dudacek Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 2 hours ago, Brawndo said: If the Sabres let Skinner get to the legal tampering period, there will not be enough Xanax or Prozac in the WNY Area to go around. 8/8.75 is my guess I think I would grudgingly accept that even though I think it's a mistake
SABRES 0311 Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 25 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said: I say give him what he wants. Somebody will and they will benefit from his stats. Take a chance if that's what it is. Not like we can get much worse if he tanks. In case anyone hasn't realized there isn't much else to get excited about with this team. At the very least we can enjoy a real top line for a few more years to mask the failure of what we call a rebuild. 13 minutes ago, Derrico said: I donno, I completely disagree with this take. So you want to pay him because that gives fans a reason to get excited? Or it can’t get worse? You know how it gets worse? We suck and have multiple long term, unmovable contracts. I’m still hoping the core will get much better in a couple of years. If that happens and the sabres are paying Eichel $10, Dahlin God knows what, Reino God knows what, Mitts if he gets there, Montour on his next contract. That adds up. Plus this team realistically is another two or three years at minimum for serious contention. So skinner should still be good for a few of years but I’m very very skeptical his points don’t fall of a cliff those last 2 or 3 years. I don’t know the answer. I would be happy with 5 x $9 per but I know that’s not on the table. 1. Sarcasm 2. Whose to say we can't have all four and Skinner? In fact I made a post about this concern a while back and another poster stated there shouldn't be an issue with cap space. 3. Skinner is getting paid period. Just because we have a couple guys over 30 who suck does not mean it will happen to Skinner.
sweetlou Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 Talks have been very quiet and you are only hearing rumors. I would have to think Botts is in the $7.5-$8 million range and Skinner's agent is asking $9. If you look at the comparable LW I don't think he gets above $8 million. Gaudreau- 6.75 million Marchand- 6.125 million Landeskog- 5.571 million Kane- 7.00 million I don't see how Skinner's camp thinks he is better or more deserving of more money than any of these players. If I'm Botts I stick to 7.5 to max 8.0 million. If he wants more. See ya and good luck. There are too many other young, talented players we can get. I would give Panarin 9 million before I give Skinner 9 million. Give me Dzingel and Ferland at 5 million each before I pay Skinner 9 million. 3
Brawndo Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 57 minutes ago, Derrico said: I donno, I completely disagree with this take. So you want to pay him because that gives fans a reason to get excited? Or it can’t get worse? You know how it gets worse? We suck and have multiple long term, unmovable contracts. I’m still hoping the core will get much better in a couple of years. If that happens and the sabres are paying Eichel $10, Dahlin God knows what, Reino God knows what, Mitts if he gets there, Montour on his next contract. That adds up. Plus this team realistically is another two or three years at minimum for serious contention. So skinner should still be good for a few of years but I’m very very skeptical his points don’t fall of a cliff those last 2 or 3 years. I don’t know the answer. I would be happy with 5 x $9 per but I know that’s not on the table. Something to remember Dahlin, Montour, Mittelstadt and Reinhart will all still be RFAs when their present deals, giving the Sabres much more leverage in negotiations then in the Skinner Situation.
nfreeman Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 2 hours ago, Derrico said: Thats a good sign but not a reason to throw caution to the wind here. I know these are unpopular takes but I don’t think we should overpay wingers who could be benefitting from franchise centres. Penguins didn’t do it with Crosby. His wingers came up for contract and they moved on. Well, Pittsburgh traded for Kessel 1 year into an $8MM x 8 year contract, when Kessel was about to turn 28 so that’s pretty much the same ballpark as the Sabres 4 years later giving Skinner $8.75MM x 8 before he turns 27.
Stoner Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 Is anyone willing to admit being surprised that it's dragged on this long?
SABRES 0311 Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 24 minutes ago, PASabreFan said: Is anyone willing to admit being surprised that it's dragged on this long? Right here. I really thought he and Eichel’s production would have made this thing go quicker. Guy has to do what he feels is best for him though. Ah well at some point it will be over.
TrueBlueGED Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 12 hours ago, Derrico said: Very unpopular but I let him walk for anything over $8 per for 8 years or any other amount over 6 years. As much as I hate him I'd probably pony up the extra half million if that got the job done, but I don't think your position is unreasonable at all. He's probably about a $7.5M player given his career as a whole, so $8M is already paying a premium.
TrueBlueGED Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 9 hours ago, nfreeman said: Well, Pittsburgh traded for Kessel 1 year into an $8MM x 8 year contract, when Kessel was about to turn 28 so that’s pretty much the same ballpark as the Sabres 4 years later giving Skinner $8.75MM x 8 before he turns 27. To be completely fair, Kessel was also quite a bit more prolific offensively. 6 straight 30-goal seasons (okay, technically 4 and then a 5th, but I'm willing to bet he'd have gotten 10 goals in an extra 40 games from the short season) and over 60 points in all but 1 season. Skinner had 2 30-goal seasons and only hit 60 points twice, including a couple seasons not even getting to 50. 1
SABRES 0311 Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 In terms of market value, does it go by other players of that position getting new contracts that year or by all players in that position?
