Let's Assume: Lineups for Opening Night

[LGR4GM]

Let's assume the team is set. No trades, no wish lists, none of that. How are you lining them up on opening night and who are you waiving to get to a 23 man roster? 

Here is your roster: https://puckpedia.com/team/buffalo-sabres

[Hoss]

I don't want to be a doomer. Last season was a ***** blast. But there isn't a current lineup combination that doesn't make me feel like we'll see a pretty significant regression next season.

[Doohickie]

I think Puckpedia  has it pretty well figured, with the exception that I suspect the second and third lines will flip early on (i.e., Helenius's will get more minutes than McLeod's line).  Or possibly just swap the centers.

[tom webster]

Just now, Hoss said:

I don't want to be a doomer. Last season was a ***** blast. But there isn't a current lineup combination that doesn't make me feel like we'll see a pretty significant regression next season.

I’m not sure what you consider a “serious” regression but I don’t see this at all. As I said earlier, they’ll be a lot better than they were before KA was fired and while they’ll miss Tuch, I think they’ll be fine. 
All conditioned on their health, as always.

[Hoss]

5 minutes ago, tom webster said:

I’m not sure what you consider a “serious” regression but I don’t see this at all. As I said earlier, they’ll be a lot better than they were before KA was fired and while they’ll miss Tuch, I think they’ll be fine. 
All conditioned on their health, as always.

You genuinely don't see the potential for a serious regression from this team "at all?" C'mon now... A team that just went on one of the most unimaginable runs in recent NHL history lost their second-leading scorer and a second-pairing defenseman who was key to their offensive identity.

Anyone claiming they don't see a path toward even a major regression, especially with the division they're in, is just lying to themselves.

[oddoublee]

10 minutes ago, tom webster said:

I’m not sure what you consider a “serious” regression but I don’t see this at all. As I said earlier, they’ll be a lot better than they were before KA was fired and while they’ll miss Tuch, I think they’ll be fine. 
All conditioned on their health, as always.

Serious, moderate...pick your word I guess. 

I understand teams overpay in FA, but unless the other GMs are completely wrong, we lost 23m per year in talent between Tuch and Byram. 

That's not nothing. 

In fairness to this thread ..I'm probably going outside the rails here

[dudacek]

I’ll say it again:

Tuch -> Kulich/Helenius

Dunne -> Carrick

Greenway -> Danforth

Byram -> Zellweger

Bryson/Kesselring -> Crevier

If you aren’t concerned about regression you’ve got more faith in internal growth than most.

If you think they’re doomed, you probably overestimating how much the Sabres relied on their best players last year and underestimating how much talent remains.

The current roster can still outskate, outwork and out score most opponents over an 84-game season.

My concern remains lack of faith in the ability of the goalies to repeat what they did last year.

[Hoss]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I’ll say it again:

Tuch -> Kulich/Helenius

Dunne -> Carrick

Greenway -> Danforth

Byram -> Zellweger

Bryson/Kesselring -> Crevier

If you aren’t concerned about regression you’ve got more faith in internal growth than most.

If you think they’re doomed, you probably overestimating how much the Sabres relied on their best players last year and underestimating how much talent remains.

The current roster can still outskate, outwork and out score most opponents over an 84-game season.

My concern remains lack of faith in the ability of the goalies to repeat what they did last year.

None of the bolded players matter to the success of this team. If Josh Dunne, Sam Carrick, Jordan Greenway, or Justin Danforth (or any combo of) are making or breaking your season, you've got bigger problems.

But, that said, nobody has suggested we're doomed (but there are certainly those who seem to think a regression isn't possible).

I love the moves GMJK has made this offseason, but the moves he hasn't made make me think this is a fringe playoff team right now.

[tom webster]

24 minutes ago, Hoss said:

You genuinely don't see the potential for a serious regression from this team "at all?" C'mon now... A team that just went on one of the most unimaginable runs in recent NHL history lost their second-leading scorer and a second-pairing defenseman who was key to their offensive identity.

