The Sabres Power Play is a Problem.

[JoeSchmoe]

18 minutes ago, Taro T said:

True.  But if the goals bouncing in off Sabres is even just 1/2'd, is it still a sub-0.900 S%?  (Not incredible, but close enough to average that some puckluck breaking his way could have the S% where they need it to be.)  He had had a crazy amount of bad luck in that regard.  Know there have been at least 6 like that, wouldn't dispute it if somebody were to say there were 12 like that.  And it seems Comrie is usually the victim of those goals.

Comrie is 63 out of 73 in the league in goals saved above expected- That's starters and backups.

[Taro T]

47 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Comrie is 63 out of 73 in the league in goals saved above expected- That's starters and backups.

Thanks for that.  But it doesn't answer the question that was asked.

[JoeSchmoe]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

Thanks for that.  But it doesn't answer the question that was asked.

Doesn't it?

[SwampD]

We miss The Mighty Boosh and Joker. They had been there to sweep those to the corner.

Edited November 15, 2022 by SwampD

[Quint]

On 10/29/2022 at 5:46 PM, Thorny said:

We need to get a power play whiz specialist in there immediately to help out Granato

promote VO to power play whiz specialist

Gilbert Perreault. You kind of wonder why the Sabres never hired him for anything except being an ambassador. He's so ultra-talented.

Edited November 17, 2022 by Quint

[mjd1001]

I always thought Power play was mostly a function of 3 things and not much else: 1.) do you have a couple of guys with a skillset that lends itself to the PP. 2.) Luck  3.) coaching (and this is by far the last of the 3).  

You have Dahlin, Tage, and VO to satisfy the first one.  The third one I have no idea how good the coaching is with these guys on the PP.  The 2nd one comes and goes.  All I would be worried about is the coaching, and right now I think the Sabres anre middle-of-the-pack in PP so i'm not overly concerned.

[nfreeman]

Back to the PP:  I noticed that against Boston, VO was restored to his rightful spot in the right circle on PP1.  I think he should stay there.

[Thorner]

21 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Doesn't it?

It should. The stat is supposed to account for things like luck. It makes an effort to do so - that's not to say it's perfect or close to - but it would take some pretty good fudging of the numbers to see Comrie's standing near the bottom of the expected goals list as a nothing burger. 

If the counting stats are bad, and the advanced stats are bad, and the results are bad, and there is no sample size of positive results in the past....

I mean I dunno 

How much of a defence would you be amounting for this player, if he wasn't a Buffalo Sabre. That's the question I'd ask to anyone claiming he's been fine, if anyone is 

[Porous Five Hole]

22 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Back to the PP:  I noticed that against Boston, VO was restored to his rightful spot in the right circle on PP1.  I think he should stay there.

It makes such a difference when Tage is on one side and VO is on the other. And Dahlin distributing. The goalie can’t cheat toward the shooter because we have two of them.  
 

I know there’s good data to run the PP from behind the net instead of the point, but this is working (8th in the league). 

[Taro T]

53 minutes ago, Thorny said:

It should. The stat is supposed to account for things like luck. It makes an effort to do so - that's not to say it's perfect or close to - but it would take some pretty good fudging of the numbers to see Comrie's standing near the bottom of the expected goals list as a nothing burger. 

If the counting stats are bad, and the advanced stats are bad, and the results are bad, and there is no sample size of positive results in the past....

I mean I dunno 

How much of a defence would you be amounting for this player, if he wasn't a Buffalo Sabre. That's the question I'd ask to anyone claiming he's been fine, if anyone is 

But does it actually account for the shots that go in off Power as a single example?  When Comrie kicks the puck out right into Power's ankle & it's then in the net, the counting stats say Comrie faced 1 shot and gave up 1 goal even though he effectively faced 2 shots to give up that single goal.  Even on the ones he keeps out of the net, he made 2 saves but gets credit for 1.  And that 2nd "shot" is typically high danger though the 1st might not have been.

