10/26/23 Practice Lines

[SabresBaltimore]

Jost in on the 3rd line. Olofsson still on the 4th. Benson out. Still no Levi

 

 

[Doohicksie]

49 minutes ago, SabresBaltimore said:

Olofsson still on the 4th.

I see this as a positive.  I think Olofsson is capable of playing a more defensive role; this forces him to focus on it.  It will help him develop a more complete game.

[SabresBaltimore]

1 minute ago, Doohickie said:

It will help him develop a more complete game.

Let's hope so. It seemed to help Krebs. Although so far Krebs offense have felt absent since getting a promotion.

 

I just hope if there is a critical defensive zone draw he sends out Krebs or Jost with them instead. Or maybe the Thompson/Greenway line since they are already killing penalties together.

[Weave]

9 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

I see this as a positive.  I think Olofsson is capable of playing a more defensive role; this forces him to focus on it.  It will help him develop a more complete game.

It would be a very interesting development indeed if VO were to be able to transform his role to keep his NHL career going.

[Pimlach]

2 hours ago, Weave said:

It would be a very interesting development indeed if VO were to be able to transform his role to keep his NHL career going.

 

I am  skeptical about VO on a checking line. 

I watched him closely and he just does not engage physically as much as he should.  He has a knack for being around the play without being in the play.  

Edited October 26, 2023 by Pimlach

[That Aud Smell]

2 hours ago, Doohickie said:

I think Olofsson is capable of playing a more defensive role

The guy has one authentic interest when he's on the ice: Shooting the puck. He has exhibited no aptitude for developing a defensive game.

[TheAud]

I realize it could have happened regardless, but it's so annoying that they played Levi four straight games to start the season and he ends up with an LBI.

[Thorner]

2 hours ago, TheAud said:

I realize it could have happened regardless, but it's so annoying that they played Levi four straight games to start the season and he ends up with an LBI.

 

[Thorner]

People don’t get to claim overreaction or hindsight on this one. It was brought up ad nauseam this offseason that expecting someone without a history of playing close to that level of workload to do so was a dicey proposition. It was always likely going to be a situation where we relied on the other guy (s) here, heavily. Of course that needed to be accounted for in roster construction.

Adams is fine as long as Comrie plays well (it’s about the results). But if he tails off, this is exactly what people were talking about when they said Adams is answerable for the goaltending 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Thorny

[Pimlach]

16 minutes ago, Thorny said:

 

The record shows I was against that 4th start in a row.   Short sighted move for a team with a long, long, term plan.  

[Thorner]

3 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

The record shows I was against that 4th start in a row.   Short sighted move for a team with a long, long, term plan.  

They did it last year with Dahlin, too. If Granato thinks a guy is his best option, he’s going to play. And play a lot. 

[dudacek]

Are we really going to say playing a well-rested, well-prepared 21-year-old goalie 4 times in 8 nights was putting him at risk?

Ive been watching goalies do that pretty much my entire life. I watched Levi play 6 in 11 days at the world junior. I watched him play 7 in 15 days to close out last season.

Until somebody shows me the numbers, colour me very skeptical.

 

[Thorner]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Are we really going to say playing a well-rested, well-prepared 21-year-old goalie 4 times in 8 nights was putting him at risk?

Ive been watching goalies do that pretty much my entire life. I watched Levi play 6 in 11 days at the world junior. I watched him play 7 in 15 days to close out last season.

Until somebody shows me the numbers, colour me very skeptical.

 

21 year olds very rarely play 50. If that was the betting plan, it was a substantial risk

The reason it was so risky is because of compound risk: there were any number of reasons why it’s difficult for a goalie that age to do it - and the injury concern doesn’t disappear. Like just in general, any goalie looking to get to 50 is going to have to contend with that hurdle. (It’s a questionable bet to make to the tune of not rostering competent backups, regardless of a goalies age)

We don’t get to dismiss away the one thing that happened because it only had, I dunno, a 20% chance of happening- it was always that several unlikely bets were being placed at once: 1 coming up Bingo is exactly the point- 1 finding it’s way through was likely because of how many pitfalls there were. They were dodging in an asteroid field. And that’s precisely the point: it wasn’t the odds of any one potential shortcoming, it was the field. 

just by hypothetical: if this was a season ending injury, because this ONE PITFALL was unlikely in a vacuum, does that now prove the strategy sound? The specific asteroid that hits you wasn’t ever likely to do so: but that doesn’t change the fact you were likely to get dinged. It would be a logical fallacy to dismiss this as unlucky or chance.

no matter what happens, it will have always been a risky proposition to bet on Levi playing 50, and that is even *further* compounded by their/our clear lack of confidence in the backups

plain and simple: the only thing that can save Adams on this front is the results.
 

