He stated in a post game after benching Dahlin in the third period that he was going to put the best players out there to give us the best chance to win the game.

So either he is lying, or he believes playing Risto over Dahlin gives them a better chance to win the games.

There’s no room for feelings, he said so himself, he is trying to win games.
- Beethoven

Right, so again, by your logic, he truly believes that Sobotka is a better player than Casey Mittelstadt.

You’re right he’s infallible

So you do believe that Krueger and his coaching staff are incompetent to evaluate our talent. You do believe you are better than professional hockey minds at evaluating talent. Or if those aren’t true, you must believe there is a conspiracy afoot to not put the best people in their best roles to in some way sabotage the teams potential when people’s jobs are at stake.

Seriously, this is Dunning Kruger at its finest.
- Beethoven

You think you know more than sabres hockey legend Housley does about hockey? Because you disagreed with him all the time.

What about Stanley cup winning head coach Dan Bylsma? He was getting shredded again just today.

Or maybe it's Time Murray, life long scout of the sport, that you are smarter than? Because you ripped him as well.

Why is it that any decision Krueger makes has to be agreed with? Of course he knows more about hockey than I do or sbroad does. That hardly makes him immune to questioning.

This is the latest Risto argument: The coach plays him, so he must be good, because the coach is smart. How do I know he is smart? Because he is the coach of an NHL team and not a member of a hockey forum.

Ever think that we have only played 10 games? Krueger is just playing the guys he was given. Maybe after 20 games he will go to Botts and say, look, I played Sobotka 20 games and he has 1 point. Maybe he goes and has that conversation after 40 games. Maybe he isn't going to kneejerk and make a decision on Risto after he gives up 8 goals. Maybe it takes 16, or 60. But you have no idea that he won't get to that point this season. When he does, what will the argument be? Fire the coach because he didn't get through to Risto?

You think you know more than sabres hockey legend Housley does about hockey? Because you disagreed with him all the time.

What about Stanley cup winning head coach Dan Bylsma? He was getting shredded again just today.

Or maybe it's Time Murray, life long scout of the sport, that you are smarter than? Because you ripped him as well.

Why is it that any decision Krueger makes has to be agreed with? Of course he knows more about hockey than I do or sbroad does. That hardly makes him immune to questioning.

This is the latest Risto argument: The coach plays him, so he must be good, because the coach is smart. How do I know he is smart? Because he is the coach of an NHL team and not a member of a hockey forum.

Ever think that we have only played 10 games? Krueger is just playing the guys he was given. Maybe after 20 games he will go to Botts and say, look, I played Sobotka 20 games and he has 1 point. Maybe he goes and has that conversation after 40 games. Maybe he isn't going to kneejerk and make a decision on Risto after he gives up 8 goals. Maybe it takes 16, or 60. But you have no idea that he won't get to that point this season. When he does, what will the argument be? Fire the coach because he didn't get through to Risto?
- matty12345

It’s just so weird to me.

Jokiharju legit never gets scored on, makes about as an impressive plays as you can hope for with passes to send guys in on a breakaway or his zone entry to set up Johansson, and people rarely talk about it here.

Ristolainen takes a shot that hits a goalie and Eichel makes a great play on, while also being on the ice for 2/3 goals against (shocker) and he was “great”?

It’s just absurd

Right, so again, by your logic, he truly believes that Sobotka is a better player than Casey Mittelstadt.

You’re right he’s infallible
- sbroads24

No

You’re comparing forward lines to defense pairing which isn’t at all the same. Also, I am sure he does think Sobotka is the better defensive player and would trust him more than Mitts in defensive situations.

The fact that they are trying to spread out the talent on forward lines giving some forwards more ice time than others has nothing to do with him choosing which defensive pairing he thinks are best suited for defensive situations.

You’re trying to twist things to win an argument. Which is the first sign that you’ve already lost.

Ristolainen has been on the ice for just 39 more minutes 5 on 5 than Jokiharju, yet has had 6 more goals against than Jokiharju does.

It’s just a big coincidence, every, single, year.

He stated in a post game after benching Dahlin in the third period that he was going to put the best players out there to give us the best chance to win the game.

So either he is lying, or he believes playing Risto over Dahlin gives them a better chance to win the games.

There’s no room for feelings, he said so himself, he is trying to win games.
- Beethoven

Dahlin has been a defensive liability for a majority of the season. So yes. Benching dahlin when protecting a lead and playing Risto is a better idea.

It’s just so weird to me.

Jokiharju legit never gets scored on, makes about as an impressive plays as you can hope for with passes to send guys in on a breakaway or his zone entry to set up Johansson, and people rarely talk about it here.

