Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
gocanes0506

Come one and all to "discuss" the Skinner Trade (and only here)

Recommended Posts

I find it interesting that we are all so crazy about getting  Nylander who scored 20 and 22goals in his two year career.  yet skins scores 24 last year and it was an "off" year and he is traded for nothing.  Really puts into perspective how hard it is to find guys that score 24 plus every season.  To give away our only guy that does it every year is the worst move in this franchises history.  Skinner is sticking it to us now by pretty much leading the friggin NHL in goals while we get scoring from nobody. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet Skinner wouldn’t have half the goals with us.  A Wallmark or Martinook centered line doesn’t have the same punch as Eichel.

 

Nylander is another Aho type. Natural center but hasn’t played a lot it in the league.

 

 

Share this post


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

Yet Skinner wouldn’t have half the goals with us.  A Wallmark or Martinook centered line doesn’t have the same punch as Eichel.

 

Nylander is another Aho type. Natural center but hasn’t played a lot it in the league.

 

 

And that was the problem.If the Canes buried him on the 3rd/4th line then yeah his production would decrease. Put him with either top two lines and he produces.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gocanes0506 said:

Yet Skinner wouldn’t have half the goals with us.  A Wallmark or Martinook centered line doesn’t have the same punch as Eichel.

 

Nylander is another Aho type. Natural center but hasn’t played a lot it in the league.

 

Even so, there's still a good chance he'd be leading the Canes in goals.  I'm still disappointed we didn't utilize Skinner as a "season long rental", especially considering what we got in return.

Edited by LakeLivin
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

And that was the problem.If the Canes buried him on the 3rd/4th line then yeah his production would decrease. Put him with either top two lines and he produces.

We haven’t had the center to match him with.  Oddly enough E Staal wasn’t the guy either.

 

Aho, still learning

Staal is our shutdown center

Options: Rask, Martinook, & Wallmark

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, less than 2hrs until the wailing over "spilled milk" hits a new level, when Nylander furthers the pain by signing with Toronto? gocanes, it just defies my reasoning that your and several others point of that truism is just ignored. Ergo, Skinner is doing so well because he's got a support cast that the Canes have never been able to supply, if one looks at Eichel as "support cast". 

Share this post


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

We haven’t had the center to match him with.  Oddly enough E Staal wasn’t the guy either.

 

Aho, still learning

Staal is our shutdown center

Options: Rask, Martinook, & Wallmark

 

I woul have him wit Aho at center and TT or with Jordan and Svech.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I woul have him wit Aho at center and TT or with Jordan and Svech.

I doubt Skinner would have ever been a Aho linemate.  Aho was trying to learn the position, need a better 200 foot winger (and protector) on his line

 

Staal is the shutdown guy.  Skinner wouldn’t be a good placement there. Too many D zone starts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gocanes0506 said:

I doubt Skinner would have ever been a Aho linemate.  Aho was trying to learn the position, need a better 200 foot winger (and protector) on his line

 

Staal is the shutdown guy.  Skinner wouldn’t be a good placement there. Too many D zone starts.

We will never know.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was and still am a fan of Skinner. He is fun, exciting and talented. He is a scorer, a puck hound and his defensive lapses are a trade-off I was always willing to accept.

 

I don't know why we traded him, more gave him away then traded him but we did. I suspect it had more to do with some signal Skinner or his agent may have sent that he was going to test free agency than a coaches decision but I'm not sure. Under the committee setup I expect everyone had a say.

 

When he was traded my first thought was he is going to love playing the Sabres style, My second thought was why couldn't we get a better return and later my third thought was he would of loved the Brindy philosophy of shoot first ask questions later. All water under the bridge.

 

I'm happy he is having a banner year. I wonder if he can keep it up or will he go into a scorer funk as he is prone to do. I hope not but at the same time he is no longer a Hurricane. If he does he does and if he doesn't he doesn't.

 

I have moved on. We need another scoring forward but it won't be Jeff. A tip of the cap for your time here, good luck in the future, time to move on

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I suspect it had more to do with some signal Skinner or his agent may have sent that he was going to test free agency than a coaches decision but I'm not sure.

 

 

No telling. I'm still of the frame of mind, however, that even if that was the case, why rush to trade him for table scraps?  Nobody thinks for a second that he would have as many goals here as he has in Buffalo, but dollars to doughnuts he would have more than PDG/McGinn/Foegele have.  We could have had 6 months of him and traded him at the TD for more than we got.  Or we could have had him all season and lost him for nothing next summer.  Either way, i'd have to think it a better fate than trading him for spare parts before camp.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This trade IMO should be an embarrassment to the “committee”! We got crap for a return. Should at the very least traded at deadline for a big return. I’m a die hard Canes fan but I’m sure he is loving playing with talent in a front of a filled arena every night. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff is happy having the Hurricane anchor removed. Canes were a too small a market/budget team for his pure goal scoring skills. He’s got another 4.5 months to get 10 goals and hit 30 and likely will push north of 35. Buffalo will bend over backwards to keep him driving the price up. Jeff’s probably looking at 6.5 + per season on a 6-7 year deal. 26 years old.  I wonder what the underground player chatter is about coming/playing for Carolina as a free agent? Good? Bad? Indifferent?

