IKnowPhysics

Chad says Sabres and Penguins are talking, and he was told Matt Murray and Jared McCann are in discussion.

Yeah, there's data and analysis available that concludes that the top line has a better GA/60 with Reinhart on it, suggesting he's defensively useful. https://www.expectedbuffalo.com/buffalo-sabres-myth-busting-sam-reinhart-cant-produce-without-jack-eichel/

Wacky rumor on reddit that Mike Hoffman is sought by EDM, MTL, and BUF. Doesn't make much sense.

Taylor ***** Hall. Suddenly a top-five 1st line and a top-ten top six forward group.

Agreed. If Matt Ellis can make Matt Ellis as good as Matt Ellis, imagine what he could do for Casey Mittelstadt or Dylan Cozens.

My body is ready.

I forgot Jokiahrju (right shot) from the list, yes. I think I keep getting confused because I think Dahlin (left shot) lines up on the left, but many of his highlights, even non-PP highlights are him working the right point where his stick side is towards center ice/the net. He's an efficient puck mover on his stick side (left shot/LD), but he's a sickeningly lethal playmaker on his offside (left shot/RD). Nonetheless, still jammed on RD, with only McCabe and Dahlin lining up LD.

Pietrangelo is a right shot RD. Bringing him in means the following right-shot D: Pietrangelo, Ristolainen, Montour, Miller, plus Dahlin (left shot) on the right. If you bring him in, you're all but forced to move someone in that list out. Maybe that means making another move for some good forward return or an LD; maybe Risto goes. The only left shot D that's been playing LD now with Pilut gone is McCabe. Botterill left us a ***** mess. Pietrangelo's a good player, and a good player is a manageable asset, and with enough mangeable assets, you can make moves (as long as everyone's not locked into NMCs). I'm also not surprised by any UFA talk, because we have cap space and willpower to acquire UFAs, and any top-flight UFA available will come up in coversation around us, as we have many needs. Pietrangelo is the best D available, Hall is the best forward, and I imagine it's only a matter of time before someone mentions Holtby or Crawford. Callahan, Granlund, Byfuglien, and Schultz round out the front page of CapFriendly UFAs. We need to be. Botterill left us a ***** mess. But I'm optimistic.

Based on Rossi's NHLe, it's possible. I'm just hoping we get a shot at him, and if not him, another prospect in that plateau.

My progressive self usually would agree with you: "Of course size doesn't matter, scoring matters. Size is an archaic metric for the old timers' leftover memories of clutch-and-grab hockey." There are plenty of anecdotes that back up that thinking (St Louis, Gaudreau, et al). And there's some data: higher weight correlated to higher P/GP, but only in the 1967-1979 era, not the 2005-2012 era: https://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/2014/03/13/hockey_analytics_does_size_really_matter_in_the_nhl.html But if I'm being truly progressive, it's the data that matters, not anecdotal thinking, and that analysis isn't sufficient to answer the question of drafting size. So a deeper dive is worthwhile. A 2015 stats study of CHL players transitioning into the NHL looked into it. It defines "success" as 200 NHL GP (not perfect, but a start). https://canucksarmy.com/2015/01/27/size-does-matter-defencemen/ It concludes that while scoring in the CHL doesn't guarantee success in the NHL, not scoring in the CHL pretty much guarantees a lack of NHL success. It also observes that among players that do score in the CHL, the percentage of success is higher for players with taller heights. This was found to be true for forwards and defensemen separately (the article for forwards, although cited by several analytics journal articles, is since defunct): (height in cm is across the top row [183cm is 6'0"], P/GP in CHL is down the left column, percentages are of all 17 year old CHL players with 10 CHL GP that year that went on to play >=200 games in the NHL) Defensemen: The percentages and spread of percentages across height and P/GP for forwards are likely different, but the conclusions are the same. However, the percentages this concept is based on, if it they hold up, only hold for large numbers of selections, not the individual. So what do you do to maximize the odds? Draft size or draft scoring? Well, both. And if you can't get one, you get the other. So if other teams take size, you could find value in scoring, and vice versa. Additionally, since those models were published, more advanced models have been developed. Josh Weissbock developed Prospect Cohort Success, and then was hired by the Panthers in 2016. Jeremy Davis built Prospect Graduation Probability System and started a pay site, but still publishes publicly sometimes.

It's mostly this. With a good bit of this sprinkled in. This year's forward crop is particularly strong. It's considered so strong that it really gives the value of this year's #8 pick a boost over other years. This makes it somewhat enticing to keep the pick. However, we want to accelerate the team's performance improvement, as most of us are tired of losing/rebuilding at the cost of years of Jack Eichel's career. Defensemen take longer to develop and any that aren't Dahlin will likely take one to four years to develop into being NHL-ready. Some of the forwards potentially available at #8 this year are strong enough to play in the NHL next year, a somewhat unusual occurence for players drafted at #8.

