Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

With the trade deadline approaching...


Stumpy
 Share

With the trade deadline approaching...  

19 members have voted

  1. 1. If you are Don "The Don" Waddell, what's your move?

    • Try to find a true #1 Goalie.
      9
    • MOAR FORWARDS!!!
      3
    • Get someone who can replicate Dougie's previous production.
      0
    • More size/grit.
      2
    • All of the above.
      0
    • Stand pat... Profit
      6


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Anybodyhome said:

The Canes are looking for a right-shot defenseman. At a decent price. This may be the guy.

 

Not the best numbers/stats this season but wouldn’t say no and let bean and fleury fight it out in the other spot. A little competition would def help fleury and probably Bean too. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's been hurt this season, but he's not an offensive-minded D. He's physical and would provide a presence Dougie cannot, for some reason, figure out.

Look, right now everyone (Hamilton & Canes) is saying the right things, but if Hamilton wants $8M a year, he needs to find a physical part of his game that will have teams thinking twice about teeing off on Canes players. I'm not completely sold on Hamilton at that price.

I'm also beginning to think the team is looking at replacing TT. I'm increasingly concerned if he'll ever lace up the skates again.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/7/2021 at 9:09 AM, CanesFanStan said:

Not a trade, but Lucas Wallmark got placed on waivers - he was an awesome fit with the Canes and could make sense for center depth. 

"Florida receives defenseman Lucas Carlsson and center Lucas Wallmark."

https://www.nhl.com/news/brett-connolly-riley-stillman-traded-to-chicago-by-florida/c-323404000?tid=278542340

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Harbingers said:

I'm onboard with the author that Manson isn't worth a first-round pick. If the choice is to give up a 1st round pick or give $8M to Dougie, unfortunate as it may seem, the second option I can live with.

And, I'm not sure, but the author also makes it sound like Fleury is the odd man out if Carolina does find another right hand blue liner.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Anybodyhome said:

I'm onboard with the author that Manson isn't worth a first-round pick. If the choice is to give up a 1st round pick or give $8M to Dougie, unfortunate as it may seem, the second option I can live with.

And, I'm not sure, but the author also makes it sound like Fleury is the odd man out if Carolina does find another right hand blue liner.

That’s what I’ve read elsewhere too. I think it was NHL.com’s trade buzz. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...