Taro T Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 You just love making excuses. He's just looking to take the title of Board Contrarian from PA. Good luck w/ that. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 You just love making excuses. Not making excuses. I'm just not delusional about where this team is talent/experience-wise. DD may be a problem, but he is certainly not the boogieman everyone is making him out to be with regard to why we suck. Also, I might be trolling a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 Not making excuses. I'm just not delusional about where this team is talent/experience-wise. DD may be a problem, but he is certainly not the boogieman everyone is making him out to be with regard to why we suck. Also, I might be trolling a little. This team has the talent to be better than it is. Even with injuries he's setting back the development of this team every day the he's the coach. He's poison. They need to fire him now before we waste any more time. He is who we thought he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 This team has the talent to be better than it is. Even with injuries he's setting back the development of this team every day the he's the coach. He's poison. They need to fire him now before we waste any more time. He is who we thought he was. I know that is the fashionable thing to say these days, I'm just not sure it's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 (edited) I know that is the fashionable thing to say these days, I'm just not sure it's true.Five twenty goal scorers from last year plus two guys on pace for 18-20 who aren't in that list point to tank level even strength offense? When a leading scorer of the tank teams is still around but isn't one of those seven guys? We aren't asking for top 10 offense and a 3 seed. This team should absolutely be 0-3 games below De Luca .500, fighting for those divisional and WC spots. Not ten below at the halfway point, scoring at these levels at ES. Edited January 18, 2017 by Randall Flagg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 I know that is the fashionable thing to say these days, I'm just not sure it's true. It's absolutely true. People have taken exhaustive efforts here to prove this and you seem completely disinterested in taking them seriously or offering any counter argument except "nuh uh". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 It's absolutely true. People have taken exhaustive efforts here to prove this and you seem completely disinterested in taking them seriously or offering any counter argument except "nuh uh". I have also seen many arguments describing Dan's system like it is unique to him or the Sabres. It's not. I watch game after game of other teams and see them doing the exact same things we do, they're just better at it. Again, he may be a problem but he's not the whole problem and replacing him won't immediately get us to the playoffs. When we stop putting the likes of Derek Grant, Cal O'Reilly, and D-lo on the ice I'll start grousing about the coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 I have also seen many arguments describing Dan's system like it is unique to him or the Sabres. It's not. I watch game after game of other teams and see them doing the exact same things we do, they're just better at it. Again, he may be a problem but he's not the whole problem and replacing him won't immediately get us to the playoffs. When we stop putting the likes of Derek Grant, Cal O'Reilly, and D-lo on the ice I'll start grousing about the coach. This is insane to me. You can't judge the coach because our 4th line is littered with AHLers? That's like saying you can't judge the quality if a meal because it was seasoned with table salt rather than sea salt. Did anyone need to see Ted Nolan with a better roster to know he wasn't a good coach? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 I've spent a lot of time re-watching games to look for things, and I've been to four live this season where I've spent most of the time trying to dissect what we do on the ice. I post a lot about it as you've all seen. Throughout the process my understanding and critiques of Bylsma hockey have evolved a little bit. --- Insightful Hockey Analysis -- Intentionally-low-event-hockey that produces a terrible record depresses this entire fanbase. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 This is insane to me. You can't judge the coach because our 4th line is littered with AHLers? That's like saying you can't judge the quality if a meal because it was seasoned with table salt rather than sea salt. Did anyone need to see Ted Nolan with a better roster to know he wasn't a good coach? Questionable analogy. I would've gone with something like ..."because the napkins are 2-ply instead of 4-ply." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 This is insane to me. You can't judge the coach because our 4th line is littered with AHLers? That's like saying you can't judge the quality if a meal because it was seasoned with table salt rather than sea salt. Did anyone need to see Ted Nolan with a better roster to know he wasn't a good coach? 