Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
gocanes0506

Trade- Jeff Skinner to Buffalo

Recommended Posts

On 8/8/2018 at 6:50 PM, top-shelf-1 said:

Good piece, but it makes my point: This deal - for a prospect and picks - would have been there in September. Why not wait those few weeks to see if a need developed on another team that was critical enough to get us a first-rounder coming back?  

Especially if other teams encountered any injuries in pre-season camp. The value would certainly rise. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2018 at 10:19 PM, top-shelf-1 said:

. I may not agree with the Committee's conclusion about Skinner more broadly, but I've been very consistent about saying the new management approach of deciding to make wholesale changes and following through beats the heck out of the old one.

 

 

I applaud the overall changes so far but my verdict on the "committee" requires more time before I cast my vote. I'd love to be a fly on the wall during one of the "committee" meetings. I can't say it is a valid process since I have not actually seen it in action with this organization.. On paper it sounds good if it is being used as described by the owner. How do we know if everyone truly has a voice? Does Dundon kick off the meeting regarding the topic and voice his opinion? Does he wait to hear everyone's opinion before he casts his vote? I would assume process two or else everyone else on the committee would become a yes man. How many times can your opinion differ from the majority or specifically the owner before you are no longer a part of the committee? I hope that our Ambassador does not have a committee vote especially since he publicly assassinated one of our players that was under contract.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, slapshot02 said:

I applaud the overall changes so far but my verdict on the "committee" requires more time before I cast my vote. I'd love to be a fly on the wall during one of the "committee" meetings. I can't say it is a valid process since I have not actually seen it in action with this organization.. On paper it sounds good if it is being used as described by the owner. How do we know if everyone truly has a voice? Does Dundon kick off the meeting regarding the topic and voice his opinion? Does he wait to hear everyone's opinion before he casts his vote? I would assume process two or else everyone else on the committee would become a yes man. How many times can your opinion differ from the majority or specifically the owner before you are no longer a part of the committee? I hope that our Ambassador does not have a committee vote especially since he publicly assassinated one of our players that was under contract.

 

Valid points. Given everything I've seen from TD, he's smart enough to know that interjecting his opinion prematurely would bias the results.  And he's adopted the committee as a means of getting at the best solutions, not as a means of getting his own way (he can do that without any manipulation). 

 

I'd be shocked if Cole had a vote, but who knows if he might have influenced the opinion of any committee members?  It just hit me that one person who might well have had a big influence on the Skinner decision is Justin Williams.  He was very vocal about "culture problems" after the season, and TD did the exit interviews.  If Willy thought Skinner was part of the problem, I could see that informing TDs take on Skinner's future with the Canes. 

Share this post


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

I hope that our Ambassador does not have a committee vote especially since he publicly assassinated one of our players that was under contract.

I doubt Cole is on the Committee, but still say he was sent to do the job, and based on the on-the-record comments and their chronology, I'm now convinced he was sent by Roddy, not TD to do it. I can totally see those two radio yo-yos tripping over each other to do whatever Rod asked them to, and TD's praise of Skinner was effusive and genuine enough that his trade, just a couple of days later, convinced me that Cole's well-rehearsed hit job was Rod trying to embarrass Jeff into leaving on his own. (Which is pretty chicken *edit* IMO.) When that didn't happen, and TD told the world he'd be happy to have Jeff back, Captain Testosterone's only option was to grow a pair and spell it out: It's him or me. I think Rod has that card to play, unfortunately; we already know TD didn't want to pay for a head coach who is proven at the NHL level.

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


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

It just hit me that one person who might well have had a big influence on the Skinner decision is Justin Williams.

If you read my stuff more closely, that would have hit you a week ago. :D 

 

I do think JWilly played a part, if only as part of the choir to which Rod preaches. But then I watch the replay of that early-season goal he and Skins teamed up on and remember that a player's job is to shut up and play hockey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are giving Brindy way to much credit in the decision making pecking order for all that is transpiring. In his recent interview he said he found out about the de Hann signing a day before it happened when Dundon called him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, OBXer said:

In his recent interview he said he found out about the de Hann signing a day before it happened when Dundon called him.

But we're not talking about that deal. Even if we were, all that suggests is that it happened quickly, not that Rod was out of the loop in the targeting process.

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


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

But we're not talking about that deal. Even if we were, all that suggests is that it happened quickly, not that Rod was out of the loop in the targeting process.

 

Ok but it is an indicator. Also when the Skinner on the market news broke Brindy wasn't the coach. The desire to move him was public long before that. I'm not saying Brindy doesn;t have input but only that he is one voice in this new management style and maybe not the loudest voice.

