Confirmed with Link: Skinner traded to Buffalo for 2nd, 3rd, 6th, and prospect

[Nikishin Go Boom]

Goal scoring really doesn’t matter if you don’t help your team win. His 200 foot play is so bad he scores 40 and the team is better off without him.

The James Harden of the NHL.

 

[Ole Gil]

I wish every other team in the conference had a Jeff Skinner with an 8x9 contract.

Great goal scorer. Exciting to watch. Quiet in the playoffs.

 

[WreckingCrew]

We're winning @ 6 in a row, points in like 12 or 13 in a row, our goalie is playing God tier and we are doing it without significant players. Gotta let the folks have something to bitch about. At least we can keep this in one place instead of 5 different threads.

Challenge accepted!

*walks off to spam other threads with Skinner info/opinions*

 

[Daeavorn]

He was maybe our best goal scorer ever, and we struggled with offensive depth during most of his career.

No chemistry? Weak. He had chemistry with both Erik Cole and the Finns, as well Rask. He has pretty damn good chemistry with Thompson and Tuch….not to mention Eichel. Play the guy with the right people and he’s just fine.

He never made the playoffs? Weak. We sucked his whole time here. He’s a winger, none of that is on him. We traded him to the other worst team in the league. He’s a huge part of the upswing.

Coaching staff wanting him off? Not buying it. I think the contract is the only reason he’s gone, just like every single other fa player that’s moved on since. Ownership wanted to make a change, make people believe everything was going to be different under them. New attitudes. They used him in part to create this. As they used Lindy and Hanifin who were both ridiculously maligned for “not wanting to win” because they wouldn’t sign under value deals. Look how we negotiate the whole time since….Skinner had an up and down career here that needed and clearly wanted a new start. He wasn’t staying no matter what from either way. We used him to begin the changes. The story was framed the way it was.

To continue that theme we did things like say only hard working fellas like Foegele are going to make this team now and pretended he did that when he had already made the team late in the season before and we had multiple spots open. He couldn’t not make the team without us spending more money. He didn’t play that well in preseason.

But I digress. The hardest line to read in your post is the last one. Very few people defend Jeff Skinner on this board. No one glosses over a single wart. They get amplified here the loudest.

We got the best deal we could get, and we’re getting lucky with the picks. Good enough. I was happy he was gone for his sake, and I’m very happy for him this year as he’s always seemed like a very good human being who works as hard if not harder than most to be a good player. He deserves success and I hope he gets it.

You think we shouldve paid him 72 million dollars? He only wanted to be traded to a couple of places so we got the best we could. I dont see the issue here.

 

[Vagrant]

I think a lot of us knew that he was going to burn us that first year after the deal, because that's the kind of emotional fuel he needs to play his best and the inspiration of the money bags at the end of the rainbow were more than enough to keep him focused. The thing that would have *really* killed us were his 2019 and 2020 seasons where he was just.... checked out would be putting it kindly. If you think about how that $9 million of cap space would have felt for his combined 21 goals over those 2 seasons when we were really starting to build an identity, it would have been catastrophic. we cleared the deck of all pointless seniority so that RBA could shape Aho, Svech, Necas, and Teuvo for the task ahead without the exception to the rules needing his 18 minutes a night to hot dog the system and undermine the universal buy in we needed to make this work. we moved to bringing in the type of veterans who were tone setters like Jesper Fast, Nino Niederreiter, Derek Stepan, Vincent Trocheck and emphasizing guys like Jordan Staal, Jaccob Slavin, Brock McGinn, Jordan Martinook, etc. who were going to take the coach's message and run with it. these were good soldiers who were important to establishing the identity of this team and the reverb has been that when some of those players departed, the tone didn't change. it was cultural now.

Jeff Skinner had no place on a bench where the most important player is the guy sitting next to you. I don't think it was in his DNA. there may have been some maturation in the last year or two that I haven't seen from him being out of sight out of mind, but a big part of me doubts it. I think his 7 goal season was enough to embarrass him into a certain level of revenge, that same fuel that leaving here provided him, that gave him enough juice to put together another 30 goal season in which he was on for 84 goals against despite 68.7% offensive zone starts. We shall see how the rest of his season goes should Buffalo enter a tailspin.

