Buffalo Sabres 2018-19: What went wrong, how to fix it?

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

13 minutes ago, E4 ... Ke2 said:

If last year's problems had been 100% on the roster, then neither would Vladimir Sobotka have been 4th in TOI for the forwards nor would Marco Scandella and Rasmus Ristolainen have got so much ice time.

If last year's problems had been 100% on the coach, we all would have Matt Hunwick, Tage Thompson, and Vladimir Sobotka in our desired opening night line-ups for this year.

I like the nuance in Flagg's posts.  Yes, the roster had glaring flaws.  Yes, they were often mishandled dreadfully.  And both reinforced the other's problems.

<joke> @Randall Flagg -- I hope the referees of the journals that you are submitting your paper to give its abstract the notices it deserves.  Do you think it is good enough to get you tenure? </joke>

What's with the <joke> ?.....he should be in consideration for the Pulitzer Prize.

Well done @Randall Flagg

[Formerly Allan in MD]

14 hours ago, Zamboni said:

Nope. You’ve been saying this in multiple threads over the months  and I know you won’t change your mind. But the major reason, the biggest reason, the main reason,  the Sabres weren’t successful is the coaching staff. And Housleys ghastly inability to execute effective in-game adjustments. He was horrific at it. Sure, a team could always always always try to improve their roster, and that falls squarely on JB for not doing it, (especially a good 2C) during most of the season while struggling, but the overall talent on the team was not the major reason the season played out the way it did. With a better coaching staff, I bet the 18-19 roster would have been 15-20 points better.

Bingo!  We have a winner.  Housley was a disaster.

[DarthEbriate]

Impressive, @Randall Flagg. Most impressive. This is one of the reasons why sabrespace is so wizard.

[Trettioåtta]

This roster has an odd shape.

We have no 2C

We have Thompson and Mitts who are both centres but not really ready / good enough (atm) to play 3C, let alone 2C.

Reinhart is our only legit RW. So no 2RW.

We have a ton of LW - Sheary, Erod, Vesey, Olofsson, Skinner, Wilson, Elie etc.

I guess Girgensons and Larsson make up 2/3 of our fourth line, which I am happy with, But we need a 4RW to bulk them out

[Curt]

On 7/1/2019 at 12:39 PM, Trettioåtta said:

This roster has an odd shape.

We have no 2C

We have Thompson and Mitts who are both centres but not really ready / good enough (atm) to play 3C, let alone 2C.

Reinhart is our only legit RW. So no 2RW.

We have a ton of LW - Sheary, Erod, Vesey, Olofsson, Skinner, Wilson, Elie etc.

I guess Girgensons and Larsson make up 2/3 of our fourth line, which I am happy with, But we need a 4RW to bulk them out

-Thompson isn’t a C.  When is the last time that he played C, high school?

-ERod and Vesey both can play RW, and have in the NHL on a semi regular basis.  ERod does well at C too.  Thompson and Sheary I think can also play either side.

-LW(Skinner, Olofsson, Sheary, Girgs, Nylander)

-RW(Reinhart, Vesey, ERod, Okposo, Thompson)

-C(Eichel, Mittesltadt, Larsson, Sobotka?  ERod?

In my eyes, C is the real think holding the team back.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

On 6/30/2019 at 8:38 PM, Weave said:

 

I disagree.  As much as I think Housley was the wrong coaching choice, no coach was winning with a roster completely devoid of a second line and a 4th line masquerading as a 3rd line.

70% roster, 30% coach.

I believe this is correct.

On 6/30/2019 at 9:30 PM, SwampD said:

I'm with Weave.

Yup.  Housley was not very good, it seems, but he did not have much to work with.  The biggest problem with Housley, IMO, was he was trying to have a roster play a certain way that the skill set was not there for.  He also seemed to not be willing to let Jack be Jack.

We will never know what might have been if Housley had a better roster to work with.

EDIT TO ADD:

@Randall Flagg, what very well though out analysis.  You should have been out on a Saturday night with dates and mates, but instead ...

Edited July 3, 2019 by New Scotland (NS)

[Curt]

This is really fantastic.  I appreciate all the time and energy you must have put into it.

I think you hit the nail on the head.  Good teams use coordinated movement to create space in dangerous areas and then fill that space with an attacking player.  

