Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
AWACSooner

Official Trade Deadline, Re-signing, Trade Talk "Maybe it's really a fire sale" thread

Recommended Posts

Any deal we make for Skinner should involve a Dman coming back.  In Edmonton's case, I'd request Darnell Nurse.

 

Maybe something along the lines of Skinner/Murphy to Edmonton for Yakupov/Nurse.  I think Nurse/Fleury could be a dynamic pairing in this league one day.  It could also give Carolina room in the draft to focus on offense.

I do doubt that they'd trade Nurse, but I'd make that deal. I completely agree that Nurse/Fleury/(Faulk)/(Sekera) would be a heck of a top 4. We could then draft a nice forward prospect to develop w/ Lindholm and Yakopov and Rask. Yakapov is a wild card, but the kid put up crazy points in juniors and w/ a new coach and scenery he still could find a game.

 

I doubt the Oilers do that deal, but I'd do it.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of our trade return scenarios is to get back a young player who shows lots of talent and should improve over time.  Thats Skinner. Why would we trade him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of our trade return scenarios is to get back a young player who shows lots of talent and should improve over time.  Thats Skinner. Why would we trade him?

 

Maybe because he isn't the type of player the coach wants going forward. 

 

From the outside looking in, it seems that at times Skinner isn't pulling in the same direction as the rest of the team.  He got stapled to the bench in the 3rd against TB on Tuesday.  If this is the case, he needs to be moved now before his value drops more.  This is purely speculation though.

 

Really, you can make a good case about not trading any player on the team not named Semin.  The thing is, this team has missed the playoffs now for 6 years running.  In a league that over half the teams make the playoffs, it takes a special dedication to sucking to miss it 6 years running. Something needs to be changed.

Edited by super_dave_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Darnell Nurse is big and athletic and considered at potential top pairing dman, and was one of the top dmen picked. If we want to shore up the D, he and Fluery should be great for years, then add Faulk.

 

Nail Yakopov would essentially be for Murphy. Yakapov is harder to swallow in this deal because he is simply floundering in Edmonton. He is like Skinner but w/ less scoring.

 

BUT, he was the #1 overall pick since he put up 170 points in Juniors, 17 points in 14 games in two World Juniors Tournaments and he did put up .76 PPG his rookie year in Edmonton. He has regressed though, and is Skinner like in his lack of defense.

 

He is potential. But is problematic because he has dropped off the last couple of years. He has the skill, but I do think Francis might see a problem w another Russian and not pull the trigger.

 

Also, there is the concussion thing.

 

Would be nice to nab Nurse though...

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe because he isn't the type of player the coach wants going forward. 

 

From the outside looking in, it seems that at times Skinner is pulling in the same direction as the rest of the team.  He got stapled to the bench in the 3rd against TB on Tuesday.  If this is the case, he needs to be moved now before his value drops more.  This is purely speculation though.

 

Really, you can make a good case about not trading any player on the team not named Semin.  The thing is, this team has missed the playoffs now for 6 years running.  In a league that over half the teams make the playoffs, it takes a special dedication to sucking to miss it 6 years running. Something needs to be changed.

 

Good reasons. I would say the only reason I would trade Skinner is if after evaluation you believed he isn't the right fit for the system. I'm not saying that but saying it as the only reason I would let a young talent like Skinner go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why on earth would any team trade a top-drafted D-man?  I know it's Edmonton but D is one of their biggest issues.

 

I agreed actually. I don't think they'd do it. I just said, I'd do it from our end. It is interesting though that it has been mentioned that we'd be wrong to make that deal.

 

But it would be like us trading Fleury. And as mentioned Edmonton needs strong dmen and the last thing they need is more fancy forwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what we would have to do to get Mantha.  I think he would look great with the Staals.  That line would be enormous!

 

A reporter out of Detroit speculated that the Wings might be poking around for Justin Faulk.  I didn't even bother to repeat it here as it seems so unlikely that we'd even entertain the idea.

 

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nhl/red-wings/2015/01/24/detroit-red-wings-defenseman/22273385/

Excerpts:

. . .

Not a week goes by without Mike Babcock espousing on the benefit of having a defense split between left-handed and right-handed shots (he insisted Team Canada be assembled thusly for the 2014 Winter Olympics). The advantage is that a defenseman playing on his natural side can execute passes more easily from his forehand.

. . .

The Wings have right-shot d-men in their system in Alexey Marchenko, Ryan Sproul and Nick Jensen, but team scouts say none are ready to be full-time NHLers. That leaves going the trade route if the Wings want to acquire one in time for this year's playoff run.

. . .

Carolina, another team long out of playoff contention, might entertain offers on Justin Faulk, a 6-0, 22-year-old with solid offensive skills.

. . .

When I asked Babcock earlier this month if a righty defenseman was the single biggest addition needed, Babcock told me yes, "but it has to be someone of quality." That, in turns, means giving up someone of quality. Teams will want either Tomas Tatar or Gustav Nyquist or Anthony Mantha or Dylan Larkin, plus a higher-round draft pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, sure.  Give away our best young asset.  Really smart.  I don't see Detroit giving away young assets.  Gee, wonder how they build playoff perennial teams?

 

If RF does this.  I'm done with this team.  DONE.  (I don't think RF will, BTW.  This is just some reporter's overnight w-- dream.)

 

Skinner is different due to his health history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we could get a 1st and a good prospect/player for Faulk, why not?  We could trade that 1st and our 1st for the 1st or 2nd pick and get Eichel/McDavid.  Just a thought...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we could get a 1st and a good prospect/player for Faulk, why not?  We could trade that 1st and our 1st for the 1st or 2nd pick and get Eichel/McDavid.  Just a thought...

 

 

 

Detroit's 1st won't yield the "generational stars."  And I know you know that and are looking at a bigger universe for a Faulk trade when discussing this, so we may be looking at it differently.

 

I'm partially speaking in generalities, but also partially in the context of Detroit.  We don't need to give Detriot any favors.  Keeping a home grown guy is doing what Detroit does routinely.  And giving a young guy to Detroit that we see for the next 15 years on the other side of the blue line?  No Thank You!

 

You also cannot look at a trade in a vacuum.  I.e., "Faulk for other young star D-man".  It disrupts things.  Faulk is a product of the Canes.  Time is invested.  Swapping him out now with another newbie is a setback.  Meanwhile, Faulk is still very young and has a future ahead of him.

 

I won't say never say never with Faulk, but for Detroit's picks or dream filled garbage bag?  NO.

Edited by wxray1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we could get a 1st and a good prospect/player for Faulk, why not?  We could trade that 1st and our 1st for the 1st or 2nd pick and get Eichel/McDavid.  Just a thought...

 

The only way I see a team trading the overall 1st or 2nd pick is if a team comes at them with a "Herschel Walker" type deal.  Given our lack of depth, that's the last thing we can afford to do imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, somebody needs to revisit the draft rules.  The bottom two teams aren't guaranteed the McEichel.  However, the hockey gods will certainly step in this year and right several wrongs of the last several drafts....cough Oilers....right?

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point coastal.  From the horse's (nhl) mouth: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=728795

 

1st  - 20%

2nd - 13.5%

3rd - 11.5% 

4th - 9.5%

 

Most importantly, the 2nd pick means you could drop to 3rd.

 

In 2016, it gets worse.  That's why some people thing certain teams are in full on SRM mode because this is the last year where if you are 1st, you get at worst 2nd.  In 2016, 1st could drop to 4th.

 

Unless you are the Penguins.  Then you always get 1. :sarcasm:

Edited by wxray1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a weird rules transition year that just plain struck out on discouraging tanking. The rules assume there is usually one guy that everyone wants, so this year no one can tank and get that guy. Thing is, this year there are two.

And that changes everything to highly encourage tanking. Only the last place team is guaranteed one of the two guys. In fact the #29 team, picking second, probably won't get either one.

 

So finish 30 get one, finish 29 get neither. Pretty strong incentive to go for it.

 

Next year's rules are better in terms of limiting tanking, er SRM.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of numbers that might affect trades, it would seem that trades are more likely to happen when there are teams that think they need another piece to make the playoffs. But in the East something unusual has happened: the teams are set already.

 

What?

 

I heard on NHL.com that no team has made the playoffs that was out by 10 points or more at the All Star break since around 15 years ago.

 

Well it's even a few games further down the road, and in the East, 5 teams are clearly under that cut line, and the only two that aren't are 8 and 9 points out.

 

Sportsclub stats has really only two teams currently out with any chance Ottawa and Florida (Philly has a 1/26 chance if you want to count that, and next below them everyone is below 1%: Toronto, NJ, Columbus, Carolina, and Buffalo are OUT. (Canes chance: 3 in 10,000).

 

OK, so basically only Florida and Ottawa have a chance. But their chance is about 1/10 each. The chance of them both getting in is 1/100. Anyway there is about an 75% chance that the teams are SET. The ones in now, will be the playoff teams. That is very unusual. Wonder if the bad draft rules and the rich McEichel draft is having an effect? I say yes.

 

The West is much much more wide open with only two teams not at least 7 points or fewer, and that team 7 points out is Minnesota has 2 games in hand vs. the last Wild Card team. Though Sports stats has Minnesota at about a 12% chance. Still they will look at being only 7 points out with 2 games in hand and think they're still in it, probably.

 

Point one: the East playoff teams are oddly set to a close to 75% certainty with 10 weeks of hockey left.

 

Point two: there are now already 8 teams in the TANK pool, if you count teams with 4% or less chance of making the playoffs. 11 if you say 10% or less.

 

It will be VERY intersting as those 11 teams start fully realizing this. One, they will NOT trade their pick. This will inhibit trades. Two, they will start to tank. Will there be a spiral of teams tanking? We'll see. If ever it will happen, it will be this year.

 

Point three: there should be a slight trend to players moving West and picks moving East.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great analysis, rem,  Then extrapolating further, there are a few other points.

 

1st, with that many teams projected to be out, won't that suggest that it'll be a "buyers market" in that more players could be available for trade?

 

2nd,it would be nice, if there is more demand in the western conference for some additional help, it'd be nice to see what types of player each team needs, and to look at specifically who we have to meet those needs. That'd probably be exhaustive work for anyone to undertake!!

 

Finally, and as a completely unrelated topic, was anyone on here creeped out as much as I was last night with Tripp's constant referral to Lundquist's(?sp) flowing locks,etc..I usually ignore his antics, but I just couldn't last night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1st, with that many teams projected to be out, won't that suggest that it'll be a "buyers market" in that more players could be available for trade?

 

Without knowing for sure what is typical for this point in the season, I'm sure that 7 being out of contention in the East is much more than average but only 2 being out in the West is probably less than average.  So, 9 total.  I'd guess that typically there'd be 3-4 (maybe 5) out per conference?  So maybe not as much an overall outlier as just the East would suggest?  I guess the next few weeks will tell . . . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally, and as a completely unrelated topic, was anyone on here creeped out as much as I was last night with Tripp's constant referral to Lundquist's(?sp) flowing locks,etc..I usually ignore his antics, but I just couldn't last night.

After listening to a period and a half of him gushing over Dobbin's shoe collection, Tripp's goalie crushes no longer bother me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, somebody needs to revisit the draft rules.  The bottom two teams aren't guaranteed the McEichel.  However, the hockey gods will certainly step in this year and right several wrongs of the last several drafts....cough Oilers....right?

No...if the hockey gods were really righting the wrongs, the Oilers would be denied a top 10 pick for the next decade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally, and as a completely unrelated topic, was anyone on here creeped out as much as I was last night with Tripp's constant referral to Lundquist's(?sp) flowing locks,etc..I usually ignore his antics, but I just couldn't last night.

 

I heard that and said Good Gawd.  I thought it was kind of funny, in a weird Tripp Tracy sort of way.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...