Does Size Really Matter? Is this Regier's Thinking?

[SwampD]

Here's a thought: what if the NHL reverts again to post-lockout officiating? What if Darcy builds a bigger team only to have the rules strengthened again during the upcoming offseason and we wind up being victims of abandoning the run and gun style in favor of a more physical game?

 

Talk about continuously getting caught changing moulds.

That only matters in the regular season, though. Pre-lockout rules have been in effect during every SCFs since the lockout.

[TrueBlueGED]

Here's a thought: what if the NHL reverts again to post-lockout officiating? What if Darcy builds a bigger team only to have the rules strengthened again during the upcoming offseason and we wind up being victims of abandoning the run and gun style in favor of a more physical game?

 

Talk about continuously getting caught changing moulds.

 

Funny you say that, because this morning on WGR they were talking about how Jim Nill (Detroit assistant GM) said in an interview that with the pending CBA GMs don't know how to build their teams this offseason. Will there be a renewed emphasis on skill and speed? Will the sludge continue? It does actually put teams in a bit of a bind, especially the Sabres who most believe are facing an absolutely pivotal offseason. There's going to be a hockey summit in August (I think) with players, coaches, GMs, refs to try and inject offense back into the game....but nobody has any clue what (if anything) will come from it.

 

That only matters in the regular season, though. Pre-lockout rules have been in effect during every SCFs since the lockout.

 

Which is another problem. If a set of rules determines who gets to the playoffs, those same rules should determine who wins once there. The direction may be a debate, but I think most want some consistency one way or the other.

[LastPommerFan]

Funny you say that, because this morning on WGR they were talking about how Jim Nill (Detroit assistant GM) said in an interview that with the pending CBA GMs don't know how to build their teams this offseason. Will there be a renewed emphasis on skill and speed? Will the sludge continue? It does actually put teams in a bit of a bind, especially the Sabres who most believe are facing an absolutely pivotal offseason. There's going to be a hockey summit in August (I think) with players, coaches, GMs, refs to try and inject offense back into the game....but nobody has any clue what (if anything) will come from it.

 

 

 

Which is another problem. If a set of rules determines who gets to the playoffs, those same rules should determine who wins once there.

 

And the vast majority of the team shuffling will be done by the middle of July.

[darksabre]

 

That only matters in the regular season, though. Pre-lockout rules have been in effect during every SCFs since the lockout.

 

I'm not so sure about that. Look at the teams that have been there since the lockout: Carolina, Edmonton, Pittsburgh, Detroit, Anaheim, Ottawa, Boston, Vancouver, Philly. Only Boston and Anaheim really scream sludge hockey to me. The rest I would categorize as balanced offense/defense.

 

All of those teams outwork the Sabres though, so that's a problem. I think balanced hockey is alive and kicking, but that Darcy screwed up by building a team that was tilted towards offense and speed rather than balance. At the same time you don't want to swing too far the other way and end up like Nashville.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

Here's a thought: what if the NHL reverts again to post-lockout officiating? What if Darcy builds a bigger team only to have the rules strengthened again during the upcoming offseason and we wind up being victims of abandoning the run and gun style in favor of a more physical game?

 

Talk about continuously getting caught changing moulds.

 

The NFL can suddenly stop calling holding on lineman to protect the QB and have more offense and the $150 million the Bills spent on their D-line this offseason could be a gigantic waste. But you do what makes sense and don't hope for a black swan to help you out.

 

Again, you don't need monsters, but the depth of at least some size and grit for the better teams really puts the Sabres to shame. Then when you see something like the Lucic incident....it's like warning the 300lb person with high cholesterol for years even though they are walking around fine and then, BOOM!, massive heart attack. It's easy to deny shortcomings until time catches up with you.

 

One of the reasons I like Winnipeg so much is that they have so much high end talent with size, that they would be the type to be able to trade away those great assets and pick up a little more skill. Byfuglin, Ladd, Kane, Wheeler, Bogosain, Antropov....they average just under 6'4" and 215lbs with 120 hits and all have top end offense ability. This allows for tad smaller centers like Little, Burmistrov, Wellwood and Slater who all can put up 15-25 goals and still average 80 hits. Then there are grinders like Glass and Thornburn.

 

This is the type of roster that can go looking for a mega-deal. Say Vancouver has decided they need to mold a bigger and tougher team and have Luongo as trade bait. Winnipeg has the horses to go after Luongo and say a Kessler or Burrows or maybe can pry one of their talented D-men.

 

I wish Vegas had a 3 year line because I would make a wager.

[darksabre]

 

 

The NFL can suddenly stop calling holding on lineman to protect the QB and have more offense and the $150 million the Bills spent on their D-line this offseason could be a gigantic waste. But you do what makes sense and don't hope for a black swan to help you out.

