GDT: 3/24/2021: Sabres at Pittsburgh Penguins 8pm NBCSN

[Randall Flagg]

Just now, Thorny said:

It's the names he was passing on that list - of course there are few that have done it. Plenty of impressive names passed. 

And Yakupov passed a much larger list of better names on the rookie forward list lol. This comes with sample size issues. Dahlin's season was, I guessss, unique, but it wasn't particularly good or special. It's uniqueness stems from smart hockey decisions made by other NHL franchises, and not anything else.

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

The magic of plus minus. Disingenuous garbage when PLEBS use it, but relevant when I need to use it

It's there because people value it and the "losing situations" are comparable. Did you see the other part of that post? This is the argument you go to when you've lost the statistical one 

[Randall Flagg]

Just now, Thorny said:

Ok so what about the bit about how Yakupov went way way down his second year and Dahlin didn't? And how Dahlin's 2nd year is way, way, way better than Yakupov's second? And his 3rd? 

They aren't comparable 

Why are we talking about second seasons? I never brought that up. It is not relevant to my point that Yakupov's fall happened one season later, while Dahlin's happened 1.5 seasons later. It has nothing to do with anything.

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

And Yakupov passed a much larger list of better names on the rookie forward list lol. This comes with sample size issues. Dahlin's season was, I guessss, unique, but it wasn't particularly good or special. It's uniqueness stems from smart hockey decisions made by other NHL franchises, and not anything else.

Ok man. Dahlin did not have a particularly good rookie season. 

5 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I would rather have a rookie forward that scores 30 goals than a rookie defenseman that puts up Dahlin's 18-19 season. I'd have a better shot at winning that season by making that trade.

Dahlin was one of our best possession players that year. I don't know why you are choosing to be so off base on this

[Randall Flagg]

Just now, Thorny said:

Ok man. Dahlin did not have a particularly good rookie season. 

Correct. He barely finished 3rd in Calder voting, and many people wanted him to finish 4th. There are 3rd place rookies every single year

[Thorner]

3 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

Why are we talking about second seasons? I never brought that up. It is not relevant to my point that Yakupov's fall happened one season later, while Dahlin's happened 1.5 seasons later. It has nothing to do with anything.

Because Dahlin has only had a miniscule sample size of "bad" stretch. Seriously 

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

Correct. He barely finished 3rd in Calder voting, and many people wanted him to finish 4th. There are 3rd place rookies every single year

It was particularly good relative to the league's rookies that year! Dude!

Edited March 25, 2021 by Thorny

[Randall Flagg]

Also, the 'Names Dahlin passed' 

He didn't pass Housley

He passed Orr by scoring 3 more points in 21 more games

He passed Iafrate, Ekblad, Bogosian, Hanifin, and defensive D man Scott Stevens playing trap hockey in the dead puck era, in points

I'm not big on hockey history, so I don't recognize many more names than that. but while neat, it's nothing tangibly special 

Yakupov's projected goal total passes names too, like Francis, MacKinnon, Stamkos, Neely, Bergeron, Lafontaine, Marleau, Hull, Messier etc. 

So what

Edited March 25, 2021 by Randall Flagg

[Thorner]

8 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

Why are we talking about second seasons? I never brought that up. It is not relevant to my point that Yakupov's fall happened one season later, while Dahlin's happened 1.5 seasons later. It has nothing to do with anything.

You want to talk about how his second season doesn't matter when he's played only TWO FULL SEASONS so far! Of course it matters. Your sample size selection is so bad and disingenuous. Especially considering the external factors we've already delved into. 

2 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

Also, the 'Names Dahlin passed' 

He didn't pass Housley

He passed Orr by scoring 3 more points in 21 more games

He passed Iafrate, Ekblad, Bogosian, Hanifin, and defensive D man Scott Stevens playing trap hockey in the dead puck era, in points

I'm not big on hockey history, so I don't recognize many more names than that. but while neat, it's nothing tangibly special 

Yakupov's projected goal total passes names too, like Francis, MacKinnon, Stamkos, Neely, Bergeron, Lafontaine, Marleau, Hull, Messier etc. 

