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

[tom webster]

4 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.

This is a reasonable take.

Two things I would say, though, is I don’t think they are content either and I’m not sure many of their competitors got a lot better either. A few have but it seems most teams have just as many questions and concerns.

[That Aud Smell]

7 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

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..."

Okay. Then please edit the topic thread as follows:

Dom from The Athletic: Sabres having worst offseason in NHL so far

[tom webster]

1 minute ago, That Aud Smell said:

Okay. Then please edit the topic thread as follows:

Dom from The Athletic: Sabres having worst offseason in NHL so far

Again, Dom’s model says they have been least improved. That does not equate to having worst offseason. Maybe it’s splitting hairs but……

[LGR4GM]

2 minutes ago, tom webster said:

Again, Dom’s model says they have been least improved. That does not equate to having worst offseason. Maybe it’s splitting hairs but……

I think it's a bad framing. "Worst offseason" implies you're doing dumb stuff. Losing Tuch isn't great but he's a ufa and teams can only do so much. I'd love Buffalo to add a legit forward to the top 6, but idk who and idk how. 

[tom webster]

20 hours 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 

I just found time to actually look at his numbers. Montreal actually got a +1 got getting rid of Gallagher so their ranking was really the result of doing nothing. That actually makes a certain amount of sense.

[Archie Lee]

3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

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? 

Agree with this take. I don’t see a lot of fans saying “Relax, everything will be fine”. Different people view the lack of a big addition with varying degrees of urgency. I would like a big addition. I don’t need to win a trade from day one, but the price has to be reasonable. And the Sabres remain well positioned to take a swing when the right opportunity arises. 

Adams’s downfall was that he failed year over year to make the move that advanced the program (see Yzerman). I would not say I’m overly optimistic about Jarmo in the long term, but I will wait a bit before I draw conclusions. 

[That Aud Smell]

58 minutes ago, tom webster said:

Again, Dom’s model says they have been least improved. That does not equate to having worst offseason. Maybe it’s splitting hairs but……

fair deuce!

@PASabreFan, please change this thread's title to 

Dom from The Athletic: Sabres are least improved team this offseason so far

[Nacho Libre]

7 hours ago, dudacek said:

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.

 

Can easily see Jarmo breaking this down the same way, and coming to the conclusion we have the depth to cover for Doan Meowl and Zucker if they do drop off, and a reasonable equation in more players with the potential to swing the other direction, anyways, as you point out. And then, moving on to the other 2 names you listed, in net, and realizing it’s not unrealistically an area that could completely torpedo us. Choosing it as the key area of need and pushing his chips in on Hellebuyck as the “final” (and necessary) piece. 

[Nacho Libre]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

I think it's a bad framing. "Worst offseason" implies you're doing dumb stuff. Losing Tuch isn't great but he's a ufa and teams can only do so much. I'd love Buffalo to add a legit forward to the top 6, but idk who and idk how. 

I don’t think it’s bad framing tbh, I think it’s pretty clear what he’s detailing. Worst doesn’t necessarily imply intent or bad aptitude. It’s listed as worst because he’s saying when considering additions and subtractions we, on paper, suffered the greatest downturn purely as it relates to the looming season from the perspective of this offseason. The greatest net change to the negative, or, in other words, the worst result on paper. Imagine every team had a little number beside them out of 100, the sabres number fluctuated to the negative more than any other team. I know you don’t find it confusing but I can see why some might, tbf

Edited July 17 by Nacho Libre

[That Aud Smell]

18 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

fair deuce!

@PASabreFan, please change this thread's title to 

Dom from The Athletic: Sabres are least improved team this offseason so far

Just now, Nacho Libre said:

I don’t think it’s bad framing tbh, I think it’s pretty clear what he’s detailing. Worst doesn’t necessarily imply intent or bad aptitude. It’s listed as worst because he’s saying we lost more talent than anyone else and added less, on paper, purely as it relates to the looming season from the perspective of that offseason. Imagine every team had a little number beside them out of 100, the sabres number fluctuated to the negative more than any other team 

let's try this again.

@PASabreFan, please change the thread's title to 

Dom from The Athletic: Sabres' little number has fluctuated to negative more than any other team this offseason so far

[PASabreFan]

12 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

let's try this again.

@PASabreFan, please change the thread's title to 

Dom from The Athletic: Sabres' little number has fluctuated to negative more than any other team this offseason so far

Jarmo won't deal, but I will. I will change the title if you tell me who the "blue collar" asshat is in Sabres videos (RJ Tribute, most recent playoff hype video), and now he's the voice of the schedule release video.

[RETURNTOGLORY]

Well, we will be worse next year, absolutely no doubt about it. 

The run the team went on was an abnormality. For it to happen two years in a row is Vegas level odds. 

The question is how much will we regress points wise. 

The powerplay has to be addressed. 

Kane?

[#freejame]

13 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Jarmo won't deal, but I will. I will change the title if you tell me who the "blue collar" asshat is in Sabres videos (RJ Tribute, most recent playoff hype video), and now he's the voice of the schedule release video.

I couldn’t even find our video but I do love this crusade you’ve been on. 

[Weave]

41 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

let's try this again.

@PASabreFan, please change the thread's title to 

Dom from The Athletic: Sabres' little number has fluctuated to negative more than any other team this offseason so far

I prefer the title to read:

Sabres lose Tuch; See what happens next!

