Canes fans think Eddy is a very good player and are happy to get rid of Faulk

Welcome to the first FTP of the new season... btw...

Page number: 1

good traed

I like getting Bokk.

Bokk is a great prospect, equivalent to 1st round pick value. He was drafted 25th overall last year, only 19, right-handed shot. Would not be surprised if Edmundson is flipped. Good trade!

Not terrible. Logjam still exists. Edmundson is another LHD lol.
Basically acquiring Bokk for Faulk while still having a major logjam at LHD.

As in Bokkanalia? Our storm surge just got more interesting.

Mods fix typo of Edmundson in title pls.

Bokk was #50 in Pronman's recent NHL prospect rankings. Good right hand shot forward prospect.
Canes PP is the true winner in the deal

Are we doing another trade then? Fleury and Edmundson for 3rd LHD. Doesn't make sense.

I guess this is OK. Was kind of hoping for someone who could come in and make a more immediate impact.

Would think there is another move in the works?
Slavin, Gardiner, Edmundson, Fleury, Forsling, Sellgren, Bean? I realize Sellgren and Bean will likely not be on the roster,but still seems like a logjam.

They're trading Slavin

#stanleycupchampion Joel Edmundson

Yeah im confused as hell. Why are we still picking up D.

Yikes, Faulk signed a 7 year $6.5m AAV extension in St. Louis

Wasnt there a guy named Bok in Dark Forces 2 with two lightsabers? Awesome

Can Edmundson PK?

Edmundson can play both sides, though he's a left shot.

I imagine STL needs to shed that money this season for the deal to work.

I like Edmundson a lot. Strange.

Edmundson is whatever. Competent enough guy for the bottom pair, and gone in a year. Still promise left, but if he shows plays well we'll have to pay him. But we get a high quality prospect.

Good for Faulk, man, he got insane money and goes to the defending Cup champs. If you have to leave a great situation in Carolina, go there. Happy for him, he's a great player.

Yes. He's averaged about two minutes per game on the PK>

I love this team.
And for the record, thanks to Justin for being a great dude through the past eight seasons. He had some really nice seasons and for a time, looked like he could be a perennial All-Star type player. It didn't work out here and there was a clear changing-of-the-guard that left him without a spot. I'm glad he's going somewhere that he can play regularly and have a chance to win. I've got nothing against the guy personally, and I wish him all the best.
Also, I love this team, and I can't believe this sets up *yet another* trade.

No more Faulk on #1 PP is the best part of this deal.

Page number: 2

For this reason also is why this is a win for us. I'm glad we aren't on the hook for that contract.

Sad to see Justin go. I like what we got back though. Edmundson is more or less a plug-in for DeHaan on the third pair. Gardiner in/Faulk out balances the left side/ride side situation that was off last year.

Who'd have thunk that during all that Nylander/Pesce talk last winter, that we'd actually see the proposed Gardiner-Pesce pairing that both sides talked about being a good fit ... in Carolina.

Edmundson is an excellent 3rd pairing defender if that's where we are going to play him. Would be a more natural fit there than Faulk would have been and brings a bit of a physical edge to his game that should resonate well with what we're trying to do with that line.
This could end up being a sneaky tweak that actually improves the roster this year. And we added Bokk.

That's a boat load of $$ for Faulk. 7 years is insane. No way Tom was doing that.

Nice, happy they finally traded Faulk and got a decent package. That 7 year extension by the Blues is really bad.

Yeah, why go to Anaheim when the Cup champs are interested. Nice to have some control over your fate.

i'd be willing to bet edmundson gets moved to another team shortly

I don't like it but it seems like most of Blues nation does.
Never got what's so special about Faulk, but Edmundson sucks. Bokk is boom or bust and that's what I'm worried about.
But what knocks this from an A to a D+ for me is the extension. My god.

On the other hand, if that kinda sets the market for Hamilton, I don't mind doing the same contract for him if I'm Dundon.

Bokk is an intriguing prospect
Edmundson is a quality depth guy
Pretty good trade for both teams

Absolutely. I mean I'm glad we're not paying it, but I'm happy he's going to get paid his money and be in a great situation down the line. Just a shame for him that the Blues already got theirs. It'll be a shame being on the losing side of the Finals while the Canes are rolling off as soon to be 5x Stanley Cup Champs.

Probably but he's one of the best third pairing guys around the league.

So is Fleury on the way out?

That contract is going to age like a fine milk.

Sorry guys thought this was the main forum.

I like Edmundson. I watched the Finals closely because I have family in St. Louis. He always stood out to me as a solid D for a big guy. It wouldn't shock me if the Canes kept him and moved other pieces, despite multiple teams reportedly being interested in Edmundson (per Friedman today).

And has been proven throughout the history of gaming, the extra "K" will make him twice as bad***.

That contract made me LOL. Best of luck St Louis!

My guess is that Edmundsen is the new Fleury, and Fleury is the new trade bait.

I agree. Or maybe Fleury.

With our Jaccob and Bokk we might have to rebrand to the Bunch of Stuttering Jerks in the near future

Thank you for everything Justin.

Page number: 3

I'm keeping this ****ing name ok.

Did not see St. Louis as a potential trading partner at all. Crazy.
The AAV is fine. The aging curve for a defenseman is different than that of a forward. He'll only be 28 in year 1 of the deal. If you're confident that you'll consistently get 18-19 Faulk, I don't see the issue with the term.

He's going to get $18m in cash over the next....
holy hell, he's going to earn $1m in cash per month for the first year and a half of the deal

How does Edmundson compare to deHaan?

I hope Dougie finally take #27.

Blues are my wc team.
Yall got screwed bud.

Bad.

I'm ok with this. Of course Kase or Ehlers would have been great. But Bokk seems like a nice prospect, and we can bury Edmunsson/flip him. I think increasing ice time for our true top 4 is the big win here.

He's gonna have northern rednecks claiming they're family isn't he?

Another deal where GMBC appears to be playing the league like most play NHL 2020. Sign the undervalued Free Agent to be your 5th top-4 D. Then take your least value top-4 D (now slotted to the 3rd pairing) and move him for a top prospect and a good 3rd pair D. Churn that roster as opportunities arise and stock the cupboards in the process.

Faulk: SHOW ME THE QUESO!

btw. Edmundson just turned 26 years old age... but he has 50 playoffs game under his belt. He's ****in solid on the PK, he's expierenced guy. Exactly Brindy type player. I prefer him over Fleury.

Like I said on the main board, the extension is a little rich for Faulk, but the deal seems pretty even overall. Canes probably lose a little value-wise, but considering we needed to move Faulk to give Hamilton/Gardiner more significant roles, it's fine.

Great now my phone has to learn to not autocorrect bokk to book

Flip a LHD to Montreal? They are trying to move a forward

Mine auto-corrects to Radek Bonk.

I'm seriously seeing people with blue leaves on the trade board say that Faulk's value is higher than what StL just signed him for because "he was sheltered in Carolina"
like... ok, sure... if you think one of our bottom pairing defensemen are worth that much, sure we'll keep trading them to you for some of your top prospects. No. Stop. Please. Don't.

The big win is that we don't have to run our PP through Faulk anymore!

That's probably the right thing to do but **** Montreal.



Canes get Gardiner and Edmundson for just a little over the cost of Faulk from an AAV standpoint and much less term commitment.
Gonna miss Faulk but I see how this is a good move for the Canes.
Getting Bokk + Edmundson for Faulk =/= Disappointment. Maintain roster depth plus add a very good prospect.
From the Blues perspective, they are now stacked on the right side...will they try to move either AP or Parayko...or do one of those guys play the left side?

I don't dislike this. A shade better than a typical rental return.
Would have preferred Kase but Bokk is a solid prospect. Probably ranks somewhere in the Geekie/Goat/Kuokkanen tier or a hair above.

Did Faulk ever play on the left side at all during his tenure?

It's all good. Yeah not getting that extension from the St Louis side unless they know they're not going to be able to keep Petro.

I will miss Faulk though, mostly because he was the beginning of this organization's turn around (IMO).
I remember catching the Frozen Four when he was playing with Minnesota Dulth, and I couldn't believe the Canes had a defenseman that just oozed raw talent. It was so out of place, considering Rutherford's long-standing stance on drafting defense.
Then we kept hitting gold in the 2nd rounds and later, and you could tell this organization was finally heading out of the swamp it found itself in.

It will be a problem for a while. Bool it.

Page number: 4

Not sure about under Muller since God knows what the **** we are doing with him as coach, but never under Peters and he didn't much if ever under Rod

At the end of the day, there is a reason Faulk still got a ton of minutes on a team loaded at defense. You guys are getting a solid defenseman with obvious offensive upside. If Faulk wasnt playing PP1 or getting as many minutes on a team with such good defenseman a lot more of us Canes fans would be sad to see him go.
FWIW I'd take Faulk at $6.5m/year over Skinner at $9m/year without question.

not really.
Over the years, he played with guys like Gleason (LHD), Sekera (LHD), Hainsey (LHD), Hanifin (LHD), Fleury (LHD) and more recently, Pesce (RHD who played on the LHD side).



maybe the swap fluery for honka to balance out the pairs
Slavin - Hammy
Gardiner - Pesce
Edmundson - Honka
TVR

Looks like they spelled it Boc... man he was ugly too. Love those 90s live action cutscenes

Yeah, Pronman has him in the "very good" tier, which puts him on par with Bean and Puistola.

Faulk is a good player as long as you don't overslot him. He's a great 3rd pairing defenseman or even a solid 2nd line if you pair him with a stud. He seemed to break down when he was out there against the elite talents of the opponents, which was tough for us given the elite talents in the Metro. And for the love of god, don't let him run point on the power play. I know its tempting, but just don't.

Edmundson being a bottom pair guy who can play either side makes a ton of sense to me since we don't know right now who the 6th D is.
Basically what I'm saying is, the D is very flexible right now

Looks similar to Necas. From the speed to the silky passes without time/space all the way down to falling over on his PP one-timer goals.

Not a huge shock there. With teams now being allowed to negotiate extensions prior to trades, I think that the days of the pure rental are close to dead. Works better for everyone, really. Player gets security, team 1 gets the player they want for the long term, team 2 gets a bigger return in the trade since team 1 knows they're not going to lose the player to free agency.

You probably want to see a doctor about that

What sucks is, other than my Whitney Lithograph, Faulk is my only autographed picture.

So, where is Bokk currently? Was he still with the Blues at camp, or has he already returned to the SEL?

