Player Discussion Jeff Skinner - Part II

[OkimLom]

I’m all for questioning the idea of paying Skinner huge based on this year and the inherent risk of that.

But if your threshold is 8 million dollars, you’re nuts. I’d dance to press conference if he would take 8 a year. That’s pretty much in line with what a first line ufa costs.

Please let it be 8 a year.

Where did I say it was threshold and I would deny? I said so wasn’t sure, meaning I don’t have the opinion I think there’s enough information to be so sure $8 million is a good investment in the type of player Jeff is.

For the record, my hardline is $9+ million is a big no from me.

 

[Jim Bob]

Your not just paying for his goals though. Your paying for the chemistry with your franchise player. He'll get 8 + for sure, and both Botts and Jack will be happy he takes it.

That is a dumb reason to overpay a guy based off of expected production.

Skinner is a 30g 55pt player over his career.

That is likely to be closer to his production over the life of his next contract than the 52g 75pt pace he is on today.

It's funny how so many people were against Reinhart getting a big extension because he's only going to be a 55 to 60 point guy, yet that doesn't seem to be a concern at all with Skinner.

Paying a guy more than he is worth based on production is how you get contracts like Okposo and Moulson.

Pay Skinner like a 30g 55pt player that is hitting UFA and the contract probably won't be regrettable over the long run.

Pay him like a 52g 75pt guy and you will. Or, overpay him because it will make Jack happy and the same thing will happen.

 

[Jim Bob]

Yes, Skinner will be *overpaid*. But will he be overpaid to the degree of Okposo and Moulson?

And people are asking about Botts timeline.

Seeing as how Skinner might get in the $9 to 10M range, he might end up that overpaid because he will be getting much more than either of them got.

 

[Gordo21]

Seeing as how Skinner might get in the $9 to 10M range, he might end up that overpaid because he will be getting much more than either of them got.

Do you think the word Egregious could be used in the same context?

 

[Yatzhee]

That is a dumb reason to overpay a guy based off of expected production.

Skinner is a 30g 55pt player over his career.

That is likely to be closer to his production over the life of his next contract than the 52g 75pt pace he is on today.

It's funny how so many people were against Reinhart getting a big extension because he's only going to be a 55 to 60 point guy, yet that doesn't seem to be a concern at all with Skinner.

Paying a guy more than he is worth based on production is how you get contracts like Okposo and Moulson.

Pay Skinner like a 30g 55pt player that is hitting UFA and the contract probably won't be regrettable over the long run.

Pay him like a 52g 75pt guy and you will. Or, overpay him because it will make Jack happy and the same thing will happen.

1. I wasn't one of those against a long term deal with Reinhart. As I've continually stated, Botterill had his reasons for the bridge deal.
2. Implying Jeff Skinner falls remotely in to the Okposo/Moulson category is not just hilarious at best, it's down right criminal given "THE LACK OF CHEMISTRY" from those 2 with your franchise player as opposed to Skinner.
3. If you attempt to pay Skinner as a 30g 55pt player that is hitting UFA, you don't sign Skinner. Have fun continuing to search for that elusive winger for Jack.
4. Thank god Botterill is the GM.

 

[sabrebuild]

Where did I say it was threshold and I would deny? I said so wasn’t sure, meaning I don’t have the opinion I think there’s enough information to be so sure $8 million is a good investment in the type of player Jeff is.

For the record, my hardline is $9+ million is a big no from me.

My apologies if I overemphasized your number, I just assumed it was a number that you were not comfortable with.

As to information, even without this year’s explosion, he was comfortably in the range to get more than Kane by skill or simply another year into the market.

With his year to date and a fair bet for regression to only bring him to a low thirties scorer, 8 million will be acceptable.

You got your 1C and 1D, just add talented players.