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 I'm a very new Sabres fan but have loved watching the team and learning more about them. Growing up in the South I never was exposed to hockey so I'm very much still learning the ins and outs of the game and what to be looking for while watching a live game. That being said, watching the Sabres offensively seems to be so boring and painful at times. There doesn't seem to be much flow to the offense and they don't seem to consistently transition through the neutral zone and create opportunities on the offensive end like some other teams do. But, as a new hockey fan, I'm just now able to understand this. So, what really is it about Byslma that makes him a bad coach? By putting it in very basic terms for a new hockey fan that doesn't yet understand a ton, what is his offensive style and what kind of style would you prefer instead? Randall's epic post does a great job laying out. In short (I think I have it right): Byslma likes long passes and dumping the puck in, which are old school "safe" plays. The long stretch pass from the D in the Sabres zone to the forwards at center ice doesn't connect enough, but when it misses the puck is going away from your net. Same with the dump in where you shoot the puck from center around behind the opposing net. If you make short passes or skate it out, you stand a better chance of having the puck when you get to the opposing zone, but mistakes may result in your opponent attacking faster. 15-25 years ago, many teams were successful in this "keep it away from our net" approach. Get the puck down towards your opponents net and wait for mistakes to attack. It's terrible hockey to watch. Now, either the players have gotten better or the strategy has changed and this doesn't work. The data suggests that successful teams are the ones that keep the puck. In really short: "They can't score if the puck is in their end" is losing out to "we can't score unless the puck is on our stick". Byslma's system emphasizes the former where many good teams with talent (which the Sabres have) are winning with the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 This is insane to me. You can't judge the coach because our 4th line is littered with AHLers? That's like saying you can't judge the quality if a meal because it was seasoned with table salt rather than sea salt. Did anyone need to see Ted Nolan with a better roster to know he wasn't a good coach? I think the replacements will be to the upper lines thus moving guys down, not just swapping out 4th liners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 Randall's epic post does a great job laying out. In short (I think I have it right): Byslma likes long passes and dumping the puck in, which are old school "safe" plays. The long stretch pass from the D in the Sabres zone to the forwards at center ice doesn't connect enough, but when it misses the puck is going away from your net. Same with the dump in where you shoot the puck from center around behind the opposing net. If you make short passes or skate it out, you stand a better chance of having the puck when you get to the opposing zone, but mistakes may result in your opponent attacking faster. 15-25 years ago, many teams were successful in this "keep it away from our net" approach. Get the puck down towards your opponents net and wait for mistakes to attack. It's terrible hockey to watch. Now, either the players have gotten better or the strategy has changed and this doesn't work. The data suggests that successful teams are the ones that keep the puck. In really short: "They can't score if the puck is in their end" is losing out to "we can't score unless the puck is on our stick". Byslma's system emphasizes the former where many good teams with talent (which the Sabres have) are winning with the latter. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickshaw Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 Time for a new coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 I think the replacements will be to the upper lines thus moving guys down, not just swapping out 4th liners. Who is getting replaced and pushed down the lineup? O'Reilly, Eichel, Reinhart, Okposo, Kane are locked in. Who is moving any of them down other than Nylander? Maybe Kane isn't around long term, but for the most part, I think the top forwards we're going to run with are already here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 Who is getting replaced and pushed down the lineup? O'Reilly, Eichel, Reinhart, Okposo, Kane are locked in. Who is moving any of them down other than Nylander? Maybe Kane isn't around long term, but for the most part, I think the top forwards we're going to run with are already here. Well, in a perfect world, one of them will be on the third line, no? Zemgus, Foligno should be playing lower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 Well, in a perfect world, one of them will be on the third line, no? Zemgus, Foligno should be playing lower. Um, no. If O'Reilly, Reinhart and Eichel aren't all playing in the top 6 then they aren't going to be on the team. Other teams will pay these guys to be in their top six. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 (edited) Well, in a perfect world, one of them will be on the third line, no? Zemgus, Foligno should be playing lower. I think in a perfect world ROR is at LW (as he was a fair bit in COL). Kane likes to skate and shoot so much, I'd rather him not be on a line with other playmakers. Ideally, Kane is 3LW with players like Foligno, Girgensons, or Larsssson where they are defensively responsible but have the speed and some skill to force the other team to take the line seriously as a scoring threat. Nylander and maybe Asplund or Carrier join Eichel, Reinhart, ROR, Okposo in the top six. Fourth line is similar to the third, but with the drop-off in scoring that's realistic. Ennis may fit in there somewhere if no one claims the 2LW or 2RW spots. Edited January 18, 2017 by MattPie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 Um, no. If O'Reilly, Reinhart and Eichel aren't all playing in the top 6 then they aren't going to be on the team. Other teams will pay these guys to be in their top six. But they are all centers. In a perfect world, ya know, a world in which we want to compete for a Stanley Cup, one of them will be the third line center and we will have wingers to match their skill. Otherwise, we won't be competing for a Stanley Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 Well, in a perfect world, one of them will be on the third line, no? Zemgus, Foligno should be playing lower. In my perfect world, yes. In Bylsma's, no :nana: But who are they going to be replaced by that are significant upgrades? All of the best teams have a couple of "JAGs" playing on their top three lines. Do you view Zemgus and Foligno as strictly fourth line players? Nick Bonino is centering Phil Kessel, and he has a whopping 4 more points than Foligno does. Um, no. If O'Reilly, Reinhart and Eichel aren't all playing in the top 6 then they aren't going to be on the team. Other teams will pay these guys to be in their top six. I disagree. I think all three are good enough to drive their own line, and that's ideally how it would be set up. I want the Pittsburgh setup: Crosby, Malkin, Kessel (granted, not a center) all getting their own line to captain. Hell, this is what Toronto is doing too. I continue to think "top-6" is an antiquated notion that inhibits debate because it makes people treat the "3rd line" as a red-headed step child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 But they are all centers. In a perfect world, ya know, a world in which we want to compete for a Stanley Cup, one of them will be the third line center and we will have wingers to match their skill. Otherwise, we won't be competing for a Stanley Cup. In my perfect world, yes. In Bylsma's, no :nana: But who are they going to be replaced by that are significant upgrades? All of the best teams have a couple of "JAGs" playing on their top three lines. Do you view Zemgus and Foligno as strictly fourth line players? Nick Bonino is centering Phil Kessel, and he has a whopping 4 more points than Foligno does. I disagree. I think all three are good enough to drive their own line, and that's ideally how it would be set up. I want the Pittsburgh setup: Crosby, Malkin, Kessel (granted, not a center) all getting their own line to captain. Hell, this is what Toronto is doing too. I continue to think "top-6" is an antiquated notion that inhibits debate because it makes people treat the "3rd line" as a red-headed step child. It's all economics though. How are we going to afford those three down the middle long term? Pittsburgh LUCKED into Kessel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 It's all economics though. How are we going to afford those three down the middle long term? Pittsburgh LUCKED into Kessel. In the same way we lucked into O'Reilly: incompetent regime misvalues and misplaces blame, trades for pucks. Anywho, I don't think there's an economics problem. Each winning team has X core forwards they invest into, and I don't think it matters if that X includes 2 centers and a winger, or 3 centers--the total price for those foundational pieces is going to be about the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXSabresFan Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 Randall's epic post does a great job laying out. In short (I think I have it right): Byslma likes long passes and dumping the puck in, which are old school "safe" plays. The long stretch pass from the D in the Sabres zone to the forwards at center ice doesn't connect enough, but when it misses the puck is going away from your net. Same with the dump in where you shoot the puck from center around behind the opposing net. If you make short passes or skate it out, you stand a better chance of having the puck when you get to the opposing zone, but mistakes may result in your opponent attacking faster. 15-25 years ago, many teams were successful in this "keep it away from our net" approach. Get the puck down towards your opponents net and wait for mistakes to attack. It's terrible hockey to watch. Now, either the players have gotten better or the strategy has changed and this doesn't work. The data suggests that successful teams are the ones that keep the puck. In really short: "They can't score if the puck is in their end" is losing out to "we can't score unless the puck is on our stick". Byslma's system emphasizes the former where many good teams with talent (which the Sabres have) are winning with the latter. That makes a lot of sense. Appreciate the explanation. Who are some guys out there that you all would like to see the Sabres go after if they are to fire Byslma? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted January 18, 2017 Report Share Posted January 18, 2017 Hey all, new here but long time reader. I have good friends from the Pittsburg area who are telling me Dan Bylsma heavily stifled the Penguins offensive capacity while he was there. While I realize this team has had injury issues this season, there is something going on here. This team should be better than this. Anyways, I'd like to see Bylsma removed and a new system installed to work the strengths of our players. Just my take is all. Welcome! Good first post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts