Bowen Byram- Really Bad... But Not The Worst Anymore

[Stoner]

He's hot tho.

[\GoBillsInDallas/]

2 hours ago, Archie Lee said:

I’m not at all hung

[Doohicksie]

1 hour ago, Jorcus said:

You have to look at who he is replacing. That would be Ryan Johnson or Jacob Bryson. I am going to think at the end of the day that is an upgrade. Highly mobile defensemen are coveted in todays NHL and there is no mercy on the teams that don't have them. It's 10 games with a new coach and a new system with a skilled developing defenseman. The Ruff system is get the puck out of the D zone as fast as you can vs the Granato system which was to box in gain control and work your way out. I am not sure why he is paired with Power but that may change. I would like to see the three puck movers spread out.    

I'm not convinced Byram is much of an upgrade over Johnson (not enough data on Johnson).  I think Johnson is the odd man out because he's waiver exempt and, as a graduating college student, just doesn't have pro experience.  But if we needed him on the big club I think he'd be okay.  But maybe not... like I said, not enough data.

1 hour ago, SwampD said:

I’m guessing age. I know we don’t want to hear this old trope, but the Sabres are still a young team.

Age on who's part?  Mitts (25)?  Byram (23)?  Relative to what?  Tying it back, Johnson is the same age as Byram.

Edited October 30 by Doohicksie

[Mango]

2 hours ago, Stoner said:

He's hot tho.

 

58 minutes ago, Doohicksie said:

I'm not convinced Byram is much of an upgrade over Johnson (not enough data on Johnson).  I think Johnson is the odd man out because he's waiver exempt and, as a graduating college student, just doesn't have pro experience.  But if we needed him on the big club I think he'd be okay.  But maybe not... like I said, not enough data.

Agreed he isn't our worst player. He has been fine via the eye test. But Ryan Johnson was also fine by the eye test. 

The issue that this team has with Byrum is that it just doesn't make sense. If he blossoms into what we were sold he could be, it doesn't make sense to extend him with Power/Dahlin already here. So what is the plan? From a roster construction POV it was just weird. We still need help on the defense and we now need more help filling out the top 6. 

This team would be better if we had Mitts/Ryan Johnson than it is is Cozens/Byram. 

[JoeSchmoe]

4 hours ago, GoPuckYourself said:

 

Relative expected goals? This might be the dumbest ***** I've seen on here in awhile. Seriously could there be a more meaningless stat if this is even a stat? How can you possibly factor that it's better when he's off the ice than when he's on? Is there not other players on the ice at the same time as him who factor in this equation? More nerd stats that people who think they're smarter than everyone created and now everyone goes with it.

It's not as hard as it sounds.

You can quite easily measure shot differential of when he's on the ice vs when he's off the ice. If you also apply a quality rating to each of the shots, you get this stat.

Byram gives up a ton of high danger scoring chances when he's on the ice. The brain fart the other night against FL was a good example. We also get hemmed in a lot when he's on D... He's not good at winning pucks (positional awareness, battle skill, finding outlet passes).

He also doesn't generate many 5 on 5 scoring opportunities. 

I find he's got good edges and agree that he looks like a good hockey player.  But he was a net negative on CO, despite having an elite team around him, and he's just flat out bad with us.

1 hour ago, Mango said:

 

Agreed he isn't our worst player. He has been fine via the eye test. But Ryan Johnson was also fine by the eye test. 

The issue that this team has with Byrum is that it just doesn't make sense. If he blossoms into what we were sold he could be, it doesn't make sense to extend him with Power/Dahlin already here. So what is the plan? From a roster construction POV it was just weird. We still need help on the defense and we now need more help filling out the top 6. 

This team would be better if we had Mitts/Ryan Johnson than it is is Cozens/Byram. 

Bryson was good last year and would be another option here. 

[JoeSchmoe]

5 hours ago, 7+6=13 said:

Can you tell us how many years it's been since we've been in the playoffs?

Yes, I could.

[Doohicksie]

32 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Bryson was good last year and would be another option here. 

Bryson is a far better player than most people on this forum give him credit for.

[7+6=13]

1 hour ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Yes, I could.

Could you cry about that and everything else 10 games into the season?

[JoeSchmoe]

1 minute ago, 7+6=13 said:

Could you cry about that and everything else 10 games into the season?

I suppose I could. 🤠

[7+6=13]

Just now, JoeSchmoe said:

I suppose I could. 🤠

I suppose you are.

I'm sure you're a fantastic person but man this bashing everyone and everything about the team is nauseating.  Obviously, it's not just you.  Obviously, anyone can understand the negativity, but when is enough, enough?

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, Doohicksie said:

Bryson is a far better player than most people on this forum give him credit for.

