Doan > Peterka?

[Drag0nDan]

23 hours ago, WhenWillItEnd66 said:

I loved this trade from the get go. If Doan can grow and loves to be here, he is going to cement us winning this trade if the centerpiece plays as advertised

I wanted to pair doan and mcleod, but assumed doan would have been playing down as a young player on line 4.  Pleasantly surprised that those 2+tuch has become a thing, and it's probably been the most consistent line.  

[Pimlach]

Peterka has 3 goals, 9 points, and is +9 in his first 10 games.  
 

That’s a 24 goal pace, and he isn’t getting much PP time.  

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

Peterka has 3 goals, 9 points, and is +9 in his first 10 games.  
 

That’s a 24 goal pace, and he isn’t getting much PP time.  

Good for him.  He's a very good player.  Hoping in the long run the Sabres ended up with 2 very good players in their own, though significantly different, right.

[LGR4GM]

Peterka is scoring at almost the exact same rate as last year. He's off by 0.1 while his secondary assist rate is up and his overall pts per 60 is up just a smidge. 

 

[LTS]

On 10/24/2025 at 6:39 PM, 7+6=13 said:

I'm confused too.  This isn't difficult if you don't change the discussion.  Are you saying every trade is even if both teams got better?  How would you measure if both teams got equally better.  Wouldn't it be scarce to say both teams got equally better?

The math has to be on the side that one team got better than the other. Or as I'd call it, won the trade.  That's what I think is so difficult for some posters to even suggest.

I didn't change the discussion I simply asked a question.  I appreciate your follow up, so here's mine.

If both teams improve, would you say the team that improved less lost the trade even though they improved?

If there are two winners in the lottery and one person won more than the other person it doesn't make the other person a loser does it?  It just means they did not win as much.

Win/Lose is a finite discussion.  But, if both teams can improve, then are we moving out of a finite discussion?

In the end, it's subjective so mostly it's just not a conversation worth having especially as the difference between outcomes gets closer.

 

[JohnC]

I’m happy that Buffalo made the trade for Doan and Kesserling. But I’m also sure that as Utah sits on top of their division with an 8-2 record that they are happy acquiring JJP. 
 

This was a fair and good trade for the dealing teams.

[CTJoe]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

I’m happy that Buffalo made the trade for Doan and Kesserling. But I’m also sure that as Utah sits on top of their division with an 8-2 record that they are happy acquiring JJP. 
 

This was a fair and good trade for the dealing teams.

And hopefully Kesselring starts contributing tonight

[JohnC]

11 minutes ago, CTJoe said:

And hopefully Kesselring starts contributing tonight

I'm not expecting too much from him tonight. As a third pairing player in this game his workload is going to be somewhat limited. What most of us expect/hope is that he will soon be paired with Power and put him in a better position to flourish. TBD. 

[7+6=13]

4 hours ago, LTS said:

I didn't change the discussion I simply asked a question.  I appreciate your follow up, so here's mine.

If both teams improve, would you say the team that improved less lost the trade even though they improved?

If there are two winners in the lottery and one person won more than the other person it doesn't make the other person a loser does it?  It just means they did not win as much.

Win/Lose is a finite discussion.  But, if both teams can improve, then are we moving out of a finite discussion?

In the end, it's subjective so mostly it's just not a conversation worth having especially as the difference between outcomes gets closer.

 

First, I have no argument with you or your comments.  I'll respond your first statement.  The reason I think you changed the discussion is, my comment was directed towards some Sabres fans unwillingness to complete a positive thought about the team.  They must say - or are compelled to say, both teams got better, so both teams won. I'm saying, who cares? And that's nearly impossible to be true.

We could discuss winning "over the other team" forever, as you suggest and there's no way to know when it is "subjective".  

For me it's simple.  If I believe the Sabres are better with Doan and Kesselring vs JJ.  I think we won.  Why do I have to care about Utah? I  don't care if they did good too.  

[GASabresIUFAN]

Peterka has 9 pts in 10 game, a 72 pt pace.  All his points are at EV.

Doan has 3 EV pts in 9 game.  His other 3 pts are on the PP.  He is on about 49 pts pace.  

Doan adds a compete motor we need in the bottom 6,  but he doesn’t drive offense like JJP.  

Frankly I wish we had found another way to acquire Doan, but he is not a better hockey player than JJP.

 

[LGR4GM]

6 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Peterka has 9 pts in 10 game, a 72 pt pace.  All his points are at EV.

Doan has 3 EV pts in 9 game.  His other 3 pts are on the PP.  He is on about 49 pts pace.  

Doan adds a compete motor we need in the bottom 6,  but he doesn’t drive offense like JJP.  

Frankly I wish we had found another way to acquire Doan, but he is not a better hockey player than JJP.

 

No, Doan has a compete motor we need in the top 6.

[tom webster]

I’ve never understood why people worry about the guy that’s traded. All I care about is if Buffalo got better. 

Maybe Dallas wished they had kept Iginla. All I would have cared about is that Joe N helped me win the Cup.

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

No, Doan has a compete motor we need in the top 6.

If Doan and McLeod are in your top 6, you aren’t a championship caliber team.

[shrader]

1 hour ago, tom webster said:

I’ve never understood why people worry about the guy that’s traded. All I care about is if Buffalo got better. 

Maybe Dallas wished they had kept Iginla. All I would have cared about is that Joe N helped me win the Cup.

And there’s always this quick rush to declare a winner. Your typical trade usually involves one team making a move for today and the other making a move for tomorrow. The 24/7 news cycle mentality of judging it right now is always going to lead to the same conclusion.  

[_Q_]

22 hours ago, 7+6=13 said:

That's exactly how the math of probability works.  It's heavily against it being an exactly even trade.  

I suppose that's why a mathematical equation that's true, has you fooled that it's irony. 

No it is exactly not.  You said someone “has to be the winner of the trade.”  For something as precise as mathematics, you should use more precise English.