 

Again, you don't need monsters, but the depth of at least some size and grit for the better teams really puts the Sabres to shame. Then when you see something like the Lucic incident....it's like warning the 300lb person with high cholesterol for years even though they are walking around fine and then, BOOM!, massive heart attack. It's easy to deny shortcomings until time catches up with you.

 

One of the reasons I like Winnipeg so much is that they have so much high end talent with size, that they would be the type to be able to trade away those great assets and pick up a little more skill. Byfuglin, Ladd, Kane, Wheeler, Bogosain, Antropov....they average just under 6'4" and 215lbs with 120 hits and all have top end offense ability. This allows for tad smaller centers like Little, Burmistrov, Wellwood and Slater who all can put up 15-25 goals and still average 80 hits. Then there are grinders like Glass and Thornburn.

 

This is the type of roster that can go looking for a mega-deal. Say Vancouver has decided they need to mold a bigger and tougher team and have Luongo as trade bait. Winnipeg has the horses to go after Luongo and say a Kessler or Burrows or maybe can pry one of their talented D-men.

 

I wish Vegas had a 3 year line because I would make a wager.

 

I like what Winnipeg is doing, I think they'll be a threat as long as they really gel next year.

 

It's important to note the role fourth lines have played this season. Richardson, King, Nolan and Fraser have been huge for LA, while Carter, Gionta and Bernier have played energized for NJ.

[5th line wingnutt]

On the debate about Stanley Cup winning coaches and their tenures...

 

I do not generally appeal to authority but I will make an exception in this case. I was trained as a mathematician and I will appeal to my own authority. I took a course in advanced statistics when I was an undergrad and have been interested in, and studied, statistics in economics and the social sciences.

 

TrueBlue has the better of this debate.

 

A few unscientific observations from 50+ years of watching hockey:

 

At the highest levels of hockey (Stanley Cup, World Championships, Olympics) it is unusual for coaching to be the difference. The last time this happened was probably the 1980 Olympics. Herb Brookes convinced a bunch of no-name kids they could beat the best team in the world. The Russian coach, whose name escapes me at the moment, failed to get his team to take those kids seriously. Monumental fail, but in hindsight, understandable.

 

Bad coaches can hurt teams more than good coaches can help them.

 

A coach can lose a team, and then must be replaced without regard to how good he is. Think Bowman near the end of his tenure with the Sabres.

 

A coach must coach the team he has, not the team he wants. Young teams must be encouraged, mistakes forgiven, Xs and Os explained and drilled. Veteran teams must mostly be left alone, unless they need a kick in the ass.

 

Coaches are smarter than the average player. We have all seen players (LR was one) who are heady and curious. I remember Lindy talking to Scotty Bowman in the bench area during the games. Understand that I said “Lindy talking to Scotty” and not vice versa. I thought that Lindy was probably asking about strategy or tactics. I was less than surprised when Lindy became a coach. Other players just seem heady, smarter than the average bear. Scott Arniel and Kevin Dineen both come to mind and both became coaches. Having now convinced you that coaches are, generally speaking, smarter than players, I can get to the point. Coaches need to practice the KISS principal. LR may be guilty here.

 

Coaching is not just the head coach. You need a combination of talents to coach a team. Getting the right combo is the joint responsibility of the head coach and GM.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

.

 

Bad coaches can hurt teams more than good coaches can help them.

 

 

 

This is it in a nutshell and I agree. In racing, the horse is 90% of it. A good trainer may be able to keep a horse healthier or going near his peak and be able to spot his workload better, and a good jockey may be able to let the horse do what is natural for that horse and not screw it up....but it's the horse that matters. A bad trainer can ruin a good horse and a jockey that doesn't understand the horse can dampen it's performance.

 

A good trainer though can take a horse that is doing well and keep him there for an extended period of time. If the horse isn't talented enough to win the Kentucky Derby, it doesn't matter who the trainer is. If he is good enough....it does matter though.

 

To a point Ruff can only do with what he is given. He also has worked with the same person picking out the horses for 15 years, so he has to have input and they should be on the same page. Ruff is a capable coach, but he hasn't been able to keep his stable clicking for an extended period of time. It's the same horse over the course of a year for the most part, and you can't trust betting on a horse that finishes 2nd, 7th, 8th, 3rd, 6th, 10th, 9th, 2nd, 2nd throughout the year. Just when it looks like he is doing good, the horse clunks.

 

Darryl Sutter went to LA and put front wraps and blinkers on the horse and it took off running. After 15 years it would be nice to see someone else run the stable after continuous also-rans. You can spend $16 million on a horse and never win a race. You can spend $35K on a horse and win the Triple Crown. Until one of the decision makers changes though....you are probably throwing good money after bad, year after year.

