JohnC

For a 2/3 C you will have to give up more than you are indicating. For a 3C, I agree with you that it would be too much. Strome is more of a 1/2 C. If available, he's not going to be cheap.

Would you be interested in trading with Washington for Dylan Strome? Maybe cost you a #1, Savoie and Krebs or Joki?

The Caps ended the season with Charlie Lindgren being their #1 goalie with Kuemper the backup. They believe that Dubois can be rehabilitated and become their #2 center. One of their other centers, Strome, might be available. Strome is the caliber of center who I believe can be a 2/3C. Dowd is more of a 4C. He can be acquired for a reasonable price.

No, I'm not saying what you think I said. Of course, if you can get better players at a reasonable, if not better, price, they should do so. I would extend that line of thinking for any player on the roster. If you can get a better player at a similar or lesser price, then get the better player.

Thanks for both of your responses. Based on @Brawndo's comment that he wants to be assured of a NHL roster spot, I would say no thanks. I would rather use our first-round pick as an asset to be parlayed for a NHL ready player.

How good is McCroarty? Where would he rate in our prospect pool?

I would be extremely disappointed with another year of no playoffs. If the team makes the playoffs and is then quickly dispatched, I won't be totally satisfied or dissatisfied. The bottom line for me has to be making the playoffs first and then go on from there.

The GM hasn't made any transactions yet. So why be so dour about what you expect him to do? Your zealotry about Krebs and Joki is perplexing. Whether either of them or both of them stays or go will not have a major bearing on how the team does. So why gets so frenzied over marginal issues? How is the GM going to handle this offseason regarding the reworking of this roster, especially the bottom portion? I don't know. I respectfully recommend you wait a little longer before you unload your fuselage of criticisms for actions that may or may not happen. It wasn't that long ago when you were insistent that Mitts and UPL were lost causes and should be summarily dispatched. You were wrong. Very often patience is a virtue.

You are working too hard to depress yourself. Take a chill pill and give yourself a lift. You are right that it is not inconceivable that Savoie ends up on the roster and that Krebs and Joki get re-signed. But those transactions don't translate into a catastrophe. Loosen up and relax. You may end up being surprised how this offseason actually turns out.

I don't want to belabor a point that I already just made. As I just said it is rare that there is ever unanimity on any issue. Will some people consider a Skinner transaction controversial? Probably so. However, overall, I don't see a Skinner move having much of an effect on the fanbase.

I'm not saying that he is wrong. I'm simply saying that I don't see a buyout of Skinner or trade as being very controversial. That's my view. If you want to say for a faction of the fanbase it would be controversial, then it's likely to be. But it is rare that there is ever any unanimity on any transaction.

You misread and over interpreted my post.

https://www.tiktok.com/discover/muscle-guy-walking-around-beach

A Kane deal would rev up this somnolent fan base.

What's so controversial about a decision to buy-out or trade Skinner? A sizeable majority fans desire it. The controversy would come into play if he was kept.

The both of us agree that Skinner does not fit the profile of a player that Lindy prefers. However, I'm confident in saying that no coach inherits a team in which all the players are the players the coach would want if starting from scratch. Is Skinner in Ruff's or the organization's long-term plans? It' safe to say no. But even if that's the case that doesn't mean that for the short-term (this season) keeping him in an altered role isn't the best option for now. It seems to me that I value his primary talent of scoring goals relative to his liabilities more than most people here do. My sense (opinion) is that the GM will soon be making a number of moves. Will they be blockbuster type moves? I don't think so, but they probably will go beyond tinkering. As a hockey fan this is a period of time where there is a lot of speculation before transactions take place. We shall see.

There is no need to apologize for one's assessment. The point I was making that especially with young players such as Mitts, Tage and UPL very often patience is the right course of action. I realize that the Skinner scenario is an altogether different situation.

The GM has repeatedly stated that his focus is primarily going to be on the lower half of the roster. My reading of his many comments since the season ended is that he is more than satisfied with the upper half of the roster. There will be deals but odds are it won't involve a blockbuster deal. However, he needs to bring in a 2/3 C player to replace Mitts.

The majority of people want to see me impeached. And there is a radical faction that would love to see me hung upside down with a noose around my balls. 😆 A large faction of the same rowdy crowd a few years ago wanted to see Mitts and UPL gone because they fervently believed that they were a lost cause and a drag on the roster. They were wrong. What the both of us are saying is that until there is a better option he adds value to this roster. Right now, flaws and all, he is still one of our best goal scorers.

I agree with you that Benson is the type of player who can play on any of the top three lines. Mitts was a similar player that he could fit in at C or W on any of the top three lines. That's an invaluable attribute to have. It's going to be intriguing to see if Benson can make a quantum leap in his second year. He's a youngster who has a mature game. How can anyone not like him?

The comparison between Skinner and Satan don't resonate with me. A couple of years ago, Granato spoke on WGR about Skinner handling his demotion when Krueger was the coach. Clearly, Skinner didn't fit the model of a player he preferred. His minutes and role were severely diminished. The former HC said that after being demoted, Skinner was one of the hardest practice players on the team. The point I'm making is that he's not the type of person who will become a negative influence on the team even when as a player his role is diminished.

One of the perceptive points you make that I agree with is that when talking about any player movement from this roster requires answering the question of who is going to be brought in. Right now, we don't know. We should know fairly soon. Also, our positions coincide on whether the 2/3C position is going to be addressed. That is going to be a critical issue. You make another interesting observation as to whether Skinner is a type of Lindy player. Probably not. But that doesn't mean that if he is kept that he can't find a way to maximize his asset (goal scoring) and put him in a position to minimize his liabilities. Transactions are starting to happen around the league. TBD.

I still believe that Skinner is capable of scoring 25 goals on a third line if the other parts of the line are solid players. If you add Benson and bring in a credible 2/3 C for the third line, it's not out of the real of reality that he can score at least 25 goals. If you play him on the second PP unit, I'm comfortable in projecting that he can score 25-30 or maybe 35 goals. My preference would be to play him on the top line with Tage and Tuch. (Obviously, this is a minority view here.) That would move JJ down to a line with Cozens and Quinn. I find that configuration very attractive. As you adroitly put out our roster right now is incomplete. That's the issue. What players is the GM going to bring in? That's the most consequential issue that we are facing this offseason. It's more likely than not that Skinner will not finish out the rest of his extended contract in Buffalo. That doesn't mean that he can't be a positive contributor this upcoming season.

Why would it be so catastrophic if he ended up being the 4C? If he ends up as a 3C, then I will be troubled. Right now, my attitude towards Krebs is that he shouldn't be handed any role, including the 4C role. He needs to earn it. That means bringing in players where he has to compete for his assignment.

If we are not bringing in a top 6 higher salaried player (that's an unknown right now), then why would you have to shed Skinner and his contract this year? Skinner on a higher line (top 2 lines) is capable of scoring 30-35 goals. He certainly is not a complete player but he's not a bum. On a third line he's still has the ability to score 25 plus goals. If most of the GM's attention is to the lower lines, there is plenty of cap room to work them in, especially after shedding Okposo, Olofsson, maybe Girgs and other contracts. It seems that Skinner has been the target for scorn from many people here. I still believe that he has enough utility to keep him on the roster this year.