Speculation: New GM/Management group?

[Chainshot]

Yes they are still 2nd 3rd or 4th for nearly every single nationally televised game that isn’t the Sabres

We endeavor to persevere.

 

[May Day 10]

A "2nd" in Buffalo is a very small amount of households compared to a low rating in large markets.

 

[Chainshot]

A "2nd" in Buffalo is a very small amount of households compared to a low rating in large markets.

They mean 2nd as in 2nd most nationally per household. Not 2nd in just Buffalo.

 

[sabremike]

They mean 2nd as in 2nd most nationally per household. Not 2nd in just Buffalo.

In 2007 our playoff games vs the rags were on local cable. The WNY MSG feed not only outrated the NYM there were more actual viewers as well despite being in a fraction of the homes. It was a literal running gag that the tank Sabres were constantly on national broadcasts because they knew so many people in WNY would tune in that it would do a good rating by their standards.

 

[Chainshot]

In 2007 our playoff games vs the rags were on local cable. The WNY MSG feed not only outrated the NYM there were more actual viewers as well despite being in a fraction of the homes. It was a literal running gag that the tank Sabres were constantly on national broadcasts because they knew so many people in WNY would tune in that it would do a good rating by their standards.

Someone did some work on regions with heavy WNY expat populations like Ft. Myers/Naples Florida and how they would also have rating spikes when the Sabres play.

Wish the team would do something with it for a change but here we are.

 

[TageGod]

I'm not sure, teams with good analytics that make loads of mistakes will likely win less than the numbers predict. We have too many low iq players.

Those mistakes lead to the high danger data that they are still excelling at.

 

[HaNotsri]

Those mistakes lead to the high danger data that they are still excelling at.

I've never seen data based on how a chance is created (turnover, proximity to opposition). A contested shot in a high danger area is not the same as a getting to tee up in the same position.

 

[Jim Bob]

I've never seen data based on how a chance is created (turnover, proximity to opposition). A contested shot in a high danger area is not the same as a getting to tee up in the same position.

Clear Sight Analytics takes way more factors into account when figuring out xG and shot quality.

The challenge is that there data is behind a paywall for the most part.

A Guide to the Data of Clear Sight Analytics (CSA) - InGoal Magazine

An overview of how InGoal uses data from Clear Sight Analytics to better interpret goaltending performances

ingoalmag.com

The Importance of Shot Quality​

All goaltenders know that not all shots are created equal. An unscreened wrister from the point is far easier to stop than the same shot with a body in front. Add another body, then another player skating through the goalie’s line of sight as the shot is released, and what could have been an easy save turns into a tough stop.
CSA tracks 34 separate variables on every shot, making theirs the most comprehensive shot-quality tracking system available today. They not only mark where the shot originated, but also what type of shot it was (wrist, backhand, slap, snap), the goalie’s sightlines (screened by an opponent, their own player, both, whether the screen was moving), whether and how the puck was deflected (by their own player or an opponent), and more.
Even more importantly, CSA tracks pre-shot movement, including passes and carries, and the “flow” of the plays that precede each shot: a two-on-one where a player makes a long lateral pass to a teammate is very dangerous. It’s even more dangerous when another long lateral pass follows that, and CSA considers all this in its evaluation of shot quality. Whether a shot comes off the rush, low-to-high, a broken play, or a netback-situation like a wrap-around, CSA notes it.
Such rich detail has enabled CSA to determine how likely a given specific event is to result in a goal. Their massive and ever-expanding database of shots allows them to calculate the goal-likelihood of very specific types of play.
A shot coming off a two-on-one where two long lateral passes are made is, for example, more likely to end in a goal than a breakaway. An unscreened point shot scores on only a tiny fraction of attempts. Goalies know this intuitively, but having the data to confirm precisely how tough one save is likely to be over another is indispensable for anyone who cares about goaltending performance.

The Importance of Accuracy​

The aforementioned NHL play-by-play data is useful for many analytical purposes. Unfortunately, its inaccuracies render it less useful when considering smaller sample sizes (like goals scored on an individual goaltender, or saves made in very specific situations, like breakaways or wraparounds).
CSA uses its own tracking system, and verifies each shot. This means that problems in the NHL data with shot type and location are non-issues, so that the picture the data paints is much sharper. Further, CSA verifies that every shot they record is an actual shot on goal – the NHL does not. Also, because CSA employs a single tracking system for every team, issues like “rink bias” (where the shot-counters in a given arena tend to over- or under count shots and distances) disappear.
In addition to simple improvements in accuracy, there’s a meaningful philosophical difference between the way CSA counts shots, and the way the NHL does.
Normally, the league would count a long dump-in from the redline that happened to land on goal as a shot on goal. That’s fair, and technically true, but not very meaningful in terms of a goalie’s performance and abilities: “shots” like those do little more than inflate a goalie’s save percentage.
CSA simply doesn’t count those kinds of incidental, absolute “gimmie” shots as shots on goal. As a result of this decision, and of course more accurate counting of shots, CSA gets closer to the “true” save percentage of a given goaltender, and that number, league wide, is consistently lower than the NHL’s save percentage numbers.
To avoid confusion (because it’s count does not match the NHL’s count), CSA refers to each shot on goal they record as a “scoring chance” or just “chance.” This is very important to remember, so to be absolutely clear:
CSA calls the shots on goal it records “scoring chances” or just “chances.” If they determine a goaltender faced 30 shots on goal in a game, they would say the goaltender faced 30 chances.

 

[TageGod]

I've never seen data based on how a chance is created (turnover, proximity to opposition). A contested shot in a high danger area is not the same as a getting to tee up in the same position.

Well, we know Sabres mistakes usually cause odd man rushes and wide-open players.

 

[sabremike]

Well, we know Sabres mistakes usually cause odd man rushes and wide-open players.

Coincidentally the single best way to end up creating odd man rushes the other way is taking a shot and completely missing the target.

 

[TageGod]

Coincidentally the single best way to end up creating odd man rushes the other way is taking a shot and completely missing the target.

wait, the Sabres? Missing the net to kill a play/possession?

 

[HaNotsri]

Clear Sight Analytics takes way more factors into account when figuring out xG and shot quality.

The challenge is that there data is behind a paywall for the most part.

A Guide to the Data of Clear Sight Analytics (CSA) - InGoal Magazine

An overview of how InGoal uses data from Clear Sight Analytics to better interpret goaltending performances

ingoalmag.com

Yeah would be interesting to see, csa domain is down for me though.
I have nothing against analytics but when you are unsure about the data quality it becomes more of a curiosity.

 

[brian_griffin]

I like Forton as well. You can follow his logic and he's not acting like Adams.

Adams is a total imposter. His angry press conference is the most fake thing I've seen.

I must have a link to this!!!!

 

[Gabrielor]

It'll all be internal. No one wants to work for Terry.