Let the Fire Bylsma Watch begin

[matter2003]

I want to know all this supposed "Veteran Leadership" from Gionta, Gorges and O'Reilly how this team continues to put forth efforts like last night?? It's happened far, far too often this year. Whether it's a period, two periods or the whole game, almost every game has featured a long stretch of play from this team where the appear completely disinterested in playing hockey and seems to be going through the motions or mailing it in.

 

Something doesn't add up to me. If we had such good leadership this would have happened once or twice in the beginning of the season and they would have been all over the guys Chris Drury style. Now THAT was a leader.

 

It's unacceptable and it starts at the top...this dude HAS to go.

Glad to hear him taking blame for the effort/results of both the last 2 games. Now let's see him play better next game & put this team on his back.

They've said it all season long. At some point you've got to stop talking about it and start doing. Put up or shut up.

Never mind Dan's technical flaws, or his player usage issues.

All coaches have blind spots. All coaches make mistakes in those areas.

 

For three-quarters of the year the team has worked hard in spite of that.

Since the break they have checked out.

 

They don't believe in their leader.

That is impossible for a coach to overcome.

That is why Dan has less than two weeks left.

No this team worked hard in spurts. One period they play well, the next period they suck. Then they turn it on for 5 minutes and score 3 goals.

 

It's been going on all year. And it's not good enough, not by a long shot. No reason this team couldn't be challenging for the last playoff spot...do we really think Boston has that good of a team? That Ottawa has that good of a team?? We smoked Ottawa this year...the only divisional team we seemed to play well against.

Edited April 4, 2017 by matter2003

[Derrico]

Weird, I give most of the credit to the players.

Players obviously have a huge part in it.  But how do you explain the PP being #1 in the league and our even strength scoring being so low??

 

Also, we had basically the same players last year and were 12th in the league.  The Sabres have jumped up nearly 6% from last year. 

Edited April 4, 2017 by Derrico

[dudacek]

No this team worked hard in spurts. One period they play well, the next period they suck. Then they turn it on for 5 minutes and score 3 goalst.

 

No, this team played well in spurts. That's not the same as working hard. They worked hard for the first four or five months of the season.

 

The first 20 games were squandered with the ultra-defensive "guys without Jack we're just not good enough! Don't even cross the street! It's dangerous!" style of hockey. The next 40 we saw the Sabres I expected: a young, talented, rather explosive team that lacked the discipline and consistency to play 60 minutes because their defence wasn't good enough to feed or cover up for their freelancing forwards. But they kept coming. The last quarter they are a defeated, unfocused team that doesn't believe.

 

Players obviously have a huge part in it. But how do you explain the PP being #1 in the league and our even strength scoring being so low??

 

Also, we had basically the same players last year and were 12th in the league. The Sabres have jumped up nearly 6% from last year.

 

Not diminishing the coaching, but our PP is mostly so good because we have some really skilled forwards (plus Risto). I said early in the year that we had the pieces for our best PP since Lafontaine/Mogilny/Andreychuk/Bodger/Hawerchuk and the season has proven that to be correct.

 

I think the bigger question is why can't those guys succeed 5-on-5?

Edited April 4, 2017 by dudacek

[Randall Flagg]

The Sabres had the best PP in the league in one of the early 90s seasons, and they only collected something like 74 or 76 points in the standings that year too.

[darksabre]

The Sabres had the best PP in the league in one of the early 90s seasons, and they only collected something like 74 or 76 points in the standings that year too.

 

95-96. Nolan's first year as coach. Lafontaine scored like a nut on the PP but they couldn't do anything else. Then the next season without Patty they couldn't do anything on the PP but made the playoffs anyway. 

[Stoner]

95-96. Nolan's first year as coach. Lafontaine scored like a nut on the PP but they couldn't do anything else. Then the next season without Patty they couldn't do anything on the PP but made the playoffs anyway. 

