Let the Fire Bylsma Watch begin

[WildCard]

If they're not defensively skilled played, maybe Byslma shouldn't force a square peg into a round hole. If all we have is offense, well, let the hound loose

[Randall Flagg]

How many shots you allow is 50% of the Corsi algorithm.    To have good possession numbers you need players who can prevent shots on net... that starts with winning face-offs, blocking shots, shutting down other teams top shot generating line.    BUF is supremely inept at defending.. and my eyes tell me it's not because of the "system", it's the players who are too slow, unwilling to block shots, can't win faceoffs.. etc.. intangible skills that aren't a reflection of coaching.

But I did all that hard work in the System Thread! :P 

Dan's fine, our team's intangibles are what is hampering possession. Nice.

[WildCard]

But I did all that hard work in the System Thread! :P

Dan's fine, our team's intangibles are what is hampering possession. Nice.

:lol:

[pi2000]

Didn't they have nearly record breaking performances that postseason?

 

You guys are cracking me up.   PIT wins a Cup and it's all because of Crosby and Malkin.    

 

They don't win a Cup with Crosby and Malkin in the years following and it's all Bylsma's fault.

[Weave]

 

Speaking of which, to those in the pro-Bylsma camp...

 

You could jsut direct it to Pi and NS.  It's a small camp.

[TrueBlueGED]

I stand corrected. That said, my eyes tell me BUF sucks at shot blocking. However (I looked it up before, I'm too lazy right now), they rank in the top half of the league in block shots per game... which I would argue is because they allow a ton of shots. A more telling stat would be shots blocked %... which I would imagine BUF is near the bottom.

 

That said, to take the next step, they need to work on their shot suppression, and that will come by getting better defensive players in their bottom six. Gionta, Moulson, Ennis are not defensively skilled players, and I would argue neither are Girgensons or Foligno. It's a hot mess at the moment.

I agree wholeheartedly with the second half of your post.

[WildCard]

You guys are cracking me up. PIT wins a Cup and it's all because of Crosby and Malkin.

 

They don't win a Cup with Crosby and Malkin in the years following and it's all Bylsma's fault.

Well Fleury too

[TrueBlueGED]

You could jsut direct it to Pi and NS. It's a small camp.

And yse! But I think that might be it :lol:

[Randall Flagg]

I've readily acknowledged in the past that Bylsma's system has legitimate shot suppression value. But it cannot do that while also creating. He neuters the offense for the sake of low event hockey. I don't think that wins in 2017, and I'm certain it's the wrong approach for this group of players.

 

Speaking of which, to those in the pro-Bylsma camp...would it be any more effective for me to argue Bylsma is the wrong coach, rather than a bad coach? Or is any criticism of Bylsma going to be rejected in full?

You can do this if you want to be looked at in a slightly more favorable light by people who will ultimately still disagree with you in favor of mystical intangibles which express themselves via blocked shots and showing up to stretch on time, or, you can be right that Bylsma hockey, which may have won 9 years ago when teams hadn't gone full-speed-possession, can no longer produce sustainable results in today's NHL. Any team that is successful one season goes and buys Michael Froliks and Troy Brouwers to load up and then wonders why they crash until they get a coach with the ability to implement successful possession-based systems.

Edited April 4, 2017 by Randall Flagg

[WildCard]

You could jsut direct it to Pi and NS. It's a small camp.

yse too

 

Gotta say, I do have fun with this. I'm glad pi sticks to his guns

Edited April 4, 2017 by WildCard

[pi2000]

But I did all that hard work in the System Thread! :P

Dan's fine, our team's intangibles are what is hampering possession. Nice.

 

13th in shots for per game.

 

30th in shots against.

 

It doesn't take a genius to figure out they need better defensive forwards.  

[WildCard]

13th in shots for per game.

 

30th in shots against.

 

It doesn't take a genius to figure out they need better defensive forwards.

