Where Does Risto End Up?

[Randall Flagg]

There are countless hockey styles that can be successfully incorporated into a winning team. Playing heavy hockey is still one of them, provided the heavy is of the Blues brand, and not the 2007 Flyers brand (and I don't think anyone sticking up for heavy hockey is insinuating they want Derian Hatcher as their 1D). 

 

[SwampD]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

If it helped it would help consistently over time. We don't see that. We don't see weighted teams getting better results because it is a weak correlation. 

This is incorrect. There is not only one weigh to win, something which you seem to never get. Everything that a team is is the reason that that particular team won. They can be different from team to team.

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

Fun fact - using that weighted-shot data that has been talked about, takig into account shot type and location, no NHL netminder had an "easier" job than Jordan Binnington this past year. St. Louis's D is really good.

 

 

This counter only makes sense if I had said "having a large weight means you will always make the playoffs and if it's not your distinguishing style you can never win a cup." 

What I actually said was that the Blues used the fact that teams are overwhelmed by them physically in a way that allowed them to be puck-dominant and they won games that way, while also being suffocating defensively, both by raw skill (Dunn), smarts (Parayko, Pietrangelo) and physically snuffing people out (Parayko, Petro, Gunnarsson/Bortuzzo/everyone else)

There is no sweeping claim being made here, it's just an observation about this year's cup winner. 

Right but that wasn't because they were a heavy (weight) team. It was their style of play. You don't have to counter that with your own heavy (weight). I actually think countering it with speed is the best solution. Hence zone breakouts and excellent skating are my preferred counter to that style. 

[Randall Flagg]

1 minute ago, darksabre said:

I would bet that St. Louis' forwards did a lot of that smothering.

Based on their work on the lower boards in the offensive zone, that'd be a safe bet! You know those times when the Sabres play against teams like that, and it's so maddening that theyre incapable of making anything happen? The game in Dallas this season was like that for me. I feel like that times a billion is how Jets/Stars/Sharks/Bruins fans felt in the playoffs

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, SwampD said:

This is incorrect. There is not only one weigh to win, something which you seem to never get. Everything that a team is is the reason that that particular team won. They can be different from team to team.

But you are not listening to what I am saying. I am not saying a team that is heavy can't win. I am saying that it isn't the dominating factor. It can be a contributing factor but the Sabres shouldn't look at St Louis and think "OMG! They won because they were fat!". 

[Randall Flagg]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Right but that wasn't because they were a heavy (weight) team. It was their style of play. You don't have to counter that with your own heavy (weight). I actually think countering it with speed is the best solution. Hence zone breakouts and excellent skating are my preferred counter to that style. 

I'm almost positive that everyone you're arguing with is using the word "heavy" as a symbol for their play style and not their physical weight on planet earth.

[darksabre]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

Based on their work on the lower boards in the offensive zone, that'd be a safe bet! You know those times when the Sabres play against teams like that, and it's so maddening that theyre incapable of making anything happen? The game in Dallas this season was like that for me. I feel like that times a billion is how Jets/Stars/Sharks/Bruins fans felt in the playoffs

That Dallas game was traumatic.

[Randall Flagg]

FWIW, it'd take like 7 years for the Sabres to adequately transfer their organization over to playing St. Louis hockey. We're very lucky it's not the only way. 

I didn't see much of a coherent identity in last year's team. I can see one forming in the defense, but the forwards are still completely scattered in my mind.

Edited July 11, 2019 by Randall Flagg

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I'm almost positive that everyone you're arguing with is using the word "heavy" as a symbol for their play style and not their physical weight on planet earth.

Then I disagree with the terminology being used. 

[SwampD]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

But you are not listening to what I am saying. I am not saying a team that is heavy can't win. I am saying that it isn't the dominating factor. It can be a contributing factor but the Sabres shouldn't look at St Louis and think "OMG! They won because they were fat!". 

Every time I watch one of our small forwards get rubbed out on the wall and end up on their knees while trying to enter the zone, I yell to the Sabres, "Hey! We would win more if we were fatter!!!!"

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, SwampD said:

Every time I watch one of our small forwards get rubbed out on the wall and end up on their knees while trying to enter the zone, I yell to the Sabres, "Hey! We would win more if we were fatter!!!!"

Tell me which forward you mean. We only have about 2 small forwards. Although I am using my definition of small so what is yours?

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

FWIW, it'd take about 7 years for the Sabres to adequately transfer their organization over to playing St. Louis hockey. We're very lucky it's not the only way. 

