is this a good way to improve my chess skills?

in a chess match there comes a time when the game is crowded of pawns and other treats and any move will result in sacrificing a peace. i realize i must learn to do decent sacrifices, i mean, know what to sacrifice to keep the most material in relation to my opponent.

so i am thinking of using scid to analyse my games but by trying the best i can to foresee the possible variations of each move, writing it down and then letting the engine run to see how accurate i was.

has anyone ever tried this or anything alike?

Ummm I have no clue what you mean, Very few positions ever have a sac a piece to make progress thing going on. and if that is the case do to pawns being stuck and locked. just play 50 non capture moves and take the draw.

I don't use chess engines at all... I don't even own one, despite a few half-decent free ones being available. Of course, that might just mark me as a grumpy old man, rather than as a chess player.

If your current rating of around 1000 is anywhere within 500 points of your true strength, then I suggest that a chess engine's analysis will do you little good.

Focus instead on study and practice of basic tactics (pin, fork, skewer, overload, guard destruction, decoying, sealing-and-sweeping, etc). Then work on coherent series of model mates (corridor, smothered, epaulette, Morphy's, Paulsen's, Anderssen's, Anastasia's, Legal's, etc). Study typical Pawn positions (duo, ram, chain, lever, backward and doubled Pawns) and on the common Pawn formations that occur in the opening (Franco, English, Caro, Slav, etc) with particular focus on the usual plans associated with each of these formations.

I've found that one of the biggest differences between low-rated and moderate-rated players is that the low-rated player seems to have no idea where his play OUGHT to come from in a given position... while a moderate-rated player can just look at the Pawn formation and immediately sense whether he should be active on the King's side, Queen's side or center, and whether he should be leading his offensive with Pawns or pieces.

I think the OP means exchanges rather than sacrifices

If you do mean "exchange" or "trade" rather than "sacrifice"... a word with a completely different meaning... then you should consider trading a piece of yours which has a poor future for a piece of his that has a good future. For example, in rather blocked positions try to trade a Bishop of yours that is hampered by your own Pawns for an enemy Knight.

I am not as good a player as some that have already posted but one idea that apeals to me is just play. I am not being sarcastic,

feel like sacing a knight for an attack do it.

feel like making 20 pawn moves in the opening do it.

feel like playing materialistic chess with no regard for activity do it.

playing the bishop here or there do it etc etc

I feel this gives a more intuitive grasp of the game, rather then saying "I played the opening to control the center because thats what Carlson says" you will eventually say. "I noticed my opponent lost concern for the center around move 11 and was able to convert that to a win because I used to make that same mistake"

I am not advocating playing bad moves to learn, rather play the moves you think are good, and later judge for yourself whether that was the case. 

I like that, that is kind of what I do, I just tend to study some tactics to go with it. and am working on my weakness in the endgame.

dont get me started on the endgame, this is the downside to my advice, I have often lost peice up positions in the endgame because of playing what i feel should work. I do want to supliment study of the endgame.