So, are those plays getting put properly into those models?  Don't know.  But asked a specific question regarding those goals and the deflections off Bryson, Cozens, etc.  Simply coming back w/ "well, the advanced stats say he sucks, so there's your answer" ISN'T an answer to the question on anything but a superficial level.  How do those get accounted for in these advanced stat models?  ARE they accounted for in the advanced stat models?  The guess here is that they DON'T get fully accounted for in the "advanced" statistical models because they're too rare and also because not all deflections or rebounds resulting in friendly fire are created equally.

We are told the models incorporate "puck luck" into them, but without seeing the model's parameters don't know that it is adequately addressed.

The original question was simple.  Going off into advanced stat tangents adds a lot of complexity & additional questions to it.

And, it very well could be like faceoff wins.  Yes, the majority don't matter, that initial puck battle is more important.  But when there is a CLEAN faceoff win, it is supremely important and can be game altering.  But the advanced stats aren't really all that advanced there because they can't / don't account for clean faceoff wins.  There's the issue of defining them & also the issue of how seldomly they happen; you don't get reliable data from a single game nor even a chunk of a single regular season.

Mittelstadt lucks into a clean faceoff win to Olofsson by bouncing the puck off his own ankle & all of a sudden the puck is in the net.  Advanced stats don't attempt to measure that.  Not convinced the goaltending stats actually measure those Power goals either.

 

Edited November 15, 2022 by Taro T
F'n autocorrect

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

But does it actually account for the shots that go in off Power as a single example?  When Comrie kicks the puck out right into Power's ankle & it's then in the net, the counting stats say Comrie faced 1 shot and gave up 1 goal even though he effectively faced 2 shots to give up that single goal.  Even on the ones he keeps out of the net, he made 2 saves but gets credit for 1.  And that 2nd "shot" is typically high danger though the 1st might not have been.

So, are those plays getting put properly into those models?  Don't know.  But asked a specific question regarding those goals and the deflections off Bryson, Cozens, etc.  Simply coming back w/ "well, the advanced stats say he sucks, so there's your answer" ISN'T an answer to the question on anything but a superficial level.  How do those get accounted for in these advanced stat models?  ARE they accounted for in the advanced stat models?  The guess here is that they DON'T get fully accounted for in the "advanced" statistical models because they're too rare and also because not all deflections or rebounds resulting in friendly fire are created equally.

We are told the models incorporate "puck luck" into them, but without seeing the model's parameters don't know that it is adequately addressed.

The original question was simple.  Going off into advanced stat tangents adds a lot of complexity & additional questions to it.

And, it very well could be like faceoff wins.  Yes, the majority don't matter, that initial puck battle is more important.  But when there is a CLEAN faceoff win, it is supremely important and can be game altering.  But the advanced stats aren't really all that advanced there because they can't / don't account for clean faceoff wins.  There's the issue of defining them & also the issue of how seldom lyrics they happen; you don't get reliable data from a single game nor even a chunk of a single regular season.

Mittelstadt lucks into a clean faceoff win to Olofsson by bouncing the puck off his own ankle & all of a sudden the puck is in the net.  Advanced stats don't attempt to measure that.  Not convinced the goaltending stats actually measure those Power goals either.

 

The advances metrics will gain more prominence, as with regular stats, with an increase in sample size. Basically, once the sample size gets large enough, law of averages takes over. 

Ie. just hypothetically, if Comrie is sitting near the bottom of the expected goals list after 82 games, the chances that he just happened to suffer a significant amount more "odd" deflections than other goalies, just randomly, so often and for so long, is almost impossible. Like, you can spin red 5 times in a row by chance, if you spin red 100 times in a row, that's not luck. Something is up with the wheel. 

It's early enough that the "he's been unlucky" thing does have merit - the runway is shrinking, though. 

[Taro T]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

The advances metrics will gain more prominence, as with regular stats, with an increase in sample size. Basically, once the sample size gets large enough, law of averages takes over. 

Ie. just hypothetically, if Comrie is sitting near the bottom of the expected goals list after 82 games, the chances that he just happened to suffer a significant amount more "odd" deflections than other goalies, just randomly, so often and for so long, is almost impossible. Like, you can spin red 5 times in a row by chance, if you spin red 100 times in a row, that's not luck. Something is up with the wheel. 

