The Jeff Skinner Contract - Revisited

[GASabresIUFAN]

The Athletic has Skinner’s value at 10 million.

 

[DarthEbriate]

If HC Krueger doesn't exist, then Skinner stays on the top line with Eichel and Reinhart, producing points instead of skating the 4th or being scratched. If that occurs, Eichel and Reinhart put up points and everything looks better. Because the offense is better, there is no need to sign Hall to "make us Stanley Cup contenders" and that money can instead be spent on a true defensive center (not an Eakin) and a goalie to replace Hutton. Because the offense is better, there's no reason for Eichel to demand a trade. Montour looks like a real defenseman. Mitts and Thompson and Asplund develop a year earlier. If there's no Hall, then there's no Eichel neck injury or bottoming out for Power. If there's no Power, then Eichel's still the captain and maybe Reinhart is here although he'd been bridged. Always in motion is the future.

[LabattBlue]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

The Athletic has Skinner’s value at 10 million.

 

WTF...I need to cancel my subscription.  😂 

[Zamboni]

When he signed the contract in June of 2019, it was ….

ZOMG that’s ridiculous! Huge overpayment.

 

Now it’s turned into ….

Wow that’s high, but ok

If he stays around a 60 pt player for the next few years, it will be …

Expensive but it’s not terrible. 

 

 

[JohnC]

2 hours ago, triumph_communes said:

Did you watch the recent 5 game slide?  He stuck out like a sore thumb. It wasn’t working. 

Tell that to the Granato who has kept him on the first line. Explain that to me. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

Skinner has 11 pts (3g 8a) in his last 12 games.  He hasn't been at his best of late (something I've commented on before), but he certainly hasn't been bad or a real negative.  

[PerreaultForever]

51 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Skinner has 11 pts (3g 8a) in his last 12 games.  He hasn't been at his best of late (something I've commented on before), but he certainly hasn't been bad or a real negative.  

He's still overpaid imo but I agree that he hasn't been bad this year, good at times, and is far from he problem.

I know the modern kids don't like the old +/- but Skinner is plus 14 while Mitts is -13. The 3rd line on this team is the problem, not the 1st. 

[Thorny]

Good thread. 
 

Still draws a lot of penalties as well 

7 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

The Athletic has Skinner’s value at 10 million.

 

Yep there it is: 97th percentile. It’s something that remained good even when his production / ice time was down - always an indicator he could potentially bounce back 

[GASabresIUFAN]

22 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

I know the modern kids don't like the old +/- but Skinner is plus 14 while Mitts is -13. The 3rd line on this team is the problem, not the 1st. 

Have you even checked the numbers of late?  Mitts has 15 pts in his last 24 games and 0+/-.  Sabres record in those games is 14-7-3.  The facts don't support your claim.  Also in the first 10 games (Sabres 7-3) when the D was healthy, Mitts was +1 with 7 points.  That means the majority of Mitts struggles defensively has coincided with the Sabres injuries on D and in goal.  The 3rd line isn't the problem.  

This team allows 3.4 goals against on average.  Goaltending and D beyond the top 3 is the problem.  

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Have you even checked the numbers of late?  Mitts has 15 pts in his last 24 games and 0+/-.  Sabres record in those games is 14-7-3.  The facts don't support your claim.  Also in the first 10 games (Sabres 7-3) when the D was healthy, Mitts was +1 with 7 points.  That means the majority of Mitts struggles defensively has coincided with the Sabres injuries on D and in goal.  The 3rd line isn't the problem.  

This team allows 3.4 goals against on average.  Goaltending and D beyond the top 3 is the problem.  

So to be clear, you think Mitts-Jost-VO is a good line and it can compete head to head with the 3rd lines on playoff caliber teams. Is that correct? 

[Archie Lee]

4 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

So to be clear, you think Mitts-Jost-VO is a good line and it can compete head to head with the 3rd lines on playoff caliber teams. Is that correct? 