 

[sabremike]

I still have no idea why anyone would think letting a real good player whose preference seems to be to stay walk over a $1 million overpayment is smart. The vast majority of NMC's in the league have us as one of the"no go" teams. Getting good players to want to come here is a challenge, so when we totally luck into one I think it's a good idea to keep him.

 

[Yatzhee]

I still have no idea why anyone would think letting a real good player whose preference seems to be to stay walk over a $1 million overpayment is smart. The vast majority of NMC's in the league have us as one of the"no go" teams. Getting good players to want to come here is a challenge, so when we totally luck into one I think it's a good idea to keep him.

Skinner already had an NTC, so I don't believe luck had anything to do with him coming here. I think he wanted to come here or Toronto, and with Toronto's future cap situation, he chose here. I believe he wanted to come closer to home, but to also play with a center that could elevate his game, and that appears to have happened here.
But overall, I agree with your statement.

 

[sabremike]

Skinner already had an NTC, so I don't believe luck had anything to do with him coming here. I think he wanted to come here or Toronto, and with Toronto's future cap situation, he chose here. I believe he wanted to come closer to home, but to also play with a center that could elevate his game, and that appears to have happened here.
But overall, I agree with your statement.

To clarify: by luck I mean having him fall into our laps for a bag of used pucks.

 

[hizzoner]

Sabres can offer him an 8th year, playing closer to home, good line mates and an up and coming team with solid ownership and a great fanbase. I do not think it is asking too much for him to take all that into consideration when negotiating an extension. I am sold on his ability as a top first line winger but he is NOT generational or elite and should not be paid as such. With this team and the line he is on I would expect 40 goals and 75-80 points. 8 years at $8m to $8.5 would be a very generous contract and one I think the Sabres could live with although even that might be a slight stretch.

 

[Gordo21]

Sabres can offer him an 8th year, playing closer to home, good line mates and an up and coming team with solid ownership and a great fanbase. I do not think it is asking too much for him to take all that into consideration when negotiating an extension. I am sold on his ability as a top first line winger but he is NOT generational or elite and should not be paid as such. With this team and the line he is on I would expect 40 goals and 75-80 points. 8 years at $8m to $8.5 would be a very generous contract and one I think the Sabres could live with although even that might be a slight stretch.

like

 

[Yatzhee]

Sabres can offer him an 8th year, playing closer to home, good line mates and an up and coming team with solid ownership and a great fanbase. I do not think it is asking too much for him to take all that into consideration when negotiating an extension. I am sold on his ability as a top first line winger but he is NOT generational or elite and should not be paid as such. With this team and the line he is on I would expect 40 goals and 75-80 points. 8 years at $8m to $8.5 would be a very generous contract and one I think the Sabres could live with although even that might be a slight stretch.

And that is reasonable. The league however, does not exist in a bubble. Specifically the salary cap. Given the coming addition of Seattle combined with a reasonable upward trend on the cap, If for example he signs an 8x8.5 contract, year 4 salary cap will most likely be at or around 86 / 88 mil a season post new cba. That is very manageable.

 

[Icicle]

That is a dumb reason to overpay a guy based off of expected production.

Skinner is a 30g 55pt player over his career.

That is likely to be closer to his production over the life of his next contract than the 52g 75pt pace he is on today.

It's funny how so many people were against Reinhart getting a big extension because he's only going to be a 55 to 60 point guy, yet that doesn't seem to be a concern at all with Skinner.

Paying a guy more than he is worth based on production is how you get contracts like Okposo and Moulson.

Pay Skinner like a 30g 55pt player that is hitting UFA and the contract probably won't be regrettable over the long run.

Pay him like a 52g 75pt guy and you will. Or, overpay him because it will make Jack happy and the same thing will happen.

If you're confused why Reinhart and Skinner aren't going to be paid the same because 'pointzz', then maybe you need to change your criteria for forming opinions. They aren't going to get paid anywhere close to the same.

 

[Jim Bob]

If you're confused why Reinhart and Skinner aren't going to be paid the same because 'pointzz', then maybe you need to change your criteria for forming opinions. They aren't going to get paid anywhere close to the same.

