Reinhart, does he fit JBots mold?

[Thorner]

Samson would be better off signing next summer after his 60 point season

Samson comparables coming off their entry deals:

Huberdeau spent his post-draft year in JR, then put up 31*, 28, and 54 point seasons

He signed a two-year bridge deal at $3.25 per (*was the lockout season)

Seguin signed for 6 years at $5.75 after 22, 67, 32*

Johansen 3@4 (JR, 21,12*, 63)

Nugent-Hopkins 7@6 (52, 24*, 56)

Landeskog 7@5.6 (52,17*,65)

Galchenyuk 2@2.8 (27*,31,46)

Yakupov 3@3.75 (31*,24,33)

Barkov 6@5.9 (24,36,59)

Drouin RFA (JR, 32,10,53)

Lindholm 2@2.7 (21,39,39)

Monahan 7@6.3 (34,62,63)

Bennett RFA (1,36,26)

Draisaitl RFA (9,51,77)

Reinhart (JR,42,47)

Would it not make sense for Botterill to try and lock him up at a discounted rate then, this offseason, before a breakout? Or do players in his tier usually always go to RFA status first?

 

As opposed to a guy like Eichel, who'll almost certainly get extended this summer.

[dudacek]

Looks to me like it's 2-3 years cheap, or 6-7 expensive.

And really, of the guys who signed long-term, which of them looked like a bargain?

 

We know Murray wanted to sign Sam to an extension this summer, but I don't know if that's normal.

Think most guys on his tier wait until they hit RFA, betting on a big third year.

Edited June 8, 2017 by dudacek

[pi2000]

Let's get wild - Reinhart & Ristolainen for Slavin & Aho.

I'll allow it. Aho is a stud.

[SabresFanInRochester]

I'm really hoping that JB takes a good look (like through November) at what he really has currently & doesn't make any major moves (unless some no-brainer comes up & bites him in the bippy) prior to having a good handle on what these guys can do being led by someone that ISN'T a Goober.

 

With a real coach this current lineup SHOULD be good enough to make the playoffs. Get the full picture & figure out how to have them better than that in the near future.

 

Throwing away Reinhart for a 3/4 D would be poor asset management IMHO.

 

 

Neither Reinhart nor Kane should be traded unless a definitive top-50 NHL defenseman is part of the return. And this is not very likely, even with the expansion draft complicating things.

 

Just think about what we sacrificed for each of these guys:

 

1. Reinhart: the entire 2013-14 tank season.

2. Kane: essentially 4 1st round picks, a high 2nd round pick, and Bogosian's awful contract.

 

Both have their flaws, but they are still major talents who have proven that they can produce at the pro level. Moreover, they are both very young and still have plenty of room to grow, especially with better coaching.

 

I'm inclined to keep talent rather than get rid of it. Enough with the stupid trade proposals.

 

 

No one is judging anything. Merely pointing out that the moves made by the coach will be indicative of how Reinarts (or all players on the roster for that matter) will turn out. And yes, while it is true we don't have a clue as to the adjustments that may be made as injuries occur, the chemistry that may develop, the maturity of the youth that may be gained or the impact of rebounding veterans, one thing is a constant, coaching will be the pivotal factor in much of that, which, in turn, will equate to players stats.

 

 

I know what you are saying I am disagreeing. The lineup changes and the lines and that crap doesn't tell us much about a coach who will have limited knowledge of his players by that time (October). By January sure. Saying that start of the season, meaning first game lineup, will be a gauge of the new coach is IMPO not correct. Our coach at that stage might have had 2-3 preseason games with his full roster. All it will gauge is who the Gm and coach think is NHL ready and what the GM did to fix the team. The start of the season is not when you gauge the coach.

For example if on opening night he has Reinhart on Jack's wing I am not going to judge that the coach is right or wrong. Idk the new system, idk how players will work in it, idk if he will move lines often or not at all, idk if he wants the player to transition to another spot after learning the system. My point is I am not gauging the coach on anything for a bit. The first month of Bylsma I didn't think much of him but still had to give him a chance. Same goes for this. 

