Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
gocanes0506

In-Season 2018-2019

Recommended Posts

Skinner? Really? That is your answer. Huge cop out and tells me you got nothing. 

The guy didn’t want to be here. Heck Staal needed wingers to play with yet Skinner wasn’t it. There has to be a reason he didn’t play with Staal.  He played a combined 2.8-4 minutes a game of even strength and about 2 minutes a game on the PP.

 

Again here are the suspected lines based on use and available talent

 

FAT (not putting Skinner here)

Foegele-Staal-Williams (shutdown, not putting him here)

McGinn-Martinook-Skinner

???-Wallmark-Svech

 

Martinook slides down after Rask came back.  We’d all be complaining about Skinner’s 4 goals and -8 at this point with those linemates.  Then complaining when all we get is what we got before the season started.  

Edited by gocanes0506

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now if we don’t fork over the 

3.5-4 million for Ferland

7-8 million for Aho

5-6 million for Turbo

 the 2 million for Martinook

And go out and spend very little in FA

 

then sure I will join the chicken little group of TD and his spending.

 

this upcoming FA class seems to be a lot better at this point for quality and quantity.

 

also we should have 1-2 right side defenders to trade (the more valuable side)

 

hopefully we can shed Rask and Darling as well. 

 

Edited by gocanes0506

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Derailed75 said:

Jeez, you guys are pansies. Have some faith. 

 

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

Japanese, and I have faith we will still make the playoffs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

10 hours ago, bluedevilcane said:

Rem, if you end up with 10 “loser points”, to get to 92 points, you need to be 41-31 in the remaining games. So we need to go          27-18-5 the rest of the way to accomplish that. Unless our management does something major real soon, I don’t see that as very likely.

Yet again, the time-honored barometer proves correct: If you're not above the cut line at American Thanksgiving, it's very doubtful you will be when the season's over.

 

Here's my barometer: If you need a slide rule and protractor to give you hope, it ain't gonna happen.

Share this post


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

FAT (not putting Skinner here)

Based on nothing.

 

(Except... that's he's been just brutal with elite talent in Buffalo?? I guess????)

 

Share this post


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

Based on nothing.

 

(Except... that's he's been just brutal with elite talent in Buffalo?? I guess????)

 

Based on we specifically targeted Ferland to protect Aho on the ice and provide some physical net front presence for the line.  None of that is Skinner.  It wasnt Lindholm on a regular basis or even back to back games.

Edited by gocanes0506

Share this post


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

Seems a little odd you calling me out for a post based on nothing yet you throw some wild conspiracy theories.  

Blah, blah, blah. Seems a little odd to me that you're too freakin' blind to read tea leaves, even when the cup has been emptied on your noggin'. But hey, at least you finally found the "quote" button.

 

As for "protecting" Aho, that's genuinely hilarious, and could have been handled (and a lot less expensively) by McGinn, if they'd just put Aho and TT with him, and given them third-line minutes. Instead, they moved out - for nothing - the proven scorer who excelled despite NOT being protected his entire career, and didn't acquire an actual 1C, skilled enough to keep up with him, and able to set screens by holding net-front real estate. 

 

Playing Aho where a kid still learning the job at this level belongs (3C), so his learning curve isn't as steep and he can enjoy success and gain confidence sooner, is standard practice all over the league. But not in Carolina, where player development best practices go to die. Just because a kid projects to 1C eventually doesn't mean you start him there.

 

Again, player management. We haven't had a whiff of it in over 10 years. We had a bonafide scoring winger but refused to spend the money on talent to play with him, Duchene, Landeskog, Tavares, or anyone else. Instead we serially push players who are not yet ready for them into jobs way above their level of development (Lindholm. Hanifin. Aho. Necas. And [maybe] coming soon, Fox). 

 

That is not an on-the-ice issue. It's a front office i$$ue. 

 

Edited by top-shelf-1
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Now if we don’t fork over the 

3.5-4 million for Ferland

7-8 million for Aho

5-6 million for Turbo

 the 2 million for Martinook

And go out and spend very little in FA

 

then sure I will join the chicken little group of TD and his spending.

. . .

