Speculation: Sabres Roster Speculation - Pre-season 2023 Edition

[Jimmybarndoor2]

Yes you try to sign Kane
Only question is cost/term

 

[The Blunder Years]

Skinner has proven talent, but he should only be here as long as his contract has left. Sooner if a free buyout period happens or someone is willing to take on his contract. He swings too wildly season to season, he's on the wrong side of the aging curve. I am hoping with coaching and some role stability, that will improve. But the reality is we likely saw the best we will see from Skinner this last year.

Mittelstadt is far from proven. He's had one good half a season. He is unsigned beyond this season. I'm OK with giving him a reasonable mid term deal at this point, but, in reality, what is the point of having so many prospects if you aren't moving on from non core pieces when they get expensive?




I think you are incorrect in the volume of players. Of those prospects, we'd be fortunate if half are NHLers.

Your overall point is correct though, we have a large number of fowards on the roster/in the system. Turning that depth into improving an area of need is one of the basic tenants of asset management/roster building

Adams hasn't shown the willingness to do that, however.

I know my list is pretty subjective and I failed to make the point that every player will not reach their potential. However, I wanted to just show that we have an abundance of forwards and a move to acquire a superstar is both possible and almost necessary.

 

[Dubi Doo]

I fall firmly in the 'don't sign Kane' boat. I want some snarl and defensive chops in the bottom-6 if anything at all.

 

[Fjordsen]

Kane may not be the right type of player, but then they should have signed someone like Tatar and Adams didn't do it. On the other hand, Kane fits the bill on many other counts.

I'm not against Kane, but I won't shout that you must sign him. I'm sure Adams and Granato know Kane better than all of us and whether they need him or not.

 

[Irie]

It's like you fundamentally don't understand that these are just a counting stat like any other. It's like saying goals are a worthless stat because they are without context and they count the number of goals the player scored, not the players goal scoring ability. There's nothing inconsistent about the stats themselves changing from team to team, season to season or system to system or any other variation because players performances can change in all of those circumstances.

I'm simplifying here, but the offensive stats count things like shot attempts, shots on goal, scoring chances, cross seam passes, rebound chances, the distance/location from the net those events occur, etc and converts it into a single number. The Defensive stats are basically the inverse of your opponents offensive stat.

So when Cozens has a bad def war score, it basically means that when he was on the ice and the opponent had the puck they got an above average number of chances to score from more dangerous areas of the ice.

The player charts are absolutely not "just a counting stat". They are based on algorithms that compare results from different players on different teams in different roles playing in different systems and draw conclusions by assigning rankings without an ounce of context and ARE implying a narrative with their rankings.

WAR charts are designed to measure similar situations for evaluations, and they work well for sports were players' individual performances are more isolated,(pitchers, QBs, etc), but are often extremely misleading in a purely team sport like hockey where the game control is much less reliant on individuals.(the McDavids, Crosby's, and MacKinnons aside).

Cozens' lines gave up a lot of goals last season, but watching and evaluating the plays, rarely was he the primary reason the puck ended up in the back of the Sabres net.

 

[joshjull]

It's like you fundamentally don't understand that these are just a counting stat like any other. A It's like saying goals are a worthless stat because they are without context and they count the number of goals the player scored, not the players goal scoring ability. There's nothing inconsistent about the stats themselves changing from team to team, season to season or system to system or any other variation because players performances can change in all of those circumstances.

I'm simplifying here, but the offensive stats count things like shot attempts, shots on goal, scoring chances, cross seam passes, rebound chances, the distance/location from the net those events occur, etc and converts it into a single number. The Defensive stats are basically the inverse of your opponents offensive stat.

So when Cozens has a bad def war score, it basically means that when he was on the ice and the opponent had the puck they got an above average number of chances to score from more dangerous areas of the ice.

No its not. WAR is an attempt to come up with a single number using a model that captures the total of a players value vs a replacement level player (Oversimplification). Which itself has various definitions depending on model.

Goals, assists and points are straight forward, objective and INDIVIDUAL stats. They're not trying to do anything other than measure how many goals or assists, etc a player had. As opposed to trying to encapsulate the entire value of a player like WAR is.

WAR has value. But too many think it’s an objective individual stat like goals, assists, etc. Its not But you seem to think it is based on how you’re using it.

