Samson's Flow

Especially since bogo could have skated it freely all the way to the red line. Maddening few plays by him

Hang on to your butts guys. It's pk time

Samson magic. I'm sorry I ever doubted them guys :w00t:

We just need to play against our own pk

I feel sad that our friend from Sweden is often our most enthusiastic fan on here. ... and that he makes such an effort to watch these games

Liger!!!!!

At $1,165 after that big loss earlier this week. I'm going 10 units on the Wings tonight (!) to try to get above the mendoza line. :ph34r:

Good summary, I will point out that I think the timing of the strategy change directly correlates to the elimination of the 2 line pass and the brief period where interference was called.

Teds Nolans was a great motivator but a terrible hockey coach. His players would run through a wall for him, they just weren't sure which wall they needed to run through.

Great post Flagg. Very detailed breakdown and verbalizing what a lot of us have been seeing throughout the year. We are asking our defense to make incredibly low percentage passing plays and the forwards have to make great individual effort plays in order to generate offense. There is no "systematic" way for our team to generate scoring chances in 5 on 5 scenarios. We need to give the forwards the puck in our own zone and allow them to move up the ice as a cohesive unit. I would also like to see our mobile defensemen be activated on the rush far more often, as I think you would see very effective and dynamic play for Risto, McCabe, Kulikov and Bogo, who are all very good puck carriers and skaters. The way we currently play, our D&C play often looks like the practice drills for clearing the zone for the other team. Since there is no pressure on them, they are often able to execute their d-zone clear transition without any impediment.

I'm worried the Sabres are not going to have the same level of effort and success that they had yesterday, since this is the second game of a back to back. I foresee a slow first period where we end up down by 2 and are playing catch up all night, and the final ends up 4-2 or somesuch for the Leafs.

Every one of those answers are the exact opposite of how I want an owner and Russ Brandon involved. :sick:

the truth hurts. :(

To your point, I really don't think we have the goalie of the future on the team right now. Neither goalie has been particularly bad, but Lehner's rebound control scares me in the playoffs and Nilsson doesn't have the career pedigree that allows me to buy into him long term. If Ullmark or Peterson can step up and show something in the next few years, I would think that is most likely our long term answer.

Sexy center lineup there. :flirt: I agree. Oh how the mighty have fallen, but I would much rather see Fedun-Falk in there than Gorges. They at least have some transition skills in their game.

Good breakdown from BuffaloRumblings as to the difference between Rex's 3-4 and McDermott's 4-3 http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/1/12/14236950/sean-mcdermott-buffalo-bills-head-coach-4-3-defense-all-22 Saint Doug at it again!

Loser last game - down to $1,665 I will put 5 units on the Sabres tonight - lets ride that hot streak! (the Sabres hot streak, not my poor gambling related decisions) :thumbsup:

Nothing official yet. Just twitter speculating that is Joseph's preference now that he has the Denver job. OTOH, folks in Denver are flipping out because there are rumors that Wade Phillips might be leaving now that Joseph is there. @MikeSilver As I reported last night, Vance Joseph would like to take Mike McCoy as his OC in Denver. McCoy not in a hurry to make a decision.

If you are interested in McDermott's defensive scheme, below is a nice breakdown with visuals for the basic concept of his 4-3 Under defense. http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2013/11/8/5080004/panthers-vs-49ers-defense-breakdown

I agree. Most of our personnel fit well with the 4-3, but the LB's are decidedly more in a 3-4 thumper mold. That would be the toughest transition. Then again we haven't even seen Ragland play yet, so we don't know what we have there. I also think competent 4-3 LB's are one of the easier positions to fill, especially since you end up in nickel most of the time anyways.

Also with respect to the secondary play, his concept is primarily a zone - cover 3, which is heavily corner dependent, and was very successful with the best zone corner in the league (Norman). His concept relied heavily on the ability of all three linebackers to drop quickly into deep zones (which may be where we struggle a bit) as his defense is helped significantly by having 3 LBs (or at least 2) with almost safety-like speed and dropping ability, which creates very small windows in the zones for QBs to try to thread. We have Zach Brown who can do that, but we don't have a Keuchly like LB to do everything - is this Ragland? Also I don't think Rivers is in the cards, he was very against moving his family from SD to LA, can't imagine he would sign off on SD -> Buffalo. I would think we would pursue a veteran like Romo, Brees, Cousins etc. if we don't stick with Tyrod.

Because we have the defensive line that is suited for a 4-3 personnel grouping, and McDermott tends to favor zone schemes over man-to-man, which is where our secondary really struggled last year with Rex's man heavy schemes. IIRC, the "4" in McDermott's scheme has one DE playing closer to a wide 9 technique, which would be Hughes (he was very successful in Schwartz wide-9) and the other plays a 7 tech which would be Lawson. Kyle and Dareus go back to playing penetrating 3-techs. Dareus was not as effective because our best player on the line was asked to play NT and take up blockers in Rex's D.

I have no intention of trading Kane. As long as he stays off the Eichel line for the rest of eternity, he is a productive player and provides the speed and relentless forecheck for the new Reinhart line. Running 3 scoring lines has revitalized this team in terms of productivity and watchability.

it looked like we were far more aggressive on the forecheck, and routinely had two or even all three forwards in the offensive zone challenging for the puck. It made the Flyers look very uncomfortable and caused some easy turnovers in the neutral zone for the B&G. I think that aggressiveness is giving the team a purpose and allowing them to work more cohesively as a unit. Before we would only get turnovers on great individual efforts. Last night we got turnovers and had the puck far more often because Philly's D stunk and we forced the play.

Last night against the Flyers it looked like we were far more aggressive on the forecheck, and routinely had two or even all three forwards in the offensive zone challenging for the puck. It made the Flyers look very uncomfortable and caused some easy turnovers in the neutral zone for the B&G