Is Jiri Kulich really a center?

[inkman]

I’ve watched him fairly extensively with the Amerks and obviously been watching him in Buffalo.  I have to say, I don’t think he plays like a center.  Certainly not in the traditional sense.  He’s a shoot first player, his shot is his main asset and he just seems to move more like a winger.  Straight line speed, built compact and powerful, not long and lanky for playmaking.  Maybe it’s just me…

Edited February 1 by inkman

[Flashsabre]

2 minutes ago, inkman said:

I’ve watched him fairly extensively with the Amerks and obviously been watching him in Buffalo.  I have to say, I don’t think he plays like a center.  Certainly not in the traditional sense.  He’s a shoot first player, his shot is his main asset and he just seems to move more like a winger.  Straight line speed, built compact and powerful, not long and lanky for playmaking.  Maybe it’s just me…

Ideally no. You want a top 6 centre who is a playmaker and create for his wingers. The Sabres have none of them.

Kulich and Tage have good chemistry but both should be wingers with a good playmaker in the middle.

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, inkman said:

I’ve watched him fairly extensively with the Amerks and obviously been watching him in Buffalo.  I have to say, I don’t think he plays like a center.  Certainly not in the traditional sense.  He’s a shoot first player, his shot is his main asset and he just seems to move more like a winger.  Straight line speed, built compact and powerful, not long and lanky for playmaking.  Maybe it’s just me…

I suspect that eventually Kulich and Cozens will both end up on wing. As far as Kulich, as you stated, this young fellow can certainly shoot! 

[Weave]

13 minutes ago, inkman said:

I’ve watched him fairly extensively with the Amerks and obviously been watching him in Buffalo.  I have to say, I don’t think he plays like a center.  Certainly not in the traditional sense.  He’s a shoot first player, his shot is his main asset and he just seems to move more like a winger.  Straight line speed, built compact and powerful, not long and lanky for playmaking.  Maybe it’s just me…

No idea what his ultimate position will be.  I do know he has a dynamic element to his game we haven’t seen much of during our generation wandering in the desert.

Mitts had that dynamic element too.  Hopefully this time it turns out better.

[Taro T]

18 minutes ago, inkman said:

I’ve watched him fairly extensively with the Amerks and obviously been watching him in Buffalo.  I have to say, I don’t think he plays like a center.  Certainly not in the traditional sense.  He’s a shoot first player, his shot is his main asset and he just seems to move more like a winger.  Straight line speed, built compact and powerful, not long and lanky for playmaking.  Maybe it’s just me…

Is he in the traditional C model?  No.

But if Matthews can be a C, guess any goal scorer can.  As long as he's willing to have to put in extra work in his own end, sure, why not.

And wouldn't be surprised if LT he's back at W.  But for now, sadly, he's about the best they've got.

[Thorner]

36 minutes ago, inkman said:

I’ve watched him fairly extensively with the Amerks and obviously been watching him in Buffalo.  I have to say, I don’t think he plays like a center.  Certainly not in the traditional sense.  He’s a shoot first player, his shot is his main asset and he just seems to move more like a winger.  Straight line speed, built compact and powerful, not long and lanky for playmaking.  Maybe it’s just me…

Will fit right in with our other centres 

personally I much prefer playmakers as we lean so heavily so snipers across the board and that tends to dry up. But there’s no denying the skill 

[mjd1001]

51 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Is he in the traditional C model?  No.

But if Matthews can be a C, guess any goal scorer can.  As long as he's willing to have to put in extra work in his own end, sure, why not.

And wouldn't be surprised if LT he's back at W.  But for now, sadly, he's about the best they've got.

Its not always about do you look to pass first or shoot first.  its about the ability to make that decision correctly. Knowing at any given time if you taking the shot is better than your winger(s).

Kulich might be a very good center who doesn't look like a playmaker.  If at any given time when he has the puck on his stick, he he has a better chance of scoring than a winger would (because he has a better shot or is in better position)...then make the correct decision.

That is one of the reasons Cozens isn't a good Center. Its not that Cozens shoots too much or not, its that he doesn't make the decision on when shooting is better or passing is better. With Cozens, the decisions are like flipping a coin.

A good center isn't one who passes more than he shoots. Its one who can make the decision of when to pass vs shoot.  If that means the correct decision is he shoots more and has more goals than assists, so be it. That would be a good center.

Its not as simple as goal to assist ratio.....instead its about making that correct decision in the offensive end, whatever that decision is...and maybe even more so your defensive zone play or transitions through the neutral zone.

 

Edited February 1 by mjd1001

[Jorcus]

One thing that points to being a center is that he is not bad on the face offs. Even though he is 45% that is pretty good for a rookie. He has very quick hands on the dot.