That's a good guess. Pat had a big comeback year with 40 goals and the team was down (in the first year of a one-year rebuild by Muckler). But the season in question is 91-92. The Sabres were actually 20th on the power play in 95-96 (and even worse the next season).

[pi2000]

Not diminishing the coaching, but our PP is mostly so good because we have some really skilled forwards (plus Risto). I said early in the year that we had the pieces for our best PP since Lafontaine/Mogilny/Andreychuk/Bodger/Hawerchuk and the season has proven that to be correct.

 

I think the bigger question is why can't those guys succeed 5-on-5?

 

They do, they're our leading scorers... after that, there's a huge drop off in talent/ability.

[Randall Flagg]

They do, they're our leading scorers... after that, there's a huge drop off in talent/ability.

Really? Cuz for the first 60 games or so, Gionta led all Buffalo Sabres in even strength scoring rates before he fell off a cliff.

 

Eichel is 1st, followed by Kane, Reinhart, Gionta, ROR, Carrier. Okposo is 9th. So numbers 1, 3, 5, and 9 are on our first PP unit. Jack has 1.78 ES points per 60, Sam 1.56, ROR 1.32. ROR is down more than .6 ES points per 60 from his days in Colorado.

 

Eichel is behind such superstars as Elias Lindholm, Radim Vrbata, Josh Anderson, Antoine Roussel, Curtis McKenzie, Andreas Athanasiou, Jonathan Marchesseault, Jordan Schroeder, Phillip Danault, Paul Byron, Jason Chimera, Casey Cizikas, Scott Wilson, Jannik Hansen, Magnus Paajarvi, Tyler Bozak, Sven Baertschi, and Brett Connolly, in this stat. Either we tanked for a talent that can't outscore these scrubs at even strength, or something is wrong with the way we play even strength hockey.

 

Considering the fact that despite being behind these scrubs, Eich is a top 15 PPG player all year, he can pull that much weight on the power play alone, it's abundantly obvious that our system does not cut it in today's NHL. I mean, some of these players are being coached by GARBAGE coaches, and they can still produce at higher ES rates because their teams do. 

 

Colorado, Philly, and NJ are the only teams whose leading 5 on 5 points per 60 player scores fewer than Jack, who leads us in that category.

 

Also edited to add that Okposo had only seen 2 seasons dip below 1.7 ES points per 60 during his previous 8 years before coming here, while he sits at 1.13 this season. Our system suppresses offense because it focuses on hockey 'plays' which give the other team the puck and put even more pressure on our leaky defense.

Edited April 4, 2017 by Randall Flagg

[LTS]

 

@SabresBuzz

Jack not thrilled with his own performance. Said with so many young guys in the lineup he has to be a better leader

 

@SabresBuzz

Eichel: "I have to look myself in the mirror. I have to be better"

 

@SabresBuzz

Eichel said the breakdowns on ice that led to goals has nothing to do with communication with coaches. Jack says onus is on all players

 

@SabresBuzz

Eichel: We are professionals. We all have to show up here at 5pm a couple hours before the game and prepare ourselves

 

 

That last one confuses me

 

 

 

 

That's what I want to hear from Jack.  He's growing up, let's hope it continues.  The last comment is interesting.  There are clearly a few bodies in the locker room who are not as interested in doing what it takes.  Who is it?  

[WildCard]

No this team worked hard in spurts. One period they play well, the next period they suck. Then they turn it on for 5 minutes and score 3 goals.

 

It's been going on all year. And it's not good enough, not by a long shot. No reason this team couldn't be challenging for the last playoff spot...do we really think Boston has that good of a team? That Ottawa has that good of a team?? We smoked Ottawa this year...the only divisional team we seemed to play well against.

100% agreed. 

Not diminishing the coaching, but our PP is mostly so good because we have some really skilled forwards (plus Risto). I said early in the year that we had the pieces for our best PP since Lafontaine/Mogilny/Andreychuk/Bodger/Hawerchuk and the season has proven that to be correct.