Or we need to spend more time in the offensive zone

[qwksndmonster]

13th in shots for per game.

 

30th in shots against.

 

It doesn't take a genius to figure out they need better defensive forwards.

Or like, maybe we should try to play offense with our offensively talented players?

[Randall Flagg]

13th in shots for per game.

 

30th in shots against.

 

It doesn't take a genius to figure out they need better defensive forwards.  

We are 25th in even strength Corsi-for per 60. Our ridiculously good power play gets a lot of shots because we have very good offensive players, which helps "shots on net", not excluding special teams, look good. Just like our beefed up power play allows us to not have terrible scoring numbers at first glance.

Edited April 5, 2017 by Randall Flagg

[pi2000]

I've readily acknowledged in the past that Bylsma's system has legitimate shot suppression value. But it cannot do that while also creating. He neuters the offense for the sake of low event hockey. I don't think that wins in 2017, and I'm certain it's the wrong approach for this group of players.

 

Speaking of which, to those in the pro-Bylsma camp...would it be any more effective for me to argue Bylsma is the wrong coach, rather than a bad coach? Or is any criticism of Bylsma going to be rejected in full?

 

I disagree.  Match up your best defensive forwards against the top shot generators.   Let your top 6 free wheel.     Unfortunately there are no shutdown forwards on this team, nobody skilled enough defensively to match up with.  

 

Any coach is the wrong coach for this team :P   That said, improve the bottom six, get a shutdown C for the third line and suddenly shots against look much much better.    

 

Let me ask you this.... with this roster, and any other head coach, do you think shots against would still be an issue?   

Or we need to spend more time in the offensive zone

 

13th in shots for, offensive zone time is not the issue.

[Randall Flagg]

I disagree.  Match up your best defensive forwards against the top shot generators.   Let your top 6 free wheel.     Unfortunately there are no shutdown forwards on this team, nobody skilled enough defensively to match up with.  

 

Any coach is the wrong coach for this team :P   That said, improve the bottom six, get a shutdown C for the third line and suddenly shots against look much much better.    

 

Let me ask you this.... with this roster, and any other head coach, do you think shots against would still be an issue?   

 

13th in shots for, offensive zone time is not the issue.

 

We are 25th in even strength Corsi-for per 60. Our ridiculously good power play gets a lot of ###### shots because we have very good offensive players, which helps "shots on net", not excluding special teams, look good. Just like our beefed up power play allows us to not have terrible scoring numbers at first glance.

[WildCard]

Spending time in the opposition's zone, or the neutral zone, is not directly related to shots for. Not by a long shot

[pi2000]

We are 25th in even strength Corsi-for per 60. Our ridiculously good power play gets a lot of ###### shots because we have very good offensive players, which helps "shots on net", not excluding special teams, look good. Just like our beefed up power play allows us to not have terrible scoring numbers at first glance.

 

...and 28th in 5v5 Corsi-against per 60...  BUF's forward group wouldn't be able to defend my kids squirt team.

Spending time in the opposition's zone, or the neutral zone, is not directly related to shots for. Not by a long shot

 

BUF gives up a lot of shots because they spend a lot of time chasing around in their own zone because collectively, the forward group as a whole, cannot defend worth ######.    Get better defensive forwards and suddenly they're spending more time in the offensive zone because they're not chasing in their own end for minutes at a time.

 

I get where you're coming from,.. you're arguing a better offensive strategy would result in more offensive zone time, reducing the amount time spent in their own end, and as a result, organically reducing shots against.  

That said, when compared to the rest of the league they're much worse at shot suppression than shot generation... that, in and of itself, should be a clear indication of where they need to show an improvement. 

Edited April 5, 2017 by pi2000

[Randall Flagg]

...and 28th in 5v5 Corsi-against per 60...  BUF's forward group wouldn't be able to defend my kids squirt team.

