Holding a 2 Goal Lead

[WildCard]

There's been a bunch of games so far where we've had a 2 goal lead and either given it up, or just been drastically out played immediately after. Is it the coaching? Players mentality? Effort? Kinda weird to see this. Good news is it's probably something very fixable

[LGR4GM]

It is deeply concerning. We go into the famous Lindy Ruff shell it seems. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

7 minutes ago, WildCard said:

There's been a bunch of games so far where we've had a 2 goal lead and either given it up, or just been drastically out played immediately after. Is it the coaching? Players mentality? Effort? Kinda weird to see this. Good news is it's probably something very fixable

Last night was most likely a bunch of tired legs on the second night of a back to back after a physical and emotional loss.

These guys are also just learning a new system and learning how to win.  We also have 25% new parts some of which, like Joker and VO, are NHL rookies.  Hiccups like Mon and Fla are going to happen as the team gels.  The good news is that they kept their composure well enough to win or earn points in the end.

If we are still blowing 2 goal leads after 20 games, then wee might have a problem.  Biron last night downplayed the issue.

Edited October 18, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN

[DarthEbriate]

I say just keep building two-goal leads until we learn how to close them out neatly.

Last night was a heavy, desperate team at home -- on our second of a back-to-back, 3rd in 4 days, with cross-country travel -- and our goalie stole and fourth line stole it for us. We'll need that every so often.

[LGR4GM]

6 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

I say just keep building two-goal leads until we learn how to close them out neatly.

Last night was a heavy, desperate team at home -- on our second of a back-to-back, 3rd in 4 days, with cross-country travel -- and our goalie stole and fourth line stole it for us. We'll need that every so often.

Kinda like building Death Stars until we learn how to defend the reactor core properly? 

[Curt]

Last night it was extreme because it was also a back to back on a west coast road trip, but I think it’s clear that it has been a consistent coaching strategy to dial it way back when protecting a 2+ goal lead.  It hasn’t always worked well and I don’t like it.

[DarthEbriate]

8 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Kinda like building Death Stars until we learn how to defend the reactor core properly? 

They said it was daft to build a Death Star, but I built it all the same... just to show 'em. The Rebels blew it up. So I built a second Death Star. And the Rebels blew it up. So I built a third one. That absorbed a sun, cracked apart, and the Rebels blew it up. But the fourth one is still here....   (apparently resting on the seabed, partially exposed to the air, and ready to Rise up.)  And that's what we're gonna do. We're going to have so many two-goal leads that we'll always be in the lead.

[woods-racer]

Our core has never had to practice it before.

What a great problem we finally have.

Edited October 18, 2019 by woods-racer

[Randall Flagg]

I don't like what we did with our 2 goal leads against MTL and FLA. 

3 goal leads are a bit different. When you incorporate the circumstances of last night's game, and how exhausted they were, I'm not really worried about that. Their most recent 2 goal 3rd period lead was against Dallas and they did well with it.

[Zamboni]

Meh. Not too worried about this “problem” less than a month into the season.

[Wyldnwoody44]

I'm still trying to figure out what a 2 goal lead it, it's so... Foreign to me 

[Skibum]

Jeez, they win in a shutout with an extra insurance goal, second game of a back to back on the west coast, after losing the first game by 3, to take first place in the Eastern Conference, and we’re talking about how they can’t protect a 2-goal lead. A little perspective maybe???

Edited October 19, 2019 by Skibum

[matter2003]

I like the fact this is no longer a one line team anymore. They have gotten contributions from all the different lines so far and different lines have played key roles in their wins. Last year if the Eichel line didn't score they pretty much lost because nobody else did anything.

I'm not overly concerned. Keep getting 2 goal leads and they will get plenty of experience on what works and what doesn't. They aren't the only team that has trouble with them...i remember back before the lockout if teams got a 2 goal lead the game was pretty much over because they would just neutral zone trap the rest of the game and clutch and grab and the other team couldn't generate anything...hell the Devils won cups on the basis of that...now that doesn't work as well because they will call penalties and teams are too fast up and down the roster for it to have the same effect...

[pi2000]

Not sold yet. Period.

[Pimlach]

They had a home game, a long flight, and then back to back games on the road against two heavy teams.  

This has been a tough trip and I think they are holding up ok at this point.  How they play tonight, after a day of rest, will say a lot about this teams grit, its will, and its preparedness.  

I am happy to see this team score first and get the two goal leads. Holding those leads and putting opponents away is a level of maturity that I think will come.   The competition in this league is tough, especially our division and conference.  

[dudacek]

10 hours ago, pi2000 said:

Not sold yet. Period.

Not about you per se, but I have trouble interpreting what this means when people say stuff like this.

Not sold that they are as good as their record?

Not sold that they are good?

Not sold that they are competitive?

Not sold that they are any better than last year?

 

[pi2000]

46 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Not about you per se, but I have trouble interpreting what this means when people say stuff like this.

Not sold that they are as good as their record?

Not sold that they are good?

Not sold that they are competitive?

Not sold that they are any better than last year?

 

yes

[mphs mike]

im convinced they are

1. better then last year

2. competitive

3. and good. the question is “how good”

4. i doubt they are as good as their record - giving place in standings

[pi2000]

Miller and Johansson made this a better team. 

The rest of them still have most of the same warts as last season imo.

[SwampD]

11 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

Miller and Johansson made this a better team. 

The rest of them still have most of the same warts as last season imo.

The passing and puck movement is light years ahead of last year.

[Thorner]

1 hour ago, SwampD said:

The passing and puck movement is light years ahead of last year.

Don't forget Jokiharju. His transitioning has been excellent. 

Like Pi I'm not "sold" they are a "good" team yet, I think that's normal, I mean it's basically been a decade. But I'm coming around the idea that the additions that were made (Johansson, Miller, Jokijharju, Krueger) are in some ways greater than the sum of their parts. I'm stating to believe in an alchemical transformation of sorts, but they certainly need to keep the winning up. 

I think they are an improved team, definitely. It's so early in the season though, so much changes, teams start game planning for teams strengths in a way they don't earlier in the season - so for that reason HOW MUCH they are improved is still a question. 

Pre-season expecations for my part were playoff bubble at minimum, so while they are off to a promising start, there is tons of runway left. Absolutely a very promising, and almost as importantly, entertaining start. 

Edited October 19, 2019 by Thorny

[dudacek]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

Don't forget Jokiharju. His transitioning has been excellent. 

Like Pi I'm not "sold" they are a "good" team yet, I think that's normal, I mean it's basically been a decade. But I'm coming around the idea that the additions that were made (Johansson, Miller, Jokijharju, Krueger) are in some ways greater than the sum of their parts. I'm stating to believe in an alchemical transformation of sorts, but they certainly need to keep the winning up. 

I think they are an improved team, definitely. It's so early in the season though, so much changes, teams start game planning for teams strengths in a way they don't earlier in the season - so for that reason HOW MUCH they are improved is still a question. 

Pre-season expecations for my part were playoff bubble at minimum, so while they are off to a promising start, there is tons of runway left. Absolutely a very promising, and almost as importantly, entertaining start. 

Or Olofsson. Six games as the Sabres were running for the bus don’t really count, IMO.

I never really understand those who said the Sabres didn’t make any changes; they changed the coach, his assistants and 1/4 of the roster. That’s pretty significant.

[Thorner]

26 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Or Olofsson. Six games as the Sabres were running for the bus don’t really count, IMO.

I never really understand those who said the Sabres didn’t make any changes; they changed the coach, his assistants and 1/4 of the roster. That’s pretty significant.

Well, I certainly questioned the amount of change, especially relative to the oft referenced "roster surgery" comment from the GM. To be fair, I lauded him for the D upgrades, so I'm not surprised at all that Miller and Jokiharju have our D depth looking great. 

The changes or lack thereof at forward was/is where the real question lies. Olofsson, Vesey, and Johansson had reasonably sized question marks attached. Olofsson has delivered so far, even with room for improvement at ES. Johansson has exceeded expectations so far, to me. He's looked solid outside of Johydesson in the Anaheim game. A solid 2C, that is, a position we were in great need. His strong playoffs last year pointed towards it being possible, but he's still a man that played 58, and 29 games the previous 2 years, for 30, and 14 points. He was worth a wait-and-see approach. Vesey has been a disappointment, but there have been signs of life recently. 

Overall, that's a lot more "hit" on those forward swings than the odds may have predicted. So, good on the pro scouting department so far, and Botterill. Krueger too. 

Edited October 19, 2019 by Thorny

[dudacek]

7 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Well, I certainly questioned the amount of change, especially relative to the oft referenced "roster surgery" comment from the GM. To be fair, I lauded him for the D upgrades, so I'm not surprised at all that Miller and Jokiharju have our D depth looking great. 

The changes or lack thereof at forward was/is where the real question lies. Olofsson, Vesey, and Johansson had reasonably sized question marks attached. Olofsson has delivered so far, even with room for improvement at ES. Johansson has exceeded expectations so far, to me. He's looked solid outside of Johydesson in the Anaheim game. A solid 2C, that is, a position we were in great need. His strong playoffs last year pointed towards it being possible, but he's still a man that played 58, and 29 games the previous 2 years, for 30, and 14 points. He was worth a wait-and-see approach. Vesey has been a disappointment, but there have been signs of life recently. 

Overall, that's a lot more "hit" on those forward swings than the odds may have predicted. So, good on the pro scouting department so far, and Botterill. 

I’ve come to understand that many people defined change as being synonymous with dumping most of Larry, Gus, Vlad, Kyle and Risto, and adding an impact forward, preferably a 2C.

So by that definition they didn’t make any changes.

Edited October 19, 2019 by dudacek

[Randall Flagg]

4 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Well, I certainly questioned the amount of change, especially relative to the oft referenced "roster surgery" comment from the GM. To be fair, I lauded him for the D upgrades, so I'm not surprised at all that Miller and Jokiharju have our D depth looking great. 

The changes or lack thereof at forward was/is where the real question lies. Olofsson, Vesey, and Johansson had reasonably sized question marks attached. Olofsson has delivered so far, even with room for improvement at ES. Johansson has exceeded expectations so far, to me. He's looked solid outside of Johydesson in the Anaheim game. A solid 2C, that is, a position we were in great need. His strong playoffs last year pointed towards it being possible, but he's still a man that played 58, and 29 games the previous 2 years, for 30, and 14 points. He was worth a wait-and-see approach. Vesey has been a disappointment, but there have been signs of life recently. 

Overall, that's a lot more "hit" on those forward swings than the odds may have predicted. So, good on the pro scouting department so far, and Botterill. Krueger too. 

The question-mark approach is what we were so critical of this offseason. ie, "so much stuff that has been bad recently has to become not bad all at once" and whatnot. 

Every single one of them has been a hit to this point, which is pretty remarkable. In general I would never plan/operate as if this was the norm, or lean on something like that going so well again, though I doubt we'll ever be stuck in that position in an offseason again (bringing back a whole bunch of under-performers to a bad team with very little top-end roster overhaul). But since it's working, Jason and Ralph deserve the credit. We just have to hope that the question marks don't slip back into their old ways that made them question marks. 

Assuming they don't, next offseason we will be in the position of good team looking to make tweaks to stay good and get better. It will be refreshing!