 

I think the bigger question is why can't those guys succeed 5-on-5?

Cause it's easier to enter the zone when you carry the puck in. Honestly that's it. We can enter the zone and establish a presence 

[Stoner]

That's what I want to hear from Jack.  He's growing up, let's hope it continues.  The last comment is interesting.  There are clearly a few bodies in the locker room who are not as interested in doing what it takes.  Who is it?  

Isn't there a report for work time? It would actually be funny if this team didn't have one, after the ridiculous YogaGate.

[TrueBlueGED]

In what may be a futile attempt to get the prediction thread back on track, I'll bring the discussion of "what if" scenarios revolving around a Bylsma return here. Assuming he comes back, my evaluation of his job performance will have only a small amount to do with point totals or where the team is in the standings. How they get to where they're at is far and away the most important thing to me. I'll look at the underlying numbers. Is their spot in standings a result mostly of luck (or lack thereof)? Being in first place doesn't mean much to me if it's on the back of shooting 12% and saving 94%. That's not an indicator of sustainable success.

 

I'll also look at even strength performance--is it much improved over this year and last year? The best even strength teams are the contenders. Teams that get by on special teams play are pretenders, and routinely lose in the playoffs if they aren't also good at evens. I'm of the belief that Bylsma's system, in 2017, is incapable of high end even strength results. In order for me to change that opinion, those results have to show significant improvement.

 

Has he learned from past mistakes, or is he still running Risto and O'Reilly into the ground while riding Lehner in back to backs?

 

Smoke and mirrors victories can go to hell. Wholly uninteresting to me. If it comes to pass that Bylsma returns, I'll judge him on the metrics which predict playoff success. Bookmark this and quote it back in my face next year if I'm being a hypocrite. That's fine. But don't come at me with "hey they're winning, give the man credit" if the criteria I use to evaluate his performance are just as poor as they have been for two seasons now.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Antics, err, I mean analytics.

[Mustache of God]

1/17/17, 9 AM:

Well, statistics show that goalies lose a huge chunk of their save percentage when they start the second night of a back to back as well as the first - but I have a good feeling about Robin tonight, so we'll throw him out there and see what happens.

 

1030 PM: Welp - I had to pull Robin less than halfway through the game after allowing a pitiful goal from the half wall. 3 quick GA and our lead was evaporated.

 

2/12/17, 8 AM: 

You know what? Robin had a damn good game last night. What the hell, I'll throw him out there again. The Canucks suck anyway, right?

 

10:00PM: Eeeeeeek. He gave up 4 goals in a loss to a terrible team. Had temper tantrum in lockerroom after. Bad move, I'll own it. 

 

2/19/17, one week later, 8AM:

I know I said that this was a bad idea, but I just can't shake the feeling that I should start Robin tonight. He had a great, if busy, game yesterday after all. My name Dan Bylsma, and I can turn on all the faucets in my house. 

 

11PM: Yikes, this time he gave up FIVE. Not a great way to start the vacation. Oh well, GMTM is probably already on a beach somewhere, maybe he didn't see.

 

3/21/17, 9 AM: 

I'm doing it. I'm starting Lehner. He has to pull one of these out one of these times, right?

 

9:30 PM: Well, he gave up 3 this time, but we lost. I know that I keep making the wrong choice and I can even tell you why it's wrong statistically. But I'm still going to do it. Just like how on the radio in early April I noted that I need to cut back on some of Risto's ice time, just like I said last August, and yet I will continue to give him 27+ minutes per game like I have all season. 

 

4/3/17, 9AM:

Lehner played last night. I don't care. ###### Jack Eichel.

 

10PM: I had to pull him after 3 goals before the first period was over. I'm starting to wonder if I should change my approach. 

 

This is my vote for post of the year. :worthy:

[Stoner]

Antics, err, I mean analytics.

