The Ralph Krueger put Jeff Skinner on the 4th line discussion including an excerpt from the instigators thread

[dudacek]

45 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

what if leaving skinner where he is gives that line a +4% in overall corsi, say instead of 47 they are 51. But let's say I move him to a line that has a 56% corsi now and they go up to a 62% because Cozens and Staal work well with Skinner... I gained 2% overall but I am supposed to believe this was bad?

No one said this would be bad, or that it couldn't be better.

But you haven't really responded to what IKP spelled out: a situation where every line has a positive Corsi and the top line is dominant. He didn't prove this is the best possible mix, but he show it is an effective one based on the analytics that you have long wanted the Sabres to use.

[dudacek]

Ralph talked a lot about matchups over the pause and a lot of us thought he was talking about matching lines.

It's becoming more clear that what he was talking about was rolling 4 lines capable of tilting the ice in a positive direction, rather than having to hide one or more.

[Taro T]

4 hours ago, LabattBlue said:

HC's always have a double standard when it comes to "performance determines play".  Early into this season, but Dahlin has arguably been the worst Sabre on some nights, yet he still dresses every game, still plays significant minutes, and still gets PP time.  So for all those who say Skinner deserves what he gets for not buying in, I say BS.

Has Dahlin's performance affected his usage?

His usage has gone:

24:20 toi w/ 23 shifts

21:31 - 20

19:56 - 20

18:34 - 18

10:08 - 12 (and a bump to the 3rd pairing prior to getting benched)

22:47 - 23 (3rd pairing; in an OT game that they were down to 5 D-men midway through the 3rd)

17:17 - 20 (3rd pairing).

Might there be a noticeable trend in ice time, shifts, and quality of opponents for Mr. Dahlin corresponding w/ his play?

 

Edited January 28, 2021 by Taro T

[IKnowPhysics]

Now looking at Olofsson's numbers.  Shift charts confirm Olofsson has only played 5v5 with centers Eichel and Staal, but had a few different RWs (Reinhart, Cozens, Thompson).  Again, the sample sizes are small, but here's the 5v5 result so far:

Center - TOI - CF% - HDCF%

Eichel with Olofsson - 12:55 - 38.10% (8CF 13CA) - 75.00% (3HDCF 1HDCA)

Eichel without Olofsson - 99:43 - 62.94% (107CF 63CA) - 79.17% (19HDCF 5HDCA)

As mentioned before, Hall-Eichel-Reinhart are absolutely trashing opponents in CF% and HDCF%.

Note that most of Olofsson's time with Eichel was also with Sam Reinhart.  And in the previous post, you saw how much Reinhart boosted Hall-Eichel.  CF% would say that Olofsson should definitely not play with Eichel and Reinhart and there's not enough HDCF% data to refute it, EPSECIALLY considering how well Hall-Eichel-Reinhart is currently playing.

And last season's data supports that too.  Olofsson-Eichel-Reinhart three played over 600 minutes together and recorded a CF% of 48.97% and HDCF% of 42.49%.  Also last season, Skinner-Eichel-Reinhart played about 79 minutes and recorded a CF% of 61.27% and HDCF% of 60.00%- It's still a little mind boggling why we didn't see more of that.  Anyways, focus on the overall impact on wins/losses from your top line improving in HDCF% from 42.49% to 79.17% when they play 1/3 of the 5v5 game! This alone should get you wet.  Back to this Skinner/Olofsson with Staal this season:

Staal with Olofsson - 69:45 - 47.41% (55CF 61CA) - 50.00% (7HDCF 7HDCA)

Staal without Olofsson - 19:46 - 59.38% (19CF 13CA) - 83.33% (5HDCF 1HDCA)

Staal with Skinner - 16:10 - 61.54% (16CF 10CA) - 80.00% (4HDCF 1HDCA)

Staal without Skinner - 75:25 - 47.54% (58CF 64CA) - 53.33% (8HDCF 7HDCA)

Lazar with Skinner - 51.06% (48CF 46CA) - 62.50% (10HDCF 6HDCA)

There's not a lot of data on Staal with Skinner instead of Olofsson, but what's there is promising.  Maybe enough to warrant getting more data.  There's even less data about what happens if Olofsson is put with Lazar or Eakin (two and five minutes, respecitvely).  But if you're Krueger, and you're happy with how Skinner elevates Lazar in HDCF, do you attempt to see what happens when Olofsson is put with Lazar?  It's a risk.  The data doesn't suggest that Olofsson is elevating anyone's CF or HDCF game so far, so do you boost Staal's game with Skinner while potentially creating a hole with Olofsson and Lazar?  Krueger has repeatedly answered this question: no.

One could boil it down into ++ (good CF% and HDCF%) and -- (worse CF% and HDCF%).

         Staal / Lazar

Olofsson   --  /  ??

Skinner    ++  /  ++

I think Skinner being on the 3rd/4th line may have more to do with Olofsson's game than Skinner's game.

