Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
OBXer

UFA-Trades-RFA

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

But Faulk has had many, many opportunities and the incentive to be (at least) a consistent offensive force without hurting us at the other end of the rink, and he just hasn't done it. 

 

Nonetheless, packaged with a second-rounder and a good prospect (Gauthier? Roy?) could he - based on a belief that is pretty much universal among GMs, that a change of scene raises guys' games - bring back the one thing we are absolutely sure we need, a top keeper?

 

 

Sadly i think the 'sell high' window on Faulk was slammed shut this season.  He's obviously never been sound defensively (despite being a defenseman) and the only real strength he's ever had is the howitzer and the goals that come with it.  But after averaging 16 goals/game the past 3 seasons, his goals were cut in half this season, and he turned in his worst +/- yet.  At this point, IMO, i don't see him being the main cog in a deal to bring back a top keeper - at best he's the sweetener.  Maybe next year if he can show this season was an outlier, but if i'm GM X, no way do i give up anyone of any real value for Faulk+ right now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, KJUNKANE said:

And top, I get the argument that his line mates are such that they can't keep up, but I'd counter, if he's aware of that, then why press on?

 

 

Because that's his job and his strength.  If he doesn't try to create offense when nobody else on the ice can, then he may as well be an home playing on his X-Box.

 

Edited by realmdrakkar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, realmdrakkar said:

 

 

Because that's his job and his strength.  If he doesn't try to create offense when nobody else on the ice can, then he may as well be an home playing on his X-Box.

 

And get the puck taken away helps how? Its called teamwork for a reason realm?

Edited by KJUNKANE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/28/2018 at 9:13 AM, realmdrakkar said:

Yeah, that's the thing - everyone wants changes to be made but they don't want to give up anyone with any value.  No different than these bloggers who think their team can go piranha on the Canes and only give back 4th-rounders and B-level prospects in return.  Fact of the matter is that our 4th-liners and Checkers prospects aren't going to bring in Connor McDavid (neither will Jeff Skinner, but you know what i'm saying).  If you want to bring in players who will make a difference via trade, you're going to have to give up someone you'd really rather not give up.

 

Ok, but in all fairness to those bloggers, they're offering a lot of 4th rounders and B-level prospects in return for our grade-A players.  Slavin for a Drayson Bowman and Ryan Murphy?  No way.  But if you make it Slavin for a Drayson Bowman, Ryan Murphy, Kevin Westgarth, a 5th, a 6th, and a Starbucks gift card?  :ohyeah: 

 

 :sarcasm:  (because I know there will be at least 1 member who will take the above seriously if I don't include this)

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how many of Skinner's goals won games, but I can recall what seemed like a lot of games where he was literally our only offense. Lots of goal scorers are "streaky" and it really depends on the definition because almost no goal scorer just puts up one goal every other game like clockwork. 

 

I get the idea of trading Skinner. But with every single time we contemplate trading a guy we tend to misread the potential return. While people are rightfully suspicious of the plus minus stat, certainly many GM's can read this basic stat and have concern. It can't help, especially if there is a trend and especially if the plus minus lines up with the eyeball test or scouting reports. I once attended a low attendance game and a scout from another team was charting stuff behind me. There were a couple of girls sitting in front of him too and somehow he got to talking to them about what he was doing. I still remember one line, "you see this mark here, this is if the player won the puck on the boards, as you can see Skinner usually loses those..." My point is not that he hasn't improved, but other teams are scouting our guys and know that that ugly plus minus is rooted in actual play they've observed. 

 

This is not to say that no team would want Skinner. To the contrary, I'm sure several teams would be very interested. Even if they were worried about the plus minus they can seen he had fixed that the two previous seasons and could be brought back. They probably also imagine him potting 40 goals playng with this guy or that one on their team.

The quesiton will be return on a guy coming off a down year, with (I'm guessing) scouting reports saying he let up and a plus minus to support that, and finally a guy with a NTC and one year to UFA. 

 

I get the idea of a more north south traditional type guy, but if this is not at least a 25 goal guy, there will be a drop off there. 

 

I will throw out an idea though. If we could trade Skinner for, say a good goalie. We could take a shot at a guy like JVR in UFA. In that case we'd have little drop off in forwards, a veteran with playoff experience and a goalie. Maybe if we add to it: Skinner plus for a goalie, then sign JVR. Yes, the UFA thing can turn bad, but at least you don't lose an asset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted to make this a separate post because it's a separate idea. 

 

In my dream on my Island, I have good Skinner out there. I can remember, especially before the concussions and again last year, the shear joy of his goal scoring artistry. If we can put together a team with many offensive threats, it will be harder for teams to key on Skinner, especially if he has a dynamic linemate. I can see us doing this pretty quickly with Necas and Svech on board, and in a single season if we can land a Tavares, or ok realistically even an ROR to center. 