There is a big part of me as well that thinks Elias Lindholm was another guy who had a lesser case of not really wanting to play the way we wanted him to play and expected to call his own shots a bit more. He was a hard worker on the ice, but there was always this just under the surface discontent that you could read off him that I think may have limited his buy in with the coaching change as well. He wanted that offensive role and he got the opportunity to play with some $10 million linemates and really helped it work. However, his on ice goals for and against are still incredibly close for a player of his presumed stature. I think he made it work, but it will be interesting moving forward to see if there's a team that believes enough to give him $8 million or more after next season.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Could we/Should we have gotten more for Skins? Yeah, probably but we were basically just negotiating with one team due to Skinner's NTC. He was ONLY going to a team close to Toronto and the Leafs didn't need him or have space.

So, we could have kept him for a year and then he likely walks and goes to Buffalo or Ottawa maybe and we get nothing for him.

Could we have re-signed him? Sure, that's a possibility but I sure as shit don't want to be paying him 9x8 so we did what we could and moved on.

This org makes a decision on a player and then does the best they can based on that direction. See Hanafin, Lindholm, Rask, Faulk, Ned, Fox, Hamilton, TDA, etc.

It doesn't always work out perfect but at least they don't get burned over-committing or generally letting guys walk away without getting something in return. Obviously, Hamilton and others have walked in UFA but you're not going to be able to get assets out of every single situation if you want to give yourself the best shot at winning. Sometimes you take your shot while having the player on your team and when it's done you thank them for their service and keep on going.

 

[tarheelhockey]

All I said is he isn’t a reliable 30-40 goal scorer. Almost no one is, as your list suggests. He’s a goal scorer, that’s what he does and he’s damn good at it.

Curiously, you left out MaxPac out of this list even though he has 6 actual 30 goal seasons and 3 others he paced for 30. In his prime he did it 4 years in a row. Injuries have derailed him since but he had another 30 in Vegas two years ago and paced for it easily the last two years.

Edit:Tarasenko isn’t there either even though he scored 30+ 6 times in reality in 6 full seasons and not 5 times in 12. If we’re including numbers that are “close enough” to 30 and seasons on pace for 30 I’m guessing we can add another 10 or so players to your list.

The parameters for that list are Skinner’s 6 season of 28+, plus the current season’s pace which virtually guarantees a #7.

I noticed Pacioretty and Tarasenko. Pacioretty has 6 but he is obviously not going to hit #7. Tarasenko’s 9-in-31 pace this season makes it unlikely he hits #7. I added Pavelski in good faith because he’s on pace for 27.

No, we cannot add another 10 or so. The three players I just mentioned are the only borderline cases. So it’s just the 9 franchise players, plus 4 high-end complementary guys including Skinner.

 

[cptjeff]

Could we/Should we have gotten more for Skins? Yeah, probably but we were basically just negotiating with one team due to Skinner's NTC. He was ONLY going to a team close to Toronto and the Leafs didn't need him or have space.

So, we could have kept him for a year and then he likely walks and goes to Buffalo or Ottawa maybe and we get nothing for him.

Skinner had a 40 goal season that year. 40. Scoring 40 and then walking is a far more valuble outcome than the return than we got.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Skinner had a 40 goal season that year. 40. Scoring 40 and then walking is a far more valuble outcome than the return than we got.

I mean if we're gonna use hindsight here would you rather have Skinner score 40 goals and walk (we're almost certainly still not beating the Bruins in the ECF) or have Pyotr and Nikishkin?

And if we're being honest, Skinner probably doesn't score 40 with us because he wasn't going to be playing along side Eichel.

I'll take what we got.

 

[bleedgreen]

You think we shouldve paid him 72 million dollars? He only wanted to be traded to a couple of places so we got the best we could. I dont see the issue here.

No. I don’t.

Im not complaining about the trade. I’m not complaining about anything. I replied to Svechhammers post that I didn’t agree with. That’s it.

