triumph_communes Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 If you have a guy the whole team likes on a personal level who doesn’t ever buy into coaches systems and does his own thing, as coach with a spine is absolutely going to jettison him first chance. 1
NAF Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 No reason to do this now IMO. Either buy him out or trade him next year such that either the buyout length/price or trade price isn't as much. If you really don't want him on the roster next year bury him in the AHL like they did with Moulson.
PerreaultForever Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 6 hours ago, Archie Lee said: I’m all on board for a buyout. I still don’t think it happens, but I am 100%. But I don’t buy the Carolina got better because they dumped Skinner thing. Skinner was a year from UFA and Carolina’s options for a move were limited due to his NMC. They got what they could for him before losing him for nothing. I’m not saying he is a fit with a Brind’Amour team (he isn’t), but if I was going to weight the impact of Brind’Amour becoming head coach and Skinner’s departure on Carolina’s ascension, it would be 100% on Brind’Amour becoming coach. and Brind'Amour didn't want an uncoachable player ruining what he had planned for that locker room. Culture changed there. Skinner could have been sold off at a deadline for more than we gave them. I do not think it was contract related at all. 6 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said: Could have been worse, you could have done rape and ice skate sales. Oddly also a perfect statistical correlation. 1
Pimlach Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 2 hours ago, dudacek said: And people are taking my initial post far more seriously than it was intended. I was just having a random chuckle about how even when we seem to agree on some things some times, we never completely agree on anything. You are an influencer here at SabreSpace. 1 2
Flashsabre Posted June 19 Author Report Posted June 19 57 minutes ago, NAF said: No reason to do this now IMO. Either buy him out or trade him next year such that either the buyout length/price or trade price isn't as much. If you really don't want him on the roster next year bury him in the AHL like they did with Moulson. “Note: A no-movement clause means a player cannot be traded, placed on waivers or assigned to the minors without his consent.” Can’t send him down. So he either waives for a trade or you buy him out. 2
pi2000 Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 I believe strongly that Ruff taking the job was contingent on the fact that Skinner would not be part of the team moving forward. Ruff talks about not immediately jumping at the opportunity when he first spoke with KA... so it would seem that Lindy initially had some reservations, which KA likely promised to address. 3 1
Scottysabres Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 42 minutes ago, Pimlach said: You are an influencer here at SabreSpace. dudacek, let me know when the endorsement deals start flooding in, you'll need a manager, and I'm very reasonably priced for my skillset (which is 0, but hey, I come with a great sense of humor, hope you have one as I cut you some deals, 50 Duffs wings here, 41 game supply of free La Nova there ]game tickets bot included].) 🤣
Crusader1969 Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 16 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said: Am I the only one that thinks losing him will actually hurt us? (In the short term anyways. That contract will definitely bite us in the ass eventually). Say what you want about his defence, but he has the 3rd best 5 on 5 goal % on the team behind only Peterka and Thompson. Combine that with no Mittelstadt next year and I see us in a world of hurt offensively... Especially after how lackluster things were this year. Enter a full year of Jack Quinn and Benson improving his offence. Skinner will not be missed. 1 1
Crusader1969 Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 9 hours ago, SouthernSabre said: Are they saying Skinner is a cancer or bad locker room guy? I have not heard that before. I don't think he is a cancer and on a team with lots of vets he is probably fine. BUT on the youngest team in the league you can't have your oldest player only trying in one end of the ice. he may not be a cancer but he is definitely not a leader and you definitely don't want young players learning from him. addition by subtraction 3 1
Crusader1969 Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 8 hours ago, Archie Lee said: I’m all on board for a buyout. I still don’t think it happens, but I am 100%. But I don’t buy the Carolina got better because they dumped Skinner thing. Skinner was a year from UFA and Carolina’s options for a move were limited due to his NMC. They got what they could for him before losing him for nothing. I’m not saying he is a fit with a Brind’Amour team (he isn’t), but if I was going to weight the impact of Brind’Amour becoming head coach and Skinner’s departure on Carolina’s ascension, it would be 100% on Brind’Amour becoming coach. Let's not forget Brind'mours first order of business after being the assistant coach in Carolina for many years was to make sure Skinner was booted off the team. He knew that Skinner is not part of a winning culture
North Buffalo Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 21 hours ago, North Buffalo said: Barclay Goodrow on waivers by Rangers... any interest 3.6 cap hit Nuts Sharks claimed him...
