Moneypuck the Sabres system?

[vcv]

Holy overanalyzing his point. It's a valid comparison, the OP isn't that off the rails just because there's different circumstances.

How is it a valid comparison?

 

[tehinternet]

This thread is weird. The amount of arguing over if the Sabres org is similar to a movie about a completely different sport is odd. But, it's the off season, so not much to argue about, especially when the team has turned the corner to a positive direction.

IMO for any 'Moneyball' comparison to be even close the Sabres would need to base all their trades/FA Ack's/Drafting on something like a really high Corsi number even though to most teams the player is worth a bag of pucks and a case of Blue. That's not really happening though.

 

[dotcommunism]

This thread is weird. The amount of arguing over if the Sabres org is similar to a movie about a completely different sport is odd. But, it's the off season, so not much to argue about, especially when the team has turned the corner to a positive direction.

IMO for any 'Moneyball' comparison to be even close the Sabres would need to base all their trades/FA Ack's/Drafting on something like a really high Corsi number even though to most teams the player is worth a bag of pucks and a case of Blue. That's not really happening though.

I don't think most people are actually talking about how similar the Sabres are to the movie at all, they're talking about how similar the Sabres, and what they're doing, are to the actual process that a real sports team used, you know, in real life.

 

[Sabre the Win]

I used the movie as a concept; many of the posters here are arguing that the Sabres are not in the position that Oakland is and thats true. We don't have money issues but what I was trying to make in comparison is that while the Oakland A's used Sabremetrics and Analytics to find players that other teams didn't want to fill their need to gain RBI's due to key players leaving; the Sabres would have adopted their OWN system to find key contributors to fill the leadership role(s) that were left by Pomminville, Vanek, Miller, Ott as well as establish their OWN analytic's system to grade prospects based on fundamentals, IQ, vision, zone play, stick handling, skating like for example Jordan Samuels-Thomas (7th round pick, 24 years old and almost forgotten); perhaps the Sabres saw something more than just size and hoped he can bring more to Rochester. While many see a 7th round nobody; perhaps the Sabres system analytic's saw more than what meets the eye similar to Chad Bradford (another comparison). While we hum and haw and debate things like we know how the Sabres management thinks and what exactly their doing it's all just opinion and estimated guesses.

I'm sure more people will dissect and read things out of context and while you may have thought I was taking the basis of the movie and their system and applying it to the Sabres; I was merely only using it as a concept. What I propose for 'Moneypuck' is going about finding and establishing veteran role models while plugging in talented young stars and keeping the pipeline stacked so Sabres can plug in players for a decade or more and be relevant without having cap issues, players attitude issues and still finding talent through scouting analytics's (the numbers) while drafting in the 29th/30th range etc.

 

[Jim Bob]

I used the movie as a concept; many of the posters here are arguing that the Sabres are not in the position that Oakland is and thats true. We don't have money issues but what I was trying to make in comparison is that while the Oakland A's used Sabremetrics and Analytics to find players that other teams didn't want to fill their need to gain RBI's due to key players leaving; the Sabres would have adopted their OWN system to find key contributors to fill the leadership role(s) that were left by Pomminville, Vanek, Miller, Ott as well as establish their OWN analytic's system to grade prospects based on fundamentals, IQ, vision, zone play, stick handling, skating like for example Jordan Samuels-Thomas (7th round pick, 24 years old and almost forgotten); perhaps the Sabres saw something more than just size and hoped he can bring more to Rochester. While many see a 7th round nobody; perhaps the Sabres system analytic's saw more than what meets the eye similar to Chad Bradford (another comparison). While we hum and haw and debate things like we know how the Sabres management thinks and what exactly their doing it's all just opinion and estimated guesses.

I'm sure more people will dissect and read things out of context and while you may have thought I was taking the basis of the movie and their system and applying it to the Sabres; I was merely only using it as a concept. What I propose for 'Moneypuck' is going about finding and establishing veteran role models while plugging in talented young stars and keeping the pipeline stacked so Sabres can plug in players for a decade or more and be relevant without having cap issues, players attitude issues and still finding talent through scouting analytics's (the numbers) while drafting in the 29th/30th range etc.

