Dom's fancy stats of The Atlantic: Sabres having least best offseason in NHL so far

[Taro T]

30 minutes ago, #freejame said:

Huh. I thought they went from President’s Trophy to 8th and that’s when they won. 

They lost to Vegas in the Finals the year they snuck past the Sabres for 8.

[dudacek]

8 minutes ago, Nacho Libre said:

No, it’s that the defining take away is that we’ll only be worse by way of a regular season point total and not when it actually counts. As opposed to just, potentially worse, as the thread topic seems to indicate (PA can correct me if need be).

sometimes I don’t know why I bother when people don’t pay attention to the context by which I am responding. You get that I was having a discussion with someone who had presented the theory, because of something Florida didn’t do, that we may see greater success in playoffs despite falling point total in regular season? 

this is what I was fairly obviously alluding to. The idea being presented that it’s not actually worse next year, it’s actually better. Lower regular season point total is a straw man no one cares about. Obv everyone is measuring by playoff success 

To me it seemed like you were talking about things way broader than Florida.

So it’s how come more people aren’t worried about the playoff or long-term consequence of being worse this regular season?

[tom webster]

21 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

With regards to Montreal, it’s the fact they did not lose any major pieces off their roster this summer and his model rates their existing roster high 

Yeah but the chart is “most improved.” Do his charts adjust based strictly on a player getting older or are twenty teams rated as “no improvement “ so teams six through twenty-five are at tied at zero improvement?

I know Montreal is the darling of the league because the guys they have locked up are consider high end compared to Buffalo’s being middle six but ……

[triumph_communes]

Model doesn’t project what the young players proved they can be in playoff hockey even. Nothing to see here 

[LGR4GM]

7 minutes ago, Nacho Libre said:

Great post.

re: the bold. 

how would you feel about the strategy if we DO miss the playoffs next year? Is it a “we can take a step back as long as we make the playoffs” type equation for you personally or are you even open to the idea that the prudent offseason could even lead to a miss outright and the strategy still be a reasonable one? 

They need to make the playoffs next season. I am doubtful of Buffalo being a "Cup Contender" and think they need more playoff seasoning which all the young guys need... and most of the older ones too. I want them to get more playoff experience and I think playoffs needs to be the standard.

[GoPuckYourself]

It's a bad offseason so far but I'm hoping the Zelleweger can be both a consistent offensive presence and just be decent defensively, he doesn't need top be all world amd we shouldn't miss a beat there plus Rudolph as early as next year can and probably will be in our lineup. Tuch is going to be a huge blow this year, when it takes 3 players to replace you that just shows your worth but I don't think it will be catastrophic if we can somehow pull off the deal for Hellebuyck, which imo is pretty mind boggling that he hasn't already been traded by Winnipeg, they really have no leverage as he stated he won't re-sign there already and wants to come here, I'm hoping they retain some of his salary as well if he does get traded to us. I know people like to crap on the idea or they're sick of hearing his name but you still have Patrick Kane out there and he's by far the best option and we need a RW after losing Tuch, He could come in and polay on line 2 and on the power play to really open things up. he will be no help defensively or on the PK obviously but a solid offensive option even at his advamced age and I bet you'ds see a boost in production and a rejuvinated Kane being in front of the home crowd finally after all these years plus it would be cool to see him retire in the place where he started again imo, but I know many are against it and I get it.

Edited July 16 by GoPuckYourself

[Taro T]

15 minutes ago, Nacho Libre said:

Great post.

re: the bold. 

how would you feel about the strategy if we DO miss the playoffs next year? Is it a “we can take a step back as long as we make the playoffs” type equation for you personally or are you even open to the idea that the prudent offseason could even lead to a miss outright and the strategy still be a reasonable one? 

ENTIRELY depends on the why's and the how's of how they miss, should they in fact miss the playoffs.

If it's primarily because of injuries to core players and UPL having a truly down year; am frustrated by it because UPL should've been replaced by Hellebucyk this off-season but am also hopeful because at the ages the players the Sabres have injuries shouldn't be a major issue (at least for guys not named Norris) and the Sabres should still have the same sort of ammo available to try to land the Hellebucyk sort next off-season if he or something similar is available.

If it's because the kids all had sophomore slumps, the PP is even worse, and whereas the D this last year managed to either block most of the passes through the crease or have a timely stickraise for that pass but this coming year start giving up that backdoor play again; will be downright dispondent because that means a LOT of parts &/or the philosophy need to change.

Rags won the Presidents Trophy in '92.  Missed the playoffs in '93.  Won the Cup thanks to a couple of key additons and Richter finally not letting in cheapies to kill good efforts in '94.  Where were their fans in the grand scheme of things in the summer of '93?

