Fine - our OT and SO performance is objectively good this year, not relative to last season. Relative to good NHL teams. We are tied for the best winning percentage in the shootout, where we don't use Skinner because of that 0 for 18 stretch he's on. In overtime, we are 9-5, which is excellent. It is bafflingly difficult to find team OT stats, but over the last three years, only three NHL teams have a winning percentage in OT better than the one we have this year, so there's at least some context.
I don't remember where to find this either, or the exact number, but Skinner's OT results both here and Carolina point to him being more of a liability than an asset in the extra time. Sure, stick him out on the PP where he has scored twice , but he's minus-a-large-integer at ES in overtime. If you'd like a hockey reason for this, I urge you to watch our second period power play from tonight, where his passes missed their marks by like 12 feet. The guy cannot pass to save his life, as many people have pointed out all season long, and tape-to-tape plays, often at large distances and through dangerous areas, are KEY in OT if you want to score or at least keep the puck. Further, his coverage skills are sorely lacking. He's great at burying garbage, one-touching pucks into the net, but that's not how most OT goals happen. Whatever Phil does and doesn't do in other areas, deciding to keep Skinner off the ice hasn't stopped the Sabres from amassing an impressive OT record, and since I've just described why he's not a great OT player (neither is Sam Reinhart, for that matter), there's a justifiable purpose, and it's clearly not as simple and obvious as you insist.