[Brawndo]

46 minutes ago, IKnowPhysics said:

Now looking at Olofsson's numbers.  Shift charts confirm Olofsson has only played 5v5 with centers Eichel and Staal, but had a few different RWs (Reinhart, Cozens, Thompson).  Again, the sample sizes are small, but here's the 5v5 result so far:

Center - TOI - CF% - HDCF%

Eichel with Olofsson - 12:55 - 38.10% (8CF 13CA) - 75.00% (3HDCF 1HDCA)

Eichel without Olofsson - 99:43 - 62.94% (107CF 63CA) - 79.17% (19HDCF 5HDCA)

As mentioned before, Hall-Eichel-Reinhart are absolutely trashing opponents in CF% and HDCF%.

Note that most of Olofsson's time with Eichel was also with Sam Reinhart.  And in the previous post, you saw how much Reinhart boosted Hall-Eichel.  CF% would say that Olofsson should definitely not play with Eichel and Reinhart and there's not enough HDCF% data to refute it, EPSECIALLY considering how well Hall-Eichel-Reinhart is currently playing.

And last season's data supports that too.  Olofsson-Eichel-Reinhart three played over 600 minutes together and recorded a CF% of 48.97% and HDCF% of 42.49%.  Also last season, Skinner-Eichel-Reinhart played about 79 minutes and recorded a CF% of 61.27% and HDCF% of 60.00%- It's still a little mind boggling why we didn't see more of that.  Anyways, focus on the overall impact on wins/losses from your top line improving in HDCF% from 42.49% to 79.17% when they play 1/3 of the 5v5 game! This alone should get you wet.  Back to this Skinner/Olofsson with Staal this season:

Staal with Olofsson - 69:45 - 47.41% (55CF 61CA) - 50.00% (7HDCF 7HDCA)

Staal without Olofsson - 19:46 - 59.38% (19CF 13CA) - 83.33% (5HDCF 1HDCA)

Staal with Skinner - 16:10 - 61.54% (16CF 10CA) - 80.00% (4HDCF 1HDCA)

Staal without Skinner - 75:25 - 47.54% (58CF 64CA) - 53.33% (8HDCF 7HDCA)

Lazar with Skinner - 51.06% (48CF 46CA) - 62.50% (10HDCF 6HDCA)

There's not a lot of data on Staal with Skinner instead of Olofsson, but what's there is promising.  Maybe enough to warrant getting more data.  There's even less data about what happens if Olofsson is put with Lazar or Eakin (two and five minutes, respecitvely).  But if you're Krueger, and you're happy with how Skinner elevates Lazar in HDCF, do you attempt to see what happens when Olofsson is put with Lazar?  It's a risk.  The data doesn't suggest that Olofsson is elevating anyone's CF or HDCF game so far, so do you boost Staal's game with Skinner while potentially creating a hole with Olofsson and Lazar?  Krueger has repeatedly answered this question: no.

One could boil it down into ++ (good CF% and HDCF%) and -- (worse CF% and HDCF%).

         Staal / Lazar

Olofsson   --  /  ??

Skinner    ++  /  ++

I think Skinner being on the 3rd/4th line may have more to do with Olofsson's game than Skinner's game.

Olofsson is averaging 17:33 TOI compared to 13:43 for Skinner. 
 

Skinner should be double shifted for Olofsson at least once a period and when Krueger shortens the bench when the Sabres trailing Skinner should take Olofsson’s LW2 Spot 

[IKnowPhysics]

1 hour ago, Brawndo said:

Olofsson is averaging 17:33 TOI compared to 13:43 for Skinner. 
 

Skinner should be double shifted for Olofsson at least once a period and when Krueger shortens the bench when the Sabres trailing Skinner should take Olofsson’s LW2 Spot 

The aded ice time is because Olofsson has been playing the power play.  Total 5v5 minutes on the season between SKinner and Olofsson are within a single shift.

[Brawndo]

12 minutes ago, IKnowPhysics said:

The aded ice time is because Olofsson has been playing the power play.  Total 5v5 minutes on the season between SKinner and Olofsson are within a single shift.

I would still rotate Skinner up to the second line a minimum of one shift per period 

[PerreaultForever]

I can only imagine how this conversation might have gone had Skinner's incredibly lazy puck flip over the glass resulted in the game winning goal for the Rangers. 

[LTS]

10 hours ago, LabattBlue said:

HC's always have a double standard when it comes to "performance determines play".  Early into this season, but Dahlin has arguably been the worst Sabre on some nights, yet he still dresses every game, still plays significant minutes, and still gets PP time.  So for all those who say Skinner deserves what he gets for not buying in, I say BS.

He has played demonstrably better since "the game".  Skinner is still mediocre in my opinion.  If he made $5M we might not even be talking about him other than to get rid of him.

8 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

what if leaving skinner where he is gives that line a +4% in overall corsi, say instead of 47 they are 51. But let's say I move him to a line that has a 56% corsi now and they go up to a 62% because Cozens and Staal work well with Skinner... I gained 2% overall but I am supposed to believe this was bad?

Your point is perfectly valid. If the overall team benefit is there, then you move him.  But we don't know that it would happen and there are no statistically relevant measures that say otherwise. Even pointing to prior seasons doesn't work necessarily because this year is not equal to last year. You know that though..

