roboturner913]

Not really. Necas, and maybe a guy like Geekie, Suzuki, or someone entirely unexpected could be ready in a year. Wallmark is an adequate 3rd line center but unless he keeps improving I'm not sure we would miss him too much either way. So far he's basically the definition of a replacement level player, sort of like Derek Ryan. He's just one of the few we've actually drafted and developed ourselves.

Think you're probably underselling Wallmark a little bit. Just because somebody's "replacement level" doesn't mean they're that easy to replace. Especially at center. If the choice is between trading center and trading a winger, and they're roughly equal talents, you trade the winger.

 

[emptyNedder]

I "see" the world—and for this purpose hockey—differently than most. For whatever reason I see trends based on numbers.

For instance, before last season I suggested that Aho would be fine as a 1C because he put excellent numbers in international play and because his production his first two seasons was almost identical to John Tavares' production. Well as a 1C Aho had 30 goals and 53 assists in his third season; Tavares had 31g/50a.

There was extensive discussion about Teravainen's commitment (including photos showing a soft belly) and "grit" before last season. A decent sized minority argued that Ferland was much more valuable. I thought (I hope I even posted these thoughts) that Teravainen's development trajectory looked much like Blake Wheeler's. They play dissimilar styles, as do Aho and Tavares, but as i mentioned I see trends based on numbers. TT's 55 assists continue to support the Wheeler-like trajectory.

I bring this up because I have been a proponent of Wallmark remaining at 3C not because of how he looks when he plays but because of his trajectory. At this point in his career, Wallmark looks like Frans Nielsen or possibly Tomas Plekanec. Nielsen became a strong two-way 45-50 point center. Plekanec was reliable for 60+ points in his best season. Ironically, a more recent player with a similar, yet slightly lower, point trajectory is Erik Haula.

I fully understand that Haula is faster and that is important in today's game and the Canes gameplan. However, while I surely over-emphasize the trends evident in pure numbers, I think others miss that Wallmark likely has more upside that what we all saw. I truly believe that the best of both worlds would be a third-line of Haula/Wallmark/Necas.

 

[GoldiFox]

I "see" the world—and for this purpose hockey—differently than most. For whatever reason I see trends based on numbers.

For instance, before last season I suggested that Aho would be fine as a 1C because he put excellent numbers in international play and because his production his first two seasons was almost identical to John Tavares' production. Well as a 1C Aho had 30 goals and 53 assists in his third season; Tavares had 31g/50a.

There was extensive discussion about Teravainen's commitment (including photos showing a soft belly) and "grit" before last season. A decent sized minority argued that Ferland was much more valuable. I thought (I hope I even posted these thoughts) that Teravainen's development trajectory looked much like Blake Wheeler's. They play dissimilar styles, as do Aho and Tavares, but as i mentioned I see trends based on numbers. TT's 55 assists continue to support the Wheeler-like trajectory.

I bring this up because I have been a proponent of Wallmark remaining at 3C not because of how he looks when he plays but because of his trajectory. At this point in his career, Wallmark looks like Frans Nielsen or possibly Tomas Plekanec. Nielsen became a strong two-way 45-50 point center. Plekanec was reliable for 60+ points in his best season. Ironically, a more recent player with a similar, yet slightly lower, point trajectory is Erik Haula.

I fully understand that Haula is faster and that is important in today's game and the Canes gameplan. However, while I surely over-emphasize the trends evident in pure numbers, I think others miss that Wallmark likely has more upside that what we all saw. I truly believe that the best of both worlds would be a third-line of Haula/Wallmark/Necas.

Waddell's comments on the Haula trade:

“(Haula) can play special teams, power play and penalty kill, and gives you another offensive guy who can skate,” Waddell said. “We need three good lines and nothing against (Lucas) Wallmark, who did a good job for us last year, but if he ends up sliding down that’s good. We’ll have three very good offensive lines and a true centerman that we really wanted.”

Wallmark will be a great 4C next year who can move up to 3C in a pinch. Haula is a vastly better offensive C at this point in their careers.

 

[MinJaBen]

I "see" the world—and for this purpose hockey—differently than most. For whatever reason I see trends based on numbers.

For instance, before last season I suggested that Aho would be fine as a 1C because he put excellent numbers in international play and because his production his first two seasons was almost identical to John Tavares' production. Well as a 1C Aho had 30 goals and 53 assists in his third season; Tavares had 31g/50a.

There was extensive discussion about Teravainen's commitment (including photos showing a soft belly) and "grit" before last season. A decent sized minority argued that Ferland was much more valuable. I thought (I hope I even posted these thoughts) that Teravainen's development trajectory looked much like Blake Wheeler's. They play dissimilar styles, as do Aho and Tavares, but as i mentioned I see trends based on numbers. TT's 55 assists continue to support the Wheeler-like trajectory.

I bring this up because I have been a proponent of Wallmark remaining at 3C not because of how he looks when he plays but because of his trajectory. At this point in his career, Wallmark looks like Frans Nielsen or possibly Tomas Plekanec. Nielsen became a strong two-way 45-50 point center. Plekanec was reliable for 60+ points in his best season. Ironically, a more recent player with a similar, yet slightly lower, point trajectory is Erik Haula.

