[News] Blues offersheet Broberg (2 yrs, $4.580 mil AAV) and Holloway (2 yrs, $2.290 mil AAV)

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

It is hilarious reading people say that these guys took discounts. No, Oil Stain, I haven't seen a single unbiased fan claim that they did (only Oiler fans and media). The only way that you can claim guy took a discount is if you know that he turned down more money elsewhere (or, for an RFA, took a short deal). We have NO evidence that any of these guys turned down more money elsewhere.

I mean we probably aren't going to find a signed affidavit from Mike Grier stating he offered more money if that is what you are looking for.

You can find a lot of stuff in the media if you do one google search though:

TSN reporter Chris Johnston said this about the deal though, “Jeff Skinner… he had lots of options. He’s playing on a one-year, $3 million contract. I know he’s getting paid by Buffalo. So he’s still he’s still doing pretty well, financially. He’s going [to Edmonton] clearly to win. I mean, he could sign for one year and $3 million in about 10 spots,” Johnston added.
https://dailyhive.com/toronto/jeff-skinner-leafs-oilers-contractoffers

Old Adam Proteau over at the Hockey News was suggesting the Red Wings should sign Skinner for $5 million before free agency started.
https://thehockeynews.com/news/three...r-jeff-skinner

Todd Panula over at BleedinBlue wanted Skinner for the Blues.
"If you could get a player that might net you upper 20's or even 30-plus goals for something in the $4-5 million range, you should jump on that. Skinner isn't the world's best defender, but he's responsible with the puck and doesn't often turn it over."
https://bleedinblue.com/posts/st-lou...r-01j1k3w4hm0x

Bob McKenzie:

Stephen
@DTSB_98
Bob McKenzie saying just now that two Canadian teams are interested in Jeff Skinner who could be had on a shorter term deal at a club friendly number.... Oilers and Leafs
1:25 PM · Jul 1, 2024
·
96.9K
Views

Skinner leaving money on the table seems pretty likely. This site is probably the only place on the internet you would get backlash against that statement.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Groot

Buffalo management - Even though we don't even need the cap space, we would rather pay Skinner not to play for us than have him around the team any longer. We can't even find a trade partner that will take him with retention.

Buffalo possibly could have traded him with retention. Skinner wouldn't waive his no-movement clause.


Lance Lysowski
@LLysowski
Jeff Skinner and his camp have not expressed a willingness to waive his no-move clause.

Reporter covering the Buffalo Sabres and NHL for
@TheBuffaloNews

[dino7c]

It totally helps my argument

Skinner on a good team isn't getting prime offensive situations. Who not on PP1 puts up big numbers in Edmonton?

Warren Foegele had 41 points last season
Skinner had 46 points being a tire fire in his own end

The upgrade is so immense I can't even!

Like are people actually suggesting he had offers for more than 3M and he thought "nah I will go to Edmonton this winter and not get any PP time for less money"

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Buffalo possibly could have traded him with retention. Skinner wouldn't waive his no-movement clause.


Lance Lysowski
@LLysowski
Jeff Skinner and his camp have not expressed a willingness to waive his no-move clause.

Reporter covering the Buffalo Sabres and NHL for
@TheBuffaloNews

Forcing a buy out, then having the option to sign another contract was a way more lucrative opportunity for Skinner. Of course he wouldn't waive.

It's hard to know if Skinner's current contract is a bargain or not without know what the other offers on the market were, if any. Players that get bought out tend to have some factor that is undesirable. And in Skinner's case, I don't think it was just his cap hit because it's not like they are worried about cap space right now. The dollar savings aren't fantastic either, and add to that the dead cap space they'll have for several years. The more prudent approach would have been to keep him for another season at least to see if he might eventually waive. There must have been something else pushing them to get rid of him.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Flames' situation at that time was worse, because there was no LTIR then, so injured players couldn't be replaced since the Flames were right up against the cap. If there had been LTIR, they could have used a full roster.

Well if they wanted to be without the player for 10 games or 24 days. The likelihood that the Oilers would shove any of their actual good players on LTIR when they do not have a long term injury is very unlikely. But they could do that with Derek Ryan or something if he got injured. Once they are on LTIR and the Oilers exceed the cap they don’t accrue any cap space for those 24 days, which would lower the contract value they can get at the deadline.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Flames' situation at that time was worse, because there was no LTIR then, so injured players couldn't be replaced since the Flames were right up against the cap. If there had been LTIR, they could have used a full roster.

