Toggle sidebar

Rumor: Teams connected to Faulk: CHI, DET, EDM, and TOR

GoldiFox

Registered User
Apr 21, 2014
13,287
32,030
heybuddyhowyadoing said:
Lower value.

Why?

Because CAR went out and got Hamilton and DeHaan this offseason.

Waddell doesn't need to be desperate, but he's not getting great assets back for Faulk.
Click to expand...

A contender isn’t going to offer less to Carolina for Faulk just because the Canes added Hamilton and De Haan. There are 31 teams in the league and 124 top-4 D slots. Whether the Canes own 4% of that market (5/124) or 3.2% (4/124) of that market doesn’t move the needle much from a demand standpoint.

The offers are already bad. If the Canes had a suitable offer at this point then they would not be preparing to pay one of Faulk, Pesce, or Hamilton $4-6 million to play on the 3rd pair (and scratch a $2 million TVR). The Canes are not as desperate to move Faulk as they were with Skinner who only had 1 year left.

Teams that are heavy on Karlsson will eventually be let down or get frustrated and look at other options. Faulk seems like an obvious backup plan. Not much rush to deal Faulk while the value-drivers like that are still in limbo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SaskCanesFan
HoweHullOrr

HoweHullOrr

Registered User
Oct 3, 2013
11,608
2,215
lukeleim said:
My best offer is:
Ron Hainsey
Leafs 1st 2019
Calvin Pickard
Yegor Korschkov
Click to expand...

heybuddyhowyadoing said:
Seems like a lot. CAR will have to come down a lot.
Click to expand...

Yes, its 4 assets if that's what you mean by "a lot". Otherwise, its just another quantity over quality offer.

Boom Boom Apathy said:
Canes would be moving Faulk because they have 7 NHL defensemen on the roster (Slavin, Pesce, Hamilton, De Hann, Faulk, TVR, Fleury). Taking an NHL defenseman back in a deal makes zero sense for the Canes.

Leafs 1st is very likely going to be at the very end of round 1, maybe even 31st.
26 year old AHL / back-up goalies like Pickard have almost no value in a trade, especially when he's going to have to pass through waivers in the first place.
Don't know much about Korschkov.

On the surface, not a very enticing deal. If that's the "best offer", I'd pass.
Click to expand...

^^^ This is a better analysis imho.
 
ManofSteel55

ManofSteel55

Registered User
Aug 15, 2013
32,053
12,169
Sylvan Lake, Alberta
RCS said:
No way Carolina trades Faulk for RNH. It would be RNH ++
Click to expand...

Its fine that you think so, but the Oilers wouldn't consider moving RNH for Faulk in any scenario, the time when Nuge may have been available is gone. The only way Edmonton and Carolina can do this deal I think is a three way trade. Even that will be too complicated with the Oil having to dump salary in this deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TFHockey
ottomaddox

ottomaddox

Registered User
Oct 31, 2017
10,592
4,600
Toronto
KeonHorton said:
Yes, its 4 assets if that's what you mean by "a lot". Otherwise, its just another quantity over quality offer.



^^^ This is a better analysis imho.
Click to expand...

No. A 2019 1st is at play here and I think most teams would best be advised to try their damnedest to keep their pick.
 
spockBokk

spockBokk

Registered User
Sep 8, 2013
7,122
17,864
Boom Boom Apathy said:
If you ignore that the Canes have no use for a bottom 6 winger, that might make sense.

Nah, even then it doesn't.
Click to expand...

This.

And this doesn't even address the part of the original crap offer that also included a "top 4 " D in Hainsey....which of course CAR needs w/ Hamilton/Slavin/Pesce/de Haan...:help:

I wouldn't like it, since I think CAR needs a proven 20g guy back for Faulk, but I could put up with offers of Kapanen + 1st that were so common before the Skinner trade. The scraps added to a 1st or 2nd rd pick that Leaf fans have posted lately in this thread that they'd think would actually land a top 4 RHD on a reasonable contract is mind-boggling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SaskCanesFan and Svechhammer
Boom Boom Apathy

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,332
97,736
Don't get me wrong, I don't have confidence that Waddel won't make a bad trade, but just because a GM makes a bad trade, doesn't mean it makes sense. Guys like Chiarelli have taught us that.
 
Henkka

Henkka

Registered User
Jan 31, 2004
31,205
12,195
Tampere, Finland
If nothing pleases Carolina now, maybe just better for all wait a year, and let Faulk value drop, when Dougie Hamilton runs the 1st PP.

Then he would be got for Skinner value. Nearer the UFA status comes... you guys know it.
 
Liferleafer

Liferleafer

TSN Scrum Lurker
Feb 9, 2011
39,848
13,005
spockrock said:
This.

And this doesn't even address the part of the original crap offer that also included a "top 4 " D in Hainsey....which of course CAR needs w/ Hamilton/Slavin/Pesce/de Haan...:help:

I wouldn't like it, since I think CAR needs a proven 20g guy back for Faulk, but I could put up with offers of Kapanen + 1st that were so common before the Skinner trade. The scraps added to a 1st or 2nd rd pick that Leaf fans have posted lately in this thread that they'd think would actually land a top 4 RHD on a reasonable contract is mind-boggling.
Click to expand...
I actually agree, but i am also a Leafs fan that doesn't want to target Faulk. I won't bash him, he just isn't the D we need.
 
