Even after trading for Jordan Staal and coming up short in the Zach Parise sweepstakes, Carolina GM Jim Rutherford has still discussed the possibility of bringing in another forward for the top line. This is easier said than done because the free agent pool was already shallow enough and most of the big names are already off the market. With even fewer players available now, Rutherford is going to have to either overpay to get someone, take a risk on a low-valued talent (think something similar to the deal Wolski got) or possibly work out a trade with another organization. Acquiring Jordan Staal changes the foundation of the team and reduces the severity of a need for a top-six winger, but there is no doubt that the Hurricanes still need one for at least next season.

The biggest thing that is standing in the way of the Hurricanes making a signing is that they have very limited options in terms of who they can go after and what kind of contract they can give out. They have a few guys in the system who are going to be looking to play in the NHL within the next couple of seasons and probably can't afford to tie up a roster spot for the next five or six years with Ruutu and the Staal brothers locked up for awhile. An ideal situation for the Hurricanes would be to sign someone to a one or two year contract regardless of the cap hit and see how they work out. One of the main problems for the Hurricanes last season was the lack of quality top-line wingers, so Rutherford probably knows that he needs to at least try to acquire someone this year.

Who is available right now, though? If Rutherford wants to go the free agency route, there are still at least three players who he can go after and at least two of them are going to be looking for big money. Even with the cap currently over $70 mil., a team like the Hurricanes needs to get the most value out of the players they sign and that's especially true with the amount of money tied up in players like Ward and the Staal brothers. The Hurricanes not only need to acquire someone who will give them good value, they need to sign a player who also fits their system, which means that they will probably favor a player who can play in a power-vs.-power type role and not be overly dependent on his linemates.

After the jump, we will look at these said free agents and it will be up to you to determine which one fits the system best.

I might be a supporter of statistical analysis in hockey but one stat that I never use is plus-minus. My opinion is that it isn't very useful and doesn't provide much value for evaluating players. The reason I say this is because it's a stat that's largely derived on luck and how good a player's teammates are. Charging a player with a positive or negative rating whenever they are on ice for a goal is basically assuming that they did something to contribute to a goal being scored for or against their team. A player could do absolutely nothing to contribute to the play still have his plus/minus rating affected. His plus/minus rating would also be affected even if the goal scored is a complete fluke and the fault of the goaltender. 

Luck and randomness is something that occurs in just about every hockey game and goals for/against is usually where it is seen the most. Thus why plus/minus is a bad stat to use when judging a player. All it really tells you is what kind of teammates he played with and how good or bad the team around him was. If you were to look at the players with the worst plus/minus ratings in a given year, you will probably notice that they are mostly skaters who play a lot of minutes on bad teams. It's also more likely to be a players who are relied on to play the majority of the tougher minutes, unless it's Jack Johnson then he's going to look bad no matter what. Someone who plays on a team with bad goaltending is also subject to have a lower plus/minus rating than others and vice versa. The overall point here is that plus/minus really doesn't tell you much about how a player performs, which is why I tend to favor shot and possession based metrics instead.

There is definitely something that can be drawn from looking at goals against data, though because not every goal a player is on ice for is the fault of the goalie. This is especially true with the Hurricanes, who were a very weak defensive team this season. Charging every single player with a negative rating because they were on ice for a goal is a bit ridiculous but another option would be to penalize the player who was at fault for the goal. Miscues and defensive breakdowns happen all the time and there are usually a couple players who are at fault for it. There may have been a bad turnover, a defenseman may have forgot to tie up his man in front of the net or a forward may have been caught wandering in the defensive zone and allowed an opposing player to sneak in. Those are usually the kind of mistakes that lead to goals against and they are the fault of more than just a goaltender.