I believe the Flames’ injuries happened too close to the end of the season to meet the threshold required for the then existing LTI rules.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Forcing a buy out, then having the option to sign another contract was a way more lucrative opportunity for Skinner. Of course he wouldn't waive.

Skinner was getting paid $9 million a year on his last deal. He lost a third of that due to being bought out. Now he is getting $3 million on a one-year deal – so he makes back exactly what he lost this year, but he has less guaranteed money in the future. On top of that, he has to wait longer to collect the money Buffalo owes him, and I promise you his discount rate is not zero.

It was not in his financial interest to force a buyout.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

I believe the Flames’ injuries happened too close to the end of the season to meet the threshold required for the then existing LTI rules.

Yup. IIRC, one of the players suffered a season-ending injury with exactly 9 games remaining – so he could not miss 10 games and did not qualify for LTIR. The way the rule was written, that was the worst-case scenario.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Skinner was getting paid $9 million a year on his last deal. He lost a third of that due to being bought out. Now he is getting $3 million on a one-year deal – so he makes back exactly what he lost this year, but he has less guaranteed money in the future. On top of that, he has to wait longer to collect the money Buffalo owes him, and I promise you his discount rate is not zero.

It was not in his financial interest to force a buyout.

Skinners cap hit was $9MM for 3 remaining years, but he only had $22MM of cash left, it was front loaded. He gets $14.67MM from Buffalo, so he needs to make up $7.33MM in the 3 years to come out ahead. Given he got $3MM from the oilers this year he only needs $4.33MM combined the last 2 years to beat that deal. I think he makes it, but it could be close.

There might be some tax benefits to having the money paid out later that could potentially offset the time value of money issue, depending where he lives post-NHL.

[Samonadreau]

Jeff Skinner is 32 and has a -160 over his career. I'm not too worried.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I mean we probably aren't going to find a signed affidavit from Mike Grier stating he offered more money if that is what you are looking for.

You can find a lot of stuff in the media if you do one google search though:

TSN reporter Chris Johnston said this about the deal though, “Jeff Skinner… he had lots of options. He’s playing on a one-year, $3 million contract. I know he’s getting paid by Buffalo. So he’s still he’s still doing pretty well, financially. He’s going [to Edmonton] clearly to win. I mean, he could sign for one year and $3 million in about 10 spots,” Johnston added.
https://dailyhive.com/toronto/jeff-skinner-leafs-oilers-contractoffers

Old Adam Proteau over at the Hockey News was suggesting the Red Wings should sign Skinner for $5 million before free agency started.
https://thehockeynews.com/news/three...r-jeff-skinner

Todd Panula over at BleedinBlue wanted Skinner for the Blues.
"If you could get a player that might net you upper 20's or even 30-plus goals for something in the $4-5 million range, you should jump on that. Skinner isn't the world's best defender, but he's responsible with the puck and doesn't often turn it over."
https://bleedinblue.com/posts/st-lou...r-01j1k3w4hm0x

Bob McKenzie:

Stephen
@DTSB_98
Bob McKenzie saying just now that two Canadian teams are interested in Jeff Skinner who could be had on a shorter term deal at a club friendly number.... Oilers and Leafs
1:25 PM · Jul 1, 2024
·
96.9K
Views

Skinner leaving money on the table seems pretty likely. This site is probably the only place on the internet you would get backlash against that statement.

because reporters never get it wrong when guessing potential salaries. Especially when it's a buyout player, meaning they don't have last year's number to work from.

[Enoch Root]

also, players in their 30s make different choices (not always about money) - that does not, in any way, suggest that there is an 'Edmonton discount'

people see what they want to see, and believe what they want to believe

[dino7c]

I take media opinions on the Oilers with a large grain of salt...Oiler propaganda pays the bills these days.

I mean I can post articles about the offer sheets and how shrewd the Oilers are. First it was a masterclass to match and then smrt to not match. Skinner contract for ONE season set them up yo lose their top 2 prospects.
What a steal!

[CaptainCrunch]

It wasn't offense, or powerplay specialists that the Oilers needed.

They dropped a bunch of speed, they lost a couple of good penalty killers, their blueline is a trainwreck, and this season is really now, going to fall on the slopped shoulders of Skinner, and if he can't handle it, the Oilers are going to be this years major disappointment and disasters.

They still have to deal with the deadline in 6 days on Draisaitl, because if they don't sign him he becomes a major distraction.