 

BUF gives up a lot of shots because they spend a lot of time chasing around in their own zone because collectively, the forward group as a whole, cannot defend worth ######.    Get better defensive forwards and suddenly they're spending more time in the offensive zone because they're not chasing in their own end for minutes at a time.

 

I get where you're coming from,.. you're arguing a better offensive strategy would result in more offensive zone time, reducing the amount time spent in their own end, and as a result, organically reducing shots against.  

That said, when compared to the rest of the league they're much worse at shot suppression than shot generation... that, in and of itself, should be a clear indication of where they need to show an improvement. 

Yes, we allow a lot of shots. I'm showing you that your claim that we take enough of them at ES is wrong. We do not. We are terrible at generating shots at even strength, and unsurprisingly, we allow a lot of them at even strength. Those kind of go hand in hand. Nobody says we are great in our own zone. But we would spend less time there if we had a transition strategy that was conducive to maintaining possession when we recover the puck. I have done literally dozens of hours of work showing that we do not have this strategy. I have seen zero hours of work done that refute this work that I have done. 

 

The Leafs are also terrible at defending in their own zone. That is how they have lost 10 games that they led by multiple goals in the third. But they can transition and maintain the puck, and the resulting offense they create allows them to enjoy loads of team and individual success, while Babcock "teaches them defense on the fly" in his own words. That could have been us. Because of our system and the way we transition, we strive for low-event hockey and do things that give the other team the puck to do whatever they want with. Which is ###### stupid because as you and me and everyone else knows, we aren't good at defending them when they have it.

Edited April 5, 2017 by Randall Flagg

[TrueBlueGED]

...and 28th in 5v5 Corsi-against per 60...  BUF's forward group wouldn't be able to defend my kids squirt team.

 

That number has completely and totally tanked down the stretch. I don't have exact dates off the top of my head, but as recently as late January-ish we were in the mid teens. 

 

Edit: Actually, I might have this wrong. I think I'm thinking of GA/60, not CA/60. Disregard.

 

 

Yes, we allow a lot of shots. I'm showing you that your claim that we take enough of them at ES is wrong. We do not. We are terrible at generating shots at even strength, and unsurprisingly, we allow a lot of them at even strength. Those kind of go hand in hand. Nobody says we are great in our own zone. But we would spend less time there if we had a transition strategy that was conducive to maintaining possession when we recover the puck. I have done literally dozens of hours of work showing that we do not have this strategy. I have seen zero hours of work done that refute this work that I have done. 

 

The Leafs are also terrible at defending in their own zone. That is how they have lost 10 games that they led by multiple goals in the third. But they can transition and maintain the puck, and the resulting offense they create allows them to enjoy loads of team and individual success, while Babcock "teaches them defense on the fly" in his own words. That could have been us. Because of our system and the way we transition, we strive for low-event hockey and do things that give the other team the puck to do whatever they want with. Which is ###### stupid because as you and me and everyone else knows, we aren't good at defending them when they have it.

 

Keep fighting the good fight.

Edited April 5, 2017 by TrueBlueGED

[pi2000]

Yes, we allow a lot of shots. I'm showing you that your claim that we take enough of them at ES is wrong. We do not. We are terrible at generating shots at even strength, and unsurprisingly, we allow a lot of them at even strength. Those kind of go hand in hand. Nobody says we are great in our own zone. But we would spend less time there if we had a transition strategy that was conducive to maintaining possession when we recover the puck. I have done literally dozens of hours of work showing that we do not have this strategy. I have seen zero hours of work done that refute this work that I have done. 

 

The Leafs are also terrible at defending in their own zone. That is how they have lost 10 games that they led by multiple goals in the third. But they can transition and maintain the puck, and the resulting offense they create allows them to enjoy loads of team and individual success, while Babcock "teaches them defense on the fly" in his own words. That could have been us. Because of our system and the way we transition, we strive for low-event hockey and do things that give the other team the puck to do whatever they want with. Which is ###### stupid because as you and me and everyone else knows, we aren't good at defending them when they have it.

