Confirmed with Link: Priskie is a Jerky Boy [2 years/$925K AAV]

[Unsustainable]

Have to think that Faulk or TVR is on the board for something. Even add a bottom 6 to him to get a better bottom 6?

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Have to think that Faulk or TVR is on the board for something. Even add a bottom 6 to him to get a better bottom 6?

I don't think Rod would guarantee a spot for a guy that has never played professional hockey before in his life, particularly at the expense of Faulk, a legit top 4 D. Next year, after he's had a year to evaluate Priskie, Bean, Forsling, Fleury, etc...is a different story, but I think it would be lunacy to trade Faulk or TVR right now.

 

[spockBokk]

I don't think Rod would guarantee a spot for a guy that has never played professional hockey before in his life, particularly at the expense of Faulk, a legit top 4 D. Next year, after he's had a year to evaluate Priskie, Bean, Forsling, Fleury, etc...is a different story, but I think it would be lunacy to trade Faulk or TVR right now.

I’d agree here with a few caveats.

-I think they’d deal Faulk in a NY minute if they got an offer for him they considered adequate. I don’t buy the party line that the extension talks went well around the draft and think the reports that he was being shopped were correct. Now, the CDH trade probably reined in their willingness to trade him, but I still think they’d be very open to it, provided the return was worthwhile.

-I also think they’d deal TVR easily, with all the depth they have and with his high price tag as a 3rd pair D.

Realistically, an ideal time for any move would probably be around Thanksgiving after they see what they have in all the current unknowns-Fleury/Forsling/Bean and Priskie. I’d not be surprised at all if Faulk and TVr were kept all season.

Actually I’m somewhat hope they end up re-signing Faulk to a 3-4 yr extension and moving on from Hamilton. A future, long term solution of Pesce/Faulk/Priskie down the right side looks ok to me.

 

[bleedgreen]

We no longer have the depth to trade Faulk. TVR would be in our top 4, or one of the kids. We need a top four coming back from somewhere if we move Faulk now. That’s what made the DeHaan trade more painful. It only made sense if Faulk was a shoe in to re sign, and he hasn’t which says to me it’s no done deal.

So unless we have a top 4 coming back from somewhere else we don’t have the depth we had.

 

[Ole Gil]

The team is trying to win the cup this year. They aren't dealing Faulk.

Canes are loaded with prospects and picks. "Losing him for nothing" isn't a big deal.

 

[AD Skinner]

We had 5 top 4 d, now we have 4. If we trade Faulk we will only have 3. I dont see him going anywhere unless the whole team completely stinks up the place to start the season

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I’d agree here with a few caveats.

-I think they’d deal Faulk in a NY minute if they got an offer for him they considered adequate. I don’t buy the party line that the extension talks went well around the draft and think the reports that he was being shopped were correct. Now, the CDH trade probably reined in their willingness to trade him, but I still think they’d be very open to it, provided the return was worthwhile.

I disagree. Once CDH was moved, I cannot see them moving Faulk. The team is trying to win now and forcing Fleury, Bean, Forsling or Priskie into a top 4 role is fraught with risk. Rod gave Faulk the 2nd most toi among D. I’ll never say never, but it would surprise me to see Faulk moved.

-I also think they’d deal TVR easily, with all the depth they have and with his high price tag as a 3rd pair D.

Realistically, an ideal time for any move would probably be around Thanksgiving after they see what they have in all the current unknowns-Fleury/Forsling/Bean and Priskie. I’d not be surprised at all if Faulk and TVr were kept all season.

Actually I’m somewhat hope they end up re-signing Faulk to a 3-4 yr extension and moving on from Hamilton. A future, long term solution of Pesce/Faulk/Priskie down the right side looks ok to me.

I don’t think TVR will be moved, but it wouldn’t surprise me if someone shows well at camp.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

We had 5 top 4 d, now we have 4. If we trade Faulk we will only have 3. I dont see him going anywhere unless the whole team completely stinks up the place to start the season

Exactly. We got tons of prospects as well as likely two 1sts, two 2nds, and two 3rds in the next draft.

 

[Bunch of Jurcos]

Exactly. We got tons of prospects as well as likely two 1sts, two 2nds, and two 3rds in the next draft.

Considering the depth we have in Charlotte is the better strategy to move up to get an elite level talent or continue to move down to get more chances at diamonds in the rough? In considering what it would be like to have Laine play here, I got to thinking we'd only need an elite LW to have a damn solid top six. On the other hand I think analytics says to move down when there's value but I'm not sure if I'm remembering that correctly.

 

[cptjeff]

Considering the depth we have in Charlotte is the better strategy to move up to get an elite level talent or continue to move down to get more chances at diamonds in the rough? In considering what it would be like to have Laine play here, I got to thinking we'd only need an elite LW to have a damn solid top six. On the other hand I think analytics says to move down when there's value but I'm not sure if I'm remembering that correctly.

