Predicting the Buffalo Sabres 2020 Roster

Every offseason I feel like I can write an interesting article on the Buffalo Sabres’ roster construction. This is the type of thing I thoroughly enjoy. It is a giant puzzle that has multiple pieces. Unlike a traditional puzzle, there are multiple ways the pieces could fit together to accomplish the same goal. Some combinations will probably look better than others but there is no exact solution to this problem.

Once again, I am going to try to discuss what my thought process would be if Kevyn Adams gave me a call and asked for my assistance (Kevyn, if you happen to be reading this, my contact info is on the website). Here, I am going to go through all the moves I would consider, in order of priority. Ultimately, I will come to some sort of roster that I think would give the team the best chance to be a playoff contender next season. I think getting there is possible but it will take some aggressive moves and some financial commitment.

Re-sign Sam Reinhart, Dominik Kahun, Victor Olofsson

Outside of Jack Eichel and Jeff Skinner, these three forwards may be the next three most important forwards for the Sabres next season, especially if they fail to add anyone significant at the position. The top priority HAS to be getting them under contract for next season. All three are scheduled to be restricted free agents with arbitration rights. Kahun and Olofsson are both young forwards who have shown promise in a limited sample of games (Kahun only ended up playing six games in Buffalo). 

Personally, I would look to sign Olofsson to a long-term contract. He has the type of shot that is going to allow him to be an effective goal scorer even as other abilities may decline. If Olofsson produces anything like he did in his rookie season and you sign him to a short-term deal, you might be pricing yourself out of him very quickly. The hope has to be to capitalize on the small sample size and flat cap to get Olofsson signed to a value contract. The problem is the team needs to be judicious with their spending as they have numerous areas of their roster where they need to improve. Striking a balance between spending more now and saving later will be critical. I have budgeted $4.5M for Olofsson. I would assume that would be enough to get him signed for some term.

Kahun is someone who is on his third organization in his only two years of playing in North America. He has shown promise but also doesn’t possess any unique skill that would make him impossible to replace if his future contracts start to get expensive. Unlike Olofsson, I would look to get a short-term deal done. For him, I have budgeted $2M, which is probably erring on the high end but that would be the correct way to go through this exercise. Underbudgeting would allow me to spend more money than I have. Being aggressive on the contracts would leave some wiggle room to either offer someone more or give the team cap space to work with through the season.

Sam Reinhart is probably the most interesting player in this group. I fully expect his name to be brought up in trade rumors this offseason. If the team is looking to make a major shakeup, he is one of the few players remaining in the organization that fit the bill. To me, Reinhart is not “untouchable” but a trade offer for him would need to be overwhelming. I am still not completely out on the idea of Reinhart playing center and would like to see him get a run as the second line center and play with good wingers. Even if you view Reinhart solely as a winger, it is undeniable that he is at worst a second-line winger and can more than hold his own on the top line. 

If you decide to trade Reinhart, you are basically looking for a Reinhart-like player in return. I think the only way you can trade Reinhart is if you get: 1) A clear-cut center to play on the second-line (almost should be capable of playing on the top line) or 2) A cheaper RW who can perform at a near identical level. Considering neither return is very likely, I think you are just spinning your wheels and gambling whatever player you bring in to replace Reinhart has similar chemistry with Eichel. As an aside, you already have a superstar player who has to be getting frustrated with the losing, I’m not sure trading his best friend on the team is going to stave off the frustration boiling over.

My goal is to lock Reinhart up to a long-term contract. I’ve set aside $7M to make that happen.

For these three restricted free agents, I would look to sign both Olofsson and Reinhart to long-term contracts. For Kahun, I would go short-term. For the three players, I have allocated $13.5M of cap space. To me, these are the no-brainer moves and with this business out of the way, I now have $20.5M in cap space to retool the rest of the roster.

Address 2^nd Line Center

How many times will I have to write about this until the Sabres get it right? There are a couple ways the team could address the position. If it were me, I would strongly consider giving Reinhart a look as the 2^nd line center. If he can handle the responsibilities, it would significantly balance the rest of the roster AND be the least costly option (both in terms of dollars and potentially assets). The problem is there simply isn’t enough data to form a conclusion that we can feel confident in. The last time Reinhart played center regularly was on the third-line between Seth Griffith and Benoit Pouliot. Assuming my memory is correct, those are not players that provide the best case study on whether Reinhart could be successful at center.  

Having said that, I highly doubt this will be the route Buffalo takes. Instead, I expect them to once again look to unrestricted free agency (UFA) or the trade market for someone under contract or to acquire the rights to a restricted free agent (RFA). I went through every player who I could envision being a possibility to acquire and coded them as green (go), yellow (proceed with caution), or red (avoid) based off how much better their team performed when they were on the ice, both in terms of shot quality and quantity. Although some consideration should be given to point production, I don’t think it should be the main factor for Buffalo. Whoever the team brings in is going to play with at least one of Jeff Skinner, Sam Reinhart, and Victor Olofsson. 

Ideally, the team adds a true second-line center but from my list of available options, I don’t see many realistic options to fill that role. If they can’t land one, fit becomes important. I think there are a couple of ways to approach fit. I think it is likely Kruger rolls Skinner on the second-line again. You need to find someone to compliment him. I do think Skinner’s two-way game is a little underrated. I don’t think he is a defensive liability by any means. That said, he also isn’t a defensive stalwart either. 

To compliment Skinner, I think the team needs to either find a creative offensive player and give the line favorable deployment or find a skater who can fly or find a responsible defensive center who would allow Skinner to “cheat” to offense. I am going to present the options I believe are realistic possibilities for the Sabres to acquire.

One consideration the Sabres have to discuss is the long-term outlook at the position. How high are they on Cozens taking over that role? Do they view him taking over after a season or further down the road? Obviously having an abundance of players who can fill the role of 2C effectively isn’t a problem but are you going to be comfortable potentially having $25M – $30M committed to three centers down the road? Are you comfortable with one playing on the third line or on the wing instead? This doesn’t preclude them from making any move but it does, in my opinion, impact the price they should be willing to pay and what players they might target.

Ideal Targets

If I were Buffalo, my first inquiries (in order) would be checking the availability of Anthony Cirelli, Phillip Danault, Andrew Copp, and Derek Stepan. 

Anthony Cirelli

I don’t know how available Cirelli would be but at some point, someone in Tampa will have to be the odd man out. Cirelli was good this year but borderline elite the year before. In the past two seasons, one of the best teams in the league did a better job controlling shot quality while Cirelli was on the ice. The Lightning also improved their shot differential last season but just about broke even this year when Cirelli was on the ice versus off. If available, I think the Sabres have to consider including Cozens in a trade for him. I would offer Colin Miller, Will Borgen, Casey Mittelstadt, and 2020 8^thoverall. I would assume Tampa would have their eyes on Jokiharju or Cozens. Acquiring Cirelli instantly gives Buffalo one of the best, young 1-2 punches down the middle. Because Eichel and Cirelli would fill the first two lines for a long-time, it makes parting with Cozens possible but still not desirable. I’m not sure parting with Jokiharju here would be the best move.

Likelihood: Low

Phillip Danault

When I was originally compiling my list, I didn’t include Danault because I didn’t think Montreal would have interest in moving him. However, after reading some of the reports out of Montreal this past week, it sounds like Danault could be more available than I originally anticipated. He would be an ideal target for Buffalo. I think a trade for him would have to come with an extension. On one hand, Danault is coming off an elite season where he should have been a Selke finalist, if not winner, so he might be looking to capitalize on that and parlay it into a nice contract. On the other, he has not consistently put up the numbers that traditionally lead to significant contracts. If you can get Danault for a reasonable price in a trade and sign him to a new contract, he would be a perfect addition for Buffalo. He would be a surefire 2^nd center for the next couple years. As he ages and Cozens begins to step into his prime, Danault is an elite two-way player who could easily slide down to the third-line and play a little more of a defensive role. If Danault can be traded for with an extension, the trigger has to be pulled.

I do not know how different players in general but especially prospects are valued by different teams in the NHL. If I’m Buffalo I look to offer Mathias Samuelsson, Rasmus Asplund, and Tage Thompson and see what Montreal thinks. Montreal might value one of those prospects highly or might prefer another. I would be hesitant to include Jacob Bryson but I think Samuelsson could be swapped for another defensive prospect. I think this trade partnership makes a lot of sense but them being in the same division makes me a little less confident of the teams making something happen. 

Likelihood: Moderate

Andrew Copp

The downside with Copp is he hasn’t been a major point producer and has mainly skated on the third line in Winnipeg. He did spend some time playing an expanded role during the restart and seemed to be perfectly fine. Pairing him with Skinner would allow Skinner some more freedom offensively and also give Skinner a center who can play with some speed. Winnipeg has been a better team with Copp on the ice for the past three seasons. I don’t see why the Sabres couldn’t count on him to help control play. Buffalo and Winnipeg have been connected as trade partners for over a year now. Is this the offseason where they finally pull off a trade?

I question how available Copp is. Winnipeg should look to swap a forward for a defenseman this offseason. I question if moving a quality center on a good contract is the way to go. To me, them moving a winger seems more likely. 

Much like Danult, Copp is a player who probably could handle the second-line until Cozens is ready to take that role. He could then move to the third line and be a great depth option. Contract wise, Copp probably would be reasonable as he will be arbitration eligible when his current contract expires. I would offer Ristolainen and Asplund for Copp. I would also consider Mittelstadt or Thompson instead of Asplund but I might need a little more in return.

Likelihood: Slightly more than Danault

Derek Stepan

Stepan will likely be available and I don’t think the assets needed would be too much either. Stepan didn’t move the needle much in Arizona either positively or negatively and is coming off a year with low point production. However, Stepan is still good enough to fill the role the Sabres would need him to and playing with Skinner might give him his best winger since his time with the Rangers. Stepan is probably on the wrong-side of the age curve but also is the type of player who seems like he could adapt if he loses some speed. There might be a little added motivation for him with UFA looming after next season. Lighting things up could pave the way for another nice contract.

I might like the idea of Stepan more than other observers. I think he would make the most sense from a pure asset management standpoint. First, he fills the needed role next season. Second, he should be fairly inexpensive to acquire. Third, he should serve as a good bridge to Cozens, who I think should be slotted into that spot for the 2021-2022 season. Finally, if the team once again finds themselves outside of the playoffs, Stepan probably could be traded at the deadline, possibly for a profit of assets. I think a 2^nd round pick gets it done. I also could see this trade evolving into something bigger.

Likelihood: Fairly

Other Options

I don’t think any of the solutions presented above are perfect as the perfect scenario is Dylan Cozens or Casey Mittelstadt coming in and grabbing hold of the position. However, going into the season with that as the plan again would be gross negligence. The next tier of solutions is a little more flawed than those above. Here I look at Erik Haula, Colin Wilson, Vlad Namestnikov, or Craig Smith who are UFAs, Dylan Strome, who is an RFA and might become a UFA with no qualifying offer. I think the most realistic trade option here is Alex Wennberg. 

I will not go as much into detail with these players but give a quick overview of why they could make sense. Craig Smith is probably the most attractive option but I am not sure how I feel about playing him at center. I could the Sabres signing him and it working out like Marcus Johansson where he is fine but plays out of his comfort zone. I don’t mind the idea of signing him but I don’t see him as an answer at 2C. Of these options, Wennberg probably is going to be the “safest” option as he has shown he can be a shot driver in Columbus but the quality of those shots has lacked. However, the point production has not been there and at $4.9M for three more seasons, I’m not sure that’s a contract I want to take on. I’m not sure I see Namestnikov as a fit in Buffalo. 

That leaves us with Haula, Wilson, and Strome. Haula and Wilson have had injury concerns. Of the two, I’d much rather roll the dice on Haula. Wilson would be low on my list. Strome is most interesting. First, he might not be as available as I think. If he is, putting him with Skinner would likely create a sort of glass cannon line. Strome has done better suppressing shots this past season but his value has largely come from his offensive generation. If the team went this route, they would certainly have to construct a good defensive line to help with matchups. 

Most likely other option: Erik Haula

Second Line Center Solution: Buffalo acquires Derek Stepan and the rights to goalie Adin Hill for 2020 2^nd round pick 

Sort out the Blueline

The Sabres currently have four right-handed defensemen under their control, Rasmus Ristolainen, Henri Jokiharju, and Colin Miller are under contract for next season while Brandon Montour is an RFA, who the team can retain by extending a qualifying offer to. The Sabres have $34M in cap space but I have just spent $20M of my cap space, leaving me with $14M to go about improving the rest of my roster. I would anticipate Montour’s next contract coming in around $4M. The team can’t go into next season with Ristolainen, Montour, and Miller accounting for over $13M, and one (or Jokiharju) will have to play on the left side. The Sabres will not get any better by having this happen again.

If I were working in the front office, I would go about determining who the odd man out should be in a logical manner. First, Jokiharju is the player I am least interested in trading. He is young, cost-controlled, and has shown he can be a positive play driver. I wouldn’t say he is untouchable but someone would have to blow me away with an offer to have me move him. That leaves us with Miller, Ristolainen, and Montour. 

I think an argument could be made for any of the three so it really comes down to fit and value for me. With Rasmus Dahlin coming into his third pro season, it is time to make him your unquestioned top-pair defenseman. The priority has to be putting him in the best position to succeed. If the team had more left-handed defensemen, I think an argument could be made to have Dahlin play on the right side but with a plethora of right-shot defensemen already, that makes little sense. Out of Montour, Miller, Ristolainen, and Jokiharju, Dahlin performed pretty well with the first two so one of those should have the inside track to play with Dahlin. Let me be clear, under no circumstances should Dahlin and Ristolainen be the team’s top pair next season. They haven’t shown the ability to spend more time in the offensive zone than their own end when paired together. Last season, Jokiharju was actually the worst partner for Dahlin so counting on that to work would be a risk that probably doesn’t need to be taken. I lean toward rolling Dahlin with Montour. They struggled with shot quality as a pair but were absolutely dominant in controlling the shot differential. Miller and Dahlin were very average together. I think there is a much better chance of Dahlin-Montour catching fire than Dahlin-Miller. 

Let’s pencil in a first pair of Dahlin-Montour. I think the chatter of Buffalo having some interest in Pietrangelo makes sense as they really could use a bona fide top RD to pair with Dahlin. However, unless someone unexpected becomes available, I just don’t see how the team can justify adding additional cost at a position where they have options already instead of spending to improve the roster elsewhere.

Next, we move onto the second pair. Here, we are currently looking at McCabe being the option on the left side and one of Jokiharju, Miller, or Ristolainen as the partner. Ristolainen and McCabe did not work last season so I don’t think that makes much sense. Out of Jokiharju and Miller, McCabe and Jokiharju did the most to improve the Sabres’ performance while paired together. That would then leave Miller and Ristolainen who played almost 60 minutes together last season and were an absolute disaster. To me, one of Miller or Ristolainen would need to be moved. I think Ristolainen will be viewed as more valuable by other teams around the league. I also would much rather shed his $5.4M cap hit than Miller’s $3.875M hit. Right now, I have penciled a blueline of:

Dahlin-Montour

McCabe-Jokiharju

Bryson-Miller

I think Jacob Bryson will be a really quality NHL defenseman and I believe he finished higher on the team’s organizational depth chart than Lawrence Pilut last season, which is one of the reasons I believe Pilut left for the KHL. These names are penciled in for a reason because I would be looking to see if there are options for improvement. 

I think the Sabres would be fine if they went into the season with that as their blueline. However, I think there are improvements that can be made. First, McCabe is entering the final year of his contract and will be a UFA next offseason. I’m not convinced he is a player that is part of a long-term solution. I would be very open to trading him this offseason and would definitely move him at the deadline if the team is out of playoff contention again. I also think there are a couple of current UFAs that would make sense to bring in on a short deal, allowing Bryson to start in the AHL and then be promoted during the season. Here, I would be targeting Brenden Dillon or Jon Merrill. However, the player I am most interested, who seems to be available is Vince Dunn from St. Louis. I might also inquire on the Islander’s Devon Toews. 

I think Dunn would be a tremendous pickup for Buffalo. His point production was not there last season but he has consistently been a tremendous possession and shot quality driver in his career. Sabres fans can think of him as a left-handed Henri Jokiharju. I am not sure exactly what St. Louis might be looking for to move Dunn so my offer in this exercise would be Jake McCabe, rights to Ryan Johnson, and Rasmus Asplund. In this case, St. Louis might want Buffalo to take Gunnarsson back. If I do that, I wouldn’t be happy to give up both Johnson and Asplund but I also am not letting that deter me from acquiring Dunn.

My other move on defense is to inquire on Merill and Brenden Dillon to see if I could sign one to a short contract. However, I have bigger moves still planned so I am not sure if one of those will be able to be fit in. If something else falls through, I might circle back. You will notice I haven’t addressed Ristolainen yet but know he will be traded shortly.

Trade: Buffalo acquires Vince Dunn for Jake McCabe, Ryan Johnson, and Rasmus Asplund

I have budgeted $4M to sign Dunn. I would hope it would be enough to lock him into a long-term deal. With Dunn coming off a season where he didn’t put up a lot of points, the team should be able capitalize and sign Dunn to a value contract. Dunn is a RFA without arbitration rights so the team could conceivably acquire him and play “hard ball” with his contract to save salary cap space.