HoweHullOrr

HoweHullOrr

Registered User
Oct 3, 2013
11,608
2,215
heybuddyhowyadoing said:
A lot as in trading a top 4 D plus a first round pick and two prospects just to acquire Faulk.

I think a bottom 6 winger (full time roster player) plus a 2nd round draft pick could get it done.
Click to expand...

I think (one of) the disconnect(s) here is the reference to Hainsey as a top-4 D. He'd be a bottom pairing defender on most good/decent teams. Our blueline isn't that strong, so we had to push him up on the depth charts because of lack of options. And the other 2 assets that are included are tertiary, hence little to no incentive for our potential trading partner.
 
Boom Boom Apathy

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,332
97,736
Henkka said:
If nothing pleases Carolina now, maybe just better for all wait a year, and let Faulk value drop, when Dougie Hamilton runs the 1st PP.

Then he would be got for Skinner value. Nearer the UFA status comes... you guys know it.
Click to expand...

Maybe, a couple counterpoints though:

1) Assuming Hamilton will automatically be on the #1 PP might be premature. Faulk has actually been a BETTER PP scorer than Hamilton last year, and over the past 4 years. Faulk may very well stay on that 1st PP unit.

2) Faulk is coming off a bad year in which his SH% was (IMO), unsustainably low. I think there's more chance he bounces back than gets worse, but that's just my opinion.

3) Flipside is the Canes are now in a position where they can let Faulk have lesser defensive responsibilities, and use him in a more offensive, sheltered role. His ES scoring and effectiveness could actually improve.

A bunch of what-ifs, but not totally unreasonable either.
 
ottomaddox

ottomaddox

Registered User
Oct 31, 2017
10,592
4,600
Toronto
KeonHorton said:
I think (one of) the disconnect(s) here is the reference to Hainsey as a top-4 D. He'd be a bottom pairing defender on most good/decent teams. Our blueline isn't that strong, so we had to push him up on the depth charts because of lack of options. And the other 2 assets that are included are tertiary, hence little to no incentive for our potential trading partner.
Click to expand...

It's been said before, but I don't think Hainsey has been lower than a number 4 throughout most of his career. This isn't like putting Antropov/Stajan in when Sundin retired type of thing. Hainsey might be not good enough to be a number two, but he sure is a top 4.
 
HoweHullOrr

HoweHullOrr

Registered User
Oct 3, 2013
11,608
2,215
heybuddyhowyadoing said:
It's been said before, but I don't think Hainsey has been lower than a number 4 throughout most of his career. This isn't like putting Antropov/Stajan in when Sundin retired type of thing. Hainsey might be not good enough to be a number two, but he sure is a top 4.
Click to expand...

Then why are we moving Hainsey if he is a legit top-4 defender? Doesn't make any sense.

Anyhow, I doubt if anything I say at this point will make a difference. So, its time .....
 
spockBokk

spockBokk

Registered User
Sep 8, 2013
7,122
17,864
Liferleafer said:
I actually agree, but i am also a Leafs fan that doesn't want to target Faulk. I won't bash him, he just isn't the D we need.
Click to expand...

Perfectly reasonable.

I think Faulk would help you guys, but maybe not as much as a guy like Pesce. With either guy from CAR, I think the asking price wouldn’t fit with what TOR would be willing to give up.
 
Big Daddy Cane

Big Daddy Cane

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 8, 2010
13,334
31,882
Western PA
Even if you want to call Hainsey a Top 4 defender, he’s still 37 and a UFA next Summer. His trade value, and that’s all that matters to Carolina given the LHD depth in the organization, is less than that label. I mean, he only returned a 2nd in a similar circumstance 1.5 years ago.
 
Svechhammer

Svechhammer

THIS is hockey?
Jun 8, 2017
23,730
87,231
heybuddyhowyadoing said:
Seems like a lot. CAR will have to come down a lot.
Click to expand...

heybuddyhowyadoing said:
Lower value.

Why?

Because CAR went out and got Hamilton and DeHaan this offseason.

Waddell doesn't need to be desperate, but he's not getting great assets back for Faulk.
Click to expand...
I just want to point out the fact that this guy is saying
1 - The Canes have to lower their Faulk value because they have too many D-men
2 - The Canes would have to raise their offer to acquire a deal that revolves around Hainsey, a D-man for Toronto who is clamoring for D
 
ottomaddox

ottomaddox

Registered User
Oct 31, 2017
10,592
4,600
Toronto
Svechhammer said:
I just want to point out the fact that this guy is saying
1 - The Canes have to lower their Faulk value because they have too many D-men
2 - The Canes would have to raise their offer to acquire a deal that revolves around Hainsey, a D-man for Toronto who is clamoring for D
Click to expand...

No.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom