mjd1001

If you were ever going to overpay compared to everyone else for a player, Marner would be it for me. Open up the checkbook.

It kinda is my argument, but the short point of my long post is...how many minutes do you want him to play? If you want him to play only 15 minutes (give or take) then he is your 3C. If you want him to play 17+ minutes, that is your 2C...as very few 3C's get considerably less minutes. So, 2C, 3C, its a matter of semantics. Is who you label a 2C or a 3C a matter of their assigned role on the team (who you think is better) or who plays in more situations (who gets more ice time). I guess my point is tell me how many minutes you expect him to play, or want him to average, and I'll tell you then whether I consider that a 2C or a 3C.

Most obvious answer....Not sure. Even if I wanted to say yes, Its hard for me right now. In his spot duty with this team, I haven't seen much of anything to show me he is going to be good in the NHL. He might be, goalies tend to get better with expereince and age. But right now, I'm not confident.

The only issue with NHL.com is that they list a lot of players as centers that aren't actively playing center. I just took a quick look at the site, anyone who has played 35 games (half the season): 104 left wingers, 92 Right wingers, 204 listed as center. So while all forwards should have one primary position, 33.3% as LW, 33.3% as C and 33.3% as right wing.....NHL.com has 51% of forwards that have played half the season or more listed as a center. So its hard to break things down, but I would think his numbers among true centers would rank closer to 40th overall in goals, 36th in points, and 38th in P/GP. (to get from the NHL.com 51% of centers down to the 33.3%, you need to multiply by a factory of .65. If you apply that factor to your points above, that is what you get). Again, without having an accurate breakdown of players who play most of their minutes at Center, that is what the best 'math guestimate' gives us. Or Break it down among all forwards on NHL.com. Again, 400 total fowards have played 35 games or more. Statistically, the 'top 100' could be 1st liners, the 2nd 100 can be 2nd liners...all the way down to 4th liners being ranked 301-400. So in terms of production, a 2nd liner would be ranked from 101-200, and a 3rd liner ranked from201-300.... McLeod among forwards in goals ranks 126th (toward the top of 2nd line status). In points he ranks tied for 98th (at the bottom of 1st line territory/the top 25%), in G/GP tied for 116th, and P/GP tied for 105th overall. So, this year, his production in terms of pure points and in terms of points per game puts him in 2nd line territory (2nd 25%), but on the upper end of that. Oh, and +/- is an imperfect stat, but it does have meaning. After all, it shows how many goals you were on the ice for against vs for....if you want to use that as the most basic overview of his defensive play without going too deep into the analytics...he is tied for 41st among 400 forwards, for sure deep into the very first quarter of all forwards. He is doing the above tied for 150th overall in ice time per game. So all of his production numbers exceed where he should rank based on his ice time. I know just numbers, but then again....numbers! Here is the bottom line. My definition of a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th liner is simply who gets used the most. My first line center gets the most minutes, 2nd line center the 2nd most, etc. In the NHL, first liners get 18 minutes and up on average 2nd liners get 15 1/2 up to 18 minutes (Sabres 2nd line gets 16-17 minutes) 3rd liners get about 13 minutes to 15 1/2 minutes (Sabres 3rd line gets 14.5 to 15 minutes) 4th liners average under 13 minutes. If McLeod plays the 2 way game he does, I do not want him only playing 13 to 15 1/2 minutes like a typical 3rd liner. I want him with more minutes than that...in the Sabres case their 2nd line gets 16-17 minutes...That is the number of minutes I want him playing. If you want to bring in someone who puts up more points and 'call that person the 2nd center, and call McLeod the 3rd center', fine. But to me if McLeod plays 16+ minutes per game, to ME that is a 2C. So here is the question I'd like others to answer (no sarcasm at all I'm really curious): If a 1C on this team gets about 18-19 minutes per game... and a 2C on the Sabres gets 16-17 minutes and a 3C gets about 14.5 minutes and a 4C gets a lot less....... Who are your 4 primary centers next year...and how do you position them in terms of ice time? Maybe you go 1C=18m, 2C=17m, 3C=16m and 4C=9? No way you could keep things to plan over whole season. In that case I don't think you have a !c, 2C, and 3C..you simply have an interchangeable top 3Cs.

