Jeff Skinner rumors, trade and buyout speculation swirling

[sabrefanday1]

I have to admit I find it rather strange that we are letting VO go and now Skinner too when we had problems scoring last year? I actually like OV and think that he will do very well with Pittsburg or whoever he signs with. Skinner will score 30+ goals for Toronto when he signs for cheap...then we can all lament letting him go as we already do with a ton of ex-Sabres...

Edited June 21 by sabrefanday1

[Demoted]

46 minutes ago, sabrefanday1 said:

I have to admit I find it rather strange that we are letting OV go and now Skinner too when we had problems scoring last year? I actually like OV and think that he will do very well with Pittsburg or whoever he signs with. Skinner will score 30+ goals for Toronto when he signs for cheap...then we can all lament letting him go as we already do with a ton of ex-Sabres...

Isn't that what Farm teams are supposed to do? You build a player up and send them off to play well for a better team.

[Flashsabre]

This isn’t rocket science. If they buy him out its not because they need cap space, it’s because they don’t want him on the team any longer. Why is that? 

 

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, sabrefanday1 said:

I have to admit I find it rather strange that we are letting OV go and now Skinner too when we had problems scoring last year? I actually like OV and think that he will do very well with Pittsburg or whoever he signs with. Skinner will score 30+ goals for Toronto when he signs for cheap...then we can all lament letting him go as we already do with a ton of ex-Sabres...

Does OV, mean Victor Olofsson?

38 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

This isn’t rocket science. If they buy him out its not because they need cap space, it’s because they don’t want him on the team any longer. Why is that? 

 

He doesn't play defense. 

[Archie Lee]

37 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

This isn’t rocket science. If they buy him out its not because they need cap space, it’s because they don’t want him on the team any longer. Why is that? 

 

The Sabres will be taking an enormous risk to their already bad reputation, if they buy him out and don’t utilize the cap space to improve their team. If they go cheap, don’t make the playoffs and Skinner signs on and thrives with a playoff team, I can only imagine the reaction of fans and media. If they are worried about the future cap implications of a buyout followed by taking on new long-term contracts, then there is a long-list of veteran players who are one-two years from UFA status, who teams might be looking to move, who don’t all have trade protection, and who could help remake our line-up. 

There have been rumblings about Adams trying to acquire a top 6 winger. My best guess is that Skinner will only be bought out if this happens. The additions Adams has commonly spoken of, would not require a Skinner buyout to make work. Add a $6-8 million winger and it will get tight to add a (good) 3c and upgrades to the bottom of the line-up. The buyout window starts 48 hours after the last playoff game and then ends on June 30. If we don’t see a big Sabre acquisition before free agency, then I don’t think there will be a buyout. 

[JohnC]

8 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

The Sabres will be taking an enormous risk to their already bad reputation, if they buy him out and don’t utilize the cap space to improve their team. If they go cheap, don’t make the playoffs and Skinner signs on and thrives with a playoff team, I can only imagine the reaction of fans and media. If they are worried about the future cap implications of a buyout followed by taking on new long-term contracts, then there is a long-list of veteran players who are one-two years from UFA status, who teams might be looking to move, who don’t all have trade protection, and who could help remake our line-up. 

There have been rumblings about Adams trying to acquire a top 6 winger. My best guess is that Skinner will only be bought out if this happens. The additions Adams has commonly spoken of, would not require a Skinner buyout to make work. Add a $6-8 million winger and it will get tight to add a (good) 3c and upgrades to the bottom of the line-up. The buyout window starts 48 hours after the last playoff game and then ends on June 30. If we don’t see a big Sabre acquisition before free agency, then I don’t think there will be a buyout. 

I'd rather keep Skinner this year because I think it is wrong to assume that KA can swing a deal for a top 6 forward. It's not that he isn't willing to pursue a deal for such a player as it is the cost it would require to consummate such a deal. My sense (opinion) is that our GM is not inclined to make a blockbuster type deal because it would take too many assets to get it done. That doesn't mean that he can't bulk up the lower lines and add a credible 3C. We shall se. 

[Taro T]

10 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Their on ice style and persona changed entirely. You have forgotten this but if you compare the way they played before that move to after it is night and day. Yes, it's Brind'Amour, but he needed a locker room he could work with. 

