• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

2024-25 Canes Miscellaneous Thread

I'm ok with keeping Taylor Hall, but any extension needs to be for a lot less than the $6 million AAV he has on the current contract. He turns 34 in November and is probably no better than a 40 point player at best at this stage of his career.

$4 million per for 2 seasons would seem reasonable to me.
 
HurryCanes said:
I thought the same thing.
Click to expand...
But the flip side is that Dundon may have to money whip (to steal a phrase from his fellow Texan, Dan Jenkins) players because their agents don’t like dealing with him. It certainly didn’t hurt in the extensions with Aho and Slavin. Aho’s agent only has 9 other pkayers and all but Anton Forsberg are Finns It’s also a 1 man shop. Slavin’s agent has 33 others and the agency he runs has a total of 60. And Slavin probably told his agent he wasn’t leaving, because he left a lot of money on the table. He also met Guentzel’s total number but lost out due to other reasons.
 
There's no real downside to having the agents hate you. They freaking SHOULD hate you as an owner or GM. The weasels want GMs that fall for their smarmy crap.
 
How many of you have personally dealt with a talent agent? I ask because there is a lot of generalized vitriol directed at them here and I wonder how much it has to do with personal experience.

Agents have one job—to get the best deals for and advocate on behalf of their agents. Some do so using questionable, unethical tactics, but the overwhelming majority of them work hard and find win-win situations for their clients and the other parties. In my work in the media, I’ve gotten to know a few agents and they are not “weasels” or “swarmy.”

As some of you know, my wife is a novelist, and her literary agent is an awesome, impressive person who has allowed my wife to make dramatic strides with her career. She also is highly respected by the editors and publishers with whom she negotiates deals with her clients.
 
HeyKurtz said:
How many of you have personally dealt with a talent agent? I ask because there is a lot of generalized vitriol directed at them here and I wonder how much it has to do with personal experience.

Agents have one job—to get the best deals for and advocate on behalf of their agents. Some do so using questionable, unethical tactics, but the overwhelming majority of them work hard and find win-win situations for their clients and the other parties. In my work in the media, I’ve gotten to know a few agents and they are not “weasels” or “swarmy.”

As some of you know, my wife is a novelist, and her literary agent is an awesome, impressive person who has allowed my wife to make dramatic strides with her career. She also is highly respected by the editors and publishers with whom she negotiates deals with her clients.
Click to expand...
The general vitriol towards agents reflects our competing interests. Player agents serve their client, fair enough. But they often do so with a myopic focus on the individual's welfare that is at odds with the interest of the team we happen to support ... which is why we're paying attention in the first place.

Look at it this way, if sports is about the bottom line and the bottom line for a team is winning then anyone who would call Tom Dundon the worst owner in the NHL is either unhinged from reality, or he's the kind of guy who really doesn't give a crap about the teams that pay his players' salaries or the league for that matter ... only the salaries. In my estimation those kinds of people deserve the vitriol they get. And the agent negotiation model simply doesn't work the same across all professions. Publishing and professional sports are two completely different fishbowls with different stakes and different incentive structures. If you want to know who specifically I'd call a weasel, then look no further than the agent who handled Aho's "interests" during the Montreal offer sheet debacle. Tell me again how ANYTHING that guy did was in everyone's best interests. Or maybe remember Marc-Andre Fluery's agent's behavior during his last months in Vegas. You don't want to get called smarmy, then maybe stop acting smarmy.
 
OK ... pivoting here.

I saw a blurb somewhere indicating that the Ducks had held some conversations with teams about John Gibson again, after scaring most everyone off with their asking price back in January. Carolina and Edmonton are supposedly involved, although I've also seen Edmonton supposedly involved in talks for forward help and Carolina has reportedly been sniffing around for a rental forward as well. The two teams aren't in terribly different situations. Both have issues up front and a lack of confidence in their goaltending ... warranted on all fronts IMO. The gist of the reporting was that Carolina was probably better suited to Gibson's desire to be the lead keeper where ever he lands, and since I think he has one of those "give us your list" restricted movement clauses, he does have a say. So long as the Canes ship a goalie back, they could likely find a way to make the money work.

While I strongly feel like the Canes interests would be served by getting a rental center and not risking their hand on a goalie at this stage, that supposed that one of their two goalies will get their head out of their backside long enough to get themselves settled in net for the playoffs. Frankly, I haven't seen anything out of either Kochetkov or Andersen to indicate that either one of them has yet received that memo, much less read it. And while young Lukas Donstal has taken over the crease in Anaheim, it's not really an issue of Gibson's play so much as the Ducks looking to their future. Gibson's win/loss record might suck but so does his team ... again. His other stats are solid and he's 3rd in the league in goals saved above expected per 60 minutes if you sort for guys who are more than part timers.

If I'm Carolina's front office, and thank God I'm not, I'd love to see Brind'Amour ditch the goalie rotation and give one of his two mules a chance to prove he's not lame between now and the deadline. I distrust them both equally, so I don't care which. Then if you don't like what you see, the price for Gibson starts to be something you weigh against what you calculate for your post season chances otherwise. The Canes are likely already resolved to use their 1st rounder either way, whether they go for a center or a goalie. The question is, which one gets you a better shot in the East ... where if you slug your way out of the Metro you probably end up with Florida or Tampa between you and the Finals. A tough road, but not beyond question. Provided of course, they find some chemistry pretty soon, which I see as way less of a challenge than a lot of people seem inclined to think.
 
Our goalie situation is priority one for me. There's no way that the Canes are getting even out of the first round with either of the guys that we have right now.
 
IF Rod decides to ditch the goalie rotation (and I'm not at all sure he should until one provides an outstanding effort in at least 1-2 games), I also don't know who to trust with the #1 job. As bad as Freddie has been, I still have a slightly higher faith that he'll get his game together - BUT - I think I'd go with our crazy Russian simply to see if he's part of our future. We know for sure that Freddie is not.
 
I think it comes down to this for me. Last year, the Canes weren't great in the playoffs but Freddie dropped an absolute dud at home in Game 6 against the Rangers to send them packing. There was all but nothing between those teams, and the one with the goalie that blinked went home. The year before, the Canes got absolutely goalie-ed by Bob in the Eastern Finals. Before that, they were stuck with rookie Kooch and freaking Raanta for the post season. Even if the Canes get their groove back (and I think they will), we're almost certainly still on a train heading to that same station
 
Elliott Friedman has been suggesting that Rantanen's "situation" with the Canes is holding up other trade business.

The consensus at this point is that Rantenen is not signing before the trade deadline and that the Canes will spend the next few days deciding internally if they are going to try to trade him before the deadline or not. Teams that want Rantanen are holding other deals until they know for sure if Rantanen is going to be made available or not.
 
Rumor is that we've met his number (whatever that is), or at least we're very close. So, if he hasn't signed then he obviously doesn't want to play here or thinks he can make more later on. If he was playing lights out, then I'd keep him. But he isn't (although he's damn strong on the puck and you can see how good he is or can be) and if that's the case then GMET should see what assets are available before the deadline.
 
Last edited:
This Thursday's home game against the Bruins might be interesting from a lineup perspective. The Bruins might hold out certain players who might be traded by 3PM the next day. Less likely, but also possible, the Canes might do the same thing that night.
 
Everyone needs to chill on Rantanen; IMHO he doesn't sign before the trade deadline, and unless he actively says he's not signing here, then we wait until July 1. He was blindsided by a trade and everyone wants him to signn an 8 year deal with a team he barely knows and who is playing like crap. If I were him I would 100% not rush my decision period.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top