Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dejeanerret

Point Total Per Line. What is your metric?

Recommended Posts

For me, it lays out like this:

First line:  65 points or more

Second line:  41-64 points

Third line:  25-40 points

Fourth line:  24 points and under.

Based on this, the Sabres issue was they simply had no second line.  Do they have players that produced 2nd line numbers before?  Yes.  But they didn't do it last season.  Was that on Housley?  Perhaps.  But I look at a player like Sheary who the Sabres hoped would be more of the 53 point producer than the 30 for Pitt, and he ended up being the latter.

Okposo went from being a solid 2nd line producer to 3rd line production.  Was that the system?  Or a player whose age is catching up to him.

There are some unknowns in this.  For example, if you play Olafsson with a solid 2C and 2LW can he produce over 41 points?  I think so.  That guy is dynamic.

Middlestadt scored 12 goals and 25 points, barely squeaking into 3rd line production.  For me, he is a 3rd liner until his production tells me different.

That's why Pommer's return to me isn't as vital, cuz he's a 3rd liner at this stage of his career.  We have guys coming up that might be able to fill that 3RW

With the Vesey deal, the jury is out.  17 goals and 35 points puts him at a 3rd liner in my book.  But that was an improvement from 28 points the year prior.  Another similar jump and he could be a 2nd line performer.

That's why the 2nd line scoring in my mind was so critical to our failure.  But one has to ask, was that lack of production on the player, or the coach?  Will Krueger be able to allow some of those 3rd liners who put up 2nd line numbers in the past replicate them, and help those on the brink of 2nd line numbers achieve those goals?

If Bots is thinking Vesey at 2LW and Olafsson at 2RW, then no question we need a 2C center.  I find it incredible to believe we won't achieve that this summer.  Keep in mind, the Skinner deal wasn't done until August.  The summer is young.  But make no mistake without that 2C the Sabres are in jeopardy of falling flat on their face next season.  

Thoughts?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Berg said:

65+64+40+24=193...Good result for the last place..We need 240 or more.

What is this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's 65x3/and so on for each line no? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think those numbers are a pretty good baseline and I totally agree that Buffalo literally had no 2nd line quality forwards.  

It wasn’t even because guys turned in seasons well below what was expected of them.  Sheary was only a 53pt player when he was on the wing of Sidney Crosby. No one expected him to do that here. Okposo has not been the same since his serious head injury a couple years ago.  I don’t expect him to return to the 50pt guy he was before.  

Mittelstadt, you could say was disappointing but he was a rookie and you can never be sure what to expect from them.  I would love for the team to add a 2C, so Mitts will only need to be counted on to fill 3C duty.  Olofsson looks like he could fill a 2LW role, but see what I said about Mitts.  I would rather not have to depend on him to do so.

To me Vesey looks like a good fit to possibly play 1RW, even though he is a 2/3 line player.  He is a big body with speed who can go to the net and clean up loose pucks or recieve passes in dangerous areas.  Hopefully he could score 20+ doing that.

This would allow Reinhart to shift to 2RW, play with the new 2C and Sheary at LW.  Then the 3rd line could be Olofsson-Mitts-ERod.  4th, Girgs-Lars-Okposo.

Thats not an ideal forward group, but it shouldn’t get completely shut down outside of the 1st line like last years team.  The team last season had glaring holes, you can’t put that on Housley.  However, he did a lot of things wrong and could have gotten more out of the team than he did.

I would agree with you that acquiring a quality 2C is a key to improving the lineup.  If that can’t be done, acquiring a very good top-6 winger would help a lot too.

Edited by Curt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Curt said:

What is this?

It's basically the number of goals, if you (a) assume the best case for the bottom three lines, (b) the worst case for the top line, and (c) that there are two assists per goal. 

As for (c), the number is closer to between 1.5 and 1.7 assists per goal, which would bump the number of goals a fair bit over 200.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ROR trade set us back 2-3 years as did GMTM horrible cap management.  This year will be another wash unless Kruger makes some magic happen.  Since no one is going to sign here, we have to draft our way out of this.  What’s sad is Nylander and Mitts are big questions yet.  If Cozens is who we think that is one.  We might have to endure several years yet and more lotto picks.  If we go into the season like this, 80-85 points would be my projection.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, carpandean said:

It's basically the number of goals, if you (a) assume the best case for the bottom three lines, (b) the worst case for the top line, and (c) that there are two assists per goal. 

As for (c), the number is closer to between 1.5 and 1.7 assists per goal, which would bump the number of goals a fair bit over 200.

What about our defenses' contribution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Berg said:

65+64+40+24=193...Good result for the last place..We need 240 or more.