So what

I don't recognize the names so they can't be factored into the argument? 

Edited March 25, 2021 by Thorny

[Randall Flagg]

4 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Because Dahlin has only had a miniscule sample size of "bad" stretch. Seriously 

It was particularly good relative to the league's rookies that year! Dude!

I think this is "particularly good" semantics. He had a season that nobody outside of Buffalo will ever remember, think about, or write about. There's nothing wrong with the season he had, it was a decently promising rookie year, of which there are many in the NHL any given year

[Randall Flagg]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Like lol

You want to talk about how his second season doesn't matter when he's played only TWO FULL SEASONS so far! Of course it matters. Your sample size selection is so bad and disingenuous. Especially considering the external factors we've already delved into. 

I don't recognize the names so they can't be factored into the argument? 

If there are magic HOFers on the list that escaped me, then it's relevant. But it's time to circle back to my main point. 

I think Dahlin is a really bad hockey player right now, and through some combination of circumstance and his mental state and things both in and out of his control, he is flirting on the edge of a cliff that most hockey players cannot climb out of. I see a player playing worse than other promising players that weren't capable of fixing their issues, and nothing about his past or present situation can convince me that there is "no chance" he doesn't recover, which is the claim I'm combatting. 

You might not like my Yakupov example, but I introduced him to point out that they were players achieving similar levels of accomplishment for their position as rookies, and he fell off a cliff, and could never come back - it's just an example that shows that players who roughly hit a similar level of dahlin's ability to impact an NHL hockey game early on in their careers, have before fallen apart. Dahlin is not magically immune to this possibility because of a "historic" rookie year which is only "historic" based on technicalities and establishment developmental decisions 

Edited March 25, 2021 by Randall Flagg

[sabremike]

21 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

The all-timers numbers were only because he was 18, the numbers themselves weren't anything special. I get that it's rare for an 18 year old to be in the NHL, but that's entirely because most teams prefer taking the long route with D prospects and don't draft them so high. 44 points along with bad defensive play should not be spoken of in hushed, awed tones, even if he happened to be 18 instead of 19 while doing that. Yakupov's rookie year was as impressive as Dahlin's. And Dahlin's peers have been much more interesting than he, and they only got 1 year extra of development. Dahlin spending one more year in the SHL could have possibly closed that gap, but I am skeptical, and it can never be proven of course. His problems stem from a sort of timidness that he's always had. And his rookie successes climbed the list only because he had a competition sample size of about 4 18 year old defensemen in the last several decades lol, while Nail's competition was an order of magnitude larger in sample size

Ignore the draft stuff, and the super epic historical secondary PP assists. Nail and Rasmus were at a similar level of hockey player in their rookie seasons, and Dahlin's quality as a hockey player has since deteriorated to the point that he is really, really bad. The same thing happened to Nail, and many other prospects who have achieved a player-quality level Dahlin has had now, and many have never climbed out of that hole. Dahlin is not special because his rookie year had some nice passes to Jack, and he is not immune to this possibility. He is bad and it is alarming people in the organization, and probably around the league, who know that ruination could be around the corner. 

What is true about Dahlin is also true of every single player in this organization in terms of having their games fall straight off a cliff. Fix the source of the problems (having comically incompetent coaching because the team is too stupid to hire qualified professionals) and things will do a 180. The stories about how the team would constantly screw things up in practice and Kreuger would never stop things to point out what was done wrong and make them repeat the drill until they got it right are just mindblowing, how could any player possibly develop under such ludicrous circumstances?

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

I think this is "particularly good" semantics. He had a season that nobody outside of Buffalo will ever remember, think about, or write about. There's nothing wrong with the season he had, it was a decently promising rookie year, of which there are many in the NHL any given year

It's the fact you want to project "bust" based on one objectively good season relative to his peers, in league, that year, a following season where it's arguable that he even regressed at all, and...31 games this year in this incredibly wonky year. All under a literal non-coach when even the best of players need *help* in their development. 