Just looking at the 3rd lines of playoff contenders using the depth chart tool on capfriendly and I would say there are plenty of teams that our 3rd lines stacks up fine against. I’m not saying it couldn’t be improved, but it isn’t the case that they would be grossly overmatched in any playoff matchup. 

[JohnC]

5 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

So to be clear, you think Mitts-Jost-VO is a good line and it can compete head to head with the 3rd lines on playoff caliber teams. Is that correct? 

Yes. The addition of Jost has made a difference and solidified that line. 

[JohnC]

7 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Have you even checked the numbers of late?  Mitts has 15 pts in his last 24 games and 0+/-.  Sabres record in those games is 14-7-3.  The facts don't support your claim.  Also in the first 10 games (Sabres 7-3) when the D was healthy, Mitts was +1 with 7 points.  That means the majority of Mitts struggles defensively has coincided with the Sabres injuries on D and in goal.  The 3rd line isn't the problem.  

This team allows 3.4 goals against on average.  Goaltending and D beyond the top 3 is the problem.  

You make a potent point that even the ascending numbers that have followed Mitts with the addition of Jost to the line don't alter the unshakeable narrative that many have of this particular player. And as you insightfully point out the other units you are playing with are a factor in the analytical numbers attached to this particular players. I have a recommendation for those who aren't capable of deciphering the actual numbers: Trust your eyes more than your ingrained jaundiced attitudes toward specific players. 

[Taro T]

8 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

He's still overpaid imo but I agree that he hasn't been bad this year, good at times, and is far from he problem.

I know the modern kids don't like the old +/- but Skinner is plus 14 while Mitts is -13. The 3rd line on this team is the problem, not the 1st. 

The 3rd line was a big problem when it was used as the 2nd line.  Since dropping the 3rd line deployment it hasn't been a problem & since Jost subsequently joined it, it has been actually been good.

[Drag0nDan]

21 hours ago, LabattBlue said:

Skinner never was nor will he ever be a 9 mil hockey player.  Yes, he has made the number look better based on his play this year, but still a ridiculous contract that Botts and Pegula agreed to….and just because the cap goes up as the years go by, it doesn’t make it any better.   He is overpaid by at least 2 mil per year. 

He's way too close in AAV to Gaudreau and Huberdeau (similar age at contract signing), considering they signed their deals much later.  Rantanen and Kucherov signed around the same time as well and are again far too close. 

In any case - he's found a home on that line with thompson and tuch.  He still draws penalties, he still chirps, and he's still finding greasy areas for rebound goals.  At the time a lot of people were concerned on term and what kind of player he'd be towards the end of the deal, and I'm seeing a player who doesn't rely too much on speed.  I think he'll be fine.  

[GASabresIUFAN]

8 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

So to be clear, you think Mitts-Jost-VO is a good line and it can compete head to head with the 3rd lines on playoff caliber teams. Is that correct? 

 

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

Yes. The addition of Jost has made a difference and solidified that line. 

Yes!  Are there better 3rd lines in the NHL?  Probably, but the majority are similar or worse.  

VO is 29th among NHL forwards in goals with 23.  18 are at even strength. His EVG's are 19th in the NHL.  That's top line production for most teams, but he's a 3rd line winger for the Sabres.  Mitts is tied for 138 in points and tied for 97th in assists.  That's 2nd line production for most NHL teams.  

I understand you (not @JohnC) are in the Casey sucks camp. I get it. but maybe it's time to look at the broader picture.  If you moved Casey out, what would it cost you in assets and cap to get someone "better" and now much better would they really be?

For example, the Rags just traded a 1st rd pick for Vlad Tarasenko.  Vlad has been an excellent player in this league, but guess what his production is this season? 10g 19a for 29 pts and a -18.  Is that 7.5 million worth of production from a 31 year old?  Is he really much of an upgrade at this point?  Would you spend a 1st this season to get him?    

Would I like to see play more physically? Absolutely, but as Rob Ray pointed out a few games ago, Casey is doing a much better job at winning puck battles now that he is on the wing.  Would I like to see Casey score more goals?  Also absolutely, but I'm ok with him feeding VO, which he has been doing with regularity once Jost took over the center job.

