Sabres are 8th for 5 on 5 xGoal%

[JoeSchmoe]

Problem is they're 23rd for actual Goal%.

They are the 2nd worst team in the league for 5 on 5 goaltending (goals against above expected) so until that gets better it'll be tough to improve.

[inkman]

Just now, JoeSchmoe said:

Problem is they're 23rd for actual Goal%.

They are the 2nd worst team in the league for 5 on 5 goaltending (goals against above expected) so until that gets better it'll be tough to improve.

Frankly, their goaltending, while being slightly improved over last season is still below league average.  Until that’s resolved, this team is booty cheeks. 

[tom webster]

2 minutes ago, inkman said:

Frankly, their goaltending, while being slightly improved over last season is still below league average.  Until that’s resolved, this team is booty cheeks. 

The problem is that there are about ten teams looking to improve their goaltending, fifteen teams learning to live with what they have and seven, maybe less, have franchise goalies. Their best hope is one of the guys in the system, either already here or in the minors, turning out to be that guy.

[Sidc3000]

Shooting directly into the chest of the goalie gets you a ***** ton of shots but you’ll never score and that’s what they’re doing.  On top of that I would love to see if there is stats on how many shots go wide and enter the Sabres stand with that. 
 

[JoeSchmoe]

26 minutes ago, tom webster said:

The problem is that there are about ten teams looking to improve their goaltending, fifteen teams learning to live with what they have and seven, maybe less, have franchise goalies. Their best hope is one of the guys in the system, either already here or in the minors, turning out to be that guy.

Hopefully Ellis can do it. He's the only guy with any runway left.

[Pimlach]

26 minutes ago, Sidc3000 said:

Shooting directly into the chest of the goalie gets you a ***** ton of shots but you’ll never score and that’s what they’re doing.  On top of that I would love to see if there is stats on how many shots go wide and enter the Sabres stand with that. 
 

All except for Tuch, right?  Don't all of his shots go wide?   Isn't that one of the many knocks you have on the guy? 

[tom webster]

1 minute ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Hopefully Ellis can do it. He's the only guy with any runway left.

In the short term yes, but they have to commit to one guy. Teams like Carolina have learned that if you don’t have “that guy,” you ride the consistent guy and learn to overcome his shortcomings.

[inkman]

14 minutes ago, tom webster said:

In the short term yes, but they have to commit to one guy. Teams like Carolina have learned that if you don’t have “that guy,” you ride the consistent guy and learn to overcome his shortcomings.

If Ellis flames out than it may be time to see if Levi can be the guy.  It’s probably too much of a mental hurdle for Kevyn to figure out how he can do that with 3 goalies already on the roster but it’s probably time to cut bait with at least one of them. We all want it to be UPL, I just don’t see a buyer out there even at 50% salary retention which we know Daddy Wantsbucks isn’t fond of. 

Edited yesterday at 05:25 PM by inkman

[Taro T]

11 minutes ago, tom webster said:

In the short term yes, but they have to commit to one guy. Teams like Carolina have learned that if you don’t have “that guy,” you ride the consistent guy and learn to overcome his shortcomings.

But that's one more thing this crew watches but don't get right.  Brind-Amour doesn't ride a goalie until he loses a game and then run with the other guy until he loses.  He picks the guy he expects will get them the W in the harder games and then spells him in the easier ones; and if one starts playing particularly well or particularly poorly, the determination of which guy will get them the tougher win changes.

They really don't seem to twig to the WHY of what successful teams do.  They get the WHAT, but because they don't get the WHY, they can't replicate that success.  One of my classmates a long time ago in a statistics class, who simply didn't get it, when seeing the grade they earned on a test complained "but I followed all the steps."  No, you didn't, because you put it down to a recipe that needed to be followed exactly when it fact it was a set of guidelines that had a lot of if/thens in it.  It isn't do 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and then profit; but rather if A then B, if C then if D then E and if not D then F and if not C then G and if not A but C then H.  

Personally expect Ruff understands that, but isn't going to do the X's and O's at this point in his journey and the guys he has working for him can't do the X's and O's at this level because they simply don't understand the WHY of what they're trying to do.

Right now, in net, still believe UPL has the highest ceiling but he also has the lowest floor and too often he plays closer to his floor than the ceiling.  Lyon is calm and can get in a groove, but giving him 1 game every 4 weeks will never see him in that groove again.  Ellis is an unknown, but he's good at squaring up and then finding a way to get a body part in front of the puck but he still can resquare himself pretty quickly.