Address Forward Group

My forward group for Buffalo is looking better with the acquisition of Derek Stepan but it is time for the team to get aggressive. Currently, here is how my lines would shake out

Olofsson – Eichel – Reinhart

Skinner – Stepan – Kahun

M. Johansson – Cozens – Thompson

Hole – Lazar – Okposo

First, I am bringing back Curtis Lazar and Tage Thompson. Lazar, I am giving a little raise to $800,000 and Thompson will get his qualifying offer of $874,125. Thompson showed glimpses of major improvement before getting injured late in his first NHL game of the season. With him still being waiver exempt, there is little risk in retaining him for another season. I am also open to including him in a trade if the opportunity presents itself but I am not counting on it. Lazar was a good fit last season and can work well on the 4^th line as a center and could move up in the lineup in event of injury. Much of what I said about Thompson also applies to Mittelstadt. The difference between the two is I anticipate Mittelstadt having more trade value.

I think Buffalo would be competitive with the above forward group but as I previously said, I would want to get aggressive and I think the moves I have made so far allow me some flexibility now. I have multiple forward targets that I think could slot into my forward group throughout the lineup. I break the UFA wingers I would have interest in into the following tiers:

1. Mikael Granlund, Tyler Toffoli
2. Craig Smith, Evgeni Dadonov
3. Hoffman, Fast
4. Maroon, Ennis, Nosek, Simmonds

Some other players that are on my radar are Andres Athanasiou, Chandler Stephenson, Jesper Bratt, Ryan Donato, Ryan Hartman, Nikolaj Ehlers, Mason Appleton, Alex Killorn, Jack Roslovic, and Johnny Gaudreau. I am realistically looking for right-wing solutions so Kahun can slide down to the third line and I don’t have to count on Thompson on being a regular. Since I have already traded away this year’s 2nd round pick, Ryan Johnson, Rasmus Asplund, and Jake McCabe my well is starting to run dry of assets that teams likely value enough to get an impactful player for while also leaving some sort of prospect pool. I still have all my 1st round picks, all my 2022 picks (less a 5th), and my 2^nd, 4^th, 6^th, and 7^th picks in 2021. As far as players go, I have Marcus Johansson, Kahun, Ristolainen, Mittelstadt, Thompson, Cozens, and all my defensive prospects outside Ryan Johnson. If I’m going to move Cozens, it has to be for a young player who has already established themselves as a really good player. Few teams are going to be willing to make that type of trade so I am not planning on moving Cozens. The other players are all firmly in play.

Trading Ristolainen

Last offseason we wrote about how the team should trade Ristolainen only to see them keep him through the season. With Botterill fired and Adams taking over, the time is now. Winnipeg has been the logical trade partner for over a year now. It’s time to get that trade done. If I were Buffalo, I’d strongly consider doing Ristolainen for Andrew Copp one for one and then use the extra cap space elsewhere. However, I don’t see how Winnipeg could make that work from a salary standpoint. Copp is a really good player signed to a very reasonable contract. With them having many other really good players who they are paying more, I think they have to look to move equal or greater money in a trade. Maybe a swap of McCabe for Copp could make sense. Instead, I will re-visit the player who has been most connected in a Ristolainen trade, Nikolaj Ehlers.

Getting Ehlers would be a major coup for Buffalo. Ehlers is coming off an elite season but because Winnipeg has a plethora of good, young forwards who are going to take up a significant amount of their salary cap, someone is likely going to have to be traded to bring in some defensive help. Buffalo would go from a question at 2^nd line RW to being in the discussion for the best top-six wingers in the league with Olofsson, Skinner, Ehlers, and Reinhart. I don’t think Ristolainen alone is enough to get Ehlers at this point. I am more than happy to include Mittelstadt, Thompson, and/or possibly one of my remaining defensive prospects. I would not give up my 8^th overall pick but I would be open to swapping it for Winnipeg’s tenth overall. 

Trade: Buffalo acquires Nikolaj Ehlers, 2020 10^th overall in exchange for Rasmus Ristolainen, Casey Mittelstadt, Marcus Davidsson, 2020 8^th overall, 2020 4^th round pick

I am starting to build a quality roster but I think I can improve even more. Here is where my forward group now stands:

Olofsson – Eichel – Reinhart

Skinner – Stepan – Ehlers

M. Johansson – Cozens – Kahun

Hole – Lazar – Okposo

I think this forward group is solid but I also want to have an eye on the Seattle expansion draft. Right now, I would have Cozens exempt and would protect Olofsson, Eichel, Reinhart, Skinner, Ehlers, Kahun, and probably Thompson. I’m fine with leaving Thompson unprotected if I can bring in a player that will have more of an immediate impact. I have had my eyes on Craig Smith. He would bring some versatility to this lineup and if one of my other moves falls through, he can slot in that position instead. I have budgeted $4M for Smith and would go more if I can’t pull off one of my other forward moves. Signing Smith now moves either Kahun or Johansson to the fourth line. It also puts me in a precarious cap situation. In order to bring in Smith, I am trading Marcus Johansson. I am looking to replenish some of my draft capital in return. Minnesota and Nashville are two teams that could make sense but the only limitation I have is Johansson’s 10 team no-trade list.

Signing: Craig Smith 4 years; $4M AAV

Trade: Buffalo acquires 2020 4^th round pick from Nashville for Marcus Johansson

I am not actively seeking to trade Johansson unless I have to for salary cap purposes. I am perfectly fine going into the season with him as long as I can move him back to left wing, his position of comfort. I think he would be a very good fit alongside Dylan Cozens. However, I see an opportunity to improve my team now and in the future so I am moving Johansson to do so. If Smith is a good fit, he gets protected in the expansion draft. If not, he becomes exposed. My forward group now looks like this:

Olofsson – Eichel – Reinhart

Skinner – Stepan – Ehlers

Kahun – Cozens – C. Smith

Hole – Lazar – Okposo

At this point, I probably could plug just about anyone into the open fourth line spot. I might consider Arttu Ruotsalainen at center with Lazar and Okposo on the wing. However, I believe I still have a hole in my lineup and that is on the power play. About halfway through last season, the Sabres moved Reinhart to the perimeter and Ristolainen to the net front on their top power play unit. They also really lacked a net front presence on their second unit. Regardless of whether the Sabres move Reinhart back to net front, they still would benefit from someone to fill that role on their second unit. I also think it is important to acknowledge the type of hockey the Sabres’ fourth line is going to play. Last season, Kyle Okposo played with Johan Larsson and Zemgus Girgensons. They were incredibly effective because they played a physical, grinding game and were certainly not flying up and down the ice. Lazar certainly has some speed but Okposo is not going to be able to keep up with two guys flying up and down the ice. 

I look at how Vegas has built their fourth line as inspiration while also keeping in mind I could use a power play net front guy. Some fans reading this might think this idea is crazy but I would look to bring Wayne Simmonds back on the fourth line or might look at Pat Maroon instead. I have budgeted $2M to fill this role. If I end up having to pay more somewhere else, this becomes a luxury and someone on a deal that pays them less than $1M might be inserted. I think from a pure numbers standpoint, Maroon makes more sense. Our contract predictions have him a slightly less expensive option and I think he is a more impactful player. This season is the first time in five seasons that Maroon’s team has not been better with him on the ice than when he was on the bench. The concern with him is he does appear to be trending downward so I would not be willing to give him more than one year. The same would be true of Simmonds. 

Signing: Pat Maroon 1 year; $1.5M AAV

Goaltending

I have acquired Aden Hill from Arizona along with Derek Stepan. Is he going to be an upgrade on Hutton? Possibly. If so, I would bury Hutton in the minors. If not, Hill can go to the minors or possibly be moved to another team. Grabbing Hill also sets the team up to be in a good position for the expansion draft. I know fans were frustrated with Carter Hutton last season. Linus Ullmark also hasn’t shown to be a completely dominant force either. Although an upgrade to the goalie position should be considered, I think anything more than a marginal upgrade would be too costly. The only reason I am making a significant investment this offseason is if I am not confident in a long-term solution of Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen/Ullmark/Eric Portillo. In that case, I might look at acquiring Tristian Jarry or Casey Desmith from Pittsburghs or Alexandar Georgiyev from the Rangers.

I am very hesitant to acquire another stopgap goalie like Hutton was intended to be out of fear of ending up in a similar situation in another two years. I’m going to operate that I have improved my roster enough where a poor goaltending performance can be overcome. The only way I make a change at goalie is if I fail to significantly improve my roster in other places. 

Final Roster

Below is my final roster. Please note that players whose names are red would be protected in the expansion draft while green ones are exempt.

I think this team looks tremendous on paper. The issue will be the salary cap and whether the organization will be willing to spend this type of money. The roster I have constructed leaves very little wiggle room for extras. The first cost-cutting option is not spending $2M for Maroon or Simmonds. By replacing them with a minimal player like CJ Smith, there is plenty of cap space. Another option would be to sign Olofsson to a one-year contract that would come in way under $4.5M. One concern that I would have is fitting Dahlin’s next contract into this roster with a flat cap. Next season, you would have Stepan’s $6.5M and the $2M fourth line money coming off the books. I also try to get Seattle to take one of Okposo, Montour, or Miller to free up more space. A little more movement might have to be done but I think it is workable. I would rather have too many good players than be devoid of talent. As long as that happens, the team should be able to trade someone to clear space and replenish assets. It’s time for the Sabres to get aggressive and this roster would do just that. 

Stats are courtesy of naturalstattrick.com and contract data is courtesy of cap friendly.com.

KYLE STICH is the Director of AFP Analytics.  In addition, Mr. Stich is a tax specialist and Director of Operations at AFP Consulting LLC, whose clientele include professional athletes performing services on three separate continents. Mr. Stich earned his Master of Science in Sport Management with a Concentration in Sport Analytics from Columbia University in 2017. He earned his undergraduate degrees in Accounting and Sport Management from St. John Fisher College in 2015, where he has served as an adjunct professor teaching Sport Finance and Baseball Analytics.

Grading Buffalo Sabres’ GM Jason Botterill: Part 2, Signings

The Buffalo Sabres recently fired General Manager Jason Botterill. The decision to do so has come as a shock after they previously announced he would be retained. I personally haven’t thought that he has done a great job but I also don’t know if going through another regime change, especially given all of the uncertainty in the world right now would be the best course of action for the organization. In this article series, I am going to go through every single move he has made since taking over the organization and grade them. I am going to break the series into four parts: NHL trades, NHL signings, the draft, and minor league management, and overall organizational management. I will provide an individual grade for every move, a grade for each segment, and finally an overall grade.

Before I begin grading, I should set my rubric and the guidelines on how I will arrive at the grade for every move. A good general manager needs to do two things well. First, they need to make good decisions. Second, they need to have good results. In my opinion, when grading a general manager, more weight should be placed on the decision-making process as it needs to be sound to lead to positive results. That said, there are some results that can be predicted and it is a decision maker’s job to do so. As I work through my grading, I will do my best to be objective. I will consider everything from advanced metrics to the current situation of the team. Ultimately though, these will be my opinions that I will try to back with reason.

The second part of the series will look at the signings he made during his tenure. I have discussed the signings in chronological order from oldest to most recent.

Victor Antipin, 1 year $925,000 AAV

In the first month and a half on the job, Botterill added three new defensemen, Nathan Beaulieu and Marco Scandella via trade, and Victor Antipin via free agency from the KHL. Antipin did not work out in Buffalo. A lot of the blame for that could fall on Phil Housely and the rest of the coaching staff. Botterill probably didn’t help the matter either but this grade is mainly based on the thought process and decision-making in signing Antipin. Antipin was a young defenseman who had been excelling in the KHL. He was another puck mover that the Sabres lacked. It seems like a lot of the leg work had been done by Botterill’s predecessor, Tim Murray, but much like the expansion draft trade, Botterill still had to execute and complete the signing. 

The idea of Antipin was tremendous. His signing had virtually no risk and a significant reward if things worked out. The signing of Antipin was Botterill’s best shot at finding a young, cheap, immediate impact puck-moving defenseman that could have slotted into the top four sooner than later. Antipin never got a fair shake in Buffalo but that doesn’t mean the signing was bad though it does prevent me from giving this signing an “A.”

Grade: B+

Linus Ullmark, 2 years, $750,000 AAV

This was a great signing for Botterill. It was pretty obvious that Ullmark would be in the NHL full-time during this contract and whether that was as a starter or backup, a $750,000 AAV would be a tremendous value. Ullmark had shown in the AHL that he was capable and was projecting well. This was a low-risk, high-reward signing for Botterill and one that was frankly a no-brainer. Any contract for Ullmark at or under a $1M AAV would have been acceptable.

Grade: A

Taylor Fedun, 2 years, $650,000 AAV

Fedun had previously proven to be an extremely valuable depth player for the organization and at times probably should’ve been one of the Sabres’ regular defensemen. There would definitely have been some demand for him had he hit the open market so being able to sign him to a deal worth the minimum (even if it guaranteed him more money in the AHL), was a nice get for Botterill. Ironically, things went south for Fedun in the organization soon after signing this contract. However, I think Botterill gets credit for getting the deal done as it seemed like a smart idea at the time of signing.

Grade: A-

Chad Johnson, 1 year, $2,500,000 AAV

The Sabres had been plagued by poor goaltending since the great purge in 2014-2015, where superb goaltending almost derailed the team’s run to the bottom. Since then, they struggled in net and Johnson was one of the issues from his first run with the team. Ironically, it was the goaltender in between Johnson’s stints, Andres Nilsson, who was probably the most consistent of the goalies. Addressing the backup goalie position was a necessity. I would have preferred seeing them keep Nilsson as he ended up signing a deal for the same AAV with Vancouver (though it was two years). However, the market that summer was fairly thin with other options so Botterill did well to get one of the better free-agent options. Of course, there are other routes he could have went to address the situation but I don’t think he did too poorly either. I generally don’t mind one-year contracts as they have little risk and the NHL salary cap system is use it or lose it so you might as well use it. Ultimately, Johnson turned out to be one of many of the problems the team had in route to another last-place finish so Botterill was fortunate to be able to walk away from him after only one season.

Grade: B

Benoit Pouliot, 1 year, $1,150,000 AAV

One of the Sabres’ weaknesses, when Botterill took over, was a major lack of depth. They had some good top-end skill players in Eichel, O’Reilly, Kane, Okposo, and Reinhart but things really fell off after that with an aged Brian Gionta and Matt Moulson being the only other forwards to produce more than 30 points (in all situations) on the season. Pouliot had shown flashes of scoring ability in the past as well as an ability to make his team better when he was on the ice. 

However, he was coming off a brutal season in Edmonton so he was able to be signed to a relatively cheap contract. The problem with the signing is it seemed more likely than not that his recent season was the start of a trend opposed to an abnormality because of his age. Signing Pouliot was a risk worth taking, however, Botterill should have anticipated he wouldn’t be much more than a third-line forward due to his aging curve. He had been trending downward the past few seasons and some research and the use of analytics would have indicated that would continue to be the case.

I like Botterill’s idea of signing Pouliot in an effort to provide more depth scoring, especially considering it was a low-risk deal. However, the results should have been more anticipated.

Grade: B

Jacob Josefson, 1 year, $700,000

Another signing aimed at improving organizational depth though there was nothing in his previous performances to suggest that he would add much. Realistically, Josefson should’ve strictly been a player for the Rochester Americans but he somehow played 39 games in Buffalo while missing a good amount of games with injuries. The Sabres were significantly worse with him on the ice. Overall, it was a low-risk move that seemed more aimed at improving organizational depth but circumstances changed that.

Grade: C-

Matt Tennyson

Basically, the same that was said for Josefson applies here. Phil Housley seemed to have some sort of favoritism toward Tennyson that had no statistical evidence to support. Had he strictly been an AHL player, this wouldn’t have been such an issue. Botterill could’ve pushed the issue as well by demoting Tennyson.

Grade: C-

Johan Larsson, 2 years, $1,475,000 AAV

Larsson has been an adequate fourth line player and good penalty killer for the Sabres over the years but shouldn’t be counted on to be much more than that. This should also be reflected in his pay. Although not horrible, Larsson was a restricted free agent (RFA) who had little negotiating leverage when Botterill signed him to this contract. The AAV on his contract shouldn’t have come in over $1M. I don’t think retaining Larsson was a major issue (and still don’t) but at the time, Botterill overpaid and needed to play more hardball in the negotiations.

Grade: C-

Robin Lehner, 1 year, $4M AAV

Tim Murray dealt Botterill a losing hand with Lehner and the overall goaltending situation. Botterill really had no other options than to retain Lehner and the way Lehner’s previous contract was structured forced Botterill into a contract with an AAV of at least $3,125,000 so Botterill bumped him further. Lehner was not bad prior to signing this contract but he also hadn’t shown enough to warrant this high of a salary, which would further increase in the team decided to retain him in any subsequent season. Botterill was stuck between a rock and a hard place with the goaltending situation. His options were to roll with Chad Johnson and one of Lehner or Ullmark. At the time, Lehner was the clear choice.

Grade: B-

Evan Rodrigues, 2 years, $650,000 AAV

At the time, Rodrigues had shown some signs that he could be an effective NHL player but also hadn’t shown enough to have complete confidence in him either. Botterill did well to get him signed to a two-year contract that paid him the minimum both years. His most effective season was easily his second year of the contract when he was arguably one of the team’s best forwards during the 2018-2019 season. He generated tremendous surplus value for the team. Frankly, there is nothing to find fault in for this contract. The worst case is Rodrigues was a depth player for the organization, shuttling between Rochester and Buffalo. Even if that had occurred, he was getting paid the minimum to do so.