I fully understand that Haula is faster and that is important in today's game and the Canes gameplan. However, while I surely over-emphasize the trends evident in pure numbers, I think others miss that Wallmark likely has more upside that what we all saw. I truly believe that the best of both worlds would be a third-line of Haula/Wallmark/Necas.

I see Rask when I see Walmark. Both had good years when they were asked to step into the void filled by a Staal injury. Both are smart players who know where to be on the ice in both zones. Both have decent shots and are good passers. Both are slow. Both are being left behind by the uptick in the speed of the league.

 

[NotOpie]

Compare Haula's 24 yr. old year (his 1st full year in the NHL) to Wallmark's 23 yr. old year (his 1st full year in the NHL).

Haula - 72 games/ 7 goals/ 7 assists/ 14 points
Wallmark - 81 games/ 10 goals/ 18 assists/ 28 points

That year, Haula's FO% was 45.9%. Last year, Wallmark's was 50.9%

Now I'm not arguing that Wallmark is the better player; currently Haula clearly is. However, at similar points in their progressions, Wallmark was well ahead of Haula.

I agree that THIS YEAR, Wallmark and the team will be better served with him at 4C. I do believe he will see some PK time and likely averages 9 - 10 minutes a game. I also realize that Erik Haula has never played a full 82 game season in the NHL, so Wallmark is almost guaranteed to see 3C duties.

All of this assumes that somebody doesn't rise up in camp and displace players that we hadn't anticipated.

 

[A Star is Burns]

I don't get all of this comparing guys at the same age like it's going to indicate how two completely different players will progress the same. Riley Nash had his first full year at age 24 and put up 24 points in 73 games. And that's just what he is at best aside from a fluke season with Boston one time.

 

[NotOpie]

I don't get all of this comparing guys at the same age like it's going to indicate how two completely different players will progress the same. Riley Nash had his first full year at age 24 and put up 24 points in 73 games. And that's just what he is at best aside from a fluke season with Boston one time.

It has less to do with same age and more to do with same place in the player development cycle. As I said, right now Haula's a better player and the smart move is to play him in the 3C role. But don't downplay the potential of Wallmark who has progressed nicely every single year he's played professionally.

Playing against men in Sweden, he went from 10 to 18 to 32 points and then scoring 9 points in 11 playoff games. Fast forward to Charlotte and he comes in on North American ice and puts up 46 and then 55 points. In his 1st full season in the NHL, he puts up 28 points. At every stop in his career he has continued to develop and increased his contributions.

Again, this isn't putting down Haula, merely pointing out that we have a very nice resource in Wallmark. While I'd be sad to see him go, he also would be a nice chip in a mult-player trade. I believe he's valued more by other teams than by us here on HFB.

 

[A Star is Burns]

I like Wallmark a lot, though I'm very happy we might be in a situation where he's on the 4th line because of our depth. I'm not saying he won't ever develop into more. I just think it's equally likely he'll be what he is now or close to it, a la a Riley Nash, as it is finding someone that had a progression into a 2nd line center type and thinking he'll make it there because someone else did. That's not how it works.

 

[emptyNedder]

Haula is a vastly better offensive C at this point in their careers.

The word vastly is doing some heavy lifting. Haula has one really good season (playing with the good version of James Neal and a healthy David Perron ) on a team where every player over-performed. Last season he was on pace for 38 points, which is pretty much his average year. That is better than 28 points but it is not a vast gap. As NotOpie mentioned Wallmark is better in the face-off circle and I would argue better defensively. The Haula from 17-18 is significantly better than Wallmark of last season; the mean Haula is about what everyone can expect from Wallmark this season.

I just think it's equally likely he'll be what he is now or close to it, a la a Riley Nash, as it is finding someone that had a progression into a 2nd line center type and thinking he'll make it there because someone else did. That's not how it works.

But similar progression at multiple steps does indicated some degree of correlation. So let's look at Haula and Wallmark as 22-year-olds in the AHL. Haula produced 27 points in 31 games (14g/13a) .88 ppg. Wallmark produced 55 points in 45 games (17g/38a) 1.22 ppg. The ratio of goals to assists is a consistent theme for both players.

I am fine with Haula on the 3rd line—it is just that most indicators point toward Wallmark being better this coming season at those things that are important for a center: face-offs, defense, setting up teammates' goals.

 

[GoldiFox]

The word vastly is doing some heavy lifting. Haula has one really good season (playing with the good version of James Neal and a healthy David Perron ) on a team where every player over-performed. Last season he was on pace for 38 points, which is pretty much his average year. That is better than 28 points but it is not a vast gap. As NotOpie mentioned Wallmark is better in the face-off circle and I would argue better defensively. The Haula from 17-18 is significantly better than Wallmark of last season; the mean Haula is about what everyone can expect from Wallmark this season.