While all that futures and depth can buy us top flight talent if we want it, we're going to run into the Toronto problem: There's only so much cap space, and springing for too many elite playes is going to severely handicap our ability to shift the investments we make from F to D or to G, and it'll create serious weaknesses elsewhere in our lineup. If we want to stay a contender, we're going to need to identify a few core pieces and to have a constant stream of cost controlled talent coming in around them. The huge number of early round lottery tickets we're accumulating seems like a very good way to guarantee that flow. We had a lot of players in the AHL that could have been serviceable NHLers this year. Lots of them wanted out because they can't get their shot because our NHL players are better than they were. They'll get their shots elsewhere. That is exactly what you want to have happen, as unfair as it is to those guys at times.

Laine is a guy who, a couple years ago, it would have been worth totally reshaping the team for. Now? I don't think so. We actually have elite level talent on this team right now, but we also have seriously capable players up and down the lineup, and elite players are only on the ice for 1/3 of a game. As Vegas has shown, 4 lines full of 2nd/3rd liners beats the ever loving crap out teams with an elite top line and a bunch of scrubs. You do need a couple elite guys to win a cup, but you also have to pay attention to minimizing your weak spots. We have very few weak spots other than the fact that you can murder us on the ice without fearing our PP. Laine could help that, sure, but to come in under the cap we'd have to create weaknesses elsewhere in the lineup. That's not worth it.

 

[Bunch of Jurcos]

While all that futures and depth can buy us top flight talent if we want it, we're going to run into the Toronto problem: There's only so much cap space, and springing for too many elite playes is going to severely handicap our ability to shift the investments we make from F to D or to G, and it'll create serious weaknesses elsewhere in our lineup. If we want to stay a contender, we're going to need to identify a few core pieces and to have a constant team of cost controlled talent coming in around them. The huge number of early round lottery tickets we're accumulating seems like a very good way to guarantee that flow. We had a lot of players in the AHL that could have been serviceable NHLers this year. Lots of them wanted out because they can't get their shot because our NHL players are better than they were. They'll get their shots elsewhere. That is exactly what you want to have happen, as unfair as it is to those guys at times.

Laine is a guy who, a couple years ago, it would have been worth totally reshaping the team for. Now? I don't think so. We actually have elite level talent on this team right now, but we also have seriously capable players up and down the lineup, and elite players are only on the ice for 1/3 of a game. As Vegas has shown, 4 lines full of 2nd/3rd liners beats the ever loving crap out teams with an elite top line and a bunch of scrubs. You do need a couple elite guys to win a cup, but you also have to pay attention to minimizing your weak spots. We have very few weak spots other than the fact that you can murder us on the ice without fearing our PP. Laine could help that, sure, but to come in under the cap we'd have to create weaknesses elsewhere in the lineup. That's not worth it.

You made a very good post. I was thinking moving up into lottery territory in the draft to get an elite level of talent that can grow with Svech and Aho. Although I do agree it would be difficult to move up from 31 it could happen...somehow especially if a Cole Caufield type talent is dropping. I am just spit balling as I learn a lot about hockey and the right things to do from you guys. Hence why I always ask so many questions.

 

[Roboturner913]

Only way I can see Faulk getting traded is if two of Bean, Priskie, Fleury, Sellgren come in and make it impossible to send them back to Charlotte. Even then, trading Faulk would only make sense if we're getting a forward of equal value in return.

I do not see this happening, but stranger things have. What if Bean/Priskie/etc. come in looking like the 2015 versions of Slavin and Pesce as rookies?

 

[NotOpie]

I also think having d-men on their "opposite" side might become something of a trend in hockey like the infield shift in baseball.

Yeah, it's not as big of a deal as some think. However, I've see a few mentions of TVR on his off side. Frankly, he was terrible playing on the left side in my limited viewings.

Brute

Old Spice

 

[The Jerk Store]

Old Spice

Aqua Velva

 

[FreshSeabass]

 

[DougieSmash]

Not a fan of D wearing #7... But Wallin was beauty. Btw. I hope Bean take another number not 24.

 

[raynman]

Bah Gawd that’s Ryan Murphy’s music!

 

[Chrispy]

Bah Gawd that’s Ryan Murphy’s music!

Ryan Murphy got music?? He struck me as standing in the ring when they came back from commercial.

 

[My Special Purpose]

The team is trying to win the cup this year. They aren't dealing Faulk.

Agreed.

Canes are loaded with prospects and picks. "Losing him for nothing" isn't a big deal.

Disagree. Losing him for nothing is bad.

Only way I can see Faulk getting traded is if two of Bean, Priskie, Fleury, Sellgren come in and make it impossible to send them back to Charlotte. Even then, trading Faulk would only make sense if we're getting a forward of equal value in return.

I do not see this happening, but stranger things have. What if Bean/Priskie/etc. come in looking like the 2015 versions of Slavin and Pesce as rookies?

Faulk isn't getting traded based on two weeks of anybody's play, no matter how spectacular. Training camp isn't going to change anything. Hamilton, Faulk, Pesce, Slavin and Fleury are on the team. TvR is there when healthy. Forsling likely sticks as the seventh guy, and maybe a guy like Priskie or McKeown (if he's signed) has a chance if TvR needs more time.