[Thorner]

29 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

Its not always about do you look to pass first or shoot first.  its about the ability to make that decision correctly. Knowing at any given time if you taking the shot is better than your winger(s).

Kulich might be a very good center who doesn't look like a playmaker.  If at any given time when he has the puck on his stick, he he has a better chance of scoring than a winger would (because he has a better shot or is in better position)...then make the correct decision.

That is one of the reasons Cozens isn't a good Center. Its not that Cozens shoots too much or not, its that he doesn't make the decision on when shooting is better or passing is better. With Cozens, the decisions are like flipping a coin.

A good center isn't one who passes more than he shoots. Its one who can make the decision of when to pass vs shoot.  If that means the correct decision is he shoots more and has more goals than assists, so be it. That would be a good center.

Its more about goal to assist ratio..its about making that correct decision in the offensive end, whatever that decision is...and maybe even more so your defensive zone play or transitions through the neutral zone.

 

Whether to pass or shoot is a choice to be made by all players, that’s not a defining factor of what makes a good centre, particularly. That choice is as important and relevant no matter *what* the position. It’s simply a factor in what makes a good player, period 

Playmaking has historically been favourited for centres because traditionally they were essentially being positioned in zone as the point guard: the spot where facilitating is the most important.

Now, that’s often still the case, but not always: often positions nowadays are more important re: the defensive zone. In which cases, players are allowed a more free-wheeling style in the offensive zone, and anyone can be the primary distributor, or it can be a combination 

but you still need the distributor. If you have 3 guys on a line who all always make the correct pass/shoot decision but none of the three are actually particularly adept at playmaking, the line would fail 

Edited February 1 by Thorner

[mjd1001]

9 minutes ago, Thorner said:

Whether to pass or shoot is a choice to be made by all players, that’s not a defining factor of what makes a good centre, particularly. That choice is as important and relevant no matter *what* the position. It’s simply a factor in what makes a good player, period 

Playmaking has historically been favourited for centres because traditionally they were essentially being positioned in zone as the point guard: the spot where facilitating is the most important.

Now, that’s often still the case, but not always: often positions nowadays are more important re: the defensive zone. In which cases, players are allowed a more free-wheeling style in the offensive zone, and anyone can be the primary distributor, or it can be a combination 

but you still need the distributor. If you have 3 guys on a line who all always make the correct pass/shoot decision but none of the three are actually particularly adept at playmaking, the line would fail 

I'm just going on the Center being more important on making the better choice, because historically I think the Center has more zone entries than the wingers do and the Center has more time with the puck in the offensive zone than the wingers do. I know I read someplace, on Twitter on on here, that someone posted something to that effect, and I think it makes sense.

So, I was just going on the idea that the guy in the position that has the puck more often (usually the center) I want as the one that makes the best decisions.

Edited February 1 by mjd1001

[LTS]

As the game evolves it's really hard to nail down what a C is supposed to be.  I think Thorny has it down.  Face-offs aren't necessarily taken by the "C" any longer. They are taken by the forward who gives the team the best chance to the the face-off in that particular moment.  Left vs. Right dot, defensive vs. offensive zone.

I think if you had a "C" that is particularly strong on the dot then that helps, but ultimately it's not the end of the world.

As far as of the offensive zone goes, it's such a cycling game at this point that you just need to make sure you have a distribution of skill sets that achieves the output expected from that line.

In the defensive zone it can be a bit more defined if you want C who is better at assisting in closing down the net front area. I think the game has become so much more transitional now that it's not too often that teams end up establishing a zone presence (the Sabres defensive coverage notwithstanding) and that they play more F1, F2, F3 than anything.

I think Kulich and Thompson work well together so far. So I'll be happy with that.  Peterka seems to be benefiting as well.

[Thorner]

7 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

I'm just going on the Center being more important on making the better choice, because historically (at least the advanced stats someone posted here a couple years ago), the Center has more zone entries than the wingers do and the Center has more time with the puck in the offensive zone than the wingers do.  (I'll try to find the post and link it here, but there was a stat that showed the Center has the puck on his stick 20% or more time than a typical winger does, I assume the numbers are similar today than they were a few years ago)

So, I was just going on the idea that the guy in the position that has the puck more often (usually the center) I want as the one that makes the best decisions.

Makes sense, but I’ve heard from most Leafs fans Marner is commonly the primary puck carrier when playing with matthews. If the centre on our line is the primary carrier, I do think distribution is the most important skill. After we get past, say, hockey sense where the decisions you speak of apply. There’ll be a multitude of passing options at all times, but only one shooting 

Edited February 1 by Thorner

[mjd1001]

1 minute ago, Thorner said:

Makes sense, but I’ve heard from most Leafs fans Marner is commonly the primary puck carrier when playing with matthews. If the centre on our line is the primary carrier, I do think distribution is the most importantly skill. They’ll be a multitude of passing options at all times, but one shooting 

I guess its up to the coach and how you structure lines, and how well the players work together.

But if you can structure lines a certain way....or have players play in 'non traditional' rolls, then I guess it doesn't really matter if you are a center or winger, so maybe this conversation is a moot point, just giving us something to talk about.

But, then again, I DO think of defensive responsibilities. At least with the Sabres under Granato and Ruff, the person assigned to Center in the defensive zone is the one who covers the center of the ice, while the wingers seem to be the ones going to the boards.

Maybe the roll of Center vs Wing in the modern NHL matters a lot for defensive zone assignments...a moderate amount for neutral zone play, and matters the least for offensive zone play?

Edited February 1 by mjd1001

[Thorner]

3 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

I guess its up to the coach and how you structure lines, and how well the players work together.

But if you can structure lines a certain way....or have players play in 'non traditional' rolls, then I guess it doesn't really matter if you are a center or winger.

No, it doesn’t matter in the end. I think you need a good (pass-first) distributor on the line (or 3 50/50 players, I guess) but the distributor can line up at wing. It’s less common but it happens

the thing with us is we are simply lacking distributors 

Who’s our best pure playmaker? Peyton Krebs? 

Tuch I guess. 

I mean it’s essentially Dahlin but when thinking about the F ranks we lack good playmaking and that’s a stylistic no no for me in addition to aptitude based and results affecting. I’m a little weary of the sick sniper mode we seem to be following a little closely 

Edited February 1 by Thorner

[mjd1001]

7 minutes ago, Thorner said:

No, it doesn’t matter in the end. I think you need a good (pass-first) distributor on the line (or 3 50/50 players, I guess) but the distributor can line up at wing. It’s less common but it happens

the thing with us is we are simply lacking distributors 

Who’s our best pure playmaker? Peyton Krebs? 

Last year I would have said Mitts. This year...I assume we are talking about forwards otherwise I would probably say Dahlin.

I don't see a player on this team as a pure playmaking forward. When I think of players that make great passes, an occasional one by Tuch or Thompson comes to mind, but neither of those guys are pure playmakers. They might actually be shoot-first players who happen to have the ability to make a nice pass every once in a while which is the only reason I remember them.

I can't even remember when they had a good playmaker. Reinhart maybe?  Vanek had good vision and involved his teammates but he was more of a shoot-first guy. Eichel I guess? No one really stands out on this team in recent memory. Is Tuch a good playmaker from the wing and that is one of the reasons why Thompson is their best goal scorer because he plays with Tuch?  I'm really at a loss here for thinking of anyone this team has, or has had, that is a legit good playmaker.

Edited February 1 by mjd1001

[Thorner]

7 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

Last year I would have said Mitts. This year...I assume we are talking about forwards otherwise I would probably say Dahlin.

I don't see a player on this team as a pure playmaking forward. When I think of players that make great passes, an occasional one by Tuch or Thompson comes to mind, but neither of those guys are pure playmakers. They might actually be shoot-first players who happen to have the ability to make a nice pass every once in a while which is the only reason I remember them.

I can't even remember when they had a good playmaker. Reinhart maybe?  Vanek had good vision and involved his teammates but he was more of a shoot-first guy. Eichel I guess? No one really stands out on this team in recent memory. Is Tuch a good playmaker from the wing and that is one of the reasons why Thompson is their best goal scorer because he plays with Tuch?  I'm really at a loss here for thinking of anyone this team has, or has had, that is a legit good playmaker.

“I guess”

dude come on. Eichel is a world class playmaker. World class. He’s near the top of the league in assists. He’s on pace for a whopping 77 assists this year. He led the playoffs in assists. I was calling him a playmaker the entire time he was here 

maybe I was just a little bit right about Jack Eichel. Ya know? Maybe just a tad 

Edited February 1 by Thorner

[GASabresIUFAN]

Is Kulich a center? Yes 

[inkman]

6 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Is Kulich a center? Yes 

Appreciate the input 

[DarthEbriate]

Eichel was a fantastic playmaker here and is even better now with a competent team. 

Reinhart was a very good playmaker here, who also happened to go to the net and score off deflections. In his 3rd Sabres season his shot really took off. And now he combines all three and his IQ leads him to a bunch of “puck finds him” rebound goals. 

Kulich isn’t a playmaker, but it’s quite all right because he creates scoring chances for himself and goes to the net with purpose to create space for others. It’s a different type of puck distribution.

What has impressed me most is his willingness to play defense and his acumen in creating middle ice turnovers. He’s directly caused turnovers the last few games that led to Sabres rush goals, whether he got an assist on it or not. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

25 minutes ago, inkman said:

Appreciate the input 

lol!  You’re welcome!  
 

All 3 current alleged centers are shoot first players in Cozens, TNT, and McLeod.  The only “playmaker” on the roster is Tuch.  JJP has the passing skills but is also a shoot first player.  Quinn is shoot first as well.  Benson was known as a creator in the CHL but hasn’t made a consistent impact that way in the NHL.  Zucker, who traditionally is a shoot first player, has focused on more playmaking as a Sabre.  

One of the huge issues with this roster is the lack of playmakers once Mitts was traded and no effort was made to find an adequate replacement.

Edited February 1 by GASabresIUFAN

[mjd1001]

1 hour ago, Thorner said:

“I guess”

dude come on. Eichel is a world class playmaker. World class. He’s near the top of the league in assists. He’s on pace for a whopping 77 assists this year. He led the playoffs in assists. I was calling him a playmaker the entire time he was here 

maybe I was just a little bit right about Jack Eichel. Ya know? Maybe just a tad 

When he was with the Sabres... He put up a lot of points one year but I wouldn't call him a world-class playmaker then. He's become more of a pass first player with Vegas than he was with the sabres. He's gotten better as he's matured.

I'm sorry but his time in Buffalo, he was more of a balanced player. When he set up other players... It was less about him having great vision and looking to pass first and making pinpoint passes, rather than it was about him drawing attention as the best overall player on the ice and taking advantage of that.

I remember he would often carry the puck into the offensive zone and slow down, looking to pass the puck as he just crossed the blue line. But once he got in close to the net, he was not always looking 'pass first'.

When I think of the word 'playmaker', I think of someone who gets the puck closer to the net, and then looks to set up linemates.  Eichel was almost the opposite with the Sabres...he would 'distribute' after crossing the blue line, but the closer he got to the net, the more he looked to shoot. That is my memory of him with the Sabres.

Edited February 1 by mjd1001

[Carmel Corn]

13 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

lol!  You’re welcome!  
 

All 3 current alleged centers are shoot first players in Cozens, TNT, and McLeod.  The only “playmaker” on the roster is Tuch.  JJP has the passing skills but is also a shoot first player.  Quinn is shoot first as well.  Benson was known as a creator in the CHL but hasn’t made a consistent impact that way in the NHL.  Zucker, who traditionally is a shoot first player, has focused on more playmaking as a Sabre.  

One of the huge issues with this roster is the lack of playmakers once Mitts was traded and no effort was made to find an adequate replacement.

I really like Tuch, but he ain’t a playmaker anymore than our other so-called centers.  The organization as a whole really only has one prospect who might be a traditional playmaker….and that is Östlund IMHO.  

[JohnC]

14 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

When he was with the sabers... He put up a lot of points one year but I wouldn't call him a world-class playmaker then. Last win for you. He's become more of a pass first player with Vegas than he was with the sabres. He's gotten better as he's matured.

I'm sorry but his time in Buffalo, he was more of a balanced player. When he set up other players. It was less about him having great vision and making pinpoint passes, rather than it was about him drawing attention as the best overall player on the ice and taking advantage of that.

I understand why you wouldn't consider Eichel a world-class playmaker here but I disagree with that assessment. He simply didn't have the players to convert his passes that he does in Vegas. (I believe @Thorner made that point.) Eichel had elite attributes when it came to skating, shooting and passing. In Buffalo, what always stood out to me were his passes to players who couldn't convert them. He was a special talent that was way beyond the players he played with in Buffalo. And that frustrated him and was one of the factors why he wanted out of the dismal situation that he felt he was stuck in. 

[DarthEbriate]

8 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I understand why you wouldn't consider Eichel a world-class playmaker here but I disagree with that assessment. He simply didn't have the players to convert his passes that he does in Vegas. (I believe @Thorner made that point.) Eichel had elite attributes when it came to skating, shooting and passing. In Buffalo, what always stood out to me were his passes to players who couldn't convert them. He was a special talent that was way beyond the players he played with in Buffalo. And that frustrated him and was one of the factors why he wanted out of the dismal situation that he felt he was stuck in. 

^ This. 
In half a season on Eichel’s wing, Kane alone should have had 4 more tap-in goals on empty nets because of elite passes and goalies forced to respect Eichel’s shot.

[Scottysabres]

I don’t know if he’s a center, but he’s on the path to being capt. clutch. Ya, keep this guy, he’s worth a grain of salt.