 

I'm with you in feeling the verdict is still outstanding.  Just a minor correction: if TD doesn't spend as above, it won't be the Chicken Little group we'll be joining, it will be the Nostradamus group.  (my money is still on a major investment on the ice by the time next season starts)

 

Here's one positive: we've finally got a debate where we'll actually get a definitive answer in a fairly short amount of time.

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Derailed75 said:

It was a movie quote from Animal House. That everyone knew that movie.

Ah. Apologies. Sometimes you just have to hit me over the head.

 

Edit to add: And it still doesn't work.

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


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

Skinner? Really? That is your answer. Huge cop out and tells me you got nothing. 

The guy didn’t want to be here. Heck Staal needed wingers to play with yet Skinner wasn’t it. There has to be a reason he didn’t play with Staal.  He played a combined 2.8-4 minutes a game of even strength and about 2 minutes a game on the PP.

 

Again here are the suspected lines based on use and available talent

 

FAT (not putting Skinner here)

Foegele-Staal-Williams (shutdown, not putting him here)

McGinn-Martinook-Skinner

???-Wallmark-Svech

 

Martinook slides down after Rask came back.  We’d all be complaining about Skinner’s 4 goals and -8 at this point with those linemates.  Then complaining when all we get is what we got before the season started.  

 

Huge cop out?  Let's go ahead and dismiss not spending money on a GM, head coach, or Hutton.  Which I stated that you failed to comment on because you know it's the truth. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Blah, blah, blah. Seems a little odd to me that you're too freakin' blind to read tea leaves, even when the cup has been emptied on your noggin'. But hey, at least you finally found the "quote" button.

 

As for "protecting" Aho, that's genuinely hilarious, and could have been handled by McGinn if they'd just put Aho and TT with him, and given them 3rd line minutes. Instead, let's move out - for nothing - the proven scorer who excelled despite NOT being protected for his entire career, and not acquire an actual 1C--one skilled enough to keep up with him. 

 

Playing Aho where a kid still learning the job at this level belongs (3C), so his learning curve isn't as steep and he can enjoy success and gain confidence sooner, is standard practice all over the league. But not in Carolina, where player development best practices go to die.

 

Again, GC, player management. We haven't had a whiff of it in over 10 years. We had a bonafide scoring winger but wouldn't spend the money on talent to play with him. Instead we've serially pushed players not yet ready into jobs way above their level of development (Lindholm. Hanifin. Aho. Necas. And [maybe] coming soon, Fox). That is not and on-the-ice issue. It's an in-the-front-office i$$ue. 

Yet we had the 1C and he didn’t play with him. Was it Staal or Skinner that didn’t want to play with the other. Saying it is all on the organization for not giving him a 1C may not be entirely true. Staal needed skill wingers to play yet there was Skinner.  A whopping 2.5-4 minutes a game together over their length of coexistence. Half of that time was PP time. Id bet the other half was coincidental happenings due to line changes.

 

What if Skinner didn’t want to play with the 1C we had?  And JR kept him anyways.  Seems conspiracy theory enough.  

Share this post


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

 

I'm with you in feeling the verdict is still outstanding.  Just a minor correction: if TD doesn't spend as above, it won't be the Chicken Little group we'll be joining, it will be the Nostradamus group.  (my money is still on a major investment on the ice by the time next season starts)

 

Here's one positive: we've finally got a debate where we'll actually get a definitive answer in a fairly short amount of time.

7 months seems like a long time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Yet we had the 1C and he didn’t play with him. Was it Staal or Skinner that didn’t want to play with the other. Saying it is all on the organization for not giving him a 1C may not be entirely true. Staal needed skill wingers to play yet there was Skinner.  A whopping 2.5-4 minutes a game together over their length of coexistence. Half of that time was PP time. Id bet the other half was coincidental happenings due to line changes.

 

What if Skinner didn’t want to play with the 1C we had?  And JR kept him anyways.  Seems conspiracy theory enough.  

The Staal thing doesn't hold water. Skinner was hugely successful without him as a rookie and in later years when Staal was here and they weren't playing together. Because Eric Staal couldn't find - let alone hold - net-front. But keep throwing that red herring out there, maybe somebody will bite.