I don't think Murray puts a ton of value in the analytical analysis of prospects.

He has just brought in a slightly different system to traditional scouting, from everything I've heard him say and read about.

It's not getting away from traditional scouting and using analytics as a different method to grade players using traditional scouting.

 

[Husko]

Murray, from time to time, has talked about players in terms of how many wins they're worth. That's essentially the basis of money ball. All the OP is making is a bit of a comparison. I see it, even if the circumstances aren't exactly the same.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

The disconnect stems from MoneyBall's theme and the current position of the Sabres.

MoneyBalls focuses on using analytics (or in broader terms) any method of player evaluation to seize value ignored by your competitors.

Buffalo is a reach for this analogy because TM is using the exact same selection criteria the rest of the league does. 2-way centers, punishing wingers, big puck moving defensemen. He's just trying to 'outdo' the popular girls at their own fashion game.

There's nothing innovative about the the players he's targeting. If he switched gears and selected small elusive winger, low mobility defensemen and shoot first sniper centers it'd be closer to MoneyPuck.

There's innovation in the manner the team was quickly disassembled by trading 2 Top 3 talents over two years almost exclusively for futures. Theoretically the idea has existed, but you'd be hard pressed to find a real life example where so much player value has been time shifted into the future (via draft picks).

In short: TM is picking roughly the same players everyone else is. His attempt to have so many converge on the NHL simultaneously is novel.

 

[Jim Bob]

Murray, from time to time, has talked about players in terms of how many wins they're worth. That's essentially the basis of money ball. All the OP is making is a bit of a comparison. I see it, even if the circumstances aren't exactly the same.

If you read the book, that wasn't what Moneyball was about.

And the Sabres under Regier would apply a dollar value to every player and prospect. Nobody was calling that system Moneypuck.

Moneyball was about the process to identify undervalued players and exploiting market inefficiencies and moving away from traditional scouting.

I don't see Murray and the Sabres doing that and thus I don't see the comparison.

 

[Jim Bob]

The disconnect stems from MoneyBall's theme and the current position of the Sabres.

MoneyBalls focuses on using analytics (or in broader terms) any method of player evaluation to seize value ignored by your competitors.

Buffalo is a reach for this analogy because TM is using the exact same selection criteria the rest of the league does. 2-way centers, punishing wingers, big puck moving defensemen. He's just trying to 'outdo' the popular girls at their own fashion game.

There's nothing innovative about the the players he's targeting. If he switched gears and selected small elusive winger, low mobility defensemen and shoot first sniper centers it'd be closer to MoneyPuck.

There's innovation in the manner the team was quickly disassembled by trading 2 Top 3 talents over two years almost exclusively for futures. Theoretically the idea has existed, but you'd be hard pressed to find a real life example where so much player value has been time shifted into the future (via draft picks).

In short: TM is picking roughly the same players everyone else is. His attempt to have so many converge on the NHL simultaneously is novel.

The Sixers and Astros say hi!

 

[Jame]

i guess this is as good a place as any to post this...

great article about Germany's soccer team, and the use of big data/analytics.

http://blogs.wsj.com/cio/2014/07/10/germanys-12th-man-at-the-world-cup-big-data/

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

The Sixers and Astros say hi!

They had good players to trade for draft picks?

In baseball you can trade prospects but not picks AFAIK.

 

[JLewyB]

If you read the book, that wasn't what Moneyball was about.

And the Sabres under Regier would apply a dollar value to every player and prospect. Nobody was calling that system Moneypuck.

Moneyball was about the process to identify undervalued players and exploiting market inefficiencies and moving away from traditional scouting.

I don't see Murray and the Sabres doing that and thus I don't see the comparison.

The issue is the system in the NHL is so obvious in what it undervalues that it does take a genius like Bill James to figure it out. Players on ELC and RFAs are grossly underpaid for their product on the ice typically especially players drafted in the top 3. And it really doesn't matter what type of player they are.

 

[joshjull]

The issue is the system in the NHL is so obvious in what it undervalues that it does take a genius like Bill James to figure it out.

I'm not following the point you're trying to make. If its obvious why would you need a genius to figure it out? Did you mean it doesn't?

Players on ELC and RFAs are grossly underpaid for their product on the ice typically especially players drafted in the top 3. And it really doesn't matter what type of player they are.

I don't disagree that some RFAs and players on ELCs are underpaid, in some cases as you say grossly so. But thats not really undervaluing. Thats the CBA suppressing compensation. Its also not something one team could exploit over others. In that every team has this mechanism to suppress the salaries of their young players.

 

[Jame]

The issue is the system in the NHL is so obvious in what it undervalues that it does take a genius like Bill James to figure it out. Players on ELC and RFAs are grossly underpaid for their product on the ice typically especially players drafted in the top 3. And it really doesn't matter what type of player they are.

I completely agree.

However, we've seen other areas that were previously undervalued (because they didn't have baseline stats to support their true value), begin to change across the landscape.

That shift is being supported on both sides of the "scouting" spectrum... it's being supported with the growth in advanced metrics to understand player value, as well as traditional scouting and roster construction adding elements of intangible value.

 

[JLewyB]

I'm not following the point you're trying to make. If its obvious why would you need a genius to figure it out? Did you mean it doesn't?



I don't disagree that some RFAs and players on ELCs are underpaid, in some cases as you say grossly so. But thats not really undervaluing. Thats the CBA suppressing compensation. Its also not something one team could exploit over others. In that every team has this mechanism to suppress the salaries of their young players.

sorry, meant to say it doesn't take a genius

 

[joshjull]

sorry, meant to say it doesn't take a genius

Thanks for the clarification

 

[JLewyB]

I'm not following the point you're trying to make. If its obvious why would you need a genius to figure it out? Did you mean it doesn't?



I don't disagree that some RFAs and players on ELCs are underpaid, in some cases as you say grossly so. But thats not really undervaluing. Thats the CBA suppressing compensation. Its also not something one team could exploit over others. In that every team has this mechanism to suppress the salaries of their young players.

that's what I was trying to point out in my post is that even if we find some secret stat that shows certain players are undervalued, it's still not even close to how underpaid players on their ELCs like Granlund and MacKinnon.

 

[joshjull]

that's what I was trying to point out in my post is that even if we find some secret stat that shows certain players are undervalued, it's still not even close to how underpaid players on their ELCs like Granlund and MacKinnon.

ah ok that makes sense.

 

[Halpysback*]

Re: "Sabremetrics" / analytics / and the like...

A sure-fire way to ensure the SabreTank model '14-15 lives down to it's most dismal un-potential,

1. Re-acquire Rej Sekera & play him more than 21 minutes every single night.
2. Finish 0-82-0-0 & Draft no worse than #2.
3. Profit.





(some of you remember that thread... )

Do you have a link to that thread by chance?

 

[Jim Bob]

They had good players to trade for draft picks?

In baseball you can trade prospects but not picks AFAIK.

The Sixers did:

http://www.libertyballers.com/2014-...ers-jrue-holiday-nerlens-noel-trade-nba-draft

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/nba-bag-volume-2-10-steps-to-tanking-perfection/

Q: What are the odds that the Sixers finish their season on a 36-game losing streak? They’re at 15 already with 21 games to go. They put two actual NBA players on the floor each night, and things are so bad that I just thought about whether or not Byron Mullens is an actual NBA player. Is there a chance for L36?
— Jack, Philly

SG: The short answer … YES!

You know how Lance Armstrong was the greatest cheater ever? How he blended his commendable charity work with state-of-the-art science and relentless lying to pull an ongoing Jedi mind trick on the American public? The 2013-14 Sixers have a chance to go down as the greatest NBA self-sabotagers ever. They haven’t been tanking games as much as obliterating any chance of winning them. And they’re doing it because the NBA gives every team the same loophole …

If you want to throw away a season, depress your fans and disgrace the league for a 25 percent chance at the no. 1 pick and a 100 percent chance at a top-four pick … knock yourself out!