Instead of penalizing every player who was on ice for the goal, a more sensible thing to do would be to charge the player(s) who made the mistake that led to a goal with an "error." David Staples of the Edmonton Journal has done this with the Oilers players in recent years and his general rule of thumb with it is that a player who makes a defensive mistake in a scoring sequence is charged with an error. I did this last year with the Hurricanes defense and will do it again this year, only with every Carolina player instead of just the defense. I've also made a few changes from Staples' method. Instead of using a total error percentage from every goal that a player was on ice for, I separated them by game state.

Why? Because players who kill penalties are going to be on ice for more goals (and possibly more errors) simply because they play more defensive minutes than those who are considered offensive specialists. I also did not count errors from 5-on-6 play because less than 2% of the game is played there and the defending team is already at a big disadvantage there. Another thing that is different from last season is that I was able to look at some more detailed footage of the goals thanks to NHL Game Center. This allowed me to get a better look at where certain plays broke down and where errors occurred as opposed to watching only highlights.

After the jump, we will take a look at which Hurricanes players made the most mistakes this year and how many of them ended up turning into goals for the opposing team.

The growth of statistical analysis in hockey has come a long way in the last few years as there are now many different ways to analyze players and break down the ins and outs of just about anyone who has played in the NHL recently. However, most of the work that has been done in the last few years has applied to skaters while goalie analysis is still gaining its footing. Just looking a goalie's save percentage usually gets the job done because it's a simple way to tell you how efficient a goalie is at preventing pucks from going in his net. However, another thing we know is that the performance of goaltenders tends to bounce around over the course of a few years and in many cases, over the course of a full season. We saw it this year with Cam Ward and the Coyotes, Blues, Flyers, Kings, Penguins and Lightning also got a taste of how a good or bad season from a goalie can come out of nowhere.

Predicting goaltending performance is tough and it's probably impossible because of how much the team around him can have an impact on his performance. However, what we can do is further the statistical analysis of goaltenders to see what went right and what went wrong for them during a regular season. A goalie with a low save percentage on a team that doesn't give up many shots usually means that the net-minder isn't getting the job done while the team around him is playing fine. On the flip-side, a goalie who has to face a ton of shots and puts up a respectable save percentage despite that deserves more praise than a goalie with similar numbers on a team with a better defense.That's a fair assumption but it would be nice to get a closer look at his performance to see what exactly he is doing wrong and what kind of saves he is forced to make. Does he have positioning issues? Does he get beaten five-hole a lot? Is he the type of goalie who is more likely to challenge shooters or does his defense just make every save incredibly difficult on him?

Now, looking into this might be a tad excessive because it's possible that goalie could inexplicably bottom-out after having a great season and not many holes to speak of, but getting a closer look at a goalie's strong and weak points could be helpful for predicting future performance. Showing where a goalie gets beaten the most can also give fans a better idea of what his tendencies are and so would looking at what types of mistakes he routinely makes. There's a lot more to goalies than just their save percentage and how many shots they face, so doing some further analysis on their performance wouldn't hurt.

How do we do an analysis like this? I made an attempt at giving an in-depth look at Cam Ward last year where I looked at what types of goals the gave up, where most of the shots he faced came from and where he was beaten. I'm going to do the same thing with this analysis but I changed up my methods a little bit. Before, I was going by my own judgement to determine what is a "good" or "bad" goal and for this analysis, I referred to the "soft goal" guidelines drawn up by Rob Parker from Japers Rink. A "soft goal" is one that a goalie has to have and by Parker's guidelines, a shot from outside the scoring chance area where the goalie HAS to make the save. For instance, a shot from a bad angle that squeaks through the goalie short side is a soft goal but a shot from the point that is deflected in or goes through a screen is not. I was a tad less lenient on that front since there are plenty stoppable shots that come from the scoring chance area but my criteria was mostly the same otherwise. Goals that come on shots that most goalies usually stop are considered to have more of an impact, so this is definitely worth looking at.

