Chychrun vs Demko; Defense vs Goaltender - Where Should KA invest?

[Hank]

We don't know what comrie is yet. He's only had 11 games, some when the D was decimated. He could be a legit starter and we just don't know it yet. 

Not all drafts are equal. No way I'm trading a first in this deep draft. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

23 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

The Same Reason that Tim Murray did during the 2014-15 Season 

They don’t need him to trade him to accomplish their 2022/23 tank.  They are already that bad.

[LGR4GM]

3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Why would AZ trade Vejmelka?

 

12 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

They don’t need him to trade him to accomplish their 2022/23 tank.  They are already that bad.

They are 5 points out of last place. 

[Refuting]

4 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

They are 5 points out of last place. 

Yo LGR can you answer me in other threads I'm big curious 

[GASabresIUFAN]

30 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

 

They are 5 points out of last place. 

Their going to trade Chychrun, Ghost and others. They can finish the tank without trading the goalie. They literally just extended him this past offseason.

[Freeezo]

4 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Of course their isn’t one.  You have to draft a few higher in the draft than the 4th rd, other than Power.  Johnson is the closest but there is no guarantee he signs here.  In the last 3 drafts we have had 13 picks in the top 3 rounds and drafted only 1 D (and only 1 G).  This is not a shot at KA, who has done a very good job drafting overall, but just a statistical fact.  If you want a top 4 D, you typically have to draft one and most are top 3 rd picks.  

Therefore KA if he is serious about a top 4 D and news reports say he is, he is going to have sign one next offseason or trade significant assets to get one.

Who else would you go after and at what cost?

Maybe he's using his 1st rounder to get a D Ala Myers that can start next year

[LGR4GM]

54 minutes ago, Refuting said:

Yo LGR can you answer me in other threads I'm big curious 

no idea what this means

[Refuting]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

no idea what this means

I quoted you in other threads lol what's not to understand 

[LGR4GM]

13 minutes ago, Freeezo said:

Maybe he's using his 1st rounder to get a D Ala Myers that can start next year

Maybe Adams is using a first rounder in trade for Tyler Myers? Is that the suggestion here?

11 minutes ago, Refuting said:

I quoted you in other threads lol what's not to understand 

Which threads. 

[nfreeman]

1 minute ago, Refuting said:

I quoted you in other threads lol what's not to understand 

Dude -- knock it off or keep quiet.

[Refuting]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Maybe Adams is using a first rounder in trade for Tyler Myers? Is that the suggestion here?

Which threads. 

Look at your notiez 

Notifications 

[Thorner]

9 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

He should invest in defense. For me, that's not Chychrun due to price and injury history but Adams needs to find another 3/4 defenseman and I have doubts one exists in this system currently. 

Would you look to make a move at G too or is that market too dried up in your estimation? 

[Refuting]

Just now, nfreeman said:

Dude -- knock it off or keep quiet.

Sry nfreeman sir 

[LGR4GM]

11 minutes ago, Refuting said:

Look at your notiez 

Notifications 

11 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Would you look to make a move at G too or is that market too dried up in your estimation? 

I think that market is pretty dry but if the Czech goalie in Arizona is available (no idea if they are) that would interest me. 

[Freeezo]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Maybe Adams is using a first rounder in trade for Tyler Myers? Is that the suggestion here?

Which threads. 

No I meant maybe they target a D in the 1st round of '23 hoping they can start '23-'24 like Tyler Myer did. Cheaper than acquiring a vet D.

[Thorner]

4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Vejmelka is very intriguing to me and more-so than Chychrun at this point. He gives you your backup or starter for next year, it allows Anderson to retire, and it means Levi can go to Rochester. 

What’s more likely, back up or starter? 

4 hours ago, matter2003 said:

Comrie was 2nd in Goals Saved Above Expected last year in a much bigger sample size...how's that working out for us? even before getting hurt, other than the first game he has mostly stunk.

I think I come down here, as well. I wouldn’t mind betting on a guy with actual sample size though maybe that just isn’t in the cards with this money ball crew

2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

The Sabres have played only 5 games with all 6 starting D in the lineup.  Their record is 4-1-0. (17% of games ytd).

The Sabres have played 10 with 5 of the 6 starters.  Their record 4-4-2

The Sabres have played  8 games with only 4 starters.  Their record is 2-6

Interestingly, when down to 3 starters, they went 3-2 in those 5 games.  

Our record without Samuelsson was 3-10 and without Joki so far 5-8.  

We’ll be down to 5 starters for the foreseeable future as Jokiharju is week to week and on IR. Lyubushkin is skating and could return soon.
 

 

All these numbers look pretty par for the course for how you’d expect a team’s record to move via commonplace injuries, especially when lack of depth to withstand has been a talking point for the organization. Nothing unexpected or unusual. Sabres remain as one of the league best-off re: man games lost this year 

[matter2003]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

What’s more likely, back up or starter? 

