The offseason so far - Are the Sabres better?

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

This team has allowed 282+ goals against 2 of the last 3 seasons.  18 teams over the last 3 years have allowed 282 or more.  Over that period the Sabres gave up an average of 3.36 goals against per game.  Even if the Sabres manage to score 270 +, they won’t stop enough goals to net a positive differential and make the playoffs.

PS Even when they scored 293 they allowed 297, a -4 differential, and missed the playoffs.  

The additions of Kesselring, Timmins and Lyon, aren’t enough to change the defensive/goaltending shortcomings of this team.  

Much of the team's success or not is predicated on better defensive player by the blue liners and lines. Will the goaltending beupgraded? If the other units play better, it will. I'm not assuming that there will be a dramatic defensive upgrade but expect better play on that end this season. Will it make much of a difference from a record standpoint? I think so. There's no reason not to believe that individually and collectively that Quinn, Benson and Power will not be better. The biggest issue for me will be how UPL plays. If he surprises us in a positive way, then this team should be at least respectable. 

In general, you seem to lean toward the negative while I grudgingly lean toward just maybe this team is on a more positive route. And another open issue is how will the Byram saga play out? I don't know.  

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

 

The additions of Kesselring, Timmins and Lyon, aren’t enough to change the defensive/goaltending shortcomings of this team.  

I have no idea how to quantify that the way I tried with the goals for potential.

In terms of in/out with the skaters this is what the athletic model has to say about their defensive impact:

• Peterka 2% -> Doan (not ranked)
• Cozens 8% -> Norris 39%
• Lafferty 19% -> Danforth 40%
• Jokiharju 56% -> Kesselring 81%
• Clifton 13% -> Timmins 59%

Not even sure how the stat (I believe it is a percentile relative to the league) is calculated, so take that for what it is worth.

[GASabresIUFAN]

36 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The biggest issue for me will be how UPL plays. If he surprises us in a positive way, then this team should be at least respectable. 

Hoping and praying that UPL doesn't suck again is not a plan for success.  By signing Lyons, Adams is basically saying that no further upgrades in goal are coming that that he is employing the same failed strategy since Ullmark left town and that is hoping and praying one or both of UPL and Levi emerge as real NHL goalies.  This team is done before the season even starts.  

[Turbo44]

13 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I have no idea how to quantify that the way I tried with the goals for potential.

In terms of in/out with the skaters this is what the athletic model has to say about their defensive impact:

• Peterka 2% -> Doan (not ranked)
• Cozens 8% -> Norris 39%
• Lafferty 19% -> Danforth 40%
• Jokiharju 56% -> Kesselring 81%
• Clifton 13% -> Timmins 59%

Not even sure how the stat (I believe it is a percentile relative to the league) is calculated, so take that for what it is worth.

So I read this as really good, right?

[JohnC]

3 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Hoping and praying that UPL doesn't suck again is not a plan for success.  By signing Lyons, Adams is basically saying that no further upgrades in goal are coming that that he is employing the same failed strategy since Ullmark left town and that is hoping and praying one or both of UPL and Levi emerge as real NHL goalies.  This team is done before the season even starts.  

You are working too hard to be pessimistic. You are assuming the negative when the goalie issue is still an open issue.  I, like you, have my doubts about UPL. Were there better alternatives in the market? Not sure about that. My hope is that the team's better defensive play contributes to the better play in net, whoever is there. Hang in there, you are working too hard to be dour. 🙂

[dudacek]

6 minutes ago, Turbo44 said:

So I read this as really good, right?

🤷

I read it as Kesselring is really good without the puck, Jokiharju was better defensively than people say, and the other guys we moved on from were really bad.

Edited 5 hours ago by dudacek

[Rasmus_]

55 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I have no idea how to quantify that the way I tried with the goals for potential.

In terms of in/out with the skaters this is what the athletic model has to say about their defensive impact:

• Peterka 2% -> Doan (not ranked)
• Cozens 8% -> Norris 39%
• Lafferty 19% -> Danforth 40%
• Jokiharju 56% -> Kesselring 81%
• Clifton 13% -> Timmins 59%

Not even sure how the stat (I believe it is a percentile relative to the league) is calculated, so take that for what it is worth.

Alright, I'm not even going to pretend I understood this.  How would this percolate to on ice improvement?

[Pimlach]

49 minutes ago, dudacek said:

🤷

I read it as Kesselring is really good without the puck, Jokiharju was better defensively than people say, and the other guys we moved on from were really bad.

I would agree with this but Lindy was apparently not a fan of Jokiharju.  Probably because he no one on defense that was physical other than Dahlin and Clifton.   There is the concept of Samuelsson which is wanning with each year.  

I see data showing that Kesselring and Timmins were not big hitters, they better bring something to improve the defense.  

