Are the Sabres better off without Skinner?

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

Just curious what y’all think- I’m convinced it was simply a cost cutting move, and somehow a lot of Sabres fans have bought into the scapegoating of Skinner, but whatever- dude’s gone, replaced by Zucker. From what you’ve seen, is he really that bad defensively as to be of negative value? Sabres are 12 mil below the cap with all core pieces signed, so it’s tough to make the money argument- at worst the move coulda been made later, but again, I’m biased.

Tl;dr- are the Sabres better without Skinner?

Click to read more...

 

[Three On Zero]

Too early to tell, the buy out was a bit of a head scratcher considering where the Sabres are though

 

[sr edler]

Getting rid of empty calories players like Skinner and Savoie, when you're already loaded with other offensive prospects, seems like a very reasonable move, yes.

It's clear they've chosen a bit of a different approach this year building that 4th line with Malenstyn, Kubel and Lafferty.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Skinner’s an easy scapegoat for poorly constructed teams needing a reboot. It’s happened to him twice now.

The thing is, everyone has always known exactly what he is and he has delivered on exactly that. No he’s not bad enough defensively to make any real difference, certainly not any more than your typical one-way winger. It’s just an easy narrative to sell on a player who has virtually no defensive responsibility in the first place.

You want to know what went wrong in Carolina and then Buffalo, look at the core players who were supposed to be dominating the middle of the ice, your centers, your top pair D, your goalies. Out of 82 games, how many times did Skinner’s team have the advantage in those areas? The story of those positions gets swept under the rug to scapegoat a guy whose job was to score goals and did that effectively.

 

[Bouboumaster]

Skinner is a good player but his contract was too much