Not true.  Flagg here used their play in the year or 2 before they got good but had no goaltending as examples of how the Sabres SHOULD be playing.  He had dozens of examples of that team playing the right way overall but getting undone by below average AHL goaltending.

[Gatorman0519]

The never ending dysfunction of this franchise is astonishing. They are going to have to eat that contract for 6 years if I’m reading it right? Yikes. Singing that guy to 9 mill a year was a joke to begin with. 🤦‍♂️

[Archie Lee]

53 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I'd rather keep Skinner this year because I think it is wrong to assume that KA can swing a deal for a top 6 forward. It's not that he isn't willing to pursue a deal for such a player as it is the cost it would require to consummate such a deal. My sense (opinion) is that our GM is not inclined to make a blockbuster type deal because it would take too many assets to get it done. That doesn't mean that he can't bulk up the lower lines and add a credible 3C. We shall se. 

I’m not sure I follow. I don’t necessarily think Adams can or will pull of a big trade for a top 6 forward. If he does though and the outcome is we need to buy out Skinner to make it all work, that is a positive  

 

2 minutes ago, Gatorman0519 said:

The never ending dysfunction of this franchise is astonishing. They are going to have to eat that contract for 6 years if I’m reading it right? Yikes. Singing that guy to 9 mill a year was a joke to begin with. 🤦‍♂️

While not a sure thing by any means, buying out Skinner could actually represent an end of the dysfunction. Teams who are eating millions of dollars in dead cap space because of bad contracts, were well represented in the playoffs (and cup final). 

[Rasmus_]

Skinner is what he is.  Yes he's bad on defense, but he's not Victor Olofsson levels of bad.  I am neither against or for buying him out.  If they do, they had better replace his production.   Will they, not likely.

[Stoner]

Thorny, you said it yourself. It's not about always winning a trade on paper. It's the net result. You can agree or disagree, but effectively trading Jeff Skinner for nothing is a win in my opinion. And I don't even care if Terry uses the savings for fancy bidet toilets for his yacht staff.

As someone posted above, there's no way Lindy is coaching that guy. That's good enough for me. Farewell, flamboyant mohawks and squeaky theatrics.

Edited June 20 by PASabreFan

[LGR4GM]

Adams has most assuredly talk to Skinner and his agent about trade scenarios or I am totally misreading the subtext. Not that something is in the works but if it did come up, what would be acceptable or not. Others should listen to the question and answer to see if it seems I am hearing things though. 

[dudacek]

11 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Adams has most assuredly talk to Skinner and his agent about trade scenarios or I am totally misreading the subtext. Not that something is in the works but if it did come up, what would be acceptable or not. Others should listen to the question and answer to see if it seems I am hearing things though. 

My read is that there is a web of potential moves contingent on each other.

Skinner's future is one of several balls in the air.

Adams generally seems like he tries to keep his players informed, so I would be surprised if he hadn't talked to Skinner's camp.

[...]

The "every scenario is on the table" line would indicate he has talked to Skinner's camp. "Every scenario" by default must include a trade and, by default, a trade requires Skinner's blessing.

[Archie Lee]

It does seem that this is a real possibility now. Not that I expect Adams to shut down every crazy rumour, but if there was talk of a Dahlin or Power trade I think he would put that to rest in a hurry. That he didn’t just say “we aren’t buying out Jeff Skinner” suggests to me it is at least an option if things fall a certain way.  

[Flashsabre]

16 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

It does seem that this is a real possibility now. Not that I expect Adams to shut down every crazy rumour, but if there was talk of a Dahlin or Power trade I think he would put that to rest in a hurry. That he didn’t just say “we aren’t buying out Jeff Skinner” suggests to me it is at least an option if things fall a certain way.  

The first tip off is that they didn’t have Lance quickly fire off a “sources close to the team have told me there in no truth to the Jeff Skinner buyout rumours”

[SabreFinn]

Att least the talk of buying out Skinner sends a message to contracted players that it is time to get to work and do summer practice properly. 

[Flashsabre]

As far as a Skinner trade the only one that would seem to make sense would be Chicago. They need cap and scoring and the proximity is close enough to Toronto that he may consider it. Can’t see him being sold on Utah or SJ.  Maybe Columbus. He may waive for Ottawa, Montreal or Detroit but Indont think those teams would be interested. Toronto has no cap space for it.

