JoeSchmoe

Cozens did some good things. Like the puck movement.

Cozens is 40%, Benson is 25%. They're probably seeing this kid being on the ice for so many GA and saying his inexperience is costing the team.

His actual goal % is worst on the team despite his expected goals being one of the best. The team may be valuing actual production vs expected production.

I'd really be curious to know what kind of data actual NHL teams have. It wouldn't surprise me if there were teams that had data similar to this. It's all about the budget and how much you want to buy in to the math / analytics vs the artform of the eyetest. From the looks of it, it seems this offseason the Sabres were looking for value on under represented point / expected goal players that might have had tougher assignments. McLeod, Zucker, Aube-Kubel, Lafferty, and Malenstyn all fell under this umbrella. With our cap space, I'm not sure we needed to penny pinch like we did, unless a deal on a top 6 fell through and we don't know about it.

His 5 on 5 expected goal % 58.5. That's really good... Means he's playing strong defensively and creating chances Problem is #1 D get a lot of their points on the PP, and we all know that's going.

Reading it again, it is a bit wordy. The eight-year version is its kind of like a plus-minus for scoring chances. The teenager version is the more chances you get, and the better chances you get, the more expected goals you should have. The more chances against along with the better chances against, the more expected goals against you get. The % is the ratio of the two.

Here's more food for thought. McLeod and Zucker are getting double to triple the defensive zone starts than most of the other forwards, yet are both mid-tier in expected goals. This far, they are looking like good pickups by Adams.

I thought I'd start this thread for discussion. I'll provide regular updates on 5 on 5 team expected goal % to see where our guys are. Essentially the stat quantifies the scoring chances for along with the quality of the chance vs the number of chances and quality of chance against you. It'll also do a "relative" measurement that compares how the team does when you're on the ice vs off. Measuring shot quality is an imperfect science, but a lot of people try very hard to model this, and I think they're at least close. Different sites have different models as well. I use Moneypuck since it's free and what I'm used to. The stat does not track shooting skill, so players like Thompson, Olofsson, Matthews, etc will be underrepresented by this stat given they do a better job of putting pucks away. Players who consistently get defensive matchups will show worse since they inherently are used to stop goals instead of getting goals (i.e. Malenstyn). Also, if you consistently play with a good or bad player, it will affect you. It also doesn't track special teams play which sometimes is important. That said, we know our guys pretty good, so we can make some sense of the numbers... Here's what I see. Peterka, Dahlin, and Thompson are our best players and that's clearly seen here. Power and Byram are low. Byram sucked in this regard on COL. Are they actually getting the tough matchups? Last year Power was actually pretty good so it's surprising to see him that low. Cozens isn't as bad as advertised, but still has to improve. Lafferty, Malenstyn, and Krebs are low, but would their defense assignments justify this?

I kinda thought it might be Stoner in PA with a long game troll job.

Thanks for thread even if you're just playing a long game troll job! They're actually playing okay. I'm just mad about them buying out Skinner this year instead of next. In fact, if the team got good I think we could have gotten something for him if we ate salary.

Sabres are 10th in the league in expected goal %. If they stay at 10th AND if shooting percentages and goaltending regress to the norm, they'll make the playoffs. Edit: COL is 2nd in the league in EXG% but are below us, so it's possible for good teams to have bad results this early in the season.

It means this team needs guys that can score. We got rid of three of them and brought in guys who "play the game the right way". Funny enough that all 3 guys that weren't good enough for us (and our drought) are now on teams that are some of the best in the league. All three have won a cup or been in the finals the last three years.

So you think Vegas was right out to lunch by signing him and his 50% 5 on 5 goal % from last year? I'm sure they'll hate him on the power play as well.

As opposed to our super elite 3rd line? I guess they didn't really know what they were doing when they took him over guys like Lafferty or Aube-Kubel- two guys that play the game the right way.

What do the Golden Knights know that you don't?

Not good enough for us and our mega-drought. Good enough for Vegas, two years removed from a cup.

Never said anything of the sorts... But by your logic the Vegas Golden Knights also lack credibility too. Tell that to Vegas.

Wouldn't one of the 3rd liners be his actual replacement? Olofsson two years ago with 28 goals is better than all of them.

They could have kept those guys and shored up the 4th line (maybe lose Olofsson just due to roster spots). It didn't have to be one or the other.

Cozens was a +2 last night.

Edit: this is the Moneypuck model which is slightly different than LGR's source above.

I only saw the 2nd but, this might have been Levi's worst game advanced stats wise. 6GA on 1.665 expected goals.

This plan doesn't work. Skinner, Mittelstadt, and Olofsson put pucks in nets. We had them... All we had to do was not buy them out, trade them, or ice them out on the bench.

I shredded my hands and arms up replacing a dead furnace motor that's jammed right in there? What'd I miss?

So far this year, Quinn hasn't looked much better. They'll likely pick up their games together.