I think I come down here, as well. I wouldn’t mind betting on a guy with actual sample size though maybe that just isn’t in the cards with this money ball crew

All these numbers look pretty par for the course for how you’d expect a team’s record to move via commonplace injuries, especially when lack of depth to withstand has been a talking point for the organization. Nothing unexpected or unusual. Sabres remain as one of the league best-off re: man games lost this year 

Wonder if they have learned and are using any information they have learned from the Bills in this regard on helping to reduce injuries via cutting edge sports science and state of the art facilities/treatment.  

 

While the Bills have been hit with what seems like a lot of injuries this year, compared to other NFL teams, they are still among the least injured...the difference this year versus the other years is that almost all of the injuries have been to key players and starters when previous years many would be to ST guys or backups.

[Thorner]

11 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I think that market is pretty dry but if the Czech goalie in Arizona is available (no idea if they are) that would interest me. 

How does it look re: offseason? 

[Thorner]

3 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

Wonder if they have learned and are using any information they have learned from the Bills in this regard on helping to reduce injuries via cutting edge sports science and state of the art facilities/treatment.  

 

While the Bills have been hit with what seems like a lot of injuries this year, compared to other NFL teams, they are still among the least injured...the difference this year versus the other years is that almost all of the injuries have been to key players and starters when previous years many would be to ST guys or backups.

I’ve been fairly pleased with what I’ve seen / interpreted with their communications on the injury front this season: still early but seemingly less of the “its day to day. JUST KIDDING! He’s actually dead” type stuff 

[LGR4GM]

36 minutes ago, Thorny said:

What’s more likely, back up or starter? 

I think I come down here, as well. I wouldn’t mind betting on a guy with actual sample size though maybe that just isn’t in the cards with this money ball crew

All these numbers look pretty par for the course for how you’d expect a team’s record to move via commonplace injuries, especially when lack of depth to withstand has been a talking point for the organization. Nothing unexpected or unusual. Sabres remain as one of the league best-off re: man games lost this year 

Backup probably 

[Thorner]

57 minutes ago, Thorny said:

What’s more likely, back up or starter? 

I think I come down here, as well. I wouldn’t mind betting on a guy with actual sample size though maybe that just isn’t in the cards with this money ball crew

All these numbers look pretty par for the course for how you’d expect a team’s record to move via commonplace injuries, especially when lack of depth to withstand has been a talking point for the organization. Nothing unexpected or unusual. Sabres remain as one of the league best-off re: man games lost this year 

Just an injury graphic follow up 

Sabres have suffered a below-average amount of injuries, yet have also a below average amount of wins 

Sabres sitting among the less-hard-done-by teams, here, mostly surrounded by playoff teams. In addition, the metric they use to determine how bad the injuries are specifically re: points lost has the Sabres among the teams with the least severe impacts. 

We aren’t all the way left so can see our injuries haven’t been “negligible”, but relative to the league, they kind of are. Par for the course.

That is to say, if someone offered us this injury outlook in advance, heading into any season, we should be jumping on it. That injuries have had a run at sliding our record again comes down to the fact our regular amount of injuries have affected us unrelatively strongly due to being a building team lacking depth

Edited December 15, 2022 by Thorny

[thewookie1]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Just an injury graphic follow up 

Sabres have suffered a below-average amount of injuries, yet have also a below average amount of wins 

Sabres sitting among the less-hard-done-by teams, here, mostly surrounded by playoff teams. In addition, the metric they use to determine how bad the injuries are specifically re: points lost has the Sabres among the teams with the least severe impacts. 

We aren’t all the way left so can see our injuries haven’t been “negligible”, but relative to the league, they kind of are. Par for the course.

That is to say, if someone offered us this injury outlook in advance, heading into any season, we should be jumping on it. That injuries have had a run at sliding our record again comes down to the fact our regular amount of injuries have affected us unrelatively strongly due to being a building team lacking depth

Again, the WAR version of this chart makes it clearer how much injuries effected us. 

[Thorner]

7 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

Again, the WAR version of this chart makes it clearer how much injuries effected us. 

Because of the *replacement*

thats exactly my point or rather, THE point 

[thewookie1]

13 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Because of the *replacement*

thats exactly my point or rather, THE point 

Ah, I get it now; the chart is a bit misleading to your point though 🙂

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, thewookie1 said:

Ah, I get it now; the chart is a bit misleading to your point though 🙂

Forgive me but no, the chart precisely IS my point. 

Remove the x and y axis definitions and all the numbers. Just look at the logos and forget all the noise. Even just at a glance, where are the Sabres, if you had to say? 

Somewhere around the middle. Normal. 

My point all along has been merely that the injuries are, )for sake of argument, here,) more less par for the course. That we haven’t been “hard done by” re: bad lack, unusual circumstance on the injury front, *relatively*.

But my point has also been that that ^ is not the same as saying it hasn’t *affected* us more: it has. I think the numbers bear that out. But that’s because our depth replacements haven’t been up to snuff relative to other teams. That’s ok, because we are building depth. But we can’t realistically have expected better results re: injury hand dealt. In future, we’ll simply be less affected, better equipped to withstand, due to the looming depth it looks like we’ll have coming.