Rumor: Hurricanes discussing trading Darling and Faulk to Blackhawks

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,483
Minneapolis, MN
If that is the case and Seabrook loses control once he opts to leave Chicago, how does that benefit him? He's the one that would need to be convinced to waive it to go to Carolina.

Because Subban's NTC didn't kick in yet when he was moved from MTL to NAS, the Preds had the option to honour it, and they chose not to.

Not sure if that holds when the NTC/NMC is already active.

Never said it benefits him (unless there is a tax break where he is moved to or a personal reason). Just simply stating that once it is waived and the player is moved the NTC is gone.
 

rent free

Registered User
Apr 6, 2015
20,427
6,114
Faulk isn't 20 points defensively better than Gardiner. Both trades are ****, but for some reason Hawks fans are entertaining the Canes one I figured I'd give you another **** deal, but better than the Canes one.
faulk plays on a much worse offensive team.
 

SaskCanesFan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2015
2,405
5,970
Faulk isn't 20 points defensively better than Gardiner. Both trades are ****, but for some reason Hawks fans are entertaining the Canes one I figured I'd give you another **** deal, but better than the Canes one.

Nice cherry picking one season on acting like Faulk is a 30 point D man. As if he hasn't been comparable offensively on a worse scoring team than Gardiner, while being a much better goal scorer for the past 5 seasons
 

steveayres35

Registered User
Apr 27, 2018
346
61
There is already a thread for this. I'm not sure theScore re-posting one "The Athletic" rumor from earlier today requires a new thread.
Seems unfair that some people post threads before you and you can't even post your ideas, but rules are rules I guess...

But to stay on topic, I guess Chicago could use another backup goalie for competition...
 

HC7

Registered User
May 2, 2018
1,278
939
Nice cherry picking one season on acting like Faulk is a 30 point D man. As if he hasn't been comparable offensively on a worse scoring team than Gardiner, while being a much better goal scorer for the past 5 seasons

Faulk has scored over 40 points once in his career.
Faulk is coming off 3 seasons of having between 30-39 points.
That makes Faulk a 30 point D-Man.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,174
97,102
Once a player with NMC/NTC is moves the new team does not have to honor it (I could be wrong though).

The CBA states that’s only the case if the NMC isn’t yet in effect. Look at the guys teams had to protect last time after a trade like Clarkson, Rick Nash, etc

I don’t recall ever seeing a case where a NMC didn’t survive a trade when it was already in place.

Even so, we aren’t taking Seabrook. He’s owed $9m just next year. Can’t see the Canes taking on that contract in any scenario
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unsustainable

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,174
97,102
Never said it benefits him (unless there is a tax break where he is moved to or a personal reason). Just simply stating that once it is waived and the player is moved the NTC is gone.

I don’t think that’s true at all

EDIT: Here's what is says in the CBA regarding NTC/NMC.

11.8 Individually Negotiated Limitations on Player Movement. (a) The SPC of any Player who is a Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agent under Article 10.1(a) may contain a no-Trade or a no-move clause. SPCs containing a no-Trade or a no-move clause may be entered into prior to the time that the Player is a Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agent so long as the SPC containing the no-Trade or no-move clause extends through and does not become effective until the time that the Player qualifies for Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agency. If the Player is Traded or claimed on Waivers prior to the no-Trade or no-move clause taking effect, the clause does not bind the acquiring Club. An acquiring Club may agree to continue to be bound by the no-Trade or no-move clause, which agreement shall be evidenced in writing to the Player, Central Registry and the NHLPA, in accordance with Exhibit 3 hereof.

So it says IF the clause is not yet in effect, a team has a choice to either not honor it, or continue to be bound by it. Like I said earlier, every guy I've seen traded with a NTC/NMC in place has continued to have it after the trade. Rick Nash had to be protected n the last expansion draft even though he waived his clause to trade to the NYR. Clarkson had to be protected because his NMC stayed in place after the trade. Wizniewski was bought out by Carolina so they didn't have to protect him as his NMC was still in place. etc.. etc..
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Unsustainable

Big Daddy Cane

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 8, 2010
13,229
31,414
Western PA
Matthew is 21, and he's shown improvement every year.

Is Clarkson a 30 goal scorer in your view?

You didn't answer the question. Is he just a 60 point forward or not?

Clarkson's follow up season had him score at a 25 goal pace. At his peak, it wasn't unreasonable to view him as that. That's why the Leafs gave him the contract they gave him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unsustainable

HC7

Registered User
May 2, 2018
1,278
939
You didn't answer the question. Is he just a 60 point forward or not?

Clarkson's follow up season had him score at a 25 goal pace. At his peak, it wasn't unreasonable to view him as that. That's why the Leafs gave him the contract they gave him.

You obviously want me to say Matthews is a 60 point player because he's never gotten more, but the difference between him and Faulk is obvious.