Edited 4 hours ago by Pimlach

[DarthEbriate]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I have no idea how to quantify that the way I tried with the goals for potential.

In terms of in/out with the skaters this is what the athletic model has to say about their defensive impact:

• Peterka 2% -> Doan (not ranked)
• Cozens 8% -> Norris 39%
• Lafferty 19% -> Danforth 40%
• Jokiharju 56% -> Kesselring 81%
• Clifton 13% -> Timmins 59%

Not even sure how the stat (I believe it is a percentile relative to the league) is calculated, so take that for what it is worth.

The easy way to read it is that the Sabres are at least 113% better.

 

However, for that left-hand column I'm wondering if it's solely based on the 2024-25 Sabres or how much an impact being on last year's defensively-inept Sabres team had on those numbers. For example, if Norris had played between JJP and Quinn for 30 games (like Cozens did), would Norris' number be 12%?

[Rasmus_]

Just now, DarthEbriate said:

The easy way to read it is that the Sabres are at least 113% better.

 

However, for that left-hand column I'm wondering if it's solely based on the 2024-25 Sabres or how much an impact being on last year's defensively-inept Sabres team had on those numbers. For example, if Norris had played between JJP and Quinn for 30 games (like Cozens did), would Norris' number be 12%?

Thanks for the explanation.

 

[dudacek]

21 minutes ago, Rasmus_ said:

Alright, I'm not even going to pretend I understood this. 

 

From the article:

It’s a weighted combination of their production (goals, assists, expected goals, blocks, penalty differential) and their play-driving (on-ice expected and actual goal stats), adjusted for difficulty (quality of competition and teammates). The cards also show each player’s market value based on total contributions.

The cards showcase both offensive and defensive ratings. I just showed the defence.

6 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

 

However, for that left-hand column I'm wondering if it's solely based on the 2024-25 Sabres or how much an impact being on last year's defensively-inept Sabres team had on those numbers. For example, if Norris had played between JJP and Quinn for 30 games (like Cozens did), would Norris' number be 12%?

 

[Rasmus_]

9 minutes ago, dudacek said:

From the article:

It’s a weighted combination of their production (goals, assists, expected goals, blocks, penalty differential) and their play-driving (on-ice expected and actual goal stats), adjusted for difficulty (quality of competition and teammates). The cards also show each player’s market value based on total contributions.

The cards showcase both offensive and defensive ratings. I just showed the defence.

 

Thank you for that too dudacek!

 

[dudacek]

23 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

The easy way to read it is that the Sabres are at least 113% better.

Another way of looking at is seeing how individual Sabres scored without the puck:

• Dahlin 90%
• Kesselring 81%
• Benson 73%
• Tuch 71%
• Timmins 59% 
• Jokiharju 56%
• McLeod 54%
• Byram 48%
• Krebs 47%
• Samuelsson 46%
• Power 45%
• Thompson 44%
• Malenstyn 41%
• Danforth 40%
• Norris 39%
• Greenway 27%
• Kulich 26%
• Lafferty 19%
• Zucker 16%
• Quinn 16%
• Clifton 13%
• Cozens 8%
• Bryson 3%
• Peterka 2%

For some reasons they don't have a Doan card, but reports say his play without the puck is a strength of his game. It seems pretty clear that roster has improved in this area, at least as measured by this metric.

Also, the fact the Sabres had just 5 players among the top half of the league last year in this metric seems pretty reflective of their need to improve.

Edited 4 hours ago by dudacek

[Thorny]

 

14 hours ago, dudacek said:

I ran a bit of inexact model that tries to project what kind of offence we could reasonably expect from the current lineup.

I took the three-year average of each player, added a % to the U25 kids who have yet to break the 250 game mark (Power, Byram, Kulich, Doan, Benson and Quinn) and subtracted a % for the vets who have passed their peak and the age 30 threshold (Danforth and Zucker). The percentage was based on this model.

https://medium.com/@mattdesfosses/the-hockey-aging-curve-b0f33b91d1e4

And I got something that looks like this:

• Thompson 44/37/81
• Tuch 33/39/72
• Dahlin 18/53/71
• Norris 34/28/62
• Quinn 19/29/48
• Zucker 21/24/45
• Power 7/36/43
• Byram 10/32/42
• Benson 15/26/41
• Doan 17/24/41 *(rookie, small sample size)
• Kulich 25/15/40 *(rookie, small sample size)
• McLeod 16/24/40
• Danforth 12/16/28
• Kesselring 6/22/28
• Greenway 10/14/24
• Krebs 8/15/23
• Timmins 4/18/22
• Samuelsson 4/12/16

Basically, the above is based on all 18 projected starters playing the full 82 games, which won't happen, and no one else playing at all, which also won't happen. The fill-ins almost certainly won't be scoring at the same rate as the starters so it trends to the optimistic.