Or Marley drug

6.5 for Faulk for 7 years is fine. I suspect the holdup was either/both trade protection and guaranteed money, specifically during the lockout year.
My favorite Faulk moment: Fleury got pwned by Henrik Zetterberg on one of the 5 man rushes that signaled the end of the Bill Peters era, which went back the other way for a Henrik Zetterberg goal. Faulk broke his stick on the net in anger and looked like he was going to come over and murder poor Hadyn.

Edmundson is big boost for our PK. I don't know if he's a keeper but he's solid on the kill.

He didn't go to the Blues camp and it appears that was a mutual decision. He is playing in the SEL right now (Rogle BK) as a 19 year old. 0 points in 4 games. Looks like he is getting ~10 minutes of ice time a game.

Yup. Going all in on a shaky 3rd pairing seems like a vulnerability we'd rather not have.

Interesting how they view him as a '3rd line Dman" and that their PP will be better without him. Yet, his stat's say otherwise. Then again, we never appreciated Petro or Parayko as much as other fans do until they raised the Cup this summer so I'll take their POV with a grain of salt.

Carolina had a huge glut on D, and Faulk had the expiring contract. I don't think this was a bad trade for either team. If Bokk pans out it's a nice haul for the Canes.

bradleygt89 wrote: Tue Sep 24, 2019 2:39 pm Interesting how they view him as a '3rd line Dman" and that their PP will be better without him. Yet, his stat's say otherwise. Then again, we never appreciated Petro or Parayko as much as other fans do until they raised the Cup this summer so I'll take their POV with a grain of salt.

We basically got Shattenkirk back with better hair and boy does our power play need it.

Thanks for posting. Interesting to see Canes fans view of the deal.
I like it. Not pumped about 7yrs but I like it

BluesSK wrote: Tue Sep 24, 2019 3:46 pm

bradleygt89 wrote: Tue Sep 24, 2019 2:39 pm Interesting how they view him as a '3rd line Dman" and that their PP will be better without him. Yet, his stat's say otherwise. Then again, we never appreciated Petro or Parayko as much as other fans do until they raised the Cup this summer so I'll take their POV with a grain of salt.

We basically got Shattenkirk back with better hair and boy does our power play need it.

Lol. I like this take.

And a second part of the trade talk on the Canes board:

Page number: 5

It's amazing to see the main board takes on what kind of player they think Faulk is.

The Stars are tight against the cap until Hanzal goes on LTIR but a trade/flip of Edmundson for one of our faster bottom six forwards (Janmark/Cogliano) seems like a possibility.
We need a #4-5 D-man and the Canes traded away Faulk; but brought in another.

Blues fan saying he will play "the Shattenkirk role" on the PP. Oof. Faulk might be a decent half-wall shooter but his ability to make plays as a PPQB is non-existent. If he isn't shooting then he is cycling or dumping the puck into the opposite corner.

Well that doesn't look super great.
I guess there's something to be said for contract efficiencies.

The canes are all full on faster bottom 6 forwards

Would think he goes there with Slavin& Gardiner taking the top spots.

Yeah, you can't tell these people anything, it's amazing

You must, you must.

Knew you were heavy on D but not sure about forwards.

Based off reactions i feel like this was a fair deal for both sides.

I want to know if he's looking at this based off of a multi year data set. St. Louis didn't make this trade thinking they were going to get 17-18 Faulk, they want 18-19 Faulk.

Paid $4 million for Gardiner vs. $6.5 million for Faulk
2 guys who I'd always seen compared to one another as equals.

Thank you for the years and being a pretty damn good player for a second round pick Justin. Good luck man.

Not very enthused by this. Wish we had an NHL forward coming back for Faulk. The ever increasing logjam at 3LD is perplexing but maybe that's an indictment on how the candidates have performed thus far for that position

I don't look at it that way though as we moved de Hann for peanuts as well.
In the end, we went from:
Slavin-Hamilton
Pesce-Faulk
de Hann-TVR
TO
Slavin-Hamilton
Gardiner-Pesce
Edmundson-TVR*
Fleury
* Post injury.
Gardiner and de Hann were signed long term, Edmundson and Faulk, short term. Canes added Bokk on top of that.

Will miss Faulk. One of the few bright spots through some very rough years.
Isn't he also one of our franchise leading scorers on D?

Page number: 6

We have a logjam at forward too. Don't think we were going to get back a forward that pushed anyone out of the top 6 unless we were adding to Faulk or completing another side deal.

I am not really surprised at how many people think Faulk is a 1D, or even a 2D. They can have that disapointment.

I think he is THE leader for goals and points.

Faulk was being pimped pretty hard by everyone on here for a few years before Pesce and Slavin came in and outplayed him. For a while he was probably in contention for our best player(some rough lineups around that time)A lot of other fan bases probably are all over the place on what kind of player Faulk actually is because depending on the year this board has named him anywhere from very low end Norris contender to bottom pairing PP specialist.

The thing is, Faulk's a top-pair guy for a lot of teams out there. He's frustrating at times, but so is Erik Karlsson.

And then there was one.
Jordan better watch out.

Adam Gold out there mixing things up on Twitter arguing that Faulk is better than Dougie Hamilton.

Putting Faulk out there for top line minutes and top line assignments every night is a one way ticket to heartburn over a season. He's good when he's slotted correctly and not going up against the best of the best. His mental lapses get badly exposed when he's playing first line minutes.

Is Hayden Fleury a stay-at-home defenseman who seldom goes out and when he does stay close to home?
And who now stays close to the bench?

Faulk probably slots in as the Blues 4th or 5th Dman. My bigger concern is what this means for the Blues signing Petro long term. That's a lot of money and yrs for Faulk.

Well, our captain just 'retire', then the longest tenured Hurricane is out of town. It's time for young faces to step up.

Yikes, Blues fans on Twitter are calling this the 2019 version of the O'Reilly acquisition.

While I wouldn't say he's far and away "better" the ATOI doesn't lie; it's obvious who Rod trusted more. Dougie's going to get more love because he scores the goals; in a lot of ways, he's the same player Faulk was 5 years ago.

Why you're posting photo of Patrik Laine on this thread

Maybe I follow the Canes board too closely during the season to have that reaction!
Have seen a lot of frustrated posts involving Faulk. Still, I think he's behind Petro, Parayko, and Dunn on the Blues pairings, and possibly Bouwmeester.

Lots of money for a 4th DMan, so that REALLY raises my concern around their plan for Petro

This is true, but you can say that about a lot of top-pair defensemen. Remember when we had Joe Corvo on the top pair?
We've been spoiled lately.

Not getting the people saying we need to flip Edmundson either; do that and we're looking at some combination of two of Fleury/Bean/Priskie/Forsling/Sellgren/Claesson/McKeown on the third pair and that could go real badly when you're talking about Fleury as being the grizzled veteran of that bunch.

Cross posting from the trade board.

This started in late June when they unexpectedly traded Calvin de Haan for a depth D and depth G from Chicago. We were all kind of scratching our heads at that, because CDH was solid for us. He was just a little overpaid and somewhat injury prone.
Then, a couple of weeks ago they unexpectedly pick up Gardiner. And it was like "ahhhh that's why they ditched CDH", even though the two are about as far from each other stylistically as possible.
Today, they flipped Faulk for Edmundsen... a CDH type player.
So they did this:
Faulk (expiring at $4.8M, looking for 7 x $6.5M) --> Gardiner (4 x $4.0M)
De Haan (3 x $4.5M) --> Edmundson (1 x $3.1M)
5th 2020 --> 7th 2021
Add Dominik Bokk
Add Gustav Forsling
Add Anton Forsberg
Canes are on the hook for $3.9M less in salary commitments, for at least an equal pair of players, while adding three prospects/depth, at the cost of downgrading from a 5th to a 7th.
And as a cherry on top, went from having 4 RHD in the top-6 to having a perfect 3R/3L balance.

I had this exact same take but you spelled it out way better.

Don't remind me.
To be faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiir, I think those years made us realize how important defense was, and helped us overhaul our defensive scouting that ended up getting us Slavin, Pesce, Hanifin (who was flipped for Hamilton), Fleury, Bean, etc. Without those awful years of defense, we wouldn't have learned the lesson that allows us to be spoiled now.
I mean I'm not disagreeing that he can play 1D minutes. I am just saying that it would be advisable to not have to rely on it.

succintly, we've gone from:
Slavin-Hamilton
Pesce-Faulk
DeHaan-TVR
to
Slavin-Hamilton
Gardiner-Pesce
Edmundson-TVR (once TVR is back)
IMO, there's not a whole lot of difference between those two units. Edmundson is likely a downgrade from De Haan, but then again, De Haan was overkill on the 3rd pair.

But its not Edmundson for DeHaan.
Its Edmundson of maybe half a season of DeHaan, and another half a season grinding through a series of prospects trying to get their footing in the NHL.
In that case, what we have now is better.

Page number: 7

true enough

Has Adam Gold always been this cringey? Yikes.

I mean, I guess this beats what we got for Skinner for but I'd rather have Faulk on the team and a outrageously stacked D for the year than somebody who will be good at a later date. This is the year to build on success. it'd be amazing if this team could actually make the playoffs two years in a row, just sayin'

I wouldn't want to rely on Faulk as a #2 either. And while I don't think it's actually a motivation behind this trade, part of what happened today was moving on from an outdated vision of the Carolina Hurricanes which would have had him in that top-pair position long-term.
Y'know what's kind of mind-blowing? The only two defensemen left on the NHL roster from 2017 season are Slavin and Pesce. The other defensemen who dressed for us that season were:
Justin Faulk
Noah Hanifin
Ron Hainsey
Matt Tennyson
Klas Dahlbeck
Ryan Murphy
Jakub Nakladal
And even if you look at the forwards, Jordan Staal is the only player remaining from that season who was over 22 years old at the time. We're only talking about 2.5 years ago...

I've seen what an NHL team looks like when it is reliant on Faulk to be a top pair guy. Those were some bad years.

I will say - I prefer Kase 10 times out of 10.

I'm torn about this: I'm sad that the Canes couldn't get Kase, but I'm also super-happy that Justin is going to get mad money to play for the Cup Champs rather than a bottom-feeder. This was honestly a good outcome for both the player and the Canes.

Its kind of crazy how much this franchise has changed since the moment Dundon bought it. The front office was completely overhauled, and the roster was completely moved out, and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would say we aren't much better off for it.
Karmanos was an awful, awful owner, and that point keeps getting proven more as the days pass.