Yup. That encapsulates everything that's wrong, nay, unholy, about analytics. I couldn't in a million years have written so coherent a post to make the case against analytics. I thank True for doing so. Even if Dan wins next season, even if he wins a lot, it won't necessarily matter. The number-crunchers and their style points will tell us if the wins have "value." In the past I've sometimes imagined this bizarro future world where goals don't matter anymore, where the final "score" might be Leafs .3045, Senators .3042. I was half-kidding. Now I'm not so sure. It's a little creepy. And: a lot of these people are in seats of power in the game. Standings, they're coming for ya!

[WildCard]

The stats provide a basis on if your team has a legitimate shot at actually winning the Cup. And that's what we all want, right? To win the Cup?

[TrueBlueGED]

Yup. That encapsulates everything that's wrong, nay, unholy, about analytics. I couldn't in a million years have written so coherent a post to make the case against analytics. I thank True for doing so. Even if Dan wins next season, even if he wins a lot, it won't necessarily matter. The number-crunchers and their style points will tell us if the wins have "value." In the past I've sometimes imagined this bizarro future world where goals don't matter anymore, where the final "score" might be Leafs .3045, Senators .3042. I was half-kidding. Now I'm not so sure. It's a little creepy. And: a lot of these people are in seats of power in the game. Standings, they're coming for ya!

You must have loved the Avs a couple of years ago when Patrick Roy's "great coaching" turned them into a 100-point team, and been completely shocked at the subsequent collapse in the playoffs and following seasons.

[pi2000]

The stats provide a basis on if your team has a legitimate shot at actually winning the Cup. And that's what we all want, right? To win the Cup?

 

So you what... just snap your fingers and play possession hockey and you win a Cup?   The Kings led the league in Corsi% this season, where are they?   The Lightning 5th, the Hurricanes 7th, the Flyers 9th.... all on the outside looking in.

 

Meanwhile the Rangers are 25th in Corsi and they're in, the Wild 21st.  

 

...and that's all on Dan right?   And the lack of depth on defense and bottom 6 tank leftovers have nothing to do with it? 

[WildCard]

And the Rangers are going to get slaughtered.

 

Hey True, where is that chart / article you used to post all the time about this? Playoff teams with the best possession stats being the best indicator for success in the postseason?

 

I've acknowledged the defense is bad, although I think they're made worse with stretch passes. Maybe we'd have a good 'bottom 6' if we put our God damned 2nd, slow footed, natural center pick at oh I don't know, the center position? Maybe let him anchor the 3rd line, maybe make some competent lines to maximize what you do have.

[pi2000]

And the Rangers are going to get slaughtered.

 

Hey True, where is that chart / article you used to post all the time about this? Playoff teams with the best possession stats being the best indicator for success in the postseason?

 

I've acknowledged the defense is bad, although I think they're made worse with stretch passes. Maybe we'd have a good 'bottom 6' if we put our God damned 2nd, slow footed, natural center pick at oh I don't know, the center position? Maybe let him anchor the 3rd line, maybe make some competent lines to maximize what you do have.

 

Unlikely.

 

Moving Reinhart off Eichel's wing would leave a void.. he already has 1 void to his left, moving Reinhart would hurt Eichel's production and significantly water down the top 6.     And Reinhart is not nearly good enough defensively to match-up against other teams top lines.    

[WildCard]

Unlikely.

 

Moving Reinhart off Eichel's wing would leave a void.. he already has 1 void to his left, moving Reinhart would hurt Eichel's production and significantly water down the top 6. And Reinhart is not nearly good enough defensively to match-up against other teams top lines.

NYR and Ducks, two teams pretending to be good

 

I really don't believe Eichel​'s production relies on Reinhart at all. I'd prefer, and credit to dudacek cause he convinced me, to roll 3 lines deep equally, as 3 scoring lines. No bottom or top 6, no purely defensive line; if it is it's your 4th, who should be getting more than 6m per game anyways

[Weave]

In what may be a futile attempt to get the prediction thread back on track, I'll bring the discussion of "what if" scenarios revolving around a Bylsma return here. Assuming he comes back, my evaluation of his job performance will have only a small amount to do with point totals or where the team is in the standings. How they get to where they're at is far and away the most important thing to me. I'll look at the underlying numbers. Is their spot in standings a result mostly of luck (or lack thereof)? Being in first place doesn't mean much to me if it's on the back of shooting 12% and saving 94%. That's not an indicator of sustainable success.