PS While I do defend Casey because I think he is a pretty talented player who seems to be growing into his role with the Sabres, I'm also realistic on his future here.  At this point, JJP and Quinn probably have more upside.  Because of his age and contract status, there is a high likelihood that he (and VO)will be a cap casualty in the next few years as guys like Rosen, Kulich and Savoie push from below.  

.....and now back to our featured topic.  Just as an aside, I'd love to hear what guys like Dahlin and Skinner truly think about RK.

 

 

Edited February 10, 2023 by GASabresIUFAN

[JohnC]

2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

 

Yes!  Are there better 3rd lines in the NHL?  Probably, but the majority are similar or worse.  

VO is 29th among NHL forwards in goals with 23.  18 are at even strength. His EVG's are 19th in the NHL.  That's top line production for most teams, but he's a 3rd line winger for the Sabres.  Mitts is tied for 138 in points and tied for 97th in assists.  That's 2nd line production for most NHL teams.  

I understand you (not @JohnC) are in the Casey sucks camp. I get it. but maybe it's time to look at the broader picture.  If you moved Casey out, what would it cost you in assets and cap to get someone "better" and now much better would they really be?

For example, the Rags just traded a 1st rd pick for Vlad Tarasenko.  Vlad has been an excellent player in this league, but guess what his production is this season? 10g 19a for 29 pts and a -18.  Is that 7.5 million worth of production from a 31 year old?  Is he really much of an upgrade at this point?  Would you spend a 1st this season to get him?    

Would I like to see play more physically? Absolutely, but as Rob Ray pointed out a few games ago, Casey is doing a much better job at winning puck battles now that he is on the wing.  Would I like to see Casey score more goals?  Also absolutely, but I'm ok with him feeding VO, which he has been doing with regularity once Jost took over the center job.

PS While I do defend Casey because I think he is a pretty talented player who seems to be growing into his role with the Sabres, I'm also realistic on his future here.  At this point, JJP and Quinn probably have more upside.  Because of his age and contract status, there is a high likelihood that he (and VO)will be a cap casualty in the next few years as guys like Rosen, Kulich and Savoie push from below.  

.....and now back to our featured topic.  Just as an aside, I'd love to hear what guys like Dahlin and Skinner truly think about RK.

 

 

You know what that answer is! Stop toying with us! 🤡 There's no doubt that the inglorious Krueger stint was damaging for a lot of obvious reasons. But there is an aspect to Krueger's proclivity toward stifling talent that the owner should be furious over. It was not getting production value from dollars invested. It's like Pegula sinking in a lot of money in a location that is supposed to be filled with an abundance of gas only to draw a miniscule amount of gas that didn't come close to getting a return on one's expensive investment. Skinner was getting paid $9 per year. Under Krueger's suffocating approach Skinner was being used as a marginal $250,000 utility player. That made no sense. Let's not even bother with how he handled Dahlin! He took a player with expansive talents and deliberately crimped (castrated) him with his regimented approach to the game. Compare how Coach Don G in relatively short order regained the value that the players' possessed.

Shifting gears a little, what you see now is that the players on the roster are being more properly slotted to their talent level. Our first is composed of first line players. The second line, although not currently fully developed, have young players who will in the not-too-distant future play up to their line status. The same goes for our first pairing and for the most part the second pairing. (I'm aware that some don't believe that Joki is playing on a pairing that is too high.) As the talent base increases the slots get more properly solidified. Not that long ago that wasn't the case. 

[Contempt]

I would love to move that contract in a hockey trade but nobody will take it. The teams that he could help don't want a hockey trade and don't have the money to absorb him without moving money out.

[Weave]

14 minutes ago, Contempt said:

I would love to move that contract in a hockey trade but nobody will take it. The teams that he could help don't want a hockey trade and don't have the money to absorb him without moving money out.

He’s got a no movement or no trade clause anyway.

He’s a Sabre.

[Contempt]

10 minutes ago, Weave said:

He’s got a no movement or no trade clause anyway.

He’s a Sabre.