I would, too. But given Faulk's ability to veto that move, that's also like saying I prefer to be the CEO of Amazon rather than the current position I have

Someone in that front office has the opportunity to write one hell of a book someday. Even aside from the behind-the-scenes scoop on storm surges, it would be absolutely fascinating to know how much of this is driven by Dundon's business philosophy. It sure seems like the front office came alive as soon as he implemented that controversial "red-yellow-green" philosophy for decision making. All of a sudden we're making trades every other week and assembling an analytics superteam.

a few observations about this trade:
1. edmundson is a stylistic fit for what we needed out of the vacancy that we created when we traded de haan. i think he's here to stay as opposed to being flipped elsewhere. he's a big bodied player that has no problem with physicality. he's not a bully, but he's not an observer when it starts getting chippy. we need that kind of dynamic as well. but most importantly, this is a move for the penalty kill. as the lines were composed prior to his arrival, the second pairing penalty killing unit was not at all encouraging. having to play faulk or gardiner back there was tragedy waiting to happen.
2. edmundson also has the reputation of being knicked up a lot. trevor van riemsdyk is recovering from a serious operation. the depth we have in guys like forsling and fleury that can't go down without waivers doesn't by necessity have to be resolved right away. i think forsling gets demoted at some point, but fleury will be our 7th defender and likely play even more than he did last year. the fact that he hasn't earned the spot outright made a trade like this more palatable for a team that believes they can contend next season. i think a lot of the hand wringing about out defensive depth coincides with some of those options being overrated or overvalued. fleury is a 23 year old defenseman that has been trying to make this team since the dawn of time and has only shown bite size portions of being nhl capable. if he works his way past edmundson on the depth chart, more power to him. however, it's not a total loss to have a player like him in the press box to jump in when needed. there's not a lot to worry about in terms of spoiling the development of a four year pro. the draft position has us a lot more invested in his development than we would be if he had been taken in the 3rd. we'd probably view him as about the same as forsling.
3. speaking of van riemsdyk, edmundson's career point shares distribution by season shows tvr as one of the most accurate career comparisons to edmundson by age and distribution. he's basically a left handed tvr in terms of impact on the game. that's a solid if unspectacular 3rd pairing that doesn't have to hide from anyone. both guys are stanley cup champions and have played tougher minutes than they'll be asked to play here. plus, if we decided to go offensive and perhaps put someone like priskie back there with edmundson, he could do an adequate job of babysitting a more offensive talent. he's done it before.
4. bokk is obviously the wild card on this deal. i don't know a damn thing about him other than his measurable stats, so a more in depth reflection will have to wait a while, but if the price for shifting our defense around a bit was the difference between edmundson and faulk and a recent first round pick, sign me up for that.

Damn. That is crazy

Slavin/ Hamilton
Gardiner/ Pesce
Edmundson/ TVR (healthy)
Fleury- McKeown
Bean- Priskie
Forsling- Sellgren
lol

The smartest thing that Dundon did was come in and identify Tulsky right away as a budding genius in this game. The second we moved from a franchise trying to operate like any of the other good hard working traditionalist markets to diving head first into the analytics side of the game, we've been absolutely killing it. And its insane to think, but I think we have such a head start on this with such the perfect guy running the show that we might have the rest of the league trying to play catch up from here on out.
I took some product owner training not so long ago, and one of the things they stressed was, if you're not an established brand, the only way you're going to get ahead is to be a disruptor. And damn if Dundon didn't come in and immediately make that happen for us by letting the perfect analytical mind run the show. At this point, there's no way that all of these decisions aren't being driven through Tulsky's desk, only using Waddell to make the deals happen after we've identified targets. And our thinking is so, so far ahead of anyone else in the game in this regard right now that... Man

Edmundson has been inconsistent, but when he's on, he's a solid top 4 guy. Last season, we just never knew which guy would show up on a nightly basis. Bokk has a ton of skill, hope he works out well for you guys.
Rootin for you jerks.

Gardiner I agree with, but Faulk was a regular on the PK last year and had the best GA/60 of all of the defensemen on the PK.
Slavin: 197 min; 6.39 GA/60: 21 GA
Pesce: 182 min; 6.24 GA/60: 20 GA
CDH: 147 min; 8.14 GA/60: 19 GA
Faulk: 142 min; 5.92 GA/60: 14 GA
TVR: 81 min; 8.86 GA/60: 12 GA
Edmundson was 4th in STL with 133 min on the PK but had the 2nd worst GA/60 among the 5 D that killed penalties in STL with a 8.1 GA/60.

An underrated skill for any GM is being able to delegate. Tulsky doesn't deserve all of the credit for Waddell's tenure, but even if it's a 40-50% portion of the credit, that's still a lot of power in favor of analytics relative to the rest of the hockey world.

What did his tweet that was so objectionable?
Reading his Twitter, it seems like a case of analytics vs. eye-test and usage. Hamilton is like a #1 according to the stats, but didn't look like it and got played like a #4 in the playoffs, including a demotion to the 3rd pairing in Game 7 against Washington. Faulk is a #4 or thereabouts according to the stats, but didn't look like it and got played like a #2 in the playoffs.
If you subscribe to the numbers, that's fine. There should be room in the conversation for something other than a chart, however. Gold is a voice on that side.

Jeeeeeez, Charlotte.

re: 3. I almost forgot about Priskie and wonder what the Canes think of Priskie. Given how early he was hurt, he's been an afterthought for most of camp, but I wonder if they are thinking like you mentioned longer term. I assume he'd go to Charlotte and have to show he's capable though, given he's missed camp.
re: 4, I agree and don't know much about Bokk either. It's like another dart that we have to throw at the board.

Page number: 8

Pretty sure that Forsling and Fleury will be with the big club this year and Sellgren will be in Sweden, but still, that has to be far and away the best defense in the AHL.

He's a voice that has routinely proven itself very uninformed when it comes to the Canes. Sometimes on air he even takes pride in how uninformed he is.
If its down to which I will trust more, the front office analytics of the Canes or the eye test of a radio jock who takes pride in how little he knows, I'm going to go with the analytics.

He hasn't actually supported a point. Just keeps repeating "œFaulk is better than Hamilton" over and over.
Go to his feed and select "œTweets and Replies", not just Tweets. You'll see how embarrassing it is.

I don't see anything embarrassing.
He says Hamilton and Faulk carry roughly equal value (in the context of signing Hamilton long term) and people ridicule him for it like he just said the dumbest thing ever. He points out this year's team is down two of its key leadership players from last year (Faulk and Williams) and that may not be such a good thing and people ridicule him for it.
The usual anti-Faulk crowd is so vociferous and unyielding they can't even let themselves understand that he's making actual sense. He responds in kind. As usual, Twitter is a cesspool with no room for nuance or anything other than extreme hot taeks.
But the truth is, we don't know how this is going to work out. There's at least some potential for all this shaking up the roster to backfire in a major way. He's not wrong to point that out.

I think he ridicules the people saying Dougie are better by asking "oh so you didn't watch the playoffs then?" over and over without providing any evidence (eye test or otherwise) to support his point.
Even if he has a point he's arguing it poorly.

perhaps. Twitter makes it so it's damn near impossible to have an intelligent conversation. It's probably contributed more than we realize to the downfall of civilized discourse online.

Yet, the same FO actively wanted to re-sign him earlier in the off-season. That alone gives some credence to the arguments he's making about leadership, physical play, the eye test, etc. There must be more to their decision making than just Corsi and xGA.
I see the motivation behind these moves in the context of asset management more than an effort to improve the roster. Get mid-term cost certainty in lieu of having to make a long-term commitment while adding assets in the process. It's creative, but whether Carolina 19-20 is better because of them remains to be seen.

It's clear that we werent going to be players for Faulk in UFA.
We got some decent value for him. Good on Don for that....
Let's move on.....

If you think Tulsky actually believes this, ok.

I think GMBC is ably demonstrating that soft skill has better option value than heavy players, who can be acquired at good prices.

Believes what? I'm confused....

This.
Whether Faulk is better than Hamilton is a moot point. The relevant information is that Faulk was entering the final year of his contract and he was asking for more than he was worth (to us) in an extension. That means we have one Faulk to trade. In return, we got one Edmondson and up to six Bokks. That's good value.
St. Louis did it because they got eight Faulks for one Edmondson and six Bokks. IMO, they lose the trade both ways, with or without the extension, because they are paying too much for seven of their eight Faulks.
As for Hamilton next season, it will work the same way. Around the 2020 draft we'll talk to his agent about a possible extension. If he prices himself out of our market, he will be moved. The team has a perfect track record on this, so players have to know now that if they want to get traded, they can ask for more money than we're willing to pay. If Hamilton wants to stay, he'll take less than the market would support.
And in the end, I agree that this process works perfectly on paper, but the jury is still out as to how it will work on on the ice. The amount of turnover is concerning, as is the loss of established leaders. But in terms of maximizing value, the club continues to set a standard not previously seen in the NHL.

Sorry... believes that he's only 3% responsible for the org's success. I don't think he actually believes that for a second.

It's hilarious he assigns a value to himself even.
What it must be like to be this guy's wife and kids
"I'm sorry honey but your productivity in the bedroom has declined by 11% in the last 2 years and you're now worth 26% less to me than you were the day we got married; I just don't think I can continue taking these kinds of losses."

3% of the success = 3% of the profits?

You want to end up on Investigation Discovery because that's how you wnd up on Investigation Discovery.

Eddy was the whipping boy last year, I think he'll bounce back for sure. Sucks losing Bokk too.
Sorry if this has been answered a bunch but I haven't really gone through the threads, but can Faulk play his off side at all?

Full NTC for Faulk over the first 5 years of the contract, limited NTC after that
The yikes factor of that extension keeps getting stronger.
I am reading this was pretty much made to be Expansion fodder for Seattle. Given Francis is running that show and how front loaded the contract is, that actually wouldn't surprise me.

Faulk's new contract is front loaded, $9 M in each of the first two seasons

Page number: 9

Will Hamilton switch to #27 now?

I'm not good at math but that amount retained works out to around 800K

These are some seriously ballsy moves.
I wouldnt be surprised if things dont click at first.. But since some of my favorites are included, and this team looks VERY entertaining, I cant wait to see what will happen.

Apropos the Gold discussion. I think Edmundson might also be insurance for RBA losing faith in Hamilton"”like he did in the Caps playoff series. Then:
Slavin/Pesce
Gardiner/TVR <=>Edmundson/Hamilton
Slavin and Hamilton (as others have mentioned) weren't a great pair last season. RBA reunited Slavin/Pesce when it looked like the season was all but lost in December and early January. I didn't think Edmundson made much sense at first, but he does provide some insurance. I totally agree with DougieSmash's pairing to start the season. However, I am pretty sure RBA has doubts in the back of his mind about Hamilton on the 1st pairing.

