Confirmed Trade: [STL/CAR] Justin Faulk (14% retained), 2020 5th for Joel Edmundson, Dominik Bokk, 2021 7th

[LetsGoBLUES91]

There is a post on the Blues facebook fan page saying he could be our best defender "to anyone who watches hockey". Then he backs off and says "okay maybe not as good as Pietrangelo" but doesn't mention Parayko. It makes me actually appreciate this website. Thank you all.

 

[David Dennison]

Lol someone on the radio this morning said he was a top 10 defenseman in the league, he was like the 3rd beat defenseman on the Hurricanes last year.

 

[LetsGoBLUES91]

Depends on what they need. Faulk's one of the higher end PP triggermen out there. Average defenseman in other aspects.

And we have a team that was elite 5 v 5 but had a garbage power play. This will help.

 

[LetsGoBLUES91]

Isn’t Joel Edmunson pretty good too?

Seems like a good deal for both teams. Gardiner + Bokk + Edmunson > Faulk + De Haan

Not really, no. The value for Carolina is that Bokk is a pretty solid prospect. Probably a 2nd line, 50 point type of guy way down the road.

Edmundson isn't very good. No real complaints on a 3rd pairing but he's not a coveted asset.

 

[Nihiliste]

I guess this is a money thing for the Canes? I feel like they could have gotten an established player if they were willing to take some salary

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Lol someone on the radio this morning said he was a top 10 defenseman in the league, he was like the 3rd beat defenseman on the Hurricanes last year.

4th best. He had a strong year and a solid playoffs but he's not better than Slavin or Pesce for sure and Dougie was a monster on the ice when the calendar flipped over to 2019 so I wouldn't put him ahead there either.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I guess this is a money thing for the Canes? I feel like they could have gotten an established player if they were willing to take some salary

Huh? I think you are confusing this with prior year Canes where they were a budget team. They aren't any longer. They were at the cap limit with Faulk and a 22 man roster, so the most they could take back is the $4.8M cap hit they were sending out with Faulk. They took back $3.1M in Edmundson and retained $677K with Faulk, so this wasn't a "money" thing.

 

[Skin Tape Session]

Edmundson is underrated imo and is perfect for hamilton

 

[Anton Babchuk]

I guess this is a money thing for the Canes? I feel like they could have gotten an established player if they were willing to take some salary

what? we're going to be pressing right up against the cap this season.

Carolina Hurricanes - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

 

[paragon]

I'm confused as this makes no sense at all to me.

First, this has nothing to do with the Calgary trade. Had the Calgary trade never happened, the Canes weren't going to sign Faulk to that deal and would have likely moved him all the same. Second, the Canes missed the playoffs for 9 straight years and the first year after the Calgary trade, they made the playoffs and went all the way to the ECF. How is that "wasting away years they could really be competitive?" Thirdly, the Canes aren't just "acquiring futures"for cap space and veterans. They also acquired guys they think can and will help their team now in Gardiner, Haula, Dzingel, Edmundson, Forsling and Claesson this off-season along with Niederreiter, Hamilton and Martinook last season.

I think the Calgary trade had very little to do with Carolina making the playoffs. It was more about Nino, Mrazek instead of Darling, Svechnikov and coaching change. Especially coaching change. Saying it was because of the Calgary trade is like saying Islanders made the playoffs because they gave away John Tavares for free.

 

[Anton Babchuk]

And we have a team that was elite 5 v 5 but had a garbage power play. This will help.

the hurricanes had a garbage powerplay as well though for virtually faulk's entire tenure. faulk is good at scoring powerplay goals but can't pass to save his life, and his goal totals are inflated by the powerplay being set up around his shot. last year he was 10th in total powerplay time but tied for 35th in powerplay points among defensemen.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I think the Calgary trade had very little to do with Carolina making the playoffs. It was more about Nino, Mrazek instead of Darling, Svechnikov and coaching change. Especially coaching change. Saying it was because of the Calgary trade is like saying Islanders made the playoffs because they gave away John Tavares for free.