 

I think the coaching change will lead to a more dominant play out of Sam, and I am hoping the same for Girgensons. I think they have more talent than what we saw on the ice last year. I want to make sure we get to see them play with a new coach before we write them off. Might be hard to predict without knowing the coach, but I firmly believe we see a couple players improve due simply to a different system that better fits their strengths. 

 

Are there any players who you think will do better under the new coach?

 

Are there any players who you think will suffer under the new coach? 

[dudacek]

Are there any players who you think will suffer under the new coach?

 

Girgensons, Bogosian, Reinhart, Gorges, Moulson, were the most miscast under Bylsma.

 

The ones most likely to suffer are the ones he leaned on hard.

 

ROR, Risto and to a lesser extent McCabe were overused. Most of us think less ice time will help their games, but it might not.

 

Larsson found a niche with Dan that may not be there with the new guy, so he would be one candidate for a faller.

 

And the other, surprisingly, is Eichel. Seemed to me he had most favoured child status and got away with a lot of that others may not have and still kept going out there.Same with Kane.

 

But honestly, I think Kane is gone and Jack is too good to backslide.

 

Someone will though. It's inevitable.

Edited June 8, 2017 by dudacek

[I-90 W]

In buffalo?

 

Eh a bit optimistic but not out of the question by any means.

[SabresFanInRochester]

Girgensons, Bogosian, Reinhart, Gorges, Moulson, were the most miscast under Bylsma.

 

The ones most likely to suffer are the ones he leaned on hard.

 

ROR, Risto and to a lesser extent McCabe were overused. Most of us think less ice time will help their games, but it might not.

 

Larsson found a niche with Dan that may not be there with the new guy, so he would be one candidate for a faller.

 

And the other, surprisingly, is Eichel. Seemed to me he had most favoured child status and got away with a lot of ###### that others may not have and still kept going out there.Same with Kane.

 

But honestly, I think Kane is gone and Jack is too good to backslide.

 

Someone will though. It's inevitable.

 

I agree with you. The troubling thing is the players that you identified as being miscast, could make the difference in this being a playoff team. Shipping them off now would leave questions unanswered regarding 'what if.' With the addition of either Guhle or Antipin (potentially both) upgrading the defense; add improvement from either Bogo or Gorges and the team should be able to compete for a playoff spot. I think trading Kane or Reinhart, will upgrade the defense, but will it create a void in the top 6? I think this is a playoff team just based on the coaching change and the current roster (including Guhle or Antipin.)  

[Doohicksie]

1. What do we know about JBot's "mold"? 

2. I don't see JBot making major changes for the sake of making changes.  If we trade Reindhart, it will be be to fill a hole (like D).  But I don't see him making changes right away to "shake things up."  The team just did that with a new GM & coach.  I think before doing any shakeup among the players it would be wise to see how they fit into the new coach's system.

[Eleven]

We really need some action here in Buffalo.  Seems like half the board is trading the team's leading goal scorer for a draft pick; the other half is trading Reinhart for JVR's kid brother.

[North Buffalo]

We really need some action here in Buffalo.  Seems like half the board is trading the team's leading goal scorer for a draft pick; the other half is trading Reinhart for JVR's kid brother.

October cant come soon enough here...

[nfreeman]

Reinhart doesn't 'look' like the most dominant player out there, he isn't that big, not the best skater...but he does produce pretty well for a top 5 pick.  He has 40 goals in his first 2 years in the NHL.  That is very close to, or better production than these other recent top 5 forward picks in their first 2 years:

 

Evander Kane (33)

Nathan McKinnon (38)

Jonathan Drouin (29 total goals in 164 NHL games over 4 years..but he LOOKS good doing it)

Aleksander Barkov (24)

Alex Galchenyuk (42 in his first 3 seasons, one being a short season)

Ryan Nugent Hopkins (47 in his first 3 seasons, one being a short season)

Jonathan Huberdeau (only scored exactly 20 goals once in his career, averages about 15 per year)

 

Sure, there are also players who did better (McDavid, Seguin) and also some I wouldn't take at all (Yakupov), but Reinhart I think is doing what you would expect him to do, maybe even slightly better. His biggest problem might be he just doesn't look 'dominant' in the way he produces.

