HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Carolina & Phoenix

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-27-2013, 03:44 PM
  #1
jayhamm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: South Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Carolina & Phoenix

Jeff Skinner
B. Gormley and 2013 1st

Value based around J. Staal draft day deal.

Thoughts?

jayhamm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 03:47 PM
  #2
IPreferPi
A Nonny Mouse
 
IPreferPi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 6,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayhamm View Post
Jeff Skinner
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.


Last edited by IPreferPi: 04-27-2013 at 03:55 PM.
IPreferPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 04:03 PM
  #3
AKL
#AnyoneButThem
 
AKL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Pominville
Country: Nauru
Posts: 6,436
vCash: 500
Not sure why the 'Canes do this. Someone want to help me out here?

AKL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 04:05 PM
  #4
jayhamm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: South Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKL View Post
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.

jayhamm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 04:12 PM
  #5
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
How's the thesis?
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 32,120
vCash: 562
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.

DaveG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 04:15 PM
  #6
Perro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,655
vCash: 500
makes sense if barkov is available when the canes pick

Perro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 04:36 PM
  #7
jayhamm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: South Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveG View Post
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.

jayhamm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 04:42 PM
  #8
Xylo
CaroladianHurriwings
 
Xylo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Cary
Country: United States
Posts: 202
vCash: 500
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.

Xylo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 04:53 PM
  #9
rockinghockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,533
vCash: 500
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.

rockinghockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 05:03 PM
  #10
Vankiller Whale
All hail WMD
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,960
vCash: 400
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.

Vankiller Whale is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 05:09 PM
  #11
jayhamm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: South Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylo View Post
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.

jayhamm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 05:52 PM
  #12
Roboturner913
Registered User
 
Roboturner913's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,221
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKL View Post
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.


Last edited by Roboturner913: 04-27-2013 at 05:58 PM.
Roboturner913 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 06:03 PM
  #13
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 43,218
vCash: 500
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 poster should not be taken seriously under any circumstances.
rt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 06:04 PM
  #14
Xylo
CaroladianHurriwings
 
Xylo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Cary
Country: United States
Posts: 202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockinghockey View Post
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 View Post
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.

Xylo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 06:54 PM
  #15
Jakey53
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,755
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt View Post
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.

Jakey53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 07:01 PM
  #16
jayhamm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: South Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt View Post
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


Last edited by jayhamm: 04-27-2013 at 07:09 PM. Reason: edit: original reply was too negative, added Rask explanation
jayhamm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 07:05 PM
  #17
Jakey53
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,755
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayhamm View Post
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.

Jakey53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 07:07 PM
  #18
IPreferPi
A Nonny Mouse
 
IPreferPi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 6,868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayhamm View Post
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.

IPreferPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 09:08 PM
  #19
YotesFan47
Registered User
 
YotesFan47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, Arizona USA
Country: United States
Posts: 728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayhamm View Post
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.

YotesFan47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 11:25 PM
  #20
DesertDawg
Registered User
 
DesertDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Superstition Mts
Posts: 4,719
vCash: 500
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).

DesertDawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 11:21 AM
  #21
Kaibur
Registered User
 
Kaibur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayhamm View Post
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

Kaibur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2013, 12:02 PM
  #22
Hero
The Corporal Returns
 
Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,261
vCash: 500
Makes sense, it's been proposed before in other threads.

Hero is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:25 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.