On paper, you could argue that and it would be a fair argument, but getting the right guys to play the way Brind'Amour wanted them to play was just as key. And if you are going to state that it had little to do with it, it's just as valid to say the Calgary trade didn't hurt their chances at being competitive or making the playoffs either, which is what you were implying, even though the results don't back up your assertion. Also, as I said earlier, this move has NOTHING to do with the Calgary trade so not sure why you are even bringing it up and saying "these moves make it worse", which is what makes no sense at all.

After all these moves, the Canes have a better, more competitive team, a deeper prospect pool, more picks in the upcoming draft and are coming off one of their best seasons ever. Results are all that count and it's kind of hard to argue with the results so far. Only time will tell if the results will continue to be positive and I fully understand it can go south with all these changes as well and the goaltending is still a question mark.

Either way, your comment made no sense as this deal doesn't affect/impact the Calgary trade in any way, shape or form. Not to mention that the Canes aren't just adding picks/prospects in the moves they are making.

 

[GoldiFox]

Faulk's Individual Points Percentage (his % contribution to scoring plays when he was on the ice for a PP) was 32%. Meaning Faulk only factored into 1 out of every 3 PP goals his unit produced. Of the 24 NHL defenseman with more than 200 PP minutes last year (read: #1PP options) that was #24/#24 with the next lowest player (Giordano) at 51%.

In real terms:
- When #24/24 Faulk was on the ice his PP unit scored 31 goals and he factored into (G or A) only 10 of them
- When #23/24 Giordano was on the ice his PP unit scored 41 goals and he factored into 21 of them

Basically Faulk was a non-factor in Carolina's PP last year. Among PP options around the league he was significantly worse than even the second to last option. He doesn't have the puck moving skill to make plays (producing an Assist) which limits his options to 1) cycling the puck to the man next to him, 2) dumping the puck into the corner, or 3) shooting into a clogged slot because the opponent knows all he can do is shoot.

 

[paragon]

it's just as valid to say the Calgary trade didn't hurt their chances at being competitive or making the playoffs either, which is what you were implying, even though the results don't back up your assertion.

Didn't say or imply that. I think it made Carolina better in the short term. I just think it's not the move to make, if you waste 6M of cap space on Marleau and downgrade on Faulk. Of course I'll take that back, if Hamilton extends.

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

Faulk's Individual Points Percentage (his % contribution to scoring plays when he was on the ice for a PP) was 32%. Meaning Faulk only factored into 1 out of every 3 PP goals his unit produced. Of the 24 NHL defenseman with more than 200 PP minutes last year (read: #1PP options) that was #24/#24 with the next lowest player (Giordano) at 51%.

In real terms:
- When #24/24 Faulk was on the ice his PP unit scored 31 goals and he factored into (G or A) only 10 of them
- When #23/24 Giordano was on the ice his PP unit scored 41 goals and he factored into 21 of them

Basically Faulk was a non-factor in Carolina's PP last year. Among PP options around the league he was significantly worse than even the second to last option. He doesn't have the puck moving skill to make plays (producing an Assist) which limits his options to 1) cycling the puck to the man next to him, 2) dumping the puck into the corner, or 3) shooting into a clogged slot because the opponent knows all he can do is shoot.

Care to share the breakdown of the year prior (17/18)?

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Didn't say or imply that. I think it made Carolina better in the short term. I just think it's not the move to make, if you waste 6M of cap space on Marleau and downgrade on Faulk. Of course I'll take that back, if Hamilton extends.

Here was your exact quote:

But all this acquiring futures for cap space and veterans makes the Calgary trade even more worse, because they are wasting away years they could be really competetive

So maybe I am misreading your post. What were you trying to say or imply?

Here's my confusion:
1) How does trading Faulk and de Hann (who is coming off another shoulder surgery), but also acquiring Gardiner and Edmundson (while gaining a recent 1st round pick) end up being "wasting away years", particularly if you also consider they signed Dzingel, traded futures for Haula, and acquired Nino mid season last year?

2) Marleau's cap space is 1 year and doesn't apply to Faulk or Hamilton. How is this relevant to this discussion at all? The Canes moved Faulk because they didn't want to pay him what he would get NEXT year (the extension St. Louis signed him to). They could easily fit him in this year. And any Hamilton extension would kick in 2 years from now. Marleau's contract is THIS year and is completely irrelevant.