Eleven Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 2 hours ago, PASabreFan said: Is anyone willing to admit being surprised that it's dragged on this long? Not surprised and frankly, the longer his drought extends, the better right now. 1
GASabresIUFAN Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 3 minutes ago, Eleven said: Not surprised and frankly, the longer his drought extends, the better right now. I agree. His recent play hasn’t helped his negotiating position. He hasn’t scored in the last 10 games, although he has 5 assists. (He is also -6 period that period).
Sabres Fan in NS Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 14 hours ago, nfreeman said: Just so we’re all clear: if you’re saying you wouldn’t give him 8 years x $8.5MM, then you’re saying the Sabres should let him walk. He’s not going to take less term or less AAV. This is what I think too. And I expect an announcement right around the time when (IF!!) the Sabres are officially eliminated from the playoffs this season ... 8 years / $8.75 AAV. It will give a boost to a disappointed fan base that management / owners are committed to building this thing up. 13 hours ago, Derrico said: Very unpopular but I let him walk for anything over $8 per for 8 years or any other amount over 6 years. Love you, man, but hey that is one very unpoopular thought right there, eh. ? ? I can't believe the Sabres made the trade without the deepest desire to sign Skinny long-term and what it would take to do so.
dudacek Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, SABRES 0311 said: In terms of market value, does it go by other players of that position getting new contracts that year or by all players in that position? Assuming both sides want to reach a deal, my understanding a big part of the negotiation is establishing the right comparables: what have players of similar age, position, role, contract status, and production signed for recently. That becomes the starting point. From there, other factors are weighed: recent production, internal team salary structure, value to the team under the cap, cap inflation, ancillary income sources, taxes, and outside market forces (supply and demand and what offers the player might get from other teams.) I think the Sabres starting comparables are Kane and Van Reimsdyk’s 7x$7 million. Skinner’s is Stone’s rumoured 8x$9.5. Edited March 8, 2019 by dudacek
SABRES 0311 Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 9 minutes ago, dudacek said: Assuming both sides want to reach a deal, my understanding a big part of the negotiation is establishing the right comparables: what have players of similar age, position, role, contract status, and production signed for recently. That becomes the starting point. From there, other factors are weighed: recent production, internal team salary structure, value to the team under the cap, cap inflation, ancillary income sources, taxes, and outside market forces (supply and demand and what offers the player might get from other teams.) I think the Sabres starting comparables are Kane and Van Reimsdyk’s 7x$7 million. Skinner’s is Stone’s rumoured 8x$9.5. Thanks for the education. Clearly I won’t be getting a call for GM.
dudacek Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 Excellent article on what a fair contract for Skinner might be in the Athletic, looking at a lot of comparables: https://theathletic.com/856451/2019/03/08/what-is-a-fair-contract-for-jeff-skinner-these-comparables-may-tell-the-story/ The conclusion: 8 years times $8 million. 1
Sabres Fan in NS Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 4 minutes ago, dudacek said: Excellent article on what a fair contract for Skinner might be in the Athletic, looking at a lot of comparables: https://theathletic.com/856451/2019/03/08/what-is-a-fair-contract-for-jeff-skinner-these-comparables-may-tell-the-story/ The conclusion: 8 years times $8 million. I can't read it. Mostly, well completely, because I'm a cheap ass, but does it take into consideration the 'intangibles' (or whatever you want to call them) of the Sabres situation? Those alone will add another $750K / year. Which brings me to my expected ... 8 year / $8.75 AAV.
North Buffalo Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 Yes it addresses that issue as well. 1
Sabres Fan in NS Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 8 minutes ago, North Buffalo said: Yes it addresses that issue as well. Well, then, the analysis is flawed. There is no way Skinner will sign for 8 / 8, IMO.
GASabresIUFAN Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 (edited) In the cap thread weeks ago I said 8.5 for 8 years. Nothing has changed but Skinner’s 10 game drought to make me change my mind. Edited March 8, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN
North Buffalo Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 It said that 8 was fair value but Sabres may pay more because of Skins value to Sabres, many good comparisons and analyzed Skins risk to fullfiling contract as low
North Buffalo Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 More the analysis dwelled on the likely drop off in later years and how likely and much it might be.
Brawndo Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 Dreger was on WGR for his weekly appearance and he was told by his sources not to read anything negative into the fact that the deal is not done, and that if he had to guess what the sticking point was it would be term.
nfreeman Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said: In the cap thread weeks ago I said 8.5 for 8 years. Nothing has changed but Skinner’s 10 game drought to make me change my mind. Does this mean you don't want the Sabres to give him that contract?
Recommended Posts