Yeah that is fair.
I realise Botts almost HAD to extend Skinner no matter what - but that deal is going to be the one causing us most problems down the road imo.
I take Couture 10/10 times over him on what are essentially very similar contracts.
Sabres fans have talked themselves into a mental bind on what they "had" to do with Skinner. They can't think beyond the "right now" and can't handle a "what if" more complicated than what if Skinner-or-nothing.
In general:
You trade for a streaky, one-dimensional UFA goal scorer who's good for 50-60 points a year. [Replace this with any secondary supporting piece at another position]
You play him with your franchise center and, wow, you get him tracking a 50-goal pace around midseason. [Replace with any guy playing way above his grade in his UFA season]
He demands one of the top salaries in the league to stay for a term that takes him into his mid-30s.
Conventional wisdom is you trade him at the deadline for more than you bought him for and congratulate yourself on a net-value set of moves. We all were able to predict this when they made the trade, but by the time we got used to him in the lineup, it was "unthinkable" that they might not give him the moon to stay.
The idea that the Sabres had no other choice requires you to accept so many precepts that are really just about fan service disguised as wisdom. I'd rather have had multiple additional high picks and nine million dollars of space last summer than Jeff Skinner for the next eight years, even if it takes a little imagination to think of what a GM might do with that.