Grade: A

Nathan Beaulieu, 2 years, $2,400,000 AAV

Botterill upped the price of this contract by simply trading for Beaulieu, who was arbitration-eligible. It is pretty hard to argue in an arbitration case that a player isn’t valuable when you just traded an asset to acquire him. I don’t think this contract was great but it wasn’t terrible either. I further discussed Beaulieu in the first part (the trades) of this series so I will not rehash it here. Had Beaulieu slotted onto the second pair, this would have been a fantastic contract. However, as a third-pair or worse defenseman, the value isn’t great. 

Grade: C

Zemgus Girgensons, 2 years, $1,600,000 AAV

Much like Johan Larsson, Girgensons has been a perfectly fine role player for the Sabres in his time with the team. He doesn’t make the team a whole lot better or worse when on the ice and is a fine penalty killer. He will never live up to his draft status but he will probably carve out a nice career in the NHL as a role player, whether that be in Buffalo or elsewhere. However, having a single role player take up $1.6M of cap space is not great cap management. It is even worse when you consider Botterill earlier in the offseason signed Larsson for $1.475M so he committed over $3M to two players who projected to be at best third line players and more realistically fourth liners. Girgensons has shown a little more than Larsson so it makes sense that he would be paid a little more. The problem with both is that it sets the floor for their next contract.

Grade: C-

Jack Eichel, 8 years, $10,000,000 AAV

Jack Eichel will arguably be the best player to ever wear a Sabres’ jersey. He was going to get paid at some point and it seemed like a contract around this was a foregone conclusion. In most cases, it makes more sense to sign a player to a long-term contract after their entry-level contract (ELC) EXPIRES. The keyword being expires. Eichel signed this contract before the final year of his ELC. Connor McDavid had set the bar for young superstars. Unless Eichel literally carried the Sabres to a Stanley Cup, I don’t think he was getting paid much more than the $10M AAV regardless of when he signed the contract. However, had he had a down year, the Sabres might have been able to save some money on his contract. It was unlikely to happen but there really was no reason to rush on this contract. No team was going to extend Eichel an offer sheet that the team wasn’t going to match. Retrospectively, this contract has proven to be better as more and more young players sign new contracts off their ELCs for more and more money.

Grade: B

Casey Nelson, 2 years, $812,000 AAV

I will say I might personally overvalue Casey Nelson. I think he has been a quality depth defenseman in the Sabres’ organization and provided a stabilizing presence when playing along some of the team’s young, puck-moving defensemen, namely Brendan Guhle and Rasmus Dahlin. However, he has never put up eye-popping numbers either so his contract was never going to be that high either. I think overall this was a solid deal for Botterill.

Grade: A-

Lawrence Pilut, 2 years, $925,000 AAV

I have generally avoided entry-level contracts but since Pilut was more of a free agent, I want to include him here. Pilut was chosen to be the Swedish Elite League Defenseman of the year (ahead of Rasmus Dahlin) so he clearly had the ability to play at the top level. The knock-on him was his size and the question of whether his game could translate. His stats indicated it likely would. This was a great move by Botterill to bring him into the organization. There was no risk in bringing Pilut into the organization and potential for a high reward. I will later address the management of Pilut in another part of the series so this grade will strictly be based on his signing.

Grade: A

Carter Hutton, 3 years, $2,750,000 AAV

Let me remind you that I am grading Botterill more on the decision-making process than the results. Going into the 2018 offseason, it was abundantly clear the Sabres needed to improve their goaltending situation. Ullmark appeared ready to be a full-time NHL goalie but being thrust into the full-time starter role didn’t seem like the best decision. The options on the market at the time were former Sabre, Jaro Halak, Petr Mrazek, Anton Khudobin, Jonathan Bernier, Cam Ward, and Hutton. If I had been in charge, I would have been targeting one of Halak, Mrazek, Khudobin, or Hutton. Mrazek signed for a little less than the other three but ultimately the contract for Hutton seemed to make sense. The only question is whether Botterill got his top choice. If so, we can question a little bit why he favored Hutton over the others. Ultimately, many analysts liked the signing at the time as many thought he could fetch another million-plus per year. Even though the results haven’t been ideal, Botterill gets high marks for this signing.

Grade: A-

Scott Wilson, 2 years, $1,050,000 AAV

Scott Wilson had proven to be a useful depth player for the organization but also hadn’t shown anything to indicate he was more than a bottom line player. If Wilson is in the minors, his salary doesn’t impact the Sabres’ cap situation. However, if the team does choose to recall him, they are paying a fourth-line player $300,000 more than the league minimum. When you consider Wilson along with his signings of Girgensons and Larsson in the previous offseason, he has likely cost himself over $1M in cap space by overpaying fourth line players. The good news is Wilson has been a quality player in his role bouncing between the NHL and AHL and has provided what the team has expected from him.

Grade: C+

Sam Reinhart, 2 years, $3,650,000 AAV

If we simply look at this contract as relative value, Botterill does fantastic here as Reinhart would clearly provide more value than $3,650,000 per season. The problem is signing Reinhart to a bridge contract was a HORRIBLE decision. I have written and research extensively on why bridge contracts for good players are bad ideas. Reinhart had put up good box score metrics but his real value was in the metrics that measure how he drove play. In Ryan O’Reilly’s last season with Buffalo, the only time the team was better during 5v5 play with O’Reilly on the ice was when Reinhart was one of his wingers! The easiest way for a GM to create future value for his team is to take advantage of a player putting up lower box score statistics while being a strong possession driver. In most negotiations, the contract value will be depressed if a player’s traditional stats are not as strong. 

At the time of signing, we at afpanalytics had predicted a long-term contract for Reinhart would be six years and carry an AAV between $5.5M and $6M. If the team had Reinhart locked in for that price, it would answer a lot of questions the team faces this coming offseason, where Reinhart will likely get a minimum of $8M per year. Botterill might have saved approximately $2M over two years but will now likely have to pay an extra $2M to $3M over the next four years. Remember when Botterill overpaid Larsson and Girgensons to a tune of at least $1M (combined)? That money could have been used instead to give Reinhart a long-term contract. Being generous with contracts for role players while playing hardball in negotiations for your top-line players is not going to be a long-term formula for success. Overall, the only reason this signing does not get a failing is that Botterill did well on the contract he did give.

Grade: D

Arttu Ruotsalainen, 3 years, $925,000 AAV

Much like what I have written for Lawerence Pilut and Victor Antipin, this signing comes with relatively low risk for a player who has shown he can produce against high-level competition. I think there is a little more uncertainty with Ruotsalainen than the others but I will never knock rolling the dice on younger players who have produced in Europe and can be signed for cheap contracts. If Ruotsalainen doesn’t pan out, the team isn’t out anything. If they find a hidden gem, it could be a big help in moving the team forward. I knock Botterill slightly for giving Ruotsalainen the ability to go back to Europe this year as he is a smaller player that will probably need to adjust to the smaller ice in North America.

Grade: A-

Jeff Skinner, 8 years, $9,000,000 AAV

Botterill had backed himself in between a rock and a hard place with this negotiation. By keeping Skinner and seeing him score 40 goals, Botterill had to retain Skinner. In order to do so, Botterill was going to have to pay and pay him enough to not test the free-agent market. We had predicted Skinner’s market value to be $8.5M per year on a seven-year contract. In order to deter Skinner from talking with other teams, Botterill was going to have to give him an offer he couldn’t refuse and the contract he signed was just that. Had Skinner left for nothing, it would have been a major hit to a team that is desperately seeking goal-scorers. On the flip side, it was apparent that Skinner was not going to continue to score 40 goals a season so his value to the team was never going to be as high as the contract. 

Overall, Botterill left himself little choice with Skinner once he was on the roster past the trade deadline. The problem is Skinner’s contract is going to be one of the main reasons the team is not as comfortably under the cap as they should be. The team needs more scoring production out of Skinner than they got this season. They need him to be part of the solution and not further their problems. I don’t mind that Botterill chose to keep a good player who has shown he can produce. I do take issue with how they managed him this year but that doesn’t severely impact the grade too much as this is based mainly on the decision at the time of signing. Had Skinner scored 40 or more goals again this season, the narrative is completely different.

Grade: C+

John Gilmour, 1 year, $700,000 AAV

I have generally skipped AHL signings but Gilmour spent enough time in Buffalo to warrant discussion. Gilmour was signed as a depth defenseman for the organization and he filled that role well. He provided speed and puck-moving abilities from the blueline. If Botterill hadn’t created such a logjam of defensemen, Gilmour had shown enough, in a limited sample, to be a bottom-pair player and the team probably would’ve been better for it. The knock here is Botterill added another defenseman to an already packed position in the organization.

Grade: B+

Curtis Lazar, 1 year, $700,000

Much like Gilmour, Lazar was signed to provide depth to the organization. Unlike Gilmour, Lazar spent a significant amount of time in the NHL and was a fine depth player. When Lazar was on the ice during 5v5 play, the team was outshot in quantity a little more than when he was on the bench but the Sabres’ took better quality shots. Lazar was also used on the penalty kill. When he was first called-up, he provided better-shot suppression but ultimately finished the season getting shelled on the penalty kill. Realistically, Lazar should have been playing over Sobotka for the entire season as he was a better version of a similar player.

Lazar also brought some intangibles that the team lacks. Every shift Lazar was on the ice, he played like it could be his last. He was never the most talented player on the ice but provided an energy that not everyone else on the team always brought. Lazar will never be more than a depth player but can play in the NHL. As long as Botterill realizes that going forward, everything will be ok.

Grade: A-

Zemgus Girgensons, 1 year, $1,600,000 AAV

Botterill previously signed Girgensons to a contract that set his qualifying offer at this price so he had already backed himself into a corner. The alternative would have been to not tender the qualifying offer and let Girgensons become an UFA. There is a chance that Botterill would’ve been able to bring him back at a lower price but it also would have given Girgensons the opportunity to negotiate with other teams and potentially sign with one of them. At the time, I didn’t think the team losing Girgensons would have been detrimental but I don’t know if it would have been a positive development either. Ultimately, Girgensons, Larsson, and Kyle Okposo combined to form a formable line that struggled to score but consistently controlled play. Could have the results been similar if one of Girgensons or Larsson were replaced? Possibly. To be consistent, I will grade mostly on the decision-making process and I am not 100% confident that Botterill made the best decision at the time but did do well to keep Girgensons with the qualifying offer.

Grade: C+

Marcus Johansson, 2 years, $4,500,000 AAV

I liked this signing for Botterill a lot. Johansson was the type of secondary scoring player the team had been lacking. According to our contract predictions, Botterill slightly overpaid on AAV but gave a year less in term than we anticipated so the contract was pretty solid. The downside is this contract pushed the Sabres into salary cap danger. The other problem with this signing is Botterill basically forced Johansson into playing center, a position that he hadn’t played in years and was left comfortable with, especially against the strong competition he faced on the second-line. Botterill will be knocked more in a future part of the series than he will be here as this was overall a good signing. The failure to properly address the second-line center position takes a little away but not enough to make this a poor grade.

Grade: B+

Johan Larsson, 1 year, $1,550,000 AAV

It seemed logical that the team would move on from at least one of Sobotka, Girgensons, or Larsson as they frankly fill a very similar role. Going into the offseason, an argument to lose any of them could have easily been made. Sobotka was clearly the weakest of the three players but the other two were the easiest to move on from. It seemed the team was poised to lose Larsson to Europe but ultimately things got done with the Sabres. Of the three, Larsson is probably the most valuable player so I don’t fault Botterill for bringing him back, especially since he was able to pay him less than Girgensons. I do have a problem with him bringing all three back. Larsson ultimately had a quality season and the team is going to be in a similar situation with him and Girgensons this offseason as they were last year. Although both players are replaceable, the two departing would create additional holes. I like the signing of Larsson slightly better than Girgensons but a lot said under each applies to both.

Grade: B-

Evan Rodrigues, 1 year, $2,000,000

In our contract predictions we had Rodrigues’ value at ~$2.3M AAV on a two-year contract so value-wise, Botterill did well. During the 2018-2019 season, Rodrigues was one of the team’s most impactful forwards. I thought there was a chance that he could’ve solved the team’s second-line center woes in the short-term. Instead, entitlement took hold and he became a toxin in the Sabres’ locker room. Despite his strong underlying metrics during the 2018-2019 season, Rodrigues quickly became a player who the team needed to move on from. Botterill gets high marks on the signing that will be slightly reduced because of poor results.

Grade: B+

Jake McCabe, 2 years, $2,850,000 AAV

I still don’t know what to think of Jake McCabe. He has had stretches of a season where he has been the Sabres’ best defender and also stretches where he has been the team’s worst defender. There were times when he was paired with Rasmus Ristolainen and it worked incredibly well and others where they were a complete disaster. In two of the past three seasons, the Sabres have overall been better with him on the ice. However, I fully expect McCabe to be at the top of the list of players available partly due to his inconsistent play throughout the season and partly due to the number of defensemen the team has. That is a discussion for another article.

Overall, I don’t have a problem with the Sabres retaining McCabe as it would have made no sense for them to let him walk for nothing. I also don’t think the contract was a huge overpayment. I don’t think Botterill can be knocked too much for this signing. He paid McCabe bottom four money, which is exactly what McCabe deserved.

Grade: A-

Linus Ullmark, 1 year, $1,325,000 AAV

Linus Ullmark came off a successful first season as an NHL regular so getting a new contract was a no-brainer. We had predicted Ullmark to get a one-year contract with a slightly higher AAV but overall this contract seems right in-line with where Ullmark’s value was. I think the only knock here is that the contract was only for one year. Going for multiple years might have been a gamble that would have been worth taking for Botterill, though it takes two to tango and I’m not sure it would have made sense for Ullmark to take something with more term as his stock was most likely going to rise as he received more playing time.

Grade: A

Dalton Smith, 1 year, $700,000 AAV

Even though the impact was minimal, this was a disgraceful signing by Botterill. He signed Smith to play and start a fight against Tampa Bay. Smith had never played an NHL game before and skated less than two minutes in the game. For a team who was starting to slide, wasting a roster spot, even for just a game on a useless player is inexcusable. The last time the Sabres’ did something like this was signing John Scott in 2012. They haven’t sniffed a playoff spot since.

Grade: F

Botterill grades out slightly better for his signings than his trades as his GPA was 2.83 for the signings while only 2.77 for the trades. Though both ultimately land with the same letter grade.

Overall Grade: B-

With the recent news of Botterill being fired, I may condense the remaining planned articles into one. Please follow @afpanalytics and check back to read the remaining articles in the series. Feel free to share your thoughts with @afpanalytics or @k_sticher on Twitter.

Please note all salary figures and trade compensations are courtesy of Capfriendly.com and all statistical information is courtesy of Naturalstattrick.com. Featured image is via the Buffalo News.

KYLE STICH is the Director of AFP Analytics.  In addition, Mr. Stich is a tax specialist and Director of Operations at AFP Consulting LLC, whose clientele include professional athletes performing services on three separate continents. Mr. Stich earned his Master of Science in Sport Management with a Concentration in Sport Analytics from Columbia University in 2017. He earned his undergraduate degrees in Accounting and Sport Management from St. John Fisher College in 2015, where he has served as an adjunct professor teaching Sport Finance and Baseball Analytics.

Grading Buffalo Sabres’ GM Jason Botterill: Part 1, Trades

The Buffalo Sabres recently announced that they would retain General Manager Jason Botterill for a fourth season. The decision to do so has not gone over well with the fans of the team as most believe that he has done a generally poor job in his role. I personally haven’t thought that he has done a great job but I also don’t know if going through another regime change, especially given all of the uncertainty in the world right now would be the best course of action for the organization. In this article series, I am going to go through every single move he has made since taking over the organization and grade them. I am going to break the series into four parts: NHL trades, NHL signings, the draft, and minor league management, and overall organizational management. I will provide an individual grade for every move, a grade for each segment, and finally an overall grade.

Before I begin grading, I should set my rubric and the guidelines on how I will arrive at the grade for every move. A good general manager needs to do two things well. First, they need to make good decisions. Second, they need to have good results. In my opinion, when grading a general manager, more weight should be placed on the decision-making process as it needs to be sound to lead to positive results. That said, there are some results that can be predicted and it is a decision maker’s job to do so. As I work through my grading, I will do my best to be objective. I will consider everything from advanced metrics to the current situation of the team. Ultimately though, these will be my opinions that I will try to back with reason.

The first part of the series will look at the trades he made involving regular NHL players. I have discussed the trades in chronological order from oldest to most recent.

Trade for Nathan Beaulieu

Details: Buffalo Acquired D Nathan Beaulieu from Montreal for a 3^rd round pick (68^th overall)

Botterill’s first player move as a general manager was to add more speed and mobility to the blueline, something that was desperately lacking from the team he inherited. Beaulieu is a defenseman with great speed and puck-moving abilities. He was an odd man out in Montreal but still young enough where it seemed like he could improve. During Beaulieu’s first three years in the league, the Canadiens improved in controlling both shot quantity and quality while he was on the ice. The next two seasons, leading up to him being traded, saw things go south.

When Botterill acquired Beaulieu, there were signs of things going the wrong direction but there had also been signs of strong play earlier in his career. He was a player that had “change of scenery” written all over him. I think overall Beaulieu fit a need for the Sabres and Botterill was able to acquire him for a reasonable price of a third-round pick. Once Beaulieu got to Buffalo, he seemed to fall out of favor for glaring mistakes. However, his metrics were pretty solid for a bottom four defenseman and really did not get a fair chance in Buffalo. It isn’t Botterill’s job to make day to day lineup decisions but he should have had some organizational support/structure in place to assist the coaching staff with lineup decisions. I think there is a lot to like about the process and decision to make the trade but the results did not work out.