The Sixers know they’re better off bottoming out in the grisliest way possible, so they’re owning it — they’ve done everything short of signing Kevin Hart and Allen Iverson’s mom to 10-day contracts. And those moves might be coming next week. Would anything shock you? Look at the self-sabotage blueprint that Philly’s new owners and GM Sam Hinkie have followed.

Step 1: Trade your best player for future assets if you don’t feel like he can be the best player on a championship team.

And that was a GREAT trade: Jrue Holiday for 2013’s no. 6 pick (Nerlens Noel) and New Orleans’s top-five protected first-rounder in 2014. Thanks to New Orleans’s struggles, Philly has an excellent chance of landing two top-10 picks in a deep 2014 draft; more important, they improved their own 2014 lottery chances by turning 82 games of Holiday into zero games of the already-injured Noel. A crucial part of self-sabotage: maiming yourself in the short term. You don’t want to sorta suck or kinda suck in the NBA. You want to suck all kinds of suck.

(Important note: I loved that trade last summer and love it even more now that New Orleans is flopping in the West. Philly got somewhere between 130 and 200 cents on the dollar, depending on where that second pick lands, for someone who wasn’t a franchise player. I love Rajon Rondo, but if the Celtics got a Holiday-like offer for him, I’d be packing his bags and his leather Connect Four case for him.)

 

[Chad Thundercock]

I guess you missed the part where the A's actually found locker room chemistry to be an area that wasn't valued in the marketplace.....

Beane didn't care about that. He had guys like Durham that hated the situation he was in and was a cancer to the younger players. He openly lied to half the old players about their roles, and then quickly dumped them.

 

[Jim Bob]

http://www.athleticsnation.com/2012...yball-an-exclusive-interview-with-billy-beane

Bleszinski: You’ve talked about power a lot and how important power is to being successful. One of the themes of Moneyball was how on base percentage had become an undervalued commodity. Someone listening to this interview might think that you value power more than anything these days.

Beane: It’s 10 years later and people still don’t understand what the book was about. It’s a fruitless exercise.

Bleszinski: I think in many ways, this year’s story was even more remarkable than those "Moneyball" teams.

Beane: Michael was never writing about an individual team.

Bleszinski: Yes, I know.

Beane: You say yes, but people misunderstand the book all the time.

Bleszinski: He was writing about the process and how teams at a disadvantage had to try and find things that could possibly give them an advantage. It was never about on base percentage. It was how a team with a $55 million budget could possibly figure out how to compete with a $200 million team. When you’re talking about a story, though, even human interest, the game has gotten more unfair based on budget differences, this team succeeded in an even more fascinating fashion than some of those teams that Michael wrote about.

Beane: Was this a good story? Yeah. But I don’t think Michael is running to his computer.

 

[SamuraiArt]

In my understanding, the OP wasn't talking about a specific system of "analytics" or "cheap" players, but more so using a combination of scouting, analytics and current contract agreements to assemble the pieces needed to build a perennial Cup contender.

In my opinion, we've got a few sure hits, several likely NHLers, and a few wildcard prospects already in our system (you can guess who falls into each category). The task is obviously to separate the wheat from the chaff - easier said than done - but clearly something that requires nothing but time and patience.

"Moneypuck"-ing the Sabres, in my view, relies on anticipating and filling in the gaps of our current/future lineup in an efficient and fiscally responsible manner (i.e. not paying top dollar for an aging superstar or an over hyped prima-donna)

Without suggesting specific names, I'd say the biggest issue that needs addressing, from a GM standpoint, is figuring out our future elite top wingers (whether they're traded for or moved into that position). Right now the Sabres are knee-deep in potential future depth but we lack reliable talented forwards. Unfortunately, most of that depth won't have maximum value for quite a few years.

Whatever players we trade, I'll (probably) always be in favor of a quantity for quality swap, even if the deal seems a little one-sided. It seems to me that a key job of GMTM over the next year or three will be to translate some of that depth into talented players. That, to me, would be moneypuck-ing the Sabres system.