Player Discussion Jeff Skinner

[Royal Thunder]

Kane plays better d, is much more physical, wins more 1v1 battles, can pk, fight, and is in the same tier of goal scorer that Skinner is, the list is long...

I'm not saying that Kane is as good of a fit as Skinner for our roster, or that he doesn't have his flaws, but he is the superior player... look at the return he got at rental price vs the return Skinner got with a NMC. It's hard to deny

Should do a poll... I think Skinner is easily the better player. Botterill literally had one team interested in Kane... Skinner would have been traded already if not for the NMC

 

[Panthaz89]

Kane plays better d, is much more physical, wins more 1v1 battles, can pk, fight, and is in the same tier of goal scorer that Skinner is, the list is long...

I'm not saying that Kane is as good of a fit as Skinner for our roster, or that he doesn't have his flaws, but he is the superior player... look at the return he got at rental price vs the return Skinner got with a NMC. It's hard to deny

no he isn't....he's not good on even strength D at all he's only good for PK and he's also a penalty machine compared to Skinner and got terrible penalties at crucial times.

 

[valet]

Should do a poll... I think Skinner is easily the better player. Botterill literally had one team interested in Kane... Skinner would have been traded already if not for the NMC

yeah I'd be curious to see what the general opinion is too

 

[Montag DP]

People have been going on for years about how bad Kane is defensively, but now suddenly he's not that bad?

 

[Drivebytrucker]

Hey - I liked Kaner. I'm just going by perception. But I'm not in the meetings in the other team's offices.

If Skinner's effort or defense was so bad then he wouldn't be in the NHL, no matter how much skill he has. It's fine to point out his drawbacks along with his strengths, but it's not like he's some lazy guy hanging around the red line waiting for a pass while his teammates are scrambling for their lives in the D zone.

I think the GM would be more thinking "this guy's scoring ability can win us a game".

Carolina Fan here. His defense is so bad that Bill Peters was starting his line in the offensive zone like 70% of the time last year and he was still -27 for the year.

Jeff Skinner / Derek Ryan line was playing against 3rd and 4th line guys, starting in the offensive zone 70% of the time and he was still outscored by 27 goals even strength.

A lot of hockey people don't watch a lot of Carolina games (besides highlights). A lot of people who watch every game are saying the same thing: Addition by subtraction!

 

[jc17]

Carolina Fan here. His defense is so bad that Bill Peters was starting his line in the offensive zone like 70% of the time last year and he was still -27 for the year.

Jeff Skinner / Derek Ryan line was playing against 3rd and 4th line guys, starting in the offensive zone 70% of the time and he was still outscored by 27 goals even strength.

A lot of hockey people don't watch a lot of Carolina games (besides highlights). A lot of people who watch every game are saying the same thing: Addition by subtraction!

But a big part of the -27 was save%. And it wasn't just because he gave up scoring chances because he was still very positive in scoring chances differential.

 

[Myllz]

A lot of hockey people don't watch a lot of Carolina games (besides highlights). A lot of people who watch every game are saying the same thing: Addition by subtraction!

So I'm guessing the greater majority of the Hurricanes posters in the Skinner trade thread on your board just watch highlights? Because going off their reactions, they're certainly not saying addition by subtraction.

 

[Sabre the Win]

2017/18 CF%

Kane: 50.56
Skinner: 55.07

 

[AustonsNostrils]

Not to mention Skinner still has his NMC, so he can have a say in whatever trade there is.

Lowers his value as well

From what I read elsewhere on this site when a player with a NMC waives it and is traded yes his NMC remains in effect BUT only if his new team adds an addendum to his contract agreeing/acknowledging the NMC. We have no idea if Botterill did that.

 

[Sabre the Win]

But a big part of the -27 was save%. And it wasn't just because he gave up scoring chances because he was still very positive in scoring chances differential.

Darling probably ruined everyone on that team.