 

1 hour ago, carpandean said:

It's basically the number of goals, if you (a) assume the best case for the bottom three lines, (b) the worst case for the top line, and (c) that there are two assists per goal. 

As for (c), the number is closer to between 1.5 and 1.7 assists per goal, which would bump the number of goals a fair bit over 200.

I’ve never seen anyone try to extrapolate team goals from forward points like that.  That’s not really how it works.  You are not going to get anywhere close to an accurate estimation.

10 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

What about our defenses' contribution?

Yes, and this.  The defensemen probably add another 35-40 goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Curt said:

 

I’ve never seen anyone try to extrapolate team goals from forward points like that.  That’s not really how it works.  You are not going to get anywhere close to an accurate estimation.

Yes, and this.  The defensemen probably add another 35-40 goals.

All questions to the author of the topic) I did not invent these numbers myself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Berg said:

All questions to the author of the topic) I did not invent these numbers myself

The OP never mentioned how many goals a particular line or the team as whole would score in this hypothetical lineup.

You were trying to use the point totals outlined by the original poster to come up with the number of team goals scored, is that correct?    I was honestly not even sure what you meant by your post with the numbers and was looking for clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Curt said:

The OP never mentioned how many goals a particular line or the team as whole would score in this hypothetical lineup.

You were trying to use the point totals outlined by the original poster to come up with the number of team goals scored, is that correct?    I was honestly not even sure what you meant by your post with the numbers and was looking for clarification.

I thought that the author has in mind the number of goals that, hypothetically, each line can score in the current composition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Curt said:

I’ve never seen anyone try to extrapolate team goals from forward points like that.  That’s not really how it works.  You are not going to get anywhere close to an accurate estimation.

Nor I, and I certainly wasn't advocating for it.  I was just trying to guess how they came about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Curt said:

I think those numbers are a pretty good baseline and I totally agree that Buffalo literally had no 2nd line quality forwards.  

It wasn’t even because guys turned in seasons well below what was expected of them.  Sheary was only a 53pt player when he was on the wing of Sidney Crosby. No one expected him to do that here. Okposo has not been the same since his serious head injury a couple years ago.  I don’t expect him to return to the 50pt guy he was before.  

Mittelstadt, you could say was disappointing but he was a rookie and you can never be sure what to expect from them.  I would love for the team to add a 2C, so Mitts will only need to be counted on to fill 3C duty.  Olofsson looks like he could fill a 2LW role, but see what I said about Mitts.  I would rather not have to depend on him to do so.

To me Vesey looks like a good fit to possibly play 1RW, even though he is a 2/3 line player.  He is a big body with speed who can go to the net and clean up loose pucks or recieve passes in dangerous areas.  Hopefully he could score 20+ doing that.

This would allow Reinhart to shift to 2RW, play with the new 2C and Sheary at LW.  Then the 3rd line could be Olofsson-Mitts-ERod.  4th, Girgs-Lars-Okposo.

Thats not an ideal forward group, but it shouldn’t get completely shut down outside of the 1st line like last years team.  The team last season had glaring holes, you can’t put that on Housley.  However, he did a lot of things wrong and could have gotten more out of the team than he did.

I would agree with you that acquiring a quality 2C is a key to improving the lineup.  If that can’t be done, acquiring a very good top-6 winger would help a lot too.

All of this is spot on.

When I say 65 points for first line, that's minimum output for all 3.  Of course the top first lines have players in the 90+ and above point totals.

You look at a team like Pittsburgh.  They had no 2LW or 2RW.  But there first line was massively productive, and they had a highly productive 2C which carried them to 100 pts.  Besides Letang, there D was nothing to write home about, but Letang was so productive he made up for the others.

With all that said, they got swept in the first round by the Islanders.  When your dependent on one line and one Dman, it's easy for a good team to shut you down.  

When the Pens won the cup in 16-17, their scoring fit this model.  It didn't in 15-16, but Fleury stood on his head that year during the regular season and post season.  If you can't put up the numbers in this model, then you have to have a goalie who is top 3 in the league for a legit chance to win the cup.  

A perfect example of this is St. Louis.  On New Years, they were in last place in the league.  Their main goalie Jake Allen was struggling.  His back up, Jordan Binnington, was 0-2 with a 3.51 GAA and .840 SV% in two mop up appearances.  They were heading towards nowhere.

A coaching change, Binnington gets RED HOT.  Ends the season with a league-leading 1.89 GAA and 4th in the league with a .927 SV% allowing the Blues to finish 5th in the league in total goals against.  Makes big saves during the post-season and they scrapped their way to a SC.  Their horrendous start didn't allow their point total to match this model, but they turned it around and with a goalie who stood on his head made it to the promise land.

Edited by dejeanerret

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...