I didn't see much of a coherent identity in last year's team. I can see one forming in the defense, but the forwards are still completely scattered in my mind.

Vesey, Sheary, Cozens, Johansson, Mittelstadt, Skinner...the theme is speed, or at least players who play fast.

[Randall Flagg]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Vesey, Sheary, Cozens, Johansson, Mittelstadt, Skinner...the theme is speed, or at least players who play fast.

I get that that's the idea, but it certainly doesn't work, probably because in today's NHL guys like Vesey and Sheary aren't fast relative to their peers, even though theyre not slow. I mean, every time we play the devils their random crappy fourth liners make my jaw drop because everyone in this league is a freaking speed demon now. And they're even worse at playing at speed than they are skating fast. And Skinner is a beautiful skater, but not in a speedy way really. his game is way less speed to me and way more "barrage the net with shots from in close without getting knocked down because he's figure skater strong" 

I need to see more of Johansson but he strikes me as another "good skater" whose play identity isn't contributing to a team that's faster than all other teams

We still seemed like one of the slowest teams in the league with Eichel, Mitts, Skinner, Sheary, and "mobile defense" last year

[SwampD]

8 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Tell me which forward you mean. We only have about 2 small forwards. Although I am using my definition of small so what is yours?

Can I just list the ones who aren't? jk

Does the physical part of the game play any part in your hockey analysis? Do you really not think that all things being equal, the heavier team would have an advantage?

 

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

The way I understand it is that LTIR only kicks in once you have spent to the cap. Since your cap spending is calculated daily during the season, Callahan’s LTIR really doesn’t help them until ten games or so left in the season. Trading him also gets rid of one of the 50 allowed contracts I believe.

The bolded is essentially correct, but your next sentence isn't quite correct.

The cap is, as you stated, calculated each day.  And right now, teams can spend (nearly) $500k per day.  And the aggregate spent (in cap $'s, not actual $'s) gets compared to the aggregate cap allowed to that point.  The team is allowed to have up to 23 skaters on its active roster (& unlimited skaters after the trade deadline) provided the total aggregate spent to date is equal to or less than the aggregate cap allowed to date.

So, (using $500k as the daily cap for convenience) on day 1 a team can spend $500k.  If they spend that (or more due to BF-LTIR allowance) they don't bank any cap for future days.  If they spend less than $500k in cap $'s, they could exceed the cap on a future day provided they don't cross that accumulated cap threshold AND don't project to exceed it in the future.

So, if the team only spent $490k on day 1, they'll have banked $10k to spend later that season.

And, if 87 days into the season, the team has banked $100k, they could exceed the cap on the next day (& moving forward) by $1k.  ($1k x 100 remaining days = $100k which was previously banked.). And 137 days in that same banked $100k could be used to exceed the cap daily by $2k ($2k x 50 remaining days = $100k).

But back to the Callahan situation, if his daily cap hit along with the cap hit of all other contracts charged to the cap (active, IR, buyouts, etc.) cause the team to exceed the daily allowable cap hit, the team will eat into their banked cap.  Once that banked cap is at $0, then the BF-LTIR kicks in & the team stops losing banked cap space (i.e., the team is allowed to exceed the daily cap & the banked cap balance doesn't go negative). 

So, if with Callahan's BF-LTIR the team is exceeding $500k on day 1 ( say it's $501k) then the team is charged $500k and the banked cap is $0.  (I.e., they can't have a payroll later in the season exceeding the cap on a per day basis).  And without that BF-LTIR relief, the team would have to only have 22 active rostered players because they'd be exceeding the cap when the 23rd guy's cap hit is added in.

But if on day 1 the team had banked $1k of cap credit, then on day 2 an injury hits and a player needs to get called up moving the team daily payroll to $502k from $499k including Callahan's BF-LTIR salary) the team would get charged $501k against the cap on day 2 (eating up that $1k that had been banked) and $500k on day 3 and succeeding (as the bank was already at $0 and the full BF-LTIR relief is used).

Edited July 11, 2019 by Taro T

[dudacek]

14 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I get that that's the idea, but it certainly doesn't work, probably because in today's NHL guys like Vesey and Sheary aren't fast relative to their peers, even though theyre not slow. I mean, every time we play the devils their random crappy fourth liners make my jaw drop because everyone in this league is a freaking speed demon now. And they're even worse at playing at speed than they are skating fast. And Skinner is a beautiful skater, but not in a speedy way really. his game is way less speed to me and way more "barrage the net with shots from in close without getting knocked down because he's figure skater strong" 

I need to see more of Johansson but he strikes me as another "good skater" whose play identity isn't contributing to a team that's faster than all other teams

We still seemed like one of the slowest teams in the league with Eichel, Mitts, Skinner, Sheary, and "mobile defense" last year

Talking past each other a bit here. You were talking about what the Sabres were and how they seemed to lack a vision for their forwards. I was talking about what I think that vision is, and why I think that.