 

I'm not saying that BUFs even strength shots-for doesn't need to get better, it does... and it will get better when they spend less time chasing the puck in their own end.. again, when compared to the rest of the league their shot suppression is worse than their shot generation.    That should tell you righ there where GMTM needs to focus his attention... he said it himself, he needs to find a way to fix the defense... and IMO he's not just talking about defensemen... If they had a few forwards capable of defending in their own end against other teams top players, they'd spend less time there, and more time in the offensive zone generating shots.    

[Randall Flagg]

I'm not saying that BUFs even strength shots-for doesn't need to get better, it does... and it will get better when they spend less time chasing the puck in their own end.. again, when compared to the rest of the league their shot suppression is worse than their shot generation.    That should tell you righ there where GMTM needs to focus his attention... he said it himself, he needs to find a way to fix the defense... and IMO he's not just talking about defensemen... If they had a few forwards capable of defending in their own end against other teams top players, they'd spend less time there, and more time in the offensive zone generating shots.    

They may get better at defending in their own zone, but the bold will not happen until the step in between those two areas is overhauled with a different system, whether Disco Dan or Big Bird implement it. 

 

I'm right there with you on the need to get better defensemen and have everyone playing better in the d-zone. What I object to was the insistence that the offense and the transition system are totally fine, and that all of the blame for our poor possession and poor team lies solely on what the forwards and defensemen do in front of Lehner.

[dudacek]

So did Babcock ultimately choose to go to TO because he and Murray were not on the same page about low-event hockey and how to break a talented young core into the NHL?  :devil:

[Stoner]

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.

As a fan, the ride would have been fun as hell.

[MattPie]

...and 28th in 5v5 Corsi-against per 60...  BUF's forward group wouldn't be able to defend my kids squirt team.

 

 

BUF gives up a lot of shots because they spend a lot of time chasing around in their own zone because collectively, the forward group as a whole, cannot defend worth ######.    Get better defensive forwards and suddenly they're spending more time in the offensive zone because they're not chasing in their own end for minutes at a time.

 

I get where you're coming from,.. you're arguing a better offensive strategy would result in more offensive zone time, reducing the amount time spent in their own end, and as a result, organically reducing shots against.  

That said, when compared to the rest of the league they're much worse at shot suppression than shot generation... that, in and of itself, should be a clear indication of where they need to show an improvement.

 

 RIght, keep the puck on your stick and the other team cannot shoot it at your net.

 

I'm not saying that BUFs even strength shots-for doesn't need to get better, it does... and it will get better when they spend less time chasing the puck in their own end.. again, when compared to the rest of the league their shot suppression is worse than their shot generation.    That should tell you righ there where GMTM needs to focus his attention... he said it himself, he needs to find a way to fix the defense... and IMO he's not just talking about defensemen... If they had a few forwards capable of defending in their own end against other teams top players, they'd spend less time there, and more time in the offensive zone generating shots.

 

I grant your point, but it's two ways at looking at the same problem. If the Sabres played better team D, they'd spend less time chasing the puck in their own zone. You're correct there. But can you not see, based on Randall's great work, that when the Sabres do finally get the puck back, the first thing they do is make a low-percentage pass? Then, they spend time chasing the puck in the neutral zone and offensive zone. The anti-Byslma camp hates his system because it gives the puck away constantly, meaning the Sabres are going to be chasing in their own end shortly after.

 

I like the idea upthread that Bylsma isn't necessarily a bad coach, but he is one that sticks to his system even if they don't have the right players to implement it; that makes him the wrong coach here. Frankly, I want to see these guys skate. The last f'ing thing I want to see is Jack Eichel, Sam Reinhart, and the rest of the skill players play low-event hockey. When you get the puck, keep it; firing it down the ice in hopes you might get it back just negated the work you did getting it. Screw that ######.

Edited April 5, 2017 by MattPie