vet forward to fill in until Quinn returns

[LGR4GM]

Just now, Thorny said:

I don’t really understand what the slant is here - the net is Quinn, out, Rousek/Olofsson, in

Slant? Idk what that means. The teams gonna be fine without adding another forward. 

[Thorner]

Regardless, the result of Quinn to WHICHEVER of those guys is still a likely downgrade, no? 

[Eleven]

15 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I love a semantic discussion as much as anyone but truthfully his designation is besides the point obv. I think it’s probably fair to say it’s unlikely a rookie can contribute to record what Quinn likely would have. 

I think you're missing the point.  Quinn was, for all logical purposes, a first-year guy last year.  I.e., a rookie.  That does NOT make him a veteran the next year.  A second-year guy (even if he played two games before his real rookie year) is not a veteran.  

The idea is that there are other soon-to-be rookies, just like Quinn was last year, who can give the same production.

 

[LGR4GM]

Just now, Thorny said:

Regardless, the result of Quinn to WHICHEVER of those guys is still a likely downgrade, no? 

No. The 3rd highest scoring team in the NHL will be fine. 

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Slant? Idk what that means. The teams gonna be fine without adding another forward. 

Right, that’s what I’m getting at. In your view, Quinn to Rousek/Olofsson isn’t a downgrade? Or it’s just not a sizeable enough one to really matter?

1 minute ago, Eleven said:

I think you're missing the point.  Quinn was, for all logical purposes, a first-year guy last year.  I.e., a rookie.  That does NOT make him a veteran the next year.  A second-year guy (even if he played two games before his real rookie year) is not a veteran.  

The idea is that there are other soon-to-be rookies, just like Quinn was last year, who can give the same production.

 

*as Quinn contributed last year*

if we are lucky

no? 

Edited August 8, 2023 by Thorny

[Thorner]

As for the veteran designation @ElevenI was using the actual, official nhl definition 

The designations don’t matter to me 

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Right, that’s what I’m getting at. In your view, Quinn to Rousek/Olofsson isn’t a downgrade? Or it’s just not a sizeable enough one to really matter?

*as Quinn contributed last year*

if we are lucky

no? 

No in my view, Quinn to Mitts isn't a downgrade. 

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

No in my view, Quinn to Mitts isn't a downgrade. 

?

You have to look at the net of the team, man. You can shuffle the lines but you aren’t making the absence disappear, it’s not a street trick. It’s Quinn out, rookie/Olofsson in 

Mittelstadt was already playing more than Quinn 

Edited August 8, 2023 by Thorny

[Randall Flagg]

The things I had in mind for Jack Quinn are almost certainly unattainable by Rousek or any in-house option, so I would either be changing my formula or bringing in another player in light of Quinn's injury. Doing nothing because we have Greenway or Rousek is probably what we will do, but I believe it's silly 

[Thorner]

Just now, Randall Flagg said:

The things I had in mind for Jack Quinn are almost certainly unattainable by Rousek or any in-house option, so I would either be changing my formula or bringing in another player in light of Quinn's injury. Doing nothing because we have Greenway or Rousek is probably what we will do, but I believe it's silly 

No, we are somehow replacing Quinn with Mittelstadt? I need a life preserver here 

[dudacek]

27 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

No in my view, Quinn to Mitts isn't a downgrade. 

Mitts replacing Quinn on the 2nd line is not a downgrade, but that isn’t really what we are talking about here since Mitts was better than Quinn last year anyway.

I mean you’re absolutely right that every person in the lineup can move up a slot without a huge net overall loss if your depth is strong.

But @thorny is also right that your team might be better if you moved Tatar into the lineup instead of Olofsson.

Edited August 8, 2023 by dudacek

[dudacek]

A lot of people around here think Olofsson isn’t an NHL player, or at least one with much value.

I think most GMs would love to have an Olofsson handy to plug into their lineup at no acquisition cost if a regular forward went down for a half-season with injury.

I also think that guys like Rousek and Kulich need to see they have opportunity and giving them the first shot when an opportunity arises is sound people management.

But only once your organization has arrived at the point where it has that kind of organizational depth.

That’s what I meant when I said that “next man up” is what a strong organization would do.