 

Good post.

 

 

I'm really hoping that JB takes a good look (like through November) at what he really has currently & doesn't make any major moves (unless some no-brainer comes up & bites him in the bippy) prior to having a good handle on what these guys can do being led by someone that ISN'T a Goober.

 

With a real coach this current lineup SHOULD be good enough to make the playoffs. Get the full picture & figure out how to have them better than that in the near future.

 

Throwing away Reinhart for a 3/4 D would be poor asset management IMHO.

 

Totally agree with the bolded, and I'll add that the same is true for trading Kane IMHO -- unless he's told them he's leaving in FA.

 

 

And that's the rub. Nobody really knows how the Vegas draft will shake out. But I'd not be at all surprised if an Anaheim-type team that's close now & stands to lose a much more valuable asset than a team further away (such as the Sabres - does anybody really care who they lose other than Ullmark, and even he won't be universally be bemoaned if he's gone) ends up making a side deal to give up prospects to Vegas to keep an unprotected player protected.

 

That's the way past expansion drafts worked. Even if the league had a mechanism in place to prevent those deals, they'd be VERY hard to enforce. "We didn't want Vatannen, he's old & injured. Prove we took x ONLY because we also swapped pick y for prospects A&B."

 

Many here are hoping for the easy snag of a top D. I'd like to see that too, but don't have terribly high hopes for it unless the Sabres pay close to normal rate because the Sabres aren't the only team bidding for that/ those assets. And the top price will be better than the 2nd best offer by definition. (Well, duh. Thanks for that nugget Sherlock. :lol:)

 

Is there any reason to believe another team that wants Brodin (just as an example) will make so low an offer that the Sabres can scoop him up for a song? The price will likely be lower than a normal year, but it's doubtful it will truly be a buyer's market. (Again, hoping the Sabres can get the cheap upgrade. Just not expecting it.)

 

This is what I expect too.  There aren't going to be a bunch of high-quality defensemen falling from the trees.  One or 2 may shake loose, but they will be few in number and expensive.

 

 

Neither Reinhart nor Kane should be traded unless a definitive top-50 NHL defenseman is part of the return. And this is not very likely, even with the expansion draft complicating things.

 

Just think about what we sacrificed for each of these guys:

 

1. Reinhart: the entire 2013-14 tank season.

2. Kane: essentially 4 1st round picks, a high 2nd round pick, and Bogosian's awful contract.

 

Both have their flaws, but they are still major talents who have proven that they can produce at the pro level. Moreover, they are both very young and still have plenty of room to grow, especially with better coaching.

 

I'm inclined to keep talent rather than get rid of it. Enough with the stupid trade proposals.

 

I don't agree with keeping someone because the price to acquire him was high, but I completely agree with the bolded.

 

 

Oh no, I agree the asking and purchase price will be high. To me reinhart is a huge ask if he's the one to go. But I think guys that were not even close to available may be for a high price.

 

This is also true -- one or 2 will probably become available.  I'll be interested to see whether JBott gets into the bidding. 

 

We know that Darcy would've looked up nervously from his coupon-clipping and quickly shaken his head no, while GMTM would've hastily spilled his pint while sorting through a pile of credit cards to find a couple that weren't maxed out.

 

I expect JBott will plot a middle course.

 

 

TLDR: Slavin transitions the puck the way the ideal modern defenseman does, and the point differential between the two isn't enough to elevate that above Slavin's skills for me, especially because he doesn't get PP time and outproduces Risto noticeably at even strength. 

And I funking love Risto - I think he's in a group of 4 elite defensemen in his age group (which I'll call under 24) - Slavin, Risto, Jones, and Ekblad. With guys like Werenski and Provorov soon to jump in.

 

 

Great stuff as always RF.

 

With Tocchet and Housely looking like strong contenders for the Sabres' job, I'm curious as to your views on Pittsburgh's and Nashville's D group in terms of possession, passing, system, etc.

 

 

Girgensons, Bogosian, Reinhart, Gorges, Moulson, were the most miscast under Bylsma.

 

The ones most likely to suffer are the ones he leaned on hard.

 

ROR, Risto and to a lesser extent McCabe were overused. Most of us think less ice time will help their games, but it might not.

 

Larsson found a niche with Dan that may not be there with the new guy, so he would be one candidate for a faller.

 

And the other, surprisingly, is Eichel. Seemed to me he had most favoured child status and got away with a lot of ###### that others may not have and still kept going out there.Same with Kane.

 

But honestly, I think Kane is gone and Jack is too good to backslide.

 

Someone will though. It's inevitable.

 

Do you think Kane took shortcuts on the ice?  I thought he played hard pretty consistently.

[Derrico]

 

This is also true -- one or 2 will probably become available.  I'll be interested to see whether JBott gets into the bidding. 

 

We know that Darcy would've looked up nervously from his coupon-clipping and quickly shaken his head no, while GMTM would've hastily spilled his pint while sorting through a pile of credit cards to find a couple that weren't maxed out.

 

I expect JBott will plot a middle course.

 

:w00t:

 

Very true.

[Sabre fan]

Sam's worth or value in any trade will be much higher then kane's so I can see Bott's at least exploring the trade option but the return would have to be so enticing that we cannot refuse. Teams with those nice defencemen we so long for cannot take on Kane's salary so Sam is a much nicer option. We do not even know Bott's "mold" so who knows? Maybe he will like and keep Sam and resign like we all hope. something tells me he will be resigned

[Thorner]

We know that Darcy would've looked up nervously from his coupon-clipping and quickly shaken his head no, while GMTM would've hastily spilled his pint while sorting through a pile of credit cards to find a couple that weren't maxed out.

 

I expect JBott will plot a middle course.

Good stuff.

[dudacek]

@Freeman

 

I agree Kane skates and battles very hard on the ice.

But we've seen him take ill-advised, selfish penalties, yap at the refs, and get distracted by battles with others on the ice.

And we've heard he maybe wasn't studying film and/or putting in extra practice time.

 

(And great stuff with the pint and the coupon clipping quote. It's why I love this place)

[TrueBlueGED]

Girgensons, Bogosian, Reinhart, Gorges, Moulson, were the most miscast under Bylsma.

 

The ones most likely to suffer are the ones he leaned on hard.

 

ROR, Risto and to a lesser extent McCabe were overused. Most of us think less ice time will help their games, but it might not.

 

Larsson found a niche with Dan that may not be there with the new guy, so he would be one candidate for a faller.

 

And the other, surprisingly, is Eichel. Seemed to me he had most favoured child status and got away with a lot of ###### that others may not have and still kept going out there.Same with Kane.

 

But honestly, I think Kane is gone and Jack is too good to backslide.

 

Someone will though. It's inevitable.

Lehner. I think he's going to see a noticeable numbers dip if we play a more open game and expose him to a higher percentage of dangerous chances.

[dudacek]

Lehner. I think he's going to see a noticeable numbers dip if we play a more open game and expose him to a higher percentage of dangerous chances.

Good call. And a good test for whether he is a legit number one worth making an investment in.

This is his last RFA contract, is it not? Tough decision there for Botterill. A show-me contract is hard to draft.

Maybe two years @ $3.5 with the intention of negotiating an extension next summer if he proves himself?

[GASabresIUFAN]

Lehner. I think he's going to see a noticeable numbers dip if we play a more open game and expose him to a higher percentage of dangerous chances.

The guy was under seige last year. With a better D group and better puck possession, he should actually face less scoring chances not more regardless of playing style.

 

As to this topic, Sam could be Crosby lite in the right enviroment. Crosby doesn't beat you with speed or size, but with skill and brains. Like Crosby, Sam's best skill is his brain. I'm sure Jbot understands this and isn't trading Sam now or in the near future.

Edited June 8, 2017 by GASabresFan

[Derrico]

The guy was under seige last year. With a better D group and better puck possession, he should actually face less scoring chances not more regardless of playing style.

 

As to this topic, Sam could be Crosby lite in the right enviroment. Crosby doesn't beat you with speed or size, but with skill and brains. Like Crosby, Sam's best skill is his brain. I'm sure Jbot understands this and isn't trading Sam now or in the near future.

I like Sam. I really do. But those guys aren't in the same universe. Sam is a nice player. Crosby is a superstar. Maybe Crosby is a dark Belgian stout and Sam is a Coors light.

[Randall Flagg]

 

 

With Tocchet and Housely looking like strong contenders for the Sabres' job, I'm curious as to your views on Pittsburgh's and Nashville's D group in terms of possession, passing, system, etc.

 

Pittsburgh: It's pretty amazing what they've been able to accomplish with the injuries they've had on the back end. It's been shown that they've decided to look for under-the-radar names that have the very specific offensive, first pass, and skating skill-sets, even if their deficiencies in other areas (looking at you, J. Schultz) are massive. They don't have to give up substantial assets when addressing the defense like this. I don't think any of us cared when Schultz, Ruhwedel, Daley, and Cole went to Pittsburgh, as if we had missed out on anything. I don't think those players would have enjoyed nearly the same amount of success here.

 

When your team is built to stretch the ice quickly and accurately by putting cheap fast wingers on the wings of two generational level centers, it doesn't matter if you allow 7 goals a couple times throughout the RS, because you can even win half of those (like when they beat Washington 8-7 recently). The guys they plug into the back end may be mediocre defensively, but when they recover pucks they are good at getting them to Phil on the wing or Sid/Geno down the middle, and at that point you're sitting pretty. And even the defensive mediocrity can be addressed with coaching¹.  As much as this quick-fix style is appealing, I'm skeptical that it would work nearly as well as us, and I don't think our two reliable pieces going forward (Risto, McCabe) compete with the established base of Letang-Dumoulin (who CAN play defense)-Maatta, even if Maatta sorta sucks. Not when the forward gap between the two teams is so big. 

 

 

¹I don't consider myself very knowledgeable about advanced stats, but a lot of the newer stats we see get referenced take into account the quality of chances generated. The Sabres defense tried to funnel shots out to the point, sacrificing quality of shots allowed for quantity in the hopes that Lehner has an easier time. The defensive zone heat map shows a gorgeous blue streak in the slot area. Perhaps it was the Kings' dominance of this area, and ensuing success, that created the league's copycat reaction that gets talked about so much. People talk about Samson Reinhart's xGF and xGA and stuff like that because they show that not only do more shot plays happen when he's on the ice (and fewer shots against) but higher quality ones for all skaters involved (measured by several variables, notably distance from net and angle from the normal to the goal line). He's better than Eichel in this regard, i believe. Eichel is ridiculous in his point-generating abilities but a lot of it is through doing everything himself and not so much elevating other players he plays with. But anywho, it appears to be possible to take players who may suck defensively and teach them how to at least limit good chances against, and to put them into positions where they are using their best attributes as often as possible and leaning on Sid/Geno to keep the puck for a long time to limit the time spent having their weaknesses exploited. This is something I thought Bylsma failed miserably at, though as a team with different strengths and weaknesses I wasn't asking him to do exactly what Pittsburgh did. 

 

Nashville: Nashville appears to be a breeding ground for elite two-way defensemen. They've had all of the accomplishments this season WITHOUT two practically Norris-level guys they drafted and developed, Weber and Suter. One of whom left for absolutely nothing. They also grabbed a guy that looks to be one of the best under-24 defensemen in the world and traded him to address their weakness at center. And without those three guys they still have Subban(trade), Ekholm(draft), Ellis(draft), and Josi(draft). Each of these four players is a top 2 on just about every single team in the league. Irwin and Weber were perfectly fine as a third pair. The skating, passing, and offensive abilities of each of those top four players is obvious when watching. They are smooth, calm, and confident. The particular focus on shot quality defense almost helps a team like Nashville. Their forwards aren't going to be able to take advantage of the slot like elite ones can anyway, so when play gets funneled to the outside and into the hands of PK/Ellis for a bomb or Josi/Ekholm for some sick blue line dancing to find the perfect lane, well, that's just fine in Nashville's eyes.

