Forwards 2021-22

[3putt]

There is 16mm hole in the middle of the lineup for the next 2 years and then a 9mm hole for five years thereafter.  Until KA figures out how to address that, the rest is rearranging deck chairs.  KO can be used to some extent , but expecting Skinner to magically rebound and gifting him toi on the top line is one of the what ifs mentioned earlier.  This can be fixed. It will hurt and it will be expensive, but until we can get something approaching breakeven  production wise for the percentage of cap allocated, I don’t see things changing much.

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, 3putt said:

There is 16mm hole in the middle of the lineup for the next 2 years and then a 9mm hole for five years thereafter.  Until KA figures out how to address that, the rest is rearranging deck chairs.  KO can be used to some extent , but expecting Skinner to magically rebound and gifting him toi on the top line is one of the what ifs mentioned earlier.  This can be fixed. It will hurt and it will be expensive, but until we can get something approaching breakeven  production wise for the percentage of cap allocated, I don’t see things changing much.

Jeff Skinner under Ralph: 25/2/1/4-9. Jeff Skinner since Ralph was fired 19/3/4/7/-1

Based on the numbers, Krueger turned a 12-goal scorer into a 6-goal scorer. Sorry guys, Jeff ain't that good.

#worstthingbotterilldid

[Thorner]

5 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Jeff Skinner under Ralph: 25/2/1/4-9. Jeff Skinner since Ralph was fired 19/3/4/7/-1

Based on the numbers, Krueger turned a 12-goal scorer into a 6-goal scorer. Sorry guys, Jeff ain't that good.

#worstthingbotterilldid

33 points in games under Ralph and since he's left, over the course of about 25% more than a regular full season. And that's the worst we've seen - all while continually drawing penalties at a high rate - which we usually capitalize on, when Jack is in the lineup.

Let's not disregard what he did before Ralph, and before this covid-cursed season, a benefit you've awarded to plenty of other facets, when we saw him under Housley. 

[dudacek]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

33 points in games under Ralph and since he's left, over the course of about 25% more than a regular full season. And that's the worst we've seen - all while continually drawing penalties at a high rate - which we usually capitalize on, when Jack is in the lineup.

Let's not disregard what he did before Ralph, and before this covid-cursed season, a benefit you've awarded to plenty of other facets, when we saw him under Housley. 

Let's not disregard the 24 points in the last 40 games under Housley, either. Or the 6 points in the last 20 that year.

He's drawn 15 penalties this year, leading the Sabres and 41st in the NHL, indirectly creating ~ 3 goals in the process.

It's been two years since he was even a 40-point player. How long does he have to be a 25-point point player before we say he is a 25-point player?

Do you think Jeff is still a top 6 winger?

 

[Thorner]

13 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Let's not disregard the 24 points in the last 40 games under Housley, either. Or the 6 points in the last 20 that year.

He's drawn 15 penalties this year, leading the Sabres and 41st in the NHL, indirectly creating ~ 3 goals in the process.

It's been two years since he was even a 40-point player. How long does he have to be a 25-point point player before we say he is a 25-point player?

Do you think Jeff is still a top 6 winger?

 

Ya his drop off that year came after his "miraculous" return from what looked like a sure LT injury. He wasn't himself. 

It's been 2 calendar years, but only 21 games more than one full season. A player having a bad, "off" season is something we see quite often - and the extra games we tack on come with all the added caveats of this season - all while playing him away from the position where we saw him put up the good numbers. 

41st in the NHL for drawing penalties is very good, that's "top line" penalty drawing, if you will. Combined with the fact that he's usually even better than that - it's a massive benefit. There'd be more than 3 goals if Jack was still playing, as Jack is the man when it comes to the PP

I'd say he needs to be a 25 point player for more than around 1 season, which is close to what it's been (103 games). Considering the size of the NHL sample we saw before that. His skating ability doesn't seem to have dropped off, so I'm not thinking it's an age thing quite yet. 

I haven't really seen anything to make me think it's an absurd rational to think, paired back with Jack, we'd be getting a much better Skinner again. 

9 million reasons to find out

Edited April 23, 2021 by Thorny

[LGR4GM]

The important lesson is that you tell UFA's they get no more than 5 or 6 year deals max from you. No one in the league makes out by giving no elite UFA's 8 year deals. 

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

The important lesson is that you tell UFA's they get no more than 5 or 6 year deals max from you. No one in the league makes out by giving no elite UFA's 8 year deals. 

Unquestionably a bad deal. But what's the old thing about "sunk cost?" 

Play him where he'll have success. It doesn't matter that Skinner needs jack (and that Jack needs Reinhart on the RW) when that line was, IIRC, the best metrics we've seen from a top line here since god knows when. Plus all those goals

[dudacek]

9 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Ya his drop off that year came after his "miraculous" return from what looked like a sure LT injury. He wasn't himself. 