 

Edit to add: Eric Staal is the only guy in this league who thinks he's a 1C. He's a natural winger, which I know you don't agree with... yet he's already back to his old centering self in Minnesooooota: 22 points in 33 games, with more goals than assists. Let me guess: He's "making plays" below the goal line...

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bluedevil58 said:

 

Huge cop out?  Let's go ahead and dismiss not spending money on a GM, head coach, or Hutton.  Which I stated that you failed to comment on because you know it's the truth. 

A. Hutton is and was another Darling.  We tried to get Washington’s backup and even offered them a better deal so there goes that theory. 

 

B. If we doing GM by committee, why would we pay the price of one person making all the decisions?  

 

C. Do we know he wouldn’t pay up for a retread coach?  Maybe he liked what RBA was putting down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol.  Ok.  You are entitled to your opinion.  My statements on the other hand are facts.  Because 5hey actually happened.  Until proven otherwise.  I will stand by my statement. 

Edited by bluedevil58

Share this post


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

The Staal thing doesn't hold water. Skinner was hugely successful without him as a rookie and in later years when Staal was here and they weren't playing together. Because Eric Staal couldn't find - let alone hold - net-front. But keep throwing that red herring out there, maybe somebody will bite.

Skinner was successful without Staal meaning he shouldn’t be paired with our 1C.

 

fast forward 5 years...

 

Skinner is scoring 25 goals but why isn’t he playing with a 1C?!?!?! C’mon give the guy some linemates.

 

Fast forward another year...

 

We gave away Skinner for nothing?!?! He is playing with a 1C now and is on pace for 60 goals. How come we didn’t play him with a 1C?!?!

 

Your narratives aren’t matching up.

Share this post


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

A. Hutton is and was another Darling.  We tried to get Washington’s backup and even offered them a better deal so there goes that theory. 

Hindsight's 20/20. The point is that, yet again, no money was spent.

 

B. If we doing GM by committee, why would we pay the price of one person making all the decisions?

Umm, so, as the self-described novice owner who is "still learning hockey" you can be presented with a (clearly much needed) opposing point of view from a guy outside the (clearly failed) organizational culture who already does know it? 

 

C. Do we know he wouldn’t pay up for a retread coach?  Maybe he liked what RBA was putting down.

Oh, he liked it all right. The guy was wearing a... (OMG!!) Stanley... Cup... Ring!! ("Can I try it on Roddy? Pretty please???")

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Skinner was successful without Staal meaning he shouldn’t be paired with our 1C.

 

fast forward 5 years...

 

Skinner is scoring 25 goals but why isn’t he playing with a 1C?!?!?! C’mon give the guy some linemates.

 

Fast forward another year...

 

We gave away Skinner for nothing?!?! He is playing with a 1C now and is on pace for 60 goals. How come we didn’t play him with a 1C?!?!

 

Your narratives aren’t matching up.

We never had a 1C at any point in Skinner's tenure.

Share this post


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

We never had a 1C at any point in Skinner's tenure.

See Eric Staal-

2010-2011- 76 points

2011-2012- 70 pts

2012-2013- 53 pts in 48 gms

2013-2014- 61 pts

 

so no on the 1C or was Staal a glorified 2C?  

Share this post


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

See Eric Staal-

2010-2011- 76 points

2011-2012- 70 pts

2012-2013- 53 pts in 48 gms

2013-2014- 61 pts

 

so no on the 1C or was Staal a glorified 2C?  

Yes, he was a glorified 2C--or might have been, if he'd played any defense.

 

True 1Cs live in the slot. They make plays, set screens, and cause havoc, making their linemates better. They don't p*ss and moan that they have no one to play with, they play with anybody and make silk purses from sow's ears.

 

Eric was, is, and will always be a much better sniper than net-crasher. If you're more comfortable cherry-picking in the neutral zone than getting back to clear your own slot, and sniping from the top of the o-zone circles or passing from the half-wall or below the goal line than crashing the net, you, by definition, are a natural winger--no matter how much you might like to think otherwise.

 

But we've had this debate, and have agreed to disagree, before. If you want to continue it, maybe you should start another "here and only here" thread--on the Staal trade.

  

Edited by top-shelf-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...