Anyone claiming they don't see a path toward even a major regression, especially with the division they're in, is just lying to themselves.

I’d appreciate if you didn’t completely dismiss my opinion, especially when you seemingly refuse to define (major). I realize you are still young and haven’t yet come to grips with the idea you may not be always right so I’ll cut you a little slack.

As for the division, Florida is the only team in the division that might have made themselves significantly better and their age and goaltending may be a mitigating factor.

4 minutes ago, Hoss said:

None of the bolded players matter to the success of this team. If Josh Dunne, Sam Carrick, Jordan Greenway, or Justin Danforth (or any combo of) are making or breaking your season, you've got bigger problems.

But, that said, nobody has suggested we're doomed (but there are certainly those who seem to think a regression isn't possible).

I love the moves GMJK has made this offseason, but the moves he hasn't made make me think this is a fringe playoff team right now.

No one said a “regression” isn’t possible. We have said we don’t see a “major” regression.

[tom webster]

29 minutes ago, oddoublee said:

Serious, moderate...pick your word I guess. 

I understand teams overpay in FA, but unless the other GMs are completely wrong, we lost 23m per year in talent between Tuch and Byram. 

That's not nothing. 

In fairness to this thread ..I'm probably going outside the rails here

History and recent information show individual players do not impact win probability more then two or three games per year. It’s not like you’re taking those guys out of the lineup and replacing them with air. 

[Archie Lee]

10 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I’ll say it again:

Tuch -> Kulich/Helenius

Dunne -> Carrick

Greenway -> Danforth

Byram -> Zellweger

Bryson/Kesselring -> Crevier

If you aren’t concerned about regression you’ve got more faith in internal growth than most.

If you think they’re doomed, you probably overestimating how much the Sabres relied on their best players last year and underestimating how much talent remains.

The current roster can still outskate, outwork and out score most opponents over an 84-game season.

My concern remains lack of faith in the ability of the goalies to repeat what they did last year.

Since leaving Buffalo in 2012, Ruff has been a head coach for 10 seasons with Dallas, NJ, and now the Sabres.  Last season was the 4th of those seasons that he made the playoffs.  He has not made the playoffs two seasons in a row since he left the Buffalo the first time. 

In 2015-16 the Stars, under Ruff, finished 2nd overall with 109 points. The next season they missed the playoffs with 79 points.

In 2022-23 the Devils, under Ruff, finished 3rd overall with 112 points. The next season they missed the playoffs with 81 points.

It is fair to say that there were factors such as injuries and goaltender performance that contributed to those teams regressing.  It's also fair that there was no  ingrained and repeatable structure for those teams to rely on, when injuries occurred and goaltending failed.

I'm not predicting a big regression, but history suggests it is quite possible.   

 

[dudacek]

To answer the OP’s question:

I think Lindy had two excellent middle six lines last year in Östlund/Norris/Doan and Zucker/McLeod/Quinn that generally won their matchups.

He’ll probably return to those to start.

Malenstyn and Carrick are prototypes in their 4th line roles. Considering Danforth or a better player will be riding shotgun, the Sabres are also in good shape there.

That leaves the 1st line as the question mark. Tage is excellent. Tage and Krebs were excellent together last year. Is Benson really a serious drop-off from Tuch as the 3rd guy there?

Kulich and Helenius are very talented. Talented enough to seamlessly replace an injured Norris or Östlund or Zucker. Talented enough to force Lindy to push Krebs down the roster, or reconsider his lines altogether.

This remains a very deep and talented group of forwards.

[Nacho Libre]

15 minutes ago, Hoss said:

I love the moves GMJK has made this offseason, but the moves he hasn't made make me think this is a fringe playoff team right now.

I think people can be forgiven for being let down by the fact this sentence could have been pulled straight out of any Adams offseason. 

23 minutes ago, dudacek said:

My concern remains lack of faith in the ability of the goalies to repeat what they did last year.

Which brings me to the idea that personally, my main concern might just be a lack of faith in the league itself being an interesting follow. Maybe there really is nothing Jarmo and Kevyn could have even done. Maybe this is just nhl hockey (gm mode online) in 2026. Maybe this is just it. 