 

[Drivebytrucker]

I'm not saying that Carolina stole this trade by any means. But the view in the hockey world, that Carolina gave up a 1st line winger for basically nothing, is far from the truth.

 

[Dirty Dog]

I'm not saying that Carolina stole this trade by any means. But the view in the hockey world, that Carolina gave up a 1st line winger for basically nothing, is far from the truth.

Yes, we are aware Pu and our 2nd rounder are not “basically nothing.” In fact, we may know that more than anyone else as those were our assets.

 

[truthbluth]

From what I read elsewhere on this site when a player with a NMC waives it and is traded yes his NMC remains in effect BUT only if his new team adds an addendum to his contract agreeing/acknowledging the NMC. We have no idea if Botterill did that.

That's not true

 

[joshjull]

Carolina Fan here. His defense is so bad that Bill Peters was starting his line in the offensive zone like 70% of the time last year and he was still -27 for the year.

Jeff Skinner / Derek Ryan line was playing against 3rd and 4th line guys, starting in the offensive zone 70% of the time and he was still outscored by 27 goals even strength.

A lot of hockey people don't watch a lot of Carolina games (besides highlights). A lot of people who watch every game are saying the same thing: Addition by subtraction!

He started roughly 16.7% of his overall shifts in the offensive zone not 70%.

 

[Ole Gil]

But a big part of the -27 was save%. And it wasn't just because he gave up scoring chances because he was still very positive in scoring chances differential.

Adding to the -27, Aho was +4 on top line, Rask was 0. Staal was -6 I think. The goalies were bad, but Skinner was the outlier.

That being said, Skinner has been used effectively in the past. The year before last, he was just bad defensively (meaning good for him), which is more than fine for a guy scoring 30+. I think he’s a gamble, but no reason for sabres not to roll the dice on him.

And worst case scenario, he’s still one of a kind with the puck, and he’ll definitely entertain.

 

[joshjull]

Adding to the -27, Aho was +4 on top line, Rask was 0. Staal was -6 I think. The goalies were bad, but Skinner was the outlier.

That being said, Skinner has been used effectively in the past. The year before last, he was just bad defensively (meaning good for him), which is more than fine for a guy scoring 30+. I think he’s a gamble, but no reason for sabres not to roll the dice on him.

And worst case scenario, he’s still one of a kind with the puck, and he’ll definitely entertain.

This past year was Skinner's worst in terms of being on the ice for goals against. Both in total number (60) and GA/60 (3.16). Hopefully he bounces back on that front.

 

[haseoke39]

This past year was Skinner's worst in terms of being on the ice for goals against. Both in total number (60) and GA/60 (3.16). Hopefully he bounces back on that front.

And no better place to bounce back than crap

 

[Dingo44]

Carolina Fan here. His defense is so bad that Bill Peters was starting his line in the offensive zone like 70% of the time last year and he was still -27 for the year.

Jeff Skinner / Derek Ryan line was playing against 3rd and 4th line guys, starting in the offensive zone 70% of the time and he was still outscored by 27 goals even strength.

A lot of hockey people don't watch a lot of Carolina games (besides highlights). A lot of people who watch every game are saying the same thing: Addition by subtraction!

I'm just saying I was in the locker room here in NC talking to guys who both play hockey and are big Carolina fans and not one of them were happy about the trade or didn't miss Skinner. It's not a large sample size and it's only a half dozen guys but like I said they were surprised that his defense was even something that seemed to be a big consideration, even after admitting it wasn't great.

 

[Buttons85]

Skinner is one season removed from a 37 goal campaign. If ever there was a time to buy low, it's now, and good on Botts for recognizing that. Consistency/defense may be an issue, but c'mon... the guy has put the puck in the net more than anyone on the Sabres in the past 3 years, and that includes Kane and O'Reilly. He addresses our seemingly endless problem of scoring in a very direct way. With Dahlin coming on board and some legitimate talent waiting in the wings on defense (Guhle and Pilut, specifically), acquiring a one-dimensional player like Skinner to help fix a glaring, habitual problem on offense is a no-brainer.