[LGR4GM]

I don't think anyone needs convincing of these facts. Most teams build from the backend first. This is just what DR has been doing since Pegs came in. Let's face it, before that it was status quo, break even, don't let the fans know it's broken thinking.

 

We've got Miller

We've got an Ehrhoff, a Regehr, a Myers, what looks to be a Sekera.

From there centers are brought in. Ennis, Hodgson, (Roy, cringe)

A couple decent wingers and a Foligno.

 

Big guys are a dime a dozen, good big guys are tougher to get.

 

I think the foundation has been built and a few more pieces need to be in and out.

 

The teams a changin'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCWdCKPtnYE&feature=related

 

That is why I don't believe a word of it. Darcy has an image in his mind, and it doesn't work.

 

I don't hate Cody Hodgson, I hate the fact that we traded away something that is in very short supply around these parts to bring in a player similar to everything else on the team. It confirms to me again that Darcy doesn't understand.

What? Hodgson is nothing like any other center on the team or in the system. Hes 6' 190lbs and will probably be closer to 200 after this summer. He can pass better than every other player on the team and had 41pts as a rookie playing crap minutes in vancouver and having to adjust to a new system here. Hodgson is anything but similar to everything else on the team. Kassian the big powderpuff was more similar. Big guy, doesn't hit, has major issues with effort. We traded a guy with big size who played small for a guy with average size who has more potential to play big than the guy we lost.

 

Hodgson >>>>>>> Kassian and he always will be.

 

I wanted to add more to this thought. People fell in love with Kassian because he was big and showed skill but he never really played big. I never saw the big guy lay anyone out or drop the gloves to back up a teammate. He is 6'3" 214 and although he shields the puck very well he seems to be very shy about playing physical. As fr Hodgson, I am not sure how physical he will be. He is certainly going to be big enough to play in this league but I will have to see an entire season before I could judge how willing he is to throw his weight around. If anything Foligno plays the way kassian should have and Hodgson seems to have far more skill, hockey IQ, and overall effort than Kassian. Bottom line for me is I hate it when people refer Hodgson as a typical regier player when he is the exact opposite of the Roy's of this team. Smaller in statue than Kassian yes, but bigger in heart, skill, and brains.

[X. Benedict]

 

Darryl Sutter went to LA and put front wraps and blinkers on the horse and it took off running. After 15 years it would be nice to see someone else run the stable after continuous also-rans. You can spend $16 million on a horse and never win a race. You can spend $35K on a horse and win the Triple Crown. Until one of the decision makers changes though....you are probably throwing good money after bad, year after year.

Not that I was ever a fan of the Murray Brothers, but in the instance of LA, Sutter got a damn good team to begin with. If anything, Sutter made that team more defensive. And even though Sutter gets credit for a turnaround. He was given a winning team to begin with.

[MattPie]

Hodgson >>>>>>> Kassian and he always will be.

 

That's a little too much hyperbole. Right now, I'd guess you're right but you (and most others not named Zack and Cody) have no real idea how this one is going to turn out. For all we know, in 5 years we could be voting on which one is on the cover of NHL2018.

 

I wanted to add more to this thought. People fell in love with Kassian because he was big and showed skill but he never really played big. I never saw the big guy lay anyone out or drop the gloves to back up a teammate.

 

Not exactly standing up for Gerbe, but close enough.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fC1ZLG0rfP0

[darksabre]

I wonder if Kassian would have ever met the expectations this fan base had for him. The "Concept of Kassian" was basically that he embodied everything this team lacks: scoring, toughness, and rage. We wanted one single player to be everything the Sabres aren't.

 

We may have been unreasonable in that regard.

[fan2456]

Thanks chz for consolidating. I'd move the stuff myself if I could.

 

I really think Buffalo is fine in net and on defense. Chicago and Detroit had deeper talented D, but if you field Regehr/McNabb/Weber and Myers/Ehrhoff/Leopold/Sekera.....that's a nice mix of offense, size and grit. You just need Weber to find his consistancy to be a 3rd pairing and then you could move Sekera or Leopold. I am not opposed to building from the back, out, IF......you understand we are way too soft up front. All that really needs to be done to compete is to replace 3 up front with bigger, grittier guys.....and let them press and cycle more. It's just so dumbfounding that the Sabres can't see it.