 

Perhaps the growth in team reliance on advanced stats coupled with the increased accounting for shot/chance quality within the analytics community is also why Burns and Karlsson have seen deep runs for the first time in their careers very very recently. All of these guys have been criticized to some degree for their defensive zone play and have had it cited as a reason why they haven't experienced playoff success like a Keith or a Doughty. I don't think it's completely coincidental that the increase in importance of puck movement correlates with the fact that these criticized D-men are now going farther in the playoffs than the good ol' Canadian boys Doughty/Suter/Keith/Weber who play gritty defense and have thick, matted, manly chest hair.  

 

I don't think the Sabres are going to be in a position to build the way either team has, which is fine since there's no set equation to building a cup winner. I just want to climb out of bottom-3 territory when it comes to moving the puck from the back end, via both systemic and roster improvements, because I don't see its importance disappearing anytime soon. Our strength going forward is clearly at the center position, so I'd prefer that Botterill plus coach take that and use it to carve their own path towards a play style we won't know/think of until we see it produce the city's first ever professional sports championship. And then watch as the rest of the league tries to do what WE did. I think Eichel, Risto, ROR and Reinhart if he stays can be pieces for that. 

 

As far as Tocchet versus Housely goes, I don't really see the way that Nashville's D or Pitt's team plays as reasons for excitement in Buffalo because of the previous paragraph. That's why I haven't been as high on Housely and as low on Tocchet as everyone else. Housely didn't turn water into wine, he was one of several people involved in getting the most out of the defense corps of an organization that has been top of the line in terms of scouting and developing abilities in that particular area since George W. Bush's first term. Risto is not PK, McCabe is not Ellis, Guhle is promising in the transition department but is five years old, and there is a barren wasteland after that. It would take a decade to try to model Nashville. Tocchet won't have two generational centers, though he will have hopefully a superstar, a star, and a very good one on his 1-2-3 lines, respectively.

 

Both coaches are going to have to do something different because J-Bott will not be building the way that they're used to. They're going to have to do things they aren't familiar with. They're going to have to adapt. Lindy stayed 16 years because of Darcy's and the organization's loyalty, but also because he won playoff series in the trap years with teams built around his goaltender and then with a team of water bugs that took advantage of new rules better than any other. Adapting is key. The coach will have to employ a system that fits our team's strengths, and it will have to work because our players have shown that they notice when it doesn't. They'll buy in if it works. He has to be able to manage a room full of Lehners, Reinharts, and Eichels on top of it. He needs to do everything right that previous coaches have done wrong. I don't think I or anyone else has any idea if Tocchet or Housely can do any of this. Botterill is in the best position to know because he gets to hear their visions and philosophies, and has at the very least seen what it's like when an organization has done all of this successfully (Pitt the last two years) and has failed at it (Pitt before then). I'm buying into who he hires until they show me that they fail to do one or all of these things.

[nfreeman]

Great post Flagg.  Thanks.

[GASabresIUFAN]

I like Sam. I really do. But those guys aren't in the same universe. Sam is a nice player. Crosby is a superstar. Maybe Crosby is a dark Belgian stout and Sam is a Coors light.

I don't think Sam will put up 90 or 100 pts in a season, but if Jbot gets him the right coach who can teach him some of Crosby's positioning and decision making with the puck there is no reason Sam can't eventually be a 70 pt guy in this league.

[dudacek]

Great post Randall.

 

Does anyone else get the feeling that Todd Reirden is the last man standing at the moment (after all the non-finalist interviews) and Tocchet or Housley will have to be better?

Edited June 13, 2017 by dudacek

[qwksndmonster]

Thanks for the long post Randyman. Awesome stuff.

[SabresFanInRochester]

Pittsburgh: It's pretty amazing what they've been able to accomplish with the injuries they've had on the back end. It's been shown that they've decided to look for under-the-radar names that have the very specific offensive, first pass, and skating skill-sets, even if their deficiencies in other areas (looking at you, J. Schultz) are massive. They don't have to give up substantial assets when addressing the defense like this. I don't think any of us cared when Schultz, Ruhwedel, Daley, and Cole went to Pittsburgh, as if we had missed out on anything. I don't think those players would have enjoyed nearly the same amount of success here.

 

When your team is built to stretch the ice quickly and accurately by putting cheap fast wingers on the wings of two generational level centers, it doesn't matter if you allow 7 goals a couple times throughout the RS, because you can even win half of those (like when they beat Washington 8-7 recently). The guys they plug into the back end may be mediocre defensively, but when they recover pucks they are good at getting them to Phil on the wing or Sid/Geno down the middle, and at that point you're sitting pretty. And even the defensive mediocrity can be addressed with coaching¹.  As much as this quick-fix style is appealing, I'm skeptical that it would work nearly as well as us, and I don't think our two reliable pieces going forward (Risto, McCabe) compete with the established base of Letang-Dumoulin (who CAN play defense)-Maatta, even if Maatta sorta sucks. Not when the forward gap between the two teams is so big. 

 

 

¹I don't consider myself very knowledgeable about advanced stats, but a lot of the newer stats we see get referenced take into account the quality of chances generated. The Sabres defense tried to funnel shots out to the point, sacrificing quality of shots allowed for quantity in the hopes that Lehner has an easier time. The defensive zone heat map shows a gorgeous blue streak in the slot area. Perhaps it was the Kings' dominance of this area, and ensuing success, that created the league's copycat reaction that gets talked about so much. People talk about Samson Reinhart's xGF and xGA and stuff like that because they show that not only do more shot plays happen when he's on the ice (and fewer shots against) but higher quality ones for all skaters involved (measured by several variables, notably distance from net and angle from the normal to the goal line). He's better than Eichel in this regard, i believe. Eichel is ridiculous in his point-generating abilities but a lot of it is through doing everything himself and not so much elevating other players he plays with. But anywho, it appears to be possible to take players who may suck defensively and teach them how to at least limit good chances against, and to put them into positions where they are using their best attributes as often as possible and leaning on Sid/Geno to keep the puck for a long time to limit the time spent having their weaknesses exploited. This is something I thought Bylsma failed miserably at, though as a team with different strengths and weaknesses I wasn't asking him to do exactly what Pittsburgh did. 

 

Nashville: Nashville appears to be a breeding ground for elite two-way defensemen. They've had all of the accomplishments this season WITHOUT two practically Norris-level guys they drafted and developed, Weber and Suter. One of whom left for absolutely nothing. They also grabbed a guy that looks to be one of the best under-24 defensemen in the world and traded him to address their weakness at center. And without those three guys they still have Subban(trade), Ekholm(draft), Ellis(draft), and Josi(draft). Each of these four players is a top 2 on just about every single team in the league. Irwin and Weber were perfectly fine as a third pair. The skating, passing, and offensive abilities of each of those top four players is obvious when watching. They are smooth, calm, and confident. The particular focus on shot quality defense almost helps a team like Nashville. Their forwards aren't going to be able to take advantage of the slot like elite ones can anyway, so when play gets funneled to the outside and into the hands of PK/Ellis for a bomb or Josi/Ekholm for some sick blue line dancing to find the perfect lane, well, that's just fine in Nashville's eyes.

 

Perhaps the growth in team reliance on advanced stats coupled with the increased accounting for shot/chance quality within the analytics community is also why Burns and Karlsson have seen deep runs for the first time in their careers very very recently. All of these guys have been criticized to some degree for their defensive zone play and have had it cited as a reason why they haven't experienced playoff success like a Keith or a Doughty. I don't think it's completely coincidental that the increase in importance of puck movement correlates with the fact that these criticized D-men are now going farther in the playoffs than the good ol' Canadian boys Doughty/Suter/Keith/Weber who play gritty defense and have thick, matted, manly chest hair.  