Share this post


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

Jeff is happy having the Hurricane anchor removed. Canes were a too small a market/budget team for his pure goal scoring skills. He’s got another 4.5 months to get 10 goals and hit 30 and likely will push north of 35. Buffalo will bend over backwards to keep him driving the price up. Jeff’s probably looking at 6.5 + per season on a 6-7 year deal. 26 years old.  I wonder what the underground player chatter is about coming/playing for Carolina as a free agent? Good? Bad? Indifferent?

Bad, if you're a pure scorer and RB is coach.

 

Seriously, talk about a guy who projects his experience onto his expectations of others. I wonder if Gretzky played enough D for "the Captain"?

Share this post


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

I suspect it had more to do with some signal Skinner or his agent may have sent that he was going to test free agency than a coaches decision but I'm not sure.

This would make sense if we didn't control him for another year. Why give up all that scoring? Even if you're not gonna pay him, why not take the contributions he was sure to make during his contract year? Unless...

 

The new coach signaled that Jeff would stay on line 3. But even that fails to explain moving him when they did, for what they got. What does explain it is a new owner who thinks he is a GM... and is prone to premature decontractualization.

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


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

But even that fails to explain moving him when they did

 

I agree, the trade was a head scratcher. 

1 hour ago, top-shelf-1 said:

This would make sense if we didn't control him for another year.

His contract ends at the end of this season. If we didn't think we could extend him it might make sense. Lets say we were in a strong playoff position at trade deadline and we were faced with moving him or losing him at the end of the season. That is a no win. Of course from my perspective I would give up the future for a playoff run with Skinner. I'm self centered enough to want to see the playoffs at almost any cost.

 

It still doesn't explain the trade and lack of return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's absolutely imperative moving forward that when a player isn't working out that's identified with at least 2 years left on their deal, teams who move on from their top talents aren't just losing them (Unless your the Isles). Losing Staal's and Skin's 130-150 scoring points a year with nothing to show for those trades/losses is killllllllling this squad. Make them want out, make them give up the NTC, dangle the playoffs to them at the deadline but don't frickin get nothing for them. Get cut throat with them, stop doing good samaritan trades to make long time Canes happy. 

 

It makes me wonder if Jeff was in the process of refusing to sign here originally and that's how he got his team killing NTC in the first place.

 

If Rick Nash can get a kings ransom at the trade deadline with no time left on his contract less than a year after the Staal deal, someone wasn't very crafty at dealing.

Edited by legend-1
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

That is a no win. Of course from my perspective I would give up the future for a playoff run with Skinner.

My point exactly, and IMO, not a no-win, if you're willing to use the guy for what he is and pay him to do it, which this org clearly was not.

 

That's why it feels like his play of style was seen as "the problem," and the justification not just for letting him go, but doing so for what we did. Somewhere along the line, whether spoken or inferred, our Brain Trust somehow conveyed to potential trading partners that we'd be fine with a bag o' pucks--for a former Rookie of the Year and multiple-season 30-goal scorer. How does that happen if anybody in management has any clue whatsoever? Answer: it doesn't.

 

Edited by top-shelf-1
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skinner was homesick, and being the gentleman that they are, they let him go home. That's awsomesauce on a personal level, but boy, does it screw the organization over something fierce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2018 at 8:10 AM, super_dave_1 said:

 

Doesn't that mean you really like kids?  Or is it feet?  I'm confused

 

 

:)

 

My reference was so obscure, if only one person got it it's a win.

 

Here it is, one of my faves of all time:

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2018 at 9:07 AM, top-shelf-1 said:

My point exactly, and IMO, not a no-win, if you're willing to use the guy for what he is and pay him to do it, which this org clearly was not.

 

That's why it feels like his play of style was seen as "the problem," and the justification not just for letting him go, but doing so for what we did. Somewhere along the line, whether spoken or inferred, our Brain Trust somehow conveyed to potential trading partners that we'd be fine with a bag o' pucks--for a former Rookie of the Year and multiple-season 30-goal scorer. How does that happen if anybody in management has any clue whatsoever? Answer: it doesn't.

 

Based purely on playing a two way game and on plus minus stats and goals scored,Slavin is having an off year in offense and defense. His +/- could surpass Skinners numbers of last year. Time for Rod to trade him. I keed, I keed. I hope.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to know why we did not get a center for Skinner (who has 15+ goals for Sabres).  I want to know we did not get a #1 Goalie.  I want to know why we traded Skinner for nothing.  I attended 10+ games last year, I have attended 1 this year, Tom D., what is your plan?  If you want attendence ... well, share the plan.  If you don’t know, so say, and we can make decisions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...