In addition to that, I did this analysis for all four Carolina goalies who played this year instead of just Ward. The three other goalies didn't play enough for their data to be considered anything significant but I decided to look at them anyway. The data here on Ward will probably be the most intriguing since we now have two seasons worth of data on him and can start to form some more solid conclusions about him. It will also be interesting to see how his play has or has not improved compared to last season. I noted in my analysis last season that Ward was beaten on his glove side a lot. Is that still true this year? Find out after the jump.

In what seems like an odd move, the Hurricanes decided to bring another defenseman on board for next year by signing Marc-Andre Gragnani to a one-year, two-way deal. The contract will pay Gragnani $800,000 in the NHL and $105,000 in the AHL, which is a slight raise over the $550,000 he made last season. He spent all of last season in the NHL with the Buffalo Sabres and the Vancouver Canucks and was used almost exclusively in offensive situations.

Gragnani is very well-versed as an offensive defenseman as he led all AHL defensemen in scoring in 2010-11 with 12 goals and 60 points in 63 games. However, his game in the defensive zone is still coming along. He is a high-risk player who will make aggressive pinches when given the chance, so he can produce a lot of offense but he is also proned to give up a lot at the other end. His coaches seem to know this as he started over 63% of his even strength shifts in the offensive zone, faced mostly below average competition and saw a lot of time on the powerplay. Gragnani was very effective in those minutes so he is definitely capable as a powerplay quarterback and offensive defenseman. He hasn't quite lived up to his potential yet but he's still relatively young and can get better.

The Hurricanes acquiring Gragnani, however, is confusing to say the least. Their NHL club already has four puck-moving defensemen (Pitkanen, Faulk, McBain & Corvo) and two more who could join the team next year in Bobby Sanguinetti and Ryan Murphy. Adding another one into the mix doesn't make much sense to me because the Canes have a couple of players who would be third-pairing defensemen on most teams. It's possible that Jim Rutherford wants the team to carry seven defensemen next season for depth reasons and brought Gragnani in to compete with Sanguinetti during training camp for that final spot. They did the same thing with Derek Joslin last season because it was easier to have him available instead of exposing him to waivers. Of course, this was before we figured out that he was terrible.

Gragnani might have a better chance of making the team because he spent all of last season in the NHL but he was given a two-way deal so nothing is guarunteed. Although, Gragnani has experience playing left wing in the pros, so his versatility could be an asset that is valued by the coaching staff and Jim Rutherford. I would hope that they would still be feeling the sting of how bad Derek Joslin was at forward during the latter half of the season but it wouldn't shock me to see them do the same thing with Gragnani. No matter where the team decides to play him, he probably isn't going to go above the third defense pairing or the fourth line if he makes the NHL.

My assumption for next season is that one of Gragnani or Sanguinetti will make the team out of camp next season with Ryan Murphy spending another year in Kitchener. That's probably for the best since I doubt Murphy will be ready by next season and this signing allows the Canes to not rush him into the NHL. As for who makes the team out of Gragnani or Sanguinetti, we won't know that until another couple of months and the decision will probably be a toss-up. Gragnani is the more established player but Sanguinetti hasn't been given a chance yet so he definitely has a shot if he's good enough in training camp and the pre-season.

Either way, this is a decent signing for the Hurricanes. Gragnani might spent all of next season in the AHL and that's fine because he has proven success there as an offensive defenseman. If he makes the team out of camp, then the Hurricanes have someone who they can turn to if they need depth or want to replace someone on the third pairing. The worst thing that can happen from this is Gragnani not making the team and getting claimed off waivers for nothing but let's be honest, if a player can't crack this defense corps, then it's probably not a big loss if another team claims them. The bottom line here is that Gragnani has a decent amount of potential and the Hurricanes were able to sign him for less than a $1 mil. If he works out, then it's a great deal and if he doesn't, then there isn't much lost. 

