Jump to content

sabremike

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,388

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by sabremike

  3. Jbot needs to go

    in The Aud Club

    Posted

    16 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

    2019-2020
    5 teams in the top 10 of faceoff percentage are in the top 10 of NHL standings this year. 1 of the top 10 teams are in the bottom 10 of the NHL standings.
    4 of the teams in the bottom 10 of faceoff percentage are in the top 10 of the NHL standings this year. 4 of the bottom 10 faceoff teams are in the bottom 10 of the standings.

    2018-2019
    4 top 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 3 top 10 F% teams in bottom 10 of standings.
    3 bottom 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 4 bottom 10 F% teams are in bottom 10 of standings.

    2017-2018
    4 top 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 2 of top 10 F% teams in bottom of standings.
    2 bottom 10 F% teams in to p10 of standings, 5 bottom 10 F% teams in bottom 10 standings.

    2016-2017
    2 top 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 4 top 10 F% teams in bottom 10 of standings.
    4 bottom 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 2 of the bottom 10 F% teams in bottom 10 of standings.

    2015-2016
    3 top 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 2 top 10 F% teams in bottom 10 of standings
    2 bottom 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 6 bottom 10 F% teams in bottom 10 of standings.

    2014-2015
    4 top 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 3 top 10 F% teams in bottom 10 of standings.
    3 bottom 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 3 bottom 10 F% teams in bottom 10 % of standings

    Got bored at this point.
    So, 22/60 top 10 faceoff teams in the last 6 seasons have finished in the top 10 of the standings. 15/60 top 10 faceoff teams finish in the bottom 10 of the standings, an average of one fewer great faceoff team per year.

    14/60 of the bottom 10 faceoff teams in the league have finished in the top 10 of the standings, while 20/60 of the bottom 10 faceoff teams in the league have finished in the bottom 10 of the standings. Again, an average of one more bottom 10 faceoff team per year is bottom 10 than top 10.

    Of ten top ten faceoff teams in a given year, 3.6 of them are top ten NHL teams, 2.5 of them are bottom ten NHL teams, and 4.9 of them are somewhere in the middle.
    Of ten bottom ten faceoff teams in a given year, 2.3 of them are top ten NHL teams, 3.3 of them are bottom ten NHL teams, and 4.4 of them are somewhere in the middle.

    I have to say, this is hardly riveting stuff. It seems to be barely better than a coin flip. Sorta like faceoffs themselves, with even the BEST centers in the league at them.

    This is not to discount the idea that it's really nice to have guys who are great at faceoffs taking them in important moments. It was nice to watch ROR break NHL faceoff win records as we plummeted to last place before trading him. But I wouldn't let this skill drive my search for players or my team building moves (though, in building a team with a strong center spine, I have to think you'd come across good faceoff players as good centers tend to have this skill).

    Gonna spread out the above numbers to count how many times each faceoff split has given us playoff teams:
    2014/15: top 10: 5, bottom 10: 6
    2015/16: top 10: 6, bottom 10: 3
    2016/2017: top 10: 5, bottom 10: 5 (with 3 other bottom 10 teams filling out the next 3 closest playoff teams)
    2017/18: top 10: 6, bottom 10: 5
    2018/19: top 10: 7, bottom 10: 4
    2019/20: top 10: 6, bottom 10: 6

    So over 6 years, 35 of the 96 NHL playoff teams have been top 10 in faceoffs, while 29 of the 96 playoff teams have been in the bottom 10 of all faceoff teams. Try doing the same thing for goals, goals against, goal differential, and even shot metrics, and they'll be far more decisive in doling out playoff spots, tbh. The score was a couple loser points away from being 35-33. Again, this argument isn't particularly riveting from a team-building view, even if it's of course better to win faceoffs than to lose them. I think the idea is just that faceoffs comprise a couple dozen out of hundreds of different kinds of puck battles that happen in a given game, so while the advantage is obviously good for any puck battle, their effect by themselves on the standings can be overstated.

    Also, I've been noticing that so many times, a center can "win" the battle such that the puck's trajectory on the ice is back towards his own team, while someone else then loses a battle and the puck goes to his opponent. The center gets the L even if he does the better job at puck drop. The opposite happens just as often. It muddies the water quite a bit for stats that have the characteristic that ROR averages only 1.6 more faceoff wins per GAME than a league average centerman. It's relevant - but as game-changing as a billion other things you can also control in your quest for team building







     

     

    You would be the guy to ask about this: wasn't there an NHL team several years back that did a study trying to find out the effect of winning faceoffs and basically it showed that it makes virtually no difference in game outcome whatsoever?

