Player Discussion Peyton Krebs C/LW -- Re-signed 2 years, $1.45m AAV
- Thread starter Chainshot
- Start date
Good to know, but still not a problem. As stated, somebody can move to wing, but nobody has to be traded. We're not THAT stacked yet.
If that was the set up, it wouldn't be a traditional 4th line, or 4th line type deployment.
No team in the modern era (if ever in history) has ever built a winning team with 4 high end scoring lines. What you're saying is fine in a theoretical vacuum, but in reality, there is no way your 3rd and 4th line wingers are going to be as talented and productive as your 1st & 2nd line wingers. In addition, there is only so much ice time and PP time to go around. Only 5 skaters (or 6 with an empty net) can be on the ice when you're looking for that big game tying goal with 2 minutes left; or wining it in 3 on 3 overtime, etc.
So if I'm a player (Mittelstadt, Cozens, whoever) and I know I'm a legit 1st or 2nd line center who wants to play with the best wingers, and at least the 2nd PP unit if I can't get on the 1st unit, I'm not going to be happy on any team if I'm stuck and buried in that role.
And you can't pay 4 centers all like 1st and 2nd line centers. So which of those high end top 6 centers & wingers want to relinquish their ice time, PP time, scoring production, and therefore their earning potential? The answer is no one. It's practical in an all star game, not practical for an 82 game NHL season and playoff Cup contending run.
Why are you jumping to "4 high end scoring lines"? If we're lucky there will be 2-3 very good to decent scoring lines, and maybe a decent 4th line too.
Even if TT, Mitts, Cozens, and Krebs all reach near full potential, the idea that one or two will get disgruntled over ice time is a stretch. If a player wants to bolt over that...I don't want them around anyway. Why should the rest of the team?
100%
And aside from the salary cap implications, winning teams just have different types of players. You have to have some pure defensive studs/shutdown guys, elite PKers, big physical guys, etc. In addition to needing those kind of guys to win, they generally cost less on average.
You gotta have guys on the 4th line who can not only chip in with offense, but can hit, fight, PK, and willing to block a shot with their face when needed to help their team win. These are the kind warriors you need in the playoffs, never mind the regular season.
Just an example, from this year's crop: if I could sign 3 UFA forwards this year (not including the pipe dream type all stars like Filip Forsberg or Johnny Gaudreau), I would sign Nick Paul to be the 3rd line LW, Nick Delauriers to be 4th line LW/RW and Tyler Motte (if healthy) to play C.
Show me the last time a legit 1st or 2nd line skilled scoring winger or center happily embraced a 4th line role -- foregoing playing with talented wingers, PP time, point production, and therefore salary -- instead of being on a 1st or 2nd line where they belong. It's just not rooted in reality. It's all star game, fantasy hockey pool stuff.
A "decent 4th line" like you say, on Cup contending & winning teams, have those guys who are a pain in the ass to play against, physical, will block a shot with their face, elite PKers, and all out playoff warriors. It's just a different type of player, and that's not going to be Krebs or Mittelstadt playing that role. You need diversity of roles and skill on a team to win. Not sure why this is hard to understand.
Fezzy126
Rebuilding...
- May 10, 2017
- 9,131
- 12,229
Who even numbers lines anymore? I can't believe this is still happening in 2022.
The Sabres don't have a 4th line, they roll 4 lines at even strength and everyone gets fairly even ice time. The 05-06 Sabres were quite similar. That Sabres team didn't lose guys because of ego, they lost them because they couldn't afford all of them once their ELC's and bridge contracts were up.
I'm sure this team will get to that point as well, but it won't be for a while. Having too many good players is a problem that we haven't had in a long time, I look forward to it happening again.
Agree on your assessment for the lines and lineup.
And most of the time, when a team starts winning and players are contributing, guys will play wherever in the lineup to help the team. Think of guys on the class of the East in Tampa, in particular Cirelli but also Stamkos and plenty of others over the years. Need someone to move to wing? Sure. Play down the lineup? Yep. Take a checking role? Done.