There are *no hindsight outs on this*. that’s what the above explanation means. They made a risky bet on Levi to be the starter. It was wrong, or it was right, based on the results he delivers.

the goaltending will be good this year, or bad this year. Or somewhere in between. Adams is amendable to those results: that is my only point.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Thorny

[dudacek]

43 minutes ago, Thorny said:

21 year olds very rarely play 50. If that was the betting plan, it was a substantial risk

The reason it was so risky is because of compound risk: there were any number of reasons why it’s difficult for a goalie that age to do it - and the injury concern doesn’t disappear. Like just in general, any goalie looking to get to 50 is going to have to contend with that hurdle. (It’s a questionable bet to make to the tune of not rostering competent backups, regardless of a goalies age)

We don’t get to dismiss away the one thing that happened because it only had, I dunno, a 20% chance of happening- it was always that several unlikely bets were being placed at once: 1 coming up Bingo is exactly the point- 1 finding it’s way through was likely because of how many pitfalls there were. They were dodging in an asteroid field. And that’s precisely the point: it wasn’t the odds of any one potential shortcoming, it was the field. 

just by hypothetical: if this was a season ending injury, because this ONE PITFALL was unlikely in a vacuum, does that now prove the strategy sound? The specific asteroid that hits you wasn’t ever likely to do so: but that doesn’t change the fact you were likely to get dinged. It would be a logical fallacy to dismiss this as unlucky or chance.

no matter what happens, it will have always been a risky proposition to bet on Levi playing 50, and that is even *further* compounded by their/our clear lack of confidence in the backups

plain and simple: the only thing that can save Adams on this front is the results.
 

There are *no hindsight outs on this*. that’s what the above explanation means. They made a risky bet on Levi to be the starter. It was wrong, or it was right, based on the results he delivers.

the goaltending will be good this year, or bad this year. Or somewhere in between. Adams is amendable to those results: that is my only point.

If the goaltending doesn't work over 82 games, it's on Adams. We've been on the same page for this for a long time.

Right now, the goals against is 15th in a 32-team league and my eye test says our goalies have neither cost us a game, nor stolen any either. It's been "OK", or "fine".

It will be interesting to see where that goes as the year progresses.

[Thorner]

10 minutes ago, dudacek said:

If the goaltending doesn't work over 82 games, it's on Adams. We've been on the same page for this for a long time.

Right now, the goals against is 15th in a 32-team league and my eye test says our goalies have neither cost us a game, nor stolen any either. It's been "OK", or "fine".

It will be interesting to see where that goes as the year progresses.

Yep, while obviously you strive for better than average, average is good enough that I won’t care much for it as a talking point if we make the playoffs 

agree it’s been ok so far, and really it’s too early to proclaim any judgment on this season’s results where that aspect is concerned.

or really, any aspect 

Edited October 27, 2023 by Thorny

[Porous Five Hole]

5 hours ago, Pimlach said:

The record shows I was against that 4th start in a row.   Short sighted move for a team with a long, long, term plan.  

I’m not tryna start an argument, but this wasn’t an issue down the stretch last season.  Injuries are fluky. 

[Marvin]

One upside could be that they break in Levi more patiently -- assuming that Comrie and UPL continue to be passable.

[Taro T]

2 hours ago, Marvin said:

One upside could be that they break in Levi more patiently -- assuming that Comrie and UPL continue to be passable.

Expect they'll be breaking him in more patiently regardless of whether Comrie &/or UPL demonstrate an ability to be a capable backup.  The schedule compresses (not significantly, but enough) that the Sabres won't be consistently getting a single game here and then a day or 2 off, followed by another and again and so on after the calendar flips.

They'll necessarily have to be factoring in how fresh a goalie is having him consistently playing 4 games is 6 or 7 nights; 4 games in 8 nights ISN'T excessive.

But them being at a point where it comes across as more than simply lip service that they trust 2 or even all 3 of the goalies to win them a game would be an excellent development.

And, unless it's the stretch run and they're on the cusp of a berth (like last year), don't see them giving any of them 4 in a row again (provided all 3 are available).