The Sabres will win the division if...

[TrueBlueGED]

Fine. All of the following are Buffalo ranks among defensemen with at least 780 (went with 800 to start, but wanted Pysyk on the list--he had 789) even strength minutes played (165 defensemen qualify):

 

**Important note: Risto/Gorges got by far the hardest minutes of all our defensemen, McCabe/Bogo in the middle, and Franson/Pysyk the easiest. The attached graph illustrates it, as well as the zone start and opponent stats. I just have no easy way to sort the rankings by difficulty of minutes. Trust me, I'd like to, but way too much work to do manually.

 

                 Risto   Gorges   Bogo   McCabe   Pysyk   Franson

GF/60:             143      151     73      132      78       164

GA/60:             128      101    145       61      75        26

GF%:               153      151    123      108      86       149

CF%:               148      146    142      128      51        89

Primary P/60:       65      156    148       94      89       122

Dzone FO%:          15       12     49       61     139        67

Opponent CF%:       14        5     42       26     148       132

Opponent GF%:       20       28     90       85     110       100

GF% relTM:         117      111     68       47      23       112

CF% relTM:         139      123    126       88      10       132

 

 

I've probably been too hard on the blue line asserting AHL-level play, but there's no way to look at this and come away encouraged. Basically, our entire top-4 was pretty bad at what they were being tasked with. We were a very bad even strength team, and this blue line is a big part of the reason why. Surely we can expect and hope (I'll let you decide how to balance those two) for continued development to help, but there's no way I'm going to be convinced that we're a Cam Fowler away from fixing this...especially since this is the division winning fantasy thread, right? :D :p

[dudacek]

I typed out a bunch of questions, then deleted them in favour just one:

According to this, is our biggest problem the fact that Risto is so woefully overmatched as a number one?

[Randall Flagg]

I typed out a bunch of questions, then deleted them in favour just one:

According to this, is our biggest problem the fact that Risto is so woefully overmatched as a number one?

I don't know if I can say it's our biggest problem, but I will say that I think the most important thing to do this offseason, for both next season and long term after that, is to get Risto a partner that he can lean on. I'm terrified of ruining him by playing him 25 minutes a night with a partner that needs to lean on him with those minutes. Ekblad had 22 minutes of ice time about 5 minutes into the Panthers' overtime tonight. Risto needs to see a lot more of that.

[TrueBlueGED]

I typed out a bunch of questions, then deleted them in favour just one:

According to this, is our biggest problem the fact that Risto is so woefully overmatched as a number one?

 

 

I don't know if I can say it's our biggest problem, but I will say that I think the most important thing to do this offseason, for both next season and long term after that, is to get Risto a partner that he can lean on. I'm terrified of ruining him by playing him 25 minutes a night with a partner that needs to lean on him with those minutes. Ekblad had 22 minutes of ice time about 5 minutes into the Panthers' overtime tonight. Risto needs to see a lot more of that.

 

Building off of what Flagg said, I don't think it's unfair to characterize our top pair as a gigantic problem. Nor is it unfair to say that Risto was overmatched given the minutes, difficulty of those minutes, and partner. The pertinent question, however, isn't whether he was overmatched (he was), but rather, will he continue to be overmatched? We all see the potential, and he is only 21, so there's plenty of reason to hope. He was also saddled with mercilessly difficult minutes and a suboptimal partner, and still took a giant leap forward from last season to this season. But it's really tough to say either way, right? I see two real options going forward:

 

1) Get him a legitimately good top-pairing partner. This is unrealistic in the immediate future (nobody is trading a Seabrook/Vlasic-level player, right?), and we may have to settle on an okay 1st pairing or good 2nd pairing player. 

 

2) Improve the 2nd pair to a point where Bylsma can offload some of those minutes Risto faced, both in quantity and quality. Maybe part of the reason Risto/Gorges got tasked with such demanding minutes is Bylsma didn't have anyone else to do it. Just doing a cursory glance through top playoff teams, they all seem to have a more balanced approach to deploying their blue line.

 

3) Both #1 & #2. Probably a pipe dream, I know.

 

Just doing a cursory glance through top playoff teams, they all seem to have a more balanced approach to deploying their blue line. For example, look at our usage chart compared to that of the Sharks. Notice how much closer the Sharks top-4 is in how they're deployed? I think isolating Risto's struggles as the #1 as the problem, while not necessarily untrue, is oversimplifying the problem. After all, it's not like we have anyone else to fill that role. I think the makeup of the top-4 as a whole is the problem, as in, how the pieces fit together--I don't think the skill sets complement each other well. How much can be solved through development vs. acquisitions is the question.

 

Edited April 23, 2016 by TrueBlueGED

[thewookie1]

I typed out a bunch of questions, then deleted them in favour just one:

According to this, is our biggest problem the fact that Risto is so woefully overmatched as a number one?

 

No, but yes.

 

Yes he's overmatched since he's a 21 year old Dman having to prop up a 2nd pairing guy and log 25min plus a night (10th in the league) (While playing 82 games as well) 

 

Our biggest problem is we lack either  more consistent 2nd pair or a better partner for Risto

[dudacek]

See, this is where I struggle to see the difference between those stat lines above and +\- when it comes to individual players.

They both attempt to quantify the effectiveness of the unit on the ice and don't account for situations or teammates.

 

How is blaming Risto's bad fancy stats on Gorges any different than saying McCabe's +14 is meaningless? In both cases you are ignoring the numbers.

Edited April 23, 2016 by dudacek

[TrueBlueGED]

See, this is where I struggle to see the difference between those stat lines above and +\- when it comes to individual players.

They both attempt to quantify the effectiveness of the unit on the ice and don't account for situations or teammates.

 

How is blaming Risto's bad fancy stats on Gorges any different than saying McCabe's +14 is meaningless? In both cases you are ignoring the numbers.

 

I'm not sure what you're getting at. I said Risto's handling of top pair minutes was a problem, and went as far as to say the top pair as a whole is a gigantic problem. That's not ignoring the stats. Positing that something should be done to give him a better partner and something else to improve the 2nd pair to offload some of those minutes isn't ignoring anything...it's acknowledging the problem and looking for solutions.

 

Is suggesting Gorges is a bigger problem on the top pair than Risto somehow controversial? Such a statement does not mean Risto was fine (after all, I think we've all acknowledge his second half swoon), it's just a matter of prioritizing.

 

McCabe's +/- isn't useless...every single +/- for every single player in the league is useless :p

[dudacek]

Sorry, I drifted from the main thread of the discussion and didn't express myself very well.

I wasn't arguing your point at all. There are three separate things that I am struggling with.

 

1) based strictly on @fancystats, why do we say Risto needs a better partner? Why aren't we saying Gorges needs a better partner? Or that Risto is not very good?

2) I know the flaws of +\-. I also know the object of the game is to score more than your opponents and that McCabe was on the ice for 14 more even-strength goals by us than the bad guys down the stretch. Why is that irrelevant?

3) Corsi measures the effectiveness of the unit on the ice, why should we conclude the D is responsible for our poor Corsi numbers? Why isn't it Larsson's fault for not shooting enough, or Ennis's for constantly turning the puck over?

 

I'm not "into" fancy stats, but I love me some analysis. Too many internet fanboys will haul out some numbers and say here's proof that so and so sucks without explaining, or even understanding the underlying factors.

 

You aren't one of those, so help me understand.

Edited April 23, 2016 by dudacek

[JJFIVEOH]

Well, Pysyk was second on the team in CF% 5v5 when trailing on the road. He's clearly our best defenseman. 

[mjd1001]

1. No major long term-injuries for Sabres

 

2. Tampa and Florida have at least one major (top 5 player) long term injury

 

3 One major upside surprise (Reinhart hits 30 goals...sign Stamkos or a top 3 D-man...Moulson returns to 25 goal status...Ennis back at 100% and fits in with 25+ goals)

 

4. A tad bit of luck in close games.

[WildCard]

Sorry, I drifted from the main thread of the discussion and didn't express myself very well.

I wasn't arguing your point at all. There are three separate things that I am struggling with.

 

1) based strictly on @fancystats, why do we say Risto needs a better partner? Why aren't we saying Gorges needs a better partner? Or that Risto is not very good?

2) I know the flaws of +\-. I also know the object of the game is to score more than your opponents and that McCabe was on the ice for 14 more even-strength goals by us than the bad guys down the stretch. Why is that irrelevant?

3) Corsi measures the effectiveness of the unit on the ice, why should we conclude the D is responsible for our poor Corsi numbers? Why isn't it Larsson's fault for not shooting enough, or Ennis's for constantly turning the puck over?

 

I'm not "into" fancy stats, but I love me some analysis. Too many internet fanboys will haul out some numbers and say here's proof that so and so sucks without explaining, or even understanding the underlying factors.

 

You aren't one of those, so help me understand.

1) The Hextal charts are confusing to say the least. Indeed I honestly am still trying to understand how to read them

http://war-on-ice.com/hexplayers.html

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_statistics.php?s=13&f1=2015_s&f2=5v5&f4=D&f5=BUF&c=0+1+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67#

 

Here is a breakdown of last year's Norris candidates based on the same WAR Hextal charts

 

http://imgur.com/a/BfRWl#0

 

2) Birank Burke on +/-: "horse ######" 

 

On goals for and against, and taking a conservative approach to this data, it’s  safe to say that at least one third of plus and minus marks are handed out improperly. This number could be as high as 40 per cent of plus and minus marks handed out to players who have little or no impact on the play on the attack, or were doing their job on defence, only to be tagged with a minus mark due to teammate’s error.

The impact of false positives and false negatives is acute on the official NHL plus-minus system, even before you add in the impact of hot or cold goaltenders on a player’s overall number for a season.

 

Better Explained with GIFs

 

3)

There has been much investigation into the impact of zone starts on a players individual statistics. Early research found that zone starts had a significant impact on a players overall statistics. While this sentiment is still floating around, it has largely been dismissed and most are now accepting that zone starts have minimal impact for most players overall statistics. Even the most extreme zone start usage will at most have a 1-2% impact on Corsi% (i.e. a 52% Corsi player with extreme offensive zone start usage is almost certainly still a 50+% Corsi player under neutral/average zone start usage). For most players it is not a significant factor in on-ice performance.

 

Like zone starts, Quality of Competition (QoC) is largely overstated when it comes to the impact it has on a players overall statistics. While a player playing against Sidney Crosby will have worse statistics than when playing against a typical third or fourth liner, the reality is that there are no players so consistently playing against high end players (or low end players) that their statistics will be impacted in a significant way.

 

The reality is zone starts and QoC metrics are of minimal importance in player evaluation  and are best used solely as an indication of how his coach views his skill set.

 

Conversely, Quality of Teammates can have a significant impact on a players statistics. David Clarkson in 2012-13 had a Corsi% of 61.1%. He dropped to 42.3% last season. He did get significantly more defensive zone starts, but a greater statistical analysis indicates that the main reason for this massive drop in Corsi% is the quality of his team mates. He went from playing on a very good Corsi team with some very good line mates (Patrick Elias and Travis Zajac) to a very poor Corsi team and playing on the second or third line (with Mason Raymond, Nazem Kadri, Jay McClement and Nikolai Kulemin). By far the only usage statistic that really needs to be taken under significant consideration in player evaluation is quality of teammates.

 

Read more at: https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2014/08/05/introduction-to-advanced-statistics/#onicevsteamstats

 

 

 The effect of QoC on Stats:Pavel Datsyuk vs Valtteri Filppula

 

As for separating which teammate affects who, here is everything you'll need. 

 

That brings us to what I consider the most important concept in hockey analytics: WOWY’s. WOWY stands for With Or Without You and looks at how players perform when playing on the ice together and when playing apart from each other. The value of WOWY’s is they tell us who is the more important player and who is making who better.

 

Read more at: https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2014/08/05/introduction-to-advanced-statistics/#onicevsteamstats

 

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=1804&withagainst=true&season=2015-16&sit=5v5

 

That shows that Gorges apart from Risto > Risto apart from Gorges. The only issue is, sample size. Gorges was apart for 140 minutes, Risto was apart for 295 minutes. Also, if you look at it for Jack's, Jack looks terrible. But, we know this not to be true.

 

So, True, where do we go from here?

Edited April 25, 2016 by WildCard

[wjag]

I think this is the year the Sabres NEED to show true progression under GMTM.  This is now his team; his moves should be bearing fruit.  I'm hopeful that a true progression in system, defense, scoring and record are evident.

[rakish]

See, this is where I struggle to see the difference between those stat lines above and +\- when it comes to individual players.

They both attempt to quantify the effectiveness of the unit on the ice and don't account for situations or teammates.

 

How is blaming Risto's bad fancy stats on Gorges any different than saying McCabe's +14 is meaningless? In both cases you are ignoring the numbers.

 

For me, meaningless is the wrong word, but still, I have two problems with plus/minus. 

 

First, the stat is very very elastic. As an example as to what I mean, look at baseball stats after the first week.  Some guy will be hitting 456, and your nine-year-old kid says "Dad, he's TBEV," or whatever acronym the kids use for the best player ever.  And you will say, wait a few months, this happens every year, the stat is very elastic. Plus minus is the same way, but where batting average seems to find it's level by mid-season, plus/minus can be way high or way low for an entire season.  It's not meaningless, because if you look at the players with the best plus minus over their careers, it's all the TBEV's, but even a full year is too short a time span to mean much.

 

Secondly, it's not adjusted to the skill of your opponent or your teammates.  O'Reilly, Eichel, and Reinhart are good, but they got crushed this year in plus/minus because the Sabres don't have enough good players.  Without looking into it, I imagine McCabe was playing with the 3rd line, against other teams 3rd line, which seemed to hold it's own this season, but again, I'm not sure, since the stat is so elastic. Additionally, as I've talked about before, players like O'Reilly and Risto got way too many minutes this season, and each stopped scoring the second half of the year.  This benefited players like McCabe, who worked under more reasonable minutes per game.

 

I think Blue confuses things because he emphasizes GF/60 and GA/60, which essentially is plus/minus.  I tend to agree with Blue and most everyone else that a couple defensemen are needed.

[bob_sauve28]

I, for one, thought he was one of our top 2 D for the last 20-25 games or so. 

Absolutely agree. He was a very solid player. We are very lucky to have him. Part of our core group now 

[dudacek]

I think this is the year the Sabres NEED to show true progression under GMTM.  This is now his team; his moves should be bearing fruit.  I'm hopeful that a true progression in system, defense, scoring and record are evident.

So 27 points didn't show true progression?

Not sure I get your point.

 

@WildCard

Thanks. I'll give it a read when I have more time.

[deluca67]

What do you think it will take for the Sabres to win the division next season? Do you think they'll need to sign Stamkos or win the lottery? How far away do you think they currently are? Feel free to discuss your ideal off-season while leaving practicality at the door. 

They missed the playoffs this season by 6 games. I think everyone can go back over the season and find those six games where the Sabres left points on the ice. Playoffs in 2016-17, IMO, comes down to two things. 

 

1) Healthy consistent goal-tending.

 

2) The continued  maturity of the young leaders on this team. Ristoleinan, Eichel, Reinhart, O'Reilly and Kane. 

 

This team was a great deal closer than it may have seemed at times. Even without a major acquisition or top three draft pick, this team is going to be on that playoff bubble at the very least. 

[qwksndmonster]

I, for one, thought he was one of our top 2 D for the last 20-25 games or so. 

I don't think McCabe played anywhere near as well as Risto, Bogo, or Gorges in those last 25 games.

Edited April 25, 2016 by qwksndmonster

[bob_sauve28]

I don't think McCabe played anywhere near as well as Risto, Bogo, or Gorges in those last 25 games.

I thought he was better than Bogo and Gorges, and that's not taking anything away from those two 

[nfreeman]

It's times like this I feel like I'm watching a different team. I thought McCabe was downright bad for the majority of the season. He had his moments, but overall...closer to AHL level than top-4 NHL level.

 

I don't agree at all.  I saw a kid in his first NHL season play a tough game in the d-zone while flashing quite a bit of offensive ability.  Was he given, due to lack of alternatives, a bigger role than would've been ideal?  Yes, of course, and I'd like to see them add one or two guys so that he's in the 3rd pairing next season at about 16 min or so per game.  But IMHO McCabe is a legit NHL defenseman with all the tools to be a good top-4 guy.

 

More broadly, for both Bogo and McCabe, I think you are not sufficiently considering the "get up to speed" factor for guys in a new situation -- new coach, system, teammates, league (for McCabe), etc.  Bogo missed all of camp and the first month of the season.  That is a major hurdle to overcome.  By the 2nd half of the season he added a lot of value.

 

My bottom line is that Risto isn't as good yet as we want him to be, and that Gorges isn't a top-pairing defender.  There also isn't an obvious solution coming onto the market this summer.  So we'll need to hope that Risto and McCabe develop, that Bogo is healthy and more comfortable to start the season next year, that the Sabres can get good 3rd-pairing play out of Pysyk, Franson and/or Nelson, and that GMTM can add a better defenseman in FA than he's been able to add in either of the past 2 summers (or that a good one pops loose on the trade market due to cap issues and that GMTM wins the auction).

[qwksndmonster]

I thought he was better than Bogo and Gorges, and that's not taking anything away from those two 

How?  Bogo was scoring like every game and Gorges was playing better defense than McCabe against harder competition.  What was McCabe's game offering us that exceeded those two?

[pi2000]

I don't think McCabe played anywhere near as well as Risto, Bogo, or Gorges in those last 25 games.

 

Bogo was better offensively down the stretch, he was taking more chances, guess who his D partner was?

 

I thought Risto struggled down the stretch.

 

Gorges tries hard but he's slow and undersized, he makes up for it with effort and normally making the smart veteran play.... which is OK because he limits mistakes, but we're not going to contend with him in the lineup.     

 

To get to the next level we need fast skating, puck moving defensemen who can do more with the puck than just making the standard 15ft breakout pass.   

[woods-racer]

Bogo was better offensively down the stretch, he was taking more chances, guess who his D partner was?

 

I thought Risto struggled down the stretch.

 

Gorges tries hard but he's slow and undersized, he makes up for it with effort and normally making the smart veteran play.... which is OK because he limits mistakes, but we're not going to contend with him in the lineup.     

 

To get to the next level we need fast skating, puck moving defensemen who can do more with the puck than just making the standard 15ft breakout pass.   

 

You think a young Brian Campbell is the solution?

 

Or a fast skating Franson type? And I mention Franson because I thought he was our only D-man that regularly hit a streaking forward through the neutral zone with a nice 30-40 foot pass. 

 

It would be nice to see a true top 2 pair d-man added, but the chances of that happening have equal odds with winning the draft lottery in my eyes.

 

Who every we get will be an upgrade to the current roster. Not that there are 200 d-men out there better than ours, just that GMTM will be selective shopping and not looking for warm bodies. It's just nice to know we are in playoff push mode, and not draft high mode.

 

I fully expect to be in the first round next year with no major additions. Cola will be upgraded. Matty Mo will find himself watching more with a to-be-determined off season acquired player pushing him. So we will add a d-man and a top 6 forward, but not of the caliper to get us to the SC finals. It's baby step time to us, but major leaps and bounds for youngsters on the ice.

[Norcal]

I think this is the year the Sabres NEED to show true progression under GMTM.  This is now his team; his moves should be bearing fruit.  I'm hopeful that a true progression in system, defense, scoring and record are evident.

I would say his moves are bearing fruit. Besides the gains you mentioned his first 2 1st round picks just finished in the top 5 in rookie scoring.

[Drunkard]

I would say his moves are bearing fruit. Besides the gains you mentioned his first 2 1st round picks just finished in the top 5 in rookie scoring.

 

I like Murray and think he's doing a good job but I wouldn't exactly give him credit for the production of Eichel and Reinhart. Picking 2nd in the draft you are all but guaranteed to get a stud player, not to mention when he took over the team was already in the midst of the tire fire and tank and looking at finishing last the year we drafted Reinhart.

[Norcal]

I like Murray and think he's doing a good job but I wouldn't exactly give him credit for the production of Eichel and Reinhart. Picking 2nd in the draft you are all but guaranteed to get a stud player, not to mention when he took over the team was already in the midst of the tire fire and tank and looking at finishing last the year we drafted Reinhart.

he still made the moves