[dudacek]

15 minutes ago, Hoss said:

None of the bolded players matter to the success of this team. If Josh Dunne, Sam Carrick, Jordan Greenway, or Justin Danforth (or any combo of) are making or breaking your season, you've got bigger problems.

I think where I disagree here is that last years Sabres forward corps was built in such a way that all players mattered to the success of the team.

It wasn’t about elite players, it was about critical mass. They didn’t win because Alex Tuch was so much better than the man lining up across from him, they won because the dropoff from Tuch to the next man up and on down through the Sabres lineup was incremental.

Tuch is an excellent player and he will be missed. But the Sabres are better built than most teams to absorb the loss of a good forward.

[LGR4GM]

The Sabres took 45 goals off the roster and 3 veteran players with 615, 475, and 328 games played. They essentially replaced them with "Mystery Box", Krebs, and Zellweger. That's Krebs 12 goals compared to greenways 1. Mystery Box has to cover 33 of Tuch's goals, and Zellweger has to pick up 6goals to cover the gap between him and Byram. Yes I am well aware this isn't how it all works but it is to simplify the stuff. All in all, if we assume that the 4th line covers for Greenway's 1 goal, and Zellweger and Crevier cover for Byram's 11 and Kesselring's 0, the biggest question than becomes how do the Sabres cover for the 33 they lost with Tuch? 

Mystery Box is Östlund/Kulich/Helenius rolled into one. They are the mystery box because we do not know how they will play, where they will play, and what role they will be asked to fill. If think about an aggregate 33 goals from 3 players + Zach Benson (he just gets better and better), may not seem too scary but they still have to accomplish the task. There is also the issue of minutes. 3 players getting Tuch's TOI probably could get 33 goals but Mystery Box isn't individually going to get that because Tuch is 1 guy, not 3. There isn't enough extra minutes. Doan and Benson also eat into Tuch minutes. I wrote about this elsewhere but his 19mins a night will get dispersed with Doan, Benson, and probably Quinn taking what? 2-3 extra shifts each? Let's say they eat up minutes each of Tuch time and that gives them 10 minutes, you only have another 9 minutes to distribute to the rest of the guys. 

I think regression is likely in shot% and in sv% and without Tuch to bolster the sh%, I worry about how much the lines will be able to compensate for that. 

[transient]

51 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

I think Puckpedia  has it pretty well figured, with the exception that I suspect the second and third lines will flip early on (i.e., Helenius's will get more minutes than McLeod's line).  Or possibly just swap the centers.

I think their forward lines are probably a good approximation. I'm not sure I agree with Kulich in RaChaCha, but I'm not sure where he fits if he's able to continue to play. Hopefully, in this scenario, Benson and Doan can combine to make up for the production of Tuch, and Östlund and Helenius can combine to make up for the production of Benson and Doan.

On defense, I hope either Zellweger or Crevier are able to take the spot they have Timmins penciled into on the 2D pairing to bring some offense given the loss of Byram.

Regarding the goaltending, if it's UPL, Lyon and Ellis on the roster on opening night here's what I hope transpires. They use the preseason to push Ellis and see if they think he can be a future #1 in this league, and if they think he can they make him the early season primary backup to UPL and spell him with Lyon if he's not up for it. In my mind this does several things. It sends a message to UPL and they can see if he's able to stay focused when the pressure to keep his job is ratcheted up (between the Hellebuyck rumors all offseason and this, he's likely to either rise above it or crumble). It lets them determine whether or not Ellis is ready to be a long term solution. If the answer to either of those is no, Lyon is there as an able backup and they can try to aggressively address the situation if/when opportunities arise as the season wears on.

[oddoublee]

24 minutes ago, tom webster said:

History and recent information show individual players do not impact win probability more then two or three games per year. It’s not like you’re taking those guys out of the lineup and replacing them with air. 

So how many wins is helle worth over UPL? we all agree UPL is not air.

Then we have to replace the players we traded away to get helle with something other than air.