This is true of most team ball/puck sports; hockey, basketball, soccer, football.  At their best, they all use movement to create space in dangerous areas that can be taken advantage of.  You can see it whether you watch Barcelona FC, Golden State Warriors, New England Patriots, or Boston Bruins.  Even though it needs to be executed in different ways, the idea is the same across many sports.

The Buffalo Sabres need their coach to think of the game in these terms and players who are able to execute the type of coordinated movement that you have highlighted.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Has anything really gone wrong or has everything mostly gone to Jbot’s plan to rebuild this team finally? 

[PerreaultForever]

On 6/30/2019 at 2:17 PM, Zamboni said:

I don’t know if you meant to imply it or not, but I personally didn’t say it was ALL Housley. I said Coaching staff as a whole was the main reason. With Housley being the head cheese of the staff therefore getting most of the blame. Of course every single team could always use “more talent”. It just wasn’t the biggest reason for their putrid record. A reason? Yes!

It'll be a really long summer if I start worrying about the small differences between "all Housley" and Housley gets "most of the blame". The point, which I think you'd agree with us having, is that I think it was mostly about the players lacking talent and you thinking it was mostly bad coaching. 

On 6/30/2019 at 4:38 PM, Weave said:

 

I disagree.  As much as I think Housley was the wrong coaching choice, no coach was winning with a roster completely devoid of a second line and a 4th line masquerading as a 3rd line.

70% roster, 30% coach.

70/30 is a fair assessment. I might go 80/20 but the point is the same. No coach would win with that roster and no coach will win next year unless the roster is improved. So far, imo, unless some prospects surprise, we aren't much better.  

[dudacek]

8 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

It'll be a really long summer if I start worrying about the small differences between "all Housley" and Housley gets "most of the blame". The point, which I think you'd agree with us having, is that I think it was mostly about the players lacking talent and you thinking it was mostly bad coaching. 

70/30 is a fair assessment. I might go 80/20 but the point is the same. No coach would win with that roster and no coach will win next year unless the roster is improved. So far, imo, unless some prospects surprise, we aren't much better.  

I’m led to believe many don’t believe in development and understand why given the results this decade. 

But I would not be surprised to see progress made by the likes of Mittelstadt, Thompson, Ullmark and Dahlin,  or to see one or more emerge from the group of Asplund, Olofsson, Pilut, Nylander, Smith and Borgen.

We have also added Montour, Miller and Vesey in addition to the new coach to motivate and manoeuvre the existing pieces. A defenceman will be traded and a forward acquired - the roster is a flashing red light of proof - although I suspect many here will not approve of the move when it happens.

Hockey is a funny game. Last year the Canes and Islanders lost their best weapons and dredged the dungeons of the league to start the dregs of NHL goaltenders. As a result each made the 2nd round of the playoffs.

Better might not be what we think it is.

Edited July 4, 2019 by dudacek

[Stoner]

50 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I’m led to believe many don’t believe in development and understand why given the results this decade. 

But I would not be surprised to see progress made by the likes of Mittelstadt, Thompson, Ullmark and Dahlin,  or to see one or more emerge from the group of Asplund, Olofsson, Pilut, Nylander, Smith and Borgen.

We have also added Montour, Miller and Vesey in addition to the new coach to motivate and manoeuvre the existing pieces. A defenceman will be traded and a forward acquired - the roster is a flashing red light of proof - although I suspect many here will not approve of the move when it happens.

Hockey is a funny game. Last year the Canes and Islanders lost their best weapons and dredged the dungeons of the league to start the dregs of NHL goaltenders. As a result each made the 2nd round of the playoffs.

Better might not be what we think it is.

Dredged the Dungeons will be appearing at this year's #tkbc. (Working dredged, dungeons and dregs into the same sentence is one of the lexicological masterpieces in board history. I am envious.)

Other than that, I agree that each hockey season is a chemistry experiment. Chemicals that barely fizzed can next time explode with the addition of a few new ones and a slightly different shake. It's the source of my utter frustration with this franchise. You have to almost try (ahem) to miss the playoffs so many years in the row. It's safe to say that during our drought every other franchise has gotten at least one beaker to shake. I go back to my long-standing question about our beloved Sabres: What's wrong with Dad?

