Goal differential: what’s your plan?

[SDS]

A solid NHL team lands in the +30 goal differential range. In a shortened season, the Sabres were -61. Let’s just round up to -70 in an 82 game season.

What’s your plan? This team needs a 100 goal differential change. That’s about 1.25 goals per game. 

How many extra saves are you getting from a new keeper? How many more goals do we need scored across the lineup? How many fewer goals need to be allowed?

20/40/40?

Can the keepers let in one less goal every four games? Can the defense prevent one less goal every two games? Can the offense score one more goal every two games?

[WildCard]

Draft and develop

[Zamboni]

[SDS]

21 minutes ago, WildCard said:

Draft and develop

Yeah I know, but we talk in the weeds a lot. I’m just trying to go a little higher up. Ultimately, the good teams are defined by goal differential. We should be able to allocate a reasonable number of goals for each of the four lines on offense and the three lines on defense.

Allowing fewer goals on defense is harder to compartmentalize. But we can estimate goals per game by the keeper.

I think looking at it this way you can see how close or how far we really are.

[Claude Balls]

A healthy Jack Eichel woulda made a big difference. Along with an actual hockey coach. RK ruined this team, so I can only seeing it getting better. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

The formula is actually simple, but hard to execute. 

1) Get better goaltending.  This season playoff teams allowed about 2.70 to 2.75 goal per game player.  The Sabres allowed 3.50.  However Ullmark's GAA was 2.63.  That means that in the other 36 games the Sabres allowed about 4 goals per game.  Awful.  Get Ullmark level goaltending for a season and you are about 70 goals improved.   

2) Part of step 1 is getting more consistent D zone play from our D group.  IMHO that means having at least 2 defensive first D in the top 6.

3) Improve the offense.  Losing Sam and Jack unfortunately will make a short term O improvement nearly impossible unless we get at least one real center and a good winger back in the packages for those players.  Personally, I think we will see continued improved O production from Mitts, Cozens, and R2 which in ordinary circumstances would help improve the offense over last year.  A full year of Granato should also help, but it likely won't be enough.  

If I'm KA, my focus once the decisions on Jack and Sam are made, the priority is D and goaltending.  That should make the team competitive most nights.  

[SDS]

30 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

The formula is actually simple, but hard to execute. 

1) Get better goaltending.  This season playoff teams allowed about 2.70 to 2.75 goal per game player.  The Sabres allowed 3.50.  However Ullmark's GAA was 2.63.  That means that in the other 36 games the Sabres allowed about 4 goals per game.  Awful.  Get Ullmark level goaltending for a season and you are about 70 goals improved.   

2) Part of step 1 is getting more consistent D zone play from our D group.  IMHO that means having at least 2 defensive first D in the top 6.

3) Improve the offense.  Losing Sam and Jack unfortunately will make a short term O improvement nearly impossible unless we get at least one real center and a good winger back in the packages for those players.  Personally, I think we will see continued improved O production from Mitts, Cozens, and R2 which in ordinary circumstances would help improve the offense over last year.  A full year of Granato should also help, but it likely won't be enough.  

If I'm KA, my focus once the decisions on Jack and Sam are made, the priority is D and goaltending.  That should make the team competitive most nights.  

So I was close. I guessed defense plus goaltending was 60 goals.  If we can improve to 70 goals combined, that means we need 30 more goals from the offense.

15/10/5/5 and 5 from defense?

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, SDS said:

So I was close. I guessed defense plus goaltending was 60 goals.  If we can improve to 70 goals combined, that means we need 30 more goals from the offense.

15/10/5/5 and 5 from defense?

actually historically teams that break even or are just a little positive in differential make the playoffs.  It's going to be an uphill climb to get even there if both Sam and Jack are traded away with only futures in return.  Sadly I think this is the likely scenario. Mitts isn't ready for top line center duty and Cozens isn't ready for 2nd line duty.  

My prayer is that we find away to retain one of the two.  If we can, then I think we have an opportunity with improvements in D and goaltending to get to break even and contend for a playoff spot.  However I'm an optimist in general.  

Edited June 30, 2021 by GASabresIUFAN

[Second Line Center]

Montreal was a minus 9 this year.

A team with a minus 9 or worse has made the SCF 10 times in the last 40 years.  

80 teams.  10 have had a minus 9 or worse.  I actually thought it was much less then that.

Vancouver was a minus 15 in 2010 - 2011.  

https://www.statmuse.com/nhl/ask/worst-goal-differential-in-a-stanley-cup

 

 

Oh...and NONE of them won the Cup.  

Edited June 30, 2021 by Second Line Center

[PerreaultForever]

Well, unless we get better goaltending, and have much better team defense, we are going to need to score a LOT of goals. So far I see nothing to indicate we are on that path. 

My own strategy is pretty obvious and previously stated. I'm a D first guy and that does not seem to be the Sabres idea at all. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Goaltending upgrade of Hutton is critical.  I like the guy, but he is just not good enough on this Sabre team.

A team defense focus is also very important, especially if Jack and Sam are both traded (for the record, again, I don't think either should be traded).  I have always felt that it is easier to prevent goals than to score them.

We do need to score more goals, as the above will not be enough to get us close to even, especially if Jack and / or Sam are traded.

[rakish]

8 hours ago, SDS said:

Yeah I know, but we talk in the weeds a lot. I’m just trying to go a little higher up. Ultimately, the good teams are defined by goal differential. We should be able to allocate a reasonable number of goals for each of the four lines on offense and the three lines on defense.

Allowing fewer goals on defense is harder to compartmentalize. But we can estimate goals per game by the keeper.

I think looking at it this way you can see how close or how far we really are.

I think it's about the weeds. You gotta pull the weeds and plant Lafleur, no great teams were built around a guy named weeds.

[bob_sauve28]

I feel like we had two seasons last year. The first with RK, a hurt Jack playing, Hutton in goal and Steve Smith coaching our young defenseman. It was awful. 

 

Then Donny G came on, Jack left, the ATM line emerged, R2 arrived, Girardi got the defense running like a well tuned machine. 

 

Add decent goaltending and we should have a decent team.  

 

 

[Marvin]

I should have this somewhere for copy-paste

It starts with goaltending.

We need to add a couple of sage veteran defencemen to help Dahlin and Jokiharu with their games.

We need to add checking/two-way centres and maybe some veterans coming back from any trades to form some lines to insulate the youngsters so that they can learn both parts of their game better.

You will note that I am focusing on the defencive part.  This is not to inhibit the youth; it is because it is easier to find good checkers who can help do the heavy lifting so that the younger players can grow into their eventual responsibilities.

[LGR4GM]

10 hours ago, SDS said:

Yeah I know, but we talk in the weeds a lot. I’m just trying to go a little higher up. Ultimately, the good teams are defined by goal differential. We should be able to allocate a reasonable number of goals for each of the four lines on offense and the three lines on defense.

Allowing fewer goals on defense is harder to compartmentalize. But we can estimate goals per game by the keeper.

I think looking at it this way you can see how close or how far we really are.

You need to bring in an Ullmark level or better starter and a significantly better backup. 

On defense the blue line must be the point of no return as opposed to collapsing all the way to the circles. 

On offense, transitions. If we can make transitions we can get the puck in and keep it in. I think our forwards lack some skill in this area. 

[Pimlach]

Better goaltending is the quickest way to improve goal differential.  I like our young defense.  If McCabe leaves we must upgrade his spot with a veteran stay at home type.   We need that even if he stays. 

With Jack and Sam gone goals are going to be hard to get   

We were -71, just getting to -20’s would be great in one year.  

[Taro T]

Repeating the once or twice weekly post:

Re-sign Ullmark & get another guy his quality or better.

Keep Eichel & Reinhart and add Danault as a UFA.  Danault will both reduce goals scored against & increase what they're getting from the 2nd line.  Provided Eichel's neck is healthy, he alone will add about 20 goals to what the 1st line was on pace for.

Keep the Mittelstadt line together.  Having all 3 guys 1 year closer to their prime will necessarily cause increased production.

Find a cheap C for Girgensons & Okposo, maybe Ruutsalainen, maybe Sheahan or other cheap vet.  They'll be low event hockey.

Bring back McCabe.  Keep him paired with Ristolainen.  Keep Borgen stapled to Dahlin's side.  Do not let Jokiharju play with Dahlin.  Samuelsson, or a cheap vet brought in to cover for McCabe's initial absence should be Henri's normal partner.

The goalie upgrade is worth at least 20 goals, maybe 30 or 40.  Healthy Eichel & not launching Reinhart into the sun either is worth at least 20 goals.  Danault running the 2nd line nets at least 15 & likely 20-25.  Mitts line being a year older nets 10 minimum & likely more.

Simply keeping Dahlin & Henri separate nets at least 10.

That's 75 goals to the good in a worst case.  And it doesn't require all the stars aligning to get the 100 asked for in the OP. 

[Kong]

Score more goals, let in less.

[SDS]

6 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Repeating the once or twice weekly post:

Re-sign Ullmark & get another guy his quality or better.

Keep Eichel & Reinhart and add Danault as a UFA.  Danault will both reduce goals scored against & increase what they're getting from the 2nd line.  Provided Eichel's neck is healthy, he alone will add about 20 goals to what the 1st line was on pace for.

Keep the Mittelstadt line together.  Having all 3 guys 1 year closer to their prime will necessarily cause increased production.