Well, it finally happened. Justin has been on the trading block for what seems like 3 years now, ever since he got Brad Malone'd. It was also at this time that Slavin/Pesce came on the scene and made him extendable. Still though, he was a good solider for this team and was a big part of why this team won some close games last season (the block in Detroit that saved a 1 goal lead, the GWG in the playoff-clinching game), and I'm glad he got to experience a deep playoff run with us. Best of luck to him in St. Louis.

I'm glad that his tenure with us ended on such a positive note, after one of his best seasons with us. After going through 7 seasons of awful Hurricanes hockey, and multiple peaks and valleys in his own play, it's nice to see him leave after a season where we made the playoffs and he had a bounce back year after two questionable ones for himself.
A stand up guy, I wish him the best in St. Louis.

The return is a little better than what I was expecting when I said "underwelming" in the other thread. Bokk has late 1st round pick value and Edmundson has better value than a meh prospect, but not much given he's a UFA in a year. StL gave up a little better than deadline value and got him signed long term.
Seems fair, but not a great deal on either side.
EDIT: BDC said something similar in the main thread.

Wheat vs. chaff.

And we've been stuck with a lot of chaff over the past 10 years.

Why is Slavin/Hamilton our first pairing? By most accounts over the past three seasons, Gardiner/Pesce are *both* better than Slavin and/or Hamilton. My point here is that we don't need Hamilton (or Slavin) to log huge, difficult minutes as a true shut-down pairing. We have two first pairings.

Not the biggest Faulk fan but given the recent Kase rumors and WPG needs cant help but feel disappointed. I guess thry like Bokk?

Not to mention TVR and perhaps Edmundson who wouldn't look terrible on a second pairing when called upon. I can't get used to this roster building.

No, I think he's being modest.
However, the overwhelming prevailing thought here on HFCanes is that Tulsky is a primary driver in every move. Sounds to me like that is just as incorrect as Tulsky's too-modest 3% assessment.

Another point to consider: the contracts they own are mostly without NTC/NMC restrictions. Staal's on NMC lockdown, and Gardiner can deny up to 7 teams, but that's it for this roster.

I actually remember Bokk from the draft that year. Rewatched it and it reminded me that he has the same affinity for chewing gum as Roddy. He will fit in nicely.

I like the Bokk pick up, because if there were ever a good time for this organization to nurture a boom/bust prospect with elite potential, now is that time. Next year he'll be in Charlotte with the likes of Suzuki, Rees, Drury, Mattheos, you name it.

I'm kind of meh on Bokk. I like Edmunson actually and think it's the right move if we're trying to win now, though I thought we were trying to go cheaper with the third pairing. He basically replaces DeHaan I suppose as the gritty defensive type.
If Fleury can't beat him out he shouldn't be playing, though I wanted him to get a shot. Maybe he still will with TVR out for the moment.
I think it's really good value for a leaving Faulk, and I definitely didn't want that contract extension so I think we did well. You always want a better prospect but I don't know that we deserved one.

That would be his counterpart, Joe. Adam knows hockey plenty good enough.
There really wasn't anything objectionable about his tweets, other than the incessant arguing. His main point, which I believe has been glossed over here, is that *he believes* the Canes are a worse team today than yesterday. He's right.
But he's also not concerned with losing Faulk for nothing. Which is a weird hill to die on.

I don't think that's a weird hill to die on. The cupboard was already full of B-prospect types and they then picked in the Top 100 7 times in June and signed Priskie in August. They have 2 1sts, up to 2 2nds and 2 3rds coming up in the next draft to add more.
This is not the mediocre team with weak prospect depth it was 4-5 years ago. Losing a good player without getting anything back shouldn't be that much of a concern at this stage. That will happen with good teams as they try to compete.
The defense is more of a question mark than it was this time last month. Even if you buy into the analytics, how the pieces fit together remains to be seen. That's true elsewhere on the roster. For a Conference Finalist, there was a lot of turnover this offseason.

We could have absorbed losing Faulk for nothing and it wouldn't have hurt that much, considering how good the farm is right now.
Which suggests two possible scenarios: 1) Analytics liked Bokk enough to make it worthwhile in their eyes; 2) the bridge had burned with Faulk already and there wasn't going to be any going back.

...or Mike Babcock. Should be a great Coach one day
Fantastic trade, honestly. Bokk is a fantastic prospect and Edmundson brings something to the defense that the Canes didn't quite have before. I like both of those players.

Page number: 10

I hope so

It's a good trade because they get a defenseman back who can play top4, who's a lefty and who can do some damage physically. Edmundson is over 1 million cheaper than Faulk, too. Faulk is the better player, no doubt. But Edmundson is what the defense was lacking, he's cheaper and he brings one of their top forward prospects with him. Pretty good trade.

With the expected top 4 of Slavin-Hamilton, Gardiner-Pesce, Faulk would have been in the third pairing with Fleury/TVR (when healthy).
Having TVR/Faulk vs Edmundson/TVR is a wash imo especially when considering TVR playing his offside with Faulk. With Gardiner's acquisition the writing was on the wall and there was simply no place for him anymore. I agree with Robo's scenario that the bridge might have burned.
Knowing Rod's fondness for him and Faulk having contract year, having him in the third pairing might not even have been an option.
Not sure what this means for the special teams. Slavin-Pesce and Edmundson-TVR PK and Gardiner, Hamilton-Slavin PP?

I agree with this. Defense is still very deep. Gardiner and Edmundson are of very similar quality so I see them as interchangeable, too. Edmundson is a bit more solid and physical. They have options now depending on matchups and form.

We could conceivably play a PK unit that had 3 forwards and 1 D. Don't be surprised if you start seeing more of that around the league, FWIW. Analytics support a more aggressive approach to PK than has generally been done by most teams.

We would get to re-use the "for sale #27, a D-man" flyers next year.

My only concern with Edmundson the times I watch him is foot speed. deHann was pretty mobile and IMO, fit how the Canes played. The Canes play an uptempo game where most of the D are good skaters and move the puck up the ice well in transition. While Faulk's lateral movement wasn't great, he still was a good north / south skater and can move the puck up the ice well. Edmundson seems a little opposite to that, unless I have the wrong impression of him from the times I watched him. That said, he's going to be on the 3rd pairing and PK so Canes aren't going to be relying on him to play top minutes and if he struggles, it's nice to have Fleury, Forsling, McKeown etc.. as depth.
In the end, we added a better skater and puck mover in Gardiner and lost the physical play and shot of Faulk and the defensive play of deHann. Edmundson provides the defensive play and physical play. It remains to be seen if Gardiner/Edmundson is better than Faulk/de Hann. I'm not sure they are, but when you take into account contracts, I get it.

True on your first point. I didn't consider it in those terms, but when you add the fact that Faulk was a $4+ million 3rd pairing defenseman with a lack of PP acuity (even tho for some reason he was the lead guy), I just think *outside of simply liking Faulk as a dude* the roster management makes sense. Opportunity cost, whatever you want to call it.
Pay your stars. The complementary players are expendable. That seems to be the model, on steroids.

(I say the following relying on your assessment of his comments, btw)
What's weird is to be willing to die on a hill that you're not concerned about. If you're not concerned about losing Faulk for nothing, then why argue ad nauseum that his departure makes the team worse? Oh, now I remember why: radio.

I don't believe neither of Rees or Suzuki will be eligible to play in the AHL next season. They've got 2 more years in juniors unless they make the NHL roster.

Rees isn't even signed on an ELC yet.

BDC is right. Claesson is already gone off CF and Canes are currently $498K over the cap with a 24 man roster (after Faulk's retention).
Removing Gibbons (725K), Forsling (874K) and Bishop (700K) puts the canes at $1.81 M under the cap ceiling.

I know Faulk has been around here a long time, and, at times, looked re-energized last season, but he was still prone to a lot of boneheaded decisions and didn't stand out on either end of the ice. I think management made the decision on what they would be willing to pay for that type of production and it wasn't close to what Faulk wanted.
Third pairing D shouldn't be making $6.5M, so, for this team, Waddell made the right decision.
As far as them being a worse team without Faulk, I'm not ready to buy that theory just yet.

Reading comments around the internet, I'm convinced several people are mistaking Edmundson for Gudbranson.

Counterpoint: he's the second highest ranking exec behind Waddell, despite having zero proper hockey background -- and when another team comes calling for a GM, do you think Dundon lets him go? I don't. I think Waddell guess before Tulsky does.
Tulsky is the disruptor. Tulsky is potentially our Theo Epstein. And I think that's how Dundon sees him.

Third pairing D? He was 2nd in TOI for the team last season. You guys may think the team misused him last season...yada yada...but c'mon, he's not a third pairing guy...either in skill or usage.
...and lack of PP acuity? He was tied for 2nd in the league in D for PP goals last season. Is he a high-end puck distributor, no, but he's clearly a high-end goal scorer...someone's actually gotta shoot the puck...amirite?

We've been over this. A volume shooter is bound to make some shots, inflating his points at the expense of team success. He was like the Carmelo Anthony of PPQBs.
Now, it just so happens that he was often our best option in the past, because we didn't have snipers or distributors on our PP. But on a team with a good PP, he's maaaaaybe a decent shoot-only option for a 2 D-man unit.

He was second in TOI last season. He wasn't on PP1 so far this pre-season (Gardiner), and wasn't part of the top 2 pairings.
It's possible that could have shifted to:
Slavin-Hamilton
Pesce-Faulk
Gardiner-TVR
but without PP1 time, Faulk wasn't going to be near 2nd in TOI this season. And it appears RBA would rather put Gardiner with 4 forwards than Gardiner-Faulk and 3 forwards.
I'm a big fan of Faulk, and one who felt his defensive capabilities were underrated while his PP QB role was vastly overrated around the league. But it's clear he was getting phased out by the acquisitions the past couple of years.

I was pointing out that he would be a third pair with the Canes this season. Slavin/Hamilton and Pesce/Gardiner.
Canes more than likely, didn't want to pay a ton for a 3rd pairing D and certainly didn't want to give Faulk a long term deal.

On paper, maybe, but if RBA showed anything last year, it's that he trusted Faulk far more than this board did. No way to prove it, but I'd be shocked if Faulk wasn't in the top 4 in TOI if he was still on the Canes.