  5. Reinhart, sign him or trade him?

    in The Aud Club

    Posted

    44 minutes ago, triumph_communes said:

    Trade!

    ROR wouldn’t have turned his attitude around without being dealt.  Reinhart was always his entitled disciple. 

    The fact that you continue pushing the most ridiculous narrative in hockey history well after it has been completely and utterly destroyed is actually somewhat admirable in a way. Like those Japanese soldiers in the Pacific staying in their posts decades after the war had ended and their nation had been long since defeated.

    • Like (+1) 1

  7. Non Sabres Deadline Trades/Rumors

    in The Aud Club

    Posted

    17 hours ago, Curt said:

    That would be unnecessary, even if you think he is great in a role of defensive stopper, which I agree that he is.  His value around the league is not going to be so high that he would get such term.  A 1-3 year contract is all he would command, I believe.  What if he is good for a couple more years but then his play falls off in years 3-5?  Then you have a guy who produces basically zero offense, and is also not getting it done on the defensive end, and you have him signed for 2-3 more years.

    It’s just an unneeded risk for a player of his caliber.  Your not getting any real value for giving him term  He isn’t going to “break out” and make the contract look like a bargain.

    I don't this take is going to look very good on July 1st

  8. Jbot needs to go

    in The Aud Club

    Posted

    1 minute ago, pi2000 said:

    The Sabres are bad at a lot of things, we know that.   

    But what are those things exactly?

    Let's take a look at how they compare to their peers when looking at the intangibles; face-offs, blocked shots, hits and takeaways.

    Note: Season rankings below are for players who have played 25 or more NHL games.

    Also, I'm going to highlight where Sam Reinhart ranks for each category.    He'll want big bucks this offseason so let's take a look at where he ranks league wide in those categories. 

     

    Face-off win %  (min 40 faceoffs taken)

    Top 3 Sabres (out of 221 players with 25+ games at 40+ faceoffs): 
    78th Okposo
    115th Larsson
    140th Eichel
    ...
    212th Reinhart


    Blocked shots/60min

    Top 3 Sabres (out of 597 players):
    77th McCabe
    189th Jokiharju
    220th Ristolainen
    ...
    558th Reinhart


    Hits/60min

    Top 3 Sabres (out of 597 players):
    88th Ristolainen
    110th Girgensons
    144th Miller
    ...
    486th Reinhart
     

    Takeaways/60min

    Top 3 Sabres (out of 597 players):
    20th Frolik
    141st Eichel
    143rd Vesey
    ...
    438th Reinhart

    I'm not even gonna bother explaining why these are key metrics for playing winning hockey... everybody here should know that already.      Most of these intangibles simply require effort, courage and determination.    You look at top teams like St. Louis and Tampa, they both have multiple players in the top 50 in each of these categories.    You can't win without doing these things well, it's a shame they haven't figured this out yet.

    Number of hits is not a good category to lead the league in as teams at the top of that list are often at the bottom of the standings. For starters: it indicates you are losing the possession game.

  10. Reinhart, sign him or trade him?

    in The Aud Club

    Posted

    1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

    As pi2000 said, you don't keep players on your roster because they are "friends."   NHL players have friends all over the league on numerous teams. They meet up when they are in town, vacation in the off season together, they are all rich and they all know it's a business. This should not be an issue, and simply can't be allowed to be an issue.

    Now here's the problem I have with the logic. Those of us who don't like Sam and how he plays want him traded rather than awarded a big contract. That is simple and logical from that perspective. But.........

    Your view (and others) is he is a really good player and so you can't trade him unless it's for a quality 2C but you won't get that you'll get a pu pu platter which makes no logical sense. If he actually is as good as you say teams should be lining up to get ahold of his services and bidding for them. Simple logic. The argument you make however, is contradictory. You can't have it both ways. If he's as good as you claim, he should fetch a good return too. 

    Look at what we traded the Conn Smythe winner for two offseasons ago and get back to me. We have a GM who constantly gets conned and suckered, a Sam trade will be no different. And the idea that Sam is the problem with this team is complete lunacy as well, just like the idea that ROR was the problem with this team.

    "Those who cannot remember the past..."

  11. Reinhart, sign him or trade him?

    in The Aud Club

    Posted

    18 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

    Why? Are they lovers?

    Sam is one of his best friends. He is also one of the very few good players in our entire organization. What would you expect to happen if Sam gets traded for a pu pu platter of junk ala ROR that makes our roster even more sad and terrible than it already is? If they could trade him for an excellent #2 center that wouldn't be a problem because that could actually improve the team but that type of trade is going to happen on the 10th of Never.