 

Then with all of that firepower to deal with, Skinner dancing and juking and potting goal after goal would be really fun again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KJUNKANE said:

And get the puck taken away helps how? Its called teamwork for a reason realm?

 

 

I'd rather see someone make the effort to carry the puck in and lose it than to dump it and head for the bench like too many other Canes have done for the past 9 years.  Every now and then it pays off and he scores a goal, which never happens when the guys dump it into the corner.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, KJUNKANE said:

I'd like to know the number of times/per game I've seen him attempt to bring a puck in, unsupported between 3 players, always to lose it. And top, I get the argument that his line mates are such that they can't keep up, but I'd counter, if he's aware of that, then why press on?

Part of the time you are seeing that, kjun, it is indeed because his linemates can't keep up. But a significant part of the time is because he's the last guy on the line trying to get off the ice, meaning his job is to hold the puck as long as possible so the rest of the line can get off and the fresh one can start the forecheck in the o-zone, while he goes to the bench.

 

As for pressing on when there's nobody to play with, you do that because the first job of the lead puck carrier is gaining the zone. If there's no help and you stop short of their blue line, you take away their responsibility to clear the puck. It is always better to lose possession, if it has to happen at all, in the o-zone than either of the other two zones; that's why you press on, with or without help. It's also why linemates matter. The more even the linemates' skill sets, the better the line's chances of success.

Edited by top-shelf-1
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, super_dave_1 said:

This recent debate on Skinner is classic "I demand changes be made, but not my guy".

Perhaps for some. I'm fine with moving Skinner (1) for the right return, and/or (2) if he doesn't want to stay. But if at least one of those is not the case, I think we'd be getting hosed.

 

So, what's the right return?

 

Well, if we assume we take Svech, but we then move Skinner, so far that's a wash--and that's only if Svech totally lives up to his billing, straight out the blocks (as the Beasties would say). If Skinner returns a keeper, great--but the offense is still where it was, at best. And do we want to count on a rookie to replace Skinner?

 

What if we also get an ROR or JVR? I'm not on the ROR train like many here. I think between our current Cs (Aho, Lindholm, Jordan, Rask, Wallmark) and those in development, we're good. Lindholm has the hands to put up ROR-esque numbers, and he's just 23. And, he's parking himself net-front.

 

I think JVR is a viable option, but only in the nearer term--and the problem is, he's gonna want long-term money. He's 29; Skinner is 25. I'd rather trust the guy who is in his prime and play him in the right place--the top six--than count on the guy exiting his prime to play top-six minutes over the next three to four years.

Edited by top-shelf-1
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta agree with Top here. It's not a matter of not being willing to move Skinner for me either, it's a matter of return. The return off of a bad year with questions about softness etc, and only one year left on his deal till UFA, is just likely to be low. So moving Skinner seems like the ultimate selling low move. Perhaps this is addition by subtraction if Skinner has become a problem child, or perhaps Skinner has had enough and pretty much demands out and we have little choice. But that still isn't really a good thing that I'd want.

 

The other part of the equation is the chance at rehab. This is where I part with trading Faulk low vs. Skinner low (I'd trade Faulk for a lower return). There is recent evidence that Skinner can do it, whereas there are at least 4 years of trying to rehab Faulk without results. A new coach might get Skinner back on track. Sure maybe Faulk suddenly figures out defense, but that's a long shot.

 

Is there anyone on here who would say absolutely no to moving Skinner for a good return? Probably not many. I wouldn'tBut then things get into a slippery slope as few want to actually suggest what the return would be or what full value would be, and none of us knows the offers out there. 

 

For me, if Skinner gets moved and brings us back a guy who can play a more traditional edgier game and put up 25-30 goals, sure. In the end we can only really say what we'd do if we get wind of an actual offer, or if a trade actually happens. But not wanting to get fleeced is not the same as being unwilling to trade my guy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, top-shelf-1 said:

Perhaps for some. I'm fine with moving Skinner (1) for the right return, and/or (2) if he doesn't want to stay. But if at least one of those is not the case, I think we'd be getting hosed.

 

I think you left out …. (3) the team intends to trade him because he's no longer a fit and will do that prior to the season rather than having him in the room until the trade deadline when they might get a better return.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is a possibility that john tavares is off the table ,  i know john wants to win a cup soon . but the chances of him getting the chance to do that with the islanders seems so far off  .   there is a chance  he could  go to vegas or some other team that  stands a good chance of winning the cup .  if only carolina was an option  it would be awesome .    JVR  seems like he wants out of toronto and vice versa   so  it could be possible for carolina to get jvr  this off season  because his brother does play for the canes .  adding a 30 goal scorer  does add depth to the team going forward .   then you have the  aging   35 year old   kovalchuk  who says he wants to play in the nhl  again .  but if you remember how things went down last time for new jersey  it looked like they had great centers  across the board  and im not sure  if he would want to come to carolina .   i would be happy   to see him come here but he would want a lot of money and im  unsure if dundon  would be willing to pay it .    ian cole is an option for the canes .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coastal_caniac said:

 

I think you left out …. (3) the team intends to trade him because he's no longer a fit and will do that prior to the season rather than having him in the room until the trade deadline when they might get a better return.