 

I don't think the Sabres are going to be in a position to build the way either team has, which is fine since there's no set equation to building a cup winner. I just want to climb out of bottom-3 territory when it comes to moving the puck from the back end, via both systemic and roster improvements, because I don't see its importance disappearing anytime soon. Our strength going forward is clearly at the center position, so I'd prefer that Botterill plus coach take that and use it to carve their own path towards a play style we won't know/think of until we see it produce the city's first ever professional sports championship. And then watch as the rest of the league tries to do what WE did. I think Eichel, Risto, ROR and Reinhart if he stays can be pieces for that. 

 

As far as Tocchet versus Housely goes, I don't really see the way that Nashville's D or Pitt's team plays as reasons for excitement in Buffalo because of the previous paragraph. That's why I haven't been as high on Housely and as low on Tocchet as everyone else. Housely didn't turn water into wine, he was one of several people involved in getting the most out of the defense corps of an organization that has been top of the line in terms of scouting and developing abilities in that particular area since George W. Bush's first term. Risto is not PK, McCabe is not Ellis, Guhle is promising in the transition department but is five years old, and there is a barren wasteland after that. It would take a decade to try to model Nashville. Tocchet won't have two generational centers, though he will have hopefully a superstar, a star, and a very good one on his 1-2-3 lines, respectively.

 

Both coaches are going to have to do something different because J-Bott will not be building the way that they're used to. They're going to have to do things they aren't familiar with. They're going to have to adapt. Lindy stayed 16 years because of Darcy's and the organization's loyalty, but also because he won playoff series in the trap years with teams built around his goaltender and then with a team of water bugs that took advantage of new rules better than any other. Adapting is key. The coach will have to employ a system that fits our team's strengths, and it will have to work because our players have shown that they notice when it doesn't. They'll buy in if it works. He has to be able to manage a room full of Lehners, Reinharts, and Eichels on top of it. He needs to do everything right that previous coaches have done wrong. I don't think I or anyone else has any idea if Tocchet or Housely can do any of this. Botterill is in the best position to know because he gets to hear their visions and philosophies, and has at the very least seen what it's like when an organization has done all of this successfully (Pitt the last two years) and has failed at it (Pitt before then). I'm buying into who he hires until they show me that they fail to do one or all of these things.

 

The bold-faced (above) was my biggest complaint about DB when he was hired. I thought he was too rigid and was going to make whatever roster he had fit into his system. Coupled with a lack of people skills and/or ability to discipline and earn respect from the team, it spelled disaster. I feel a lot better about this coaching hire as opposed to when DB was hired. 

 

Whereas you cannot predict how somehow will behave, you can look at past tendencies. When DB left Pittsburgh, no one cried. No one stood up for him, and the same thing happened in Buffalo a few months ago. 'I was shocked' was muttered by a couple players, and I am pretty sure that is due to both FGMTM and DB being released.

 

When I read about Housley, Tocchet, or Rierden, I hear nothing but their players paying major accolades to them. Although it is not directly tied to a system, I see this as a good sign. I hear the respective defensemen exclaiming that their coach is great and made them what they are. Perhaps PK was taking a shot at Montreal with his praise of Housley. Regardless, these are coaches that are going to help our defensemen. I am not going to discredit them because they had talented players to begin with -- they still brought marked improvement and development. (We certainly know a coach can screw up a player -- at least we have three candidates who seeing improvement.)

 

I have a lot of belief/hope that J-Bott's is looking for a coach who has a plan for the existing roster. I am giving J-Bott a ton of latitude that J-Bott understands the existing roster, and knows what they need for a system to get the most out of them. I then have to honor his decision to hire the right guy to put that system in place. If it is anyone of the aforementioned three, I am on board. If it is someone else, I can only hope it is because it was a better fit, but I honestly don't see that scenario.