It's been 2 calendar years, but only 21 games more than one full season. A player having an bad, "off" season is something we see quite often - and the extra games we tack on come with all the added caveats of this season - all while playing him away from the position where we saw him put up the good numbers. 

41st in the NHL for drawing penalties is very good, that's "top line" penalty drawing individually, if you will. Combined with the fact that he's usually even better than that - it's a massive benefit. There'd be more than 3 goals if Jack was still playing, as Jack is the man when it comes to the PP

I'd say he needs to be a 25 point player for more than around 1 season, which is close to what it's been (103 games). 

I haven't really seen anything to make me think it's an absurd rational to think, paired back with Jack, we'd be getting a much better Skinner again. 

9 million reasons to find out

 

So it was injury -> Ralph -> bad limemates -> weird COVID year, filtered through an "off"-season (that carries over parts of 3) and sprinkled with a lack of Jack?

No one circles the wagons like Jeff Skinner fans.

***

Separately, is being a 25-point "first-line" penalty-drawer more or less important than being a 25-point "first-line" face-off man?

Edited April 23, 2021 by dudacek

[LabattBlue]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

So it was injury -> Ralph -> bad limemates -> weird COVID year, filtered through an "off"-season (that carries over parts of 3) and sprinkled with a lack of Jack?

No one circles the wagons like Jeff Skinner fans.

***

Separately, is being a 25-point "first-line" penalty-drawer more or less important than being a 25-point "first-line" face-off man?

So what is your answer as to Jeff Skinner going forward?

[dudacek]

10 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Unquestionably a bad deal. But what's the old thing about "sunk cost?" 

Play him where he'll have success. It doesn't matter that Skinner needs jack (and that Jack needs Reinhart on the RW) when that line was, IIRC, the best metrics we've seen from a top line here since god knows when. Plus all those goals

I just don't know how this is any different than saying the same things about Kyle Okposo a couple years after he signed his retirement deal. Jeff doesn't pass the eye test.

And, getting back to @3putt's point that launched this conversation: stapling him to Jack so he scores 22 goals instead of 11 might help Skinner, but I'm not sure it's going to help the Sabres win many hockey games.

3 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

So what is your answer as to Jeff Skinner going forward?

Tonya Harding?

(Seriously, I don't know. Play him where he least hurts the team until you can bite the bullet and find a way to move him? And that might be with Eichel. I just get tired of Jeff's play and the excuses people make for it)

Edited April 23, 2021 by dudacek

[Thorner]

15 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I just don't know how this is any different than saying the same things about Kyle Okposo a couple years after he signed his retirement deal. Jeff doesn't pass the eye test.

And, getting back to @3putt's point that launched this conversation: stapling him to Jack so he scores 22 goals instead of 11 might help Skinner, but I'm not sure it's going to help the Sabres win many hockey games.

Tonya Harding?

(Seriously, I don't know. Play him where he least hurts the team until you can bite the bullet and find a way to move him? And that might be with Eichel. I just get tired of Jeff's play and the excuses people make for it)

If we are going eye-test it'll just come down to opinion. Lately I'd agree, but Skinner did look snake bit to me the vast majority of last season( which is backed up by the underlyings)

 He was still getting his chances, and that was very un-Okposo like

I don't agree it won't help the Sabres win hockey games, at all. That line was very very metrically sound when we saw them together

Skinner did best cleaning up JE's net front rebounds. Jack let it rip that year, and put up his highest assist total 

Edited April 23, 2021 by Thorny

[LGR4GM]

Skinner's 9 mil won't be the reason we don't make the playoffs. Our drafting and development as always is the key. 

[Marvin]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

If we are going eye-test it'll just come down to opinion. Lately I'd agree, but Skinner did look snake bit to me the vast majority of last season( which is backed up by the underlyings)

 He was still getting his chances, and that was very un-Okposo like

I don't agree it won't help the Sabres win hockey games, at all. That line was very very metrically sound when we saw them together

Skinner did best cleaning up JE's net front rebounds. Jack let it rip that year, and put up his highest assist total 

Skinner is most effective on a line with other shooters.  He is a great garbageman.  And because he is a shooter, he needs someone else with finishing skills on his line.  As we are stuck with him for several years, the Sabres need to maximise his value to the team.

[LabattBlue]

3 hours ago, dudacek said:

Tonya Harding?

(Seriously, I don't know. Play him where he least hurts the team until you can bite the bullet and find a way to move him? And that might be with Eichel. I just get tired of Jeff's play and the excuses people make for it)

I've been saying that the only answer is a compliance buyout in the next 2-3 years(I'm crossing my fingers).  If you look at a normal buyout using capfriendly calculator, it is way way too painful.

 

In the meantime, I just hope there is some way to utilize him other than the RK approach.