Yup, fine with that too, although I think it's covered in the "for the right return" part of my OP.

 

All options should always be on the table, and if the circumstances conspire to make it the right move, you pull the trigger. 

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, remkin said:

For me, if Skinner gets moved and brings us back a guy who can play a more traditional edgier game and put up 25-30 goals, sure.

And for me, that's not the standard. Every team needs a mix of finesse/elite playmakers and guys who can rock opponents. But what this team needs more than an edgy replacement for Skinner, or than the lax D of Faulk or Hanifin (or yes, both) is top-flight goaltending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is that "top-flight" goaltender that we can trade for using Skinner or Faulk or both?  Very few number one goaltenders are traded unless they have a young understudy who is putting up great numbers and isx ready to replace said number one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, ChuckBurns said:

Who is that "top-flight" goaltender that we can trade for using Skinner or Faulk or both?  Very few number one goaltenders are traded unless they have a young understudy who is putting up great numbers and isx ready to replace said number one.

 

I don’t think there is a top flight goalie available that we could acquire. 

Rinne could be available but is 35

Markstrom of Vancouver maybe

Grubauer

 

Rinne is top flight but too old to trade for at this point

Markstrom or Grubauer would be worth moving a piece for.  Not Skinner or Hanifin to Washington.  Don’t want those to bite us.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also include Aaron Dell from San Jose.  And any of the Vegas goaltenders not named Fleury who played well last season.  But, all of them would be similar to Darling, backups trying to make the jump to #1. I'm not dealing a good roster player for that situation.  In most cases, those guys can be had for draft picks (not the number 2 overall, of course).

 

I still think Hutton would be our best bet.  He would only be a short-term stopgap measure, though.  But, if Darling can improve, he would likely be an improvement over Ward as a backup.  And if Darling doesn't and has to be waived and sent to Charlotte, he could split time with Nedeljkovic or Booth and mentor the younger goalie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dell, Subban, and Hutton are options but they are a tier below the 3 names mentioned above because of starting experience.  

 

Basically with any goalie we bring in, I hope we tell the new guy, Darling, and Ned that 1 will be our starter, 1 backup and 1 in Charlotte.  Their play will decide who is where.  Tell Helvig and Booth, that their play decides who is in Charlotte and who is in Florida.

Edited by gocanes0506
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll bet that the Caps don't let go of Grubaer but that would be nice. Just wonder what they'd ask? My choice of all mentioned for some reason is Subban. Just think he's got a chance to be darn good. Wonder what that'd take? And like many, I think shore up goalie and I think we make playoffs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ChuckBurns said:

Who is that "top-flight" goaltender that we can trade for using Skinner or Faulk or both? 

Two things. Everything can be had for a price. And (to be clear) I do not move both of those players for a bonafide keeper. Skinner alone (and a pick and prospect), yes. Faulk and Hanifin, Faulk and Rask, sure. But I don't throw Faulk in with Skinner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im cool with Subban.  If we bring in Subban, Dell, or Hutton, I hope we believe Darling can be a solid backup. Cam could be a camp invitee and if Darling stinks it up early, buy out Darling.  Let Subban grow as a young goaltender with Cam as the backup. I feel much better about that than Darling as the backup struggling with his own issues. 

 

Subban is a little worrisome as LV is clicking and I think all their players numbers are inflated.  Whatever the coach, or whomever, said to get them all to play at this high of a level is incredible.  We've seen some inflated stats that we wouldnt see otherwise, imo.  Subban is capable of being something great but the LV team made him look really good this year. 

 

Im not sure where LV goes with their goalie situation.  I dont see MAF going anywhere but they have the young guys in Subban and Dansk waiting in the wings.  I would do Subban and rights to one of their wingers, Perron or Neal, (basically signed) for Skinner, a young guy like Kuok, plus a 2020 conditional pick if Skins doesnt re-sign.  Perron is a hitter with almost a 100 hits over the last few seasons.  Plus he is a passer and putting him on a line with Necas and Svech could be very solid. Perron has an "A' in LV so he would bring some more leadership to the squad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure we could have had Subban for free off waivers. Sure might have had to waive Darling and send him to Charlotte, and I know, hinsight is 20-20 and all, but but what a bold move it might have been....

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...

×
×
  • Create New...