Players will play. And in particular both Cozens and Krebs have been part of U18 and U20 teams where they did things to win games that weren't just being part of easy minutes and o-zone time at center.
It isn't hard to understand, but for now the Sabres don't have that type of FW line-up. They have some young skilled FWs that can potentially fill out 4 lines. You suggest that's a problem and that they should be replaced with grinders or they'll get disgruntled and stop trying until they walk as a FA. I suggest that 1) it's not even a problem until/if these players all reach that potential and 2) if they do, rolling four lines is a thing that can happen because it's happened before. Let's wait to fuss over something AFTER it actually happens.
Who even numbers lines anymore? Well how about every GM in the league, every coach, every player and their agents.
1st line players don’t play 15 minutes per game, and play 30 seconds of PP time and then get off so the next 3 units can each get 30 seconds as well.
Players know what line they play on. Stick one of Mittlestadt/Krebs/Cozens at C on a line with the 2 least talented wingers and they’ll know they’re on the 4th line, and they won’t be happy if they believe they’re legit top line players who should be playing 20 minutes/night.
And good luck asking players: “hey, how about we just pay each of you a lot less than what a top 2 line C would make because we’re going to spread the ice time around.” Lol.
I didn’t say it’s a problem “today”, but GMs aren’t only looking at “today”. This conversation started with the comments Adams made about Krebs being a C, and me then saying I wonder what the future would then hold for a guy like Mittelstadt if Thompson, Cozens and Krebs are also all C’s. And then some people suggested that long term just throw one of those 4 guys on the 4th line and run 4 scoring lines, and I then explained why there’s ZERO chance of that happening long term.
Again, the statement about having other players with complementary skill sets in your bottom 6 is how you build a cup contending team long term. I didn’t say to just fill the bottom lines with low end grinders.
But you can put words in my mouth, take them out of context, or look at it through the narrow lense of “today” to make your argument. Adams knows what it takes to win and how’s he’s going to look at building the roster — that’s the only thing I care about and I know I’m 100% right on this. It doesn’t matter to me if a few people on a message board just don’t get it.
WhereAreTheCookies
Registered User
None of the forwards on this team play 20 minutes a night right now. There are plenty of teams around the league who also don't play their top guys 20+ minutes per game many of which are in the playoffs right now. You're still pulling the cart before the horse here. Mitts, Cozens, Krebs have not proven they are capable and consistent top 6 players yet. Yes each of them has had stretches of great play, but until they solidify themselves as those players there is no reason to panic about who plays in the top 6 vs bottom 6. That doesn't just go for those 3 either, that applies to any forward on the team really, earn your playtime. If suddenly all of these players break out and now they have too many top 6 players and not enough bottom 6, then you trade someone for a haul to address that issue when it becomes relevant.
Remember when we had so many centers that the team convinced themselves Marcus Johansson was a center? Good times.
And who could forget...
That’s why I said “in the long term”. But if you want to pretend I only said/implied the outlook for next season to help make your point, you’re certainly welcome to do that. It doesn’t change the relevance or merit, however, in how things will shaping up long term. And longer term, *IF* it’s true that all 4 of Thompson, Cozens, Krebs and Mittelstadt are going to be centers, then not all of them will be playing C for the Buffalo Sabres, in the longer term.
Simple.
Fezzy126
Rebuilding...
- May 10, 2017
- 9,131
- 12,229
That's false, the NHL doesn't work like this anymore.
Lines are identified by role, not number. For example, some teams shutdown line is their top line in ice time (Boston, St Louis), some it's much lower (Washington). Some teams have heavy/crash lines, others don't.
No one in the NHL has traditional 4th lines anymore in the sense that you're painting it because no one deploys goons for 7 minutes a game to stir up a fight and then sit for the rest of the night a la Andrew Peters. There are young kids earning their stripes in a bottom 6 role all over the league, it's not a big deal.
Please point out the quote of me saying we should be putting “goons” on the 4th line.
Oh wait….I didn’t.