 

PS I wonder whatever happened to Jeff Gilooly or whatever his name was! 😂

Edited April 23, 2021 by LabattBlue

[Thorner]

9 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

Skinner is most effective on a line with other shooters.  He is a great garbageman.  And because he is a shooter, he needs someone else with finishing skills on his line.  As we are stuck with him for several years, the Sabres need to maximise his value to the team.

Great way to put it - he is a garbage man. We saw him get a ton of chances in close that he didn't bury, clean shots - because he's better with the quick, gritty in close rebounds that Jack *always* generates because of his hard to handle shot. 

5 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

I've been saying that the only answer is a compliance buyout in the next 2-3 years(I'm crossing my fingers).  if you look at a normal buyout using capfriendly calculator, it is way way too painful.

 

In the meantime, I just hope there is some way to utilize him other than the RK approach.

We've seen it. 

Edited April 23, 2021 by Thorny

[thewookie1]

We just have to find a way to get goals out of Skinner, a buyout is literally impossible due to the horrendous cap hits we'd be stuck with. Most specifically a 6+ mil cap hit randomly placed midway through the buyout term after 2023. Anything earlier and we contend with a signing bonus from 2022 - 23. 

I'd put him with Eichel and if he still can't produce at some effective rate then I would try him with a couple others and then just bench him entirely.

[LabattBlue]

I’ll be honest I’ve watched very little even after Ralphie got fired.  For those who have, has Tage’s play “post RK” warrant him being protected for the expansion draft?   I can see protecting Mitts, but not sure about TT. 

[Hoss]

5 hours ago, Thorny said:

The "type" of players we need more of is: Good.

That's really it

No one wants players with a low motor

It might not sound scientific but this really is the answer. We’ve tried mixing and matching lineup-filling players for years but when you simply don’t have enough good player you’re going to be forced to put lesser players in bigger roles, especially when injuries arise. Find better players. If that means you’ve got to move someone out that was originally in your plans because you found an alternative you’re more confident in then do it.

[North Buffalo]

17 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

I’ll be honest I’ve watched very little even after Ralphie got fired.  For those who have, has Tage’s play “post RK” warrant him being protected for the expansion draft?   I can see protecting Mitts, but not sure about TT. 

Not really... he of course has moments but he still looks like he is struggling with concepts.  He doesnt really use that big frame enough and hasnt figured out how to protect the puck.  

[Thorner]

25 minutes ago, Hoss said:

It might not sound scientific but this really is the answer. We’ve tried mixing and matching lineup-filling players for years but when you simply don’t have enough good player you’re going to be forced to put lesser players in bigger roles, especially when injuries arise. Find better players. If that means you’ve got to move someone out that was originally in your plans because you found an alternative you’re more confident in then do it.

I can't even get to stylistic preferences/potential advantages, and trying to fill in the variable-filled equation of what's missing on our roster in that sense, when we *haven't even had an NHL 2C in the last 3 years*. Without an *adequate* centre in such a critical spot, it seems fruitless to try and prioritize stylistic fits, the ones of which we need would be so difficult to determine, when such a massive part of the talent variable missing. And it goes beyond that - how can we cast judgements on, say, Eichel's ability to "lead", or "win", when this Eichel (non elc) has never had a chance to lead a team that is competently filled at it's most important positions?

I don't need the ability to win with a bad team from my franchise centre. I just need the ability to win with a reasonable supporting cast. 

Edited April 23, 2021 by Thorny

[dudacek]

53 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

I’ll be honest I’ve watched very little even after Ralphie got fired.  For those who have, has Tage’s play “post RK” warrant him being protected for the expansion draft?   I can see protecting Mitts, but not sure about TT. 

I thought TT was bad last night, and he still makes poor decisions.

But post-Ralph he is definitely an NHL player who also makes more "skill' plays than most. He's got 5/1/6+3 in 12 April games, but has no points in his past 3.

At this moment, he would be one of the 7 forwards I protect, but it's not a slam dunk.

[thewookie1]

Risto(50%) for Tuch 

 

what do do you guys think?

[North Buffalo]

13 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

Risto(50%) for Tuch 

 

what do do you guys think?

Hmmm and a 3rd coming back if the Sabres are going to go D no 1.  Itll depend but Risto is top 4 D, Tuch is not top six on O.

Edited April 23, 2021 by North Buffalo

[thewookie1]

4 minutes ago, North Buffalo said:

Hmmm and a 3rd coming back if the Sabres are going to go D no 1.  Itll depend but Risto is top 4 D, Tuch is not top six on O.

Tuch averages just under 20 goals in his past 3 years and in theory is the type of fast moving power forward we need. That’s my reasoning for targeting him.

[Brawndo]

1 hour ago, thewookie1 said:

Risto(50%) for Tuch 

 

what do do you guys think?

If They agrees to that trade, call NHL Central Registry before Vegas has a chance to come to their senses