 

[Thorner]

14 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Mitts replacing Quinn on the 2nd line is not a downgrade, but that isn’t really what we are talking about here since Mitts was better than Quinn last year anyway.

I mean you’re absolutely right that every person in the lineup can move up a slot without a huge net overall loss if you’re depth is strong.

But @thorny is also right that your team might be better if you moved Tatar into the lineup instead of Olofsson.

Under the idea where we aren’t really losing anything by moving guys up one spot, in order for that to make sense, the players moving up need to necessarily be very close in ability. Which we can grant, I suppose, for sake of argument. 

But then, by the time you get to the end, you are replacing the guy who was able to supposedly seamlessly replace the guy who we just said seamlessly replaced Quinn. So they are all theoretically Quinn level players. In which case, you are still ultimately replacing what Krebs was going to give you on a “lower” line, with someone likely significantly inferior unless your “next man up” is of the same ilk

Ie the only thing that literally matters is the net: it’s Quinn out, rookie/Olofsson in

Edited August 8, 2023 by Thorny

[Eleven]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I also think that guys like Rousek and Kulich need to see they have opportunity and giving them the first shot when an opportunity arises is sound people management.

This is it...not necessarily those two players in particular, but the idea.

[Thorner]

7 minutes ago, Eleven said:

This is it...not necessarily those two players in particular, but the idea.

Yes, to not add a player as good as Quinn from the outside because it would prevent us starting out a rookie on a path, this year, where we hope he becomes what Quinn was going to be this year, NEXT. it’s an accepted downgrade for THIS season, though, in the name of not blocking a young player’s development. because it can’t be argued it’s in the best interest of the TEAM, this coming season, to ice a rookie instead of Quinn and what we were expecting of him this season (or a like replacement)

We are literally just regurgitating the plan here 

Edited August 8, 2023 by Thorny

[That Aud Smell]

47 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Mitts takes Quinns spot. Krebs takes Mitts spot. Rousek is the forward who battles with olofsson for the 3rd line winger toi.

This idea gives me some comfort.

28 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

No. The 3rd highest scoring team in the NHL will be fine. 

This prompts a new worry on my part (I have issues): I've heard and read that the Sabres are destined to take a big step back in GF, since a slew of players had career years last year. Yeah? Nah? (Hold me.)

20 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

The things I had in mind for Jack Quinn are almost certainly unattainable by Rousek or any in-house option, so I would either be changing my formula or bringing in another player in light of Quinn's injury. Doing nothing because we have Greenway or Rousek is probably what we will do, but I believe it's silly 

Sir! ... SIR!

[LGR4GM]

19 minutes ago, Thorny said:

?

You have to look at the net of the team, man. You can shuffle the lines but you aren’t making the absence disappear, it’s not a street trick. It’s Quinn out, rookie/Olofsson in 

Mittelstadt was already playing more than Quinn 

What you're not realizing or are ignoring is that Quinn as a rookie produced X, that's all you have to replace. Why? Because this was the 3rd highest scoring nhl team last year and even with some regression they will be top 10. So, no I'm not worried about replacing what Quinn brought. I think adding Greenway and a more experienced Krebs, coupled with Rousek makes up for what Quinn brought. 

Now the counter you'll say is, what about Quinn this year! But it's not relevant because you don't need to replace his offense this year, the team is already good enough there.

[PromoTheRobot]

I wouldn't count on Quinn returning to the Sabres this year. Even after recovery he won't be in game shape.

[LGR4GM]

5 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

This idea gives me some comfort.

This prompts a new worry on my part (I have issues): I've heard and read that the Sabres are destined to take a big step back in GF, since a slew of players had career years last year. Yeah? Nah? (Hold me.)

Sir! ... SIR!

The main regression argument has some merit, but it relies on xgf and xgf has reached a mythical status at this point. Tage is going to outscore his xgf because he has a great shot. Tuch finally had a full season and a top line role. Peterka will be better. Cozens, idk what he'll do but better seems likely. Skinner is the wild card impo. 

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

What you're not realizing or are ignoring is that Quinn as a rookie produced X, that's all you have to replace. Why? Because this was the 3rd highest scoring nhl team last year and even with some regression they will be top 10. So, no I'm not worried about replacing what Quinn brought. I think adding Greenway and a more experienced Krebs, coupled with Rousek makes up for what Quinn brought. 