Mittelstadt and Cozens and Thompson are projections. We haven’t seen Johansson and Vesey yet. And a 1/4 of last year’s lineup - Sobotka, Okposo and even Larsson - don’t fit the mould.

Ive heard Botterill make the distinction between players who play fast, as opposed to players who are fast. It’s all about pace and I’m not sure how good Jason is at identifying the players who fit. 

To me, the picks of Cozens, Johnson, Dahlin and Casey show the epitome of the kind of player he likes.

Edited to add: Alex Nylander has decent speed and a ton of talent, but he is the antithesis of playing with pace. It seems like something Jokiharju does really well. That trade should be no surprise.

Edited July 11, 2019 by dudacek

[Randall Flagg]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 Talking past each other a bit here. You were talking about what the Sabres were and how they seemed to lack a vision for their forwards. I was talking about what I think that vision is, and why I think that.

 Mittelstadt and Cozens and Thompson are projections. We haven’t seen Johansson and Vesey yet. And a 1/4 of last year’s lineup - Sobotka, Okposo and even Larsson - don’t fit the mould.

 Ive heard Botterill make the distinction between players who play fast, as opposed to players who are fast. It’s all about pace and I’m not sure how good Jason is at identifying the players who fit. 

To me, the picks of Cozens, Johnson, Dahlin and Casey show the epitome of the kind of player he likes.

Fair. I agree that that's their vision. But I'm just talking about what I see happening on the ice. It's far from a speed game with speed players right now.

[LGR4GM]

14 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Can I just list the ones who aren't? jk

Does the physical part of the game play any part in your hockey analysis? Do you really not think that all things being equal, the heavier team would have an advantage?

 

Heavy and physical are not the same so no. A physical team does not have to be heavy. A heavy team doesn't necessarily play physical. 

[LGR4GM]

Nylander is bigger than ERod, ERod is more physical than Nylander. 

[North Buffalo]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Nylander is bigger than ERod, ERod is more physical than Nylander. 

Physical not sure, seen Nylander taking a ton of hits in A... but he wasnt aggressive.  ERod is aggressive. 

[Taro T]

32 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

FWIW, it'd take like 7 years for the Sabres to adequately transfer their organization over to playing St. Louis hockey. We're very lucky it's not the only way. 

I didn't see much of a coherent identity in last year's team. I can see one forming in the defense, but the forwards are still completely scattered in my mind.

True.  But, had they not spent the past 3 off seasons moving away from the LA/ St. Louis model, they wouldn't be 7 years away from being able to effectively play that way.  (If Murray were still the GM they likely would, but had a GM with better people skills than Murray who also believed in that model have taken over rather than Botterill then they would be further down that road.)

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, North Buffalo said:

Physical not sure, seen Nylander taking a ton of hits in A... but he wasnt aggressive.  ERod is aggressive. 

Taking a hit doesn't make you physical in my mind. 

Personally I think a players determination is a major component that we should focus more on. We see that "determination" or whatever we want to call it in the recent draft picks of Botterill. He drafts guys that play. 

[SwampD]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Nylander is bigger than ERod, ERod is more physical than Nylander. 

Not sure I agree with that. Do you say that because ERod hits more? 

My idea of a heavy or physical game is someone that can take a hit (not necessarily a hit but be engaged physically with another player) and still maintain possession or make the good pass. 

I say Nylander do that, Olofsson as well. Jack and Sam are great at it.

[LGR4GM]

2 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Not sure I agree with that. Do you say that because ERod hits more? 

My idea of a heavy or physical game is someone that can take a hit (not necessarily a hit but be engaged physically with another player) and still maintain possession or make the good pass. 

I say Nylander do that, Olofsson as well. Jack and Sam are great at it.

Erod took hits and continued to push through and make plays. 

[North Buffalo]

4 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Taking a hit doesn't make you physical in my mind. 

Yeh but from what I saw ERod didnt do well shaking off hits whereas Nylander did= physical in my book.  Difference ERod picked himself up and kept attacking.., Nylander wasnt aggressive

Edited July 11, 2019 by North Buffalo