The real question, where do you move Skinner where it results in a net benefit to the team?

After tonight I feel like where ever you have Eichel and Reinhart will benefit.  Hall has dropped off since Reinhart moved up.  Nothing has really worked beyond Eichel/Reinhart.  Something might, but right now it's just not.

3 hours ago, Brawndo said:

I would still rotate Skinner up to the second line a minimum of one shift per period 

I would also do this.

2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

I can only imagine how this conversation might have gone had Skinner's incredibly lazy puck flip over the glass resulted in the game winning goal for the Rangers. 

I dunno. That kind of crap just happens in a game.  I don't put it on the player as though they suddenly are crappy players.  Do we think Brian Campbell is a total piece of crap for his flip over the glass in 2006?

[PerreaultForever]

The nonchalant way he did it is what got to me. Almost looked intentional. 

[Stoner]

Are there still Skinner defenders?

Where's our "this is what streaky scorers do" bud?

[Shootica]

I'd say the numbers that @IKnowPhysics is showing are in line with what I'm seeing out of Olofsson so far this season.

I thought Olofsson was really starting to take strides in his 5v5 game in the second half of the season last year, but to me he's been invisible at best so far this season.

Just from that standpoint alone, I think it's worthwhile to drop him to a bottom 6 line for a bit and let him get back to the basics.  And Skinner has showed me enough to say that I'd like to see him moved up.

[dudacek]

6 minutes ago, Shootica said:

I'd say the numbers that @IKnowPhysics is showing are in line with what I'm seeing out of Olofsson so far this season.

I thought Olofsson was really starting to take strides in his 5v5 game in the second half of the season last year, but to me he's been invisible at best so far this season.

Just from that standpoint alone, I think it's worthwhile to drop him to a bottom 6 line for a bit and let him get back to the basics.  And Skinner has showed me enough to say that I'd like to see him moved up.

Eye test vs analytics vs production

• Skinner GP: 8 0/1/1/+1
• Olofsson GP:8 3/4/7/-4

Is +/- the most revealing stat here?

[GASabresIUFAN]

39 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Eye test vs analytics vs production

• Skinner GP: 8 0/1/1/+1
• Olofsson GP:8 3/4/7/-4

Is +/- the most revealing stat here?

Go further

Olofsson 5 on 5 GP: 8 1/1/2 -4

Skinner 5 on 5 GP: 8 0/1/1 +1

[Shootica]

46 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Eye test vs analytics vs production

• Skinner GP: 8 0/1/1/+1
• Olofsson GP:8 3/4/7/-4

Is +/- the most revealing stat here?

Personally, the only takeaway I get from that is that most of Olofsson's production has come on the PP, which is excluded from +/-.

[IKnowPhysics]

WOWY data shows that Olofsson is not as good as Skinner in 5v5 (probably not a surprise, but let's be objective).

The real question we don't have enough data to answer yet is what's the better lineup in overall team performance: Olofsson with Stall and Skinner with Lazar OR Skinner with Staal and Olofsson with Lazar?

[nfreeman]

On 1/28/2021 at 9:46 PM, PerreaultForever said:

I can only imagine how this conversation might have gone had Skinner's incredibly lazy puck flip over the glass resulted in the game winning goal for the Rangers. 

 

19 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

The nonchalant way he did it is what got to me. Almost looked intentional. 

You have got to be kidding me.  

[PerreaultForever]

21 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

 

You have got to be kidding me.  

I said it ALMOST LOOKED intentional. I don't think it was, but it was the laziest dumb play I've seen from a Sabre this year by far. There are coaches in this league that would bench a player for it. 

[nfreeman]

20 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

I said it ALMOST LOOKED intentional. I don't think it was, but it was the laziest dumb play I've seen from a Sabre this year by far. There are coaches in this league that would bench a player for it. 

I didn't think it looked even close to being lazy.  Of course, neither of us can know what was in his mind.

I get being dissatisfied with the Sabres' top guns -- Eichel, Hall, Dahlin and Skinner have all been pretty disappointing to very disappointing this year.  Skinner has 1 freaking point in 8 games.  But he's hustling, including on the backcheck, and his line IMHO has been much better than expected.  He screwed up on an attempted zone clear.  That's all it was.  And while I think petulance and general bad attitude crept into Skinner's play last year, I think he's been working hard this year and I haven't seen any laziness.

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

I didn't think it looked even close to being lazy.  Of course, neither of us can know what was in his mind.

I get being dissatisfied with the Sabres' top guns -- Eichel, Hall, Dahlin and Skinner have all been pretty disappointing to very disappointing this year.  Skinner has 1 freaking point in 8 games.  But he's hustling, including on the backcheck, and his line IMHO has been much better than expected.  He screwed up on an attempted zone clear.  That's all it was.  And while I think petulance and general bad attitude crept into Skinner's play last year, I think he's been working hard this year and I haven't seen any laziness.

Maybe. Skinner's definitely an enigma. I don't think he is going to the net or shooting as well as he did first year but of course he played with a better center that year. I can't really say which of those is more accurate or causal. Maybe both.