If you look at the Faulk --> Edmundson transition in a vacuum, yeah I mean I guess you can say the team is worse now than it was before. But I don't know if you can look at it in a vacuum.
As has been said many times before, the end result is a defense that has seen a few of its parts shift and be replaced. DeHaan moving out was the first part. Once he was out, it created a bit of a hole for a solid defensive player on our bottom line. From what we could tell at that point, that position was going to have to be filled by one of the young kids. That might have been too much of a question mark given the need of another young kid to step up and replace TVR for a spell.
Then we signed Gardiner, who would naturally take on the role of PP1 from Faulk, and would most likely be slotted higher than him on the lineup. So now you're looking at Faulk playing 3rd line minutes needing to groom one of the young kids as they are replacing TVR. Is that an ideal situation, especially for a guy who is a couple months from UFA, and likely to be trade bait at some point in the season? Probably not. His quality of play would demand more minutes than what we would be able to give him, and in a year where he's looking to peak for UFA talks, that could easily lead to problems behind the scenes.
So replacing him with Edmundson creates a better fit for that bottom pair. A more stable defensive player who we aren't going to be asking to chip in much on offense, who can help groom that young kid, but will also be more than willing to take the 3rd line minutes he'll likely get. All the while we replace Faulk's PK abilities with a guy who is pretty good at PK himself, and its most likely a better fit for the roster we have.
And I think that is the point that guys like Adam Gold are missing. Just because Faulk is a better player doesn't necessarily mean he's the better fit.

Counterpoint: That isn't a counterpoint (to anything I have said, at least).

All I will say to this is that our organizational philosophy has completely shifted under Dundon to something primarily driven by analytics. Pretty much every move we are making right now, every one of them, has the analytics community praising our efforts. Maybe not all of them are good, but they're all accepted by that community.
Maybe he's not the one making all the calls, but he's the one pulling all the strings. That is, unless you think Waddell suddenly became an analytical genius himself ever since his days in Atlanta....
I don't buy it for a second that Tulsky is just a bystander offering his input every once in a while.

Counterpoint: of course it is.

Page number: 11

Tulsky's assessment is too modest, but to pretend Waddell is just a guy that picks up the phone is ignoring the complexity of the problem. The moves the Canes have been making have been a harmony between the quantitative observations of Tulsky and the qualitative art of the deal.
Tulsky didn't just go to Waddell and say "œtrade Victor Rask for Nino Niederreiter, go!" and Waddell did it. I could do that. "œDon, trade Niederreiter and Foegele for McDavid right now!" It's easy.
A system is clearly in place where these various aspects work in harmony, and to that extent I do buy the notion that Tulsky sees himself as providing "œtools" for Waddell and Co. to do their jobs better. Something has to be the driver of what Tulsky looks into, and it's likely a cycle of Waddell and Tulsky identifying team needs and goals together, Waddell doing intel on who's available and what other team needs are, Tulsky looking into specific players, league trends, the value of various assets, etc., to determine which things have value, and then the more qualitative aspects of when to pull the trigger given a current market, how teams can be taken advantage of in the trade market, etc.
So while I agree that 3% is WAY too modest, don't pretend "œmaking the calls" is as easy as calling a done deal into the NHL Central Registry. This is clearly a team effort, and while Tulsky may or may not be team MVP (I don't really know), he couldn't do this by himself. Even he admitted in the podcast he's years away from being qualified to be a GM even if he wanted to be.

Ngl, not sad to see him go--especially seeing the sweet deal he snagged. Wish him all the best.

he had a total of 4 powerplay assists. 10 powerplay points while being on the top powerplay unit virtually the entire season isn't good.
he was 10th in total powerplay time among defensemen but tied for 34th in powerplay points and 65th in powerplay assists.
it's not about not being a "high-end puck distributor", but about him being a very, very bad puck distributor on the pp. he can't do anything except shoot the puck.

He's certainly been a volume shooter...8th most shots from a D-man since he came into the league...but he's also got the 9th most goals.
Top 10 in goals for D-men since he came into the league, but he's just maaaaybe a decent shoot-only option?
I realize I'm somewhat conflating the PP efficacy discussion with overall performance...but the man can clearly put the biscuit in the basket.

I think this is probably accurate, but the Canes have had just a bad PP in general. Going to be interesting to see if/how it changes with Gardiner.

Arguing over which canes FO exec is the most important is top 10 pointless arguments on this board.

FWIW, every single "œsince he came into the league" stat for a single player is inherently skewed to that player, because that's specifically the frame for his career as opposed to anyone else's. Not that it doesn't have some value, but everyone looks better when it's framed that way.

Tulsky comes to the Stormtrackers luncheon once a year and he is always humble about his contribution. He is elite support staff. The team asks him for his analysis and he gives it. Over time the team has increasingly bought-in to how much they utilize that data in their decision making. It's also a positive feedback loop, increasing buy-in leads to increasing utilization which leads to increasing engagement from all areas of the organization which leads to more diverse and interesting analysis.
Tulsky downplays his individual contribution because it is an organizational effort. He is more the supercomputer facilitating the analytical approach more-so than a superstar employee in the drivers seat pulling levers and making decisions.

That second paragraph, to me, is more important than the first. This is what I was getting into when I said that Tulsky might not be the one making the calls, but he's the one pulling the strings. He's providing the blueprints and the cheat sheet for Waddell to work off of when making these deals. He's the one identifying the players across the league that we should be going after and likely the most we would be willing to give up, and he's the one providing the list of players on our own team that we would be willing to move and the minimum return we'd expect. From that point, Waddell is the one calling the shots.
Put it this way. If the Canes are a 5 star restaurant, Tulksy is the head chef, and Waddell is the head waiter. You absolutely need both to operate well, the chef alone isn't going to be able to upsell you on the best dish on the menu, and the head waiter would make a terrible meal compared to the expected quality. But if you had to lose one, you'd much rather be looking for a new head waiter than a new head chef.

This is true. A better comparison would be to look at the first 100, 200, etc games for each individual player...is there a site that does this?

Carmelo Anthony has 25,000 career points. That's amazing, right? That dude sure could score!
Faulk had too much of the puck on the PP for years and years. Some years he converted a lot of those shots into goals, and he looked great. But then teams figured out that he was the only good option and got in front of a lot of those shots, and then his numbers didn't look so great. And the PP was never really that dangerous with him on it, despite his goals -- and for the past few years it's been a consistent bottom half PP.
Again, that's not all on Faulk. But to claim that All His PP Goals are an indicator that he's a great PP D-man is just wrong. It's the wrong metric. *And* it flunks the eye test, which has told us "Faulk shoots the puck, it gets blocked, it goes the other way, a lot" for years now.

I should have clarified ... I believe he was in line to be 3rd pairing D come this season.

Joel Edmundson: 6' 4" 215 Left D-Man
Minutes Played 2018-19 Regular Season: 19:23/average in 64 Games Played
Minutes Played 2018-19 Play-Off Season: 16:32/average in 22 Games Played
He has the big body and toughness built for the Play-Offs.
RBA loves players who know their job and do it well.
Joel makes the opposition hurt the next day.
Excellent trade for the 'Canes!

These assets that get accumulated during a rebuild/retool are good not only for keeping an influx of talent from within, but also using them to make the NHL club better in the future. That can take the form of bundling some up to trade for a good player or allowing a team to have a fallback asset stash in the event that they want to basically rent their own guy.
I don't have a strong opinion of what the right decision was in this circumstance. For me, an asset like Bokk is almost the threshold of whether to basically rent Faulk or not. It could go either way. I just think Gold feeling like the team would have been better off with #27 for a year isn't some far off opinion.

It's not delegation, that's the thing. It's teamwork. When you delegate, you let another person be the sole or final decision maker and accept their decisions. When you work as a team, everyone is in a room together and making decisions jointly. Waddell may have the final call, but it's an honest to god collaborative process, not a delegated one.

So, here's my simple breakdown....
Canes would have loved to have kept Faulk medium-long term at a reasonable rate (5-6 AAV). What he got with STL is a bad contract. It's too long and it's too much money for him. They saw the opportunity to get Gardiner (who is a better player than Faulk) at an excellent rate for lesser term so they pivoted there. Gardiner is the new Faulk.
Trading CDH was a head scratcher at first and I still think they could have gotten a better return but for the Canes obviously they saw a few things in CDH...
1. While a good solid middle pairing d-man when healthy, he is a major health risk now and he could be a quickly deteriorating asset
2. He was signed for slightly too much money and for too long of a term
3. He could be reasonably replaced by a cheaper, less term committed player (Enter Edmonson)
The Canes signed CDH early in the offseason last year before anyone knew what this team was. It was a good move at the time and a great signal to the league and players that Carolina was open for business and could attract some decent talent and UFAs. But where the team is today on the ice and off the season is different than a year ago. Dundon and the front office borg have accelerated the process and they are crushing it. To go through all these moves and come out with the d-core that we have and also pick up assets like Bokk, Forsling, Toronto 1st, etc. it's nothing short of masterful. This front office and coaching staff has 100000% of my support right now.
As for Dougie potentially being the same situation as Faulk in 1 year. Yes, that is true on paper and for sure if Hamilton makes it known that it is going to take 8x8 or something like that to keep him then he's gone BUT... we can't underestimate the amount that Dougie values being in a city, team, org that values him and he feels comfortable in. I don't think there's anyway he goes tunnel vision and only looks at getting max cash and leaves to somewhere that might potentially be another Boston/Calgary situation where he clearly didn't fit in with the 'cool kids'. He knows he has a rep around the league and whether that is true or unearned, it is there. I wouldn't be shocked at all to see an extension get done next off season as long as nothing crazy happens this year chemistry wise.
Anyway, just my thoughts on it all...

Same here! I probably didn't word it right. But I agree.

Hey Red!

100% Faulk is better than Edmonson and yes, doing that swap is a downgrade this year. But we aren't looking at just this year. This was going to be Faulk's last year with us based on his contract demands. Clearly the borg thought that the swap of Faulk + CDH for Gardiner + Edmonson was minimal downgrade at best and it may end up being an improvement in the end. Add in the gain in prospects and the financial flexibility and it's hard not to say it's an overall win for the Canes in the long run. Faulk would have to have a hell of a year for it to outweigh all those other positives from moving him.

Page number: 12

Yes, Rod did play him more in the playoffs, but I would contend that he was, at times, a liability out there. I had more than a few discussions in the parking lot pregame about why Rod was playing him as much as he did.

That's the bootleg Chinese version.
#groupofjerks

Counterpoint: all arguments on this board are pointless.

It wasn't just the playoffs, it was the regular season as well where Faulk was 2nd in TOI/GP among defensemen. And in terms of being a liability out there, we seem to gloss over Dougie's mistakes and play in the playoffs for some reason.
In terms of regular season, for all his "gaffs" and with being a liability out there, in the end, he was one of the better Canes D for GA/60 and wasn't sheltered nearly as much as Dougie, CDH or TVR.
I'm not arguing that Faulk is a great defender. He has inconsistencies 0(no more than Hamilton though) and his lateral movement isn't as good as the other defensemen, but his "warts", for some reason, are pointed out more than other players. Probably because he's been here the longest and it's natural for Fans to do that.

