Marvin

Welcome to the board!

Let us face facts: this team is going to have problems on the road. They will get unfavourable defence and line match-ups which will take more out of them as the game goes on. There is not enough talent to overcome that too often.

The Bills overdid it with skill players and chintzed on the lines. If the right teams have the right preparation, then the the Bills will have problems.

Same thing here. I had to log onto NHL.com, get to the part where it links to the audio, and then go there.

I would like to see height, weight, position, ice time, production, and other stats run with a nice multivariate statistical analyses. That would be the grist for a MS thesis, I should think.

As in his first one? 😉

If the O-Line were better, then he would be too. Teams would have to respect the run and JA would have more time to throw. The Bills' offencive and defencive woes start in the trenches. Until those are fixed, they can't compete for a title.

Any chance Bales can convince Arturs Irbe to coach UPL?

This is a healthy attitude. I grew to just enjoy the good stuff and not worry as much about the bad. A couple of decades ago, the Bills' terrible O-Line would have driven me nuts; now I just shake my head. The Sabres' drought annoys me, but I will not let it drive me to distraction.

Even if he did not expect goaltending to be an area of focus this year, Anderson's injury was eminently predictable. IMHO, he was hoping UPL would rise to the occasion rather than fall on the part below the coccyx. That's on GMKA because we all hoped we were wrong.

And they needed to be. It is a clear blind spot GMKA has had two years running. This may be the flaw with relying too much on analytics, which says that goaltending does not matter much. Bad goaltending is always a problem.

The Sabres have stunk for 10 years. Like it or not, vitriol and skepticism are to be expected. Anyone here remember all the bitterness over on The Stadium Wall at Two Bills Drive during The Drought? We are in the NHL version of that. Having said that, I have no sympathy for anyone who wanted The Tank. Writing as someone who had junk thrown at me at the arena for rooting for the Sabres to win those years, my attitude is more like @PromoTheRobot.

I am offended that the Sabres make me like this thread.

Thanks, everyone, for all of the attempts to explain the data. I see a lot of truth in a lot of the explanations, such as @triumph_communes on selection bias, @SwampD on the possibility that smaller teams might skew towards the bottom of the standings, and @Curt for noting that the bottoms of rosters probably skew big. I expect that the answers are as complex as we are observing in our discussions.

Are they really heavier, or do they just play that way? I also disagree that the Sabres were physically beaten by Carolina. I have watched all 7 games recently and that series was pretty even -- even with the Sabres playing 2-3 AHL players on defence. Indeed, the Sabres often out-hit the Hurricanes. Injuries made the difference. If you want to argue that the Sabres were out-hit because the injuries proved that they were a bunch of "figure-skating pussies" and "pond-hockey pansies", you can, but you would be wrong.

The discussion above, with various posters writing past each other, is like a talk between political opponents on a bad political chat show. We have failed to acknowledge what the data show and examine why it happens. If we look at the graphs given in the article, we see that, if anything, size is slightly negatively correlated to scoring. This is very peculiar to me because, all other things being equal, I would imagine that height and weight (as a proxy for strength) should correlate to higher scoring. So what do the data tell us? IMHO, GMs, scouts, coaches, and fans over-estimate the advantages which size gives. For instance, how often do we hear about a highly-touted prospect who is "a big, physical kid" but he has minimal hockey sense, is a plodding skater, has an average shot, and does not stickhandle particularly well compared to his peers? Meanwhile, the smaller player who skates like the wind, reads plays like a hockey version of Emmy Noether, has a cannon of a shot, is a brilliant stickhandler, and is mentally and physically tough plummets down the draft charts. It seems that, far too often, the former is taken earlier as a "project," is given more chances to succeed, is always given the benefit of the doubt, and fails far more often than the latter. Based on the charts, the latter should be the preferred player more often than he is now. I am sure that GMs, scouts, and coaches are thinking, "you can't teach 6'6", but you can teach better skating, better stickhandling, better shooting, and better situational awareness" -- and they over-estimate how many things can be improved upon and how much those skills can be improved upon. Obviously, there will be trade-offs. I would love it if the Sabres had a team of guys who are big, strong, tough, fast, skilled, smart, and can finish something other than a bag of popcorn. So until they can get a better blend, where do you start? Kevin Adams clearly believes that for the Sabres to shake of the yoke of a losing culture, his short-term plan is to choose "a little more will over a little more skill" overall, with "a little more skill over a little more size" on offence and "strength with some skill" on defence. I see he clearly believes in not over-spending on goaltending in the short term, which I understand is the overall analytics evaluation, but I think that finding the right goaltenders can cover up a myriad of flaws in the skaters. It will be interesting what kind of team he builds and the blend he thinks will lead to a winning franchise and culture. I would love to see a multivariate statistical analysis of various factors to try and come up with some optimal ways of selecting players. Height, weight, mental toughness, physicality, skating, stickhandling, shooting, and hockey sense should all be more carefully evaluated and balanced by the hockey professionals and fans alike.

That was the first thing I looked for.

This cuts no ice with me. Patrick Roy let in 9 once. I was at a game where 5 were scored on Hasek. I was at a game where Tretiak let in 6. Goaltenders don't come much better than these two. The skaters have some say in a goalie's performance in a single game.

Welcome to the board.

welcome back. Welcome to the board!

Not "The $750,000 Pyramid"?

Mugwump Wanna-be.

And develop better. Maybe some of those guys would have been better had they not been rushed to the NHL.

Last year, they might not have been as good as they are now -- but they should not have been as bad as they were playing. They clearly have developed in the interim.

Who is Rick the Dog?