Yup, but he's short and this place wants 23 Brady and Matthew Tkachuk's

Just now, 7+6=13 said:

I suppose you are.

I'm sure you're a fantastic person but man this bashing everyone and everything about the team is nauseating.  Obviously, it's not just you.  Obviously, anyone can understand the negativity, but when is enough, enough?

They win, gets all quiet. They lose 1 game "omg! They are small and weak! Fire everyone! Trade everyone! 🔥 🔥 🔥  all down!!!!" 

[bob_sauve28]

Casey is 14th in the league in scoring, one point ahead of Tage Thompson 

 

https://www.espn.com/nhl/stats/player

[JoeSchmoe]

1 minute ago, 7+6=13 said:

I suppose you are.

I'm sure you're a fantastic person but man this bashing everyone and everything about the team is nauseating.  Obviously, it's not just you.  Obviously, anyone can understand the negativity, but when is enough, enough?

I don't like the Byram trade, but I don't think I've said much of anything about anyone else. I think/hope Quinn and Cozens will get it together. I've also posted on the positivity thread and told the OP to keep it up.

There's much to be hopeful about, but if we see less of #4 in favour of Bryson (my personal pick) or Johnson, we'll be even better off.

[7+6=13]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

They win, gets all quiet. They lose 1 game "omg! They are small and weak! Fire everyone! Trade everyone! 🔥 🔥 🔥  all down!!!!" 

Obviously we understand the frustration, we've just been a mess for so long.  

This board can't even discuss things anymore. The same posters get so unhinged if a morsel of positivity is detected or God forbid you disagree with anything negative.

I suppose I've been on a crusade of sorts to poke the bears and I should stop too.

[sabremike]

If we had Mitts back and replaced Byram with freaking Mike Card we'd still be in way better shape than we are now. Worst second line in the entire league is absolutely killing us.

[Porous Five Hole]

56 minutes ago, sabremike said:

If we had Mitts back and replaced Byram with freaking Mike Card we'd still be in way better shape than we are now. Worst second line in the entire league is absolutely killing us.

I don’t think you’re wrong.  Hindsight is huge here.  
The concept of having another top four D (with four overall pedigree) for a guy who was expected to be a 3C after the long term extensions to Tage and Cozens made sense at the time.  But it turns out that Mitts would have solved our top six problem we have right now. And that’s your point. 

There’s certainly a drop off between Byram and whomever would have been in the lineup without him here (Bryson or Gilbert—yikes), but Byram has not proven to be enough to justify the trade so far. 
With that said, Byram has played 28 games so far in his Sabres career.  He can flip the script. I might be alone, but I’m still optimistic that the Byram trade won’t be something we regret when this team is fully formed. 

[GoPuckYourself]

8 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said:

It's not as hard as it sounds.

You can quite easily measure shot differential of when he's on the ice vs when he's off the ice. If you also apply a quality rating to each of the shots, you get this stat.

Byram gives up a ton of high danger scoring chances when he's on the ice. The brain fart the other night against FL was a good example. We also get hemmed in a lot when he's on D... He's not good at winning pucks (positional awareness, battle skill, finding outlet passes).

He also doesn't generate many 5 on 5 scoring opportunities. 

I find he's got good edges and agree that he looks like a good hockey player.  But he was a net negative on CO, despite having an elite team around him, and he's just flat out bad with us.

Bryson was good last year and would be another option here. 

I'm not defending him as being a "good player" I just don't personally believe in the stat? It is a stat right? I should have worded it at the end as saying "but I respect those who go by this stat" because it sounds like what I'm stating is fact when in turn it's just my opinion so my bad. I don't want to discredit those who use this in part of their evaluations I just don't personally think this is a useful stat and I'm of the old school variety where my eyes tell me more than something like this (as I was just told I needed glasses so take me with a grain of salt lol). 

[JoeSchmoe]

28 minutes ago, GoPuckYourself said:

I'm not defending him as being a "good player" I just don't personally believe in the stat? It is a stat right? I should have worded it at the end as saying "but I respect those who go by this stat" because it sounds like what I'm stating is fact when in turn it's just my opinion so my bad. I don't want to discredit those who use this in part of their evaluations I just don't personally think this is a useful stat and I'm of the old school variety where my eyes tell me more than something like this (as I was just told I needed glasses so take me with a grain of salt lol). 

Expected goals definitely needs to be taken with a grain of salt... Some factors to consider:

-As your sample size increases, factors like shooting percentages become more about skill and less about luck. Some guys will always sit low on expected goals vs actual goals because they execute on more of the chances they get (Tage, Matthews, etc)

-The matchups you get greatly affect your %'s. If you're a shutdown guy you'll sit low.

-Your linemates play a big role. Clifton is a lot better this year now that he's not playing with Johnson. 