  13. Reinhart, sign him or trade him?

    in The Aud Club

    Posted

    3 hours ago, pi2000 said:

    You don't know that.  

    $6m + Sam's $3m = $9m in cap space

    vs

    $6m + $7m = $13m against the cap to keep the status quo.

    That's a net gain of of $22m/yr to use on filling out your middle 6, re-signing Dahlin down the road, shoring up the goaltender position.  That's significant.

    But no. Things are going so well with Sam and Kyle on the roster, why try something different?

    This is Karmanos Math at it's finest.

    Next season:

    Let's say Sam gets $6 million in arbitration.

    Kyle makes $6 million next season.

    That would be a cap gain of $12 million per season, not $22 million.

    Then factor in the third liner we'd get back (and if you've seen the type of guys Botts likes think not very good and expensive) that would take $2-3 million off that number.

    Now try and find a player (or players) you can get with that $9 million who would be as good as a just hitting his prime Sam.

    Oh and did I mention there's a very real chance Okposo ends up on LTIR and his cap hit gets significantly reduced? And that even though he is making far more than what his value as a player is he has actually been one of our more effective players this year with the LOG line?

     

  14. Reinhart, sign him or trade him?

    in The Aud Club

    Posted

    2 hours ago, pi2000 said:

    , I want to spend the $6m/yr Okposo is getting for the next 3 years on somebody who deserves it.   

    Which won't get you a player nearly as good as Sam in UFA, so there's a hole you just created that won't be adequately filled. And our huge bounty in the trade will be a late round first (which Botts can waste on another junk low ceiling defenseman) and a third line winger.

    • Like (+1) 1

  21. Must Listen Radio: Caller Duane Snaps Live on GR-55

    in The Aud Club

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Zamboni said:

    Ok, so we have a different opinion on what is a “big deal”. Taking down a tweet from a ranting unhinged listener (who, if you missed it, is my cousin, lol) doesn’t rise to that level. For me. Personally. It’s still readily available for consumption by the masses. And quite easily. And taking down said tweet doesn’t (for me)  rise to a burning house with a guy grabbing his head in anguish.  Again, we have a different opinion on what “big deal” is. Ok then, cool.

     

    I suppose if someone really cared that much and wanted to know why it was pulled down, they could try contacting the one who posted it in the first place. ?‍♂️

    Ever hear of The Streisand Effect?

  22. Is there a Rasmus Dahlin Blockbuster trade to be had?

    in The Aud Club

    Posted

    9 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

    Turgeon put up 106 points for the Sabres in his 3rd season and then "dipped" to only 79 points the next year before being traded to Toronto earlier the following season. He scored 122 goals and had 323 points in 322 games for the Sabres, so yes that is Eichel like production. However, it should be noted he played in a much more offensive era were 100 point players where a dime a dozen. That being said, he finished with 515 goals and 1327 points in 1294 games so he was a damn good player for a long time, averaging over a point a game, with a high of 132 points in a season for the Islanders including 58 goals that year. 

     

    Dale Hunter should still be rotting in a Nassau County prison for what he did to Pierre. He possibly cost him and the Islanders a cup, should've been kicked out of the sport for life.

    • Like (+1) 1

  24. 2019-20 Sabres Prospects

    in The Aud Club

    Posted

    On 1/28/2020 at 9:07 AM, LGR4GM said:

    Samuelsson is going to grade out as a #6 defender. He shoots left so I guess that makes him Montour's partner and I have no desire to see Samuelsson for 18minutes a night 5v5 at NHL speed. I have a lot of doubts about him. 

    I have 0 concerns for Johnson;s NCAA production. He's not only a freshmen but this is his 18yr old season. His late July birthday makes me far less worried. Meanwhile Samuelsson is producing at roughly the same and is a year older in the NCAA (17 games for Samuelsson versus 24 for Johnson). Samuelsson being a 1990 NHL defender makes me want to gag. If he isn't good at transitioning the puck out of the zone, he will fail. 

    Johnson showed no offensive production in his junior career, he is not going to magically acquire that ability at a higher level. He is the type of player this organization needed the least and they passed over a kid playing 50 miles Northwest who was exactly what this organization needed. 

    • Like (+1) 1

  25. Botterill and any other forward not named Skinner

    in The Aud Club

    Posted

    22 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

    They drafted 1st, 7th, 31st and 32nd in the past two drafts should have more than one bonafide forward prospect out of that group. 

    Bottalogic:

    Defenseman with less offensive upside than most goalies > Leading goalscorer in the OHL carrying his team to a playoff spot their roster suggests they have no business even being close to. 

×
×
  • Create New...