 

[Joe McGrath]

The parameters for that list are Skinner’s 6 season of 28+, plus the current season’s pace which virtually guarantees a #7.

I noticed Pacioretty and Tarasenko. Pacioretty has 6 but he is obviously not going to hit #7. Tarasenko’s 9-in-31 pace this season makes it unlikely he hits #7. I added Pavelski in good faith because he’s on pace for 27.

No, we cannot add another 10 or so. The three players I just mentioned are the only borderline cases. So it’s just the 9 franchise players, plus 4 high-end complementary guys including Skinner.

Kessel had 6, a season with 27 and a lockout shortened season he paced for 35.

All of this is irrelevant to my original point that Skinner wasn’t a RELIABLE 30+ goal scorer because half the time he didn’t score 30+ goals.

If you told me the Hurricanes were a reliable playoff qualifier and they made the playoffs 6/12 years I’d think you were crazy.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

I wish every other team in the conference had a Jeff Skinner with an 8x9 contract.

Great goal scorer. Exciting to watch. Quiet in the playoffs.

Yeah, we're only pay half that for our 8 year boat anchor!

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

In the holiday spirit, this thread is the gift that keeps on giving.

Unfortunately, the gift is like a stale fruit cake.

 

[Joe McGrath]

In the holiday spirit, this thread is the gift that keeps on giving.

Unfortunately, the gift is like a stale fruit cake.

My semantics pissing contest with Tar Heel is very important

 

[tarheelhockey]

Kessel had 6, a season with 27 and a lockout shortened season he paced for 35.

That started 2 years before Skinner was even drafted.

All of this is irrelevant to my original point that Skinner wasn’t a RELIABLE 30+ goal scorer because half the time he didn’t score 30+ goals.

If you told me the Hurricanes were a reliable playoff qualifier and they made the playoffs 6/12 years I’d think you were crazy.

There are like 5 guys in the entire NHL who score 30 goals every single year over that kind of timeframe. That’s your Matthews class of goal scorer. Nobody is talking about that type of player.

Skinner is as reliable of a 30 goal scorer as it gets without being a borderline HHOF candidate, does that work for you?

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

My semantics pissing contest with Tar Heel is very important

Trust me from experience, he'll wear you down. I've always considered myself an expert at semantic pissing contests, but I can't hold a candle to Tarheel. When he's on the same side of your argument, it's a joy to watch. When he's on the opposite side, it's like playing against Brad Marchand.

 

[Joe McGrath]

That started 2 years before Skinner was even drafted.



There are like 5 guys in the entire NHL who score 30 goals every single year over that kind of timeframe. That’s your Matthews class of goal scorer. Nobody is talking about that type of player.

Skinner is as reliable of a 30 goal scorer as it gets without being a borderline HHOF candidate, does that work for you?

I don’t think so because you’re missing the point. Someone who is actually reliable 30+ goal scorer IS a HHOF candidate. Skinner isn’t because every other year he scored less than 30 goals. I think we can agree that he’s one of the better goal scorers of this era in aggregate but I’m arguing that reliability isn’t his strong suit.

 

[Negan4Coach]

He was maybe our best goal scorer ever, and we struggled with offensive depth during most of his career.

No chemistry? Weak. He had chemistry with both Erik Cole and the Finns, as well Rask. He has pretty damn good chemistry with Thompson and Tuch….not to mention Eichel. Play the guy with the right people and he’s just fine.

He never made the playoffs? Weak. We sucked his whole time here. He’s a winger, none of that is on him. We traded him to the other worst team in the league. He’s a huge part of the upswing.

Coaching staff wanting him off? Not buying it. I think the contract is the only reason he’s gone, just like every single other fa player that’s moved on since. Ownership wanted to make a change, make people believe everything was going to be different under them. New attitudes. They used him in part to create this. As they used Lindy and Hanifin who were both ridiculously maligned for “not wanting to win” because they wouldn’t sign under value deals. Look how we negotiate the whole time since….Skinner had an up and down career here that needed and clearly wanted a new start. He wasn’t staying no matter what from either way. We used him to begin the changes. The story was framed the way it was.

