Depends on what you skip.
If it's already obvious that someone can code, then parts like leetcode look like either dimwitted corporate inflexibility, or a transparent hazing power play.
It seems like the majority of people in supposedly innovative dotcoms have oddly lumbering-big-corporate-drone ideas about this right now.
Someone thinks they shouldn't have do to a distracting battery of whiteboard leetcode hazing, when obviously they can code, and they're happy to have real technical discussions-- and we're turned off by their prima donna arrogance. Their failure to comply with every unreasonable or abusive corporate demand is a showstopper. (That sounds like the kind of person who might object if they find out our entire business model is secretly spying on people and controlling them!)
If the applicant further suggested that they also would like some basis for evaluating their prospective team members (just normally; not whiteboard hazing them), we'd totally flip out, and for years later would be mocking the arrogance of that one uppity jerk, who don't appreciate how our revered VC fore-funders commanded us, over 10 years ago, how software development culture works.