I'm not the "Dahlin is going to be great" guy anymore. And I apologize for using "lols" in my recent posts that's a PLEB thing to do (I don't know what that word is but you used it). But to think literal "bust" is on the table is just so far beyond my ability to comprehend the situation as I personally view it at this time. The Yakupov comparison is honestly ludicrous to me be that's just my view. 

I could be way off and Dahlin finds himself out of the league in a few years, I obviously don't know. I guess we shall see. 

[Randall Flagg]

3 minutes ago, sabremike said:

What is true about Dahlin is also true of every single player in this organization in terms of having their games fall straight off a cliff. Fix the source of the problems (having comically incompetent coaching because the team is too stupid to hire qualified professionals) and things will do a 180  360. The stories about how the team would constantly screw things up in practice and Kreuger would never stop things to point out what was done wrong and make them repeat the drill until they got it right are just mindblowing, how could any player possibly develop under such ludicrous circumstances?

I definitely think a good part of the blame for Dahlin's collapse can be pinned on the shittiness of our franchise. But all that matters now is that he's ***** terrible at hockey, and if we and he can't pull it together he could be lost for good. 

Also fixed 

Edited March 25, 2021 by Randall Flagg

[Thorner]

3 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

If there are magic HOFers on the list that escaped me, then it's relevant. But it's time to circle back to my main point. 

I think Dahlin is a really bad hockey player right now, and through some combination of circumstance and his mental state and things both in and out of his control, he is flirting on the edge of a cliff that most hockey players cannot climb out of. I see a player playing worse than other promising players that weren't capable of fixing their issues, and nothing about his past or present situation can convince me that there is "no chance" he doesn't recover, which is the claim I'm combatting. 

You might not like my Yakupov example, but I introduced him to point out that they were players achieving similar levels of accomplishment for their position as rookies, and he fell off a cliff, and could never come back - it's just an example that shows that players who roughly hit a similar level of dahlin's ability to impact an NHL hockey game early on in their careers, have before fallen apart. Dahlin is not magically immune to this possibility because of a "historic" rookie year which is only "historic" based on technicalities and establishment developmental decisions 

The point is that's not the barometer I'm arguing Dahlin needs to reach anymore. I think Dahlin's rookie year was special, nonetheless you do make good points regarding the amount of players that actually play at that age - for the sake of argument I wanted to point out that, just based on his in-season peers - Dahlin's rookie year WAS objectively good. He had a good year. If you cannot agree on that point, it's a chasm and that's ok. 

The Yakupov comparison feels needless because I see Dahlin having one good, one pretty good, and one poor year (31 games). So because he's had a drop off we must recall the worst possible comparison? Yakupov was an anomaly of a first overall pick - statistically. It doesn't seem a likely argument to me. 

Usually people go to Tyler Myers. Like, ok haha

Yakupov feels really needlessly, unstatistically, dour 

[Randall Flagg]

4 minutes ago, Thorny said:

It's the fact you want to project "bust" based on one objectively good season relative to his peers, in league, that year, a following season where it's arguable that he even regressed at all, and...31 games this year in this incredibly wonky year. All under a literal non-coach when even the best of players need *help* in their development. 

I'm not the "Dahlin is going to be great" guy anymore. And I apologize for using "lols" in my recent posts that's a PLEB thing to do (I don't know what that word is but you used it). But to think literal "bust" is on the table is just so far beyond my ability to comprehend the situation as I personally view it at this time. The Yakupov comparison is honestly ludicrous to me be that's just my view. 

I could be way off and Dahlin finds himself out of the league in a few years, I obviously don't know. I guess we shall see. 

I don't want to project "bust", I am simply worried that there is a possibility he is ruined and will become one. I argue against the claim that there is "no chance" of this happening. I think that is absolutely bananas to think.

He is not a bust yet. I hope the Sabres don't casually dismiss the possibility of this happening as much as you and liger do, and I don't think they do, considering I saw whispers that we are internally very worried about him

Haha it's short for "plebeian." That's how stats cultists (not you) seem to view people who still use +/-. I was more snarky than I wish I was when I said that, because I don't think you're one of those guys, but it's funny how sometimes that group will use that stat if it helps them out, but trash it when others use it 

[Thorner]

34 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I definitely think a good part of the blame for Dahlin's collapse can be pinned on the shittiness of our franchise. But all that matters now is that he's ***** terrible at hockey, and if we and he can't pull it together he could be lost for good. 

