News and Notes XXII: Now With More Finnish!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,544
98,727
I wouldn't be shocked if that is part of the plan. Ship salary out for "culture change", tank a bit for high picks in some good drafts, reboot in a two years.

I would be surprised.

1) It's hard to "change the culture of losing" by tanking and lose a bunch more.
2) Dundon wants to build this fan base. He's doing a ton of stuff to try and do that, but he knows having a bad team won't do that.
 

Anton Dubinchuk

aho
Sponsor
Jul 18, 2010
26,372
55,923
Atlanta, GA
The only thing I'm worried about is if we try to make too many changes. Something like Skinner, Faulk, and Darling out, Saad and Martinez in is fine. But if we start moving guys like Hanifin without a legit #1C (which isn't O'Reilly) coming back I'm REALLY concerned going forward.

I’m not super concerned there. I think winning the lottery changed a whole lot as far as Dundon’s initial message that there will be major changes. I’d bet a few players get moved, but I doubt all of Skinner, Faulk, Hanifin, Lindholm will be gone. I’d say two at most.
 

MinJaBen

Canes Sharks Boy
Sponsor
Dec 14, 2015
20,994
81,099
Durm
I would be surprised.

1) It's hard to "change the culture of losing" by tanking and lose a bunch more.
2) Dundon wants to build this fan base. He's doing a ton of stuff to try and do that, but he knows having a bad team won't do that.

What I've heard them say is that they want to change the culture to be tougher to play against. I can't recall hearing them use the word losing. Ideally, that means both, but you can lose some and still get tougher if the guys you are shipping out are skilled but soft and roll over when the chips are down.

Personally, I think this means Skinner is moved for futures/picks, Faulk is moved for a player, Hanifin is retained if signable, Lindholm is retained if signable, Darling is moved if movable, Rask is moved. Then we sign a older RHD, maybe Green for a bit more term than Detroit is offering, say four years and let both Necas and Svechnikov get baptized by fire.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,544
98,727
What I've heard them say is that they want to change the culture to be tougher to play against. I can't recall hearing them use the word losing.

Brind'Amour certainly did. He said (paraphrasing) the team always entered the 3rd period with a feeling they'd end up losing and the team needed to change the losing culture. It was very direct.

Ideally, that means both, but you can lose some and still get tougher if the guys you are shipping out are skilled but soft and roll over when the chips are down.

That could be. You also run the risk of guys you kept getting more demoralized by a craptacular seasons. Either way, I would be very surprised if the Canes plan is to tank next year, very surprised.

Personally, I think this means Skinner is moved for futures/picks, Faulk is moved for a player, Hanifin is retained if signable, Lindholm is retained if signable, Darling is moved if movable, Rask is moved. Then we sign a older RHD, maybe Green for a bit more term than Detroit is offering, say four years and let both Necas and Svechnikov get baptized by fire.

Yeah, that seems like the most likely scenario.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,544
98,727
Man, Lindholm at 5x5 is some risky business when he still hasn't shown he's going to take that next step.

True. For that reason, I'm betting his agent is pushing for a lower term deal, thinking that with Brind'Amour now coaching and Svechnikov and Necas joining the team, that Lindholm will break-out and command much more on the next deal.
 

Novacane

Registered User
Jan 25, 2012
24,985
9,030
Raleigh, NC
Sounds like you can probably bet on Hanifin sticking around:

No down time for Hurricanes' Waddell
Also in there:
Waddell says some of the Hurricanes prospects are being evaluated to determine which players could be moved in trades to fortify other positions, but says that 5-6 of the forwards with the Charlotte Checkers will be competing for roster spots with the Hurricanes.

Trading Faulk, Skinner, etc for futures may indeed be an immediate downgrade in roster quality, but it doesn’t necessarily mean we won’t turn around and use those assets to add in a replacement. Not exactly groundbreaking but it’s important to consider the whole plan when panicking about a trade
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad