HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Carolina Hurricanes
Notices

Barkov

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-02-2013, 10:55 PM
  #1
echlfreak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 867
vCash: 500
Barkov

Everyone is talking about the great Nichushkin...thing is so is TB and Nashville so its time to look at Barkov, because that is who the Canes are gonna get!!!

If Carolina can get Nich then they have the next Malkin...he is worth trading up!

Otherwise this is your next Cane

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZvj7bZJAA0



I would trade Skinner, McBain and Dalpe to Nashville for the 4th pick and draft both

Thoughts?

Tlusty-Staal-Semin
Barkov-Staal-Nich

echlfreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 11:03 PM
  #2
Aquin001 on Ice
Registered User
 
Aquin001 on Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,277
vCash: 500
If I had to put money on one player being drafted by a specific team, it would be Barkov ending up a Pred. If he fell to us however, I'd be beyond thrilled (same with Drouin).

Aquin001 on Ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 11:04 PM
  #3
Anton Dubinchuk
Danny Markov
 
Anton Dubinchuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 9,147
vCash: 3729
I'd be thrilled with any of the top 5 falling to us. And luckily, one of them will, I guarantee it!

Now remind me why this needs its own thread again?

Anton Dubinchuk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2013, 11:57 PM
  #4
These Is The Times
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 196
vCash: 500
If we are going to trade Skinner, I would sure like it to be for a more established return than a draft pick, not to mention giving up two more half decent assets. And it would take a heck of a return for me to even consider getting rid of him. He's shown a lot in his three seasons, and I think he still has tremendous room to grow. I will be pretty happy with whichever of the perceived top 5 we get, and wouldn't even mind that much if it were Monahan or Lindholm. But this all seems like standard draft thread fare.

These Is The Times is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 01:33 AM
  #5
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,177
vCash: 500
Too much faith in kids who haven't played a game. Skinner for barkov!?! I wouldn't do that if they threw in extra, let alone us.

How far skinner has fallen in one year around here. I can't stand the petulant behavior either, but for the love of god he was one of the best 18 year olds in our generation. He's growing up. Trading him for another 18 year old does nothing but set us back for two or three years and maybe missing the window with estaal.

We've suffered threw the growing pains, we're keeping him unless its for a top pairing dman. For all we know he meant ruutu or tlusty and not skinner as the top 6 forward we would give up - we're just speculating. This need to trade him for anything conceivably out there is ludicrous. Come back to the light. None of the kids in this draft will save this team singlehandedly. It's being over rated by no small margin IMO. Barkov is a staal brother with euro skill. We'd be the slowest team down the middle in the NHL. I won't complain if he falls to us, he's a great prospect but trading skinner? The summer heat has set in early this year.

bleedgreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 07:46 AM
  #6
urho
Registered User
 
urho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Oulu
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,664
vCash: 695
I'm pretty sure Nahsville will take him if he's still available.

urho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 07:55 AM
  #7
wallym
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,700
vCash: 615
The trick with Skinner+ for a top pick is that you get 5 million in cap space, too.

Skinner hasn't fallen, in my opinion, but it's possible he's going to be a square peg in a round hole on this team. If he doesn't have chemistry with Eric, and struggles with the defensive responsibilities that come with playing with Jordan, that leaves him on the 3rd line forever.

Which is fine, because the kid is an offensive dynamo. And that scoring depth will be quite nice. But if you can get a player who projects similarly in terms of overall skill, but with a skillset that fits a bit better with what is being built here, and you get some money freed up to fix another problem at the same time, I think you'd entertain that.

wallym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 08:16 AM
  #8
These Is The Times
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 196
vCash: 500
I don't think it is entirely impossible to entertain trading Skinner. And yes, it is nice to think about the extra cap space that such a trade would bring. But do we really want to trade Skinner for a draft pick because we are a little tight on cap space for this one year? The cap will likely rise after this next season again, and Rutherford is on record as saying we will be closer to the cap than not going forward in this new division. So there is every reason to believe that if we can make it through this season, Skinner's hit won't hurt quite so much. So to me, it definitely isn't worth it for a kid that we'd be lucky to end up as good as Skinner good draft or not. I would definitely want someone much more established if we would trade Skinner and someone very special like Skinner has been for his age. I definitely think he'll fix some of his issues the more time he gets in the NHL going forward. And honestly, as enticing as that cap space might be, I'm not sure I have that much faith that we would really spend it on anything that would be truly helpful. Whether because an impact free agent probably wouldn't choose here first, because there isn't a ton that is worthwhile available, or whether because we'd probably just waste that space to bring back our own failures in LaRose, Corvo, Cole, MAB or some other player we'd be better off letting go forever. Cap space is only as good as the likelihood that someone useful will be brought in with it.

These Is The Times is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 08:18 AM
  #9
StormCast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 2,842
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallym View Post
The trick with Skinner+ for a top pick is that you get 5 million in cap space, too.

Skinner hasn't fallen, in my opinion, but it's possible he's going to be a square peg in a round hole on this team. If he doesn't have chemistry with Eric, and struggles with the defensive responsibilities that come with playing with Jordan, that leaves him on the 3rd line forever.
To me, trading Skinner at this time would be a monumental blunder. It seems though that the more the idea gets repeated, the more acceptable it becomes to some. Still, that doesn't make the move any more right.

I think the whole idea that he doesn't have chemistry with Eric is overblown and overstated now. Fact is, they actually did have pretty good offensive chemistry when they played together but it was their collective D that caused them to get separated. Muller even specifically cited their D as the primary concern.

With respect to Jordan, a $6 M/yr he needs to be more than a D-focused center. In my opinion, they still need to construct the 3rd line as a the de facto checking line and let Jordan's line provide the secondary scoring. Late in the Cup year Brindy and Williams were able to effectively cover for the one-dimensional Stillman after he shifted to their line. Granted, his deficiencies were masked somewhat as he played the "lock" position but his commitment to D was iffy at best.

StormCast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 08:48 AM
  #10
echlfreak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by echlfreak View Post
Everyone is talking about the great Nichushkin...thing is so is TB and Nashville so its time to look at Barkov, because that is who the Canes are gonna get!!!

If Carolina can get Nich then they have the next Malkin...he is worth trading up!

Otherwise this is your next Cane

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZvj7bZJAA0



I would trade Skinner, McBain and Dalpe to Nashville for the 4th pick and draft both

Thoughts?

Tlusty-Staal-Semin
Barkov-Staal-Nich

As was noted in another post above...I think Skinner is a star, however concussion history and cap hit force the Canes to move somebody and Skinner would return the most value compared to Pitkanen, Gleason, Ruutu etc.

Trading McBain and Skinner frees up a lot of cap space. Nich and Barkov combined would be less than $4m cap hit. That frees up almost an additional $3m for CARO to spend elsewhere like a shutdown/physical d-man.

echlfreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 09:05 AM
  #11
RWARD18
Rookie User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: North Carolina
Country: United States
Posts: 7
vCash: 500
I wish that we would trade Calgary for the 6th pick and draft Nich and Monahan because that would give us some great depth. However I doubt JR will doing anything, he will simply draft the BPA and say that player is going to take us to the playoffs and as always come next spring we will be watching someone else in the playoffs. If we were able to pull off a trade and get Calgary's pick, I would rather have Monahan than Barkov for 3 reasons:
1. I think Nashville is going to draft Barkov before us
2. Monahan is older and almost NHL ready
3. While Barkov is better offensively, Monahan is a strong two way center and could help us out with our struggling defense

RWARD18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 09:11 AM
  #12
wallym
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,700
vCash: 615
Quote:
Originally Posted by StormCast View Post
To me, trading Skinner at this time would be a monumental blunder. It seems though that the more the idea gets repeated, the more acceptable it becomes to some. Still, that doesn't make the move any more right.

I think the whole idea that he doesn't have chemistry with Eric is overblown and overstated now. Fact is, they actually did have pretty good offensive chemistry when they played together but it was their collective D that caused them to get separated. Muller even specifically cited their D as the primary concern.

With respect to Jordan, a $6 M/yr he needs to be more than a D-focused center. In my opinion, they still need to construct the 3rd line as a the de facto checking line and let Jordan's line provide the secondary scoring. Late in the Cup year Brindy and Williams were able to effectively cover for the one-dimensional Stillman after he shifted to their line. Granted, his deficiencies were masked somewhat as he played the "lock" position but his commitment to D was iffy at best.
I think the Skinner trade stuff has picked up steam, because people are talking about a top 5 pick instead of Mark Giordano, or some other middle aged pretty good player.

I disagree with you on Skinner and the chemistry. I just don't think his style of dangling about without much thought for playmaking is particularly well suited for playing offense with the Staals, who are more about puck possession. Toss in his awfulness on defense, and its a real problem. You mention Stillman, who certainly wasn't a Selke calibur guy, but he could certainly at least hold his own on the boards, and his passes out of the zone were elite.

The catch in this talk though, is the 5 million in cap space that is coming with the theoretical #4 pick in this situation.

Would you trade Jeff Skinner for Valeri Nichushkin and Rob Scuderi?

I had mentioned this in another thread, about how the team needs more impact players, not less. In this case, we'd be giving up 1 player to essentially fill two holes.

Toss in the fact we'd also be getting Barkov or Drouin at #5, and that gives us:

Tlusty-Staal-Semin
Nich(1.25m)-Staal-Ruutu
Welsh-Barkov(1.25m)-Dwyer
Wallace-Rask-Westgarth

Joni-Faulk
Gleason-Scuderi (4mil)
Harrison-Murphy

at a cost of 58.7 million. The bottom six combinations not being particularly important. The key being we'd be at 58.7 or so instead of 63 with Skinner instead of one of the rookies.

wallym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 09:13 AM
  #13
These Is The Times
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 196
vCash: 500
Drafting one or two rookies in the 5 and/or 6 spots are not likely to put the Canes in the playoffs either, barring some other worldly rookie performances. Our playoff chances next season more likely depend on reshaping the defense, and finding the right depth and role players to fill out the rest of our forward group. And filling those spots with a couple of 18 year old rookies probably isn't the answer.

These Is The Times is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 09:25 AM
  #14
RWARD18
Rookie User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: North Carolina
Country: United States
Posts: 7
vCash: 500
I agree, before we can make the playoffs the defense needs to be rebuilt. All I'm saying is that we have some older prospects with decreasing value, we should trade them before their worthless. Also, this draft is very deep and I think that if we traded next years 1st round pick along with a prospect or two, to get an extra pick this year it would pay off in the long run. I don't think two 18 year olds can make us a playoff team instantly but in 2-3 years they could become important players to our playoff hopes.

RWARD18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 09:28 AM
  #15
wallym
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,700
vCash: 615
Quote:
Originally Posted by These Is The Times View Post
Drafting one or two rookies in the 5 and/or 6 spots are not likely to put the Canes in the playoffs either, barring some other worldly rookie performances. Our playoff chances next season more likely depend on reshaping the defense, and finding the right depth and role players to fill out the rest of our forward group. And filling those spots with a couple of 18 year old rookies probably isn't the answer.
You need money to reshape the defense. The two 6'2+ 200+ rookies, who've already played against men in the FEL and KHL, wouldn't cost much. That's the difference between having 6 million to get your dman and a solid bottom 6 guy, and 2 million for the dman and bottom 6 guy.

wallym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 09:28 AM
  #16
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,133
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RWARD18 View Post
I wish that we would trade Calgary for the 6th pick and draft Nich and Monahan because that would give us some great depth. However I doubt JR will doing anything, he will simply draft the BPA and say that player is going to take us to the playoffs and as always come next spring we will be watching someone else in the playoffs.
People can bust on JR for a LOT of things, and rightfully so, but how many GMs make trades that get them 2 top 6 picks in a draft? (especially a deep draft like this). The last time I can remember was 1999 when the Sedin Twins were drafted and that's about itm so complaining about JR not doing it this year is a bit ridiculous.

Also, after last off-season, how can anyone complain about JR doing nothing? If you don't agree with the moves, then fine, but he didn't sit on his hands and do nothing last year. Lastly, In order for JR to obtain the #6 pick, he's going to have to give up a roster player (or more). How does adding two 18 year olds (who have never stepped onto the NHL ice) automatically make them a playoff team?

IMO, who the team drafts will have little bearing on whether or not the team makes the playoffs. What will likely make the most impact is how healthy the team will stay, particularly Ward and what JR does to improve the defense (which won't be through the draft).

Boom Boom Anton is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 09:39 AM
  #17
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,133
vCash: 500
MODS: Can we put this discussion into the other prospect/draft thread?

Boom Boom Anton is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 09:41 AM
  #18
StormCast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 2,842
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallym View Post
I think the Skinner trade stuff has picked up steam, because people are talking about a top 5 pick instead of Mark Giordano, or some other middle aged pretty good player.

I disagree with you on Skinner and the chemistry. I just don't think his style of dangling about without much thought for playmaking is particularly well suited for playing offense with the Staals, who are more about puck possession. Toss in his awfulness on defense, and its a real problem. You mention Stillman, who certainly wasn't a Selke calibur guy, but he could certainly at least hold his own on the boards, and his passes out of the zone were elite.

The catch in this talk though, is the 5 million in cap space that is coming with the theoretical #4 pick in this situation.

Would you trade Jeff Skinner for Valeri Nichushkin and Rob Scuderi?
I saw a change in Eric Staal's approach this past season with respect to playmaking - and that's from one of his most vocal critics in that aspect of his game. I haven't seen anyone else comment on this but here's what I saw.

Maybe it was maturity, maybe it was the presence of Semin or some combination but he was not nearly as predictable as in years past with the puck. He actually would button-hook, skate laterally and stop-start with the puck on his stick. He didn't become a pass-first guy, and he still needs to do these things more consistently, but he as more balanced than at any point before. However, we didn't see him with Skinner so it's a bit of stretch to conclude definitively they don't have chemistry.

Yes, Stillman was better on the boards using his body and his stretch passes were elite. But his D positioning was lacking in a major way, the same biggest concern for Skinner. I think as maturity kicks in, he'll play a better brand of D. He has the hockey smarts, it's more a matter of commitment to D and on overall game.

As for your proposed trade? No, I wouldn't do that.

StormCast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2013, 09:55 AM
  #19
These Is The Times
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallym View Post
You need money to reshape the defense. The two 6'2+ 200+ rookies, who've already played against men in the FEL and KHL, wouldn't cost much. That's the difference between having 6 million to get your dman and a solid bottom 6 guy, and 2 million for the dman and bottom 6 guy.
I agree that we need money in order to reshape the defense and forward depth, but I'd rather squeeze in what we can this offseason and wait for the cap to go up the next year. Rutherford seems to be dedicated to spending more to the cap in future seasons. I don't want to make what I would consider a bad move just to fix our issues with cap space for one offseason. If we are trading Skinner to get cap space in one fluke year where the cap is going to be down, I am against it. I also don't know if we are going to get what I think Skinner is worth based on injury history and the fact that his salary may bring down his trade value in an offseason where cap space will be at a premium for almost everyone. If we get an established, really good player for him and cap space, I'd consider it. I just don't want to trade him for a pick. I don't care what competition they were playing against. I think they are all amazing prospects, but just that.

I just don't think there is a ton out there that it would really be that important to have the cap space for this offseason. Rutherford did a good job last offseason, but we can't always count on being able to get a stud FA because he has so many question marks that nobody else wants him. Some of the FA that people have been throwing out just seem unlikely to me. I like the idea of Scuderi, but I'm sure LA does too, not to mention many other teams. And I don't see us winning on many of those type scenarios out there at this point. I don't think we are a prime destination yet, and I don't think even with cap space we would be willing to blow all other offers out of the water to get most guys. It's not enough for us to want the FA. The FA needs to want to come here, and want to come here more than all other offers.

These Is The Times 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 10:26 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.