Jeff Skinner Agrees to waive His NMC for Expansion Draft

[Weave]

Skinner's overall game is undeniably selfish, not unlike Evander Kane's.  But he is (or at least was) a helluva finisher, and worthy of a first rate set up man.  He doesn't need an Eichel (although Eichel certainly benefitted Skinner).  He needs a center and/or RW that keeps the puck in the O zone and puts up alot of shots.  Skinner's game is a game of opportunity.  Of ambush on loose pucks.  If you don't get him linemates capable of producing shots and rebounds he is going to look like a selfish player with little upside.  With linemates that produce loose pucks in dangerous areas Skinner will look like a selfish player with excellent finish.

[Marvin]

2 hours ago, Weave said:

Skinner's overall game is undeniably selfish, not unlike Evander Kane's.  But he is (or at least was) a helluva finisher, and worthy of a first rate set up man.  He doesn't need an Eichel (although Eichel certainly benefitted Skinner).  He needs a center and/or RW that keeps the puck in the O zone and puts up alot of shots.  Skinner's game is a game of opportunity.  Of ambush on loose pucks.  If you don't get him linemates capable of producing shots and rebounds he is going to look like a selfish player with little upside.  With linemates that produce loose pucks in dangerous areas Skinner will look like a selfish player with excellent finish.

Exactly: he can score a lot of ugly garbage goals with linemates who shoot a lot and cause rebounds because he reads play so well on rebounds and panicky clears.  He really has a knack for reading how the discipline of the defencive zone coverage breaks down on rebounds and when his linemates cause turnovers from strong forechecking.

[dudacek]

3 hours ago, Thorny said:

So he's drawing penalties at a top-level, first line rate over the last 2 seasons. Maybe the PP should be better.

You mistakenly compared his quantifiable ability to Risto's vague "he's a physical presence" and I pointed out why that's not an appropriate comparison. You can dislike Skinner and point out his negatives all you want without calling into question a legitimate positive because it doesn't fit your argument. 

It's not so much that I take issue with your overall take, just the fact that you continually say things like "and 40 points isn't enough for the top line when you bring nothing else to the table" - when I keep pointing out that's objectively false. 

I don’t think I was questioning the positive. There are things Skinner still does well and that is one of them and it is an asset.

The comparison I was making was more about how this one positive quality tends to get trotted out every time every time Skinner gets criticized, to the point where it starts to sound like it should forgive the other flaws in his game, when it’s really just one of several qualities that come into play.

I was trying to point out how significant that skill really is when you actually quantify it. Look at it this way, there are people here who largely dismiss Victor Olofsson because he “only scores on the power play”. That one thing Skinner does well indirectly led to about 8 goals over the past two years. The one thing Olofsson does well directly led to 20.