Value of: Buchnevich to Penguins

Beauner

Registered User
Jun 14, 2011
13,031
6,132
Pittsburgh
Highly doubt pitt spends a first on rental winger. Jake should be back at playoff time. He could be ahead or behind at this point. Pitt has no panic ad they are winning and moving up the standings . Alex G goes first and maybe Shultz for a winger . De Smith perhaps.
no he shouldn't :laugh: The early side of 4-6 months puts him around round 2 of the playoffs if his recovery goes PERFECTLY. Expecting him back for R1G1 is madness.
 

kinger8998

Registered User
Apr 5, 2015
1,269
1,342
Nova Scotia
I don’t see what the rush is to trade the player. You openly admit this is the first season he’s gotten consistent ice time from the beginning of the season throughout. It also coincides with the season where he has the worst puck luck of his career. How about we wait another season and see how things go? All the advanced numbers look good, as you mentioned yourself. I don’t think it’s good asset management to give a player one season to prove themselves in a big role, and if they happen to underachieve due to having a season with bad puck luck, we must instantly trade them for an underpayment.

What is the rush to trade the player? Kravtsov hasn’t even yet proven he’ll be an NHL’er. I think that’s still very much up in the air, and Kakko has been very disappointing, as well. There’s no reason to trade Buchnevich now. It’d actually be very dumb to. You don’t trade a player having the season he’s having. If you don’t want a player on your team, you wait until their value is highest or at least not at its lowest.

Here's the thing though. It's not the first year. It's been 3. In 2017-2018, his 3 most frequent lines were KZB, Kreider-Desharnais-Buch, and Nash-Zibanejad-Buch. Those players aren't slouches. Those combos accounted for 50% of his total even strength ice time. It was ealrier in the year when AV treated him what I myself called unfairly, but after the selloff of Grabner and Nash, he got his chance consistently near the end.

Last season, 15% of his EV TOI was spent with the KZB, while 53% of his total EV TOI was spent with either Hayes or Zibanejad as his center. He did not improve on his previous years points-per-game production.

This season, his time on ice is up a minute and a half per game, 24% of his time has been spent with Panarin, 24% of it has been spent with KZB, and another 16 was spent with Chytil and Kreider. Thats 64% of his total time on ice spent with top 6 or elite talent, which is also the highest of his career.

His previous 3 seasons shooting % have been ~10, ~14 and ~17. This year it is ~9. If you are going to say 9 is an outlier than 17 would be as well. Even if he got back to the 14, he would score 4 more goals. That would give him 12-18-30 in 48 games, or a 51 point pace. While that's better, for every excuse theres another criticism. A lower than average shooting % is null and void when you consider he's been given more ice, more frequent TOI with better linemates, and a longer leash than ever. He's 24. That's still young, but he's not a prospect. The time has been now for atleast 2, arguably 2.3 years for him to live up to the 30-30-60 potential everyone says he has.

Youguys wanted him to be paid like that this summer, thank god the Rangers bridged him. I don't think the Rangers have a worse player when it comes to making plays along the defensive zone walls, and it'd be hard to argue another player for NYR who has gotten a longer leash that Buch (Howden comes to mind but even he spent time on 4th line for an extended period..I think 10 games?).

I think Buch is a good player, for his salary currently. But I don't think in the long-term he'll continue to be paid as such, and if I'm right, he's got to go. We cannot afford to f*ck up a decision like this because the $2M swing between the current salary and what youguys want him to get paid on his next deal is the difference between being able to get a rental at the deadline when we are finally contending or not being able to.

Like I said, since we are referring to my own words. Merit doesn't just apply to opply to opportunity, it applies to consequences too. Once again, before all of Buch HfBoards crucifies me, I do not hate Buch. 40-45 point players have value, at the right salary. NYR cannot afford to overpay Buch based on the hope that he'll reach his potential he's already been given an extended opportunity to reach, imo.
 

kinger8998

Registered User
Apr 5, 2015
1,269
1,342
Nova Scotia
As a NYR fan, I can't help but laugh at Buch being our 3rd best forward. He's not.
I don't know if I've ever seen a faction of NYR fans more over-enamored with a guy than this ever. Adam Clendening comes to mind maybe, but the leash and love Buch gets from that grouping puzzles me.
 

Jerkbait

Registered User
Dec 12, 2019
4,101
814
no he shouldn't :laugh: The early side of 4-6 months puts him around round 2 of the playoffs if his recovery goes PERFECTLY. Expecting him back for R1G1 is madness.
He will be back some time in first round ready to go.....money
 

Pavel Buchnevich

Drury and Laviolette Must Go
Dec 8, 2013
57,227
23,099
New York
Here's the thing though. It's not the first year. It's been 3. In 2017-2018, his 3 most frequent lines were KZB, Kreider-Desharnais-Buch, and Nash-Zibanejad-Buch. Those players aren't slouches. Those combos accounted for 50% of his total even strength ice time. It was ealrier in the year when AV treated him what I myself called unfairly, but after the selloff of Grabner and Nash, he got his chance consistently near the end.

Last season, 15% of his EV TOI was spent with the KZB, while 53% of his total EV TOI was spent with either Hayes or Zibanejad as his center. He did not improve on his previous years points-per-game production.

This season, his time on ice is up a minute and a half per game, 24% of his time has been spent with Panarin, 24% of it has been spent with KZB, and another 16 was spent with Chytil and Kreider. Thats 64% of his total time on ice spent with top 6 or elite talent, which is also the highest of his career.

