GDT - Florida Panthers @ Buffalo Sabres - January 3, 2019 - 7:00 PM

[Thorner]

I'm lost. How is that snark? I meant every word in sincerity. Did I miss-characterize your argument? The gist of what I understood you to be saying was that a) I don't have experience coaching, so there may be some reason I'm not privy to for why he's playing Dahlin the way he is, or b) that he's doing it to play him in weaker position on purpose.

I merely indicated that he's statistically worse on the right side so I'd rather him be on the left. 

Edited January 5, 2019 by Thorny

[...]

Following your logic to its absurd conclusion, the only thing human infants are good at are crapping and crying.  Why, then, teach them language when, clearly, at the beginning they're awful at it and it causes confusion and anxiety?

Or, if that doesn't make sense, if we follow your logic, if they only allow Dahlin to develop on the side he statistically is better at over the past whatever amount of games, then he'll never develop the weak side.  What if, crazy thought here, he and/or his coaches want to develop the side he has statistically been weaker at (over the past whatever amount of games)?  What if, even crazier thought, they see a value for Dahlin and the organization in doing so?

[Thorner]

8 minutes ago, ... said:

Following your logic to its absurd conclusion, the only thing human infants are good at are crapping and crying.  Why, then, teach them language when, clearly, at the beginning they're awful at it and it causes confusion and anxiety?

Or, if that doesn't make sense, if we follow your logic, if they only allow Dahlin to develop on the side he statistically is better at over the past whatever amount of games, then he'll never develop the weak side.  What if, crazy thought here, he and/or his coaches want to develop the side he has statistically been weaker at (over the past whatever amount of games)?  What if, even crazier thought, they see a value for Dahlin and the organization in doing so?

First bolded: A spot on analogy of two equivalent things and exactly what I was saying (there's your snark).

2nd bolded: should we be worried about Eichel not getting proper development at right wing? Sam Reinhart at left wing? Should Reinhart ever need to play on the left side, he's woefully unprepared.

Edited January 5, 2019 by Thorny

[Taro T]

27 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Found it. 

The only problem with the chart is that typically Dahlin was the LD when paired with McCabe & not the RD.

He plays primarily RD when out with Beaulieu & Scandella.  (Both of which probably support the theory heis worse on the RD than the LD.)

He primarily plays LD when paired with McCabe, Bogosian, & Ristolainen.  Really not sure why McCabe was shifted rather than Dahlin.

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

The only problem with the chart is that typically Dahlin was the LD when paired with McCabe & not the RD.

He plays primarily RD when out with Beaulieu & Scandella.  (Both of which probably support the theory heis worse on the RD than the LD.)

He primarily plays LD when paired with McCabe, Bogosian, & Ristolainen.  Really not sure why McCabe was shifted rather than Dahlin.

Is there a way to see how often which was on what side? You are definitely right that he played some right side with McCabe, but I know he's played on the left side of him, too. 

[...]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

Right, this is what I was saying exactly. 

We're going to have to be happy not seeing eye-to-eye on this matter.  You seem to be suggesting that Phil ought to be putting Dahlin on the left because the stats say he is weak on the right. 

I am suggesting that Phil and crew know this and that they are playing him on the right for...reasons.  I have tried to convey what those reasons could be, but since I am not a coach or teacher of high-level athletes, I can only surmise.

I asked whether you might have such experience and if so, to shed light on what is right or wrong with their approach.  The response was:

"The statistics illustrate that Dahlin has been noticeably worse on the right side. Why would it be a good thing to play him on the right side? I'm basing my take on statistical evidence, you are theorizing that Housley must have some special reason we just aren't privy to. If not, that it's important for Dahlin to be put in a positional situation he's not as good at. Why? Should we put Sam back at centre?

I don't care if Dahlin likes the right side. I care what side he plays better on."

And you reposted the post about the stats.  I fully understand your point having been exposed to it three times.

So, I have batted the ball back to you again, trying to break down my point to its essence.  Which is:

"If they only allow Dahlin to develop on the side he statistically is better at over the past whatever amount of games, then he'll never develop the weak side.  What if he and/or his coaches want to develop the side he has statistically been weaker at (over the past whatever amount of games)?  What if they see a value for Dahlin and the organization in doing so? 

I don't know what else to say, other than, again, we may very well have to be happy not being able to communicate our points effectively.

Of course, I may have the set up of this interchange wrong, and I am totally open to being corrected on that.

 

[Thorner]

An accurate summary. I dunno what to tell you. You've communicated your argument just fine, I haven't missed it. 

[Taro T]

7 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Is there a way to see how often which was on what side? You are definitely right that he played some right side with McCabe, but I know he's played on the left side of him, too. 

Without going back and actually rewatching, probably not.  Want to say when they were together that McCabe was on the right about 2/3's of the time, but not positive.  Paired together, what, about 8 games?  Would say Jake was LD ~ twice.

Heck, because the Rasmi are typically paired on the PP, technically Dahlin is typically the RD & Ristolainen is the LD.  But at even strength, they go to their strong sides. 

[...]

16 minutes ago, Thorny said:

First bolded: A spot on analogy of two equivalent things and exactly what I was saying (there's your snark).

2nd bolded: should we be worried about Eichel not getting proper development at right wing? Sam Reinhart at left wing? Should Reinhart ever need to play on the left side, he's woefully unprepared.

If the snark snaps us from the cycle of misunderstanding, then the risk was worth taking.

You are comparing two players with three years (or more) development behind them to someone who has just started their development.  I don't see how this comparison makes sense given this fact alone.  

However, aside from those two players having already had been used at those positions in their development cycle, they are also individuals whose developmental paths are unique to themselves, just like Dahlin's.

 

[...]

[Thorner]

40 minutes ago, ... said:

If the snark snaps us from the cycle of misunderstanding, then the risk was worth taking.

You are comparing two players with three years (or more) development behind them to someone who has just started their development.  I don't see how this comparison makes sense given this fact alone.  

However, aside from those two players having already had been used at those positions in their development cycle, they are also individuals whose developmental paths are unique to themselves, just like Dahlin's.

 

Disagree, I have not misunderstood your argument. 

You seem unable or unwilling to accept that I understand what your are saying, and it's getting rather frustrating, bordering on condescending, as I have stated to the contrary a few times.  I just disagree. I think Dahlin has been much better on the left, statistics back that up, and, importantly, this is already being combined with an initial bias of much preferring D men to play on their "proper" side, as almost all do. Especially franchise d men historically. Together these things make up my viewpoint.

Being OK with Housley's stance, due to trusting his judgement, due to his acumen and experience, and/or because you want to see Dahlin get acclimated to both sides, in the event that Dahlin needs to fill in on the right, is okie dokey by me. I just disagree, and will more vehemently the longer it goes on with Dahlin's play suffering.

You can take comfort in the fact that your initial challenge of my post got all the likey-thingies and mine didn't, so your view is clearly the more popular one and, maybe, time could tell, even the right one. 

But that's not what I think.

Edited January 5, 2019 by Thorny

[Stoner]

Is this fair? There are three kinds of fans. 1. Wants Phil to base player usage on analytics charts and stuff. 2. Wants Phil to be smart enough to rely solely on the eye test. 3. Wants some combination — maybe roughly half this, half that. I suppose a fourth kind of fan doesn't care about player usage a'tall.

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

9 hours ago, Thorny said:

Disagree, I have not misunderstood your argument. 

You seem unable or unwilling to accept that I understand what your are saying, and it's getting rather frustrating, bordering on condescending, as I have stated to the contrary a few times.  I just disagree. I think Dahlin has been much better on the left, statistics back that up, and, importantly, this is already being combined with an initial bias of much preferring D men to play on their "proper" side, as almost all do. Especially franchise d men historically. Together these things make up my viewpoint.