All that said, I have a feeling RaKru is a mad scientist.

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, dudacek said:

I’m led to believe many don’t believe in development and understand why given the results this decade. 

But I would not be surprised to see progress made by the likes of Mittelstadt, Thompson, Ullmark and Dahlin,  or to see one or more emerge from the group of Asplund, Olofsson, Pilut, Nylander, Smith and Borgen.

 

I have to believe in development. It's pretty much all there is to believe in. So, thoughts on those listed.

Mittelstadt - hope we haven't ruined him. Certainly has skill and developed properly could be good - in time.

Thompson - just don't see it. Said before if he beefed up and got mean he could be good but now he's just a giraffe on skates who lets goalies cherry pick predictable shots.

Ullmark - had hope for him. This year I give it up if he doesn't gain consistency. Sometimes he looks really good, other times he looks like he's stoned. I think it's now or never for him.

Dahlin - yes, obvious. Still think he will be one of the best in the league in a few years.

Asplund - fingers crossed, not sure. Haven't seen him enough to say.

Olofsson - I think he can and will be on the roster. Has offensive skill but he's not a top line star like some think. Size will be an issue down the road but he should upgrade from last year. I want to see him on the 3rd line where he belongs for now. I am afraid we are so thin he'll be Mittlestadted and falter by mid season. 

Pilut - personally I think he's too small and a defensive liability. I know I am in the minority view there.

Nylander - last chance. Can shoot, not sure he can play. 

Smith - just another Bailey Baptiste type. Not going to make the jump, doesn't really fit a role. I'd be pleasantly surprised.

Borgen - very high hopes. Just what we need and I hope he can pair well with one of the offensive minded puck movers. If not this year the next, but we need him to step up for sure.

 

There are other kids in the system I have hope for. I think JBot has drafted well as a whole, but the time line for that is long and slow.

[Broken Ankles]

9 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

All that said, I have a feeling RaKru is a mad scientist.

After the Mean Girls GIF you are still using this?  You are committed to end aren’t you?

Edited July 5, 2019 by Broken Ankles

[Stoner]

52 minutes ago, Broken Ankles said:

After the Mean Girls GIF you are still using this?  You are committed to end aren’t you?

I will die on that hill, swinging in the wind with RaKru.

[Stoner]

 

[nfreeman]

1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:

 

Now that should be the new goal song.

[North Buffalo]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

Now that should be the new goal song.

 

Na this one is better or should this one be the opening song to the Sabres 50th?

[Randall Flagg]

On 6/30/2019 at 11:08 AM, SwampD said:

Great post. I have a couple of issues, though (you knew I would.)

if you are talking about the Nov 16th game against Winnipeg, you couldn’t be more wrong. That was some of the best hockey they played all year. I’m rewatching it right now.

My second issue is probably why I have a problem with the first, Gunk is hockey. It’s why we like Risto and think the Sabres are to small and can’t get to those dangerous areas. (Jftr, the heaviest team in league (and close to the tallest) won the Stanley Cup.)

We need more talent, we near more size, we desperately need finishers.

Again, great post.

You make me a much better hockey-watcher.

Their third period was unbelievable and showed the exact type of thing that would have made me call GMs later that night to get in a 2C, but the first two periods of hockey made me want to cry. 

I agree that gunk is hockey - but it's so hard to analyze that when I'm looking for things that might explain large discrepancies in whatever stat, I need to grab onto something else! 

Do you think we're better or worse at gunk hockey than other teams? Sometimes they surprise me with their puck battles. When they fail, what's the reason? Sheer size and strength? A technical ability (thinking Sid here)? 

 

[Randall Flagg]

On 7/3/2019 at 9:20 AM, New Scotland (NS) said:

I believe this is correct.

Yup.  Housley was not very good, it seems, but he did not have much to work with.  The biggest problem with Housley, IMO, was he was trying to have a roster play a certain way that the skill set was not there for.  He also seemed to not be willing to let Jack be Jack.

We will never know what might have been if Housley had a better roster to work with.

EDIT TO ADD:

@Randall Flagg, what very well though out analysis.  You should have been out on a Saturday night with dates and mates, but instead ...

Lol my Saturdays are free! I did most of the work for that post in April, May, and June. I did almost no work when I posted it! Just finished up some video editing.