Most frequent linemates is irrelevant when it's not someone with consistent line mates and someone who isn't even playing every game. This is the first season where Buchnevich has had a consistent spot in the top 6. This is also the first season he's gotten top 6 minutes. The prior two seasons that you mention he got 7th forward minutes. This season he's getting 5th forward minutes. I don't know how you could claim this isn't the first season he's gotten a consistent top 6 role.

His previous 3 seasons shooting % have been ~10, ~14 and ~17. This year it is ~9. If you are going to say 9 is an outlier than 17 would be as well. Even if he got back to the 14, he would score 4 more goals. That would give him 12-18-30 in 48 games, or a 51 point pace. While that's better, for every excuse theres another criticism.


The SH% does matter. If he's shooting at his career average, he's on pace for over 50 points this season. That'd be a career high, and the narrative would be different.

He's also been under 10% just about all season, and his SH% has gotten really low during the stretch that he's struggled. I would say it's been the last 24 games. It started the last game of November against the Devils. He has only 7 points in that stretch, 3G and 4A. He has 50 shots in that 24 game span, which actually is pretty good. He's shooting 6% in that span.

But the puck-luck is more than only the SH%. As I'm sure you know if you've watched the games, he's had a lot of shots that are hitting posts, crossbars, hitting bodies right in front of net, missing the net wide or over the net. These aren't shots that count towards his SH%, but these are shots that another season might go in. And it's not only with shots. A good example is last game where he had a primary assist only for it to be overturned because a player who had no involvement in the play went offside. Thats bad luck. No other way around that.

You can belittle the advanced stats, but I think you are missing the point. These stats are used here to show that he's having bad luck. He's top 4-5 on the team in nearly all the important scoring and possession stats, yet his point totals aren't matching the advanced stats. I'm not even big on advanced stats. I think they are often flawed, but one thing I can understand is that the players who get the most scoring chances, the best scoring chances, have the most possession of the puck are usually the best players in the league.

Production does matter. I've never been someone who ignores production. However, I think you need to take into account that the player here is playing extremely well, and isn't producing stats. Is this player so much worse than the rest of the league at producing or is the player having bad luck? It's usually almost always the latter. This has never been a discussion point in this player's career and all of a sudden it's a discussion point the last two months. I think its pretty clear that its a case of some bad puck luck that happens to every player at some point.

A lower than average shooting % is null and void when you consider he's been given more ice, more frequent TOI with better linemates, and a longer leash than ever. He's 24. That's still young, but he's not a prospect. The time has been now for atleast 2, arguably 2.3 years for him to live up to the 30-30-60 potential everyone says he has.

I think this exactly reveals how you are being unfair. You give the player one season to prove himself, and then when he has unquestioned bad puck-luck, you decide that the player has gotten his chance, and isn't producing.

How in any way does it make sense to then decide to trade the player when his value is at the lowest? How does that improve the team? This isn't to even mention how short-sighted it is. Usually players who've proven in smaller roles for years that they produce extremely well are given more than a 45 game sample to prove that they can produce in a bigger role. And besides, you are judging the player on one measure over a small sample. It seems like you are intentionally trying to be harsh in how you are judging the player.

Youguys wanted him to be paid like that this summer, thank god the Rangers bridged him. I don't think the Rangers have a worse player when it comes to making plays along the defensive zone walls, and it'd be hard to argue another player for NYR who has gotten a longer leash that Buch (Howden comes to mind but even he spent time on 4th line for an extended period..I think 10 games?).

I think Buch is a good player, for his salary currently. But I don't think in the long-term he'll continue to be paid as such, and if I'm right, he's got to go. We cannot afford to f*ck up a decision like this because the $2M swing between the current salary and what youguys want him to get paid on his next deal is the difference between being able to get a rental at the deadline when we are finally contending or not being able to.

Like I said, since we are referring to my own words. Merit doesn't just apply to opply to opportunity, it applies to consequences too. Once again, before all of Buch HfBoards crucifies me, I do not hate Buch. 40-45 point players have value, at the right salary. NYR cannot afford to overpay Buch based on the hope that he'll reach his potential he's already been given an extended opportunity to reach, imo.

I did want to pay him long-term this summer. We definitely should've. I think you are using a very short-sighted viewpoint to justify not paying him. As I said, none of this was a discussion 25 games ago. It's a discussion when the player has bad puck-luck for 25 games. Then all the people who either dislike the player for odd reasons or view the game in an over-reactionary manner decided that we must trade this player when his value is his lowest. You can decide where you fit in, but I'd say either viewpoint is flawed and while I'm not a big fan of our GM, I think our GM likes the player and has a much more rational viewpoint of this player than some of you.

Besides, saying that he's been given a long leash is ridiculous. Maybe he's been given a long leash for the last 20 or so games, but he's gotten the furthest thing from a long leash in his career. And that brings me back to probably the thing with your analysis that I least understand. You are so focused on judging the player based on a 25 game sample based on one type of measure. How in any way does that make sense? How about you judge the full body of work? If you want the team to make the best decisions, why would you have such an irrational mindset about how to judge the player?

And you still have yet to explain to me why we are trading this player now. What is the rush? Who is replacing the production?
 

Machinehead

GoAwayKakko
Jan 21, 2011
141,171
109,587
NYC
83115373_10206695938355313_445988751181611008_o.jpg


That's a no from me, dawg.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->