3) How does this relate to the Calgary trade at all? This decision with Faulk would be the same with or without the Calgary trade. The Canes management group has shown they have a price in which they will sign/extend players and if a player that is not one of their key players wants more, they'll move him. So I'm struggling to see why you link this to the Calgary trade in any way, shape for form. If Hamilton prices himself out of the market, the Canes will move him and go out and get someone else (like they did with Gardiner) or promote from within. That's their model these days.

4) You say above that "it makes Carolina better in the short term", but then say "downgrade on Faulk". Faulk was only signed short term so these two statements seem to contradict each other.

I'm not trying to be an ass here, I'm genuinely confused by what you mean as I'm either missing or not understanding the point you are trying to make.

 

[paragon]

Here was your exact quote:

But all this acquiring futures for cap space and veterans makes the Calgary trade even more worse, because they are wasting away years they could be really competetive

So maybe I am misreading your post. What were you trying to say or imply?

Well English is my 3rd language, but I was trying to say that they are wasting away really competitive years (especially his year) by trading cap space and veterans (Marleau and Faulk). And it makes the Calgary trade worse, because that trade was essentially the opposite, making Carolina better now, but sacrificing guaranteed years from Hanifin for less years from Hamilton. If Hamilton doesn't want to extend then next summer Carolina is in the same position with Hamilton, that they were with Faulk this summer.

I'd prefer they stick to one strategy.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Well English is my 3rd language, but I was trying to say that they are wasting away really competitive years (especially his year) by trading cap space and veterans (Marleau and Faulk). And it makes the Calgary trade worse, because that trade was essentially the opposite, making Carolina better now, but sacrificing guaranteed years from Hanifin for less years from Hamilton. If Hamilton doesn't want to extend then next summer Carolina is in the same position with Hamilton, that they were with Faulk this summer.

I'd prefer they stick to one strategy.

Thanks for clarifying. I don't see it as an "either-or". I think their strategy has multiple components which co-exist. When you look at all the moves (including the additions of Gardiner, Haula, Dzingel, etc..). I feel they HAVE improved the roster this year and have also bolstered their farm system for the future.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Well English is my 3rd language, but I was trying to say that they are wasting away really competitive years (especially his year) by trading cap space and veterans (Marleau and Faulk). And it makes the Calgary trade worse, because that trade was essentially the opposite, making Carolina better now, but sacrificing guaranteed years from Hanifin for less years from Hamilton. If Hamilton doesn't want to extend then next summer Carolina is in the same position with Hamilton, that they were with Faulk this summer.

I'd prefer they stick to one strategy.

You're not wrong. They made some moves for the short term and some for the long term which could seem confusing on the outside but I think you have to look at a few things...

1. Last offseason was a huge re-set for the franchise. This meant new ownership, new GM, new coaching, and also a new philosophy of how the team vision on and off the ice.

2. Players like Skinner, Lindholm, Hanafin didn't fit with how the team wanted to play on the ice so they traded them for the best return they could and got players (Hamilton + Ferland) who played the type of game they wanted to see more of. With Skinner it was two fold, his play didn't fit and he was also an expiring contract who was going to get paid WAY more than Carolina wanted to commit to.

3. There's nothing wrong with lineup tinkering that looks at both the short term (win now) but also keeping the future in mind. With this approach they make it so no player can hold them hostage in contract negotiations. Like with Ferland or Faulk. You want to play on this team long term?... then this is the contract we're willing to give. If you can do better, good luck to you but we have internal options that we are fine with or we can go sign someone like Gardiner or Dzingel to a reasonable deal and we're good. You can't do this unless you have strong organizational depth and assets in picks, prospects, and cap space to work with.

What the Canes have done in 1 calendar year is nothing short of remarkable. Other than in goal, they have insane depth throughout their NHL roster, one of the deepest and talented prospect pools, and will have financial flexibility going forward after this year. Their team is also super young too and most players haven't even hit their prime yet.

 

[Lempo]

Well English is my 3rd language, but I was trying to say that they are wasting away really competitive years (especially his year) by trading cap space and veterans (Marleau and Faulk). And it makes the Calgary trade worse, because that trade was essentially the opposite, making Carolina better now, but sacrificing guaranteed years from Hanifin for less years from Hamilton. If Hamilton doesn't want to extend then next summer Carolina is in the same position with Hamilton, that they were with Faulk this summer.

