• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

2018 NHL Draft Preliminary Thread

cmon3 said:
You don't get many shots at players like either of the top 2 picks. So unless the return was just too good to pass up, I'd hate to not end up with one of them. I'd pick the D and trade Hanifin and or Faulk for offensive help and keep Skinner. I don't think that's going to happen though.
Click to expand...

All indications are that Skinner is as good as gone. That could change, of course, but from all I've seen he won't be on the roster in September.
 
Irbe was picked in round 10 , there are only 7 rounds now.

The all time hall of famer who was a late round pick was in baseball Mike Piazza , round 62 by Dodgers. Only picked as a favor to his father so that he could say he was drafted. His father knew Tommy Lasorda.
 
bagopux said:
All indications are that Skinner is as good as gone. That could change, of course, but from all I've seen he won't be on the roster in September.
Click to expand...

Any Skinner trade we hope has to bring back what the Canes crave the most...either a legit starting goaltender or guy that can become a starter, or a center that can be plugged into one of the top two lines. Just trading Skinner for a pick and a prospect is not going to make anyone happy.
 
CanadaCanes said:
Any Skinner trade we hope has to bring back what the Canes crave the most...either a legit starting goaltender or guy that can become a starter, or a center that can be plugged into one of the top two lines. Just trading Skinner for a pick and a prospect is not going to make anyone happy.
Click to expand...

Cynic's view: They trade him at the draft so they can focus on the Svechnikov (or Dahlin) pick and downplay what we did not get for Skinner.
 
bagopux said:
Cynic's view: They trade him at the draft so they can focus on the Svechnikov (or Dahlin) pick and downplay what we did not get for Skinner.
Click to expand...

I just don't see them trading Skinner (especially early) unless the return is going to be pretty good. Why would they jump early on that for anything less than an excellent offer.
 
CanadaCanes said:
Any Skinner trade we hope has to bring back what the Canes crave the most...either a legit starting goaltender or guy that can become a starter, or a center that can be plugged into one of the top two lines. Just trading Skinner for a pick and a prospect is not going to make anyone happy.
Click to expand...

Just don't think that level of return is commensurate with an expiring UFA one-year contract with a NMC attached to it.

Maybe the goaltender, which will really be someone's back-up itching to be a starter. But not a legit top-six center and especially not a legit 1C, which is what everyone thinks we need.

I'm not so convinced on the 1C need. Three good 2C's might do it for us.
 
Elsker said:
Just don't think that level of return is commensurate with an expiring UFA one-year contract with a NMC attached to it.

Maybe the goaltender, which will really be someone's back-up itching to be a starter. But not a legit top-six center and especially not a legit 1C, which is what everyone thinks we need.

I'm not so convinced on the 1C need. Three good 2C's might do it for us.
Click to expand...

Well a 1C would be an amazing return for Skinner... We're not getting that. We should net a good return though. He's probably worth a first round pick or so at the deadline. And if there's not a good enough return for him then why trade him at all - that has to enter into it - he has value, he might have more value at the deadline (if the offers are weak now) and we might end up resigning him if we keep him... I just don't see any reason for us to be in a big hurry to move him.
 
With Skinner the most important piece of info, which we don't know, is whether he wants out or not. That really changes the complexion of the whole situation. And we might not know that until either.... a trade (which means he wants out) or he stays and we can potentially flip him at the deadline if we aren't making the playoffs. We'd be crazy to trade the guy if he really wants to stay. Roddy is a stand up guy and I just think that with the coaching change if skinny wants to be here, Rod will want him being here. Glad I have a day job, this stuff is much to stressful. haha
 
Elsker said:
Just don't think that level of return is commensurate with an expiring UFA one-year contract with a NMC attached to it.

Maybe the goaltender, which will really be someone's back-up itching to be a starter. But not a legit top-six center and especially not a legit 1C, which is what everyone thinks we need.

I'm not so convinced on the 1C need. Three good 2C's might do it for us.
Click to expand...

There is no reason why the Canes could not find a legit 2C center via trade (which is really the only thing you can find via trade for centers since no one trades a 1C)...Skinner is still a goal scoring machine, imagine a team with a true skilled center and what that could do for Skinner's offensive output. Skinner is likely a 40 goal man easy playing in Pittsburgh, playing in Edmonton, playing in Washington where true offensively gifted centers reside.

The tougher part is finding the right trade partner, but Skinner is too good of an asset at this point in his career to just trade off for a pick because you simply think he wont sign another contract here. The job of a good GM is to do the work to find a good trade partner, hopefully that still can happen.
 
If Skinner gets traded for picks and/or prospects we'll know morons are running this show. Those would never replace the 30 goals Jeff will score (last year was an aberration) and we still need 30+ more to get us up where we need to be.

It seems when Skinner and Linholm as C., have been given a chance together it works pretty well but not given long enough to really know if it could jell into a real combo. Instead they've been shifted all over.
 
Just as a fact check Skinner has only scored at a 30-goal pace for 3 of his 8 seasons. So no guarantee he will be at that pace next season.

Plus he's a cumulative -95 over those 8 seasons including -27 last season which pretty much negates his 24 goals.

Furthermore, with the likes of Evander Kane securing a 7-year $49M contract that pretty much sets the bar as to what Skinner's agent will be expecting for his client...or more.

Canes are rightly not going to pay the freight for that show, nor should they, so he's definitely getting traded, even if there are no other issues at play. And if the trade is definite, then no time like the offseason before a potential injury during the season results in losing him for no return whatsoever.

As for the return, just what would we offer for a UFA winger with one-year left on their contract, making them potentially nothing but a one-season rental? Furthermore, his no-movement clause limits which teams can even be considered as trade partners.

So it likely won't be a player-for-player type trade unless it's also a potential rental in return. Far better, instead, to go for a high-pick and/or prospect (futures) from a team trying to add talent and then work with that return to secure the asset(s) that we might want/need for ourselves.

Just don't see a scenario in which Skinner is on our roster when camp opens. As for how the goal-scoring is covered, see two assets joining with no loss in return (Svechnikov and Necas) plus whatever talent is secured with the futures that he will bring.

Also entire team benefits by quitting the dancing around we have to do to shelter his zone starts and keep him away from heavy defenders and the turnovers that keep occurring whenever he's on the ice.

It was fun while it lasted...but time to try something different.
 
Elsker said:
Just as a fact check Skinner has only scored at a 30-goal pace for 3 of his 8 seasons. So no guarantee he will be at that pace next season.

Plus he's a cumulative -95 over those 8 seasons including -27 last season which pretty much negates his 24 goals.

Furthermore, with the likes of Evander Kane securing a 7-year $49M contract that pretty much sets the bar as to what Skinner's agent will be expecting for his client...or more.

Canes are rightly not going to pay the freight for that show, nor should they, so he's definitely getting traded, even if there are no other issues at play. And if the trade is definite, then no time like the offseason before a potential injury during the season results in losing him for no return whatsoever.

As for the return, just what would we offer for a UFA winger with one-year left on their contract, making them potentially nothing but a one-season rental? Furthermore, his no-movement clause limits which teams can even be considered as trade partners.

So it likely won't be a player-for-player type trade unless it's also a potential rental in return. Far better, instead, to go for a high-pick and/or prospect (futures) from a team trying to add talent and then work with that return to secure the asset(s) that we might want/need for ourselves.

Just don't see a scenario in which Skinner is on our roster when camp opens. As for how the goal-scoring is covered, see two assets joining with no loss in return (Svechnikov and Necas) plus whatever talent is secured with the futures that he will bring.

Also entire team benefits by quitting the dancing around we have to do to shelter his zone starts and keep him away from heavy defenders and the turnovers that keep occurring whenever he's on the ice.

It was fun while it lasted...but time to try something different.
Click to expand...

I agree with this for the most part. However, I don’t think teams will see Skinner as a 1 year rental. He’s a guaranteed 1 year player plus having a huge leg up in the process for signing him long term. As we know (see Darling) teams sometimes trade for just the negotiating rights to a player, just to have that exclusive shot, and it often works (in the sense that the player signs). So a team will likely be seeking to get Skinner long term with the risk that it doesn’t work out. Also, considering the NTC, the team that gets Skinner will know that they are likely a destination that he could see himself at long term. So I would expect more in a deal for Skinner than just a 1 year lease return, but certainly not the same as trading a controllable RFA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Elsker said:
Also entire team benefits by quitting the dancing around we have to do to shelter his zone starts and keep him away from heavy defenders and the turnovers that keep occurring whenever he's on the ice.

It was fun while it lasted...but time to try something different.
Click to expand...


Seems to me rather than dancing around sheltering his starts etc. it would make sense to put together line combinations that would give us role for him that works. You have to be able to score, and we've struggled to do that. I tend to see the problem with Jeff's stats and frustration as a direct result of not having the horses up front to allow line combinations that don't require a defense first mindset. Why not make the something different to construct the team in a way that allows us to have a more offensive line? Heck our solution for Jeff was to put him out there with 4th liners, or put him out there and ask for a 2 way game - he doesn't think that way - never will - he thinks take the puck and go score. Put him out there with Nordy and Rask and other teams are happy to smother him because those other guys aren't going to hurt you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top