The one about that TBL RFA wasn't. That was on Point.

Touche!

Counterpoint: all arguments on this board are pointless.

You motherf...
...good one. Sigh.

When you argue about the pointlessness of arguments you're going to need a much higher (lower?) bar to make the top 10

They may be on the precipice of legitimately contending. The view that they don't need to be as concerned about the team in the future as they were in the past can be a valid one.
The roster turnover is a cause for concern. There were players on the roster that fit together in the lineup and in the locker room. Sometimes that doesn't happen with acquisitions. This is a pretty different team in 19-20.
Gold was more comfortable with Faulk in almost a transitional role than what they got back in return. That's a fair opinion to have, imo.

I would agree, if you just want to say Faulk is better than Edmundson, but context matters. And in this case, context is everything.
The Canes did something very smart this offseason, IMO. They identified and established a clear top four on defense with cost control and players playing on their strong sides for at least two seasons. It looked like we were prepared to go into the season with Slavin/Hamilton, Pesce/Faulk, but that lacked two of the elements that we ended up getting, no medium-term cost certainty (Faulk, then Hamilton expiring) and Pesce on his off side. By keeping in touch with Gardiner, we were able to sign him to a very team-friendly contract that "fixed" both those issues, but which left no room in the top four for Justin Faulk.
Whatever you think of Justin's game -- what his relative strengths and weaknesses are, how is usage affected his point totals, whether 2018-19 was the "new" Faulk or an aberration -- the *team* is set up far more efficiently without him.
To be able to then move him for two pieces that fit here perfectly -- a defense-first left defenseman with some size and a top-tier prospect -- just makes it all the more impressive. So yes, Faulk is better than Edmundson, but the difference between them for this team, right now, is far smaller than anyone really wants to admit. Edmundson actually fills a role and Faulk didn't. And to get a guy like Bokk on top is just a real coup.

Oh good one!

I'm just going to put this out there. It's really not.
Allowing Faulk to play out his option really doesn't help us. He's not a huge improvement on TvR and when we're completely healthy, one d-man is playing out of position. Plus, you don't pay a guy $6 million for a "transitional role." What we got back in return is a high-end third-pairing defender who pairs perfectly with the one we already have (TvR) and a top 50 prospect.
I would be far more concerned with the makeup of our defense if we continued to jam square pegs into round holes for another season, than I am now with half the salary, clearly-defined roles and responsibilities and an extra top prospect thrown in.

I think Faulk is better than Edmundson and Gardiner .
But Gardiner is probably better on the PP. And Edmundson is probably better on the PK.
So by divvying up the minutes right, the can still be better.

Faulk is definitely not better than Gardiner. I live in Toronto and have seen a ton of Gardiner. He's very good. He's not as physical as Faulk for sure but he is one of the best skating d-men in the league so he's excellent on zone breakouts and entries and he has a great first pass. Pairing him with Pesce is going to be lights out.

Rod's interview posted on N&O today. His comment was with the loss of Williams and Faulk, he's more concerned about the leadership and chemistry of the group than he is about what was lost on the ice. Commented how well all that stuff went last year.
Also stated that he thought they made a pretty good offer to keep Faulk, but they couldn't come to an agreement.

The problem is when someone is coming up the wing at him, or he's battling in front of the net. Or digging in the corners.
Faulk's physicality was highly underrated. He threw people around in the dzone, especially along the boards.
It's the reason, I think, we saw Pesce and Faulk being leaned on over Hamilton in the playoffs, even though Hamilton is better in all the ways you just described Gardiner as better.

I don't see it as a question of Faulk vs. Edmundson. I saw Faulk as an insurance policy. What happens if Gardiner doesn't gel with Pesce? What happens if Hamilton stinks in the 1st half again? What happens if there are lengthy injuries? What happens if Brind'Amour just wants to juggle the pairs to give the team a boost? It would have been beneficial to have Faulk at the team's disposal. If they're spending to the cap, they had the ability to keep him, with the prospect depth already present.
As I said, I don't have a strong opinion at this price point. I understand why the did it. I would have understood if they chose not to do it for those reasons. This may end up being a good move. It may end up not being a good move.

I'm not an NBA guy...but I suspect you are saying that while Faulk has respectable goal numbers, if you were to normalize it for shot attempts, he would not look so good...in other words he's an inefficient puck hog...is this correct?
Looking at his numbers over the past 3 seasons, his shooting percentage is 4.9%...for D-men with at least 200 minutes, this is ~the 76th percentile...so well above average. Interestingly I see Parayko has more shots over this time period than Faulk (441 vs 428) but has a 1.6 shooting percentage which is around 16th percentile. Dougie has the 2nd most shot and scores on 5.77% which was 84th percentile.
Over his career Faulk scores on 6.1% of his shots...this again is right around the 75th percentile for d-men over that time period.
As a side note, does anyone know a good way to export data from nhl.com? They have some good shot attempt data where we could look at shot attempt efficiency and take into account missed shots (data above is pulled from hockey reference which has a handy export to csv option).
Edit: naturalstattrick.com allows for 3 seasons of aggregation and data to exported to csv as well. Was curious to look at the claim that Faulk gets a lot of his shots blocked. Looks like around 31 percent of his shot attempts are blocked which is about 30th percentile for D-men.

Brind'Amour's comments about the leadership being the primary concern after Williams leaving and Faulk being traded is a legitimate thing to key on as the season approaches.
that being said, Williams was always going to be finished playing at some point very soon, and Faulk was due to be a UFA next summer with multiple failed attempts to extend him. so identifying new leadership was always going to have to happen in the fairly short term. this just pushes it to now.
it'll be a bit awkward to sort this out with so many new roster players, and so much youth up and down the lineup. but the process was always going to be looming, this time next year at the absolute latest.

among defensemen, faulk was 10th in powerplay ice time last year but tied for 35th in powerplay points. he was tied for *65th* in powerplay assists.
just looking at goals or shooting percentage doesn't tell the whole story. he's a terrible, terrible powerplay qb.

Sure, that's fair. Physicality isn't a strong part of Gardiner's game... but on the Canes it doesn't have to be. That's why we have Edmondson, TVR, Fleury, and Pesce to a degree. The d-corps is much more balanced now.
Slavin - Lidstrom-esque. Not overly physical but doesn't shy away from playing the body but usually he doesn't have to throw around hits because he's so damn good with positioning and stick work. Can skate and move the puck. Doesn't have super offensive instincts but has a high IQ to keep the play going.
Pesce - Defensive stalwart. Shuts things down before they become a threat. Can play the body and get a bit rough but isn't going to blow people up. Found an offensive side to his game last year that we didn't know about. Pair him with Gardiner and it will be magic.
Hamilton - Big, Physical, Rocket Shot, Offensive instincts. Doesn't play the smartest or safest game defensively so will be out of position or pinching from time to time but despite what people say sometimes, he is a physical force. He doesn't love hitting or taking hits (see Ovechkin) but he will get into it for sure when engaged.
TVR + Edmonson - Stay at home guys. Big bodies. No offense. Hit people, move them out the way.
We needed more offense and transition from our D. We have enough physicality for the time being. Fleury is another big body who could play with an edge if needed, or at least he should.

Last year. The year before (17-18), he was 20th in powerplay ice time, 19th in points and 19th in assists. Focusing on one perhaps down year doesn't tell the whole story either.

How many ****ing insurance policies does a team need? We legitimately have two of the top 10 defensive lines in hockey going into the season. Stashing Faulk on the 3rd line as a 'just in case' someone gets hurt or someone doesn't gel perfectly is a pretty damn expensive insurance policy to take on a team that is already at the cap as it is. And that's before considering we have a glut of young prospects who look ready to break into the NHL any day and would be partially blocked with Faulk in the way. Keeping him around is asking for there to be locker room troubles. He's too good to be given 3rd line minutes this year, but he isn't good enough to be on our top two lines. In a contract year where he knew he was going to have to prove himself, taking away his minutes and reducing his role on the team was never going to go over well. We had to move him, or risk this becoming a problem behind the scenes all year. As has been pointed out before, we dealt with this last year with Pesce, and we weren't about to do it again. It was too expensive and too short sighted a risk to take. He had to go.
And by letting him go, we were able to backfill him with a guy who expects 3rd line minutes, but will be a good 3rd liner on his own. We improved at PP by adding Gardiner, improved on PK by adding Edmundson, and now have clear roles that everyone knows they need to be playing this year. That wasn't going to be the case with Faulk around.
Also, regarding this whole 'insurance policy'.... **** or get off the pot. We can't be afraid to make a move because of the offhand chance things might happen. And given our defensive depth, we should have enough faith in the pieces we do have long term to cover any issues that may arise this year. Freezing a move of Faulk because our ridiculously stacked defense has a chance of not being perfect isn't a smart way to do business.

Page number: 13

My main fear is we've gotten a little too soft now on the back end. I think this is a defense that's well constructed for the regular season grind. They're going to play the puck, force lots of takeaways and generate offense. What's it gonna be like late in the season if we're fighting for a playoff spot, or when the playoffs start? I'm glad we got Edmundson for this specific reason, and assuming TVR's recovery goes according to plan that helps. But is that enough? IDK

Edmunson is a step down I suppose but we clearly only wanted four top 4 D. Efficiency with salaries justifies that thinking especially when you have young guys fighting for those last two spots. Downside is we are now paying two vets 3rd pair salaries to be on that pairing. Which is fine if you're going for the cup, makes sense really. If we were trying to be really efficient with cash that's where I would save some money, and maybe that's what happens next off season.

DeHaan was good. We've made some moves and are trying to bring some if what we lost in that trade in other ways.
I'd still prefer DeHaan but I get what we've done and why.

Now I get the butt hurt over Gold.
Not everyone evaluates things via a Corsi-derived chart. At least I'm going to wait and see about the improved PP, PK and the two Top 10 defensive pairings.

Sounds like a baseball analyst ranting about the eye test while moneyball was rapidly overtaking the sport.

What he's saying is that he can put together a team that will excel over a 162 game schedule, but once you hit a best of 5 or best of 7 series, its anyone's game. Which is true.
But you still need to get through those 162 games, or in our case those 82 games. That's where the analytics come into play, and thats where you need to put the focus. Once you get that perfected, and once you are at a stable point to assure playoff entry, then you tweak to maximize impact during those series. But you still have to get there.