A few months ago, I used Gabe Desjardins' NHL equivalency values to project how some of the Hurricanes prospects might perform at the NHL level. The general idea behind equivalency values is that it is more difficult to play in one league than it is another and the NHL is top league in the world. Therefore, it is harder to score in the NHL than it is in the AHL, Swedish Elite League, the CHL or any other league in the world and the difficulty of each league is represented by a translation rate. For instance, a player in the AHL is expected to keep 44% of his scoring in the NHL during the same year, so a point-per-game player in the AHL is equivalent to a 35-40 point producer in the AHL according to Desjardins' translations. It might seem like a crude method but these translations have been very accurate in past history. 

However, an issue that arises with these translations is that they are all based on goals and points, which aren't the most accurate ways to judge a player. Why? Because both stats are largely driven by luck and can be misleading in some cases. A forward in the AHL may have a year where he has a ridiculous shooting percentage or played with very strong teammates and could be projected to be something higher than what his true talent level might be. The opposite can also happen where a player may go through a scoring drought for a number of reasons and look worse than he actually is.

We talk about this all the time with NHL players and explain how luck plays a big role in the performance of certain players, but it isn't talked about often in other leagues. A big reason is that there is a limited amount of information available in other leagues compared to the NHL. In the NHL, we can breakdown shot and zone start data to show how a player might be creating a lot of offense but falling on some bad luck (see Eric Staal from October to December) and be able to determine that he has more value than what his goal and point total indicates. Unfortunately, we can't do in-depth analysis like this for other leagues because of the limited amount of information available but there is a way to look beyond goals and points to project the performance of AHL players.

Things like Corsi and Scoring Chances may not be available to the public in the AHL, but basic shot on goal data is and that can be somewhat useful for determining what players are creating the most offense. Much like goals and points, AHL players are expected to keep a certain amount of the shots they create when they jump to the next level, so a player who is able to get more shots on goal can be expected to have a decent amount of success in the NHL, even if it is only as a third line/energy player. Stephen Cooper of Habs Eye on the Prize recognized this and used Desjardins' translations to see what percentage of shots a player in the AHL is expected to keep when being promoted to the NHL.

Cooper determined that a player in the AHL is expected to keep 56% of his shots when going from the AHL to the NHL and listed the top players in the AHL by this metrics in his post. One of the players on the list was Carolina's highly regarded prospect Zac Dalpe, which is good news for him even if he didn't light it up for the Checkers this season. Seeing that got me thinking, who are some other players in Charlotte that could be better than their boxcar numbers are predicting. Chris Terry had the highest NHL equivalency point total with 29 but could there be some players that we might be underrated due to a bad year? We will take a look at that after the jump.

Judging the quality of play of a shutdown defenseman in the NHL is always difficult because a lot of people still are not sure how to judge them yet. Regular boxcar stats like plus-minus are obviously terrible for this but advanced stats can also be misleading because one defenseman might appear to be better than another because he has played well on a poor team. Thus, there are a lot of questions regarding how good Carolina's main shutdown defenseman, Tim Gleason, is.

Some say that he is a good defenseman but not a "top shutdown defenseman" whatever that means. Others have said that he is one of the more underrated players in the league and could be a top pairing defensemen on some teams. There are also others who believe that he turns the puck over a lot and shouldn't be playing as many minutes as he does. Everyone definitely has their own feelings about Gleason as a player but something I think a lot of fans do not realize is how difficult of a role he plays on this team.

Gleason is a shutdown defenseman. We all know that, but something that you may have not known is that only seven defensemen who played 40 or more games last year started a lower percentage of their shifts in the offensive zone than him. Gleason was also given the toughest assigments on the Hurricanes in terms of who he was matched up against. He also has primary duties on the PK, where he plays well over two minutes per game. Gleason is basically the defense corps' version of Brandon Sutter in the sense that he plays somewhat of an unheralded role.

There is no doubt that Gleason is a workhorse and is a very good shutdown defenseman but he also needs help because of how difficult the minutes he plays are. After the jump, we will look at some ways that the Hurricanes could be able to help out Gleason and possibly make his job easier.