Also fixed 

If you think he was "***** terrible at hockey" last year, our evaluations are a mile apart 

If you are basing your views on him being "***** terrible at hockey" THIS year, I think the sample size is highly questionable. 

Comes down to that for me

Edited March 25, 2021 by Thorny

[Randall Flagg]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

The point is that's not the barometer I'm arguing Dahlin needs to reach anymore. I think Dahlin's rookie year was special, nonetheless you do make good points regarding the amount of players that actually play at that age - for the sake of argument I wanted to point out that, just based on his in-season peers - Dahlin's rookie year WAS objectively good. He had a good year. If you cannot agree on that point, it's a chasm and that's ok. 

The Yakupov comparison feels needless because I see Dahlin having one good, one pretty good, and one poor year (31 games). So because he's had a drop off we must recall the worst possible comparison? Yakupov was an anomaly of a first overall pick - statistically. It doesn't seem a likely argument to me. 

Usually people go to Tyler Myers. Like, ok haha

Yakupov feels really needlessly, unstatistically, dour 

I think the rookie season was pretty good yeah. I was a bit deflated by it (this was exacerbated by the string of epic 1OA picks before him, MacK, McD, Ekblad (who is now elite again, eh? There is certainly still HOPE for Rasmus) and Matthews) but then in the context of the next few guys like Hischier, Laf, Hughes it feels a lot better. 

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I don't want to project "bust", I am simply worried that there is a possibility he is ruined and will become one. I argue against the claim that there is "no chance" of this happening. I think that is absolutely bananas to think.

He is not a bust yet. I hope the Sabres don't casually dismiss the possibility of this happening as much as you and liger do, and I don't think they do, considering I saw whispers that we are internally very worried about him

Haha it's short for "plebeian." That's how stats cultists (not you) seem to view people who still use +/-. I was more snarky than I wish I was when I said that, because I don't think you're one of those guys, but it's funny how sometimes that group will use that stat if it helps them out, but trash it when others use it 

The "no chance" thing is just intentional hyperbole (but admittedly I think it's highly highly unlikely he busts out of the league like Yakupov)

I don't think it's that fair to classify my views as "dismissing" anyways as I've spoken a lot about revising our expectations for the guy

[Randall Flagg]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

If you think he was "***** terrible at hockey" last year, our evaluations are way off base.

If you are basing your views on him being "***** terrible at hockey" THIS year, I think the sample size is highly questionable. 

Comes down to that for me

He had stretches of horrendous play both at the beginning and end of last season. There are posters that *notice* stuff long before they reach consensus, and those guys were sounding off back then. I've grown to trust them. PA and inky and weave for example. 

Just now, Thorny said:

The "no chance" thing is just intentional hyperbole (but admittedly I think it's highly highly unlikely he busts out of the league like Yakupov)

I don't think it's that fair to classify my views as "dismissing" anyways as I've spoken a lot about revising our expectations for the guy

Then I think we're basically only arguing over hyperbole and on-the-spot, top-of-the-head examples, which is a classic Thorny-Flagg experience lmao

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

I think the rookie season was pretty good yeah. I was a bit deflated by it (this was exacerbated by the string of epic 1OA picks before him, MacK, McD, Ekblad (who is now elite again, eh? There is certainly still HOPE for Rasmus) and Matthews) but then in the context of the next few guys like Hischier, Laf, Hughes it feels a lot better. 

Dahlin had a better rookie year than Ekblad though, didn't he? 

I agree about the F bit, that's why I think it would be kinda ridiculous for the Sabres, should they get first overall, to end up with a D-man again, when D-men at 1 are so uncommon 

[sabremike]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

I don't want to project "bust", I am simply worried that there is a possibility he is ruined and will become one. I argue against the claim that there is "no chance" of this happening. I think that is absolutely bananas to think.