Grade: B

Enticing Vegas to take Carrier Opposed to Ullmark

Details: Buffalo gave Vegas a 6^th round pick to take William Carrier instead of Linus Ullmark in the expansion draft

This “trade” had mostly been put in place by the previous general manager, Tim Murray, but ultimately Botterill still had to finalize it and could have pulled the plug if he wanted. The Sabres had exactly two desirable assets in the expansion draft, William Carrier and Linus Ullmark. Carrier has turned into a nice role player for Vegas and probably would have been the same in Buffalo. However, allowing Vegas to take Ullmark for nothing would have devastated the organization as he has been the best goalie (not a super high bar to clear) in the organization for the past couple of years. Giving up a 6thround pick to lose a 4th line player instead of a potential number one goalie is a major win. The team got a peek at what life was without him when he was injured this season and the results weren’t pretty. Some of you reading this will probably think I gave Botterill too much credit here but in most group projects in school, everyone gets the same grade. Here, Botterill benefits from having someone else do much of the work but not messing it up at the end.

Grade: A

Trade for Jason Pominville & Marco Scandella

Details: Buffalo acquires Jason Pominville, Marco Scandella and a 4^th round pick from Minnesota for Tyler Ennis, Marcus Foligno, and a 3^rd round pick.

Jason Botterill’s first couple moves as GM were aimed at shoring up the team’s defense. Much like his trade for Beaulieu, he identified a team that seemed to have a surplus of defensemen and were open to trading them. The best piece in this trade ended up being Jason Pominville. The idea of acquiring a Wild defenseman made a lot of sense. The price of Tyler Ennis and Marcus Foligno was not steep. If anything, trading them away was a net positive for Botterill as injuries had dramatically reduced Ennis’s effectiveness and he was under a contract that paid him more than the value he was providing. Although Foligno had a tremendous season in 2018-2019, he was nothing more than a 3^rd line winger, which isn’t overly valuable in terms of trade value, and didn’t project any higher either.

The knock Botterill gets for this trade is that he settled for Scandella. Minnesota likely would have traded one of Scandella, Brodin, or Spurgeon (more likely one of the first two). Of those Scandella was clearly the weakest. Much like Beaulieu, Scandella had started off strong but saw a drop in play in the two seasons leading up to the trade as the Wild did worse in both shot quantity and quality with him on the ice. Had Botterill viewed Scandella as the bottom four defenseman he really was, this trade would have been a home run. However, Botterill thought Scandella could handle playing on the top pair with Ristolainen and matchup with the opposing team’s top players. That was never going to be the case and his failure to realize that was an issue. Botterill still gets high marks for this trade as a lot of the thought process behind this makes trade made a lot of sense.

Grade: B+

Trades Away Evander Kane

Details: Buffalo acquired Danny O’Regan, a conditional 1^st (conditions met), conditional 4^th (stayed as 4^th) for Evander Kane.

The Sabres’ play early in the season quickly signaled that they would miss out on the playoffs so the clock was ticking on making a decision on Kane early in the season. I think Botterill could have justified re-signing him or trading him. Under no circumstances could he allow Kane to walk away for nothing. In my opinion, the total return was very underwhelming as the Sabres were not guaranteed a 1^st-round pick. I’m sure Botterill took the best offer at the time but there were probably better trade offers to be had earlier in the season that he failed to make. Kane was not the most tradeable player in the league but he did produce offensively and should have had some appeal as a rental. Botterill turned him into a low-level prospect who had shown no indication of being able to be a full-time NHLer and two draft picks that he later traded away. Botterill doesn’t fail this trade but he certainly doesn’t get high marks either.

Grade: D+

Acquires Matt Hunwick and Conor Sheary

Details: Sabres acquire Matt Hunwick and Conor Sheary from Pittsburgh for a conditional 4^th round pick that became third based on player performance (stayed a 4^th)

In this trade, Botterill had cap space and a need for some depth scoring. He weaponized the cap space to add Sheary for a low cost by also absorbing Matt Hunwick’s contract. The addition of Sheary made complete sense. He had success playing along highly skilled centers (Crosby and Malkin) in Pittsburgh so pairing him with Eichel seemed great in theory. The worst-case would be provided some scoring depth for a low price. Hunwick inexplicitly played some games for Buffalo and was not good in the few games he played. That was probably more of a coaching issue though Botterill gets some blame for even providing the option.

The results of this trade were not good as neither player contributed much at all. The good news is the draft pick was conditional and did not get upgraded. Although Botterill gets knocked a little for that, this was a home run trade on paper at the time the trade was executed. Sheary was decent when looking beyond his basic box score statistics as the Sabres were better when he was on the ice BUT he just couldn’t produce points which was a major issue.

Grade: A-

Ryan O’Reilly Trade

Details: Sabres acquire Patrik Berglund, Vladmir Sobotka, Tage Thompson, a conditional 1^st round pick and a 2021 2^ndround pick

Everyone knows this was Botterill’s worst move as GM and probably the main reason fans are still so upset with him as the team has not recovered from it. There is no doubt this was bad but at the time, there was some rationale for trading O’Reilly but the return he got was dreadful. The Sabres were a top-heavy team that was in desperate need of forward depth. O’Reilly was coming off a down season (when he wasn’t playing with Sam Reinhart, the team was worse with him on the ice during 5v5 play) and he had expressed his displeasure publicly. There also was (and still is) some concern with the length of his contract and his future value. 

To me, the idea of trading O’Reilly could have been defendable but the return is not in any way. Patrik Berglund and Vladmir Sobotka were never going to be impact players. They were going to come in and be, at best, third line players. If both players needed to be included for financial reasons to get a better overall package for the Sabres, it would have been one thing. However, those two players were centerpieces of the trade and didn’t help improve the Sabres’ haul. With those two players included, the Sabres should have demanded Robert Thomas be included in addition to Thompson or multiple unprotected 1st round picks. Additionally, Botterill needed to have a better plan for the second-line center than Berglund and/or Mittelstadt (maybe it should have been Sam Reinhart). Ultimately, nothing about the trade made sense or worked out and the team is still recovering from this trade.

Grade: F

Acquire Jeff Skinner

Details: Buffalo acquires Jeff Skinner for Cliff Pu, 2019 2^nd round pick, 2020 3^rd round & 6^th round picks

Just like everyone knows the O’Reilly trade was awful, everyone knows the Jeff Skinner trade was a homerun. I think people forget about how lopsided this trade was. It is incredible that Botterill was able to make a horrible trade and follow it up not long after with an excellent trade. Skinner was everything and more for what the team needed. The line of Skinner, Eichel, and Reinhart kept the team in the playoff mix into March almost singlehandedly. The assets Botterill gave up had little value.

Grade: A

Acquire Brandon Montour 

Details: Buffalo acquires Brandon Montour for Brandon Guhle and the higher of previously acquired 1^st round picks

This was an interesting trade by Botterill. Even after some changes to the blueline, the Sabres were still in need of a fast-skating, puck-moving defenseman and that is exactly what Montour brings. However, Guhle also provides some of those same traits but was much less polished. The idea of “upgrading” from Guhle to Montour made sense. It also helped the team balance their left and right shots. However, Montour has still not settled into a role in Buffalo mostly because Botterill has failed to alleviate a logjam he created. Montour should ideally be playing second pair (or maybe top pair) minutes (on the right side) and quarterbacking the second power-play unit. 

I question the price Botterill paid to get Montour. To me, the price should have been a mid-round pick or prospect plus one of Guhle or a 1^st round pick. Using the 1^st round pick to marginally upgrade Brandon Guhle seemed a little strange to me but I also don’t think this was a terrible trade either.

Grade: C

Trades Away Nathan Beaulieu

Details: Buffalo acquires a 6^th round pick in exchange for Nathan Beaulieu

As discussed above, Beaulieu never found his footing in Buffalo and the coaching staff deserves a lot of blame for that. However, his underlying numbers were solid for a bottom four defenseman. Beaulieu publicly made his displeasure known and once that happens the returns are fairly limited. It seems like Beaulieu’s value was hurt somewhat by Botterill holding on for him for so long. A sixth-round pick for a serviceable defenseman with a decent contract and RFA status is not great compensation but something is better than keeping him and letting him walk for nothing in summer.

Grade: C-

Acquires Colin Miller

Details: Buffalo acquires defenseman Colin Miller in exchange for a 2021 2^nd round pick and 2022 5^th round pick.

On paper, this trade had the markings of another homerun trade for Botterill. When Miller was on the ice, an already good Vegas team performed even better. His advanced metrics were very good. It seemed like Miller would be a perfect fit in the top four in Buffalo and maybe even on the top pair as Rasmus Dahlin’s partner. It seemed like Miller’s acquisition would finally allow Buffalo to move on from Rasmus Ristolainen and recoup or even add assets as they had just found a better, cheaper option. 

It took Miller some time to find his footing in Buffalo and finished the shortened season by seeing the team was overall better with him on the ice than when he was off. Miller was not the immediate impact player that Buffalo was hoping and him and Dahlin together early in the season was a disaster (some of that blame also falls on Dahlin). Part of the problem for Miller was his usage was less than ideal for much of the season. Although there were signs that he could maybe slot on the top pair, it became clear that it wasn’t a good idea. Miller also had been given significant power-play time in Vegas as he has a bomb of a shot from the backend. However, Buffalo preferred to use Dahlin and Ristolainen over Miller so he was forced to share the remaining time with Brandon Montour. Confidence goes a long way in hockey and Miller’s seemed shot early but he did rebound as the season went on.

Overall, Botterill gets high marks for this trade as he again capitalized on a team tight to the cap and acquired a quality player for a reduced price. The problem with this trade is it added to an already stocked blueline and created a bigger logjam than one that already existed. Please note, I will have a grade specifically for this aspect of roster management later on so this grade will mostly reflect the acquisition of Miller.

Grade: B+

Acquires Jimmy Vesey

Details: Buffalo acquires Jimmy Vesey for a 2021 3^rd round pick

This was an interesting trade that isn’t as easy to grade as many may think. Vesey did not produce many points and was not more than a third-line player. However, over the course of the shortened season, the team was better when Vesey was on the ice, both in terms of shot quantity and quality. He provided the same for a bad New York Rangers team during the 2018-2019 season. 

Botterill identified the Sabres as a team that lacked depth and has gone about acquiring players to address that. Vesey is a good depth option. However, Botterill viewed him as more than that as he, on more than one occasion, referred to Vesey as a top-nine forward opposed to middle or bottom six, where he should properly slot. Though Botterill thought he could skate on the top line, the compensation he gave up reflects more of a middle-six player, though I still think that was still too much. The positive is the risk of acquiring Vesey was fairly low as he was signed to a relatively small, one-year contract so if he had a breakout season, the Sabres would have gotten some great value. 

Overall, the signs were there that Vesey was nothing more than a third-line player who wouldn’t kill your team if he had to slot higher in the lineup on occasion but shouldn’t have been counted on doing so. Botterill overvalued Vesey and ultimately added another player to the mix of many replacement level players he already had. However, the relatively low-risk nature of the trade, the thought process to improve depth, and the acceptable results of Vesey’s play help this grade.

Grade: C

Acquires Henri Jokiharju

Details: Sabres acquire Henri Jokiharju in exchange for Alexander Nylander

If I were to poll Sabres’ fans on what their favorite trade made by Botterill was, I bet a lot would point to this one. Alex Nylander had quickly fallen out of favor with Sabres’ fans and many were happy to see the team move on and I am guessing many would’ve been happy with a much lower return than what the team got. Jokiharju passes all the tests for a young player you would want to acquire. He is still on his entry-level contract, was a high draft selection, dominated the AHL, and has played time in the NHL and has been successful in doing so. The fact that he plays the highly-valued right defense helps as well. On paper, this seems like another home run for Botterill.

Jokiharju was a very steady performer on the blueline for the early part of the season but showed some decline as the season wore on. When he was on the ice, the Sabres gave up more shots but the quality of those shots were less than the quality the Sabres produced. Considering Jokiharju is still incredibly young and many thought he would play most of this season in the AHL, management and fans have the right to be hopeful.

I have two issues with this trade that prevent it from being an “A.” First, Jokiharju was the second right-shot defenseman acquired in almost as many weeks. Botterill now had Ristolainen, Montour, Miller, and Jokiharju on the right side alone. It is perfectly fine that the team allowed Jokiharju to earn his NHL time but his superb play created a further logjam on the blueline. So, like the Miller trade above, this will negatively impact his grade. Second, I am not against the idea of trading Nylander but the trade created a new hole and added to a problem in the organization. The Sabres’ biggest weakness right now is they are lacking prospects that project well as Top Six forwards. The only four players who may fit that mold are Casey Mittelstadt, Tage Thompson, Victor Olofsson, and 2019 first-round pick, Dylan Cozens. The former two are probably middle-six players at best. Olofsson showed tremendous promise in his rookie season but has not solidified himself either. The signs are positive for Cozens but he has no sample playing against “men.” Though Nylander did not project as a surefire Top Six, he had the skill set that could translate to that spot. With Olofsson “graduated” and Nylander traded, the Sabres have a whole in their prospect pipeline at forward. Trading Ristolainen could (have) solved two problems at once. Instead, an excellent trade in a vacuum exasperated a big problem for the Sabres.

Grade: B+

Acquires Michael Frolik; Trades Marco Scandella

Details: Buffalo traded Marco Scandella to Montreal for a 4^th round pick that was subsequently traded to Calgary for Michael Frolik

Though there may be some recency bias, this trade is probably the one most fans would pin as second-worst to the Ryan O’Reilly trade. However, I don’t have nearly as big of an issue with this trade as many fans. Many fans will point to Scandella’s subsequent trade to the Blues for a 2^nd round pick in addition to Frolik providing next to nothing for the Sabres as a clear black-eye for Botterill. However, I can’t fault Botterill for 1) The return Montreal got for Scandella, 2) Frolik providing nothing for the Sabres. In order to fairly assess the trade, we need to look at it at the point of time it was made and not play the “what if” game after it was made. For all intents and purposes, Botterill traded Scandella for Frolik and that is how I am going to assess the trade.

Both Scandella and Frolik are impending unrestricted free agents (UFAs) who probably were going to be nothing more than rentals. The Sabres definitely would not be retaining Scandella at the season’s end and needed to add someone to their forward group. Frolik graded out well analytically over the course of his career BUT was having a down season this year. The question is whether he could bounce back with an increased role or whether age had gotten the best of him. Ironically, the opposite of Marco Scandella was true. He had been down the past couple of seasons but was tremendous this season for Buffalo, which is probably attributable to playing a less demanding role and with a better partner. He had quickly become one of the more attractive assets from the Sabres’ crowded blueline.

If we look at this trade as Scandella for a 4^th round pick, it isn’t great but not bad either. Everyone in the league knew Botterill had defensemen to deal so they weren’t going to be aggressively bidding for any of them so it was going to be difficult to get full market value for Scandella, which was probably a 3^rd round pick at the time. Yes, Scandella was traded at the deadline for a 2^nd round pick and a conditional 4^th round pick but the devil is in the details. There are four reasons Montreal was able to get a better return. First, the trade deadline adjusts the supply and demand of the market so the price was going to be naturally higher. Buffalo could’ve waited it out for a slightly better return but Botterill would’ve been crucified for that too. Second, Montreal retained salary. The salary retention likely bumped the pick up a round because it was critical for St. Louis and the same would’ve been true of any other playoff contender that might have acquired Scandella. Third, Scandella proved he could play effectively in a different situation in Montreal. Although that wasn’t likely a major factor, it probably didn’t hurt either. Finally, Botterill was always playing from behind because of the logjam of defenseman he had. No opposing GM was going to allow him to “win” a trade of a defenseman. The one knock I do have on the return is the lack of a conditional pick. Every trade made in-season should include some performance, trading, or re-signing clause. This would better allow teams to capture the value the player is providing.

If we look just at the Frolik side of the trade, there is nothing wrong with the price of a 4^th round pick. Frolik’s salary certainly isn’t great and likely delayed the trade until the Sabres could move some salary but the idea of acquiring him was not bad. He was a relatively low-risk acquisition who could have provided a decent reward for the Sabres. Overall, I look at this trade as a trade of Frolik for Marco Scandella, a trade of a bottom-four defenseman for a middle-six forward, with similar contract situations. This is what people like to call a hockey trade. I don’t think Botterill made a brilliant trade but he did what he needed to do. The question is whether he did it involving the correct players.

Grade: B

Acquires Wayne Simmonds

Details: Buffalo acquires Wayne Simmonds (with 50% salary retained) for a 2021 5^th round pick 

I know there are people that don’t like this move but frankly, it was an incredibly low-risk move that could lead to a reward. Simmonds is no longer the player he used to be put still brought some unique skills to Buffalo. Although the coaching staff continued to use Rasmus Ristolainen as the net-front man on the power play, that area was a major weakness for the team. Sam Reinhart has proven to be effective in that position but he can be equally effective on the perimeter as well. Simmonds should have come in and been immediately inserted in that position. Everything else he could’ve provided would have been a bonus. Had he somehow caught fire, Botterill would’ve looked like a genius. He didn’t, as expected, but Botterill is only out a 5th round pick in next year’s draft, which is basically nothing. At worst, Simmonds would have filled the hole that would soon be created by trading Conor Sheary.