Coming into last season, there were a lot of people (myself included) who felt that Carolina's highly touted forward prospect, Zac Dalpe, would make his mark in the NHL and possibly contend for the Calder Trophy. That obviously didn't happen and it has left a lot of people frustrated with Dalpe's progression and wondering when he will take that next step. There has always been a lot of hype surrounding Dalpe, his skill level and his supposed "ceiling" and the fact that he hasn't made the jump to the NHL as quickly as most were hoping now has many assuming that he will not amount to much as a pro.

It seems that players are breaking into the NHL at younger ages every year and the Hurricanes have two major examples of that recently with Jeff Skinner and Justin Faulk. When you compare Dalpe's production in the NHL to those two, he looks weak and it may cause some people to question his development. However, before you start making assumptions about Dalpe's future and where his development is at, there are some things that you need to remember. 

1. Zac Dalpe is not Jeff Skinner. The latter is an all-world talent who was an elite goal-scorer in the OHL. Dalpe can develop into a very good player in the NHL but he is not at Skinner's level and likely never will be so there is no sense in comparing the two.

2. Dalpe is only 22 and is not an "over-ager" by any means. Last season was only his second year of playing professional hockey.

3. Dalpe MADE THE TEAM out of camp the last two seasons, which were the only two years that he was under contract.

What's to say that Dalpe can't make the team this year and possibly stick around for the entire year? The opportunity for him to do so is still open and he has a very good chance to make the team again this year with the Hurricanes having holes in the top-six and on the third line. Dalpe played only 16 games in the NHL last year and didn't exactly light up the score sheet in the AHL either but despite that, he showed some signs of promise in both leagues and could be poised to become a full-time NHL-er next season.

Dalpe may not be the star that many hoped he would turn into, but he still has a promising future ahead of him and has a stronger chance of being a full-time NHL-er next season than some may think.

If you have been reading this blog or my posts on Twitter, then you probably know that the bottom-six is an area that I wanted the Hurricanes to address in a big way this summer, specifically the fourth line. Finding a top-six winger is the top priority right now, but with there being so few options available in free agency, all we can do right now is just wait and see what happens. Having a strong top-six and defense corps is obviously very important if one wants to build a contending team but the third and fourth lines are assets that teams have to have, as well. When I say that, I mean that those lines have to be useful.

Gabe Desjardins recently looked at last year's Stanley Cup Champs, the Los Angeles Kings and the elements that made them a winning team. One main thing that he pointed out is that the players in their bottom-six could all play. There were no goons inserted into the lineup for "toughness," or role players who couldn't be trusted to be used for more than five minutes a game. Their bottom-six players were all useful in their own way and were very cheap on top of that. Carolina doesn't quite have the pieces on defense to be a cup contender and their top-six is still a work in progress, but improving the bottom-six will make things a little easier for them next season so that Kirk Muller can run a more balanced system next season.

Keeping the bottom-six in mind, another thing that Desjardins mentions in the article is that teams should be on the lookout for players with underrated skills like being able to draw penalties, win faceoffs and take on tough competition. The Canes have a few of those guys in their bottom-six already (Patrick Dwyer, Chad LaRose and Andreas Nodl come to mind) and a couple younger players who have posted strong underlying numbers during their time in Raleigh who could also help out (Drayson Bowman), but their fourth line could not be trusted to play more than 5-8 minutes a game because they couldn't do much other than throw checks and create a physical presence.

The Canes might dig within the organization to find bottom-six depth but if they want to go the free agency route, they should strongly consider signing Jeff Halpern, a player who fits Desjardins' guidelines to a T. Halpern is 35 and doesn't have much offense left in him but if you are looking for a quality player to center your team's fourth line then look no further. Over the last few years, those who have coached Halpern have trusted him enough to use him in a defensive role on almost a regular basis. He's started less than 45% of his even strength shifts in the offensive zone for the last five seasons and has been matched up against opponents who were at least above average.