Are the wins above replacement for helle vs UPL worth it considering we'd have moved out 3-4 roster players from last year (including Tuch and Byram)? And so on and so on.

Point being - that vacuum point of view you presented is great if we look at the team position by position at a micro level - but misses the big picture of the roster overall. Impact players are considered impact for a reason. 

Maybe some do over estimate the impact - but the argument that you may be underestimating the impact it is valid  - especially considering you talk to sources that have made the playoffs once in 15 years. 

[Doohickie]

12 minutes ago, Hoss said:

I don't want to be a doomer. Last season was a ***** blast. But there isn't a current lineup combination that doesn't make me feel like we'll see a pretty significant regression next season.

My feeling is this team has been capable of making the playoffs for several years but they couldn't get out of their own heads.  Now that the seal is broken, the division win may be a fluke but I think they'll make the playoffs.

There is a certain mojo in the younger players that will overcome any negativity from the players who were here for the drought.

[transient]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

The Sabres took 45 goals off the roster and 3 veteran players with 615, 475, and 328 games played. They essentially replaced them with "Mystery Box", Krebs, and Zellweger. That's Krebs 12 goals compared to greenways 1. Mystery Box has to cover 33 of Tuch's goals, and Zellweger has to pick up 6goals to cover the gap between him and Byram. Yes I am well aware this isn't how it all works but it is to simplify the stuff. All in all, if we assume that the 4th line covers for Greenway's 1 goal, and Zellweger and Crevier cover for Byram's 11 and Kesselring's 0, the biggest question than becomes how do the Sabres cover for the 33 they lost with Tuch? 

Mystery Box is Östlund/Kulich/Helenius rolled into one. They are the mystery box because we do not know how they will play, where they will play, and what role they will be asked to fill. If think about an aggregate 33 goals from 3 players + Zach Benson (he just gets better and better), may not seem too scary but they still have to accomplish the task. There is also the issue of minutes. 3 players getting Tuch's TOI probably could get 33 goals but Mystery Box isn't individually going to get that because Tuch is 1 guy, not 3. There isn't enough extra minutes. Doan and Benson also eat into Tuch minutes. I wrote about this elsewhere but his 19mins a night will get dispersed with Doan, Benson, and probably Quinn taking what? 2-3 extra shifts each? Let's say they eat up minutes each of Tuch time and that gives them 10 minutes, you only have another 9 minutes to distribute to the rest of the guys. 

I think regression is likely in shot% and in sv% and without Tuch to bolster the sh%, I worry about how much the lines will be able to compensate for that. 

When I think about Tuch purely from a numbers standpoint, I look at Benson's production in the playoffs (5G and 4A in 13 games) and hope he continues with similar production during the regular season. If he does, or if he's close and Doan takes a step as well, then that takes care of Tuch's pure numbers and you're hoping that the Mystery Box of Östlund, Kulich, Helenius, who combined for 14G and 18A in the regular season, can assume Benson's 13G and 30A. Hopefully between the 3 of them they can average 9G and 16A over the course of the season, which should be more than doable depending on their health. The part that's probably harder to replace is Tuch's veteran savvy and PK.

[Pimlach]

1 hour ago, tom webster said:

I’m not sure what you consider a “serious” regression but I don’t see this at all. As I said earlier, they’ll be a lot better than they were before KA was fired and while they’ll miss Tuch, I think they’ll be fine. 
All conditioned on their health, as always.

Timmons for Byram, if real, is a huge drop.  Even Zellweger with Power will be. 

Missing Tuch is gonna be a factor, at least for a while.  

Need Benson to pick up where he was in the playoff.  Need another big year from Doan.  Need Quinn to take another step.   
Need two of Östlund/Helenius/Kulich to establish themselves.   That’s a lot of needs.  

[mjd1001]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I’ll say it again:

Tuch -> Kulich/Helenius

Dunne -> Carrick

Greenway -> Danforth

Byram -> Zellweger

Bryson/Kesselring -> Crevier

If you aren’t concerned about regression you’ve got more faith in internal growth than most.

