Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
OBXer

UFA-Trades-RFA

Recommended Posts

top, I am going to agree with your terminology, "strategic decision", but not with your application of it, ergo "a purposeful attempt to get his point total down". Ever the optimist, and by all accounts from many if not most of you on here as to my misplaced faith in him, I continue to believe that BP put Skinner where he did to actually spread scoring around for a team woefully inept to score? Since we obviously had so little in the way of 2ndary scorers, what good would it have done to load up one or possibly two lines with our only goal producers? If that was BP's plan to maximize Skinner's scoring by "demoting" him as seems to be the popular thought around here as to his placement, but in truth may have been "strategic" on BP's part, than Skinner failed to grasp the strategy? That being the case, and I'm sure we all on here concede that we have no idea what truly transpires in the locker room, than that's on Jeff and he's got no room for getting his nose bent out of shape(hard feelings for how the season went).

Share this post


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

Just Wow.

Seems ridiculous, I know. But why else do you stick a guy with the two seasons he'd just had on the third line? 

 

IMO Ronnie was a great player. But indications are he was a top-down manager. And reality is he never did a damn thing at the TD to reward the roster for staying in the hunt, and maybe put it over the top. So trying to knock down Skinner's value knowing extension talks were coming would not surprise me one bit.

Share this post


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

That being the case, and I'm sure we all on here concede that we have no idea what truly transpires in the locker room, than that's on Jeff and he's got no room for getting his nose bent out of shape(hard feelings for how the season went).

This seems reasonable until one remembers that Skinner came out last year on fire, and stayed there for all of October, despite getting passed over in favor of the bullocks that was the co-captaincy. And, that Ronnie has been revealed as a top-down guy who asked for advice from his team and then did whatever the hell he wanted in spite of it.

 

Which is why challenging Skinner to continue his torrid pace for an entire season with linemates who were nowhere near his ability smells a heluva lot more (to me) like Ronnie than BP. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Must be August because we are debating conspiracy theories. Head coaches and GM's want to win to maintain their employment. No question that Skinner's production was impacted by his line mates, but placing him on the 3rd line also reduced his exposure to the oppositions top D. Either BP put Skinner in that slot because of his lack of total effort, to spread out the potential scoring threat, or some other issues. From a revenue point of view. making the playoffs is a bonanza that this team had to have. RF had his many faults as a GM, but he wouldn't sacrifice team performance to reduce Skinner's production, in order to manipulate his subsequent contract. A lowball offer based on 2017-18 numbers only hurts the team; because Skinner would reject it and move on. A great year makes Skinner a more valuable trade asset, not to mention that approaching UFA, he may choose to go to a contender anyway who would give him the payday he wants. GM's around the league recognize Skinner as a goal scorer (61 in two seasons), so there is no way that RF could change that perception. Can't wait for training camp so we can talk about hockey again.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/1/2018 at 12:08 PM, LakeLivin said:

 

I saw the same info and had the same thought, lol.  The only thing that stopped me from asking the question is that Forsling is a left D-man and Faulk plays right.  But Chicago had already been one of the teams mentioned most often in Faulk speculation, so maybe this adds additional pressure for them to get a deal done?    

Since Faulk doesn't play D does it matter what side he is on???

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, AssistantGM said:

Must be August because we are debating conspiracy theories. Head coaches and GM's want to win to maintain their employment. No question that Skinner's production was impacted by his line mates, but placing him on the 3rd line also reduced his exposure to the oppositions top D. Either BP put Skinner in that slot because of his lack of total effort, to spread out the potential scoring threat, or some other issues. From a revenue point of view. making the playoffs is a bonanza that this team had to have. RF had his many faults as a GM, but he wouldn't sacrifice team performance to reduce Skinner's production, in order to manipulate his subsequent contract. A lowball offer based on 2017-18 numbers only hurts the team; because Skinner would reject it and move on. A great year makes Skinner a more valuable trade asset, not to mention that approaching UFA, he may choose to go to a contender anyway who would give him the payday he wants. GM's around the league recognize Skinner as a goal scorer (61 in two seasons), so there is no way that RF could change that perception. Can't wait for training camp so we can talk about hockey again.

'zat you, Ronnie?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:kleenex:

 

OMG Canes... First Ward, then Chuck, now Skinner.   Just put me out of my misery already why don't you. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. Really surprised at this. Hope we have something better in the works for Faulk, because this trade seems on its face to leave us worse off as a team on the front end.

Edited by spyglass88

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My gut tells me this is an indication Jeff had no intention of entertaining an extension, here or elsewhere, and he's fully intent on testing the UFA waters next summer. That'd make him a pure one-year rental. Still worth at least a little something, but far from full value.

 

Better to get something than nothing I suppose (see Isles/Tavares), but hard not to be disappointed with the return. Puts more pressure on trading Faulk for at least a pseudo-replacement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were better off keeping skinner and getting nothing in return.  Hopefully he had a monster season in a contract year and helped canes make playoffs.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, G50 said:

:kleenex:

 

OMG Canes... First Ward, then Chuck, now Skinner.   Just put me out of my misery already why don't you. 

Don't forget Stormy, OMG.

Share this post


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

well now, sort of makes me wonder if any other teams really valued Skinner as much as we did, or didnt......

I think that question has been answered. Makes me wonder, though, if we might have gotten a better return if we hadn’t made it plain for all to see that Skinner was going to be traded. Could have played it a little closer to the vest. Look at the mess Ottawa is having with Karlsson, who is arguably one of the best d-men in the league. One year left on his contract, player makes it clear he does not intend to re-sign. It’s pretty much a foregone conclusion Karlsson will be traded, and Ottawa seems to be struggling to get any decent value on one of the top players in the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright Top here is your answer on the Faulk no-trade

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waddell just bluffing about Faulk?

 

i get the organization never said he was available and that was media speculation due to the Hamilton trade.  We really gonna keep him though?  That would be a sick defense but still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

Waddell just bluffing about Faulk?

 

i get the organization never said he was available and that was media speculation due to the Hamilton trade.  We really gonna keep him though?  That would be a sick defense but still.

 

Well Waddell said everyone on the team not named Aho was available for the right price. I don't know of Waddell is bluffing but they don't need to rush with Faulk. He is signed for 2 years. Still when you look at the logjam on D Faulk sure looks like an obvious trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, gocanes0506 said:

Waddell just bluffing about Faulk?

 

i get the organization never said he was available and that was media speculation due to the Hamilton trade.  We really gonna keep him though?  That would be a sick defense but still.

 

 

It would definitely be sick having a guy who can't play defense eating up minutes, but we're used to that by now.  At least Waddell got rid of one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, slapshot02 said:

Mark Stone signs a $7.35M, one-year deal with #sens, avoiding arbitration. Ottawa's best three players are all entering UFA season: Karlsson, Duchene and Stone.

I’d love to use some of these nows plus futures for Stone and Duchene.  With Duchene discussing an extension first, since Stine can’t until January 1st.

 

They dont want to suck this year because of their first round pick going to Colorado.  Im thinking Rask, Faulk, Kuokkanen, Pu, this years first and Buffalo’s 2nd for an extended Duchene and a gentlemen’s agreement with stone.

 

ZAT

Ferland-Staal-Stone

Necas-Duchene-Svechnikov

McGinn-Wallmark-Williams

 

solid 4 lines.  We’d add about 5 million to the current payroll of 60 million. Plenty of space for Aho and Turbo’s extension plus a goalie.

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...