Ristolainen takes a shot that hits a goalie and Eichel makes a great play on, while also being on the ice for 2/3 goals against (shocker) and he was “great”?

It’s just absurd
- sbroads24

There are just so many reasons to play Risto 24-25 minutes a night, and none of them are that he is a #1 Defenseman:

1. Montour is hurt.
2. Dahlin is a #1 defenseman, but his body may not be capable of 25 minutes a night yet. Honestly at 19, Risto didn't play those minutes either.
3. Jokiharju, see Dahlin.
4. McCabe might be as bad as Risto defensively with less offensive upside.
5. Scandella is giving you more than you could hope for, but who wants to push that further.
6. It would be a big statement to cut his minutes, and we are winning so Krueger doesn't need to embarrass him.
7. Maybe Botts wants to trade him and they are keeping his value high.
8. Miller is new and still learning to play with everyone.
9. It's been ten (frank)ing games, and everyone is basically being used the same as last year except Rodrigues.

Dahlin has been a defensive liability for a majority of the season. So yes. Benching dahlin when protecting a lead and playing Risto is a better idea.
- Sabretooth9

Yet in just 42 less minutes has been on for 5 less goals than the great 55

You think you know more than sabres hockey legend Housley does about hockey? Because you disagreed with him all the time.

What about Stanley cup winning head coach Dan Bylsma? He was getting shredded again just today.

Or maybe it's Time Murray, life long scout of the sport, that you are smarter than? Because you ripped him as well.

Why is it that any decision Krueger makes has to be agreed with? Of course he knows more about hockey than I do or sbroad does. That hardly makes him immune to questioning.

This is the latest Risto argument: The coach plays him, so he must be good, because the coach is smart. How do I know he is smart? Because he is the coach of an NHL team and not a member of a hockey forum.

Ever think that we have only played 10 games? Krueger is just playing the guys he was given. Maybe after 20 games he will go to Botts and say, look, I played Sobotka 20 games and he has 1 point. Maybe he goes and has that conversation after 40 games. Maybe he isn't going to kneejerk and make a decision on Risto after he gives up 8 goals. Maybe it takes 16, or 60. But you have no idea that he won't get to that point this season. When he does, what will the argument be? Fire the coach because he didn't get through to Risto?
- matty12345

I think all our defensemen are good. I think the coaching staffs have all identified Risto as being the one to rely upon the most against the best opposition.

All those people you mention played Risto in the top role giving him the most minutes.

And you are exactly right. He is playing with the hand he has been dealt. If he had better players than Risto he would be playing them more than Risto. If he had more talent at forward he wouldn’t have to have Sobotka playing on the second line.

I don’t think I know anything about hockey compared to anyone in the sport. What I am doing is looking at what all the people in the sport are deciding. And they all have decided Risto is the best defenseman on the roster to play the top role.

I never said Risto is an elite defenseman. I never said he is a number one on most teams. I am saying that he is the best we have. And that’s because every coach has come to that conclusion.

Why did Bylsma play him 26 minutes a night? Why did Housley play him 27 and 25 minutes a night in the years he was here?

Attack me all you want. If you walked into the Sabres coaching staff meeting saying what you say, you would be laughed out of the room.

Yet in just 42 less minutes has been on for 5 less goals than the great 55
- sbroads24

Matchups. What don’t you understand about that?

No offense to Dahlin, he is going to be great. But he has been terrible defensively this year. By far the worst defenseman defensively on the roster right now. That’s why he needs to be protected.

Matchups. What don’t you understand about that?
- Beethoven

Because it’s statistically proven that it’s pretty much meaningless

You realize he gets the most time with Eichel right?

You don’t think that evens it out? Because it does

Yet in just 42 less minutes has been on for 5 less goals than the great 55
- sbroads24

You see, you are only looking at the basic stat of goals. You gotta dig deeper man, get into the advanced stats. Oh he sucks there too? We'll have you looked at things stats don't account for, like ice time and strength of competition? What, you are saying that genius mathmaticians already thought of those basic things, and found ways to equalize stats for ice time, and determined the effect of strength of competition is negligible? Well, the geniuses are dumb, and I'm a hockey board commenter, so I'm smarter. And who are you to question the almighty coach? You're just a hockey board commenter.

I think all our defensemen are good. I think the coaching staffs have all identified Risto as being the one to rely upon the most against the best opposition.

All those people you mention played Risto in the top role giving him the most minutes.

And you are exactly right. He is playing with the hand he has been dealt. If he had better players than Risto he would be playing them more than Risto. If he had more talent at forward he wouldn’t have to have Sobotka playing on the second line.