[tom webster]

10 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

They need to make the playoffs next season. I am doubtful of Buffalo being a "Cup Contender" and think they need more playoff seasoning which all the young guys need... and most of the older ones too. I want them to get more playoff experience and I think playoffs needs to be the standard.

I think one overlooked part of this whole worse/better conversation is that while they might take a step back from where they were post-Adams, the won’t regress to pre-Adams. In my opinion, they will add more points then they had pre-Adams then they will lose from post-Adams and comfortably make the playoffs.

Edited July 16 by tom webster

[...]

1 hour ago, Nacho Libre said:

Is it worth at least exploring the possibility in discussion that the numbers that indicate we’ll be worse next season will lead to us being worse? And what we think about the pros and cons of prioritizing the future over the looming season?

Or is the only topic of merit, “worse next year as a means to actually being BETTER next year.”  Actually asking - cause you know that old improv rule where you don’t say “no” cause it limits discussion? I see this as already sort of morphing into a rejection of the thread premise 

not trying to position it as positive V negative. Merely trying to avoid the same old extremities it usually devolves into and compare two sides that may not be as black and white. It doesn’t seem to be “well hmm we might take a step back, but improve the future, thoughts?” type of exercise as a have your cake and eat it too wish fulfilment: “well maybe we’ll do better next year by doing this AND long term.”

I mean like ya maybe 

To do this, the thread would need to be "responses by invite only".

[PASabreFan]

1 hour ago, #freejame said:

Genuine question—is it important to people to have more than 109 points or to win the division again? 

The Sabres were three teams last year. I need Team 1 and Team 3 to be a LOT better. I am not interested in a historic run from Team 2, 2.

51 minutes ago, tom webster said:

This is perfect example of social media posting. The article is actually more optimistic than the headline. The article was also “least improved.” I’m not sure that equates to worst off season. There are literally two teams in our conference that I think are substantially better.

Also, what exactly did Montreal do to be that high? Did I miss something?

Wouldn't the team that improved the least be having the worst offseason.

I get it... any dampening of fan enthusiasm is a concern.

[dudacek]

I think it is important to make the playoffs to cement the “perennial contender” status I hope last year began.

Assuming playoffs, dropping a dozen points or five slots in the standings in the regular season is immaterial to me.

What matters is the experience the bulk of the roster gained in the playoffs this year, the growth opportunities the coming regular season should provide to the likes of Benson, Power, Zellweger and Kulich, and Jarmo’s ability to plug any roster holes that become apparent prior to the trade deadline.

The results of Dom’s model are entirely predictable once you understand how it works. They reflect a reality no one here disputes, but even he acknowledges how they likely don’t fully reflect proper expectations for next year’s Sabres. 

I think this is a playoff team but who wouldn’t  like Jarmo to take more steps to tilt the odds?

Edited July 16 by dudacek

[...]

2 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Wouldn't the team that improved the least be having the worst offseason.

I get it... any dampening of fan enthusiasm is a concern.

How are we defining "improved"? Just adding people? How does not adding people equal "improved"?

To the bolded:

 

[tom webster]

1 minute ago, PASabreFan said:

The Sabres were three teams last year. I need Team 1 and Team 3 to be a LOT better. I am not interested in a historic run from Team 2, 2.

Wouldn't the team that improved the least be having the worst offseason.

I get it... any dampening of fan enthusiasm is a concern.

Actually, I don’t. If you go into the office-season comfortable with your team and you tweak things a little, I think you have a better off-season then teams that need to improve, have the opportunity to improve and don’t. 
 

So no, in my opinion, “least improved” does not equate to “worst.”

And I understand, some people like to dismiss contrarian opinions and label them as part of the group that “drinks the kool aid.” 

[kas23]

Would love to know how these people rated the previous offseason.

[Nacho Libre]

7 minutes ago, kas23 said:

Would love to know how these people rated the previous offseason.

Sabres ranked 7th best last offseason 

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6496153/2025/07/16/nhl-most-improved-2025/

[That Aud Smell]

it took me a minute to realize what my misgiving with this thread was (as framed by OP @PASabreFan).

it's how the thread title invokes "Fancy Stats" for the judgment passed on the Sabres' offseason.

it would be better for me if that phrase had been replaced with the name of the person who authored the piece or the website that published it.

other than what's been pasted here, i haven't looked at the piece. it just seems like a fart in a bottle.

one last thing: my view is that the sabres have gotten worse this offseason (the 32nd worse, absolute worst? blargh); project to take a step back from what they achieved last season (how big a step? idk); and i am therefore hoping that jarmo can do a couple things to shore things up before camp starts.