Because ethnic predjudices?

Things I am uninterested in: Trading down from #8. Selecting a defenseman in the top 8. Spending player assets that can be used to improve this year's roster to move up in this draft, unless it's an enormous steal.

So you broadcasted an offensive joke and regretted it when people found it offensive, to the point where you had to cut affiliation with the person who made the joke in order to protect the organization they were working for?

Infiltrate the reddits, twitters, and message boards using multiple accounts. Separately pose as longtime fans of the teams and disavow any Sabres-related anything. Pump up Sanderson by showing highlights and stats to create fandom and a positive image. Admonish how bare the teams' prospect pools are at D and highlight how strong rival teams' defensive depth are to stoke fears of inadequacy and need. Ignite debates about whether the teams should select Drysdale or Sanderson to establish a false choice and encourage the other users to promote the players through argument. Ignore, harass, delete, or downvote opinions that don't promote our goals. Go now. Report back later.

Never forget that the Sabres front office once drafted an unseen player that would never play in the NHL with eventual 4x Cup winner Stefan Persson still on the board. I can't with this organization. Everyone involved with that decision should retire and the owners should sell the team.

Now we just need someone to bite on Sanderson.

Maybe Milbury can join Roenick's Ass Action Lawsuit against NBC. Shitheads.

This is bad and you should feel bad. There's no room for discrimination in the game or this message board. Hurr durr muh straight rights isn't funny. It's dog whistle language used by hateful ***** to gather others to oppress a marginalized group of people. Know better.

Marcus Johansson can also be plugged in at 2RW, and will likely produce more points than if he plays 2C.

OG post and initial example have been fixed. I was misunderstanding performance bonuses. Performance bonuses count against the cap, however, what I didn't realize is that teams get an extra 7.5% cushion for them on top of the AAV salary cap. Sabres have $3.4875M in performance bonuses for next year; 7.5% of $81.5M is $6.11M. From here on out, we'll ignore them and assume they fit in that cushion and I won't incorporate them incorrectly. Sabres would have about $8.5M-$10.5M or so with which to acquire a 2C and LD if they kept all RFAs except Pilut and carried one extra F and Miller as extra D.

I wouldn't fret too much, as this assumes we qualify everyone except Pilut and we don't make any moves. It's just a starting point, which we already felt was bad.

(Now fixed the performance bonus error.) A hypothetical example 2020-21 salary cap scenario might look like the above contracted players (4F, 5D, 1G): $34.483M in space And retaining all RFAs except Pilut (4F, 1D, 1G), totaling $19.15M (8F, 6D, 2G), leaving $15.333M: Reinhart, $3.65M - min $3.75M - signed fo $7M Kahun, $0.925M - min $0.8325M - signed for $1.25M Olofsson, $0.7675 - min $0.7M - signed for $3.5M Lazar, $0.7M - min $0.7M - signed for $0.9M Montour, $3.3875M - min $3.525M - signed for $4M Pilut, $0.925M - min $0.8325M - ? Ullmark, $1.325M - min $1.325M - signed for $1.5M Thompson (currently on LTIR), $0.925M - min $0.8325M - signed for $1M Calling up (2F, 0D, 0G), leaving $13.408M : Mittelstadt, RFA - min QO $0.8325M - signed for $1M Ruotsaleinen - $0.925M With UFAs (2F, 0D, 0G), totaling $3.6M (10F, 6D, 2G), leaving $9.808M : Girgensens, $1.6M - signed for $1.8M Larsson, $1.55M - signed for $1.8M And then $9M of the $9.808M spent on three players: Bringing up Cozens, $0.925M 2C - $6M 3LHD - $2.075M This hypothetical example sets the lines at Skinner - Eichel - Reinhart Olofsson - 2C - Johansson Girgensens - Larsson - Okposo Cozens - Lazar - Kahun (Ruotsalainen - Mittelstadt - Thompson) Montour - Dahlin McCabe - Ristolainen 3LHD - Jokiharju (Miller) Hutton - Ullmark In practicality, you wouldn't carry the three salaries of Ruotsaleinen, Mittelstadt, and Thompson (~$3M) all at the same time; this frees up shoulder room for the 2C and 3LHD. And the RFA signings will assuredly vary from what I've written. And realistically, we're likely trading and making other moves, which can free up space, but this is sort of the default of what Botterill has left us with.