I don’t think I know anything about hockey compared to anyone in the sport. What I am doing is looking at what all the people in the sport are deciding. And they all have decided Risto is the best defenseman on the roster to play the top role.

I never said Risto is an elite defenseman. I never said he is a number one on most teams. I am saying that he is the best we have. And that’s because every coach has come to that conclusion.

Why did Bylsma play him 26 minutes a night? Why did Housley play him 27 and 25 minutes a night in the years he was here?

Attack me all you want. If you walked into the Sabres coaching staff meeting saying what you say, you would be laughed out of the room.
- Beethoven

You missed the whole point. You feel free to criticize former coaches and GM's, and you can criticize the coaches of other teams.

So why can't Krueger's decisions be questioned? Because every time someone complains about his ice time, you answer with 'are you smarter than the coach?'

Ristolainen has been on the ice for just 39 more minutes 5 on 5 than Jokiharju, yet has had 6 more goals against than Jokiharju does.

It’s just a big coincidence, every, single, year.
- sbroads24

No it’s just you failing to comprehend that 39 minutes is 2/3rds of a game. And when you are the one put out there against the better competition in dzone face offs and PK situations you are going to be on the ice for more goals.

At this point I feel like I am arguing with sheer ignorance. Yes, year after year Risto has been hung out to dry. He’s been put in a position over his skill set and pay grade because he is the best option to do it.

O’Reilly had a 45 point swing in plus minus from his last year in Buffalo to his first year in STL. He went from -23 to +22. Is that a coincidence? Or does playing on a bad team affect your numbers negatively? Why don’t you give Risto a chance to play on a good team to see what he can do?

Schopp doesn’t know hockey and is arrogant as all hell!!
- MEBSabresFAN

Ok. Be honest. Which one of you is Schopp?

You see, you are only looking at the basic stat of goals. You gotta dig deeper man, get into the advanced stats. Oh he sucks there too? We'll have you looked at things stats don't account for, like ice time and strength of competition? What, you are saying that genius mathmaticians already thought of those basic things, and found ways to equalize stats for ice time, and determined the effect of strength of competition is negligible? Well, the geniuses are dumb, and I'm a hockey board commenter, so I'm smarter. And who are you to question the almighty coach? You're just a hockey board commenter.
- matty12345

The alarming part is how people refuse to consider how exiting the zone is considered a defensive quality, and how poorly he’s been at that his entire career.

He’s legit bad at defense.

He can hit someone though

No it’s just you failing to comprehend that 39 minutes is 2/3rds of a game. And when you are the one put out there against the better competition in dzone face offs and PK situations you are going to be on the ice for more goals.

At this point I feel like I am arguing with sheer ignorance. Yes, year after year Risto has been hung out to dry. He’s been put in a position over his skill set and pay grade because he is the best option to do it.

O’Reilly had a 45 point swing in plus minus from his last year in Buffalo to his first year in STL. He went from -23 to +22. Is that a coincidence? Or does playing on a bad team affect your numbers negatively? Why don’t you give Risto a chance to play on a good team to see what he can do?
- Beethoven

All the numbers are 5 on 5, which I clearly stated. No PK

No it’s just you failing to comprehend that 39 minutes is 2/3rds of a game. And when you are the one put out there against the better competition in dzone face offs and PK situations you are going to be on the ice for more goals.

At this point I feel like I am arguing with sheer ignorance. Yes, year after year Risto has been hung out to dry. He’s been put in a position over his skill set and pay grade because he is the best option to do it.

O’Reilly had a 45 point swing in plus minus from his last year in Buffalo to his first year in STL. He went from -23 to +22. Is that a coincidence? Or does playing on a bad team affect your numbers negatively? Why don’t you give Risto a chance to play on a good team to see what he can do?
- Beethoven

Holy poop dude. This is my point

We’re 8–1-1, were actually good as a team. He’s STILL on the ice for a disproportionate amount of goals against, because he STILL sucks balls

No it’s just you failing to comprehend that 39 minutes is 2/3rds of a game. And when you are the one put out there against the better competition in dzone face offs and PK situations you are going to be on the ice for more goals.

At this point I feel like I am arguing with sheer ignorance. Yes, year after year Risto has been hung out to dry. He’s been put in a position over his skill set and pay grade because he is the best option to do it.

O’Reilly had a 45 point swing in plus minus from his last year in Buffalo to his first year in STL. He went from -23 to +22. Is that a coincidence? Or does playing on a bad team affect your numbers negatively? Why don’t you give Risto a chance to play on a good team to see what he can do?
- Beethoven

He is currently on the best team in the league. He's given up more goals and scoring chances per 60 than any other defenseman. And minds smarter than yours have already proven that strength of competition is a negligible effect.