[Groot]

See this is a perfect example of cherry-picking specific phrases and trying to twist them to support your argument. Speculation by reporters that also contradicts what you're trying to prove.

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

You can find a lot of stuff in the media if you do one google search though:

TSN reporter Chris Johnston said this about the deal though, “Jeff Skinner… he had lots of options. He’s playing on a one-year, $3 million contract. I know he’s getting paid by Buffalo. So he’s still he’s still doing pretty well, financially. He’s going [to Edmonton] clearly to win. I mean, he could sign for one year and $3 million in about 10 spots,” Johnston added.
https://dailyhive.com/toronto/jeff-skinner-leafs-oilers-contractoffers

So 10 teams would have paid him $3 million per year. Seems like that's market value then, not a discount LMAO.

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Old Adam Proteau over at the Hockey News was suggesting the Red Wings should sign Skinner for $5 million before free agency started.
https://thehockeynews.com/news/three...r-jeff-skinner

Cherry-picking. Here's more quotes from that same article.

Skinner would have to take less than $5 million to make a fit for himself with the Pens

Skinner could come in, play on Nashville’s second line and not eat up a ton of cap space.

Hmm, seems like 2 of the 3 suggestions had Skinner making less than $5 million. More like $3 million most likely, you know, market value like 10 other teams would have paid him. Thanks for that quote to set market value BTW.

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Todd Panula over at BleedinBlue wanted Skinner for the Blues.
"If you could get a player that might net you upper 20's or even 30-plus goals for something in the $4-5 million range, you should jump on that. Skinner isn't the world's best defender, but he's responsible with the puck and doesn't often turn it over."
https://bleedinblue.com/posts/st-lou...r-01j1k3w4hm0x

*YAWN* Cherry-pick some more. Here's another from the same article. Skinner isn't choosing to take a discount, the fact the he was bought out forces one on him.

The Buffalo Sabres are going to be buying out the remainder of Skinner's contract in order to give them a little more roster flexibility. That means that the goal scorer might be had at a discount.

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Bob McKenzie:
Stephen
@DTSB_98
Bob McKenzie saying just now that two Canadian teams are interested in Jeff Skinner who could be had on a shorter term deal at a club friendly number.... Oilers and Leafs
1:25 PM · Jul 1, 2024
·
96.9K
Views

Club-friendly means cheap. Because he was just bought out and is a high-risk, defensive liability that is useless when not scoring. And if another team was looking at him for the same "club-friendly deal" then again its showing that is market value. Thanks again for showing he didn't take a discount.

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Skinner leaving money on the table seems pretty likely. This site is probably the only place on the internet you would get backlash against that statement.

Jeff Skinner did not willingly leave money on the table. Doesn't matter how much you try and twist it. And it still doesn't matter, he's a net negative where Buffalo would rather pay him for 6 more years to NOT play for them, when they didn't even need the cap space. Could have bought him out next year and saved 2 years of cap penalties but still said "Nope, we need this player gone now". And Oilers fans drink the kool-aid management and media spews like always.

[EldrickOnIce]

I'm sure Skinner did leave a bit of money on the table. Who cares? Maybe he could have got $3.25M instead of 3. And what? Only pertinent question, for me, is does he make the Oilers better? I doubt it.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Skinner is a good goal scorer. Always has been in this league. He signs in Buffalo for that terrible deal, except he goes and puts up 40 goals right away, under Housley.



Then Buffalo decides to hire Kruger. Skinner struggles, and gets demoted to the 4th line. Gets 14 goals that year. Next season, still under Kruger, things get worse, and he puts up 7 goals.


Kruger gets canned, in comes Granato promoted from the assistant spot, and Skinner tallies 33 goals. Then he puts up 35 goals for Granato. Then a relatively disappointing 24 goals last season.


Unless Skinner suffers an injury, or Knoblauch takes a dislike to him (both of which could definitely happen), I would probably think that Skinner puts up 30 goals this year. I would be surprised if he doesn't, actually, as long as he gets opportunity. He is likely to play on one of the top 2 lines, and I am sure he had those discussions prior to signing with the Oilers. Time will tell if he stays there or not, but that's the expected spot for him.


As for his PP time - I think he won't get as much PP time obviously. McDavid-Draisaitl-Hyman-RNH-Bouchard. No secret they stay out there for basically the entire PP, so unless one of these guys are hurt, or had a very long shift, or are in the penalty box themselves, Skinner is likely to get scraps. However, he is 47th in the NHL in the last 3 seasons for even strength point production, and 26th in goals. That might surprise some people, right?