Grade: B

Acquires Dominik Kahun

Details: Buffalo acquires Dominik Kahun in exchange for Evan Rodrigues and Conor Sheary

This is a home run of a trade for Botterill and the creative type of trade he needs to do more of. Both Rodrigues and Sheary were on expiring contracts and neither were going to be back in Buffalo (Rodrigues wouldn’t have received a tender as an RFA). Both were assets that would have been gone at the end of the season for nothing and were nothing more than rentals at the trade deadline. I also don’t think either player had much value in the trade market. Sheary was probably going to return a 4^th round pick (3^rd if lucky or retaining salary) and Rodrigues was probably a 5^th or 6^th round pick. In essence, both players would have returned a nearly worthless asset. Instead of shopping both separately, Botterill packaged them and got an intriguing asset, Dominik Kahun, in return. Kahun is young, cheap, and has shown he can play in the NHL. He is probably a middle-six forward but is a fairly safe bet to be no worse than that. Though the results are very limited with the Sabres, he did seem to be fitting in well. Regardless, he is a much better asset to have now and likely in the future than whatever those middle to late-round draft picks would have become.

Grade: A

Summary

I think a lot of the flack Botterill receives comes from the singular focus on one horrible trade and his acquisition of Jeff Skinner gets overshadowed by the subsequent contract he signed him to, which was a home run of a trade. I think the biggest issue Botterill has had is many of the trades that have looked good on paper, haven’t produced the expected results. In some instances, it should have been anticipated. However, in many instances, it is somewhat mystifying as to why players have performed so poorly in Buffalo. The other problem in Botterill’s trading history is there are very few trades where the Sabres are the clear “winners.” He has made plenty of fine and balanced trades but he needs to do more to swing trades in his favor. He should take more advantage of adding conditions to trades. Overall, Botterill grades out as very average on his trades.

Overall Grade for Trades: B-

Please note all salary figures and trade compensations are courtesy of Capfriendly.com and all statistical information is courtesy of Naturalstattrick.com. Featured image is via the Buffalo News.

Please follow @afpanalytics and check back to read the remaining articles in the series. Feel free to share your thoughts with @afpanalytics or @k_sticher on Twitter.

KYLE STICH is the Director of AFP Analytics.  In addition, Mr. Stich is a tax specialist and Director of Operations at AFP Consulting LLC, whose clientele include professional athletes performing services on three separate continents. Mr. Stich earned his Master of Science in Sport Management with a Concentration in Sport Analytics from Columbia University in 2017. He earned his undergraduate degrees in Accounting and Sport Management from St. John Fisher College in 2015, where he has served as an adjunct professor teaching Sport Finance and Baseball Analytics.

Friday Focus: November 8th

Welcome to the sixth edition of AFP Analytics’ Friday Focus section. In the Friday Focus post I hope to highlight some of the most interesting events from a numbers perspective during the past week in the NHL. If something catches my eye from other sports, I might mention it here as well. I am intending on this being more of a quick hitter type of read that I hope everyone enjoys. I would also invite any readers to shoot us questions (@afpanalytics) and we will try to answer them every week. 

Last Week’s Player to Watch – Filip Chytil

Last week I highlighted the New York Ranger’s young forward, Filip Chytil who has an impressive season debut. I was interested to watch to see if he would continue it as he played more games. His results have been an interesting mix since his season debut. The Rangers played four games since last week’s post so Chytil faced Nashville, Ottawa, Detroit, and Carolina. He played well against the weaker Ottawa and Detroit, ok against a good Nashville team, but had a rough outing against a strong Carolina team last night. Against Ottawa and Detroit, the Rangers controlled the shot counter while Chytil was on the ice but struggled with shot quality. Against Nashville they were slightly outshot but did better in quality. Against Carolina the Rangers outscored Carolina 1-0 while Chytil was on the ice but otherwise got caved in and score effects can only be partially blamed.

Last Week’s Game to Watch

In last week’s post, I highlighted Colorado at Arizona and it is starting to become a weekly tradition that the game I choose as my game of the week ends up being a blowout. Colorado has not responded well to the loss Rantanen and Landeskog, which isn’t surprising but is a little worrisome. Colorado hadn’t been the strongest possession team prior to the injuries so some regression was bound to occur. The loss of their two-star players sped the process up. I also don’t want to take away from Arizona who are continuing to prove that they are a team to be taken seriously.

Islanders are Going to Regress

I was wrong last season when I kept thinking the New York Islanders were going to regress because their Corsi For (CF)% and Expected Goals For (xGF)% were below 50% for much of last season. Simply put, they were getting outplayed in the majority of the games they played but still managed to win most of them. Somehow they are doing it again this year. They are doing worse in controlling shots but slightly better in shot quality this season. They have also been winning a lot of one goal games lately. They have a lot in common with last season’s Buffalo Sabres. Their numbers do not support the success they are having but they were able to piece together a 10 game winning streak by winning four one goal games (plus two where they added late empty net goals). Last year, Buffalo won nine of the ten by one goal so the Islanders haven’t been living quite as much on the edge but it isn’t great. The one thing the Islanders are doing well is they are controlling the goal differential during 5v5 play. I will probably end up being wrong again but I don’t know if the Islanders can sustain their success again. However, their ability to bank significant points early in the season set them up to once again make the playoffs.

What Should We Make of the Maple Leafs?

I try to very my discussion each week to the point where I feel as though I have touched on a good portion of the notable teams. I have purposefully avoided discussing the Maple Leafs because I frankly have had no clue what to make of them. I’ve decided to finally discuss them. I think they are a very average team. They are ranked sixth in the league with a CF% of 52.41%, which means they are doing a pretty good job of controlling play but they rank 21^st in the league in xGF%, with a measure just under 50%. Even though they are controlling quantity, their quality is lacking. They should make the playoffs but without some major changes, they aren’t a team that is likely going to make some noise. For Leaf fans this will certainly be a disappointment. The blueline the team has constructed is not good enough. For as much success as Mike Babcock has had, the Leafs might need to consider a change behind the bench to bring a fresh voice. For a team that has to win in the next few years, being an average team isn’t good enough.

Are the Canucks for Real?

The Vancouver Canucks have been highly criticized for some head-scratching moves in recent years. Earlier this year, they waived some players who can play in the NHL and gave some odd reasons for why they made the decisions they made. They also committed significant money to Tyler Myers, despite being in a little of a cap crunch. Many people were picking the team to finish toward the bottom of the standings again. By next week, most teams will be close playing a quarter of their games and many people like to talk about how the teams in playoff positions by American Thanksgiving usually make up the bulk of the playoff teams. Vancouver finds themselves in second in the Pacific division with a game in hand on first place Edmonton. The question on many people’s minds has to be whether they are legitimately good. I think they are. They are fourth in CF% and third in xGF%. Those numbers indicate the Canucks are probably good. Edmonton and Vancouver are certainly two surprising teams to be at the top of the Pacific Division. If you were to bet on one to stay there, the smart money is on Vancouver. 

The one major question I have is how their players respond as the season grinds on. Quinn Hughes played in college last season, where they play less than half the games in an NHL season. Elias Pettersson is in his second professional season and has to stay out of the sophomore slump. They rely on many other young players who have little experience as the pressure ramps up. They also have an older Alex Edler and injury prone Tyler Myers and Chris Tanev. Their numbers support their position in the standings. However, a bad stretch of hockey can certainly hurt their underlying metrics and cause them to regress. Some injuries or fatigue can certainly make that happen, which would make me a little nervous if I were a Canuck fan, considering who they are relying on. As an aside, Travis Green has to be one of, if not the, favorite to win the Jack Adams award for coach of the year. 

Player(s) to Watch

I am interested to see how both the Tampa Bay Lightning and Buffalo Sabres respond once they return from Europe. Two years ago, Ottawa was one of the best teams in the NHL and had just traded for Matt Duchene when they got back from Sweden. They ended up finishing second to last. Colorado struggled immediately upon their return but went on a tear later in the season to finish third in the Central. Last season, Florida and Winnipeg traveled midseason and both teams performed well immediately after returning but Florida had a miserable end to the season while Winnipeg didn’t finish how they hoped to either. With only four teams traveling overseas in the middle of the season in recent history, it is tough to draw any definite conclusions. 

If Tampa doesn’t leave Sweden with at least three points, they cannot afford any slipup when they return home. The Sabres have a little more cushion but anything less than a split puts them in a difficult position as well in a competitive Atlantic Division. Neither team can afford any sort of hangover when they get back or their seasons could be in peril. I will be interested to see how the teams respond. The NHL and NHLPA should be keeping an eye on how these teams respond to the midseason trip. I think the NHL must play games globally but they might want to reexamine when those take place if both teams falter after the trip.

Game to Watch

There are always going to be matchups that look intriguing on paper. Buffalo playing against Tampa certainly bears watching because both teams are doing ok in the standings but aren’t lighting it up during 5v5 play. With both teams traveling to Sweden it will be interesting to see how they play with almost a week off. Vegas at Washington also certainly bears watching but my game(s) of the week both involve the Florida Panthers, who started slowly but have been playing some great hockey lately. This upcoming week sees them play at two of the hottest teams in hockey, the New York Islanders (Saturday), who I have already discussed above, and the Boston Bruins (Tuesday).

If you have any thoughts or would like to submit questions for next week’s Friday Focus, tweet us, @afpanalytics, or me, @k_sticher.

All data is courtesy of naturalstattrick.com and capfriendly.com 

KYLE STICH is the Director of AFP Analytics.  In addition, Mr. Stich is a tax specialist and Director of Operations at AFP Consulting LLC, whose clientele include professional athletes performing services on three separate continents. Mr. Stich earned his Master of Science in Sport Management with a Concentration in Sport Analytics from Columbia University in 2017. He earned his undergraduate degrees in Accounting and Sport Management from St. John Fisher College in 2015, where he has served as an adjunct professor teaching Sport Finance and Baseball Analytics.

Friday Focus: November 1st

Welcome to the fifth edition of AFP Analytics’ Friday Focus section. In the Friday Focus post I hope to highlight some of the most interesting events from a numbers perspective during the past week in the NHL. If something catches my eye from other sports, I might mention it here as well. I am intending on this being more of a quick hitter type of read that I hope everyone enjoys. I would also invite any readers to shoot us questions (@afpanalytics) and we will try to answer them every week. In honor of Day of the Dead, today’s post is going to look at teams whose fans should already start mourning their 2019-2020 because they are likely dead. But first…

Last Week’s Players to Watch – Jason Zucker, Rasmus Ristolainen, Rasmus Dahlin

Last week I highlighted Jason Zucker, Rasmus Ristolainen, and Rasmus Dahlin. Zucker had been playing incredibly well during 5v5 play but had only managed one point in that time (and three power play points). I had not given any fantasy advice but I was strong in my belief that he would put up some points soon. If you read my column last week and heeded my advice, you are probably very happy as he had three points during 5v5 play and an additional power play point in the past week, doubling his total point output on the season.

The other players I highlighted were the Buffalo Sabres’ Rasmus Dahlin and Ristolainen. They both appeared on the list because they were trending in the wrong direction. I wondered if Dahlin could get back on track and whether Ristolainen would bounce back or settle into where he has always been, a player who struggles to control play during 5v5 hockey. The Sabres played two games (Detroit and Arizona) since the last post and Ristolainen got absolutely abused during 5v5 play. Both his Corsi For (CF)% and Expected Goals For (xGF)% were below 35% for both games. Those performances are absolutely brutal. It is not surprising that reports are surfacing that the team is more likely to trade Marco Scandella than Ristolainen because he will probably fetch better value, keeping in mind that value is relative. Dahlin had an ok week but still wasn’t at the level the team needs him at. His xGF% were below 50% in both games. I will be paying close attention to him this next week as the Sabres will only play four games in two weeks and two of those games will be in Dahlin’s home country of Sweden. I wonder if some rest and a trip back home will do him some good. 

Last Week’s Game to Watch

In last week’s post, I highlighted Arizona at Buffalo. The game wasn’t the cleanest hockey game played but it was entertaining, especially the overtime period, which saw both teams have multiple quality chances at ending the game. The overtime serves as a perfect case for why the NHL should look to eliminate the shootout as it was such an anti-climactic ending to an interesting game. Buffalo hasn’t been playing as well recently and was significantly outplayed by Arizona during 5v5 play. They were lucky to get a point out of the game. Arizona has been playing incredibly well lately and is a team to watch out for.

In Honor of Day of The Dead…

With the old business out of the way, I will now move into which teams’ fans should begin mourning the death of their team’s season and which fans could see a miracle by Easter.

Ottawa Senators

Ottawa was actually decent to start the season with their CF% and xGF% hovering around or above 50% for much of October. Their performance metrics have quickly fallen to where everyone expected them to be coming into the start of the season. A team devoid of talent, with poor metrics, that starts and plays in a tough division has absolutely no chance of making the playoffs. This won’t come as news to most hockey fans but I of course have to include Ottawa here. The only question around Ottawa is whether or not they can finish with the best odds in the NHL for the draft lottery.

New Jersey Devils

I am not as confident in New Jersey’s season being dead as Ottawa but I don’t see how they overcome their slow start to the season, especially with a major decision looming on Taylor Hall. To be direct, I think New Jersey should be better than they are but their CF% and xGF% rank near the bottom of the league and being tied for the fewest points with Ottawa means something has to change and quickly if they hope to be an Easter miracle. I do not think New Jersey makes the playoffs and will have a critical decision to make when the trade deadline comes. Unless Hall has signed a new contract by the deadline, I think New Jersey has to trade him. They can’t afford to let him leave for nothing.

Detroit Red Wings

Detroit makes this list because they have mediocre numbers and a steep hill to climb to secure a playoff spot. Mainly they are on the list because there are six teams in the Atlantic Division who are better than them. It seems like Boston, Toronto, Tampa, Montreal, and Florida are clearly better teams and the Sabres have banked enough points to start the season while also playing decent hockey to make them a playoff contender as well. There is no chance Detroit overcomes those teams.

New York Rangers

New York has been the worst team in CF% and xGF% in the NHL. They have only managed to get 45% of their possible points. I expect the Rangers to improve but like Detroit, they may have too much ground to make up. Washington and Carolina are near locks in their division with Pittsburgh and Philadelphia as strong playoff contenders as well. When you combine those teams with the six teams in the Atlantic Division and a playoff spot seems near impossible. I think playoff teams will be happy the Rangers miss because I think they have too many new players who are taking too long to jell together. Later in the season, I could see them going on a too little, too late hot streak.

Chicago Blackhawks

I thought Chicago could have a chance to surprise this season. I liked the offseason additions they made and they still have Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews. However, they have been awful to start this season. They are fourth worst in the NHL in both CF% and xGF%, so I don’t think their poor start is undeserved. If they commit to Robin Lehner as their full-time starter, they might be able to go on a nice run but teams who get owned during 5v5 play can have moments but generally finish low in the standings. The one positive they have going for them is they are playing in a division where only three teams have started well and St. Louis’s numbers haven’t been overly inspiring. Their loss of Vladimir Tarasenko will hurt those numbers even more. However, Chicago will be hard pressed to overtake any of Colorado, Nashville, or St. Louis in their division and have to compete with six teams from the Pacific division who have gotten off to surprisingly strong starts. Speaking of the Pacific division…

San Jose Sharks

San Jose has terrible numbers during 5v5 play and haven’t gotten the points they need to stay competitive. They are probably the most talented team in this section on paper and because of that could overcome. However, the theme persists that they have dug themselves too big of a hole to overcome.  If any team in this section is going to have an Easter miracle, it will likely be San Jose. They are most similar to last year’s St. Louis Blues.

Teams that Could Have an Easter Miracle – Los Angeles Kings & Minnesota Wild

Both the Kings and Wild have been off to a dreadful starts as far as points go. However, their numbers during 5v5 play have been surprisingly impressive. Minnesota has an even CF% and their xGF% is 53%. Those types of numbers are usually put up by playoff teams. Los Angeles is even stronger with a CF% of 51% and xGF% of 53%. I don’t think either team ends up in the playoffs but if I were going to make a longshot bet on a team, one of these two teams could be worth a shot.

Player to Watch

I am interested to see how the New York Rangers’ Filip Chytil performs after an incredibly strong performance in his season debut. Chytil should have started the season with the Rangers. Chytil wasn’t overly strong last season but was awesome in his debut against the Lightning, scoring a goal and posting a CF% of 57% and xGF% of 74%. Let’s see if he can keep that performance level up.

Game to Watch

An easy game to pick here would be tonight’s matchup of Washington vs Buffalo but I don’t think Sabre fans are going to enjoy the game too much. I also would keep an eye on Pittsburgh at Boston on Monday, Carolina at Philadelphia, Arizona at Calgary, and St. Louis at Vancouver on Tuesday, Vegas at Toronto and Washington at Florida on Thursday. However, my game of the week will be Colorado at Arizona on Saturday. I will continue to beat the drum for Arizona and Colorado has proven to be one of the more fun teams to watch this season. I am also interested to see they perform at a high level without Landeskog or Rantanen.

If you have any thoughts or would like to submit questions for next week’s Friday Focus, tweet us, @afpanalytics, or me, @k_sticher.

All data is courtesy of naturalstattrick.com and capfriendly.com 

KYLE STICH is the Director of AFP Analytics.  In addition, Mr. Stich is a tax specialist and Director of Operations at AFP Consulting LLC, whose clientele include professional athletes performing services on three separate continents. Mr. Stich earned his Master of Science in Sport Management with a Concentration in Sport Analytics from Columbia University in 2017. He earned his undergraduate degrees in Accounting and Sport Management from St. John Fisher College in 2015, where he has served as an adjunct professor teaching Sport Finance and Baseball Analytics.

