HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   Proposal: Carolina & Phoenix (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1414117)

jayhamm 04-27-2013 02:44 PM

Carolina & Phoenix
 
:coyotes Jeff Skinner
:canes B. Gormley and 2013 1st

Value based around J. Staal draft day deal.

Thoughts?

IPreferPi 04-27-2013 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayhamm (Post 64762743)
:coyotes Jeff Skinner
:canes B. Gormley and 2013 1st

Value based around J. Staal draft day deal.

Thoughts?

That's, um, actually fairly tempting. EDIT: but the $5.7 million cap hit is too big to ignore. I suppose though we could shed Morris/Moss/Klesla/Michalek easily though to make room.

So yeah, definitely would consider this, as Skinner would be able to contribute immediately over any forward we'd pick up this year at our current position.

AKL 04-27-2013 03:03 PM

Not sure why the 'Canes do this. Someone want to help me out here?

jayhamm 04-27-2013 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKL (Post 64763707)
Not sure why the 'Canes do this. Someone want to help me out here?

With a little luck the Canes could pick in the top 4 but will probably lose out on Seth Jones. Gormley is nearly NHL ready and looks to be solid. With potentially Mackinnon/Drouin/Barkov Skinner becomes expensive and replaceable.

DaveG 04-27-2013 03:12 PM

It's not brutal, but only way it really makes sense is if the Canes are in position to draft Drouin with their first, and even as good as Drouin is it's unlikely that he's as productive as Skinner over the next 3 years or so.

I'm high on Barkov, Nichushkin, etc. but the only one of those that has the same potential as Skinner is Nichushkin and the Canes just flat out don't draft Russians, especially with the KHL factor.

Perro 04-27-2013 03:15 PM

makes sense if barkov is available when the canes pick

jayhamm 04-27-2013 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveG (Post 64764123)
It's not brutal, but only way it really makes sense is if the Canes are in position to draft Drouin with their first, and even as good as Drouin is it's unlikely that he's as productive as Skinner over the next 3 years or so.

I'm high on Barkov, Nichushkin, etc. but the only one of those that has the same potential as Skinner is Nichushkin and the Canes just flat out don't draft Russians, especially with the KHL factor.

I agree it's not ideal. We finally have depth in scoring forwards but only when we are healthy and whoever we draft will be unlikely to replace Skinner immediately. But we have to work on our D and this is one step in that direction. It would also give us the option of picking up a good D prospect at #11 like Pulock, Zadorov, Mueller, or Theodore. Or even double up on offense. Or perhaps if Columbus is really high on someone in our range we could even move back and pick another pick or two.

Xylo 04-27-2013 03:42 PM

Based on the J. Staal deal, we'd need an already NHL ready winger coming back with what you've suggested.

J. Staal for B. Sutter + 1st, B. Dumoulin. Gormley is the Dumoulin part, we'd need a guy to fit the Sutter part of the return.

And don't tell me the pick is that player, because it isn't. So no. Besides, if you know JR he's not going to trade Skinner unless someone overpays hardcore.

rockinghockey 04-27-2013 03:53 PM

Why is it every time there is a name put out for a trade fans say we will not move that guy unless it is for an over payment. When was the last time anyone has seen a player get moved and received an over payment. It never happens guys so why keep saying it. If a player gets traded it is to fix a need that a team has, CAR's need is on defense and Skinner could help rectify that problem.

Vankiller Whale 04-27-2013 04:03 PM

I think Phoenix would have a better chance of getting a potential star forward by moving up in the draft. Would also be cheaper. too, as he'd be on an ELC.

jayhamm 04-27-2013 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xylo (Post 64765635)
Based on the J. Staal deal, we'd need an already NHL ready winger coming back with what you've suggested.

J. Staal for B. Sutter + 1st, B. Dumoulin. Gormley is the Dumoulin part, we'd need a guy to fit the Sutter part of the return.

And don't tell me the pick is that player, because it isn't. So no. Besides, if you know JR he's not going to trade Skinner unless someone overpays hardcore.

I think J. Staal has more value than J. Skinner. Skinner may be younger and have a much higher offensive upside but a strong, durable, big 2C is harder to come by. However, I agree that I would like to see a roster player return but I prefer to undervalue on proposals and keep the parts to a minimum and let the mob fight over it.

If Phoenix wants to move some salary I'd take back Klesla. The only forward that would be attractive coming back would be Boedker but I've seen a lot of Phoenix fans prefer taking a bullet to the face than moving Boedker.

Roboturner913 04-27-2013 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKL (Post 64763707)
Not sure why the 'Canes do this. Someone want to help me out here?

The Canes desperately need a top-4 defender, maybe even two depending on how Pitkanen recovers from his heel thing.

I think if you change the 1st rounder to Mike Stone and then a second rounder or goalie prospect, then a deal could be had. Gormley would give them a second-pair guy soon, Stone gives them a dependable guy who can anchor the third pair and move up to the second if needed. Versatility is key here, since as I said, they don't really know what Pitkanen's status will be when the season starts.

Canes would of course have a massive hole at forward, but would draft one of the top forwards and have savings from Skinner's deal to sign another forward in free agency.

Skinner's value is a bit hard to figure out right now because he's been playing at center the last part of the season and looks great there. If his long-term future is at center then that gives him significantly more value in a trade of course.

rt 04-27-2013 05:03 PM

Value is pretty close. Fit is pretty good. Money is a huge issue. This woul be impossible to fit under budget.

Skinner, Rask, and a 3rd for Klesla, Gormley, and a 1st?

Xylo 04-27-2013 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockinghockey (Post 64766327)
Why is it every time there is a name put out for a trade fans say we will not move that guy unless it is for an over payment. When was the last time anyone has seen a player get moved and received an over payment. It never happens guys so why keep saying it. If a player gets traded it is to fix a need that a team has, CAR's need is on defense and Skinner could help rectify that problem.

Because JR just signed him to a 6 year extension which hasn't even kicked in yet. He's not even thinking about trading Skinner. Skinner was the asked to be included in the Nash deal and JR pulled out. So you think we'd trade him for a mid round pick and a prospect? No. I don't anyways. JR may start to change his mind a few years into this extension, but Skinner is not going anywhere anytime soon for anything other than overpayment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayhamm (Post 64767059)
I think J. Staal has more value than J. Skinner. Skinner may be younger and have a much higher offensive upside but a strong, durable, big 2C is harder to come by. However, I agree that I would like to see a roster player return but I prefer to undervalue on proposals and keep the parts to a minimum and let the mob fight over it.

If Phoenix wants to move some salary I'd take back Klesla. The only forward that would be attractive coming back would be Boedker but I've seen a lot of Phoenix fans prefer taking a bullet to the face than moving Boedker.

I'd ask for Yandle. Considering Nash wasn't worth Skinner to JR, I doubt even Yandle would pry Skinner away.

And a sidenote: Just because a GM doesn't deal a player for a certain value return doesn't necessarily make that player that value. It just makes the GM stubborn.

Jakey53 04-27-2013 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rt (Post 64770153)
Value is pretty close. Fit is pretty good. Money is a huge issue. This woul be impossible to fit under budget.

Skinner, Rask, and a 3rd for Klesla, Gormley, and a 1st?

This, in my opinion would be a good trade for both teams.

jayhamm 04-27-2013 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rt (Post 64770153)
Value is pretty close. Fit is pretty good. Money is a huge issue. This woul be impossible to fit under budget.

Skinner, Rask, and a 3rd for Klesla, Gormley, and a 1st?

Skinners minimum value should be 1st and Gormley alone. Klesla for Rask and a 3rd is over payment as Rask is the Canes only decent forward prospect besides DiGiuseppe (who had a poor showing this year). Canes can't afford to move him for Klesla. I would do:

Skinner, McBain, 3rd
Klesla, Gormley, 1st

Jakey53 04-27-2013 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayhamm (Post 64773247)
Skinners minimum value should be 1st and Gormley alone. Klesla for Rask and a 3rd is over payment. Pass.

Ok, Skinner for 1st and Gormley it is.

IPreferPi 04-27-2013 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayhamm (Post 64773247)
Skinners minimum value should be 1st and Gormley alone. Klesla for Rask and a 3rd is over payment. Pass.

Yeah, asking the Canes to put up Rask as well is an overpayment on their end. I think Gormley + Klesla + 1st for Skinner + 3rd would be easier on the cap for us, but I think I'd pull the trigger on the original offer and figure out how to make room after.

YotesFan47 04-27-2013 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayhamm (Post 64773247)
Skinners minimum value should be 1st and Gormley alone. Klesla for Rask and a 3rd is over payment as Rask is the Canes only decent forward prospect besides DiGiuseppe (who had a poor showing this year). Canes can't afford to move him for Klesla. I would do:

Skinner, McBain, 3rd
Klesla, Gormley, 1st

I like the overall look of that deal but I think the $1.9m McBain would make wouldn't be enough of a drop in salary for the coyotes. Would you think this is more acceptable?

Skinner, 2014 2nd, 2013 4th
Klesla, Gormley, 2013 1st

That 2nd should be roughly 15-20 spots higher than your 3rd this year I would imagine and with the addition of the 4th would basically cover the cost of Klesla. Then its Gormley and our 2013 1st for Skinner.

DesertDawg 04-27-2013 10:25 PM

IMO, the number's don't work. I doubt that Maloney would be willing to take on Skinner's contract and the 'Canes would need to eat part of Skinner's contract, but aren't willing. 'Canes would want an overpayment for Skinner and the 'Yotes would want an overpayment for Yandle. Don't see the 'Canes having any interest in Michalek (a questionable contract).

Kaibur 04-29-2013 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayhamm (Post 64773247)
Skinners minimum value should be 1st and Gormley alone. Klesla for Rask and a 3rd is over payment as Rask is the Canes only decent forward prospect besides DiGiuseppe (who had a poor showing this year). Canes can't afford to move him for Klesla. I would do:

Skinner, McBain, 3rd
Klesla, Gormley, 1st

I like McBain, but I just don't see how he'd fit unless the Yotes dump another Dman. How about changing Rask and the 3rd to DiGiuseppe instead? That UM video of Chris Brown and Phil before the draft last year was pretty funny.

Skinner, DiGiuseppe
Klesla, Gormley, 1st

Hero 04-29-2013 11:02 AM

Makes sense, it's been proposed before in other threads.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:22 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.