Buffalo San Jose | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League

Buffalo San Jose

dkollidas

Registered User
Nov 18, 2010
3,848
586
There’s been talk about Skinner not being a fit with Lindy, and a buyout being under consideration.

Couture has been injured almost all year and might not return to play hockey, period.


To Buffalo:
C- Logan Couture

To San Jose:
LW- Jeff Skinner

-If Couture returns he’s a leader and bottom six player for Buffalo. If not he’s LTIR’ed and they can use all that cap space.

-San Jose gets a 25-35 goal scorer who adds some speed and still probably has a couple decent years of production left.

-does either side need to retain any money?

-any word on couture coming back next year (I’ve looked but haven’t found much).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jacob582
There’s been talk about Skinner not being a fit with Lindy, and a buyout being under consideration.

Couture has been injured almost all year and might not return to play hockey, period.


To Buffalo:
C- Logan Couture

To San Jose:
LW- Jeff Skinner

-If Couture returns he’s a leader and bottom six player for Buffalo. If not he’s LTIR’ed and they can use all that cap space.

-San Jose gets a 25-35 goal scorer who adds some speed and still probably has a couple decent years of production left.

-does either side need to retain any money?

-any word on couture coming back next year (I’ve looked but haven’t found much).

San Jose can't retain, they are using all three slots right now.

Couture has a three-team trade list - three teams he would accept a trade to - and Skinner has a full NMC.

Then there is the issue of Couture's ankle injuries and that he may be shot as a player.
 
With Couture, there are two possibilities:

1) He returns, probably not the same player he once was, but he could still provide leadership and pop 20 goals and play on the wing of someone like Will Smith to help ease him into an NHL center role by helping out defensively and on face-offs.

2) He LITRetires because of his injuries.

Both options are much, much more attractive to me as a Sharks fan than moving him for Skinner, who doesn’t seem interested in being a mentor or playing competitive hockey. And that’s not taking into account Skinner’s NMC, which I’m assuming would make this a non-starter.
 
San Jose can't retain, they are using all three slots right now.

Couture has a three-team trade list - three teams he would accept a trade to - and Skinner has a full NMC.

Then there is the issue of Couture's ankle injuries and that he may be shot as a player.
I assume Buffalo would be one of very few places Couture would accept a trade to. I'm not really interested in Skinner though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: themelkman
Couture will cost futures or he won’t be traded. It’s probably in the Sharks best interests to hold onto him until Burns’ retention expires after next season and we can see if Couture is healthy. No way will the Sharks have interest in Skinner and no way Skinner waives his nmc for SJ.
 
Half of buffalo fans wants to buy out skinner and pay him to not play for us just for the upcoming needed cap space. Sharks fans will quickly want to do the same. The Sabres get LTIR protection....the sharks don't. Cant see that going over well....
 
Honestly, a lot of discussions involving contract term seem to indicate that speakers remember the original length of the contract and simply never account for the passage of time since that date and don't bother to just look it up.
I see this all the time with Josh Anderson - the total contract length freaks people out, but it's down to 3 years, finishing when he's 31. Overpaid for what he delivers? For sure. But contract length shouldn't be a subject of discussion anymore.
 
I see this all the time with Josh Anderson - the total contract length freaks people out, but it's down to 3 years, finishing when he's 31. Overpaid for what he delivers? For sure. But contract length shouldn't be a subject of discussion anymore.

lol he’s 34 and he played 6 games last season, in which he scored 1 point. Any number larger than 0 is too many years for that contract.

If he has a crazy good bounce back year, maybe the Sharks can salvage some value next summer, but it’s pretty obviously not a viable option now.
 
lol he’s 34 and he played 6 games last season, in which he scored 1 point. Any number larger than 0 is too many years for that contract.

If he has a crazy good bounce back year, maybe the Sharks can salvage some value next summer, but it’s pretty obviously not a viable option now.
And Skinner is 31, owed $9.5m a year for the next 3yrs, and has posted seasons of 23, 14, and 46 pts in three of his last 5 years (while being an empty-calorie player at the best of times).

This proposal is not "salvaging some value". Skinner is one of the most unappealing assets in the entire league, and I promise you that more teams would want Couture than Skinner. I say this as someone who straight up dislikes Couture.
 
And Skinner is 31, owed $9.5m a year for the next 3yrs, and has posted seasons of 23, 14, and 46 pts in three of his last 5 years (while being an empty-calorie player at the best of times).

This proposal is not "salvaging some value". Skinner is one of the most unappealing assets in the entire league, and I promise you that more teams would want Couture than Skinner. I say this as someone who straight up dislikes Couture.

Reaching back for the 2 seasons Krueger was bouncing Skinner between the 4th line and the press box is a pretty disingenuous way to make an argument. Skinner is obviously a flawed player, but he’s consistently been that player his whole career with virtually no injury concerns since he was a teenager.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KrakenSabresMike
Reaching back for the 2 seasons Krueger was bouncing Skinner between the 4th line and the press box is a pretty disingenuous way to make an argument. Skinner is obviously a flawed player, but he’s consistently been that player his whole career with virtually no injury concerns since he was a teenager.
Theres nothing disingenuous about it at all lol, he's had like 5 other 30 or 40 point seasons in his career. He just scored 46 points, this last season was far more representative of his career than his 80 point season and more representative than his 30+ goal, 60+ point seasons. Do I think he's a 20 point player? No. But if you are counting on him for more than 25 goals and 50 points, you are setting yourself up to be disappointed.

He has never been on a good team and, despite that, has rarely been an important player for a team.

He is not a player that most teams want and he is paid like a superstar.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Ad

Ad