Friday Focus: October 25th

Welcome to the third edition of AFP Analytics’ Friday Focus section. In the Friday Focus post I hope to highlight some of the most interesting events from a numbers perspective during the past week in the NHL. If something catches my eye from other sports, I might mention it here as well. I am intending on this being more of a quick hitter type of read that I hope everyone enjoys. I would also invite any readers to shoot us questions (@afpanalytics) and we will try to answer them every week. We are starting to get to the point where teams are playing enough games to have their data settle in. Teams certainly can have good or bad 10 game stretches but with most playing around that number, we begin to learn what the team are about.

Last Week’s Players to Watch – Oliver Wahlstrom

Last week I highlighted Oliver Wahlstrom because he had two strong games to start his NHL career but had not yet scored. This week saw him play two more decent games. Against the Blue Jackets on October 19^th, the Islanders dominated the shot counter when he was on the ice but did not take many quality shots and allowed Columbus to take quality shots. Against the Coyotes last night, the Islanders and Coyotes split shots but the Islanders’ shots were of higher quality but did not see much ice time in the game. Wahlstrom’s numbers have remained strong and it is likely only a matter of time before he finally gets on the scoresheet and it will be well deserved.

Last Week’s Game to Watch

In last week’s post, I highlighted Colorado playing at Tampa Bay as the game to watch. Colorado dominated the score sheet and did so by taking higher quality shots than they allowed because Tampa Bay dominated the shot counter. Even though there are adjustments made for score state, which certainly apply in this 6-2 game, blowouts might skew things even more. Colorado’s underlying metrics weren’t great in this game but them getting a 6-2 win on no rest over the preseason Stanley Cup favorite is incredibly impressive. I do want to mention that Colorado’s loss of Mikko Rantanen cannot be understated. I’ll be interested to see how Colorado can hold up without him. If they can stay atop the Central Division until Rantanen returns, I would look at them as the possible Stanley Cup favorite.

What’s Up With the Minnesota Wild?

Last week, Jason Zucker publicly called out his team and even coach because the team has not been getting results. Wild fans predictably are upset. This past week, they were able to secure wins over Montreal and the still surging Oilers before being shut out by their division rival, Nashville Predators. The question is are they as bad as their points show or should we expect them to start performing better? Good news Wild fans, things should get better. The Wild have had decent underlying metrics with both their Corsi For (CF)% and expected goals for (xGF)% both above 50%. Teams with those underlying metrics should be in or very close to a playoff position. So why are the Wild bottom dwellers? The Wild have the worst 5v5 shooting percentage and the seventh worst save percentage for the league’s third worst PDO, which is the sum of those two percentages. Over the course of a season, most teams should regress toward a PDO of 1. The Wild are currently at .970. I will guarantee the team’s fortune will start to improve as long as they can maintain thei strong CF% and xGF%. These are the type of performances that traditionally get coaches fired and allow the subsequent replacement to excel. With a recent turnover in general manager (GM), I don’t want to speculate over Bruce Boudreau’s future because he is a good coach and it appears the team’s new GM, Bill Guerin, is willing to be patient. However, this slow start would also give Guerin an easy excuse to move on from Boudreau so he can eventually bring in “his own guy.” If I was in charge, I would stay the course.

Speaking of Zucker, I know many Wild fans were unhappy with him calling the team out because he hasn’t exactly been lighting up the scoresheet. However, the underlying metrics tell a different story. Yes Zucker has been on the ice for only two goals for and six against during 5v5 play but his CF% (54.26%) and xGF% (58.98%) have been awesome. The team has a .929 PDO while he has been on the ice during 5v5 play. I don’t usually give fantasy hockey advice but now might be the time to buy low on Zucker. He is going to start getting some points.

Watch Out for the Flyers and Coyotes

The Flyers have the best underlying metrics in the league with a CF% of 55% and xGF% of 60%. Those numbers are very similar to what the Hurricanes were posted at the beginning of last season before catching fire and making a run to the Eastern Conference Finals. The Flyers are getting decent results to start this season but aren’t in the top tier of the league just yet.The Coyotes also been on a tear lately as well. They are fourth in the league in CF% at 54% and second in xGF% at 58%. If you have been reading this column regularly, you will know that I think the Flyers and Coyotes will likely start winning more games as long as they continue to perform at this high level.

What Should we make of the Sabres?

The Sabres lead the league in points but recently lost to the lowly New York Rangers by a score of 6-2. Sabre fans are starting to get nervous after last season and it’s valid to wonder if they are going to fall to the same fate again. I think it is still a little premature to panic though they aren’t heading in a great direction. Their adjusted CF% and xGF% are both still above 50%, but barely. The loss to the Rangers isn’t surprising as the team was due for some regression as they had been winning some games they probably didn’t deserve. With more tape on how they are playing, teams seem to be adjusting to their aggressive, pressuring style of play. I still think the team will be ok, especially considering their division rivals haven’t got rolling yet either. 

Fans of teams from around the league should keep a close eye on Buffalo as they are likely going to have to decide on their defense with Brandon Montour getting close to returning. I am just speculating here but I wonder if the team may consider playing seven defensemen and 11 forwards, especially considering most of the two defenders who are most likely to come out of the lineup, Marco Scandella and Henri Jokiharju, are playing the best. With Rasmus Dahlin struggling in his own zone, rolling seven defensemen would allow the team to use him more strategically for a few games to see if they can get him rolling again.

Player(s) to Watch

Previously I had highlighted players that have been playing well in this section. This week I am going to highlight three players who have been struggling by different standards. I earlier discussed Jason Zucker’s strong underlying 5v5 metrics but poor scoring results. I also predicted that he would soon start scoring. I will be keeping my eye on him to see if the results start to come. I also want to watch the Sabres’ two Rasmi (Rasmus Ristolainen and Rasmus Dahlin). Ristolainen had a strong start to the season but is quickly regressing back to where he has previously been: one of the worst possession players on the Buffalo Sabres. Rasmus Dahlin has had an interesting start to the season. He had 10 points through 10 games but seven of those have come on the Sabres’ lethal power play. Last season, Dahlin was a positive possession player on a negative possession team, which is phenomenal for a 18 year old defenseman. However, this season he has been below 50% on a better team. Too often he has also looked uncomfortable. Last night, he was leaving his feet far too often. Under no circumstances should he be a healthy scratch but maybe reducing his minutes or play at forward but using him more strategically would be smart for a few games. I also wonder if he is dealing with some injury that isn’t known about.

Game to Watch

Once again, there are some intriguing matchups this week. Tonight, we see Colorado at Vegas, which is certainly an intriguing matchup. On Saturday we see St. Louis return to Boston, Toronto at Montreal, and Nashville at Tampa. On Monday, we see Arizona at Buffalo. On Tuesday, there is Washington at Toronto and Philadelphia at Pittsburgh, which should be good more so because both are good hockey teams and not because of their rivalry. I am going to go off the book with this week’s pick and go with Arizona at Buffalo. Buffalo has been trending down but may still be at the top of the standings when the game takes place while Arizona has been trending upward. Buffalo needs a quality 5v5 performance and doing it against a strong Arizona team would be just what the doctor ordered to get them back on track.  

If you have any thoughts or would like to submit questions for next week’s Friday Focus, tweet us, @afpanalytics, or me, @k_sticher.

All data is courtesy of naturalstattrick.com and capfriendly.com 

KYLE STICH is the Director of AFP Analytics.  In addition, Mr. Stich is a tax specialist and Director of Operations at AFP Consulting LLC, whose clientele include professional athletes performing services on three separate continents. Mr. Stich earned his Master of Science in Sport Management with a Concentration in Sport Analytics from Columbia University in 2017. He earned his undergraduate degrees in Accounting and Sport Management from St. John Fisher College in 2015, where he has served as an adjunct professor teaching Sport Finance and Baseball Analytics.

Friday Focus: October 18th

Welcome to the third edition of AFP Analytic’s Friday Focus section. In the Friday focus post I hope to highlight some of the most interesting events from a numbers perspective during the past week in the NHL. If something catches my eye from other sports, I might mention it here as well. I am intending on this being more of a quick hitter type of read that I hope everyone enjoys. I would also invite any readers to shoot us questions (@afpanalytics) and we will try to answer them every week. We are still early in the NHL season so we want to be careful to speak on definite terms but there are definitely some interesting trends developing that we need to keep an eye on.

Last Week’s Players to Watch – Travis Konecny; Sabres’ “LOG” Line

My first player to watch was Rasmus Sandin who went from having a stellar NHL debut to average results to the AHL, which was probably the right decision by the Maple Leafs organization. I was hoping appearing in the Player to Watch section was not a kiss of death for a player because we didn’t get off to a great start. Last week I stretched this section to include the Flyers’ Travis Konecny and the Sabres’ line of Kyle Okposo, Johan Larsson and Zemgus Girgensons, who have been dubbed the “LOG” line by some of Buffalo’s media. Travis Konecny has been able to maintain his strong start to the season. Through five games he is third in Corsi For (CF)% and second in expected Goals For (xGF)%. I have looked at adjusted metrics and did not include players who have not played every game for their team. The Flyers haven’t played as many games as most of the other teams in the league so it might be a little premature to gush too much over Konecny. However, I will continue to keep an eye on him because he is in a stage in his career where he is expected to start to take some major steps forward.

The Sabres’ LOG line has regressed some though Kyle Okposo has maintained his strong play. Last week I published this article on Friday afternoon and raved about the line as a whole. That evening against the Florida Panthers, the line accounted for both of the Sabres’ goals (the Sabres won 3-2 in a shootout). My prediction that they would soon be rewarded was correct. The line is still the best driver of possession for the first place Sabres but have been bitten by the regression bug. However, Okposo ranks directly behind Konency in both measures discussed above. The Sabres’ only lineup change of the season was replacing an injured Conor Sheary. With the success the team is having, it is not surprising to see them maintain status quo in their lineup but when they hit an inevitable rut, I would not be surprised to see the team try to use Okposo as a sparkplug for another line.

Last Week’s Game to Watch

In last week’s post, I highlighted Nashville playing at Vegas as the game to watch. I am pretty happy with my pick as Nashville was able to get a win they did not deserve but that is an important test for them. I am a strong believer in using numbers to tell a story but I also think it was important for Nashville to gain the confidence that comes along with beating a team they likely will have to go through if they hope to come out of the Western Conference. In the game the shots were basically equal during 5v5 play, when adjusting for score effects, but Vegas dominated in shot quality but could not finish.

Question from our followers:

This week is the first we will discuss a question from our followers. I would love to have this weekly post be guided by your questions as we move forward. I want to know what you are interested in hearing about. 

Anyways, our first question comes from @PatrickSalmon1, who asks what my thoughts on the Islanders are to start the season and where they need to improve to have success going forward.

Let me start by saying the Islanders overachieved last season and I think they were lucky to have the success they did. I thoroughly expected them to drop off a cliff at any point. To my surprise, they were able to advance past Pittsburgh before losing to a far superior Carolina Hurricanes team. Last season the Islanders were sixth worse in controlling the shot counter but were slightly better than their opponents in generating quality. They were a well-coached team who did their best to make their goaltenders’ lives easier. They succeeded and were rewarded by incredible goaltending play. They were not the strongest offensive team but were able to score enough and at the right time to win plenty of games. Unless they dramatically improved their team in the offseason, if seemed like they would have trouble to repeat last season’s success. Their fall has probably been harder than they deserved but I fully expected the fall to happen, especially considering the offseason they had. Predicting goaltending performance year to year is unreliable but I am pretty comfortable in betting that Robin Lehner will have a stronger season than Semyon Varlamov. I think letting Lehner go in favor of Varlamov is negligence by Lou Lamoriello. Performance aside, I think there are intangible factors also in play because of the journey Lehner has been through. Additionally, Lamoriello putting all his eggs in the Panarin basket was a major problem. The Islanders desperately needed the offensive infusion that Panarin could have provided. Not having a plan B was an issue.

This season we see the Islanders rank last in CF% (42.36%) and third worst in xGF% (43%). The combination of those measures leads me to be pessimistic in them demonstrating any significant improvement in the standings. When looking at players’ individual performances, the picture does not get any better. They do not have a single player on their roster who has been on the ice for more shots for than against (when considering score adjustments). Oliver Wahlstrom and Noah Dobson have provided some offensive spark as they have produced quality xGF%. Wahlstrom is at 61% and Dobson at 54.54%. The first step the Islanders should take is to give Wahlstrom and Dobson more opportunities. I also wonder if the team wrote off Josh Ho-Sang too early. For a team that needs to drive more offense, Ho-Sang provides just that. When looking at the bigger picture, I worry about the path Lamoriello has set the Islanders on. He has committed significant dollars to Josh Bailey, Brock Nelson, Anders Lee, and Jordan Eberle. He will soon have to do the same for Mat Barzal. Good players deserve to be paid and I think all of the players I just listed are good players. However, with the exception of Barzal, all those forwards are probably on the wrong side of their aging curve and for a team that already lacks some speed, they are going to slow them down further. Additionally, I see them as quality second-line players but I am not convinced they are first-line players on a team that contends for a Stanley Cup. When looking at those forwards plus Leo Komarov and the previously mentioned Varlamov, we see Lamoriello has committed $31.5M to just those players. 

If the Islanders want to turn the corner, they need to add some elite skill both at forward and defense. The best way to get this type of talent is to pick at the top of the draft. Unfortunately, the Islanders’ roster is likely too good to finish low enough to pick there without some lottery luck. I think they need a major speed infusion but also need to be patient. I really liked what Lamoriello did in his first offseason as Islanders’ GM but hated this past offseason. I know Islanders’ fans want to see their team succeed now but I think they are going to have to remain patient as their roster is going to need some major overhaul. Barry Trotz is a top coach who has probably already maximized the talent so a change there will not likely lead to immediate improvement either. 

Looking at the bottom teams

We are starting to get closer to being able to be a little more definite in conclusions about teams but I still want to caution that there is time for things to change. Today, I want to highlight teams whose metrics indicate they may be overachieving and those that are probably going to stay toward the bottom of the standings. 

Bad Teams Who are Bad

Once again, I want to reiterate it is still early in the season and teams can dramatically improve their play. However, poor CF% and xGF% are usually indicators that any sort of improvement in points without better metrics are probably unsustainable runs. Here we see the New York Rangers, New Jersey Devils, San Jose Sharks, and Chicago Blackhawks. These teams came into the season with various levels of expectations but they are all teams I expected to be in the playoff hunt for most of the season. San Jose was a popular pick to make a run in the West. The other three were teams that should have taken a step forward. Poor starts in the NHL can doom a team’s whole season, especially considering other bubble teams have gotten off to strong starts. Where I want to spend more time though is on the bad teams who are currently dressed as good teams.

Good Teams Who are Bad

Throughout a season, teams can have stretches where they can put together point streaks even when they get out played during 5v5 play. Here we see St. Louis, New York Islanders, Edmonton, and Boston. Last season, I correctly predicted the Sabres regression at the exact moment it happened. This year I am putting these four teams on early regression notice. Right now, I would consider Edmonton the most likely candidate as their scoring is mostly coming from one line and their CF% and xGF% metrics are poor.

Player(s) to Watch

This week I am interested to see if Oliver Wahlstrom can continue to be a strong offensive driver for the Islanders. He has not yet been on the ice for a goal for or goal against but has been expected to be on the ice for at least a goal. His numbers aren’t eye-popping but I am always interested to see how high draft perform in their early game action. As I discussed earlier, the Islanders struggle to drive offense and Wahlstrom appears to be one of the players who can do that.

Game to Watch

This week we get to see Boston and Toronto square off twice, which is sure to be a good matchup. We also get matchups of Washington at Edmonton and Pittsburgh at Tampa. However, the matchup I am most interested in this week is Colorado at Tampa, which is happening Saturday night. Tampa appears to have found their footing and Colorado is still the only team to not be defeated in regulation. Many people have been high on Colorado since the offseason but I am still not 100% sold on them. Their metrics haven’t been spectacular but they have beaten some good teams. Playing at Tampa will be a good measure for them.

If you have any thoughts or would like to submit questions for next week’s Friday Focus, tweet us, @afpanalytics, or me, @k_sticher.

All data is courtesy of naturalstattrick.com and capfriendly.com 

KYLE STICH is the Director of AFP Analytics.  In addition, Mr. Stich is a tax specialist and Director of Operations at AFP Consulting LLC, whose clientele include professional athletes performing services on three separate continents. Mr. Stich earned his Master of Science in Sport Management with a Concentration in Sport Analytics from Columbia University in 2017. He earned his undergraduate degrees in Accounting and Sport Management from St. John Fisher College in 2015, where he has served as an adjunct professor teaching Sport Finance and Baseball Analytics.

Friday Focus: October 11th

Welcome to the second edition of AFP Analytic’s Friday Focus section. In the Friday focus post I hope to highlight some of the most interesting events from a numbers perspective during the past week in the NHL. If something catches my eye from other sports, I might mention it here as well. I am intending on this being more of a quick hitter type of read that I hope everyone enjoys. I would also invite any readers to shoot us questions (@afpanalytics) and we will try to answer them every week. We are still early in the NHL season so we want to be careful to speak on definite terms but there are definitely some interesting trends developing that we need to keep an eye on.