To continue that theme we did things like say only hard working fellas like Foegele are going to make this team now and pretended he did that when he had already made the team late in the season before and we had multiple spots open. He couldn’t not make the team without us spending more money. He didn’t play that well in preseason.

But I digress. The hardest line to read in your post is the last one. Very few people defend Jeff Skinner on this board. No one glosses over a single wart. They get amplified here the loudest.

We got the best deal we could get, and we’re getting lucky with the picks. Good enough. I was happy he was gone for his sake, and I’m very happy for him this year as he’s always seemed like a very good human being who works as hard if not harder than most to be a good player. He deserves success and I hope he gets it.

Thanks for writing this. Agree 100%.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Coaching staff wanting him off? Not buying it

Agree with your other points, but iirc Brind'amour or Waddell decided Skinner had to go when they won the 2nd oa and drafted Svechnikov. Since (in their view) there were now two defensively questionable wingers who needed sheltering. And only one was in the long term plans.

But I took that as why they pulled the trigger on a "get this guy away from the team" deal at the end of the offseason, not why they moved on, which I think was inevitable.

Good for Skinner for finding success in Buffalo.

Anyway my main takeaway is it's been 4 years and I remember one particular Buffalo fan who was arguing that Skinner's 50 goal ler year pace in the first half of the 18-19 season was his "standard" and who cares about things like "on ice shooting percentage" and "regression" and "Skinner's career averages". And I'm still salty because site rules prevent specific call outs of posters.

 

[LostInaLostWorld]

Good for Skins. Good for us. Blah, blah, blah.

 

[bleedgreen]

Agree with your other points, but iirc Brind'amour or Waddell decided Skinner had to go when they won the 2nd oa and drafted Svechnikov. Since (in their view) there were now two defensively questionable wingers who needed sheltering. And only one was in the long term plans.

But I took that as why they pulled the trigger on a "get this guy away from the team" deal at the end of the offseason, not why they moved on, which I think was inevitable.

Good for Skinner for finding success in Buffalo.

Anyway my main takeaway is it's been 4 years and I remember one particular Buffalo fan who was arguing that Skinner's 50 goal ler year pace in the first half of the 18-19 season was his "standard" and who cares about things like "on ice shooting percentage" and "regression" and "Skinner's career averages". And I'm still salty because site rules prevent specific call outs of posters.

I guess the main issue I’d have with what your saying is that you’re implying they would’ve signed Skinner if they didn’t get Svech? I don’t believe that, I don’t think there’s any way he would’ve been re signed. If I’m misunderstanding my mistake.

 

[sabremike]

HE HAS BEEN SAVED!!!!!!!!!!

 

[tarheelhockey]

I don’t think so because you’re missing the point. Someone who is actually reliable 30+ goal scorer IS a HHOF candidate. Skinner isn’t because every other year he scored less than 30 goals. I think we can agree that he’s one of the better goal scorers of this era in aggregate but I’m arguing that reliability isn’t his strong suit.

You’re framing this as a semantics argument, but it’s not semantics… it’s just numbers.

In the statistical category we’re talking about, only 10 players in the NHL have matched or exceeded Skinner. If you’re dead set on including Patches and Kessel and Tarasenko, go ahead… that’s 13 comparables among the 32 teams.

Using even the more generous framework, that leaves Skinner in the top 1/2 of 1% of players during this timeframe, in terms of putting together those big goal scoring seasons.

I think it’s fair to call someone “reliable” if they are more reliable than 99.5% of their peers… if you disagree, if you think that still makes him unreliable, fine. The numbers stay the same regardless of the semantic spin.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Trust me from experience, he'll wear you down. I've always considered myself an expert at semantic pissing contests, but I can't hold a candle to Tarheel. When he's on the same side of your argument, it's a joy to watch. When he's on the opposite side, it's like playing against Brad Marchand.

I wouldn’t go around holding candles during a pissing contest. That’s just me, though.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Trust me from experience, he'll wear you down. I've always considered myself an expert at semantic pissing contests, but I can't hold a candle to Tarheel. When he's on the same side of your argument, it's a joy to watch. When he's on the opposite side, it's like playing against Brad Marchand.

C’mere you