Our top 4, which was already really good, improved and got better in skating, transition, PP distribution, passing.
Our bottom pairing, which was already really good and had a legit #3/#4 playing on it, got worse but it's still very capable with a combo of Edmonster/TVR/Fleury. It also is more suited towards physical and shutdown play.
In the process we did the following...
- Shed salary
- Committed less term to CDH and gave it to Gardiner
- Gained a bunch of prospects
It's a good thing guys. The only potential downfall, which I agree is a concern, is the lack of leadership. Will need to see the young guys take a step here and maybe Staal becomes a stronger voice in the room too. He's the elder statesman of the team now.

They're both UFAs after the season, so there's no long-term commitment to either, as you noted. I'm sure we'll treat them as we will all of our pending free agents. We'll wait to see if Edmundson fits and if TvR is healthy, decide what we can afford and make them offers. If they don't sign extensions (most likely at reduced rates), they will move on, either via trade or free agency.
The development -- or lack thereof -- of Fleury, Sellgren, McKeown, Forsling, Wood and Priskie will also play a role.

I don't quite get the sentiment that our 3rd pairing is going to be a physical "shut down" role. Maybe I think of the term "shut down" role differently, but I view it like I view Staal, that they are going against the other teams top players and their role is to shut down the other teams top offensive weapons.
I'll be surprised if our 3rd pairing is going against other team's top lines. I think it's more likely they are going to be sheltered and playing other teams 3rd/4th lines.
I do agree that with Edmundson, they will be more of a defensive role and that he'll play on the PK, but at ES, I don't see a "shut-down" role.

And once you get there, there is a large aspect of luck.
If Mrazek vs WAS shows up vs BOS, that's at least a longer series. Heck, we talked about how BOS game 3 might have changed if TT hits that open net early on.
Those types of games even out over 82. They don't necessarily even out over 4-7 games.

Agree. That's why I said above, this looks well constructed for the regular season.
But even having said that, there's a massive difference between baseball and hockey. Analytics apply to baseball because it's more or less a collection of individual occurrences. But even in baseball there are still team dynamics at play that can't be accounted for through data. In Moneyball, Greg Maddux and Javier Lopez should be one of the greatest pitcher/catcher tandems ever. In real life, they could not work together at all.

He's about to go do just that in St. Louis. His agent even told Friedman that he didn't want to be traded.
There are arguments for this trade. This is one of the weaker ones.

Yeah when I looked Claesson was still on the big club. Be that as it may, I'm also pretty sure Bishop or somebody with similar salary is going to be in Raleigh so that they can have the 22 man roster most nights. That still leaves about $1 million in cap space....even without any LTIR use.

True, but that doesn't necessarily mean you need 2 all star catchers so that Maddux has his own elite pair for his starts as opposed to the ones that Glavin and others had. You just needed that one specialist to cover that role effectively so you could better spend that other money elsewhere. That's where I say we're better with the PK specialist Edumndson and top end prospect of Bokk than we were going to be with Faulk. By the eye test, we're a worse team. In terms of fit and roles, I think we're better.

Agreed, but it brings up an interesting point. What is our shutdown pairing? IMO, Brindy and Chynoweth have got it easy this season. They can basically just roll three defense pairings at 5 on 5. They may *prefer* certain matchups, but they aren't going to lose any sleep over any pairings being stuck in a bad matchup. It may not be great to see Edmundson/TvR out against McDavid, but I'm not going to assume the puck is ending up in our net like I would if it was Fleury/Faulk.

He has a 5 year full NTC and a 2 year limited NTC over the duration of this deal.
Personally, I think that is a huge mistake, and for me that's a poison pill for this contract. Lets not beat around the bush, he has enough warts to his game where I would not feel comfortable at all locking ourselves into a deal that long with him. I mean good for him that he's able to get that, but yikes. Of course, there's also the chance he's Expansion Draft fodder to Ron Francis and the Seattle team.
Just because he was able to get that NTC doesn't mean it was a good idea

I couldn't care less how St. Louis is running their team. What I do know is that paying a guy $6 million to play limited minutes as an insurance policy is horrible asset management.

But he's not an insurance policy in STL. He's the long-term solution, the heir apparent in STL. Hence the 7 year extension.
Yes, it seems odd for us to consider Faulk the "heir apparent" after 8 years here, but he's the 2nd youngest player on the STL blue line, and only a year older than Parayko. STL just has a much older blue line than Carolina.

To me shut-down is just being defensively sound, wearing down the other team physically, while keeping the puck out of the net and eating minutes.
TVR and Edmonster are obviously not expected to provide any offense to that means when you're on the ice you're giving the core players time to rest, reset, and you're not letting the other team advance their agenda.

Ok, we are using the term differently. Typically a "shut down" pairing means a pairing that goes against the other team's top lines to shut them down (like Slavin and Pesce were a few years ago, like Jordan Staal is used, etc..). Being a defense first pairing, as you describe it, makes sense.

I just don't necessarily agree with that and I'll leave it there. I didn't mean for my argument in favor of Gold having a valid argument to stretch out multiple pages. I'll end up further cluttering up the thread with the same points. He's been traded. It's in the rearview.

Yeah, you're right. Defense first is a better description. We're not talking prime Scott Stevens here are something.

A 13th forward eats away at their cap flexibility later on in the season. Being realistic, Bishop is of no risk of a waiver claim. He can go up and down as necessary.
They operated with just 6D and Fleury in Charlotte for chunks of last season. I don't see the necessity of more than a 21 man roster at full health.

Page number: 14

The Dougie discussion will happen next year. Faulk was the one looking for the new contract and he just isn't worth what he got.
Let's be fair, Faulk isn't anywhere near the level of Slavin or Pesce. He also doesn't pose the offensive threat that Dougie does.
Waddell has done a good job at trying to improve the PP and scoring. I have to think this is a better team than last season. Of course, that doesn't mean they will have the same level of success, but everything appears to be in place (caveat goaltending)

Again, agree completely, but this wasn't the discussion. The discussion was that Faulk would be a "3rd pairing Dman in Carolina this year" and my statement was "that maybe on paper, but I doubt that would be how Rod used him, particularly based on how Rod used him last year and not just in the playoffs" and I don't think he was as much of a liability as you, and others, are stating.
Don't get me wrong. I don't think Faulk is a great defender, but I do think his miscues get more airtime/hate than other defensemen's miscues and I think it's 100% because he's been here the longest. For example, if Faulk had made the same play in the playoffs when Ovi was charging in on him like Hamilton made, people would have called for his head. Hamilton has some notoriously bad pinches and his play, IMO, reduces Slavin's effectiveness, but people don't highlight those like they do with Faulk.
Anyhow, I agree the Canes needed to make this move so not disagreeing with that part of it.

maybe one of these days people will stop making arguments against analytics as if the goal for the field is to usurp "eye test" or "experience" in the evaluation process.
perhaps a couple of sycophant front offices tried that literally 15 years ago, but almost from the jump analytics in sports has been groomed and developed as a management tool to help actual human beings make better decisions. that's really the extent of it. Tulsky's 97% comments in Custance's podcast felt too self-effacing by half and maybe a bit of self-deprecating humor as well.
major developments in recent years have resulted in developing new analytical tools. either using new technology (accelerometer or GPS tracking stuff) or new concepts (possession/zone entry or shot generation stuff for hockey). you still need the human element to fill in the gaps that analytics can't cover, just like you need analytical tools to fill in the gaps that eye tests, experienced scouting, and people relations processes can't objectively evaluate. Billy Beane knows this, Theo Epstein knows this, and Eric Tulsky and Tom Dundon definitely know this.
in terms of the Carolina Hurricanes, I think the biggest organizational evolution in the Dundon era isn't really the use of analytics, but rather a philosophical change in how "Value" is determined, as well as how decisions are made to retain, move out, or target and identify value using all available means.
the red/yellow/green light decision-making process that Tom Dundon described when he first bought the team wasn't about wheeling in a big computer and typing Run into a terminal window. it was about gathering information, storing and organizing this information so that human beings can access, understand, and utilize it, and establishing a circle of trust so that a group of smart individuals can bring informed perspectives into powwows and make smart decisions nimbly, whether they involve changes of small or franchise-altering proportions.
it's this sort of flexible decision-making that enables rather convoluted deals like the Faulk trade. Faulk's value was more or less determined (with senior-level input from Rod Brind'Amour I might add), contract negotiations were undertaken, and when there was an impasse, they were able to make a move with a clear idea of what value they could get. this allowed them to maneuver a deal for a replacement roster defenseman and an exciting prospect with high end potential. not only that, but given that there was a rather minor exchange of picks and salary retention on Carolina's part, you can feel pretty confident that GMBC felt strongly about the major pieces of the deal. to me as a fan, that's uncommon insight into management priorities, especially in the NHL.
at this point, it remains to be seen how these changes will impact the won-loss record of this particular season. anything can happen, and analytical tools are kind of left standing on the dock as the season pushes out to sea when it comes to things like "leadership" or "chemistry." but if you look at the process itself for what it is and how it has impacted the value of assets throughout the organization, the results are clear as day. the Faulk trade is just the latest iteration.

Justin Faulk. Bottom pair dman, people give 6.5x7 for, along with a good prospect.
Roland McKeown. Also Bottom pair dman. People won't take him for free.

Now when Ferland is gone, there is use for player like Edmundson. Just checked all his fights

Moral of the story: don't be named like a hamburger clown.

I think it may have been trending towards Faulk starting on the 3rd pair and 2nd PP, but I don't think it matters. In the Tulsky interview (and God help me, this supports what MSP has been saying for a while), he did mention how it isn't great to have a 4+ million dollar dman on your third pair. You'll certainly take the problem if you have it, but it isn't ideal. It doesn't matter if Faulk was going the be that expensive contract on the third pair, or one of the others making that rate, someone was going to be there. Given our cap situation, Faulk's contract situation (super glad we don't have that on our books), fit (Edmundson being a clear 3rd pairing that can likely step up in a pinch, play PK, provide some physical game vs Faulk's offensive strengths that can probably be handled well enough by high end offensive guys like Hamilton and Gardiner, and mid range guys like Pesce and Slavin), I think the move makes perfect sense. And Bokk is a very nice icing on the cake.

You've made this point a couple of times and I understand it in terms of last season, but it truly didn't look like it was shaping up to be the case this season. Faulk averaged almost three minutes a game on the power play and it was looking like that was going virtually to zero this season. That, in and of itself, accounts for most of Faulk's seemingly skewed usage under Brind'Amour, who had clearly moved on from Faulk on the PP.
If you look at Faulk -- in the context of our team -- as a de Haan replacement (second-pairing guy being under-slotted, not playing on the PP but on the PK), I'd think we'd realistically have expected him around de Haan's 16:25 of ice at 5-on-5 and two minutes per game on the PK.