It's early enough that the "he's been unlucky" thing does have merit - the runway is shrinking, though. 

To the bolded, true.  But we aren't even 20% of the way through the season yet.  So, luck can still have a huge part of it.  As can Power (& others) learning how Comrie reacts & vice versa also cause that bad puck luck to improve.

And, to answer the question of how much have the friendly fire rebounds & deflections affected his numbers with 'well his advanced stats stink' is NOT an answer.  Whether it should or should not be in a perfect world.

[Thorner]

15 minutes ago, Taro T said:

To the bolded, true.  But we aren't even 20% of the way through the season yet.  So, luck can still have a huge part of it.  As can Power (& others) learning how Comrie reacts & vice versa also cause that bad puck luck to improve.

And, to answer the question of how much have the friendly fire rebounds & deflections affected his numbers with 'well his advanced stats stink' is NOT an answer.  Whether it should or should not be in a perfect world.

I already agreed with you it wasn't an answer, though. "It's early enough that the "he's been unlucky" thing does have merit"

I do believe that "his advanced stats stink" DOES represent the answer, at some point - it's just not yet. To your point. 

Edited November 15, 2022 by Thorny

[spndnchz]

This is a message board. You’re not supposed to agree with each other.

😳

[steveoath]

Why do they insist on coming into the neutral zone at speed,  then playing a drop pass? They end up with 3 static players all standing around at the blue line. 

[French Collection]

1 hour ago, steveoath said:

Why do they insist on coming into the neutral zone at speed,  then playing a drop pass? They end up with 3 static players all standing around at the blue line. 

And the opponent knows you’re going to do it.

[SwampD]

2 hours ago, steveoath said:

Why do they insist on coming into the neutral zone at speed,  then playing a drop pass? They end up with 3 static players all standing around at the blue line. 

It would be one thing if the drop pass was 6 feet back and there was an element of the option play in football, but they are dropping it all the way back to the freakin face off dots. “Hey guys, here’s even more time to set up and defend against us.”

So dumb.

Edited November 20, 2022 by SwampD

[bob_sauve28]

On 11/15/2022 at 4:30 PM, nfreeman said:

Back to the PP:  I noticed that against Boston, VO was restored to his rightful spot in the right circle on PP1.  I think he should stay there.

Absolutely! And take Jeff Skinner off top PP. He stinks at passing. 

[matter2003]

How about Now?  

Currently ranked 3rd in the NHL at 29.0%

It is a problem...for the other team.

 

 

Edited December 8, 2022 by matter2003

[matter2003]

On 11/20/2022 at 3:19 PM, bob_sauve28 said:

Absolutely! And take Jeff Skinner off top PP. He stinks at passing. 

Uhhh...he is tied for 2nd on the team in assists with 19.  Does not compute.

Also...this pass from Skinner was kinda bad ass.

 

Edited December 8, 2022 by matter2003

[LGR4GM]

32 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

Uhhh...he is tied for 2nd on the team in assists with 19.  Does not compute.

Also...this pass from Skinner was kinda bad ass.

 

You know the thing about that pass? He waits for the lane to open and then wrists it down there before Tuch clears the net knowing that Tuch is moving into that space. That's a level above. 

[matter2003]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

You know the thing about that pass? He waits for the lane to open and then wrists it down there before Tuch clears the net knowing that Tuch is moving into that space. That's a level above. 

Yeah...Tuch was still behind the net when he sent that pass, anticipating where he was going.  

[bob_sauve28]

24 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

Uhhh...he is tied for 2nd on the team in assists with 19.  Does not compute.

Also...this pass from Skinner was kinda bad ass.

 

He has gotten WAY better. Yes, my post did that 🤣

[Doohicksie]

11 hours ago, matter2003 said:

Also...this pass from Skinner was kinda bad ass.

He also made the passes that led to Thompson's 3rd and 4th on-timer goals last night.  He is an underrated passer.