I'd prefer they stick to one strategy.

We can't be exactly sure that part of the Marleau trade wasn't getting some goodwill or "future considerations" with TML. They needed a helping hand and Canes was rumored to be in for various TML players the trades for which may have eventually fallen apart in the end.

 

[67Blues]

Looked good for St. Louis until they signed him for that long term. The last few years won't go well in Seattle.

FIFY

 

[Em etah Eh]

Didn't say or imply that. I think it made Carolina better in the short term. I just think it's not the move to make, if you waste 6M of cap space on Marleau and downgrade on Faulk. Of course I'll take that back, if Hamilton extends.

Carolina is gaining assets that they can use as currency or just develop for themselves. They could flip, the Toronto 1st, Bokk, or Edmunson into other pieces down the line. Or by having those extra assets, maybe they are more comfortable in trading off another piece for something of need.

For example, the blues knew Shatty was not coming back in his final year, so they traded him for a first plus Sandford. The next year, they were on the bubble of a playoff spot but falling pretty hard and sold Stastny to the Jets for a first plus Foley. The following year they traded 2 firsts and dumped Lehtera, for 3 years of Schenn. The next year, they traded picks, plus Tage Thompson (a first round pick) for ROR. If they hadn't had those extra picks from earlier trades, they may not have been comfortable with paying the price on either of those players.

We don't know what Carolina is going to do with these new pieces yet. Maybe they just make the pick and let Bokk develop for themselves, and use Edmundson just this one year. But maybe if a Brayden Schenn type forward, or whatever Carolina's big need is, becomes available, they could have the expendable assets available to close the deal while other teams may not have enough in the cupboard to make the trade. They knew Faulk was not in their long term plans so they didn't just let him walk as a UFA.

 

[bleedgreen]

Don’t let Canes fans tell you that Lindholm and Hanifin didn’t fit in with the visions and future of the team. They’re both awesome players who lack nothing in the intangible or desire category.

New ownership wanting to change what Francis had built and make it their own. They also had to pay the contracts to those two when they knew they also had to sign Aho and TT. They wanted to make a big trade, and those two were the most valuable assets they had to make it happen so they used them. That’s it. They whole change in attitude and vision was a bit of a smoke screen and a “rebranding” for the team, especially when factoring these two players.

I’ll extend that to Skinner. They just didn’t want to pay the contract, and as a fan I dont blame him. I just didn’t like the new ownerships need to brand players as scapegoats for the past.

The canes have great d and for the first time in along time they had really good and consistent goaltending. That’s what turned the tide along with the new coaches attitude. The players shown the doors would’ve bought in and I firmly believe the “old” canes would’ve made the playoffs last year too.

Back in topic this trade was good for both teams. Faulk was leaving and they got good value for him in the end, I think the Blues got the best player and he’s still in his prime.

 

[spockBokk]

Carolina is gaining assets that they can use as currency or just develop for themselves. They could flip, the Toronto 1st, Bokk, or Edmunson into other pieces down the line. Or by having those extra assets, maybe they are more comfortable in trading off another piece for something of need.

For example, the blues knew Shatty was not coming back in his final year, so they traded him for a first plus Sandford. The next year, they were on the bubble of a playoff spot but falling pretty hard and sold Stastny to the Jets for a first plus Foley. The following year they traded 2 firsts and dumped Lehtera, for 3 years of Schenn. The next year, they traded picks, plus Tage Thompson (a first round pick) for ROR. If they hadn't had those extra picks from earlier trades, they may not have been comfortable with paying the price on either of those players.

We don't know what Carolina is going to do with these new pieces yet. Maybe they just make the pick and let Bokk develop for themselves, and use Edmundson just this one year. But maybe if a Brayden Schenn type forward, or whatever Carolina's big need is, becomes available, they could have the expendable assets available to close the deal while other teams may not have enough in the cupboard to make the trade. They knew Faulk was not in their long term plans so they didn't just let him walk as a UFA.

Agree to all of this.

This seems to be a rare "fair" trade, where you can realistically say that both teams come away with returns they are satisfied with. That's the whole point of trades.

 

[Orfieus]

has anyone talked about the pieces going to Carolina?