Edited June 20 by Flashsabre

[JohnC]

2 hours ago, Archie Lee said:

I’m not sure I follow. I don’t necessarily think Adams can or will pull of a big trade for a top 6 forward. If he does though and the outcome is we need to buy out Skinner to make it all work, that is a positive  

 

 

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. 

[dudacek]

34 minutes ago, JohnC said:

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. 

I’d say this is very much up for debate.

Skinner has produced very well in Buffalo with Tuch and Thompson, and with Eichel and Reinhart. Not so much elsewhere.

The other question is deployment: in theory, Skinner can work with a Roy/Max/Vanek style unit 3rd line, with the other 3 lines sheltering it defensively.

Buffalo doesn’t seem to have the personnel for that now and they seem to be talking about chasing players and a philosophy that doesn’t match it either.

I don’t see him working on a checking line, or an energy line, and I prefer a better defensive option on a top 4 wing group that also includes Peterka and Quinn.

To me, Skinner’s fit is largely dependent on what moves they are able to make elsewhere up front.

Edited June 20 by dudacek

[JohnC]

5 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I’d say this is very much up for debate.

Skinner has produced very well in Buffalo with Tuch and Thompson, and with Eichel and Reinhart. Not so much elsewhere.

The other question is deployment: in theory, Skinner can work with a Roy/Max/Vanek style unit 3rd line, with the other 3 lines sheltering it defensively.

Buffalo doesn’t seem to have the personnel for that now.

I don’t see him working on a checking line, or an energy line, and I prefer a better defensive option on a top 4 wing group that also includes Peterka and Quinn.

To me, Skinner’s fit is largely dependent on what moves they are able to make elsewhere up front.

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. 

[Pimlach]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

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. 

Lindy likes to have at least one solid two-way player on every line so we don't know what his first line will be, even if they can't or don't move Skinner, I don't see him being a Lindy first line player.  

It sure sounds like Lindy took the job with the promise of getting a major input into the roster.  

I do share your concern on getting rid of Skinner and then not bringing in a first line winger.   I hope they are not going to just hand a first line position to Quinn or Peterka and then bring in Kulich or Rosen for the 2nd or 3rd line.   

If they move on from Skinner they need to replace him with an NHL player.  They still need to replace Mitts too.  We know that Lindy likes situational players, he referred to them as "tools".   He said he wants to win key face-offs, to have a shut down line, to play a grittier game, and to have a few players that will keep the other team from getting out of line.  In other words it sounds like we could be bringing in 5 or 6 new players.  

As for Skinner scoring 25+ on the 3rd line with Benson on the other wing?   That would require a 3C that is capable of being a 2C and it is also asking a lot of Benson who will play next season at only 19 years old.   

Edited June 20 by Pimlach

[Thorner]

5 hours ago, Taro T said:

Not true.  Flagg here used their play in the year or 2 before they got good but had no goaltending as examples of how the Sabres SHOULD be playing.  He had dozens of examples of that team playing the right way overall but getting undone by below average AHL goaltending.

Miss Flagg and the conversations he contributed to  

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

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. 

Pretty much it comes down to, does the coach want him here on a lower line or does he want him out the door (ala Satan in '05).

If after talking to the other players and staff, Ruff thinks that Skinner would be a distraction from/ detriment to what they are trying to accomplish or would become a room cancer if he isn't going to be on the top line (and all the tea leaves indicate he will not be on the top line) then he is not going to be here even if they don't officially fill his slot.  Punting Miro with no widely recognized backfill for his production (though Briere was in house and should've been expected to replace his PP scoring if not the ES/EN) was one of the moves that lead to the best 2 year stretch in Sabres hockey in well over 30 years.

Personally, have preferred that they keep Skinner this year rather than punt him to get him fully off the books 5 years from now rather than 6 unless they have something in the works that needs his money for this season now, but wouldn't be upset if they did simply walk away from him.  Should Quinn be able to stay healthy all year, a lot of Skinner's production gets replaced right there.  

[Thorner]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

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. 

Well said

Welcome to the Skinner fan club, new vice president