In general I think it’s wishful thinking they will ever come up with a single stat that tells the entire value of a player. There are some in the analytics community that wonder this as well. But there is definitely value in working towards it.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Chad is a quick one. In response to the idea that the fans who don’t want Kane is just the twitter folks…chad asks the twitter folks

 

[Chainshot]

Chad is a quick one. In response to the idea that the fans who don’t want Kane is just the twitter folks…chad asks the twitter folks

I mean, he could go into the corner bars around South Buffalo and ask the folks sitting in their usual seat at the end of the bar for information on hockey. They always have great ideas about the game. Really.

 

[JLewyB]

I mean, he could go into the corner bars around South Buffalo and ask the folks sitting in their usual seat at the end of the bar for information on hockey. They always have great ideas about the game. Really.

I feel like thats what the other guy did that Chad was responding to. Lol

 

[Reddawg]

If PK will take a 1yr $3m deal to come home, by all means. If he won’t, seek more term/money elsewhere.

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

No its not. WAR is an attempt to come up with a single number using a model that captures the total of a players value vs a replacement level player (Oversimplification). Which itself has various definitions depending on model.

Goals, assists and points are straight forward, objective and INDIVIDUAL stats. They're not trying to do anything other than measure how many goals or assists, etc a player had. As opposed to trying to encapsulate the entire value of a player like WAR is.

WAR has value. But too many think it’s an objective individual stat like goals, assists, etc. Its not But you seem to think it is based on how you’re using it.

In general I think it’s wishful thinking they will ever come up with a single stat that tells the entire value of a player. There are some in the analytics community that wonder this as well. But there is definitely value in working towards it.

my yearly post where I mention that while a physics major the professors used to make fun of sports metrics as the worst thing to happen to statistical analysis in recorded history

 

[NotABadPeriod]

I don't despise the idea of signing Kane, I just don't think Kane moves the needle for this team. Offense was not the problem last year, and it won't be the problem this year.

 

[old kummelweck]

Does Patrick Kane fit the culture?

 

[CaliSabresfan24]

 

[TehDoak]

I would think if Adams is checking in on the availability of Zegras and has interest in Kane it would be because Adams isn't just thinking playoffs, he's thinking Cup. There'd have to be a move in play to move a bit of salary while bringing in a true 3 / 4 d man, (maybe a Pesce type move).

Interesting times for Sabres faithful to be sure

No one, and I mean no one, is thinking cup. Nor Zegras or Kane get us there. (or both)

If he was seriously going after Hellebyuck to resolve our biggest issue in net, you MIGHT be able to make that argument.

 

[Matt Ress]

No one, and I mean no one, is thinking cup. Nor Zegras or Kane get us there. (or both)

If he was seriously going after Hellebyuck to resolve our biggest issue in net, you MIGHT be able to make that argument.

It seemed to me that he was hinting that it's not worth the cost and contract for helley according to his team's analysis. Maybe I misinterpreted.

 

[Fjordsen]

No f***ing way

 

[Jim Bob]

I’ll take PKane on a 1 year deal as a UFA over trading for Zegras and signing him to a monster contract.

 

[Aladyyn]

If Ducks value Zegras at 3-4M per year... he can't be *that* expensive to pry away right?

 

[thewookie1]

While Kane isn't exactly the type of player we need, he's clutch and has a wealth of playoff experience to draw upon. Plus, if he's willing to take a 1 year deal and play a conditioning stint in Rochester I can't see how it hurts us.

 

[zuikan]

There's plenty of forward talent in the pipeline. Stay on course developing them. Acquiring defensive liabilties is pointless, and would be demoralizing. We aren't winning the cup this year unless Levi stands on his head anyway.

 

[Washed Up 29YearOld]

F*** Zegras. He only had 6 more points than CM who some are clamoring to leave town and when I point out they're on a similar level I get 8 laugh emojis in the trade forum. F*** Zegras. Overrated. Never had more than 65 points. Ducks fans are disillusioned.

 

[joshjull]

I don't feel strongly one way or the other with Kane.

 

[KrakenSabresMike]

We have almost 9 mil in cap space - a 1 yr low cost flyer on Kane costs zilch - if he has a rebound year… Could be a big boon for the team! if not, what’s the real cost? If for some reason they tank, despite all reason point to the opposite… He probably still has some value at the deadline. Really there’s no downside.

 

[old kummelweck]