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, Nacho Libre said:

I don’t think it’s bad framing tbh, I think it’s pretty clear what he’s detailing. Worst doesn’t necessarily imply intent or bad aptitude. It’s listed as worst because he’s saying when considering additions and subtractions we, on paper, suffered the greatest downturn purely as it relates to the looming season from the perspective of this offseason. The greatest net change to the negative, or, in other words, the worst result on paper. Imagine every team had a little number beside them out of 100, the sabres number fluctuated to the negative more than any other team. I know you don’t find it confusing but I can see why some might, tbf

It quite literally does. If it was "Sabres see largest net change after losing Tuch Byram" than sure I would agree with you. It is deliberately written to imply the Sabres had the "worst" "bad" whatever offseason simply because according to a math model, sending out Tuch and Byram while bringing in Zellweger/Crevier, doesn't math out good. Most of that having to do with overvaluing Byram, and undervaluing a bunch of guys who the model can't accurately predict. IMPO it implies the Sabres did dumb things, otherwise you would not say "worst".  

I would also like to add I find this article LAZY. You want to write it, fine. But you at least owe your readers some of the numbers behind it. I have no concept of what -15 means, how much of that is Tuch? What about Byram? What is Zellweger and Crevier being given? Is Kesselring overrated in this model? IDK, the guy just tells me an output number and says "trust me". It is bad writing. 

[Night Train]

Off-season filler to keep the paychecks coming. 

and now..back to summer. 

[PASabreFan]

Just now, Night Train said:

Off-season filler to keep the paychecks coming. 

and now..back to summer. 

What summer? Buy some fire cans, you cheapskate hosers.

38 minutes ago, #freejame said:

I couldn’t even find our video but I do love this crusade you’ve been on. 

Jarmo Crusade or Asshat?

[#freejame]

Just now, PASabreFan said:

What summer? Buy some fire cans, you cheapskate hosers.

Jarmo Crusade or Asshat?

Asshat. Who the hell is that guy? The people want to know!

[PASabreFan]

[Nacho Libre]

34 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

It quite literally does. If it was "Sabres see largest net change after losing Tuch Byram" than sure I would agree with you. It is deliberately written to imply the Sabres had the "worst" "bad" whatever offseason simply because according to a math model, sending out Tuch and Byram while bringing in Zellweger/Crevier, doesn't math out good. Most of that having to do with overvaluing Byram, and undervaluing a bunch of guys who the model can't accurately predict. IMPO it implies the Sabres did dumb things, otherwise you would not say "worst".  

I would also like to add I find this article LAZY. You want to write it, fine. But you at least owe your readers some of the numbers behind it. I have no concept of what -15 means, how much of that is Tuch? What about Byram? What is Zellweger and Crevier being given? Is Kesselring overrated in this model? IDK, the guy just tells me an output number and says "trust me". It is bad writing. 

This feels semantics heavy when I’m pretty much agreeing with eveything you are saying for the record. I still just don’t see it as misleading. Sabres can have the “worst” net change yet the implication not be that the changes were “dumb”, I mean the guy literally clarified that in the article in question. I’d argue it’s a skill issue re: people getting fooled by a headline when the context is fairly obvious. The decisions don’t have to be *dumb* to get the “worst” offseason, not then they might be prudent re:the long term outlook, which is why I think most people think Jarmo did what he did

Ultimately, it’s referring to the worst, most detrimental offseason on paper relative to the *immediate* season, purely in a talent in/talent out equation (not accounting for developing talent which he does mention.) The perceived downgrade is only relative to the looming season - I think that’s the key qualifier.

I get what you are saying though, he didn’t say “worst offseason relative to immediate results and unaccounting for potential growth”, or, “the team that suffered the largest net downward change in perceived talent during the offseason” he just said “worst” in the headline, which, I get it, can come of like a judgment on overall viability. I digress, not much more we can really say about a potentially misleading headline 

Edited July 17 by Nacho Libre

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:

Jarmo won't deal, but I will. I will change the title if you tell me who the "blue collar" asshat is in Sabres videos (RJ Tribute, most recent playoff hype video), and now he's the voice of the schedule release video.

Dude. What is your beef with that guy?

I mean - I'm asking.

Because I'm here for it. (I think.)

ALSO ... is he actually the voice of the schedule release video?! The one where the silicone dummy ("Bob") is getting pummeled?

42 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

It quite literally does. If it was "Sabres see largest net change after losing Tuch Byram" than sure I would agree with you.

There's a thread title I can fw.

29 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Dude's fan bona fides are impliedly solid. That is some crazy gear - the sh1tty novelty hard hat especially.

[PASabreFan]

Just now, That Aud Smell said:

Dude. What is your beef with that guy?

I mean - I'm asking.

Because I'm here for it. (I think.)

ALSO ... is he actually the voice of the schedule release video?! The one where the silicone dummy ("Bob") is getting pummeled?

There's a thread title I can fw.

Dude's fan bona fides are impliedly solid. That is some crazy gear - the sh1tty novelty hard hat especially.

My problem is the Sabres are trying to pull one over on us. You can tell the real folks, like the mom at the beginning of the hype video. This dude has been featured in three videos now. He might be a fan, but he's not just a fan. And he is 100% the voice of the sked vid as the kids say.

[dudacek]

Just now, PASabreFan said:

My problem is the Sabres are trying to pull one over on us. You can tell the real folks, like the mom at the beginning of the hype video. This dude has been featured in three videos now. He might be a fan, but he's not just a fan. And he is 100% the voice of the sked vid as the kids say.

No chance the content creators are lazy? The found him and like him so they keep going back to the well?

[PASabreFan]

Just now, dudacek said:

No chance the content creators are lazy? The found him and like him so they keep going back to the well?

[Huckleberry]

32. Buffalo Sabres

Net Rating added: -15
In: Olen Zellweger, Louis Crevier
Out: Alex Tuch, Bowen Byram, Michael Kesselring

I think both can make top 4 -  Crevier might be better fit for Power.