[Porous Five Hole]

The Sabres lost a top line winger and top four defenseman without “directly” replacing them.

Makes perfect sense why the Sabres are at the bottom of this list.

But none of that has to mean the Sabres are worse nest year. 🤷

Toronto had the fourth best offseason. Anyone scared of the Leafs right now? I’m not. 

[LGR4GM]

The real question is not are we worse, it is how many wins did we lose? Most players are only good for on their own for a few wins a season. If Buffalo losing Tuch, costs us 3 wins, we might be okay. Really hard to say. 

[Taro T]

51 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

The real question is not are we worse, it is how many wins did we lose? Most players are only good for on their own for a few wins a season. If Buffalo losing Tuch, costs us 3 wins, we might be okay. Really hard to say. 

They can afford to have 5 wins from last year turn into regulation losses and still nearly definitely make the playoffs.  Lose any more than that, and they're depending on there not being 8 good teams in the east to get in.

(Not correcting for the fact there are now 4 more points available to them starting this season.) 

Edited July 16 by Taro T

[PASabreFan]

11 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

it took me a minute to realize what my misgiving with this thread was (as framed by OP @PASabreFan).

it's how the thread title invokes "Fancy Stats" for the judgment passed on the Sabres' offseason.

it would be better for me if that phrase had been replaced with the name of the person who authored the piece or the website that published it.

other than what's been pasted here, i haven't looked at the piece. it just seems like a fart in a bottle.

one last thing: my view is that the sabres have gotten worse this offseason (the 32nd worse, absolute worst? blargh); project to take a step back from what they achieved last season (how big a step? idk); and i am therefore hoping that jarmo can do a couple things to shore things up before camp starts.

Fancy stats: "That estimate comes from the analytic model of The Athletic's Dom Luszczyszyn, who ranked the Sabres' summer (at least so far) as the league's worst based on his Net Rating metric..."

[Second Line Center]

With Tuch we made the playoffs once.  

And we made the playoffs bc goaltending finally played well and every single player on the roster except for Kesselring improved.  
 

I have no reason to think AT MINIMUM we aren’t a 90-95 point team with the core and talent we have.  We didn’t get to 109 points bc of Alex Tuch.  We won’t drop to 85 points bc he’s gone.   If that’s the case then the roster sucks - which it doesn’t.  
 

Bo had his flaws in the D zone but he’s not irreplaceable.  We lost 2 luxury guys on a deep team and right now it sucks - but if the kids step up we will be ok.   
 

My only concern is the team mindset in losing Bo and Tuch and not replacing them - someone to juice things up and instill belief.  
 

Tage and Dahlin wanted him back and were vocal about it.  
 

If you infuse Helle into this lineup I think you remove that potential issue immediately and this team is a Cup contender.  I’m not sure if you asked the core leaders rn if they think they’re a cup contender that they say yes.  Whereas as early as January they believed they were.  
 

Another move has to happen.  
 

Edited July 17 by Second Line Center

[PerreaultForever]

The thing I want to point out though is all through the Adams era people (myself included) bitched and moaned about him not going out and getting immediate veteran help but just waiting for young players to develop. Now Jarmo (so far) has basically done the same thing and everyone seems content with it. 

The reality is we are not better unless Kulich, Östlund, Helenius all step up. Or at least 2 of them. Zellewegger as well to some extent falls into that as well. It's a fragile expectation to say the least.

[dudacek]

I see regression as a reasonable fear for: Doan, Mule, UPL, Lyon, Zucker.

The first two had unexpected jumps to a significantly higher level, the latter two had late-career outlier seasons and UPL has been a model of inconsistency.

I see progression as a reasonable hope for: Benson, Östlund, Kulich, Helenius, Quinn, Power, Zellweger and Norris.

The younger players have resumes and trend lines that point towards it, while Norris has to be healthy sometime.

The rest could have unexpected jumps in either direction, but by and large we know who they are.

 

[Demoted]

Media already sick of the Sabres 😆

[LGR4GM]

3 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

The thing I want to point out though is all through the Adams era people (myself included) bitched and moaned about him not going out and getting immediate veteran help but just waiting for young players to develop. Now Jarmo (so far) has basically done the same thing and everyone seems content with it. 

The reality is we are not better unless Kulich, Östlund, Helenius all step up. Or at least 2 of them. Zellewegger as well to some extent falls into that as well. It's a fragile expectation to say the least.

I'm 100% certain, no one here is "content" with it. Most seem pretty nervous about it and most expect the team to regress. The question is how much will they regress?