Just means you have to ask permission.

[PerreaultForever]

6 hours ago, JohnC said:

Yes. The addition of Jost has made a difference and solidified that line. 

I won't disagree on Jost improving it, but it's still not a good line. 

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

I won't disagree on Jost improving it, but it's still not a good line. 

It's more of a third line, not a first or second line. I'm more than satisfied with how it is playing. They have a role and fulfilling it. 

[Thorny]

4 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

 

Yes!  Are there better 3rd lines in the NHL?  Probably, but the majority are similar or worse.  

VO is 29th among NHL forwards in goals with 23.  18 are at even strength. His EVG's are 19th in the NHL.  That's top line production for most teams, but he's a 3rd line winger for the Sabres.  Mitts is tied for 138 in points and tied for 97th in assists.  That's 2nd line production for most NHL teams.  

I understand you (not @JohnC) are in the Casey sucks camp. I get it. but maybe it's time to look at the broader picture.  If you moved Casey out, what would it cost you in assets and cap to get someone "better" and now much better would they really be?

For example, the Rags just traded a 1st rd pick for Vlad Tarasenko.  Vlad has been an excellent player in this league, but guess what his production is this season? 10g 19a for 29 pts and a -18.  Is that 7.5 million worth of production from a 31 year old?  Is he really much of an upgrade at this point?  Would you spend a 1st this season to get him?    

Would I like to see play more physically? Absolutely, but as Rob Ray pointed out a few games ago, Casey is doing a much better job at winning puck battles now that he is on the wing.  Would I like to see Casey score more goals?  Also absolutely, but I'm ok with him feeding VO, which he has been doing with regularity once Jost took over the center job.

PS While I do defend Casey because I think he is a pretty talented player who seems to be growing into his role with the Sabres, I'm also realistic on his future here.  At this point, JJP and Quinn probably have more upside.  Because of his age and contract status, there is a high likelihood that he (and VO)will be a cap casualty in the next few years as guys like Rosen, Kulich and Savoie push from below.  

.....and now back to our featured topic.  Just as an aside, I'd love to hear what guys like Dahlin and Skinner truly think about RK.

 

 

Does anyone know how to do any reconciliation with the overall goal differential and the aptitude of the forwards? I don’t have any answers but the way I continually see this being broken down is clearly flawed, that much I can identify: we are simply equating “goals scored” to forwards, and “goals against” to the defensemen and goalies. Super old-fashioned. I mean, this just isn’t the way the league works. Hockey is a game of flow- 2-way ability for F is just as important as outright offence and they have an effect, certainly, on the goals given up. D the same but inverse. 

That is it say: isn’t our goal differential about mid pack? It would be poor form to just look at “goals scored” for every line and claim them adequate. If I had to guess, the overall goal differential while not a great individual representing mark would be more accurate for an overall evaluation of the group than simply goals one way.

- - - 

I think our F group is really good overall and getting better, but those sorta intimating that it’s “set now” and we just need to tweak on D, maybe a 4th line F or so..

..after our first playoff series we are going to have a little list of stuff and I can guarantee we won’t see the F unit as compete relative to formulating a unit with overall balance and ability. Some (lots, most?) of the improvement will/may even be internal, my point is inclusive of that. I just don’t think the numbers as they are presenting themselves right now, nor the eye test, nor the record, point to the F unit being among the best in the league overall, quite yet. 

If someone smarter has advanced stats charts breaking down the fact our F lines have all been pretty dominant and we are ONLY surrendering lots of goals against because of our D and goaltending, please post them as I could be way off. Just not what I am seeing. 

Edited February 10, 2023 by Thorny

[GASabresIUFAN]

The Sabres are +16 which is 12th in the NHL.  

 

[Thorny]

1 minute ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

The Sabres are +16 which is 12th in the NHL.  

 

So in the mid third, ya. This is part and parcel with what I am saying. If you read my post I said I think the unit is “really good”. My contention is with the implication it’s sorta “set”. This isn’t your outright implication it’s just something I commonly see being intimated 

Edited February 10, 2023 by Thorny