Share this post


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

I doubt Cole is on the Committee, but still say he was sent to do the job, and based on the on-the-record comments and their chronology, I'm now convinced he was sent by Roddy, not TD to do it. I can totally see those two radio yo-yos tripping over each other to do whatever Rod asked them to, and TD's praise of Skinner was effusive and genuine enough that his trade, just a couple of days later, convinced me that Cole's well-rehearsed hit job was Rod trying to embarrass Jeff into leaving on his own. (Which is pretty chicken *edit* IMO.) When that didn't happen, and TD told the world he'd be happy to have Jeff back, Captain Testosterone's only option was to grow a pair and spell it out: It's him or me. I think Rod has that card to play, unfortunately; we already know TD didn't want to pay for a head coach who is proven at the NHL level.

 

Your behind-closed-doors projection fits the narrative.  But it still is a projection.

 

It is kind of like analyzing a crime scene.  The husband is always first suspect and usually charged.  But sometimes it is the pool guy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, OBXer said:

Ok but it is an indicator.

Of what? You seem to be ignoring my point, which is that Brindy's comment about when he heard of de Haan's acquisition indicates nothing about the strength of his influence. So, he was told de Haan would sign the day before he did. So what? It could mean that was the day the parties reached a verbal agreement. It could also mean Rod was on vacation with no cell service. Or that Rod said, "I want Hanifin gone. Give me a call when you get de Haan."

 

I'm really not trying to be difficult, OB. But as someone who tries to connect dots, I'm seeing some disparities between your recollections of the facts and what actually went down. For example:

 

11 hours ago, OBXer said:

Also when the Skinner on the market news broke Brindy wasn't the coach. The desire to move him was public long before that.

Not so. Brindy was named HC May 8. Waddell's first public comments confirming that the team was taking calls on Skinner and listening to offers came eight days later, on May 16.

  

Edited by top-shelf-1
clarity

Share this post


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

Not so. Brindy was named HC May 8. Waddell's first public comments confirming that the team was taking calls on Skinner and listening to offers came eight days later, on May 16.

 

Maybe I got the timeline wrong. Even so I think we are giving Brindy too much credit with the guy calling the shots. In honesty I don't know. Connecting the dots it appears to me this is Dundons team and he is the guy not signing off but driving the decisions. Different from the traditional process but isn't that what everyone is saying. It will be different,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, OBXer said:

Connecting the dots it appears to me this is Dundons team and he is the guy not signing off but driving the decisions.

If that's how you really see it, great. I just think it's much more likely that Brindy agreed to coach, at well below the going rate, on one condition: He gets final say on who takes the ice. It would certainly explain why the team moved Skinner for a bag of pucks just a couple of days after Dundon said he'd be happy to keep him on the roster.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt it was as explicit as "I won't coach if I don't get final say on the ice". I think Brind'Amour wanted a chance to coach and would have taken it unless it was completely untenable. But I do think that Dundon and Brind'Amour got on the same page early, and in the end that's what matters. I have no doubt that Brind'Amour was on the "move Skinner" side of the fence, and probably Hanifin too. Those were not the guys he wanted. I doubt Brind'Amour made these decisions, but do think he had a major voice. I just see him putting that out there more than Waddell. 

 

Still, with players that Brindy didn't want out, and the owner and Brindy being tight (rather than the coach never hears from the owner), and the GM being right there on the same page, the effect, which is what matters, should be to greatly empower Brind'Amour vs. at least our understanding of the Peters to Francis to JR line, where Peters seemed to have limited "powers" to yield his hammer. 

 

If we have a coach who wants to let the boys play but expects them to play the right way, and the owner and GM have his back, the results could be very good. If the owner gets down into who gets what ice time, then...probably not so good. I don't think that happens though. I think the net effect is the coach getting the most out of his guys.

Share this post


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

If that's how you really see it, great. I just think it's much more likely that Brindy agreed to coach, at well below the going rate, on one condition: He gets final say on who takes the ice. It would certainly explain why the team moved Skinner for a bag of pucks just a couple of days after Dundon said he'd be happy to keep him on the roster.   

 

I doubt Brindy has the final say. To be clear Brindy has been supportive of Dundon and the decisions and says Dundon takes opinions from everyone and then makes a decision and he said it has worked well so far. Left the door open on how it works once the season starts.

 

Where he needs final say will be behind the bench. I hope he gets it.