Personally, would be treating Lyon and Ellis like the Canes treated Gerber and Ward back in '06, and throw UPL in every now and then (but sooner than 4 weeks later) and see if he can recapture that lightning in a bottle he had for a couple of months so long ago.  It makes sense to trade one of them, but don't want Adams being the architect of that deal.

[sabrefanday1]

Living up here in Ontario (north of Toronto) I am stuck with watching the Leafs lots and they always bitch about their goaltending whoch is funny cuase in almost every game they are greatly outplayed and outshot yet their goalies keep them in until Leafs score on one of their few shpts. Even now I am watchibg Caps/Islanders and everyone wonders why the Caps are winning but their goalie is keeping them in the game, then Caps score of course. The Sabres get lousey refereeing and even worse goaltending more often then not. Mind you lots of other teams (see Edmionton) have goaltending problems too..we are not alone. Adams is at least trying to find one goalie who can actually be consistant and win us games once in a while like other goalies do for their teams

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, Sidc3000 said:

Shooting directly into the chest of the goalie gets you a ***** ton of shots but you’ll never score and that’s what they’re doing.  On top of that I would love to see if there is stats on how many shots go wide and enter the Sabres stand with that. 
 

Wide shots get 0xgf because they miss the net. 

I'd guess the Sabres sh% isn't very good. Xgf% is not accounting for sh% and most models don't account for screens or pre shot movement. It's not a perfect stat but my guess is Buffalo has a sh% issue that theoretically will improve. 

[PerreaultForever]

I'm still going to swim against the tide and say the real problem isn't the goalies, it's the team D. Good D makes mediocre goalies into good goalies. We have mediocre goalies but bad D. When you have good D the goalies play braver, worry less about rebound control, have better sight lines, and less traffic in front. They suddenly look like better goalies in that sort of system/team. 

There are exceptions, but we aren't going to get an acrobat like Hasek again. We need better D. 

[JoeSchmoe]

19 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

I'm still going to swim against the tide and say the real problem isn't the goalies, it's the team D. Good D makes mediocre goalies into good goalies. We have mediocre goalies but bad D. When you have good D the goalies play braver, worry less about rebound control, have better sight lines, and less traffic in front. They suddenly look like better goalies in that sort of system/team. 

There are exceptions, but we aren't going to get an acrobat like Hasek again. We need better D. 

Sabres have the 10th best 5 on 5 high danger shot attempts against and 9th best medium danger. That's pretty good D.

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Sabres have the 10th best 5 on 5 high danger shot attempts against and 9th best medium danger. That's pretty good D.

Now how are they on goals against from defensive giveaways?

[mjd1001]

Just now, PerreaultForever said:

Now how are they on goals against from defensive giveaways?

If I'm not mistaken, those great chances from defensive giveaways are factored into the high danger chances allowed.

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, mjd1001 said:

If I'm not mistaken, those great chances from defensive giveaways are factored into the high danger chances allowed.

Well I'm seeing them end up as goals for the opposition. 

[mjd1001]

15 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Well I'm seeing them end up as goals for the opposition. 

A turnover that results in an uncontested shot from the front of the net that becomes a goal is counted the same as a non-turnover but bad positioning that eventually results in an uncontested shot from the front of the net that becomes a goal.

If the Xga number is good, but there are a lot of turnovers that result in good scoring chances, that means that there is probably really, really good overall play to make up for those turnovers that result in that good xga number.

I want that xga number low.  If someone said I could reduce the number of turnovers by the D-men by 5 per week, but in return I have to add from other places 10 shots from the slot due to bad positioning, therefore raising that xga number....I'll take the turnovers with the overall lower xga.

[EM88]

Just now, mjd1001 said:

A turnover that results in an uncontested shot from the front of the net that becomes a goal is counted the same as a non-turnover but bad positioning that eventually results in an uncontested shot from the front of the net that becomes a goal.

If the Xga number is good, but there are a lot of turnovers that result in good scoring chances, that means that there is probably really, really good overall play to make up for those turnovers that result in that good xga number.

I want that xga number low.  If someone said I could reduce the number of turnovers by the D-men by 5 per week, but in return I have to add from other places 10 shots from the slot due to bad positioning, therefore raising that xga number....I'll take the turnovers with the overall lower xga.

Agreed.

It does not matter to me where the chances and goals come from.  I want the overall number of them low.