Halpern was also able to finish with a positive corsi relative of 2.9 despite playing in extremely unfavorable circumstances last season. He was also on ice for the fewest amount of shots against among Washington forwards, which speaks a lot about his defensive strengths. If that wasn't enough, he was the fifth best face-off guy in the league last season and has been able to win at least 51% of the draws he has taken over his career. By Desjardins' guidelines, Halpern is the type of player that you want in your bottom-six and exactly the kind of player that teams should take short-term risks on. He has decent underlying numbers, underrated skills and also kill penalties. The only red flag on him is his age but that shouldn't prevent him from getting at least a one-year deal somewhere.

Would Halpern fit on the Hurricanes if they signed him, though? The fourth line center spot is already occupied by Tim Brent and he is coming off a pretty successful year with 12 goals and 24 points. It's unlikely that the Hurricanes are going to demote Brent after a year like that but I've expressed my concerns about him many times before. He played very soft minutes and was just plain bad in terms of territorial play. His shooting percentage was also an unsustainably high 16.9% and if you take that away, you are left with a fourth liner with not much to offer other than some decent powerplay skills. Then the Hurricanes' fourth line becomes a real problem.

I've also expressed my desire to make the team's fourth line more of a defensive unit with Patrick Dwyer and Andreas Nodl playing the wings. If the Canes were to follow this strategy, Halpern is a much more suited for the fourth line center role than Brent. This is assuming that the Hurricanes decide that they want to do this, which is uncertain at this very moment. I still think bringing in Halpern or someone similar to him would be a good insurance policy if Brent or another fourth liner struggles. 

I can't say that the Hurricanes will sign Halpern and I don't know how high he is on Rutherford's radar but I am willing to bet that at least one team is interested in acquiring him.

After signing Joe Corvo and missing out on the Ryan Suter sweepstakes, Hurricanes GM Jim Rutherford stated that he likes where the team's defense is right now and doesn't plan to make any other signings this off-season. Some might say that this is preposterous because of how poor the team's defense was last season and that entering the year with roughly the same defense corps would be a bad idea. There are a few factors that make this coming year's defense different from last season, though.

Firstly, you have to account for some of the defensemen that the Hurricanes have in their system. Bobby Sanguinetti and Ryan Murphy are not locks to make the team by any stretch, but both players have a very good chance at cracking the opening night roster. Another thing to consider is that some of the younger talents like Justin Faulk and Jamie McBain could continue to improve and step into larger roles than they had last season. What I think will play the biggest factor, though, is the health of Joni Pitkanen.

There is no doubt that Pitkanen is coming off a disappointing season but the big Finn also missed 42 games with knee and concussion problems so he wasn't at 100% either. When healthy, Pitkanen can play over 20 minutes a night, be used in almost every situation and play on both special teams units. The Hurricanes are a better team when Pitkanen is in the lineup and if they can get him for a full season, then their defense corps is already much better than it was last year. Pitkanen's health is always going to be a problem and it seems that Jim Rutherford might be banking on that along with the younger players in the system to rebuild Carolina's defense.

After the jump, we will look at the level of impact that Pitkanen can have and how much better the team's defense is when he is in the lineup.

There were so many factors this off-season that had people believing this year's free agency period would be nothing but mass chaos. The fact that only so many desirable players available combined with the salary cap increasing to $70.3 mil. led a lot of people to believe that there would be a lot of massive over-payments and ludicrous contracts handed out to second-tier type players this summer. The off-season is still young but we have yet to see too many ridiculous deals handed out so far and there have actually been quite a few underrated signings that could have a lot of value at the end of next season.

After the jump, I'll go over some of the contracts I thought were solid bets and also talk about some deals that I wasn't a huge fan of. There are still plenty of moves to be made, but I just wanted to post my thoughts on some of the transactions that have occurred over the past week.