Buffalo Sabres and the NHL: 2025 - 2026. Sabres already eliminated from playoffs.

[PromoTheRobot]

Someone might have to re-edit that thread title.

2 hours ago, AlCowlingsTaxiService said:

Not quite ready to jump back on the bandwagon … we’ve had winning streaks before and we all know the end result. I’ll pay attention, but talk to me around thanksgiving and we’ll see where we are. 

 

Do you actually watch the games? 

 

It's not a mystery. The Sabres are becoming a hard team to play against. The Granato teams were fast but soft as a baby's butt. They were clumsy when pressed and would cough up pucks which turned into numerous odd man rushes every game. And no one came back to play defense.

 

This team is nothing like that. 

 

 

Edited Sunday at 03:17 PM by PromoTheRobot

[AlCowlingsTaxiService]

8 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Someone might have to re-edit that thread title.

 

Do you actually watch the games? 

 

 

I’m sure you were planning a Stanley Cup parade after our ten game winning streak too, right? No, I don’t watch games at home anymore, I will watch when I’m out at a bar/restaurant however, but what’s your point? You think all is well after one two game winning “streak”?

[PromoTheRobot]

6 minutes ago, AlCowlingsTaxiService said:

I’m sure you were planning a Stanley Cup parade after our ten game winning streak too, right? No, I don’t watch games at home anymore, I will watch when I’m out at a bar/restaurant however, but what’s your point? You think all is well after one two game winning “streak”?

 

My point is passing judgement on a team without actually seeing what they are doing is a bit silly.

[Augie]

I suppose it’s too soon to work on being eliminated from next year’s playoffs. What do we do now? 

[That's No Moon]

3 hours ago, AlCowlingsTaxiService said:

Not quite ready to jump back on the bandwagon … we’ve had winning streaks before and we all know the end result. I’ll pay attention, but talk to me around thanksgiving and we’ll see where we are. 

Thanksgiving? More like President's Day. Minimum.

1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:

This team is nothing like that. 

For two games. Before that the coach completely and utterly hated their compete level to the point where he said it publicly. I get it though, water to a man in the desert and all that.

37 minutes ago, Augie said:

I suppose it’s too soon to work on being eliminated from next year’s playoffs. What do we do now? 

Well, they're almost guaranteed to have a new coach next year and they seem to have anointed the successor already so Kev is getting some work in on that front.

[oldmanfan]

Played really good the last two.  Keep working hard every shift and keep it going

[That's No Moon]

I watched the third on a whim tonight. What's drastically different?

[PromoTheRobot]

10 minutes ago, That's No Moon said:

I watched the third on a whim tonight. What's drastically different?

 

The compete level. The effort on defense. So you drop in, look at the score, and think you know?

[That's No Moon]

7 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

The compete level. The effort on defense. So you drop in, look at the score, and think you know?

Like I said, I watched the third. Looked pretty much the same.

[PromoTheRobot]

21 minutes ago, That's No Moon said:

Like I said, I watched the third. Looked pretty much the same.

 

Yeah. They lost. It's same. No need to watch anymore.

[That's No Moon]

1 minute ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Yeah. They lost. It's same. No need to watch anymore.

They took a game that was 1-1 and got outworked and outshot for at least the first 11 minutes of that period and turned it into a 3-1 deficit. Yup. Pretty much the same.

 

They scored a goal and evened up the shot count after they were down 2. Krebs shoved a guy and Thompson got himself taken off the ice when they needed a goal so I guess that makes them harder to play against. Great. Lost multiple offensive zone faceoffs in the last couple minutes when they were trying to tie it up. That seems familiar, but faceoffs don't matter.

 

Benson I don't hate. Dahlin is still Dahlin. Whatever. FWIW you sound like the person who keeps taking their ex back who treats them like crap then tells their friends they just don't understand them and it will be totally different this time.

 

 

[QCity]

1 hour ago, That's No Moon said:

What's drastically different?

 

The goaltending, which was supposed to suck, has been stellar thanks to Lyon (2.44 GA .924 SV%)

 

Our 2 big goal scorers, Tage and Tuch, have been pretty much MIA.

 

Lots of differences, same results.

[Pete]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DI4aeARTeoe/?igsh=aHp6bjhlMHc2bW93

[That's No Moon]

7 hours ago, QCity said:

 

The goaltending, which was supposed to suck, has been stellar thanks to Lyon (2.44 GA .924 SV%)

Which are both well above his career numbers so a regression is coming at some point.

[boater]

1 hour ago, That's No Moon said:

Which are both well above his career numbers so a regression is coming at some point.

 

Yep. Even Google AI thinks so.

 

Quote

Why regression to the mean happens.

 

A goalie's performance is not a fixed, predictable outcome but a product of both their underlying skill and the random element of luck. 

 

Performance vs. ability: A goalie's performance in any given game will fluctuate above or below their true skill level. A spectacular stretch of games is often a period where a high level of skill is amplified by a run of good luck.

 

Luck is unsustainable: Factors like lucky bounces, opponent misses, and timely post-hits contribute to an exceptionally high save percentage. Since this level of good luck is not repeatable, performance will inevitably drift back toward the established average.

 

Small sample size: A "couple of really good games" represents a very small sample size of performance. The smaller the sample, the greater the statistical chance of having an extreme result that doesn't reflect the long-term trend.