If you think they’re doomed, you probably overestimating how much the Sabres relied on their best players last year and underestimating how much talent remains.

The current roster can still outskate, outwork and out score most opponents over an 84-game season.

My concern remains lack of faith in the ability of the goalies to repeat what they did last year.

I'm not worried about regression because of the forwards and d-men. I'm worried about regression because of what is in net.

IF they were to get the same level of goaltending this year as they did last year, I think they are a playoff team and competing for the division.

My issue is I don't think, with the current goaltenders, they are going to get the same level in net....therefore I think they are a bubble playoff team (depending on just how good/bad the goaltending is.)

Right now, I think the performance of the Forwards and D-men will be pretty darn close to what they got last year (barring injuries/no injuries).  However, I think you are likely to see the goalies save percentage drop to the .895-.900 range, which makes this an 85-95 point team.

[dudacek]

49 minutes ago, dudacek said:

To answer the OP’s question:

I think Lindy had two excellent middle six lines last year in Östlund/Norris/Doan and Zucker/McLeod/Quinn that generally won their matchups.

He’ll probably return to those to start.

Malenstyn and Carrick are prototypes in their 4th line roles. Considering Danforth or a better player will be riding shotgun, the Sabres are also in good shape there.

That leaves the 1st line as the question mark. Tage is excellent. Tage and Krebs were excellent together last year. Is Benson really a serious drop-off from Tuch as the 3rd guy there?

Kulich and Helenius are very talented. Talented enough to seamlessly replace an injured Norris or Östlund or Zucker. Talented enough to force Lindy to push Krebs down the roster, or reconsider his lines altogether.

This remains a very deep and talented group of forwards.

@Nacho Libre Why is this a bad post?

[mjd1001]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

To answer the OP’s question:

I think Lindy had two excellent middle six lines last year in Östlund/Norris/Doan and Zucker/McLeod/Quinn that generally won their matchups.

He’ll probably return to those to start.

Malenstyn and Carrick are prototypes in their 4th line roles. Considering Danforth or a better player will be riding shotgun, the Sabres are also in good shape there.

That leaves the 1st line as the question mark. Tage is excellent. Tage and Krebs were excellent together last year. Is Benson really a serious drop-off from Tuch as the 3rd guy there?

Kulich and Helenius are very talented. Talented enough to seamlessly replace an injured Norris or Östlund or Zucker. Talented enough to force Lindy to push Krebs down the roster, or reconsider his lines altogether.

This remains a very deep and talented group of forwards.

I'd go with Tage, Kulich, and Krebs.  If Krebs is bad on that line or if Kulich stats slow, eventually I'd move Benson there.

McLeod, Quinn and Zucker stay together.  Zucker might be a candidate to be moved out in place of one of the young guys (Benson, Östlund, Helenius, depending on who fits on the wing on this line the best)

I'm then going with Norris, Benson and Doan.

4th line mix and match whoever you want there.  I see Östlund/Helenius moving into the top 9 potentially in place of Zucker or Krebs, with Krebs possibly fitting in anywhere for injuries or just on the 4th line.

Not much has changed my opinion that this is a slightly above average team outsid of the net, with the potential to improve (if any of the young guys turn into stars)...but they will live or die with their goaltending.

 

Edited July 23 by mjd1001

[dudacek]

I think the nut of this discussion is trust.

If you trust that this was legitimately a 109-point team then it should be able to overcome the loss of two good players.

If you think the last four months of the regular season was a mirage, you should be concerned.

 

Edited July 23 by dudacek

[LGR4GM]

Just now, dudacek said:

I think the nut of this discussion is trust.

If you trust that this was legitimately a 109-point team than it should be able to overcome the loss of two good players.

If you think the last four months of the regular season was a mirage, you should be concerned.

 

My only comfort is we know that Dahlin and Thompson spearheaded the team pulling their heads out their butts in December. I know Tuch was also involved but I think Dahlin and Thompson still being here is important. I also think Doan and Benson have fundamentally changed the team up front due to play style.