Skinner produces, period, unless he plays for Kruger.


I also think he refused to waive last year so that he could force a buyout, and then turn around and bet on himself. I think those two years under Kruger just completely eroded his name in the NHL. I was actually hoping that the Flames would trade for him with retention from Buffalo with a sweetener attached, let him play a year and rebuild his reputation, and then trade him with some retention for something really good.


I do think he took a bit less to sign in Edmonton. He has a very good track record of doing the one thing that players get paid the most to do - score goals. There is no guarantee that things work out for him, but I bet he signs another contract after this - maybe a 3 or 4 year deal - for more money than he has signed with the Oilers for. As long as he doesn't get injured, or fall into Knoblauch's doghouse (both of which may happen), i expect Skinner to do what he does best - produce.


However, this does not mean that I think the Oilers got better. Their PK is obviously going to suffer this year. Their defence is going to suffer. Their character and leadership in the room is going to suffer. I think Skinner is decent, but will he take another step forward in his career, or will he regress behind a worse defence and PK?



Oilers are now once again a team that thinks that they can out-score their problems. They will win and lose 5-4 games again rather than win and lose 2-1 and 3-1 games. I don't think they took a step in the right direction this off-season. They need at least one more experienced defensive defencemen. They need one very good defensive centre (preferably 2-way centre). They got slower, they got less tough, they got less defensively sound, and they got older.



TLDR; Skinner will produce, the Oilers got better at scoring goals, but overall the Oilers got worse in almost every other metric.

[McG]

I’ll tell you who was getting forced onto the veteran’s discount scheme for baby Connor’s new dress shoes. Broberg and Holloway.

Elliotte Friedman reporting that:

A couple notes: I’d mentioned one thing about Broberg and one thing about Holloway that were disputed. I said I heard Edmonton’s offer to Broberg was in the $1.8-million range, so he got a 250 per cent bonus on what he was expecting. That was high, with the Oilers providing statistical analysis comparing him to Justin Barron and Kevin Bahl, offering a $1.1-million salary. So Broberg received 400 per cent more than he was expecting. (Doug Armstrong: I’m looking for this kind of an offer sheet for my next deal, FYI.) Agents and players absolutely loved that this happened, and you can see why. Broberg never rescinded his in-season trade demand, and the Oilers knew he was unhappy.

29. As for Holloway, I mentioned that he received a three-year offer at some point from the Oilers. One source swears that’s true, but a couple of others said no. I do know this: there were one- and two-year offers made in July — at approximately $850K (the former) and $1 million (the latter). He did very well financially, too.

So $1.1 offered to Broberg and $0.85 or $1 to Holloway.

Who wouldn’t take the new deals from blues? Oh yeah, the unwashed who believe that people should take massive discounts because oilers.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by McG

I’ll tell you who was getting forced onto the veteran’s discount scheme for baby Connor’s new dress shoes. Broberg and Holloway.

Elliotte Friedman reporting that:

A couple notes: I’d mentioned one thing about Broberg and one thing about Holloway that were disputed. I said I heard Edmonton’s offer to Broberg was in the $1.8-million range, so he got a 250 per cent bonus on what he was expecting. That was high, with the Oilers providing statistical analysis comparing him to Justin Barron and Kevin Bahl, offering a $1.1-million salary. So Broberg received 400 per cent more than he was expecting. (Doug Armstrong: I’m looking for this kind of an offer sheet for my next deal, FYI.) Agents and players absolutely loved that this happened, and you can see why. Broberg never rescinded his in-season trade demand, and the Oilers knew he was unhappy.

29. As for Holloway, I mentioned that he received a three-year offer at some point from the Oilers. One source swears that’s true, but a couple of others said no. I do know this: there were one- and two-year offers made in July — at approximately $850K (the former) and $1 million (the latter). He did very well financially, too.

So $1.1 offered to Broberg and $0.85 or $1 to Holloway.

Who wouldn’t take the new deals from blues? Oh yeah, the unwashed who believe that people should take massive discounts because oilers.

If those offers were in July, it is possible that St. Louis or even another team was in their ear by that time indicating that they could get more by agreeing to talk offer sheet.

It's unlikely to happen, but my dream is that St. Louis wins the Stanley Cup next season with those two playing a part.

[Paulie Walnuts]

lol he was still unhappy. I thought everyone wanted to be in Edmonton. Take a discount to chase the dream with McDavid and the boys.

Like I have said all along its a bunch of bull####. Players care about money.