Last Week’s Player to Watch – Rasmus Sandin

I previously raved about Rasmus Sandin’s NHL debut against the Ottawa Senators and noted that he is a player to keep an eye on to see if he could sustain his impressive play from his NHL debut. He has still been good but not elite. The Maple Leafs have not allowed a 5v5 goal while he has been on the ice but have also only scored one. The team has controlled the shot share at a 54% rate while basically breaking even in xGF%. Those numbers are perfectly acceptable for a bottom six defenseman but are not super exciting either.

Last Week’s Game to Watch

In last week’s post, I highlighted Tampa Bay-Carolina on Sunday as a game to watch. It did not turn out how I expected. Tampa Bay got absolutely throttled by the Hurricanes. They had no shots on goal in the second period. Carolina had a very nice 69% adjusted shot share and 71% xGF%. It is incredible that Tampa was able to take that game to overtime as they had no business being in the game with the numbers they posted. Again, it is early but Carolina, in my opinion, has announced they have arrived as a legitimate Stanley Cup contender. To me, this game says more about Carolina than it does Tampa Bay. Tampa Bay started slowly last season as well until storming to a historic regular season. But there has to be some concern because…

The Atlantic Division Looks to be a Gauntlet 

Again, it is too early to press the panic button or plan the parade but the Atlantic Division is setting up to be absolutely brutal for its members. Ottawa seems like a lock to finish last based on their roster on paper though after having a strong game against St. Louis, they might be pesky enough to not be complete push overs and could sneak into seventh in the division but that would not be ideal for them. Their adjusted xGF% is actually a respectable 50%. Their adjusted CF% is not as strong at 46.58%. They are taking a quantity over quality approach in their defensive zone. They are allowing a high percentage of shots but their decent xGF% means they are likely not as strong in quality. 

After Ottawa, things in the Atlantic get very interesting. Montreal and Florida have not gotten off to good starts. Their xGF%s, which is the best predictor of future success, are 45.22% and 41.85%, respectively. The next worst in the division is Toronto at 49%. Boston isn’t much further ahead at 50%. Tampa Bay vaulted themselves to 53.49%, which is tenth best in the NHL despite their dreadful performance against Carolina. The other top two Atlantic division teams in xGF% are two of the biggest surprises in the NHL. Detroit has the eighth best xGF% at 54.6% and the best team in the Atlantic and second best in the NHL is the Buffalo Sabres, who are sporting an impressive 59% xGF% through their first four games. Please keep in mind those are score adjusted numbers. 

With Buffalo getting points in every game and Boston, Detroit, and Tampa getting points in three of four games, the early season struggles by Montreal and Florida must be highlighted. Montreal’s early season schedule hasn’t done them any favors, starting on the road against Carolina, Toronto, Buffalo before playing their home opener a night after a tough overtime loss to Buffalo. They at least get a few days of rest before they have to play the St. Louis Blues, the defending Stanley Cup Champions. I think Montreal is a good team on paper and I would expect to see both their underlying metrics and team point total tick upwards. However, the early season hole they find themselves in could be the difference at season’s end. Florida is in the same spot as Montreal as they played Tampa Bay twice and Carolina once. Getting one win out of those three games is commendable. I don’t like saying a team’s fourth game out of 82 is a must win but Florida losing to Buffalo tonight would not be good for the Panthers. Buffalo is likely to be one of the teams they will be directly competing with for a playoff spot and spotting them a seven-point lead might be a problem. It would also keep them in seventh place in the division so they would have to pass at least two Atlantic teams. Hockey fans, especially Sabre fans, will remember Buffalo got off to a fast start last year before choking down the stretch. Last season, their play seemed unsustainable based on how they were winning games. This season their metrics are strong enough that a regression is less likely. Again, it’s early but early season deficits are surprisingly difficult to overcome, especially for teams that were thought of as bubble teams at the beginning of the season.

What is up with San Jose?

San Jose was a popular pick to make a deep playoff run this season. The team lost Joe Pavelski but was able to maintain the rest of their core and now have a healthy Erik Karlsson. For a team that was only six wins from the Stanley Cup and decimated with injuries during the playoffs, it did not seem unreasonable to expect them to be strong once again this season. However, they could not have started worse. They started with two losses to Vegas, the first of which they were throttled (which we detailed last week). They have gotten better each game, even dominating against Nashville and finally got their first win in dominating fashion against Chicago last night, a game they almost had to win. 

Although San Jose finally got a win, their underlying metrics are still a major cause for concern. They have just a 51% CF% and a very poor 46% xGF%. Those are both adjusted metrics. The Sharks are going to have to go on a run at some point because Vegas, Arizona, Anaheim, and Los Angeles all rank in the top half of the league in xGF%. Calgary has a decent xGF% and has banked some team points, while Edmonton has worse metrics than San Jose but has still managed to start 4-0. In what will likely be a tough Pacific division and an even tougher Western Conference, San Jose’s slow start has to be looked at critically. 

Five Teams Remain Unbeaten

Heading into Friday’s action, we see five NHL teams, the Carolina Hurricanes, Colorado Avalanche, Edmonton Oilers, New York Rangers, and Philadelphia Flyers remain unbeaten but their performances could not be more different. Since New York and Philadelphia have only played two games, I do not want to discuss them further here because of a small sample. I have already touched on Carolina but I once again want to reiterate how impressive they have been early on. They rank fourth in xGF% (57%) and eighth in CF% (53%). As long as they continue to get adequate goaltending, they may want to hold off on scheduling any events in their arena for April and May. Colorado just had an impressive win over a good Bruins’ team, where they had a slight advantage in shots and broke even in xGF%. Their underlying numbers are very average. They were expected to be a top team coming into the season and have only played three games so I wouldn’t be surprised to see their numbers uptick slightly to match their results. Edmonton, the third unbeaten team, instill the least confidence. As previously mentioned, their numbers are not strong. They are the early candidate to be this year’s 2018 Buffalo Sabres, start hot and limp to the finish. Their underlying metrics during 5v5 play have to improve if they hope to make the playoffs.

Player(s) to Watch

Last week I highlighted Rasmus Sandin to see if he could continue his incredible play that he showed against Ottawa and I discussed the results above. This week I want to highlight Travis Konecny and the Buffalo Sabres’ “4^th line.” Konecny is a player I have been high on since he was drafted. He has flashed moments of strong play but has not taken the next step in performance. However, he is still young and is playing his first season on a new long-term contract. Although it is still early (2 games), he has been on the ice for 35 shots for and only 13 against (73% CF%). His xGF% is an impressive 85.39%. He has also scored two goals. 

The other players I would like to highlight are players that have often drawn the criticism of #SabresTwitter. I mentioned Kyle Okposo last week and want to once again highlight him and his line mates, Johan Larsson and Zemegus Girgensons. The three of them compose Buffalo’s “fourth line” but the trio has arguable been the best line in hockey, by advanced metrics, through the team’s first four games. Okposo ranks second, Girgensons fifth, and Larsson sixth, among players who have played at least ten minutes in xGF%. When it comes to CF%, Okposo is third, Girgensons ninth, and Larsson 16^th. For three players who fans didn’t want to be on the opening night roster, they have been extremely steady and impressive. It would be nice to have some goals come from their strong play but for a team that played strong during 5v5 hockey in their first two games and dropped off in their second two their steady play has to be appreciated. 

Game to Watch

Like last week, there are some strong contenders for the game to watch this week. On Monday, we have Colorado at Washington, Tuesday there is Tampa Bay at Montreal and Nashville at Vegas, Wednesday has Colorado at Pittsburgh and Toronto at Washington, while Thursday has Tampa Bay at Boston. Last week I highlighted a potential Eastern Conference Final matchup so this week I am going to go for the potential Western Conference Final matchup and go with Nashville at Vegas. 

If you have any thoughts or would like to submit questions for next week’s Friday Focus, tweet us, @afpanalytics, or me, @k_sticher.

All data is courtesy of naturalstattrick.com and capfriendly.com 

KYLE STICH is the Director of AFP Analytics.  In addition, Mr. Stich is a tax specialist and Director of Operations at AFP Consulting LLC, whose clientele include professional athletes performing services on three separate continents. Mr. Stich earned his Master of Science in Sport Management with a Concentration in Sport Analytics from Columbia University in 2017. He earned his undergraduate degrees in Accounting and Sport Management from St. John Fisher College in 2015, where he has served as an adjunct professor teaching Sport Finance and Baseball Analytics.

Friday Focus: October 4th

In what I hope to become a weekly post (please forgive me if life or other work gets in the way the some weeks), I would like to welcome you to the first version of AFP Analytic’s Friday Focus section. In the Friday focus I hope to highlight some of the most interesting events from a numbers perspective during the past week in the NHL. If something catches my eye from other sports, I might mention it here as well. I am intending on this being more of a quick hitter type of read that I hope everyone enjoys. I would also invite any readers to shoot us questions (@afpanalytics) and we will try to answer them every week. With this being a short week in the NHL, this post will probably be the shortest for the foreseeable future. Without further ado, here are some things I found interesting this past week:

NHL Teams Reluctance to Put Waiver Claims on Players

Claiming players through waivers is not going to help you build a perennial playoff team but a few strategic claims could be the difference between making and missing the playoffs or winning versus losing a round in the playoffs. This week there were some interesting names on waivers that some teams should have thought long and hard about claiming. Ultimately, there were only two players claimed, the Winnipeg Jets claimed defenseman Carl Dahlstrom from Chicago and the Arizona Coyotes claimed goaltender Eric Comrie from the Jets. It makes sense that the Jets would put a waiver claim in for a defenseman but Dahlstrom seems like an odd choice. I would have preferred the Sabres’ Casey Nelson, whose has had slightly stronger numbers over the past three seasons. He also is right-handed, which would have provided more balance on the Jets’ blueline. Thomas Hickey is another defenseman who could have been an interesting option, though I don’t know if the Jets should have added his salary.

It isn’t a surprise to see Eric Comrie get claimed as he appears to have a bright future but by claiming him, the Coyotes now have four goalie who could provide respectable NHL minutes (Adin Hill, Darcy Kuempher, Antti Raanta). With many teams already having their NHL goaltending tandems set, it isn’t surprising that neither Pheonix Copley nor Casey DeSmith were claimed though they appear to be capable NHL goalies. Columbus is a team that probably should’ve considered one of the two.

Although I can’t say I’m surprised, I do find it interesting that not a single forward on waivers was claimed. Dan Sprong seemed like a very logical player for a team to claim. His inclusion on waivers looks incredibly bad for the Anaheim Ducks after they traded Marcus Pettersson for him. Pettersson is exceling in Pittsburgh while Anaheim’s blueline is lacking. Sprong is a quality young forward who would have provided an upgrade for most teams. I guarantee there will be teams that will trade for a worse forward later this season. The same can be said for Sven Baertschi and Nikolay Goldobin. The other interesting forward to clear was Josh Ho-Sang. Although his advanced metrics are fantastic, the intangibles around him has clearly scared teams off. Some team will trade for him and as long as everything works out off the ice, will likely end up with a steal.

Golden Knights and Sabres dominate

The Buffalo Sabres have been one of the worst teams in this decade while the Pittsburgh Penguins have been one of the best. Thursday night the Penguins hosted the Sabres who were playing their first game under their new coach, Ralph Kruger. Kruger has been hyped as a coach but I would’ve expected the team to struggle playing in a new system against a top team while on the road. The Penguins were the team who looked lost. Teams regularly play good and bad teams but the Penguins were absolutely dominated by the Sabres. A few numbers from that game to consider:

1. The Sabres had an adjusted Corsi For% of 62.52%  
2. The Sabres had an adjusted expected goals for% (xGF%) of 76.43% propelled by having a scoring chance for% of 71%
3. No Sabre had an unadjusted Corsi For% or xGF% under 50% so at no point did the Penguins control play
4. The Sabres’ best player was Kyle Okposo with a CF% of 77% and xGF% of 86.91%. He also had the highest individual expected goals.

One game is too small to draw definite conclusions but this win by Buffalo was incredibly impressive and Sabre fans have to hope they can continue to play at this level. The other question to ponder is maybe Pittsburgh isn’t as good as expected. Again, too small of a sample to say anything definite but Pittsburgh could not have started worse.

I think the Sharks are a better team than Pittsburgh, though Erik Karlsson’s late scratch certainly hurt, but the beatdown Vegas put on San Jose was impressive. If there were any questions about Vegas coming into the season, the team came out and looked to show they are an absolute force once again. Their numbers in the game looked very similar to what Buffalo had against Pittsburgh. Jonathan Marchessault had an insane 81.48% CF% and 95.32% xGF%. Though it is early, that may end up being the most dominant performance for the entire season. San Jose did nothing while Marchessault was on the ice. Vegas does have to be concerned about Nate Schmidt’s injury that appears to be serious enough to keep him out weeks. The biggest concern for Vegas coming into the season had to be their depth on the blue line. Losing one of their best, if not the best, defensemen might give the team some difficulty. If a depth defenseman finds their way on waivers in the next week or so, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Vegas put in a claim. They could also trade a late round pick for one.

Player to Watch

Rasmus Sandin had an amazing debut for the Toronto Maple Leafs. Of course, that debut came against the Ottawa Senators who seem destined for last place this season and may approach some of the futility records of recent years. In his debut, Sandin skated just under 9 minutes while posting an adjusted CF% of 69.23% and a ridiculous 96.36 adjusted xGF%. I will be keeping my eye on his performance to see if he will continue perform at a high level or if his numbers were propped up by playing the lowly Senators.

Game to Watch

I am definitely intrigued by the Golden Knights-Sharks rematch tonight and the Lightning visit Toronto next Thursday in what should be a tremendous game. However, the most intriguing game for me this week Tampa Bay at Carolina. Once the playoffs roll around, I think there is a good chance these two teams will be the favorites to meet in the Eastern Conference Finals. Both teams play a fun style of hockey as well. It is unfortunate that they are playing on a NFL Sunday and won’t draw as many eyes as it should.

If you have any thoughts or would like to submit questions for next week’s Friday Focus, tweet us, @afpanalytics, or me, @k_sticher.

All data is courtesy of naturalstattrick.com and capfriendly.com

KYLE STICH is the Director of AFP Analytics.  In addition, Mr. Stich is a tax specialist and Director of Operations at AFP Consulting LLC, whose clientele include professional athletes performing services on three separate continents. Mr. Stich earned his Master of Science in Sport Management with a Concentration in Sport Analytics from Columbia University in 2017. He earned his undergraduate degrees in Accounting and Sport Management from St. John Fisher College in 2015, where he has served as an adjunct professor teaching Sport Finance and Baseball Analytics.

The Curious Case of Rasmus Ristolainen: What is his value?

We previously wrote an article series (part 1 & part 2) looking at the Buffalo Sabres and their logjam on defense. We concluded that the Sabres best option would involve a trade of Rasmus Ristolainen. In the second part of the article series, we looked at nine teams that could have varying degrees of interest in the 24-year-old, right-handed defenseman. There was one burning question that remained, what is Rasmus Ristolainen’s value and why would the Sabres trade him. In this article, I will do my best to provide an unbiased assessment of Ristolainen’s play to help answer those questions. As the regular season quickly approaches, it is critical the Sabres make the smartest lineup decisions to give them a chance to get off to a good start.

Last season, there were nine defensemen who were under the age of 26 and had a cap hit between $5M and $6M on a long-term contract for next season. These players will demonstrate what level of play the Sabres should expect out of Ristolainen and can be found in the table below.

Comparing Player Performance

The first step I want to take is to look at Ristolainen’s performance compared to these other players as that provides us an insight into what level of play similar players provide. The question I want you to continue asking yourself as you work your way through each section of the article is would you be willing to trade one of these players in a one for one trade from both teams’ perspective. If your answer to that question is a resounding no, the player is not performing at the expected level.

To assess these players’ performance, I am going to focus on three “underlying metrics,” their scoring metrics, and then any other individual metrics that I see as relevant. I will focus on the previous three seasons for each player and only look at their play during 5v5 play. Please note that all statistics have been sourced from NaturalStatTrick.com As I work my way through the performance analysis, I will explain what metrics I am using, why I think they are important, and what they are telling us about the player.

“Underlying Metrics”

I will start with metrics that are most predictive of team success. Here, I will look at Corsi For% (CF%) Relative (Rel), Goals For% (GF%) Rel, and Expected Goals For% (xGF%) Rel. For each metric, I will also include their components (For and Against) so we can understand why a player is performing how they are. Let me start by explaining why I am using Relative metrics. Relative metrics are a way to look at players on a more equal scale. It will be much easier for a player to have a 50% GF% on a team that has a 55% GF% than it would be to have a 50% GF% on a team with a GF% of 45%. To put things in simpler terms, it would be easier for a player to have had a positive goal differential while playing for the 2018-2019 Tampa Bay Lightning compared to playing for the 2018-2019 Ottawa Senators. The relative metrics are looking at how much better the team performed with the player on the ice versus when he was off the ice. A relative metric near zero, means the team performed virtually the same with the player on and off the ice. Let’s stick with our example of having a player with a 50% goal differential. If that player were playing on a team with the 55% GF%, his relative GF% would be -5%, since the team is 5% worse when he is on the ice. If that same player were on a 45% team, he would have a relative GF% of +5% since he was making his team 5% better when he was on the ice. One important thing to note about the relative metrics is that those that are against metrics are better to be negative. You want to see a player give up less shots or less goals when on the ice, which is what a negative relative metric would indicate.