Crusader1969 Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 7 hours ago, Doohickie said: In a vacuum I think buying out Skinner makes the Sabres worse. Just like trading Mitts made the team worse. If Kevyn made the complementary moves everyone on this forum thinks they need, then yes it could make the team better, but simply removing Skinner from the roster will not make the Sabres better without him. Just like they were not better with Byram instead of Mitts. When he traded Reino you could see the return and it is apparent Kevyn sees Levi as the goalie of the future. When he traded Eichel he got Tuch (who has proven to be a team leader) plus another roster player (Krebs) plus 2022 first-round pick (Noah Östlund) and 2023 second-round pick (Riley Heidt- who?) When he traded Mitts he got Byram back in a one-for-one. Maybe Byram will prove me wrong, but I just didn't see the need to bring in yet another young Dman and I don't think he fills an obviously need while losing Mitts created a big hole. When you look at what Adams gave up versus what he got back in the Eichel and Reino trades, you could see the value proposition and how it benefited the Sabres. Also, those trades where transformational in terms of changing the direction of team and the way the roster is constructed. Trading Mitts created a hole that still needs to be filled, and losing Skinner would create yet another hole on offense, at a time when "transformation" should be done and the team should be competitive. You will be right if they just pocket the $7.6 million they save. No doubt part of the plan is to allocate the money elsewhere and that will make the Sabres better 1
Doohicksie Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 54 minutes ago, Pimlach said: You are an influencer here at SabreSpace. A one-eyed man is king among blind men. 4
Crusader1969 Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 7 hours ago, Weave said: If they don’t bring in a replacement for the offense he generates, yeah it could be a real problem. I really think we all need to revisit Jeff Skinners season. Cause, from what I remember, he didn't bring any offence from December on ...except in blowouts or versus Mtl
dudacek Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 19 minutes ago, Scottysabres said: dudacek, let me know when the endorsement deals start flooding in, you'll need a manager, and I'm very reasonably priced for my skillset (which is 0, but hey, I come with a great sense of humor, hope you have one as I cut you some deals, 50 Duffs wings here, 41 game supply of free La Nova there ]game tickets bot included].) 🤣 I want a total no-movement clause. @nfreeman keeps my posts exactly where and how they are unless i give the OK. 1
Wyldnwoody44 Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 8 minutes ago, dudacek said: I want a total no-movement clause. @nfreeman keeps my posts exactly where and how they are unless i give the OK. But your post are only on The offensive, you can never defend them 😉 1
dudacek Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 1 minute ago, Wyldnwoody44 said: I think dudacek should be given whatever he wants. Dude is easily the top poster here. I'm giving him all my travel points, plus he gets to borrow my flow on weekends. And I also demand the right to share Woody's posts whenever and however I choose. 2
sabremike Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 48 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said: Let's not forget Brind'mours first order of business after being the assistant coach in Carolina for many years was to make sure Skinner was booted off the team. He knew that Skinner is not part of a winning culture Skinner was 100% traded because he wasn't re signing with the Canes because he wanted to be closer to home (which is LITERALLY the reason he was traded to us: It was the only place he would waive his NMC to go to). The whole "RBA got rid of him" thing some people are pushing is absolute made up fantasy *****. 2 1 1
stinky finger Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 13 hours ago, Wyldnwoody44 said: But but but... Who will do between 2 stalls?!? Gotta admit, those are some of the best things this team has put out Reruns?
Huckleberry Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 1 hour ago, North Buffalo said: Nuts Sharks claimed him... Its ok, he is not worth 3.6 million anyway, he really isn't that good like he was for Tampa.
shrader Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 9 hours ago, Doohickie said: When he traded Reino you could see the return and it is apparent Kevyn sees Levi as the goalie of the future. When he traded Eichel he got Tuch (who has proven to be a team leader) plus another roster player (Krebs) plus 2022 first-round pick (Noah Östlund) and 2023 second-round pick (Riley Heidt- who?) I don’t know if it’s been mentioned already or not. That guy was picked by Minnesota. That pick was traded there in the Greenway deal. 1
Huckleberry Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 I don't know about this, besides him being overpaid by 2 million, he does bring us 30 goals a year. And really don't see him as the big locker room cancer some are making him out to be. 1
Thorner Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 (edited) 6 hours ago, dudacek said: And people are taking my initial post far more seriously than it was intended. I was just having a random chuckle about how even when we seem to agree on some things some times, we never completely agree on anything. My post was before yours don’t lump me in to these massive AOL online mailing lists the cds are useless I don’t even have a cd drive 8 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said: Correct. I’d be very annoyed if we buy him out and the Sabres are $8 mill under the cap entering the season. There’d still be a point to that, just not one we like Edited June 19 by Thorny
Thorner Posted June 19 Report Posted June 19 (edited) 4 hours ago, PASabreFan said: This would be enormous addition by subtraction. You’re finally breaking 3 hours ago, Crusader1969 said: I don't think he is a cancer and on a team with lots of vets he is probably fine. BUT on the youngest team in the league you can't have your oldest player only trying in one end of the ice. he may not be a cancer but he is definitely not a leader and you definitely don't want young players learning from him. addition by subtraction Are we really going to be the youngest team in da league again? Has….anyone ever perused the playoff rate of the “youngest team in the league”? You say “BUT on da youngest team in da league” as if THAT’S not the flaw Edited June 19 by Thorny 1
Recommended Posts