To factor in injuries, I took 89% (the mean NHL games lost to injury is 11%) of the above total (303->270)) then added in the amount of goals scored by Sabres skaters not in the top 18 for games played last year (12).

And I ended with a grand total of 282 goals. The NHL median last year was 245.

Obviously this is math and what actually will happen is impossible to predict and we'll all apply our own biases (Quinn will get 30! Doan might not even make the team!)

But I think the logic is pretty sound in terms of giving us a ballpark figure of what this roster might be capable of and it's better than I would have expected given our moves.

EDIT: the single biggest question mark to me here is pretty obviously Norris and his availability, then the small sample sizes of Doan and Kulich.

 

 

 

You might say Adams improved the team TOO much 

July 12th, man 

13 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Now run a projection of goals against.

By the way, in the last 3 years only 13 teams finished the season with 282 goals or more.  This Sabres group won't approach that number.  

But we ditched Peterka. Forwards are better now, addition by subtraction. Could approach upwards of 350 goals. 375 with a healthy Norris 

Edit: forgot we swapped Lafferty for Danforth. We could scratch 400 goals 

Edited 3 hours ago by Thorny

[DarthEbriate]

20 minutes ago, Thorny said:

You might say Adams improved the team TOO much 

July 12th, man 

But we ditched Peterka. Forwards are better now, addition by subtraction. Could approach upwards of 350 goals. 375 with a healthy Norris 

Edit: forgot we swapped Lafferty for Danforth. We could scratch 400 goals 

Four hundred! We could almost buy our own (champion)ship with that!

[GASabresIUFAN]

56 minutes ago, Thorny said:

 

You might say Adams improved the team TOO much 

July 12th, man 

But we ditched Peterka. Forwards are better now, addition by subtraction. Could approach upwards of 350 goals. 375 with a healthy Norris 

Edit: forgot we swapped Lafferty for Danforth. We could scratch 400 goals 

Your sarcasm is duly noted and appreciated.  

[bunomatic]

What I’m reading here is more hope and prayer of being MAYBE the width of an asshair better than last season. This alone speaks volumes of how badly KA has done to improve this team. 4 points better? Six? We have simpletons running this team. Sorry for the negativity to those that preach patience but I’m all out. As others have said I’ll believe it if and when I see it. They are treading water.

[Turbo44]

3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Hoping and praying that UPL doesn't suck again is not a plan for success.  By signing Lyons, Adams is basically saying that no further upgrades in goal are coming that that he is employing the same failed strategy since Ullmark left town and that is hoping and praying one or both of UPL and Levi emerge as real NHL goalies.  This team is done before the season even starts.  

What makes you think Lyon is not the best NHL goalie of the 3 right now? Statistics say otherwise

[Thorny]

1 hour ago, DarthEbriate said:

Four hundred! We could almost buy our own (champion)ship with that!

Good luck avoiding any EEE entanglements 

[GASabresIUFAN]

16 minutes ago, Turbo44 said:

What makes you think Lyon is not the best NHL goalie of the 3 right now? Statistics say otherwise

But that’s my point.  If Lyons is the best available goalie the Sabres are toast.  He is probably the best of Comrie, Reimer or Anderson but that isn’t saying much.

Edited 1 hour ago by GASabresIUFAN

[Thorny]

28 minutes ago, bunomatic said:

What I’m reading here is more hope and prayer of being MAYBE the width of an asshair better than last season. This alone speaks volumes of how badly KA has done to improve this team. 4 points better? Six? We have simpletons running this team. Sorry for the negativity to those that preach patience but I’m all out. As others have said I’ll believe it if and when I see it. They are treading water.

As much as I struggle with my utter hypocrisy in continuing to support the franchise as it’s run by a regime that’s willingly damaging the Crest, literally prioritizing the saving of $ over winning, a group that has a distinct and documented conflict of interest with the fans…I find myself able to draw the line at being unwilling to painstakingly dig, on my hands and knees, to find squint-and-you-can-see-it potential avenues for improvement from this roster, when those assembling it showed little to zero care in assembling the roster for those purposes 

They do not deserve it. 

[Taro T]

4 hours ago, dudacek said:

🤷

I read it as Kesselring is really good without the puck, Jokiharju was better defensively than people say, and the other guys we moved on from were really bad.

Jokiharju WAS better than we gave him credit for being.  It's not HIS fault that his coaches kept insisting on pairing him up with Dahlin for large stretches of every season after Dahlin's rookie or sophomore season.  But they REALLY needed to move on from him, because as long as he was here on the roster, they were going to find excuses to play the very good 3rd pairing and adequate 2nd pairing D-man on the TOP pairing.

Adams literally saved Wilford from himself obtaining that draft pick.