Thanks!
It's not snark, it's clarification because people keep either taking my words out of context, not reading/responding to what I actually wrote, or put words in my mouth. I apologize if that came across as snarky -- that was not my intention.
Fezzy126
Rebuilding...
- May 10, 2017
- 9,131
- 12,229
I was responding to your comment about line number distinctions. But since you asked:
You mentioned signing a guy like Nic Deslauriers and also mentioned how someone like Krebs wouldn't be satisfied playing with that type of player, and also that Krebs isn't the type of player we should play on said line. You also mentioned how these types of role players need to chip in with offense (even though complimenting these types of heavy role players with with a young playmaker seems like it would help in this regard).
You've created a half dozen strawman arguments, at this point you're just trolling...
I am certainly not trolling, because I am passionate about this team and care about them putting together the best possible lineup to be a cup contending team. I also do not take any pleasure in anything other than a good-faith, intellectually honest conversation or debate with other posters. I don't take pleasure in adversarial nonsense or contentiousness (and no, I'm not implying that you do either).
Regarding a guy like Nick Deslauriers: some teams/GMs (if not all) believe that you need to have someone on your team who can step up or provide a level of security for your younger or skilled players so you don't have guys like the Tom Wilsons of the world running them. Kevin Adams (or whoever the GM is in the future) can decide if they want this element. But the difference between Nick Deslauriers and why he is/was a very sought after player is because he's actually a great PKer and good defensive player.
To clarify: No, I am not a proponent of having one-dimensional "goons" on a 4th line or any other line. What I am a proponent of is having guys that bring different elements and ingredients to the team to provide a complementary skill set and being able to fulfill different roles. Yes, I used Nick Delauriers as one option for a 4th line role, but I also mentioned Nick Paul as a UFA I would love to target in a 3rd line role, or a guy Lawson Crouse (though not available) as a trade target for a middle 6 role because they bring these different elements to the team that I think would be a fantastic complement to the other players we have and give us a better chance to go deep or win a cup.
WhereAreTheCookies
Registered User
Apologies, I went through several of your previous posts and see now what you were getting at with the longer term view. If all of Tage, Cozens, Krebs and Mitts hit their offensive ceilings as centers then yes that could potentially prove troublesome and one might need to be flipped, but that could also be something that happens naturally as well. Cozens right now for example to me looks like a guy who could end up as more of a Jordan Staal type than a high scoring 1st/2nd line center. That would leave Mitts, Tage and Krebs for top 6 centers. While the team views them all as centers right now, they may not by the end of next season. Once guys start solidifying their roles those perceptions could easily change. Also winning hockey games can definitely make players more willing to do whatever is needed to win.
Patrik Elias is a good example. He was drafted as a center and switched back and forth between center and wing depending on what the Devils needed, and stayed there his entire career. There are other recent examples as well like Stephenson, Stamkos, Reinhart (still), Draisaitl (on and off), Copp, etc. They do what the team needs in order to win games. If those guys are getting the minutes and winning they will be less concerned with who's taking face-offs.
For sure. The good news is that there's no rush to make this decision. We have time to see how things play out in the next 1-2 years. I'm personally an advocate of keeping Krebs on LW for another year so we can give sufficient ice time to Cozens and Mitts to see how they develop. I personally think Cozens has a higher offensive ceiling, but that's what we need to find out.
And even if we were to trade Mitts, I wouldn't want to do that now. His value isn't as high right now as we hope it could be because of the injuries and such of this past season, and we'd like to see him get his game back to where it was late last season after Granato took over or beyond. Then, that would be a good problem to have, and either he's performing well here or has substantially raised his trade value.
Just hypothetically speak, if MIN ends up putting Fiala on the trade block because of their cap issues and they like Casey as part of a package (especially because he's locked in at a great AAV), that would be the kind of player I'd love to go after if he would sign a long term deal here. Otherwise there will be other trade partners if we wanted to move Mitts *IF* Krebs was going to be a C here long term and we have a log jam at that position.
