Sabres have allowed the fewest goals in the NHL since January 1st

[Broken Ankles]

53 minutes ago, ska-T Chitown said:

Isn't sorta the opposite? Maybe I am wrong, but aren't goals expected based on the quality and quantity of chances? So, Benny has had tons of good chances (I think we can all remember quite few) and has not converted (luck, bad shooter, whatevs), some for Cozzy. Tage, on the other hand, it seems like he is scoring when he should - which means he is not getting very many good chances to score.

Apologies in advance if I am making up the meaning of the fancy stats in my head and derailing the whole thing.

Your understanding is correct.  However the screen shot I first provided shows both expected goals per 60 (column 2) and goals above expected per 60. I used this measurement because  @mjd1001 was using the goal/60 stat for Zemgus in another thread.  And if you agree with the Money Pucks algorithm that converts quality chances to “expected goals” (and it’s ok if you don’t agree and use your observations), then my contention is that you cannot simply just rank the players on the team and derive anything (for any of these metrics - expected/60, goals/60, or goals above expected/60).  For example, the perception from my reading on this site is Benson is struggling scoring but he is getting tons of chances. Compared to other Sabres this year, he is behind all players on FL1, plus Kyle, JJP and Robinson.  Not bad for a rookie at all. But my contention is the Sabres in general are bad, real bad, so a ranking of 7 isn’t great.  Look at that metric to last year’s Sabres as well as other FL2/3 players on different teams this year and it will provide more context. My observation was that Benson replaced Olofsson between the 23 & 24 seasons, and the chances for Victor last year (5v5) was significantly better than Benson this year.  Coupled with the fact that VO converted more of these opportunities helps explain the drop in overall goal scoring for this years team.   And while Cozens expected goals remained about the same (good sign), others like Tage dropped Year over year.  So TNT not coverting at same rate (maybe lucky last year) coupled with fewer quality chances means his actual 5v5 production is half of what it was last year. Using the YoY comparison allowed me to disagree with others that Tage has had the same level of Quality chances/60.  I’m saying it’s way down.  Eye test confirms he is missing more, and that is confirmed when you look at Tages stat goals above expected/60 this year compared to last.  If you ONLY look at the stat for this season and just Sabres, Tage ranks #2 (1.3 goals above expected) and would lead you to believe he’s having an OK year 5v5 and all the problems are on PP.  I disagree with this assessment and believe the problems are across the roster and and we need improvement in 5v5 play.  Of course PP issues exist and it’s a glaring problem.  They are bottom 5 most of the season. No disputing its needs an overhaul.  

[Broken Ankles]

1 hour ago, matter2003 said:

I agree with Robinson...he has had a LOT of good chances around the net and seemingly always shoots the puck right into the goalie.

Which is maybe why he was a waiver pick up?  If KA can find a 4th line that doesn’t a) cost over $7m, and b) can generate chances and convert at a higher rate, while c) not sacrificing defense/higher 5v5 GA then we will be better off. 
 
   Look at what Vancouver did last offseason. They improved the bottom six and it’s paying dividends for them this year. 

[ska-T Palmtown]

1 hour ago, Broken Ankles said:

Your understanding is correct.  However the screen shot I first provided shows both expected goals per 60 (column 2) and goals above expected per 60. I used this measurement because  @mjd1001 was using the goal/60 stat for Zemgus in another thread.  And if you agree with the Money Pucks algorithm that converts quality chances to “expected goals” (and it’s ok if you don’t agree and use your observations), then my contention is that you cannot simply just rank the players on the team and derive anything (for any of these metrics - expected/60, goals/60, or goals above expected/60).  For example, the perception from my reading on this site is Benson is struggling scoring but he is getting tons of chances. Compared to other Sabres this year, he is behind all players on FL1, plus Kyle, JJP and Robinson.  Not bad for a rookie at all. But my contention is the Sabres in general are bad, real bad, so a ranking of 7 isn’t great.  Look at that metric to last year’s Sabres as well as other FL2/3 players on different teams this year and it will provide more context. My observation was that Benson replaced Olofsson between the 23 & 24 seasons, and the chances for Victor last year (5v5) was significantly better than Benson this year.  Coupled with the fact that VO converted more of these opportunities helps explain the drop in overall goal scoring for this years team.   And while Cozens expected goals remained about the same (good sign), others like Tage dropped Year over year.  So TNT not coverting at same rate (maybe lucky last year) coupled with fewer quality chances means his actual 5v5 production is half of what it was last year. Using the YoY comparison allowed me to disagree with others that Tage has had the same level of Quality chances/60.  I’m saying it’s way down.  Eye test confirms he is missing more, and that is confirmed when you look at Tages stat goals above expected/60 this year compared to last.  If you ONLY look at the stat for this season and just Sabres, Tage ranks #2 (1.3 goals above expected) and would lead you to believe he’s having an OK year 5v5 and all the problems are on PP.  I disagree with this assessment and believe the problems are across the roster and and we need improvement in 5v5 play.  Of course PP issues exist and it’s a glaring problem.  They are bottom 5 most of the season. No disputing its needs an overhaul.  