But similar progression at multiple steps does indicated some degree of correlation. So let's look at Haula and Wallmark as 22-year-olds in the AHL. Haula produced 27 points in 31 games (14g/13a) .88 ppg. Wallmark produced 55 points in 45 games (17g/38a) 1.22 ppg. The ratio of goals to assists is a consistent theme for both players.

I am fine with Haula on the 3rd line—it is just that most indicators point toward Wallmark being better this coming season at those things that are important for a center: face-offs, defense, setting up teammates' goals.

I've already laid out the data multiple times. The difference between Haula's 55 point season and what you label as his "average year" of ~15 goals and 40 points was simply 181 minutes of PP time in 2017-18 which Haula had never received in his career.

You want to compare Wallmark's season where he got 100+ minutes of PP time and glaze over Haula's only season where he received PP time. It doesn't make sense analytically so I will break it apart for you.

Haula 5v5 scoring	Team	5v5 G/82 Pace	5v5 A/82 Pace	5v5 P/82 Pace
20152016	MIN	11	17	28
20162017	MIN	16	10	26
20172018	VGK	15	17	32
20182019	VGK	11	22	33

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Wallmark 5v5 scoring	Team	5v5 G/82 Pace	5v5 A/82 Pace	5v5 P/82 Pace
20172018	CAR	7	0	7
20182019	CAR	7	10	17

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

No competition at 5v5. Haula putting up 10-15 more 5v5 points during the season could win multiple games alone. I consider this "vastly" better for a 3C.

Now let's look at the 1 single year each player got PP time:

Haula PP	Team	TOI	PPG/60	PPA/60	PPP/60
20172018	VGK	181	3.97	2.32	6.29

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Wallmark PP	Team	TOI	PPG/60	PPA/60	PPP/60
20182019	CAR	102	1.18	2.94	4.12

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Again you see a "vastly better offensively" Haula producing points at a much higher rate on the PP, particularly scoring goals which is one of the Canes weak areas.

In conclusion, Haula didn't have "one really good season" as you put it. He's had four great seasons producing 5v5 points and an even better season when his team used him on the PP. In any case he's an upgrade in every situation, as Waddell mentioned in my original quote.

 

[emptyNedder]

He's had four great seasons producing 5v5 points and an even better season when his team used him on the PP. In any case he's an upgrade in every situation

First, I totally agree about the power play, I think Haula should be on the first unit. However, 5-0n-5 is mostly due to playing with better teammates (Neal and Perron as mentioned, and NN and Pominville in Minnesota).
Wallmark actually has favorable numbers for producing High Danger chances (.250 per minute for Wallmark/ .160 for Haula). Expected goal % also favors Wallmark 59.0 to 52.6.
Advanced stats don't create wins. However, the stat geeks love them because strong advanced stats one year are an indicator of actual production the next.

Haula had 15 points in his first 46 NHL games and then 14 in his first full season (72 games). That is comparable to Wallmark's 17 5-on-5 points.

Glad to have Haula. But there are multiple data points that suggest Wallmark will produce as his career progresses.

 

[DougieSmash]

Watching all of those Dzingel highlights I think he could became fan favourite

 

[emptyNedder]

Haula PPTeamTOIPPG/60PPA/60PPP/6020172018VGK1813.972.326.29Wallmark PPTeamTOIPPG/60PPA/60PPP/6020182019CAR1021.182.944.12

Stats. Most recent year is absent.

Haula on power play in 18-19: TOI 35 minutes G = 0 A = 1 PPG/60 =0.00 PPA = 1.71 PPP/60 = 1.71.

 

[GoldiFox]

Stats. Most recent year is absent.

Haula on power play in 18-19: TOI 35 minutes G = 0 A = 1 PPG/60 =0.00 PPA = 1.71 PPP/60 = 1.71.

Not absent - clearly labeled:
"Now let's look at the 1 single year each player got PP time:"

Haula was injured 15 games into last year. Given that Vegas brought in Pacioretty and Stastny prior to the year starting Haula played on the 2nd unit. His top PP linemates were Colin Miller (28 minutes), Tomas Hyka (21 min), Pacioretty (15 min), Shea Theodore (14 min), Ryan Reaves (10.5 mins), Cody Eakin (9 mins), and Oscar Lindberg (9 mins). I don't think there is enough data to make any meaningful conclusions from that dataset other than a new 2nd PP unit was struggling to click as the season starts.

Even so if you add in those 35 minutes Haula is significantly more productive than Wallmark on the PP over the past 2 years. Which you already agreed with so this appears to be a moot point.

 

[NotOpie]

My take away is that Haula is the better choice now for the 3C position. We are lucky to have Wallmark as what probably will be an outstanding 4C. As Wally progresses in the NHL he likely becomes an equivalent or better 3C than Haula....which would be a good thing.

 

[spockBokk]

Just saw this video loaded today:



It’s noteworthy how many goals Dzingel scores on wristers or snappers from distance, as well as the number of goals on the PP.

Also he’s not too bad around the net as well.

 

[bleedgreen]

He can finish, and we need that pretty badly. I like how he does the simple things like stopping at the the net instead of flybys. He’s always looking to sit in open space and make himself a target for passes.