Share this post


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

 

I doubt Brindy has the final say. To be clear Brindy has been supportive of Dundon and the decisions and says Dundon takes opinions from everyone and then makes a decision and he said it has worked well so far.

I'm sure the committee is all luby duby and full of agreement right now since that's what got everyone their jobs was saying the same things that made Dundon happy. Give it a season when everyone's developed strong differing opinions on how to continue improving the team is where I see a useless stalemate forming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, legend-1 said:

I'm sure the committee is all luby duby and full of agreement right now since that's what got everyone their jobs was saying the same things that made Dundon happy. Give it a season when everyone's developed strong differing opinions on how to continue improving the team is where I see a useless stalemate forming.

Brindy did say once the season begins will see

Share this post


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

I'm sure the committee is all luby duby and full of agreement right now since that's what got everyone their jobs was saying the same things that made Dundon happy. Give it a season when everyone's developed strong differing opinions on how to continue improving the team is where I see a useless stalemate forming.

 

I'd be surprised if there are any stalemates.  If there are opposing factions I see Dundon listening to both sides and then making a decision.  There is little chance that the committee is a democracy where everyone gets an equal vote. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2018 at 4:28 PM, LakeLivin said:

 

  It just hit me that one person who might well have had a big influence on the Skinner decision is Justin Williams.  He was very vocal about "culture problems" after the season, and TD did the exit interviews.  If Willy thought Skinner was part of the problem, I could see that informing TDs take on Skinner's future with the Canes. 

Absolutely. JW addressed the stink in the room very early in the season. The stink in the room had much to do about the culture of loosing as being an acceptable option.

Share this post


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

Absolutely. JW addressed the stink in the room very early in the season. The stink in the room had much to do about the culture of loosing as being an acceptable option.

 

The thing is, on the ice, most of the time Skinner gave me the impression he cared more about winning than many other Canes, at least until late into last season.  If Skinner was viewed as part of the problem, seems like it could be a "chicken or egg" situation.  Did the losing culture finally get to Skinner, or did Skinner contribute to the losing culture? 

Share this post


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

 

  Did the losing culture finally get to Skinner, or did Skinner contribute to the losing culture? 

Either or would be unacceptable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some guys (Skinner and Faulk) may not have been "the problem", but certainly weren't looked at as "the answer".  Being part of a losing culture for year after year wears on a person, and I'm not getting in that argument again.  I can see them just wanting to move on.  Ward is gone.  Skinner is gone.  Faulk...well, it won't surprise me if he's gone before camp starts.  JStaal is the only one left with any tenure other than Faulk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt Skins even looked in the rear view mirror after getting traded. With suspect goaltending again, another 4-6 new faces coming into the lineup again, new coaching staff again, and a rookie owner, why wouldn’t he be thinking it’s just another Canes season; different year same s**t. Canes coaching and management have mis-managed this player who was a great pick to include right up to the end and what they got in return. 

Share this post


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

I doubt Skins even looked in the rear view mirror after getting traded. With suspect goaltending again, another 4-6 new faces coming into the lineup again, new coaching staff again, and a rookie owner, why wouldn’t he be thinking it’s just another Canes season; different year same s**t. Canes coaching and management have mis-managed this player who was a great pick to include right up to the end and what they got in return. 

Yet he accepted to walk into a very similar, if not worse, situation.  

Questionable goaltending- check

counting on a bunch of young guys- check

new faces- check

same defense coach with less talent

 

only difference is they have a 1C, also a position he couldn’t play with before. So.......

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I doubt Skins even looked in the rear view mirror after getting traded. With suspect goaltending again, another 4-6 new faces coming into the lineup again, new coaching staff again, and a rookie owner, why wouldn’t he be thinking it’s just another Canes season; different year same s**t. Canes coaching and management have mis-managed this player who was a great pick to include right up to the end and what they got in return. 

 

32 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

Yet he accepted to walk into a very similar, if not worse, situation.  

Questionable goaltending- check

counting on a bunch of young guys- check

new faces- check

same defense coach with less talent

 

only difference is they have a 1C, also a position he couldn’t play with before. So.......

 

The biggest difference is that Sabres wanted him, Canes didn't (for whatever reason).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/14/2018 at 8:10 PM, LakeLivin said:

 

 

The biggest difference is that Sabres wanted him, Canes didn't (for whatever reason).

Judging by what they got Canes didn’t seem too interested in That part of the equation which is odd. Getting unproven prospects for a proven top 6 winger who will be good for 35/35 goals doesn’t make Canes mgmt look to swift. Meantime win or lose Jeff skates in front of a sellout crowd every home game. 

  • Like 1

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...