Now the counter you'll say is, what about Quinn this year! But it's not relevant because you don't need to replace his offense this year, the team is already good enough there.

I agree with all this.

To me it’s definitely interesting as a discussion point under the context of there being a fair amount of talk this summer about whether we went too “status quo” with the forwards. I was kind of of the mind that made sense, internal improvement would be enough to offset any regression we MIGHT see. 

Quinn going down sort of takes a non negligible bite out of that “expected internal improvement” quotient, and, as you say, replaces him with a status quo output relative to last season, instead. 

So you are absolutely right. Adams might be sitting there saying we still have more than enough improvement coming from other roster spots it doesn’t ultimately matter! Ie, he had us so above the playoff line that whatever the loss of WAR amounts to in losing Quinn isn’t enough to endanger our position above that line 

[LGR4GM]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I agree with all this.

To me it’s definitely interesting as a discussion point under the context of there being a fair amount of talk this summer about whether we went too “status quo” with the forwards. I was kind of of the mind that made sense, internal improvement would be enough to offset any regression we MIGHT see. 

Quinn going down sort of takes a non negligible bite out of that “expected internal improvement” quotient, and, as you say, replaces him with a status quo output relative to last season, instead. 

So you are absolutely right. Adams might be sitting there saying we still have more than enough improvement coming from other roster spots it doesn’t ultimately matter! Ie, he had us so above the playoff line that whatever the loss of WAR amounts to in losing Quinn isn’t enough to endanger our position above that line 

That would be my guess. Idk if that's right, it's certainly a question but I feel as though we can handle it.

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Mitts takes Quinns spot. Krebs takes Mitts spot. Rousek is the forward who battles with olofsson for the 3rd line winger toi.

This except Rousek isn’t going to beat out VO to start the season.   

I wouldn’t mind if KA gave Comtois a one year prove it deal for added depth.

Edited August 8, 2023 by GASabresIUFAN

[mjd1001]

Not interested in adding a vet forward from who is left out there.  Enough young guys that can compete for the spot.  Even if Quinn was here for the first part of the season, there might be a couple of the young guys you would want to work into the lineup to see how they do.  Quinn's spot is the one those young guys can get their handful of games in.

[dudacek]

33 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Ie the only thing that literally matters is the net: it’s Quinn out, rookie/Olofsson in

It's not quite that simple because linemates and role affect player value: Olofsson was a far more useful player riding shotgun with Sam and Jack than he was on a 2nd line with Mitts and Jost. Mitts played like a star with Tuch and Skinner.

But I can get on board for sake of argument.

Assuming Olofsson is 80 percent of the player Quinn is, and that roster spot represents 5% of the Sabres lineup, for half a season, aren't we talking the team taking a 0.5% hit this year replacing Quinn with Olofsson?

The 80 percent is completely made up, the 5% is a rough estimate, and every percentage point matters to a bubble team, but i think this kinda shows the degree of impact Quinn's injury could have on the current roster.

I'm sure Tatar would help, but I'm not sure how significant that help would be.

Edited August 8, 2023 by dudacek

[Thorner]

28 minutes ago, dudacek said:

It's not quite that simple because linemates and role affect player value: Olofsson was a far more useful player riding shotgun with Sam and Jack than he was on a 2nd line with Mitts and Jost. Mitts played like a star with Tuch and Skinner.

But I can get on board for sake of argument.

Assuming Olofsson is 80 percent of the player Quinn is, and that roster spot represents 5% of the Sabres lineup, for half a season, aren't we talking the team taking a 0.5% hit this year replacing Quinn with Olofsson?

The 80 percent is completely made up, the 5% is a rough estimate, and every percentage point matters to a bubble team, but i think this kinda shows the degree of impact Quinn's injury could have on the current roster.

I'm sure Tatar would help, but I'm not sure how significant that help would be.

Pretty in line with what Liger was expressing then: it’s a loss, probably not one we need to worry about replacing, as the few points it might represent aren’t worth prioritizing 

If it’s indeed Adams’ thinking (and it appears it is), he must be very confident we’re a playoff team