The excuses have run out.

Holy poop dude. This is my point

We’re 8–1-1, were actually good as a team. He’s STILL on the ice for a disproportionate amount of goals against, because he STILL sucks balls
- sbroads24

Thank you! God someone gets it.

O'Reilly was a stats darling in Buffalo. His advanced stats were amazing. He was a great player on a bad team. He was traded not because he was a bad center, but because he basically forced his way out of buffalo. Stop comparing them.

Dude. Opinions are cool. You can have one.

But if you're going to accuse me of going off the deep end for saying he isn't a top pairing defenseman, when everyone who watches hockey all around the league agrees with me except for a few deluded buffalo homers, the maybe you should look in the mirror.

If Ristoleinen plays 16 seasons he will be 33. Will he play after that? Honestly I have no idea. The game seems to be moving in a direction where most guys are retiring earlier. Maybe he plays an extra year or two. The point is, to say his career is half over is not wrong at all. This is eight (frank)ing years dude. Mike Bossy made the 100 greatest players ever list and only played 9. 8 years is longer than the average NHL career. You show me examples of players who became elite players in their ninth season.

I'm off the deep end? I called him a decent D man who is a bit overpaid and a lot overplayed. That's a reasonable, dare I say majority, opinion.

Show me one universally agreed upon #1 defenseman in the league, then compare Risto to him for me.
- matty12345

While I'm not saying Risto is a number one. Mark Giordano didn't breakout until he was 30, and won a Norris at 35. Burns was 27, and his string of real big seasons started at 30.

Edit: Chara was 26 before his first Norris finalist season

He is currently on the best team in the league. He's given up more goals and scoring chances per 60 than any other defenseman. And minds smarter than yours have already proven that strength of competition is a negligible effect.

The excuses have run out.
- matty12345

Please, give me a break about your strength of competition argument. You aren’t even fairly representing the biased article you are referencing. It never said it was negligible. It said that line mates were a larger factor. Secondly it never said it was a consensus, it said that “most” which is a bullcrap way of saying, I have no statistic for how many but I want to prove my point so I’ll say most.

Again, all your advanced stats aren’t nuanced enough to tell the whole story. You act like they do. And that’s why we will never agree. Because there’s more to the story than those statistics indicate. Were some of the goals soft goals that the goalie should have saved? Were the scoring chances high quality? Was it a result of a mistake he made or the opponents making a great play. You already acknowledge he plays more than all the other defenseman, you acknowledge that he gets the highest percent of dzone starts. You acknowledge he gets the most PK time and plays against better competition. Why wouldn’t he have more scoring chances and goals against if all those things are true?

Risto is still an even +/-, still getting less than 40% Ozone starts, is on pace for 40 points (32 ev and 8 pp) and is still playing the most minutes against the other teams best players.
Again, if you build a team looking at all the analytics and solely basing it on those numbers, you probably aren't going to have a great team.
Okposo has the best Corsi and Fenwick on the team. Perhaps he should be playing on the top line.

Please, give me a break about your strength of competition argument. You aren’t even fairly representing the biased article you are referencing. It never said it was negligible. It said that line mates were a larger factor. Secondly it never said it was a consensus, it said that “most” which is a bullcrap way of saying, I have no statistic for how many but I want to prove my point so I’ll say most.

Again, all your advanced stats aren’t nuanced enough to tell the whole story. You act like they do. And that’s why we will never agree. Because there’s more to the story than those statistics indicate. Were some of the goals soft goals that the goalie should have saved? Were the scoring chances high quality? Was it a result of a mistake he made or the opponents making a great play. You already acknowledge he plays more than all the other defenseman, you acknowledge that he gets the highest percent of dzone starts. You acknowledge he gets the most PK time and plays against better competition. Why wouldn’t he have more scoring chances and goals against if all those things are true?
- Beethoven

That article was a random Google search result I linked you to try to show you that this strength of competition argument isn't a thing. I'm not basing my opinion on that article.

Look, brilliant people get paid to do analytics, and they think of all the shortcomings of stats and ways to account for them or if they can't be. I'm not saying I'm as brilliant as those people, but I'm smart enough to accept their work. I don't walk into a science class and argue quantum physics either. Someone smart does the work, and all I have to do is learn it.

So when analysts tell me, hey +/- isn't a great indicator of skill use a different stat, I just do it. I don't need to fight the math community. If they tell me strength of competition is more than cancelled out by strength of teammates, I just listen.