Great explanation, I was most of the way there with you before and I am sitting shotgun now.

To add my own observation ... the stat says Tage has scored one more goal this year than expected based on his chances - when you put that next to his 16 goals, that means the fancy AI whatever at MoneyPuck (anyone else think the "P" looks like an "F" sometimes?), they only think he should have scored ~15 ... so, yes - the "above expected", like most stats (fancy or plain), cannot really be taken by itself. JJ being +4.4 and having only 19 is not actually all that great, either. Contrast that to Matthews:
 +15.6, somehow actually does not tell the whole story of how great AM is at scoring this year.

 

🤮 <-- obligatory after having sullied myself talking goodly about the Loaves.

[JohnC]

2 hours ago, Pimlach said:

Benson is a fine young player.  He was good enough to make this team as constructed today, which brings to light the job Adams did, or did not do, in the offseason.   

Adams did not move VO, who has lost more value this season sitting on the bench.  He did not replace adequately replace Quinn, since VO was not up to the job. Therefore, Benson gets the job as he was more ready and more effective than anyone of his highly coveted Rochester prospects.  

I would have preferred replacing VO with a solid veteran winger and sending Benson back to juniors.  

You would think that Adams will add veteran forwards for next season and move on from KO and VO, and maybe even move on from Z?   More likely he adds very little veteran help and goes with Benson and more kids from Rochester.  

It is hard to tell what is best in the long term, but we probably aren't go to win much again next year with a team this young.   

Nothing against Benson but I think he is not top 9 on a contending team right now.  Maybe he will be next season if playing a line with the right players? 

Every player is different.  Rushing players seems to be what Buffalo thinks they have to do to get put of this funk.  They rush them into the lineup, and then they rush them into big minutes and big responsibilities, often with little veteran direction.  So far many of these players are turning out to be very good players - a lot are very good players on other teams.  

Adams says he is all in to win now, to make the playoffs, but his actions and results indicate otherwise.  This will be a most interesting off season and should be make or brake for Adams.  At some point results matter.  

In general, our assessments coincide. There are some smaller specifics where my assessment diverges from your assessment. The mere fact that he was willing to roll the dice on our goalie situation entering the season indicates to me that he wasn't all in on going for it this season. As it turns out, his view on mostly relying on the goalie talent within the system (UPL, Levi and Comrie) has in the longer run worked out (???), assuming that UPL continues with his stellar play. And the hope/expectation is that Levi's development continues to the point where he will be in some rotation with UPL. I expect UPL and Levi to be our goalie tandem next season. 

As you indicate, this is going to be a critical offseason for the GM. He has draft capital, an abundance of good prospects and the free agent market to add a few good players to supplement the roster that we already have on hand. Can you imagine if he worked out a deal to get a Tuch caliber player who is big, tough, fast and can shoot? I'm aslo hoping/expecting that he gets a Mitts deal done. I would like to see another Clifton type deal done to add to the blue line. 

I expect the bulk of our improvement next season will come from players such as Quinn, JJ, Cozens, Ryan Johnson, Power, Benson healthy Samuelsson etc. However, as you point out, unless he makes some moves to add talent and alter our current roster mix from the outside, we will all continue to sing the same sad songs about this team. And that is getting beyond being tiresome. 

[Thorner]

3 hours ago, Pimlach said:

Adams says he is all in to win now, to make the playoffs, but his actions and results indicate otherwise.  This will be a most interesting off season and should be make or brake for Adams.  At some point results matter.