Deliberatley obfuscated the numbers? Really, c'mon now, I NEVER type in a bad number unless its by mistake. I typed 15 goals instead of 14 goals, ands that is the point you are going to make? that is deliberately obvuscating the numbers? Thats a joke. Its called a MISTAKE and it was by one goal and STILL did not change the results of my argument. You want to keep telling me I'm wrong, or saying ONE mistake I made by ONE goal is DELIBERATELY OBFUSCATING the numbers? You bet I'll call you a schill for your argument and probably a lot more. You throwing out numbers that you choose does not make you correct. Its also a joke that since I value different numbers, you come at me and just say what I say is "incorrect". And the teammate argument? I can say, and somewhat believe that the 3rd line is the EASIEST line to play on. Kulich playing with Tage usually means he is playing against the other teams best shutdown guys. The lines Benson is on...usually means he is NOT given the 4th line assignment of shutting down the opposing teams top line, but neither is he facing the other teams top shut down guys. Again, You may disagree with me thats fine. But its a bit juvenile coming back at someone and jumping all over a 1 goal error or saying its incorrect or wrong because I am judging people on using different metrics than you. I'm ALL for using advanced stats to support an argument, but I never use them as the end-all-be-all of winning my argument, apparently you do. Whatever I guess. You think Benson is a better player right now. I think Kulich is. Fine, just stop escalating your rhetoric at me about it...we disagree, get over it.

Yes it is. Goal scoring to me is production. Assists are secondary to goals, and secondary assists are often times 'statistical noise'. 12.0 to 9.7% over a season, is a sizable difference to me. You want to carry the water for Benson and be a schill for his gameplay fine. I'm not saying he is bad. Just don't go and tell me what the 'truths' are of who is better or more productive based on YOUR definition of it. In no world of mine is the goals Benson has equal to the 'production' of Kulich. Not even mentioning the fact that Kulich has a few multi-goal games and/or game winners. Meaning I have some memory of some of his goals being important with respect to winning games. I don't have that with Benson yet.

As i explained in the above post, I do think he has been a better player than Benson. And I think expected goals can be useful, but that is not the end-all-be-all of stats to show it. His possession numbers may not be as good, but his production is much better, and at this point in their careers, they still have a chance to 'learn' the overall game, but I want to see production. Benson's underlying metrics are pretty good, maybe really good for someone his age and the team he is on. I just see Kulich making plays and scoring goals to actively help this team win. I need to see more of that from Benson.

Of course its correct, no idea why you are making this more complicated than I meant it to be, as I was referring to him being the better scorer, which in part leads me to him being the better player (he is playing with better linemates, but the matchups he is facing are a lot worse than what Benson is facing). Kulich has 15 goals in 54 games and is shooting over 12% Benson has 10 goals in 67 games and is shooting in the single digits. This year Kulich is the better goal scorer, and from what I see a player contributing to wins overall better than Benson.

That would be an excellent #2 center on a playoff team. For some reason people think 20 goals is third line territory. This was posted in another thread with links to the data, but an average 2ND line center is right around 20 goals (actually a bit less). If you think he is good defensively (many do)...and above average defensive player with 20 goals is actually a good 2nd line center. Maybe not the best 2nd line center in the league, but there are playoff teams that don't get that production, at least not with good defensive responsibility going with it. Now, if someone wants to say they don't want to rely on him to get 20 goals ever year....if someone says he is a 3C because they only expected 10-15 goals out of him..then sure, he is a 3C. But if you think you can get 20+ goals out of him with good defensive play...then you want that guy on the ice for 17+ minutes per game. Guess what? 3rd line centers don't get 17+ minutes per game, that is what 2nd line players get.

No proof for this, but I'll throw it out there... As a 4th line center, you aren't going to 'pass up' a great scoring chance if its there, but you might not work hard to try to get it. Your game, your job might simply be keep the puck in the offensive zone. Work it into the corners. Basically, run time/kill time while McDavid and/or Draisaitl get a rest. Again, that might be an oversimplification...but my point is he may not have 'worked' as hard for prime scoring chances as he is allowed to do now. Of course NHL edge stats say otherwise. Last year with Edmonton, he had more 'high danger' chances per game than he does this year with the Sabres. Last year he had 42 "high danger" shots in 81 games, this year he has 29 in 71 games. So maybe the above point isn't even true. Then again, their definition of a high danger chance is just how close to the net are you....last year he could have just been whacking away at loose pucks in front of the net where this year he is actually trying to legit score. I'm not sure.