That's why I said "on paper". I agree that's how it looks to be shaping up, but last year, it looked to be shaping up as Slavin-Pesce, CDH-Hamilton as the top four, everybody assumed Dougie would take over 1st PP unit and Faulk would be traded. Faulk didn't get traded and neither of the 1st two things happened, which is precisely my point. How things look to be shaping up/how we think guys should be deployed and how RBA actually deploys them would likely be 2 very different things. It's all speculation anyhow so it doesn't matter.
I think it's the right move trading him. On paper, I like the mix we have, I like the RH/LH balance, I like having Gardiner on the PP, I like the salary structure, and I like getting Bokk. How it works on the ice remains to be seen, but we've got enough depth that I'm not worried about it.
Edit: just to correct 1 thing, because I'm like that. Faulk had the 2nd most ES TOI among defensemen, just behind Slavin and his ES TOI/GP was 3rd behind Slavin and Pesce, but only 4 seconds less than Pesce so it's not completely accurate to say that PP was the main factor in skewing his TOI.

I think that can be heard in Brind'Amour's comments after practice today. He flat out said they couldn't come to a contract deal, so he knew the team was moving on from Justin. It was only a matter of time....hence the change in PP usage.

A Faulk extension was never going to work out with us. Borg was likely going off of cap hit as a starting point and Faulk was going off of actual salary which was $6 mil.
No way we were giving him a raise on $6 mil for more than 3-4 years if we were willing to go that high at all. I'm sure they were trying to get him in the 5.5 range.
The deal wasn't so much for Faulk as it was for Hamilton. If they pay him $6.5 then Dougie will want $8 mil+

Faulk would have little bearing on Hamilton's ask. They'll have to give him $8 mil+ with up to max term regardless. Spurgeon just signed for $7.58 mil x 7. Trouba got $8 mil x 7. The analytics say he's better than both, right? He has more name value, too. That's not even mentioning cap inflation, which could be significant with the next US TV deal starting at the same time as his next contract.
The desire to extend Faulk to begin with calls into question Hamilton's long-term future to me. Now that I think about it, that persists after signing his replacement even.

As has been mentioned, they'll place a value on it, and if/when Dougie wants way more than that, they'll move on and go but another dman. Pretty straightforward.

You're not wrong BUT I would also argue that the borg looks at what the rest of the league does and says "˜ya, I think I'm gonna do it my way'.
So yes, while Trouba and Spurgeon would be comparables league wide I think GMBC is gonna set their own bar for negotiations and while it might move a bit, I don't see them buckling Dubas style.
Anyway, lots of moving parts and next offseason things could be very different. So far I have no issues with anything Dundon and co have done since taking over.

There's no way Dundon is going to give Hamilton $8 million a year, nor should he. You don't stockpile guys like Bean, Priskie and Sellgren because you want to overpay for expiring UFAs.

Well Edmure makes 3.something with TVR making 2.something, so while we are "œcheaper" on the third pair we're paying a decent amount back there. Especially since we could probably roll with Fleury and McKeown.

Blues fan here! Love the Hurricanes!
Go Canes!
**** yeah!
Comin' again to save the mother ****in' day.
Yeah!
I've been a huge Edmundson supporter since he was drafted by the Blues.
He is tough and can pinch off a wing rush to the boards at will. But the problem is that he is a head game. He gets inside his head and loses his game in the process.
Bokk is sensational as long he is nurtured properly. The Blues paid dearly for Faulk. Bokk is a huge loss to our prospect pool at forward.

Honestly, if contract negotiations with Dougie don't go well, I do see them pulling another Faulk-ian move with him, signing a comparable UFA (in terms of talent, not necessarily the exact same position) and getting a good prospect and draft pick package for Hamilton in a sign-and-trade. I've been hugely impressed with the Canes FO in their constant pursuit of maximum asset hoarding. Other than a few role players like Ferland, they have yet to give up a pending UFA for absolutely nothing. Faulk in particular returned an excellent package (if Bokk pans out, of course).

Yeah, I think the Ferland thing was mis-handled a bit for sure. Only because in the end they clearly could have brought him back for a relatively low cost considering what he signed for in Vancouver. The borg decided that Haula + Dzingel were better adds and they might be right on that but you can't deny what a healthy motivated Ferland brings to the table. Either way from an asset management standpoint it was less than ideal but maybe a lesson learned on that what and at least it wasn't on a player who was part of the core.

unless edmunson is really, really bad, a fleury-mckeown pairing would be a huge step down. i think the reason we have a $5.4m third pairing is because the organization just doesn't trust those guys.
fleury has looked miserable so far, in his sixth training camp and fourth pro year. there's this "they're easily #6 defenseman on any other team!!!" sentiment that about fleury and mckeown (and other prospects in the past) that doesn't have any merit alll imo.
people here have been SHOCKED when the likes of carrick and mckeown cleared waivers, but they shouldn't be. these guys are dime-a-dozen #8/9 defensemen who shouldn't be in a regular role on any team. every team has two or three of these guys.

You can't deny what a healthy de Haan brings to the table either.
Yet both are elsewhere on reasonable contracts for the next 3-4 years. I think health played a major role in both.

I think that for most organizations, a Fleury-McKeown pairing would work just fine on a third pairing. It's important to note, however, that the Canes are clearly in win-now mode and are ready to make their run this year, and Edmundson-TVR is a third pairing to match those ambitions.

Page number: 15

who are these "most organizations"??? literally every team just passed on mckeown for free. if he was a surefire third pairing defenseman you'd think someone would at least want him as #7 or #8 for depth purposes.

Given the limited amount I've seen, I think I'd put Sellgren ahead of both Bean and Fleury as the 3rd pairing LHD. He seems to be the most effective of the three in transitions and in the offensive zone, and he doesn't seem to make terrible mistakes in his own zone.

1) Carolina had to retain salary on Faulk after taking back Edmundson to get STL cap compliant. So if they don't take back Edmundson they either take back similar salary in other player or players, or retain more on Faulk. They took Edmundson for a year rather than retain more.
2) There's a lot of talk about the lack of interest in Fleury or McKeown for cheap around the league. Why should we assume there's a market for Edmundson at $3.1M and TVR at $2.3M? Are those cap hits worth the added performance to other teams over their own third pairing?

Waivers don't just occur in a vacuum. Canes snuck him in early when other teams were still evaluating their own players.

The main kicker with TVR is his injury. Teams likely want to see how he performs after he recovers. I think that most teams know that a healthy TVR is well-above average on a third pair.

Does anyone know if the rules about staying with the NHL team for a guy claimed off waivers is the same or different in the preseason as it is during the regular season? I wonder if that may also be playing a part for teams considering whether or not to make a claim on a guy like McKeown?

i might be misunderstanding the question, but there's no rules about a waiver claim having to stay with their new nhl team. it's just that they have to go through waivers again to be sent to the ahl.

Yes, I agree. To Dundon, $3M is chump change to improve a win-now team to make them Cup-ready for this year. If Fleury plays super-well again and has the same great defensive metrics as he did last year, perhaps they will trade Edmundson for a mid-round pick and re-allocate cap for a Willy return, but for now, it's worth it.

At this point, Edmundson alone won't prevent that, due to TvR's injured status. His presence is preventing further down the pecking order from starting on opening night.

I'm not sure it was mis-handled. It was pretty clear they didn't WANT to bring him back, even at a lower price, and that due to his injuries, there wasn't much of a market for him at the deadline.

Still, if he was a sure fire 3rd pairing guy on a cheap contract, a team would have made a claim. And Carrick has now passed waivers on two separate teams. These are the type of players that every team has, which is why they are passing through waivers, early or not.

EDIT 2: I mis-understood the question and response. Your response was about a guy claimed, and there is NO days/games played associated with that. A team claiming a guy would need to put him on waivers again to send him down, just as you stated.
My response below was in regards to a guy not claimed, as I misread the posts.
Isn't that only if they are on the roster for so many days and/or play in so many games?
EDIT: 13.5 of the CBA says 30 days or 10 games.
So a player not "loaned" to a minor league club or one who gets recalled from a minor league club won't need to be waived as long as he is under 30 days or 10 games, both cumulative. I don't think pre-season games count, but it's not clear.

I'm not advocating that they start these two. I'm saying if they were being cost conservative that's a place other teams would go young. It could Bean or Forsling as well.
Personally I like that they went vet, and that Fleury should have to beat a guy out. I think they're going for it this year and this is part of the reason why.

I think they took the guy because he fits what they want at that spot. I think they didn't want to go young. I definitely think TVR has value around the league.

Some folks in that thread seem to be mentioning Blues fans who think Faulk is a #1D. Who the hell are those people? Seems to me the consensus is he's a 3rd pairing guy that will probably be PP1.

Dave's a mess wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 2:40 pm Some folks in that thread seem to be mentioning Blues fans who think Faulk is a #1D. Who the hell are those people? Seems to me the consensus is he's a 3rd pairing guy that will probably be PP1.

That's what i'm thinking. Are they clueless? We have the best D in the League.

BluesSK wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 2:56 pm

Dave's a mess wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 2:40 pm Some folks in that thread seem to be mentioning Blues fans who think Faulk is a #1D. Who the hell are those people? Seems to me the consensus is he's a 3rd pairing guy that will probably be PP1.

That's what i'm thinking. Are they clueless? We have the best D in the League.

Yea that was puzzling to me, too. Petro - Parayko - Faulk is going to be great to watch this season on the right side.

bonkers. i don't see how you see this trade as a win for the 'canes. bokkers.

I'll always respect another teams fans opinion because like us, they watch most games and know the players pretty well. Just like when I saw Flyers fans talking about how good they thought Lehtera would be, "big young, talented center" and I was just like, "oh boy they are going to be in for a rude awakening."

With that said, I'm a little concerned with why so many seem so happy to have him away from their PP? But I agree with what others have said, his role with the Blues won't be what it was with the Canes. He's not expected to be a top guy here.

Dread_Pirate_Westley wrote: Fri Sep 27, 2019 8:56 am I'll always respect another teams fans opinion because like us, they watch most games and know the players pretty well. Just like when I saw Flyers fans talking about how good they thought Lehtera would be, "big young, talented center" and I was just like, "oh boy they are going to be in for a rude awakening."

With that said, I'm a little concerned with why so many seem so happy to have him away from their PP? But I agree with what others have said, his role with the Blues won't be what it was with the Canes. He's not expected to be a top guy here.

Well Carolina's PP has been in the bottom half of the league for pretty much the entirety of Faulk's career. Most of those years they didn't have much talent, but that wasn't the case last year. The funny thing about the Blues PP is that for all the whining about it, it ranked 10th in the league last year. It was absurdly streaky, and did nothing in the playoffs, but over 82 games it was statistically in the top third of the league.