Zamboni Posted February 2, 2021 Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 Every team to more or less of a degree, have one or two “albatross” contracts they are dealing with. Between active players, buyouts, LTIR, or salary retention via trades. Skinner and Okposo are ours and it stings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted February 2, 2021 Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 38 minutes ago, Zamboni said: Every team to more or less of a degree, have one or two “albatross” contracts they are dealing with. Between active players, buyouts, LTIR, or salary retention via trades. Skinner and Okposo are ours and it stings. Is any team taking a cap hit of $15 mil and getting so little production out of their duo, like the Sabres are with Skinner and Okposo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamboni Posted February 2, 2021 Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 5 minutes ago, LabattBlue said: Is any team taking a cap hit of $15 mil and getting so little production out of their duo, like the Sabres are with Skinner and Okposo? Good question. I don’t know that without deep diving into every teams stats and cap finances. I don’t have the energy to do that research 😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 2, 2021 Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 41 minutes ago, LabattBlue said: Is any team taking a cap hit of $15 mil and getting so little production out of their duo, like the Sabres are with Skinner and Okposo? Probably but none of those teams are good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#freejame Posted February 2, 2021 Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 1 minute ago, LGR4GM said: Probably but none of those teams are good. But I thought we were good? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drag0nDan Posted February 2, 2021 Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, LabattBlue said: Is any team taking a cap hit of $15 mil and getting so little production out of their duo, like the Sabres are with Skinner and Okposo? Based on cap hits? Seabrook/Toews (not sure on toews LTIR cap hit), Shattenkirk/Lundqvist/Deangelo I get not wanting to have like 8 buyouts on the books - but the 800K for cody hodgson isn't exactly hamstringing the team at the moment. This: https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout-calculator/kyle-okposo looks appealing to me, if he doesn't hit permanent LTIR. Lower cap hits for 2 years and 2 years with a million dollar charge that replaces the 800K for hodgson. Get it done this offseason, the guy can't play. Skinner on the other hand has a fair amount of years left so its pretty much impossible to trade/buy out. He's still playing alright, he's still creative - he's just not finding the net at the moment. Edited February 2, 2021 by Drag0nDan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted February 2, 2021 Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 5 hours ago, #freejame said: But didn’t you hear, the fans would have revolted if we didn’t re-sign him! They would have. That's very simple to understand. He had the Sabres over a barrel. walk away and get blasted by the fans for giving up on a 40 goal scorer that you acquired for peanuts or pay him $9MM. take it or leave it.. and the Sabres took it because the fans very much would have blasted ownership. There would be arguments about how they could get him for less. Why? Why would he accept less? It was $9MM or nothing... As for teams that have money tied up in crap that's not helping them win? I posted elsewhere. This was posted on Twitter the other day. The Sharks.. in last place. They have: Karlson, 30, for 7 x $11.5M Burns, 35, for 5 x $8M Vlasic, 33, 6 x $7M Jones, 31, for 4 x $5.75M Couture, 31, for 7 x $8M Kane, 29, for 5 x $7M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted February 2, 2021 Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 5 minutes ago, LTS said: They would have. That's very simple to understand. He had the Sabres over a barrel. walk away and get blasted by the fans for giving up on a 40 goal scorer that you acquired for peanuts or pay him $9MM. take it or leave it.. and the Sabres took it because the fans very much would have blasted ownership. There would be arguments about how they could get him for less. Why? Why would he accept less? It was $9MM or nothing... I highly doubt that any other team was prepared to offer $9 million for Jeff Skinner. If that was the choice, the correct response was nothing. Botterill and Pegula got bent over and pandered their way into perhaps the worst decision this franchise has made in years. Yes, worse than Nylander, or Leino, or even trading Ryan O'Reilly. 18 goals in his last 94 games. seven more years at $9 million. My god. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted February 2, 2021 Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 17 minutes ago, dudacek said: I highly doubt that any other team was prepared to offer $9 million for Jeff Skinner. If that was the choice, the correct response was nothing. Botterill and Pegula got bent over and pandered their way into perhaps the worst decision this franchise has made in years. Yes, worse than Nylander, or Leino, or even trading Ryan O'Reilly. 18 goals in his last 94 games. seven more years at $9 million. My god. Wasn't Botts quoted as saying he was against long term/big money deals? If so, did he want to pass on Skinner and let him walk, and the Pegula's overruled him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#freejame Posted February 2, 2021 Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 38 minutes ago, LTS said: They would have. That's very simple to understand. He had the Sabres over a barrel. walk away and get blasted by the fans for giving up on a 40 goal scorer that you acquired for peanuts or pay him $9MM. take it or leave it.. and the Sabres took it because the fans very much would have blasted ownership. There would be arguments about how they could get him for less. Why? Why would he accept less? It was $9MM or nothing... As for teams that have money tied up in crap that's not helping them win? I posted elsewhere. This was posted on Twitter the other day. The Sharks.. in last place. They have: Karlson, 30, for 7 x $11.5M Burns, 35, for 5 x $8M Vlasic, 33, 6 x $7M Jones, 31, for 4 x $5.75M Couture, 31, for 7 x $8M Kane, 29, for 5 x $7M The fans are already in revolt. The overwhelming majority of people clamoring to keep Skinner were of the more casual variety anyway. As it was pointed out yesterday, those fans come and go with the tides and I bet they’re gone now anyway. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted February 2, 2021 Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 Deals like that don't happen anywhere without the owner's stamp of approval. It was reported Botterill had a distaste for long-term deals and was against the Eichel deal, but I've never seen anything specific about his feelings on the Skinner deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted February 2, 2021 Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 46 minutes ago, dudacek said: I highly doubt that any other team was prepared to offer $9 million for Jeff Skinner. If that was the choice, the correct response was nothing. Botterill and Pegula got bent over and pandered their way into perhaps the worst decision this franchise has made in years. Yes, worse than Nylander, or Leino, or even trading Ryan O'Reilly. 18 goals in his last 94 games. seven more years at $9 million. My god. I assume no other team was going to offer him that. But that doesn't matter to Jeff Skinner. He had an opportunity to put a price tag on the table and say, agree or I am gone. The worst decision was matching the Vanek contract in my opinion. Another one of those, you are doomed if you do and if you don't scenarios. Matching only prolonged the inevitable. 17 minutes ago, #freejame said: The fans are already in revolt. The overwhelming majority of people clamoring to keep Skinner were of the more casual variety anyway. As it was pointed out yesterday, those fans come and go with the tides and I bet they’re gone now anyway. I disagree. I think far more people would have been very upset about Skinner leaving. He's a marketable personality, with that great smile, and pointing at his teammates when they set him up for a goal. He appeared to be what they needed. I think those who really knew were okay not signing him, but those are the fans that stick around.. they are also a much smaller group and don't pay the bills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted February 2, 2021 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2021 10 minutes ago, LTS said: I disagree. I think far more people would have been very upset about Skinner leaving. He's a marketable personality, with that great smile, and pointing at his teammates when they set him up for a goal. He appeared to be what they needed. I think those who really knew were okay not signing him, but those are the fans that stick around.. they are also a much smaller group and don't pay the bills. You are correct. Go back and look at the thread on what his contract would be. Everyone wanted him back as Jack's LW. Everyone was hoping for less money (around 8 mil) and maybe less years, but most said Jbot had to choice but to keep him given our lack of depth at LW at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.