Confirmed with Link: Skinner traded to Buffalo for 2nd, 3rd, 6th, and prospect
- Thread starter super6646
- Start date
- Status
Kamiccolo
Truly wonderful, the mind of a child is.
I really like Pu so first thought is this isn't terrible. However I was hoping to get a more established piece back.
- Dec 6, 2011
- 12,359
- 39,374
As I mentioned in the other thread, this increases the urgency to move Faulk for an NHL forward.
This is probably relatively close to his rental value in general, but that other shoe really needs to drop now.
I hate that Jeff is in Buffalo
This is probably relatively close to his rental value in general, but that other shoe really needs to drop now.
I hate that Jeff is in Buffalo
Spirit of 67
Registered User
Joe McGrath
Registered User
- Oct 29, 2009
- 18,166
- 38,255
LOLZ Skinner won’t waive for Buffalo.
Dishface
Registered Jerk
Well now we need to Faulk for a forward.
Joe McGrath
Registered User
- Oct 29, 2009
- 18,166
- 38,255
I believe you mean F in the A.
Novacane
Registered User
Pu is a decent prospect. Skinner had a NMC and Buffalo is close to his home town. That 2nd is basically a late 1st.
Not too bad imo.
Not too bad imo.
Color me underwhelmed. I guess it's better than losing him for nothing?
Buenos Necas
lets go canes
Guess the market was truly terrible for Jeff. The quote from Waddell in the press release seems to underscore that. Still find it hard to believe we couldn't get a 1st from anyone, even if we had to add another small piece on our end. Whatever, won't end up being a huge difference between BUF's 2nd and a late 1st. Definitely need to get a hockey trade for Faulk now though.
Cardiac Jerks
Asinine & immoral
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
****ing horrible return. The best piece coming back for a 30 goal scorer is a B prospect. We’ll regret this in both the near and long term.
Yeah compare it to something like:
Pittsburgh 1st + Sprong
Really not that far off from Pu + Buffalo 2nd. Plus the Canes don’t help a division rival.
BB88
Registered User
- Jan 19, 2015
- 40,877
- 20,493
I hope they do. They could get a longterm F+ future assets for players they aren't keeping, smart for longterm building and giving them a shot at playoffs next season.
But if this stays as just 1 trade I don't like it, the value feels too little.
Unless they are confident Pu becomes a top6 player.
FreshSeabass
Aho!
really hope they were sure he wasn't going to re-sign. i don't get it if this is the return why not wait till the deadline?
Cardiac Jerks
Asinine & immoral
Don’t understand this. If this is the best return possible then you keep him. Unless there’s something going on behind the scenes we don’t know about that made it so we had to trade him.
They just didn’t want to pay Skinner or Brind’Amour didn’t want to keep him. His NMC limited the trade options with 1 year left to UFA.
Buffalo is not a good team. The 2019 2nd will be high. There shouldn't be a huge difference between say Pittsburgh's 1st and that pick.
Still, I'm a disappointed fan. I would have been willing to forgo that type of return for the 1 year of Skinner. It's time to move on from asset accumulation mode. I guess the FO disagrees.
Still, I'm a disappointed fan. I would have been willing to forgo that type of return for the 1 year of Skinner. It's time to move on from asset accumulation mode. I guess the FO disagrees.
Boom Boom Apathy
I am the Professor. Deal with it!
- Sep 6, 2006
- 48,360
- 97,941
Yeah, I need to eat a huge plate of crow for arguing with @What the Faulk on that.
hector morrison
Registered User
- Apr 1, 2018
- 4,792
- 1,998
Spirit of 67
Registered User
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
That’s your answer.
- Status