He is not a bust yet. I hope the Sabres don't casually dismiss the possibility of this happening as much as you and liger do, and I don't think they do, considering I saw whispers that we are internally very worried about him

Haha it's short for "plebeian." That's how stats cultists (not you) seem to view people who still use +/-. I was more snarky than I wish I was when I said that, because I don't think you're one of those guys, but it's funny how sometimes that group will use that stat if it helps them out, but trash it when others use it 

I can understand concerns but you know I was a Whalers fan and we drafted Chris Pronger. In his first two seasons he played on Whalers teams that were spectacularly awful, and on those teams Pronger stood out as especially awful (as in every bit as bad as Dahlin looks now and possibly even slightly worse). He was traded to the Blues for Brendan Shanadouche and the rest is history.

[Thorner]

7 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

He had stretches of horrendous play both at the beginning and end of last season. There are posters that *notice* stuff long before they reach consensus, and those guys were sounding off back then. I've grown to trust them. PA and inky and weave for example. 

Then I think we're basically only arguing over hyperbole and on-the-spot, top-of-the-head examples, which is a classic Thorny-Flagg experience lmao

But the season in totality maters. You are doing your own argument a disservice because you aren't using statistical anomalies as evidence for your thought that a statistical anomaly may occur. It's exceptionally unlikely on it's face that Dahlin busts out, using "bad stretches of play" in an otherwise reasonable season as evidence for being a potential bust doesn't jive 

Your argument is a great one for why Dahlin may not end up being an elite player.

Even then we have the Hedmans and the Ekblads, but this is admittedly more of a hope, at least when it comes to Hedman. But there is precedent. 

Edited March 25, 2021 by Thorny

[Randall Flagg]

Just now, Thorny said:

Dahlin had a better rookie year than Ekblad though, didn't he? 

I agree about the F bit, that's why I think it would be kinda ridiculous for the Sabres, should they get first overall, to end up with a D-man again, when D-men at 1 are so uncommon 

I remember coming out of Ekblad's rookie year thinking that he was going to be a top 4 defenseman ever, so I don't know if it was, but if it wasn't better than Ekblad's it'd be no shame. But I'm not saying it wasn't better than Ekblad's either, if that makes sense, I'm not remembering any sort of objective analysis, just my general sentiment. He then had injury and consistency issues before becoming elite the last couple years again. Ekblad was really really good. Might have been top 20 Norris finisher 

Let's get our Quenneville and Campbell (yeah, not the same teams) and do our best to fix the situation. 

[Randall Flagg]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

Your argument is a great one for why Dahlin may not end up being an elite player. Even then we have the Hedmans and the Ekblads

I think Hedman and Ekblad are elite, if that's what you're saying. 

I don't know if I ever believed Dahlin would be a no doubt HOF guy, but I do still think he's got a real shot at Hedman status. Hedman himself was looking pretty bad a few years into his career. It'll be a battle for us to become the kind of organization that can do for Dahlin what they did for Hedman, but it was a battle for them too, and they succeeded, so we can 

[Thorner]

18 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

He had stretches of horrendous play both at the beginning and end of last season. There are posters that *notice* stuff long before they reach consensus, and those guys were sounding off back then. I've grown to trust them. PA and inky and weave for example. 

Then I think we're basically only arguing over hyperbole and on-the-spot, top-of-the-head examples, which is a classic Thorny-Flagg experience lmao

Also fair 

10 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I think Hedman and Ekblad are elite, if that's what you're saying. 

I don't know if I ever believed Dahlin would be a no doubt HOF guy, but I do still think he's got a real shot at Hedman status. Hedman himself was looking pretty bad a few years into his career. It'll be a battle for us to become the kind of organization that can do for Dahlin what they did for Hedman, but it was a battle for them too, and they succeeded, so we can 

In the end I don't think we are even that far apart lol

I was struck by the Yakupov thing because that's Dahlin out of the league in 3 years. Sure we do the "on-the-spot" thing but generally your posts are a wealth of statistical information sooner than hyperbole and you don't throw out comparisons willy-nilly so I was gearing for a thorough breakdown of why Dahlin was likely to be Yakupov. 

If what you want to be acknowledged is that it's strictly possible Dahlin busts: it's possible. 

Edited March 25, 2021 by Thorny