 

Goaltending is inconsistent: Year-to-year goaltender performance is notoriously difficult to predict, which underscores the role of random chance. Even elite goalies can follow up a Vezina-caliber season with a mediocre one

 

[Jauronimo]

6 hours ago, boater said:

 

Yep. Even Google AI thinks so.

 

 

Google AI just presented the definition of the term "regression to the mean". AI did not predict anything about Lyon's play.  

[May Day 10]

Will Alex Lyon continue his solid goaltending play we have seen so far this season?

 

ChatGPT said:

Short Answer

Yes — there are strong indications that Alex Lyon can continue playing solidly this season, but with some caveats. His performance to‑date is encouraging, yet sustaining it will depend on context and consistency.

 

What the numbers say

Here are some key pieces of data:

This season, Lyon is posting a 2.44 GAA and .929 save percentage, which are very good marks. 

 

In his most recent shutout (3‑0 win vs. the Florida Panthers on October 18), he stopped all 32 shots. 

 

Last season (2024–25) with the Detroit Red Wings he recorded a 2.81 GAA and .896 save percentage over 30 games. 

 

He has spoken about his desire for greater consistency and improvement in his game.

Some forecasting (via RotoWire) sees him in a “20‑30 game starter” role with modest results, citing variance and competition for number‑one duty. 

 

Bottom line from the numbers: He’s performing at a higher level than his recent baseline, which is a positive sign. But the leap forward may or may not be fully sustained.

 

Why continuation is plausible

Here are reasons to believe he can keep up the good play:

 

Improved metrics — His current save percentage of ~.929 is elite for the early part of a season and suggests he’s locked in.

 

Motivation and mindset — Lyon has explicitly stated he wants more consistency and to improve, rather than rest on past efforts. 

 

Opportunity — At Buffalo Sabres, his contract and role give him a legitimate chance for a meaningful workload (a two‑year deal agreed in July 2025). 

 

Recent peak performance — The shutout and strong starts indicate he has the capacity for high‑level outings.

Risks & reasons it might not last

Yet there are several factors that could prevent this performance from being sustained:

 

Small sample size / variance — Goal‑tending is inherently volatile; a few bad starts or high‑shot games can swing the metrics.

 

Underlying team defense / workload — Lyon’s success will depend on the Sabres’ defensive support, shot quality against, and how many games he plays.

 

Competition and role stability — The Sabres still have other goalies in the mix; if the team opts to rotate more or bring up other options, Lyon’s rhythm could be disrupted. 

 

Historical baseline — His .896 save percentage last season is significantly lower than this year’s pace; maintaining ~.929 over a full season is a tall order.

 

Fatigue / injury risk — If he picks up a heavy workload, fatigue sets in. Also, earlier in his career he had some injury/usage questions.

 

My verdict

Given everything, here’s a reasoned prediction:

I expect Lyon to remain a very good goaltender for the Sabres this season — likely a starter or at least major contributor.

He may not sustain elite‑level metrics (e.g., a .930+ save percentage and sub‑2.30 GAA for a full season) every night, but a .915‑.925 save percentage and a GAA around 2.40‑2.70 seems quite plausible if things break well.

If the Sabres improve defensively and give him strong backup support, he could flirt with above‑average netminding. On the flip side, if the team struggles, his numbers could regress toward his historical baseline (~.900 save percentage).

In short: yes — solid play is likely to continue — but I’d avoid assuming he’ll replicate his best games every week.

Edited 20 hours ago by May Day 10

[boater]

18 hours ago, Jauronimo said:

Google AI just presented the definition of the term "regression to the mean". AI did not predict anything about Lyon's play.  

 

Pardon me, I drew an inference from Google. People draw inferences all day at TSW.

 

Google said professional athletes may have a spike in performance then usually return to their average:  

 

It is more likely than not, Lyon's recent play will regress to his usual average.

 

You don't hear of goalies having a sudden performance improvement--and then sustaining it for the long run. It's not like a QB or CB whose performance improves when they suddenly get it and understand the system.

 

Lyon:

• Career GAA; 2.99
• 2025 GAA: 2.43

 

He'll be back in the 2.99 range any day now.

[Jauronimo]

3 minutes ago, boater said:

 

Pardon me, I drew an inference from Google. People draw inferences all day at TSW.

 

Google said professional athletes may have a spike in performance then usually return to their average:  

 

It is more likely than not, Lyon's recent play will regress to his usual average.

 

You don't hear of goalies having a sudden performance improvement--and then sustaining it for the long run. It's not like a QB or CB whose performance improves when they suddenly get it and understand the system.

 

Lyon:

• Career GAA; 2.99
• 2025 GAA: 2.43

 

He'll be back in the 2.99 range any day now.

You did not draw an inference.  You claimed AI predicted a decline in a player's performance when Google had only presented you the definition of reversion to the mean.  Reversion to the mean does not happen over a defined timeline.  Taylor Hall won an MVP before settling back into what he always was.  Reversion to the mean is not some physical law of the universe.

 

Here's my "inference": Google AI just predicted that your prediction is incorrect:

 

Quote

Google AI

 

The gambler's fallacy is the mistaken belief that independent past events influence future ones, causing a person to think that an outcome is more likely to happen after it has occurred less frequently than expected, or vice versa.