I understand why.

I also am amused at some of the arguments that are pro-Skinner and anti-Reinhart.

My favorite one of late is that chemistry with Jack is being held against Reinhart (i.e. he's only productive because of Eichel) and it is also being used as a reason to overpay Skinner (i.e. Skinner has this amazing chemistry with Jack so overpay him).

 

[sufferer]

He'll do 8yr/$62mil because he loves being a Sabre

 

[Jim Bob]

He'll do 8yr/$62mil because he loves being a Sabre

I would be pleasantly surprised if that is the extension he signs.

 

[Icicle]

I understand why.

I also am amused at some of the arguments that are pro-Skinner and anti-Reinhart.

My favorite one of late is that chemistry with Jack is being held against Reinhart (i.e. he's only productive because of Eichel) and it is also being used as a reason to overpay Skinner (i.e. Skinner has this amazing chemistry with Jack so overpay him).

Eichel and Reinhart really don't have good chemistry-- the alternatives are just abysmal or can't keep up in the league anymore. Eichel, after multiple years of playing with bad players that held him back, finally found his dance with Skinner. Yes, you pay to keep that.

 

[Reddawg]

I would be pleasantly surprised if that is the extension he signs.

Happily stunned is the adjectives I would use.

 

[joshjull]

That is a dumb reason to overpay a guy based off of expected production.

Skinner is a 30g 55pt player over his career.

That is likely to be closer to his production over the life of his next contract than the 52g 75pt pace he is on today.

It's funny how so many people were against Reinhart getting a big extension because he's only going to be a 55 to 60 point guy, yet that doesn't seem to be a concern at all with Skinner.

Paying a guy more than he is worth based on production is how you get contracts like Okposo and Moulson.

Pay Skinner like a 30g 55pt player that is hitting UFA and the contract probably won't be regrettable over the long run.

Pay him like a 52g 75pt guy and you will. Or, overpay him because it will make Jack happy and the same thing will happen.

Before becoming a Sabre Skinner was already a 30g 55pt player, as you yourself pointed out. He was one of the most prolific ES goal scorers. He had already established himself as a very good top 6 goal scoring winger. Playing with Jack has taken Skinner , by your own admission, to being an elite 50g 70pt pace winger. So far this year anyway.

I agree with you that it’s probably not sustainable over any deal he signs. But it’s also reasonable to assume he won’t simple drop back to “just” being a 30g 55pt player if he plays with Jack going forward. The truth lies in between. I think it’s reasonable to assume 35-40 goals a year with Jack. Unless you’re going to argue Jack has next to no impact on Skinner. That he just happens to be out there with him.

I say “just”a 30 goal scorer because 30 goal scorers don’t exactly grow on trees. Yet you seem to be trying to diminish that goal scorer status in order to compare him to Sam for arguments sake. As if the potential production of Sam (55-60pts) debated in his contract talk has any relevance to the established production Skinner already has. It’s the difference between might be something and is something.

Part of Skinner’s deal will be based on what he’s already established himself as in this league. Which has pretty good value by itself. Part will be based on his potential with Jack.

I can live with the chance that the worst outcome you put forth (of Skinner “just” being a 30 goal scorer with 9+ salary) in order to possibly get a few seasons of 40+ goals. Worth it in my book. I’d add it’s ridiculous you’re attempting to compare this worst case to the Moulson/Okposo deals.

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

Remember when very few of us were willing to give Evander Kane 7 x 7? He has 30 goals as a Shark already and has only played 69 games FYI. Crazy how that works when you put talent around talent.

Skinner is better then Kane. Kane signed his deal a year before Skinner would. 8 x 8 is fair for Skinner just like 7 x 7 was fair for Kane.

By the time Skinner would sign his deal he would be at a 40-50 goal pace, not a 60+ one. He will sign closer to 8 then 9.

Anyone think the Sharks are still upset paying a 30+ goal scorer 7 mil and giving up a late 1st? Then why should we be upset about paying ~8 mil and giving up less then a 1st?

 

[DJN21]

Before becoming a Sabre Skinner was already a 30g 55pt player, as you yourself pointed out. He was one of the most prolific ES goal scorers. He had already established himself as a very good top 6 goal scoring winger. Playing with Jack has taken Skinner , by your own admission, to being an elite 50g 70pt pace winger. So far this year anyway.

I agree with you that it’s probably not sustainable over any deal he signs. But it’s also reasonable to assume he won’t simple drop back to “just” being a 30g 55pt player if he plays with Jack going forward. The truth lies in between. I think it’s reasonable to assume 35-40 goals a year with Jack. Unless you’re going to argue Jack has next to no impact on Skinner. That he just happens to be out there with him.

I say “just”a 30 goal scorer because 30 goal scorers don’t exactly grow on trees. Yet you seem to be trying to diminish that goal scorer status in order to compare him to Sam for arguments sake. As if the potential production of Sam (55-60pts) debated in his contract talk has any relevance to the established production Skinner already has. It’s the difference between might be something and is something.

Part of Skinner’s deal will be based on what he’s already established himself as in this league. Which has pretty good value by itself. Part will be based on his potential with Jack.

I can live with the chance that the worst outcome you put forth (of Skinner “just” being a 30 goal scorer with 9+ salary) in order to possibly get a few seasons of 40+ goals. Worth it in my book. I’d add it’s ridiculous you’re attempting to compare this worst case to the Moulson/Okposo deals.

I don't disagree with any of this so please don't assume this is an attack but goal scoring going up is gonna make that "30 goal scorer" narrative a bit watered down as this year and next move forward. It's only fair from a negotiation stand point to point that out when regarding skinner on a long term deal.

 

[ZZamboni]

Can we all at least agree with the statement ....

Jeff Skinner will sign a 7 or 8 year deal. Nothing less.

 

[Jim Bob]

I don't disagree with any of this so please don't assume this is an attack but goal scoring going up is gonna make that "30 goal scorer" narrative a bit watered down as this year and next move forward. It's only fair from a negotiation stand point to point that out when regarding skinner on a long term deal.

I do believe that the fact that scoring is up league-wide is a fact that is being conveniently left out of this conversation.

As an example, Eichel is currently t-16th in the NHL in PPG (among players with at least 30gp) at 1.16 PPG.

Last season, Eichel was t-29th with 0.96 PPG. T-16th was at 1.05 PPG.

So, Eichel is really about 0.09 PPG better this year than last year. Even if you attribute all of that to Skinner, is that amazing chemistry?

 

[Jim Bob]

I can live with the chance that the worst outcome you put forth (of Skinner “just” being a 30 goal scorer with 9+ salary) in order to possibly get a few seasons of 40+ goals. Worth it in my book. I’d add it’s ridiculous you’re attempting to compare this worst case to the Moulson/Okposo deals.

I can live with Skinner in the $8.0-8.5M range.

Skinner at $9M+ when he is likely to 60 point or less player over the course of the extension is something that just looks to me to be a deal that will be quite the anchor long before it's over.

Overpaying a guy based on one outlier season rarely ends well for the team signing the contract.

 

[joshjull]

I don't disagree with any of this so please don't assume this is an attack but goal scoring going up is gonna make that "30 goal scorer" narrative a bit watered down as this year and next move forward. It's only fair from a negotiation stand point to point that out when regarding skinner on a long term deal.

Now we’re going with....... well the league will probably go up in scoring, so a 30 goal scorer won’t mean as much.

If a player was able to establish himself as 30 goal scorer when it was harder to score. Why wouldn’t he be able to score more than that when it’s easier to score? Why wouldn’t his baseline go up as well? That’s some odd logic on your part.