 

The Sabres top 3 centers average 5'10" 179lbs 20 goals and 35 hits (Roy,Hodg,Enns)

 

LA 6'2" 212lbs 25 goals 100 hits (Kop,Stoll,Cart)

BOS 6' 185lbs 22 goals 72 hits (Krej/March/Berg)

CHI 6'2" 205lbs 23 goals 60 hits (Tws,Bolnd,Kop)

PIT 6'2" 208lbs 30 goals 73 hits (Crosb/Stall/Malk)

DET 5'11" 192lbs 17 goals 60 hits (Zet,Flip,Draper)

ANA 6'1" 204lbs 16 goals 120 hits (Getz,McDonld,Phalsn)

 

So when you average the top3 centers the past 6 Cup winners

 

6'1" 201lbs 22 goals 81 hits

 

Sabres

 

5'10" 179lbs 20 goals 35 hits

 

Now you can play around a bit and include Gaustad in there which helps size and hits....but lowers offense, but Boyes or Hecht could just as easily be inserted. I did the Sabres a favor by including Foligno in the top lines going forward where in reality it was one of those 3 in his spot.

 

 

I don't think you need a team full of goons, or a team full of giants.....but it seems fairly obvious that the best teams over the recent years have many of their top forwards using their body at a much higher rate than the Sabres, and just possibly their size helps them during a grueling 2 month grind of playing every other night. Remember.....these are REGULAR SEASON numbers......you really don't want to see playoff numbers, and quite frankly, 13 games over 5 years isn't a great sample size. That in itself should tell you something is broken.

 

Defense is soft too! Sorry, I can't agree.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

I wonder if Kassian would have ever met the expectations this fan base had for him. The "Concept of Kassian" was basically that he embodied everything this team lacks: scoring, toughness, and rage. We wanted one single player to be everything the Sabres aren't.

 

We may have been unreasonable in that regard.

 

Two words ...

 

Foligno, Marcus.

[fan2456]

Two words ...

 

Foligno, Marcus.

 

Gee, the KIngs have one tough player with size too. LOL

[darksabre]

Two words ...

 

Foligno, Marcus.

 

So does he become our whipping boy now when he doesn't meet our expectations?

 

There can't just be only one. We need to get away from this "one hero to lead us" mentality.

 

Everyone on the team needs to nut up.

[fan2456]

So true!

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Gee, the KIngs have one tough player with size too. LOL

So does he become our whipping boy now when he doesn't meet our expectations?

 

There can't just be only one. We need to get away from this "one hero to lead us" mentality.

 

Everyone on the team needs to nut up.

 

Oh, I agree Foligno is not the full answer ... don't get me started ... it's summer (almost) and the weather is fine ...

 

My point was that Foligno should fill the skates of Kassian, not that there are no other issues to address.

[X. Benedict]

I wonder if Kassian would have ever met the expectations this fan base had for him. The "Concept of Kassian" was basically that he embodied everything this team lacks: scoring, toughness, and rage. We wanted one single player to be everything the Sabres aren't.

 

We may have been unreasonable in that regard.

Would you trade Foligno for Kassian? I wouldn't.

 

My point being that no Foligno, probably no deal for Hodgson.

[darksabre]

Oh, I agree Foligno is not the full answer ... don't get me started ... it's summer (almost) and the weather is fine ...

 

My point was that Foligno should fill the skates of Kassian, not that there are no other issues to address.

 

Yup. Foligno should do well to replace Kassian. I just feel a little bad that we wanted so bad to see Kassian fulfill our expectations when there is no way he could have done it on his own.

 

Would you trade Foligno for Kassian? I wouldn't.

 

My point being that no Foligno, probably no deal for Hodgson.

 

Oh no doubt. And I think what Darcy saw of Kassian in Rochester was enough to make him realize that Foligno was going to be the better of the two. Those of us who saw Kassian in Rochester definitely came to that conclusion pretty quickly.

[drnkirishone]

I agree that we are ok in goal and on defense. IF Miller plays the whole year at even 3/4 the level he did the latter half of this season and if Enroth finds his game again and actually pushes LR to start him more.

 

I may be in the minority in this regard, I am perfectly fine having are top 3 centers being as small as they are if we can get a big 4th line center for faceoffs and/or swap out 3 players for some guys that live to throw hits.

 

If I was building a team for LR and the system he has run the past few season I am looking for fast skating good puck skill centers, some big wingers, some high energy wingers

[LGR4GM]

CODY HODGSON IS NOT SMALL. I'm going on vacation, enjoy the bitching and moaning.

[inkman]

So in conclusion, as we already knew, size matters. Right Chz? ;)

[Andrew Amerk]

CODY HODGSON IS NOT SMALL. I'm going on vacation, enjoy the bitching and moaning.

 

Vacations feel good sometimes.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

CODY HODGSON IS NOT SMALL. I'm going on vacation, enjoy the bitching and moaning.

 

My favorite part about all the Hodgson talk is that everyone is crowning him because he is going to work out with Gary Roberts.......the very same Gary Roberts that Darcy declined to trade for in '07 who probably with one more power forward...could have brought a Cup here.

 

For some reason I see Hodgson and Miller hitting it off at some point.