Being OK with Housley's stance, due to trusting his judgement, due to his acumen and experience, and/or because you want to see Dahlin get acclimated to both sides, in the event that Dahlin needs to fill in on the right, is okie dokey by me. I just disagree, and will more vehemently the longer it goes on with Dahlin's play suffering.

You can take comfort in the fact that your initial challenge of my post got all the likey-thingies and mine didn't, so your view is clearly the more popular one and, maybe, time could tell, even the right one. 

But that's not what I think.

I haven't followed this conversation as much as some and I'm curious about how adamant you are about Dahlin's usage. You seem to have the stats to back your argument about the subject and you opinion is also well documented here.

However, my curiosity lies in the area more of necessity. As we all know, right side Dmen  are harder to find and quality ones even harder.  So when you can find a lefty that can play both sides well, sometimes necessity over-shadows anything else.

My question to you is this....with recent injuries to the D has this usage of Dahlin had anything to do with it.  You know, best player to fill in for an injured player. Since you seem to be the most likely to pose this question to because you seem to be the one who's mostly looked into every aspect of the situation. Just curious about that myself to see if there is an avenue you may have overlooked or not. Also, to go along with the injuries, could it be that Phil is trying to put the best "available" D-corps on the ice. Just as an example.....would you  "sit" one of Dahlin, Pilut, or Scandella in favor of playing Tennyson or would you play Dahlin on the right and play the others on their left?

Just would like to know if these were considered in your search.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

44 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Is this fair? There are three kinds of fans. 1. Wants Phil to base player usage on analytics charts and stuff. 2. Wants Phil to be smart enough to rely solely on the eye test. 3. Wants some combination — maybe roughly half this, half that. I suppose a fourth kind of fan doesn't care about player usage a'tall.

That's fair, I think.

For the record, I am a combination of 2 and 4.  I don't really care that much, but want Phil to see and know what to do based on what he and the other coaches see.  I am not a fancy stat guy, which is pretty well documented here.

[Thorner]

8 hours ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

I haven't followed this conversation as much as some and I'm curious about how adamant you are about Dahlin's usage. You seem to have the stats to back your argument about the subject and you opinion is also well documented here.

However, my curiosity lies in the area more of necessity. As we all know, right side Dmen  are harder to find and quality ones even harder.  So when you can find a lefty that can play both sides well, sometimes necessity over-shadows anything else.

My question to you is this....with recent injuries to the D has this usage of Dahlin had anything to do with it.  You know, best player to fill in for an injured player. Since you seem to be the most likely to pose this question to because you seem to be the one who's mostly looked into every aspect of the situation. Just curious about that myself to see if there is an avenue you may have overlooked or not. Also, to go along with the injuries, could it be that Phil is trying to put the best "available" D-corps on the ice. Just as an example.....would you  "sit" one of Dahlin, Pilut, or Scandella in favor of playing Tennyson or would you play Dahlin on the right and play the others on their left?

Just would like to know if these were considered in your search.

In my mind I am prioritizing the development of Dahlin over the apparent perceived necessity to play him on the right, if that's so the case. 

He's looked less sure of himself lately and if he was mowing along great on the left side, I preferably don't see the need to mess with that mojo.

I've also stated that I believe Botterill is to blame partially as he failed to provide adequate RHD depth headed into the season. That seems to have been missed. 

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

13 hours ago, Thorny said:

In my mind I am prioritizing the development of Dahlin over the apparent perceived necessity to play him on the right, if that's so the case. 

He's looked less sure of himself lately and if he was mowing along great on the left side, I preferably don't see the need to mess with that mojo.

I've also stated that I believe Botterill is to blame partially as he failed to provide adequate RHD depth headed into the season. That seems to have been missed. 

like I said....I was just curious if you had thought about those issues, and it seems as though you have. 

I don't think the RHD situation was missed at all. I recall some discussions on that matter and the general consensus IIRC was nobody seemeed overly worried about it due to some players that could play either side (namely Dahlin and McCabe). I agree more effort should have been put into that particular need.