The first metric I will look at is Corsi. Corsi is measuring every time a shot is taken, whether it be on goal or toward goal. I prefer to refer to Corsi as shots and traditional shots as shots on goal. From here on, I will interchangeably use Corsi and shots to refer to the same thing. I will always refer to shots on goal as just that. This is the logic used in soccer and there is no reason to not apply the same in hockey.

Now that I have established what Corsi is, I will explain why it is important. With no easily accessible time of possession tracking, Corsi gives us the best ability to estimate who is consistently playing in their offensive zone and who is consistently playing in their defensive zone. If your team is taking more shots against your opponent while you are on the ice, your team has to be playing in the offensive zone. If your opponent is taking more shots, you are spending more time in the defensive zone. There are flaws with the metric, namely, you are influenced by the teammates you are playing with and the situation you are playing in. However, over the course of a season and certainly multiple seasons, most of these concerns will tease themselves out. Let’s take a look, starting with the 2016-2017 season. Remember that for the orange bar, representing shots against, the lower the number is better.

When looking at the 2016-2017 season, we see that the Sabres got absolutely caved in when Ristolainen was on the ice. Some of these other players hurt their teams’ performance but none as negatively as Ristolainen. It might be acceptable to see decent shot generation while getting shelled in his own zone because that would lead me to believe that with more favorable deployment he could be effective. One of the arguments in Ristolainen’s favor has always been he had been saddled with terrible partners for many of his early years in Buffalo. In 2016, Ristolainen played the most minutes with Jake McCabe followed by Josh Gorges and Dmitry Kulikov. The latter two defenders are definitely not possession drivers and McCabe is not a defender known for driving play himself either so on the surface it is not surprising to see the Sabres’ numbers worse when Ristolainen was on the ice considering who he had to play with. However, a deeper dive into the pairings show that each defender was actually BETTER when away from Ristolainen. Ristolainen was the one dragging their play down. That should not happen. However, I would not want to draw conclusions based off of one season. Let’s look at the 2017-2018 season next, which was kinder to Ristolainen.

During the 2017-2018 season, Ristolainen showed signs of being passable. The Sabres saw a very slight uptick in play when Ristolainen was on the ice versus when he was off. Considering they were sixthworst team in controlling the shot counter, this isn’t overly impressive. This season Ristolainen saw most of his minutes with Marco Scandella. The pair’s performance was similar to Ristolainen’s overall performance. However, when looking at Ristolainen’s performance compared to the other players in our sample, it is still really poor. Only him, Dumba, and Theodore did not significantly improve the team, though all three did improve from 2016 to 2017. Let’s look to the 2018-2019 season where we will see Ristolainen take a significant step back.

We now see three straight years where Ristolainen’s team gave up significantly more shots when he was on the ice versus when he was off. This is the first year in which he was not the weakest of our comparable group in this area, though Morgan Rielly was so strong offensively that he virtually canceled out the team’s poor performance in their own end when he was on the ice. We do not want to draw absolute conclusions based on one metric but as things stand now, I would say Ristolainen is not performing at the level he should. I would have a hard time envisioning any of the teams of these other players trading one of them one for one for Ristolainen. One of the questions the team would have to consider is if they are selling low. With just looking at one metric, last offseason would have been the best one to trade Ristolainen.

The next metric I will assess is GF% Rel. This metric is very straightforward. It is looking at whether or not your team is outscoring the opponent’s team while a player is on the ice. Keep in mind the relative aspect, which will show whether your team’s goal differential is getting better or worse while the player in on the ice. The positive of this metric is it is indicating actual outcomes. To win games, you have to outscore the opponent and that is what this metric measures. The negative of this metric is it is highly reliable on outcomes outside of a player’s control, namely the goaltending, both for and against. Save percentage is incredibly inconsistent from season to season and tremendous luck is involved. With the goal of any player analysis to be to isolate individual skill, we need to look beyond GF% to accomplish that. However, I still want to present the GF% Rel and its components because it will help us tell the most complete story about a player. I will again start by looking at the 2016-2017 season.

In 2016, we see that the Sabres were slightly better in goal differential when Ristolainen was on the ice versus off. He slotted in the middle of the comparison group for this season. As I discussed above, this is not a metric that I want to put a ton of stock in but one of the positive takeaways here is despite getting shelled by shots when Ristolainen was on the ice, the actual results were actually ok. Let’s move on to the 2017-2018 season.

Above, we see another moderately strong performance from Ristolainen, which better follows his shot metrics. Once again, we see Ristolainen slotting favorably among the comparison group. Ristolainen’s strong performance in two out of two seasons is a good trend but as we move to the most recent season, we will see a very concerning outcome.

Last season, Ristolainen performed the worst among the comparison group. Because of the unpredicatability of goaltending his poor performance here could be the result of the Sabres’ goaltending tandem of Carter Hutton and Linus Ullmark playing dreadful hockey after the Sabres’ improbable hot start. However, Ristolainen was paired with his most competent partners during the 2018-2019 season but put up his worst results. I really want to emphasize that looking at goals for and goals against do not paint a true picture of the player’s abilities and is highly dependent on the randomness of goaltending. Out of the three metrics I will present in this section, it is the one I would put the least emphasis on.

The final metric I will present in this section is xGF%, which is a more theoretical measure that does a fantastic job of speaking to an individual’s independent skill. Not only does it provide a strong individualized look at a player, it strongly correlates to team success. Every shot has many different factors, such as distance, angle from goal, type of shot, etc. that will influence how likely it is to result in a goal. A model has been created that takes those factors and assigns every shot a probability of resulting in a goal. We can then aggregate those results to determine how many goals are expected to be scored. We then look at it in the exact same manner as GF%. The advantage of this metric is it strips away luck involved in goals and provides the best individual look at a player. The one downside is it is influenced by who you play with. Let’s start by looking at 2016.

The Sabres were the fourth-worst team in expected goals during the 2016 season at 47.44% and the team was more than 2% worse when Ristolainen was on the ice. That is brutal. The other players who had negative results in 2016 played on teams that had xGF% above 50% so they were not playing at the same level as their teammates on a good team while Ristolainen made one of the worst teams in the league significantly worse. Though it is just one season, that is not a ringing endorsement for Ristolainen. Let’s move on to 2017 next.

The good news in 2017 is Ristolainen slightly improved his team’s performance. The bad news is the Sabres had the worst xGF% in the league at 46.17%. In simple terms, Ristolainen barely moved the needle in a positive direction on the league’s worst team. He was replaceable on the worst team in the league. After two seasons, there are only three players (Dumba, Theodore, and Rielly) who could be thought of in the same tier as Ristolainen. We will look to 2018 to see if the same players appear again in the bottom.

In 2018 we see some much different results than the previous two seasons. The only two players who remain near even or negative for the three seasons we looked at are Morgan Rielly and Rasmus Ristolainen. It’s interesting that the strong performers from previous years were weak this year and some of the weak ones (Dumba and Theordore) were much stronger. In the last three years, the only player we could argue as being close performance wise, based off the relative metrics I have discussed here, to Ristolainen is Rielly. 

Individual Metrics

Now that I have been through the relative metrics I want to turn your attention to some individual metrics. We will start with individual scoring and touch on some other metrics that speak to some of the other impacts the players have when they are on the ice. For some brevity, I will not go into as much depth as I did for the above metrics, mostly because these metrics are going to be more familiar to all hockey fans. I will emphasize that I will present all of these metrics as per 60 metrics so the players are compared on an equal scale. Using per 60 metrics looks at how each player would perform if they each played 60 minutes. If a player averages a goal per 60 minutes and each game played 20 minutes, we would expect them to score a goal every three games.

Scoring Metrics

Here we will look at goals, assists, and total points. When looking at defensemen, I do not like breaking assists into primary versus secondary even though the math behind it indicates we should. Primary assists are more repeatable from season to season because there is more skill involved. Players directly setting up goals have much more control over the outcome rather than relying on another player to do it for you. However, one of a defenseman’s main jobs is to make stretch passes to move the puck out of the zone. In a perfect sequence, a defender makes a stretch pass to trigger an odd–man rush that results in a goal. The defender perfectly executed his responsibility so he should not be penalized if he gets a secondary assist versus a primary assist. As such, I will not separate the two. Let’s take a look at these defenders’ scoring metrics.

One way to overlook some of Rasmus Ristolainen’s defensive deficiencies would be if he was contributing to more goals than his counterparts. Ristolainen has been a good point producer on the power play but when we look at his point production compared to the other comparable players, it is lacking. Out of the three seasons I have presented, this past season is the only one where we see Ristolainen’s 5v5 point production not be the worst of the sample. With the emergence of Rasmus Dahlin and the additions of Collin Miller and Brandon Montour, Ristolainen may struggle to get significant power play minutes so he will have to continue to produce during 5v5 play. Last season Ristolainen produced 21 points during 5v5 play, which was 47^thbest among defensemen. That was one less point than Dahlin and the same as Victor Hedman, Charlie McAvoy, Shea Theodore, and Ivan Provorov. That is respectable company. The problem is that is three points higher than his previous high of 18, which occurred in 2015-2016. Right now, I would consider last season as an outlier and wouldn’t expect Ristolainen to produce over 20 points during 5v5 play. If he is placed in favorable circumstances, I could be wrong but if I was forced to bet I would take under 20.

Points are not everything to a player but it would be easier to overlook relatively average production if Ristolainen offset his point production with quality underlying metrics but that is not the case. I would also be more willing to overlook his poor relative metrics if he produced points at a high rate. This is where I think Morgan Reilly separates himself. So far, we have not seen Ristolainen perform well compared to the other players in our sample. I will present two more set of graphs to look at some other measures that could speak to how Ristolainen has performed. 

Impact Metrics

In this next section, we will take a look at how the players performed in giveaways, takeaways, penalties taken, and penalties draw. These are all metrics most hockey observers will be more familiar with. Here we would want to see players taking the puck away more than giving it away and drawing more penalties than they take. One critical caveat to make here is giveaways and takeaways is a subjective stat. They are recorded by each arena’s off-ice officials, each of which could have their own definition of what constitutes a giveaway or takeaway. Subjective metrics are becoming more reliable every year but there is still a human element involved so there is potential for error. Once again, I will present the previous three seasons and after the graphs provide commentary on them. 

In these graphs we see Ristolainen show well in puck responsibility, which I have to admit surprises me a little. My gut reaction is many of Ristolainen’s possession struggles come from poor puck management. When looking at his numbers though, giveaways are one of the areas he performs stronger than the other players in this sample. Maybe he benefits from generous off-ice officials in Buffalo that don’t penalize him as much or his struggles come from other poor decision-making. Another possible explanation for his poor underlying metrics is his inability to take the puck away. When watching Ristolainen, I often see him giving up zone entries far too easily. Too often he will back away from the opposing attacker when they reach the blueline. Plays through the neutral zone and zone entries are the most opportune time for defenders to record takeaways. Another way that defenders can record turnovers is by physically bullying players off the puck. Ristolainen should excel at this. 

The other metrics I presented in this section relate to penalties, both taken and drawn. Considering Ristolainen plays a very physical and aggressive style of play, he compares well in penalties taken. Based off the comparable players, I expected Ristolainen to rank near the top in penalties taken in every season. Instead, he is very much in the middle. One thing many supporters of Ristolainen like to point to is he does a good job of getting under opposing players’ skin. In the future there may be some ways to better quantify that sentiment but for now I will look at penalties drawn. This is obviously not perfect and I must acknowledge that currently much of that impact is intangible. However, I do think supporters who use that argument need to use it a little less enthusiastically. In 2017, Ristolainen finished near the top of the group in penalties drawn. However, in the other two seasons he was bottom two. If he was truly getting under players’ skin, he should be drawing more penalties. Too often I have seen Ristolainen pestering an opponent while also taking himself out of the play and not getting a penalty out of it. I want to see Ristolainen draw more penalties since it would help make up for some of his poor underlying metrics.

In this section, we don’t see anything that moves the needle either for or against Ristolainen. With his poor underlying metrics, I would like to see him provide some other contributions that can help his team during 5v5 play. At this point, I am still searching for that area of his game.

Physicality Metrics

One reason many NHL observers like Ristolainen is he plays with an edge and is a grit and grind player. In this final section of metrics, I will present statistics to assess that and discuss what they mean for Ristolainen as a player. Here, we will look at blocked shots, hits given, and hits taken. All of these are once again per 60 minutes and during 5v5 play. Please keep in mind that hits, like takeaways and giveaways, are a subjective statistic. I will once again present the three graphs and then move into my commentary.

It should come as no surprise that we see Ristolainen as the player who delivers the most hits. He also takes his fair share of hits. However, there is a downward trend in the number of shots he has blocked. If I am being blunt, performing well in any of these measures don’t really positively impact the team’s ability to win games. Ristolainen’s play style is definitely more physical but one reason he is able to deliver so many hits is because he is chasing the puck more than any of these other players. The only way a player can deliver a hit is if the other team doesn’t have the puck. As a defenseman, it is more likely that most of these hits are coming in his own zone, meaning his team is constantly getting pressured while he is on the ice. One reason that Ristolainen’s blocked shots could have fallen from 2016 to 2017 is the coaching change the Sabres made and the mentality on blocking shots could have changed. 

Conclusion

The Buffalo Sabres have a decision to make on Rasmus Ristolainen and it could be directly tied to Dustin Byfuglien’s decision in Winnipeg. Back in July we wrote about why Ristolainen to Winnipeg would make sense. It would make even more sense if Byfuglien decides to retire. It also appears that Anaheim might be looking for a right-shot defender and might be willing to include Ondrej Kase in a deal. If that is true, the Sabres should have made that trade already. With Carolina recently trading a right-handed defender, Justin Faulk, all eyes are now on Buffalo.

Carolina’s trade of Justin Faulk has a direct impact on Ristolainen. Ristolainen is now the most desirable right-handed defenseman that is likely available. The trade of Faulk also sets a baseline for what a potential Ristolainen trade could look like. I think Ristolainen likely has a higher trade value than Faulk and the Sabres, in my opinion, would need to achieve that to go through with a trade. I also don’t think the Sabres have to get a roster player, especially if it is a player like Joel Edmundson. The team does not need another “throw-in” type player in a trade. If anything, they need to be the ones “throwing” a player in. Faulk has been a better defenseman in recent years but Ristolainen’s age and contract status should make him the more valuable asset.

The obvious trade would be to use Ristolainen as a way to upgrade the forward group. Kase or one of Winnipeg’s young forwards would do just that. However, there is another option that might not be as popular among Sabre fans but I think could be a wise move. Dylan Cozens appears to be a good, young forward prospect. However, after trading Alex Nylander and likely promoting Victor Olofsson, the team is suddenly devoid of forwards, especially wingers with high offensive upside. Tage Thompson looks to be the closest to fit that description and he is far from a sure thing. Using Ristolainen to fill that void might be a better decision than many fans might believe. Even though the team does not have tons of future money committed, there are some upcoming contracts (Dahlin, Reinhart, Montour) that could see their future cap space disappear quickly. If the team could move Ristolainen’s entire salary, while getting a cost-controlled forward who could contribute in a year or two, could turn out to be the smarter long-term move.

So, what should Sabre fans want them to do? If you’ve read my analysis, I think I have painted a pretty clear picture of the impact Ristolainen has on the Sabres and how he compares to other defensemen around a similar age, being paid a similar amount. I don’t think he compares well. For the age Ristolainen is and the cap hit he commands, the Sabres could better allocate their resources. They could flip Ristolainen for a forward that could have an immediate impact and make it a cap neutral move. The team also could flip Ristolainen for future assets at some point to clear additional cap space that the team may need. 

Having said that, do I think Ristolainen is a worthless asset? No, I don’t. Ristolainen’s ideal role is probably as a second-pair defenseman who could drive a team’s power play and see minimal penalty kill minutes. Ristolainen will provide the most value to a team as a powerplay driver. The opportunity to do that in Buffalo should be gone. Rasmus Dahlin should be the defenseman with the Sabres’ top unit and Miller, Montour, and Ristolainen should compete for time on the second unit. There is no denying that Ristolainen has been put in some tough situations in Buffalo and he has handled everything well. However, if he was going to become a true top pair defender, he should be improving his team’s play while he is on the ice by now. Dahlin did so as an 18-year-old. 

Maybe Ralph Kruger will finally be the coach Ristolainen needs to channel his physical gifts and make him a quality NHL defenseman. If I’m in the Sabres’ front office, I wouldn’t hold my breath on this happening. This offseason might have been a bad time to trade him because he had a brutal end to the season and the team likely would have been selling low. The best outcome for the Sabres could be Ristolainen getting off to a good start while a team like Winnipeg gets off to a slow start and realizes they have a need for a player like Ristolainen.

If you have thoughts on this article, tweet us, @afpanalytics, or me, @k_sticher with your thoughts, comments, questions. If you enjoyed this article, please give us a follow as we will try to produce some quality content as the hockey season arrives. Finally, it is my hope to do a follow-up to this article that includes some video clips. I can’t promise that it will come any time soon or if at all.

All stats are courtesy of naturalstattrick.com and contract data is from capfriendly.com.

KYLE STICH is the Director of AFP Analytics.  In addition, Mr. Stich is a tax specialist and Director of Operations at AFP Consulting LLC, whose clientele include professional athletes performing services on three separate continents. Mr. Stich earned his Master of Science in Sport Management with a Concentration in Sport Analytics from Columbia University in 2017. He earned his undergraduate degrees in Accounting and Sport Management from St. John Fisher College in 2015, where he has served as an adjunct professor teaching Sport Finance and Baseball Analytics.