All Activity

Yup. I’m sorry, do the sabres think they’ve earned the right to approach their offseason like the teams that *haven’t* been a dumpster fire for half my life? are you kidding me? Their specific situation needs addressing: they are an anomaly and need an anomalific approach to rise from the ashes I have now maintained this viewpoint for…6 seasons

That's it right? We had to do MORE than they did because we were behind them. We didn't.

Tage could be better, but okay, let's not say "bad". Some of the others are worse. Team as a whole plays open ice hockey, doesn't win puck battles, and breaks down structurally often. Absolutely on Crosby. Bergeron and Kopitar were the perfect players for me. Excellent offensively but total shut down defensively. Currently, this is Barkov, who quietly leads Florida with a perfect 2 way game while Bennett and Tkachuk etc get all the press.

I think we did ok relative to the teams around us, but absolutely putrid relative to what should be expected of a team that’s missed 14 straight

I think they are fine. They definitely hurt the Sabres disproportionately, but I think it’s completely fair for players to not want to move at any given moment. I think that the bigger change I’d want is that the salary cap should be tax adjusted so that each team has the same effective cap.

Yes, that's part of why I said it's a complicated argument. Benson shouldn't be the best defensive forward. He is in part because they are so bad. He has been well coached and he does think the game through properly at a high speed. There is nothing about Benson's game I dislike. It still remains to be seen how effective he can end up being due to his size (as in a high end player or a mid level player) but despite his size I'd bet he's already stronger than Quinn (and some others) and he's still growing. We need to focus on his development though and not just go "oh he's fine, let him grow on his own". We both have issues with their coaching, no question.

I like Kesselring. I like him as a partner for Power. I just don't think he moves the needle for the team as a whole. It will be interesting to see if McLeod continues or if last year was a one off. I have no issues with him though at this time. We just haven't done enough compared to other teams around us, that's it.

Like the creative thinking of option 3. Otherwise, players have rights - and owners have rights to not offer it. It's 2 ways

I don't see Cozens going the Peca or Gaustad route but if I was Ottawa (and I said a few years ago this was needed here) I'd have him in the weight room constantly. Beef up and get stronger. He's a big guy but really lanky and thin not strong. (Quinn needs the same treatment). I have no idea what Cozens will or won't be but we definitely overpaid him early and had too much faith in him.

Tage isn’t bad defensively tho. A superstar is great offence and merely ok D. I think people forget that sometimes Great offence and great D is prime Crosby

Next up on the tee: Lafferty Daniel…and Gilmore, Happy

Who is Gilbert's replacement? Gilbert was a 7/8 D man, but also the guy who stood up after the Tage fiasco. I could care less about Lafferty, but my expectation of him was never high to begin with. Arguing about our 4th line guys is of little consequence. We will see how it shakes out this time. It was supposed to be better last year and wasn't.

Zach Benson is the best defensive player on the team. But you're right, he imported that himself. It's why I want Wilford gone and why they need to understand drafting better.

I do think Kesselring is going to be really good. I’d predict it to follow a predictable pattern like almost eveything Adams does. His list of (positive) impact moves is sorely lacking, and he tends to be so one-track-minded he can only do one thing. But the “one thing”, see: McLeod, Zucker, etc, usually does seem to turn out pretty well

Benson isn't but that's a long argument so let's leave it as agree to disagree. Thompson is bad defensively but you forgive that a little. Most teams have an offensive star or two who is bad defensively. Boston's a highly structured team but Pasternak can make huge defensive gaffs and that's forgiven with offensive production. Same can hold for a few guys here like Thompson, but the rest of the team has to pick up the slack. Now look at the rest of the better defensive players you listed. Tuch, Zucker, McLeod, all developed outside the Sabres system and methods. Their defensive game was imported, which argues to my point about too much internal development and not enough veterans brought in. Our internal defensive development is not good.

Let's say Cozens is a 10% shooter, he's that because he doesn't get to the spots he needs to and takes the shot types he needs to. Now Tage is a 15% guy. So they get to point X on the ice and take a wrist shot. You're arguing that Tage will score more there because the league average is 11% and Tage shoots higher, yes. But you're looking at 4 goals on 100 shots. We also know the areas players score more from. Xgf% would not be the same because of Tage scores more from a spot than so does others, so the average goes up. If Tage prevents shots from those spots it prevents xga. Cozens would have to shoot from the same places meaning he's skilled enough to get there and defend the same shots. It's just not happening. Versus actual goals for. If I put Tage on a team with a real goalie his actual goals against goes down even if his xga stays the same. He's still giving up what xga says. It's also why on ice sv% is important. Idk, I think we just fundamentally disagree about what xgf shows and why it's better statistically than actual goals for and against. Doesn't mean they both can't tell us things.