Find a cheap C for Girgensons & Okposo, maybe Ruutsalainen, maybe Sheahan or other cheap vet.  They'll be low event hockey.

Bring back McCabe.  Keep him paired with Ristolainen.  Keep Borgen stapled to Dahlin's side.  Do not let Jokiharju play with Dahlin.  Samuelsson, or a cheap vet brought in to cover for McCabe's initial absence should be Henri's normal partner.

The goalie upgrade is worth at least 20 goals, maybe 30 or 40.  Healthy Eichel & not launching Reinhart into the sun either is worth at least 20 goals.  Danault running the 2nd line nets at least 15 & likely 20-25.  Mitts line being a year older nets 10 minimum & likely more.

Simply keeping Dahlin & Henri separate nets at least 10.

That's 75 goals to the good in a worst case.  And it doesn't require all the stars aligning to get the 100 asked for in the OP. 

Maybe I’m different, but I like to think of this in terms of goal differential instead of player X’s personality versus player Y’s grit. It’s measurable. Put a goal expectations tag on every player/line and let that be the ultimate measure and who’s under performing or over performing.

if the second line is scoring 30 goals when we need for 40 from them, that is what needs to be known.

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, SDS said:

Maybe I’m different, but I like to think of this in terms of goal differential instead of player X’s personality versus player Y’s grit. It’s measurable. Put a goal expectations tag on every player/line and let that be the ultimate measure and who’s under performing or over performing.

if the second line is scoring 30 goals when we need for 40 from them, that is what needs to be known.

The "net" referred to was referring to goal differential relative to this past season.

[Stoner]

1 hour ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

I should have this somewhere for copy-paste

It starts with goaltending.

We need to add a couple of sage veteran defencemen to help Dahlin and Jokiharu with their games.

We need to add checking/two-way centres and maybe some veterans coming back from any trades to form some lines to insulate the youngsters so that they can learn both parts of their game better.

You will note that I am focusing on the defencive part.  This is not to inhibit the youth; it is because it is easier to find good checkers who can help do the heavy lifting so that the younger players can grow into their eventual responsibilities.

Marvin's planting sage. Swamp?

13 minutes ago, Kong said:

Score more goals, let in less.

Right. I'm not sure where this discussion is supposed to go. It reminds me of my dad's scoring system to break 90 in golf. Four on par 3s, sixes on par 4s and 5s. Or something like that. Great. But he wasn't a good golfer and could never do it. He never practiced as far as I can remember.

[SDS]

7 minutes ago, Taro T said:

The "net" referred to was referring to goal differential relative to this past season.

I understand. You had a great answer. I was just referencing the first paragraph addressing the twice weekly post issue. 

3 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Marvin's planting sage. Swamp?

Right. I'm not sure where this discussion is supposed to go. It reminds me of my dad's scoring system to break 90 in golf. Four on par 3s, sixes on par 4s and 5s. Or something like that. Great. But he wasn't a good golfer and could never do it. He never practiced as far as I can remember.

I’m sure it’s confusing given that I never mentioned Pegula or meddling once.

[Stoner]

5 minutes ago, SDS said:

I understand. You had a great answer. I was just referencing the first paragraph addressing the twice weekly post issue. 

I’m sure it’s confusing given that I never mentioned Pegula or meddling once.

Another "Mr. Pegula" fanboi who doesn't like hearing the truth?

But, no, there's no "smart guy/think tank" mathematical solution to the Sabres' problems. They have to be better. Ownership, GM, coach and players.

Edited June 30, 2021 by PASabreFan

[rakish]

11 minutes ago, SDS said:

Maybe I’m different, but I like to think of this in terms of goal differential instead of player X’s personality versus player Y’s grit. It’s measurable. Put a goal expectations tag on every player/line and let that be the ultimate measure and who’s under performing or over performing.

if the second line is scoring 30 goals when we need for 40 from them, that is what needs to be known.

That's why you break down the HTML reports so you can do this sort of analysis. I did this sort of analysis with @inkman on the podcast last offseason. If you watch it, let me know if I said anything totally insane, memory is weird that way, my memory is that it was all genius.

If you want to do such analysis, I'm happy to podcast with you for an hour.

[Taro T]

5 minutes ago, SDS said:

I understand. You had a great answer. I was just referencing the first paragraph addressing the twice weekly post issue. 

I’m sure it’s confusing given that I never mentioned Pegula or meddling once.

Sorry for the confusion the original post created.  

Was merely indending to apologize for what has become a broken record to a degree in that it's another post saying to keep the "core" 5 guys most likely to be gone & add Danault & another another good goalie.  (Though what was originally intended for the preamble didn't end up close to what actually ended up written.  Oooops.)