The only thing with Byram is, I can't think of any grains of salt that explain/justify his low career numbers. Age maybe? Still learning the position? 

Edited October 31 by JoeSchmoe

[Flashsabre]

So this thread isn’t about how good Bo Byram is or isn’t. it’s about people being pissy that Mitts was moved. Got it. Make the thread about that then.

Saying Byram isn’t a good player is just a bad take.  

 

[#freejame]

The same people complaining about a missing top-6 forward would be complaining about a missing top-4 defenseman. Trade out from our prospect pool and ship off a 1st. If the league still perceives us as a joke, it should have plenty of value. 

[sabremike]

2 hours ago, Flashsabre said:

So this thread isn’t about how good Bo Byram is or isn’t. it’s about people being pissy that Mitts was moved. Got it. Make the thread about that then.

Saying Byram isn’t a good player is just a bad take.  

 

At best he's nothing to write home about and was/is a horrible fit for this roster. The fact we stupidly blew a giant hole in our roster to get him is the icing on the cake.

[RochesterExpat]

18 hours ago, 7+6=13 said:

but when is enough, enough?

Clearly for some that answer isn’t 13 years.

[JoeSchmoe]

3 hours ago, Flashsabre said:

Saying Byram isn’t a good player is just a bad take.  

Did you look at the first post. He's got a horrendous relative expected goal %.

When he's on the ice the team expected goal % is 39.5%. 

Once he's off the ice the team expected goal % is 54.7%.

This is the worst relative gap on the team, by a fair margin.

Last year, if you combine his numbers between CO and BUF only Isak Rosen and Tyson Jost come out with a worse relative gap on the team.

Long story short, he gives up too many chances when he's on the ice and generates relatively few.

[msw2112]

19 hours ago, Porous Five Hole said:

I don’t think you’re wrong.  Hindsight is huge here.  
The concept of having another top four D (with four overall pedigree) for a guy who was expected to be a 3C after the long term extensions to Tage and Cozens made sense at the time.  But it turns out that Mitts would have solved our top six problem we have right now. And that’s your point. 

There’s certainly a drop off between Byram and whomever would have been in the lineup without him here (Bryson or Gilbert—yikes), but Byram has not proven to be enough to justify the trade so far. 
With that said, Byram has played 28 games so far in his Sabres career.  He can flip the script. I might be alone, but I’m still optimistic that the Byram trade won’t be something we regret when this team is fully formed. 

I did not like the Byram trade at the time, and I still don't like it now.  Mittelstadt was one of the Sabres' best players and seemed to be ascending.  Byram's skill set appeared/appears to be redundant to what we have in Dahlin, Power, and even to a small extent, Jokiharju:  good skaters/puck handlers who can move the puck up the ice and possess some offensive skill (Joki far less than Dahlin and Power, of course), but are not particularly physical or "defensive" defensemen.  Yes, Dahlin can be physical and is not afraid to mix it up, but he's still a skill player more than a physical player.

But, as the above quoted post correctly states/implies, Byram is a young player (a couple of years younger than Mittelstadt) with a lot of skill and a high draft pedigree who has only played a small number of games with the Sabres, so it's quite possible that he'll become a much more valuable asset in time.  Mittelstadt himself is an example of a player with skill and a high draft pedigree that took a few years to get there, and Byrum still has a chance to do that.  A little bit off topic, but so do guys like Power, Quinn, Benson, Kulich, etc. who have lots of skill and high draft pedigree but have not yet achieved a status in the league in line with their draft status.

Edited October 31 by msw2112

[SwampD]

12 hours ago, msw2112 said:

I did not like the Byram trade at the time, and I still don't like it now.  Mittelstadt was one of the Sabres' best players and seemed to be ascending.  Byram's skill set appeared/appears to be redundant to what we have in Dahlin, Power, and even to a small extent, Jokiharju:  good skaters/puck handlers who can move the puck up the ice and possess some offensive skill (Joki far less than Dahlin and Power, of course), but are not particularly physical or "defensive" defensemen.  Yes, Dahlin can be physical and is not afraid to mix it up, but he's still a skill player more than a physical player.

But, as the above quoted post correctly states/implies, Byram is a young player (a couple of years younger than Mittelstadt) with a lot of skill and a high draft pedigree who has only played a small number of games with the Sabres, so it's quite possible that he'll become a much more valuable asset in time.  Mittelstadt himself is an example of a player with skill and a high draft pedigree that took a few years to get there, and Byrum still has a chance to do that.  A little bit off topic, but so do guys like Power, Quinn, Benson, Kulich, etc. who have lots of skill and high draft pedigree but have not yet achieved a status in the league in line with their draft status.

I can, but I can’t believe that once again, the Sabres are the youngest team in league.