Well yes, good coaching early on does help for sure and what happens all the way along matters. I don't think the Sabres do it right once they draft these kids. I'll go back to Granato's BS comment that defense was the easy part and they want the offense to develop first. It's the exact opposite of what most teams do with young prospects. Now he's gone, but Appert's still here and we do Rochester the same way. imo what we should have is a Rochester team employing a tough and rigid defensive first philosophy and then when kids graduate from that they can then go back to opening it up with the big club. The D first will be ingrained. We do everything backwards.

Call Adams quick. This is a game changer. Climate change is here to save the Sabres!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No xgf wouldn't be the same. You wanna know why? Good shooters get to the good shooting spots. And xgf% is also looking at the defensive side of things. You're suggesting actual goals, which are rarer than shots, measure individual players contributing to winning more but stats says they don't. Sure that noise might even out over a career for actual goals but the funny part to me is so would the xgf. The good shooters get to the good spots to shoot, that's the key.

Actually, that is my point...why do I want to evaluate an individual player based on 'league average shooting percentage', when that player may be quite a bit higher or lower? Yeah, there may be 'noise' in actual goals, but to me at least it takes into account the difference BETWEEN the league average shooting percentage and that actual player I am evaluating. That 'noise' will, statistically, likely 'even out' when you look at the actual goal numbers over a long period of time. I get looking at a partial season, or a half season, may not be helpful, but if a guy is below 50 year after year, vs a guy above 50 year after year, the trend is your friend. Again, If Cozens is, for his career, a 10% or below shooter, and a guy like Tage is 15% or higher....XGF might be the same for both of them but in reality it vastly over-rates Cozens and under-rates Thompson.

Five years ago Florida would be on every players NTC list and no player was waiving their NMC to go there, despite the cheaper taxes. Now basically every player in the league would waive to be traded to Florida. Players want to go to winning teams. It's that simple. However, I would not be opposed to a team being limited to 3 NMC and 5 NTC or something like that. However, I doubt it meaningfully changes things in terms of trades etc. It's ususally your best veteran players who get them, and those players are not often traded. Players have refused to waive for Buffalo because we've not made the playoffs in 14 years, have a reputation for an interfering owner and a small city with bad weather. I don't blame them

That's not accurate. Xgf takes into account league average sh%. The problem with actual goals for and against is all the extra noise and all the randomness. There's simply a better sample of shots. We could get into GAR and WAR but that's really complicated and the models vary a ton.

Agreed. I actually prefer ACTUAL goals for/vs against, as it takes into account shooting percentage (from what I can tell, xGF% does not, so it doesn't really take into account that a player like Tage is a 50% more accurate shooter than a guy like Cozens). Plus-minus is not a stat that can tell you everything about a player, I admit that, but it shouldn't be totally thrown away either. I think the key with the 'advanced stats' is to use them in combination with each other. A guy has a good xGF%? Well, what is the competition he faces, or is he on a line/paring with a guy who is a super accurate shooter or a terrible one? For me, you have to look at the advanced stats, all of them...if you see anything that stands out (good or bad), think to yourself...why? Is there something that accounts for this? Is this something that is a one time/one year thing or a long term thing. By using all the advanced stats in combination with each other, and asking 'why' when presenting them....you can get a somewhat more accurate guage of how good a player is rather than just using your single favorite one. Many people on here may know my favorite 'whipping boy' for Sabres problems over the years has been Cozens. And that isn't because of one or two stats. Its because many/most of his advanced stats are below average (not just one of them), AND they have been for years (even his really good year), and more often than now other players advanced stats are worse when they are playing with him and get better when they are with anyone else, AND simply watching him, the eye test backs all that up. Personally I usually use the eye test first, form an opinion of a player, and then see if the advanced stats/analytics back up that initial opinion. The only time I really work backwards (analytics first) is when the Sabres trade for someone/acquire someone that I haven't seen play all that much.

Addition by subtraction. To me its not simply taking someone away, but what you replace them with. With that said I have always thought that getting rid of Cozens fits the term 'addition by subtraction'...simply because without him at Center, The added minutes that McLeod, Krebs and Kulich got after he left served the team better than the minutes Cozens had. They 'helped' the team just about as much offensively, and they hurt the team a lot less. That is not to say Cozens doesn't have talent, but His 16-17 minutes per game going to 0 for the Sabres, and those other guys getting the extra minutes were a bonus. Basically, would I rather have Cozens getting 18 min per game, McLeod getting 12-14, Krebs getting 10, and Kulich not having a big role at all? -OR- Cozens getting zero (subtraction from the team), Mcleod getting his 16, Krebs getting 12, and Kulich getting 12-14? <--- I'll take this one. The productivity/score is just as good (last year maybe better with McLeods and Kulich's game toward the end of the season) and those guys, even Kulich as a rookie, make/made a LOT less costly mistakes than Cozens did in his minutes. I would expect that to accelerate this year with Norris getting any productivity. As for the rest of the guys, they didn't play enough of a role on the team for me to care about.