In the past 20 years, the Sabres have had only 3 players eclipse 37 goals: Vanek (2x), Drury, and Satan (2x). I, for one, am very excited to have someone on the team with some actual finishing skills.

 

[Icicle]

Skinner had a 95.9* PDO last year. Talk about statistically unsustainably unlucky. He’s ready for a breakout.

He’s 1.5 takeaways/giveaways too— not a stat you’d expect to see from such a defensive liability either

 

[AustonsNostrils]

That's not true

I don't know who to believe, truthbluth or my lyin' eyes.

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

I don't disagree with any of this, but it's hard not to think how holding on to a great two-way player in ROR would've complemented this move very well. Either way, we need the game-breaking and reliable scoring Skinner can bring.

No way to afford keeping RoR and making the Skinner trade unless the Skinner trade was strictly a one year rental. I would have loved to keep RoR if it meant we still added Skinner and acquired Berglund for other pieces. It just doesn't work $ wise with Reinhart needing a new deal, Mitts can be extended as early as next off season (only has 2 years left on his ELC), Skinner likely getting ~6.75-7 mil per and Dahlin likely getting 10+ mil for 8 years in 3 seasons.

We do need a real defensive minded center, a guy who will win 52+% of his draws, be able to be deployed 60% in dzs, and anchor the PK1 unit. That is what Asplund was traded up for, and also the style Davidsson plays also. Maybe they expect Asplund to be ready by 19-20 and Davidsson the following year and this season is used to see how Jack plays with more responsibility and to see what Mitts does as the 2C. Mitts was drafted to be our long term 2C, so might as well throw him in the deep end and see how he performs. If we are going to miss the playoffs with RoR we might as well move him while he still holds premium value and redistribute the 21:30 a game he gets to Casey (16-17 mins a game) and then the other 4-5 mins being given to Jack on the PK, Berglund and Reinhart at ES etc. there is a lot of different options we have in building this lineup.

One thing not really mentioned much is Skinners TA/GA. RoR excelled at that and no one else really did on the team. Luckily, that is one of the areas Skinner will help us at. He doesn't give up the puck as much as one would expect him to being a supposed one dimensional winger. He isn't a complete 2 way guy but he isn't some cherry picking goal hanger, not at all. I've been a fan of his since his rookie year and am real excited we have him here. If he signs his 7 year extension with us along with the one year left on his current deal, I could see Skinner scoring ~250 goals over the next 8 years. If I can get that locked in place for just 7 mil per I am glad to do it. Even after 8 seasons from now Skinner would only be 33 and would be 34 after a max term extension. If out of shape, lazy unmotivated slow wingers like Vanek can still be 20 goal scorers at age 33 then there is zero reason Skinner won't continue to be a top 6 forward into his mid 30s.

 

[AustonsNostrils]

3C is going to be Asplund soon. I am crossing my fingers he's going to quickly acclimate to the AHL. I think he will. Hoping for a 15-20 goal 40 point rookie season at Rochester.

 

[Jame]

No way to afford keeping RoR and making the Skinner trade unless the Skinner trade was strictly a one year rental.

Nonsense.

 

[GellMann]

This past year was Skinner's worst in terms of being on the ice for goals against. Both in total number (60) and GA/60 (3.16). Hopefully he bounces back on that front.

That's not really up to him. He plays the position with the least defensive responsibility, his heat map shows that his side took fewer shots than it does when other LWs were on the ice, and his actual GA was 20 goals worse than his xGA, because his goalie's save percentage when he was on the ice was .870 despite not facing high quality shots.

This isn't to claim he's good at defense, he's dreadful - luckily he plays the position where basic coaching competence can render it a nonissue.

Jeff's 5v5 goaltending was so bad that his 5v5 PDO was like 4% worse than that of...the tanking Sabres...