I'm going to agree with you on most, but I'd say Kulich is the one I am most encouraged by. Cozens and Quinn have actually hurt the team when they are on the ice....Benson might be very good eventually, but I think this board (in general) drastically over-rates his play. Kulich....For a first year NHL player, he is scoring goals at a better than 1 game in 4 pace. Now, will he improve on that? I don't know. But this year, among all the guys you listed (Even Cozens) I think he has clearly been the best overall player to me.

Adams brought in both McLeod and Bryam. With that said, despite Bryams pedigree, that he had a big cup run, that he was a very high draft pick...and McLeod has 'less of a pedigree', I think McLeod is more valuable right now, and even looking forward. I think Bryam is "OK", but I think his game went from 'good' when he got there and has slid into "just OK". At least at this moment, McLeod is more valuable to this team.

I'm not in the "get rid of Quinn" mode like I was with Cozens. But as of even the last few weeks, I still see huge holes in his game. What my eyes tell me (still even up to now) is in the offensive zone he really doesn't make his own shot all that much. In the neutral zone and Defensive zone, he's practically invisible. I don't expect amazing things, but he might be the forward on this team that engages on the boards and comes away with the loose puck or wins battles less than any other forward. Then, that is what my eyes see, do the numbers back it up? I think so. The last 5 games he has been put with McLeod as his center, who has some of the best defensive numbres on the team. McLeod has not brought up Quinns analytics, in fact Quinn has brought down McLeods numbers. Just looking back over the last 5 games, Quinn's line has 16 'scoring chances' generated even strength, while allowing 36 (and this is in less than 60 minutes of ice time). So again, to repeat myself, I don't see him generating his own shot, I don't see him gaining possession of the puck or winning any battles. And almost all the analytics (not just scoring chances, but Fenwick, Corsi, High danger chances...etc) are still way negative. Which on their own doesn't mean much, but it supports what I see. 16 scoring chances generated and 36 allowed in under 60 minutes of even strenght ice time...that is really really bad, Based on what I see, I would expect THOSE numbers to continue, and not his 40% shooting percentage over those 4 games. If he is scoring, that is great, that is what he needs to do. But when he doesn't score, he hurts the team.

When they play well...it doesn't surprise me. Its been the same issues (mostly) the entire year. Thompson, Tuch, and Dahlin scored. There are your 3 best players. They are all currently playing and don't look to be playing hurt. That is key #1. You got decent-to-good goaltending. You don't need a Vezina winner behind this team to make the playoffs, just decent-to-good. That is key #2. A game by one single player by Cozens can lose a team a game, and the Sabres were fighting that most of the year with him here. On the Tuch Goal, Cozens was right there, He was in position to either take out Tuch or clear the puck, he did neither, he kinda just stood there not knowing what to do or which way to look. In a big Scrum behind the Sabres net, Cozens skated the other way. And of course, the awful giveaway right onto Krebs stick for the goal. Cozens had games like that for the Sabres quite a bit. You removed that player from your roster. (As much as people think Quinn turned the corner with his scoring lately, I am not convinced. I still think he is invisible unless someone puts the puck on his stick for him, and he's almost as bad as Cozens without the puck) Defense. Its not as bad as it looks in front of the 'bad UPL', but still needs improvement. Dahlin is fine. You would LIKE one more very, very good D-man. They don't have it yet. Do you wait/can Power develop into it? Maybe, but hesnot here yet. Is it Bryam? I don't think so. The more I watch Byram, the more I get the vibes of a "below average overall D-man who happens to skate well but that's it". IF Tage and Tuch and Dahlin are healthy, and IF you get above average goaltending, and by removing the forwards from this team that hurts you (Cozens and possibly Quinn), this Can be a playoff team. The problem is, those are a lot of "IFs". You can't rely on all of them happening all the time. The win feels great after a pretty good week or two. I'm sure things will be different around here after the next 2 game losing streak. (Actually, kidding, the next time they lose a single game by 2+ goals things will be a lot different around here)

How many goals would UPL have let in if he were in net?