Bean, Sellgren, Priskie, Wood, Lintuniemi and McKeown are young, but they are known quantities. The team knows what they have coming up, and two dazzling weeks in September isn't going to all of a sudden make Justin Faulk expendable.

The hope in the organization -- in my opinion -- is that another year of seasoning for those six will make at least one or both of Faulk and TvR expendable *next* summer. The same way as they likely hope another year of seasoning for Luostarinen, Geekie, Gauthier and Kuokkanen could potentially make Haula expendable and Dzingel expendable after 2020-21.

There's really literally no rush. Guys are lined up, NHL contracts are staggered, and when the kids are ready, there will be room.

The one thing I do have an issue with when we talk about our prospect defensemen, Bean and Priskie especially, is that we don't give them enough credit, IMO. There's probably a top four guy in there. We should not be limiting them to bottom pairing projections. I don't think it's hard to imagine one of them replacing Faulk next summer.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Disagree. Losing him for nothing is bad.

I don't agree as it has to be looked at in the right context. If the Canes get a 2nd round pick and prospect for Faulk right now, that's a worse outcome (IMO) than keeping him as a top 4 RHD this year and losing him for nothing next summer.

I think your statement after that is dead on: "The hope in the organization -- in my opinion -- is that another year of seasoning for those six will make at least one or both of Faulk and TvR expendable *next* summer.", which by definition, means they lose him for nothing and right now, holding on to him at the risk of that is the right call.

If for some unexpected reason the Canes flop this year, they can always move him at the deadline.

 

[Chrispy]

The one thing I do have an issue with when we talk about our prospect defensemen, Bean and Priskie especially, is that we don't give them enough credit, IMO. There's probably a top four guy in there. We should not be limiting them to bottom pairing projections. I don't think it's hard to imagine one of them replacing Faulk next summer.

I think most of the comments around Bean and Priskie have been that they aren't ready for top 4 time this year (i.e. don't trade Faulk now), not in the future.

Whoever is the candidate for a top 4 role next year should be able to take that bottom pairing job in camp and get some NHL time this season. Whether that's Bean, Priskie, Fleury, Forsling, Sellgren, or McKeown. I feel much better about one of them taking over a top 4 role after a season on the bottom pairing than coming in straight from the AHL, even next year.

 

[My Special Purpose]

If for some unexpected reason the Canes flop this year, they can always move him at the deadline.

And if they don't, they can always try to trade his rights. I know what I said was kinda contradictory, but my point is that losing assets for nothing is bad, in general. In Faulk's specific case, I guess I'd just hope we did *something* with his rights instead of simply allowing him to walk.

I think most of the comments around Bean and Priskie have been that they aren't ready for top 4 time this year (i.e. don't trade Faulk now), not in the future.

Whoever is the candidate for a top 4 role next year should be able to take that bottom pairing job in camp and get some NHL time this season. Whether that's Bean, Priskie, Fleury, Forsling, Sellgren, or McKeown. I feel much better about one of them taking over a top 4 role after a season on the bottom pairing than coming in straight from the AHL, even next year.

Of course, but I don't think it's outside the realm of good management to pencil Bean in as a second-pairing LD after two highly successful AHL seasons, or Sellgren after two pro seasons in the SHL. I'd love to see them get some quality minutes with the big club before doing so, but if it doesn't work out that way, it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Again, the team knows what they have.

 

[cptjeff]

And if they don't, they can always try to trade his rights. I know what I said was kinda contradictory, but my point is that losing assets for nothing is bad, in general.

The thing that HF as a whole always seems to forget is that the hockey that gets played has value. A year of Faulk makes us a better team than what we would have available to replace him, and a second and mediocre prospect might eventually pan out to being worth a season of Faulk, but odds are that it won't come anywhere close. We are a team that expects to contend for a cup. The extra couple wins matter a whole lot more than a pick that has a 30% chance of ever even playing a single game in the NHL.

We're not a bad team where a win or two per season's difference is irrelevant and selling off parts gets us a better draft pick because losing an extra game might help long term. We're a contending team. We have the depth where we can easily afford to lose Faulk for nothing after this season- but this season, and Faulk's ability to earn more wins than the next player up, actually matters.

 

[NotOpie]

I just don't expect Faulk to get moved at all....unless we do stink up the joint. I do, however, feel that TVR could potentially get traded. My logic for this is that you've got Fleury who has 87 games under his belt. You've got Forsling with 122 games under his belt. If either of these guys have a great camp, then one *could* argue that guy is the veteran/experienced guy of the 3rd pair. Then you might consider moving TVR for Bean/Priskie/McKeown to take his place.

Personally, I think that scenario has a better chance of happening in November. And my guess is that Rod is more comfortable with the proven quantity. But he did throw Svech out there, even if he started him slowly (3rd/4th line). We can't overlook the slim potential that a guy like Fleury figures it out. Let's face it, of that list of youngsters (adding Sellgren), you've got the only blueliners capable of actually quarterbacking the power play.

 

[HisIceness]

Speaking of McKeown, he's likely at this point to head elsewhere yes? Doesn't seem like he's going to be given a shot here and surely there are some teams out there that would love to have a young d-man like him on their roster, right?