Faulk is 26 and had his best season 3-4 years ago. Matthews is 20 and has increased his scoring every year he's been in the league. So the difference is Matthews is trending upwards, and Faulk has been averaging the same numbers for past 3 years, and if anything there has been decrease since his only 40 point season.

Based on your theory Seabrook is still a 40 point D-Man because he scored 49 points more recently than Faulk has.
 

Big Daddy Cane

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 8, 2010
13,229
31,414
Western PA
You obviously want me to say Matthews is a 60 point player because he's never gotten more, but the difference between him and Faulk is obvious.

Faulk is 26 and had his best season 3-4 years ago. Matthews is 20 and has increased his scoring every year he's been in the league. So the difference is Matthews is trending upwards, and Faulk has been averaging the same numbers for past 3 years, and if anything there has been decrease since his only 40 point season.

Based on your theory Seabrook is still a 40 point D-Man because he scored 49 points more recently than Faulk has.

Matthews is trending up? He scored 6 fewer points in his sophomore season than he did in his rookie season.
 

SaskCanesFan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2015
2,405
5,970
You obviously want me to say Matthews is a 60 point player because he's never gotten more, but the difference between him and Faulk is obvious.

Faulk is 26 and had his best season 3-4 years ago. Matthews is 20 and has increased his scoring every year he's been in the league. So the difference is Matthews is trending upwards, and Faulk has been averaging the same numbers for past 3 years, and if anything there has been decrease since his only 40 point season.

Based on your theory Seabrook is still a 40 point D-Man because he scored 49 points more recently than Faulk has.

Faulks goal scoring increased in each of the prior 3 seasons to this one, where his shooting percentage dropped off unsustainably. I believe that 3 year period he was 3rd or so in the entire NHL for D men goals. It's not his fault he hasn't racked up secondary assists on a bad offensive team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unsustainable

Enrico Ciccone

Registered User
May 7, 2018
60
25
Canada
I think Crawford gets dealt to the Islanders, but Isles get him for cheap because say they take on his whole cap hit from Chicago.
Crawford’s contract is not bad at all for an elite goalie...which he is. Everything depends on health obviously, but he could fetch a lot if he’s good to go. And the hawks aren’t in cap hell anymore.
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
25,607
9,435
Never said it benefits him (unless there is a tax break where he is moved to or a personal reason). Just simply stating that once it is waived and the player is moved the NTC is gone.
And that would be something that would mix any deal. Seabrook will get paid regardless where he is. Just a matter of how he wants to finish out his career.

I Don’t see how seabrook waives his nmc without getting it carried over to his new team. At his age I would imagine he wants to maintain control where he plays.

So any acquiring team takes the risk that if they take him with the agreement of continuing his nmc they risk losing a quality Dman in the next ED. Seabrook could waive his nmc for the Seattle ED, but you can’t guarantee that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boom Boom Apathy

Martin Skoula

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
11,639
16,315
Faulks goal scoring increased in each of the prior 3 seasons to this one, where his shooting percentage dropped off unsustainably. I believe that 3 year period he was 3rd or so in the entire NHL for D men goals. It's not his fault he hasn't racked up secondary assists on a bad offensive team.

His even strength goal scoring had one good outlier year (13 in 16/17), other than that he's been hovering around 4-5 just like this year. With the league transitioning to a 4-1 PP, unless Faulk is your best point man, he's doubtful to return to his goalscoring highs if he gets traded.

Other than elite shots that you have to respect (Ovi, Laine), I think the league's moving away from heavy one-timers from the point. Weaker accurate shots just generate too much positive opportunities off rebounds and deflections while minimizing the risk of missing and having the puck bounce out of the zone. I just don't think defenseman goals really matter that much anymore if it's the defining part of their game.
 

Big Daddy Cane

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 8, 2010
13,229
31,414
Western PA
His even strength goal scoring had one good outlier year (13 in 16/17), other than that he's been hovering around 4-5 just like this year. With the league transitioning to a 4-1 PP, unless Faulk is your best point man, he's doubtful to return to his goalscoring highs if he gets traded.

Other than elite shots that you have to respect (Ovi, Laine), I think the league's moving away from heavy one-timers from the point. Weaker accurate shots just generate too much positive opportunities off rebounds and deflections while minimizing the risk of missing and having the puck bounce out of the zone. I just don't think defenseman goals really matter that much anymore if it's the defining part of their game.

Faulk is not a one-trick pony with the one-timer, though. In the prior three seasons, the slapshot accounted for less than half of his goals in each year.

NHL.com - Stats

Faulk’s percentages across the types of shots were at their lows of that sample across the board and the posts were marginally up relative to the prior two years.

If you want to point to 16-17 as an outlier in terms of EV goal scoring, then you have to point to 15-16 as an outlier in terms of PP goal scoring. That leaves 14-15 and 17-18, in which the split is even.

Perhaps he just had a down year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Surrounded By Ahos

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->