 

I'll also look at even strength performance--is it much improved over this year and last year? The best even strength teams are the contenders. Teams that get by on special teams play are pretenders, and routinely lose in the playoffs if they aren't also good at evens. I'm of the belief that Bylsma's system, in 2017, is incapable of high end even strength results. In order for me to change that opinion, those results have to show significant improvement.

 

Has he learned from past mistakes, or is he still running Risto and O'Reilly into the ground while riding Lehner in back to backs?

 

Smoke and mirrors victories can go to hell. Wholly uninteresting to me. If it comes to pass that Bylsma returns, I'll judge him on the metrics which predict playoff success. Bookmark this and quote it back in my face next year if I'm being a hypocrite. That's fine. But don't come at me with "hey they're winning, give the man credit" if the criteria I use to evaluate his performance are just as poor as they have been for two seasons now.

 

You would have been welcome on Team Storm Cloud. 

Yup. That encapsulates everything that's wrong, nay, unholy, about analytics. I couldn't in a million years have written so coherent a post to make the case against analytics. I thank True for doing so. Even if Dan wins next season, even if he wins a lot, it won't necessarily matter. The number-crunchers and their style points will tell us if the wins have "value." In the past I've sometimes imagined this bizarro future world where goals don't matter anymore, where the final "score" might be Leafs .3045, Senators .3042. I was half-kidding. Now I'm not so sure. It's a little creepy. And: a lot of these people are in seats of power in the game. Standings, they're coming for ya!

 

The whole smoke and mirrors win thing was what fueled TSC.  We just didn't have the stats to back up what our gut was telling us.

[pi2000]

NYR and Ducks, two teams pretending to be good

 

I really don't believe Eichel​'s production relies on Reinhart at all. I'd prefer, and credit to dudacek cause he convinced me, to roll 3 lines deep equally, as 3 scoring lines. No bottom or top 6, no purely defensive line; if it is it's your 4th, who should be getting more than 6m per game anyways

 

A big reason BUF has some of the worst possession numbers if because they don't have a shutdown line.    They routinely get outshot because they don't have anybody in the forward ranks (other than ROR) who can defend.    You improve the 3rd line, get a UFA shutdown checking C who can win draws and suddenly their possession stats look drastically improved because Bylsma can match them up against top lines instead of sending ROR out every other shift to take face-offs in their own end.   

[Randall Flagg]

The Rangers will indeed get knocked out relatively early, unless matchups really go their way (Like, Ottawa winning the Atlantic and then drawing Toronto somehow in the second round.) 

 

Their style is what gets shut down when the whistles go away and the playoff grind begins. 

 

I'm not a huge fan of the Wild's season either - I like their coach but a bunch of their players are having career years all at once. Still, the team defense seems pretty good from the games I've seen, and I could see them winning a round or two.

But the typical contenders will again be top 5 possession teams. 

[WildCard]

A big reason BUF has some of the worst possession numbers if because they don't have a shutdown line. They routinely get outshot because they don't have anybody in the forward ranks (other than ROR) who can defend. You improve the 3rd line, get a UFA shutdown checking C who can win draws and suddenly their possession stats look drastically improved because Bylsma can match them up against top lines instead of sending ROR out every other shift to take face-offs in their own end.

How do you shut down a line that rolls 3 equal lines then? How do you shut down a SJ, Chicago, Pitt, or Washington with 2 equally dominate lines? A shutdown line is not the solution

 

I'd be interested to know what Larsson shutdown line actually did as far as possession impact on the rest of the team

Edited April 4, 2017 by WildCard