Buffalo Sabres & NHL 2018-19: Sabres picking 7th overall (6/21/19). Ralph Krueger hire as new head coach!

[Turk71]

13 minutes ago, K-9 said:

I hope you’re right, but I’m skeptical. There are 64 points left after tonight and we need 42 of them to have a realistic shot at making the playoffs. That’s a .656 clip from here on out. Not impossible, especially with the next 14 points available at home. But given what this team has shown the last season and a half, I just don’t see it. Hope I’m wrong.

I hope your wrong too. It has been a long time since I had any hope for the Sabres near the end of the season so I really hope they can make a run at the playoffs and keep me tuned in til the end.

Edited January 31, 2019 by Turk71

[Boca BIlls]

Someone needs to be fired... I can't believe a team with this much talent sucks so bad still.

Edited January 31, 2019 by Boca BIlls

[JohnC]

The first two stars in this game should go to each of the goalies with Bishop being the difference in this game. Both teams played a tight up and down game. This was more of a playoff style of game than a regular season game. The effort was evident from both sides. 

 

I thought Scandella scored and Beaulois was pushed into the goaltender. We didn't get the call. I'm not going to criticize a player for being around the net. We need more of it. In this game the referees swallowed their whistles. That's fine with me.  The only thing I ask for is consistency. They were consistent. 

 

Although we didn't score in this game what I noticed is that the secondary lines have been more active. Sheary seems more energetic and is driving to the net more. And although Mittelstadt hasn't scored much he seems to be playing more aggressively.   

 

Although disappointed about the outcome I liked the way the Sabres played. If the Sabres duplicated their efforts in this game on the homestand it should be a productive homestand. 

[eball]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

The first two stars in this game should go to each of the goalies with Bishop being the difference in this game. Both teams played a tight up and down game. This was more of a playoff style of game than a regular season game. The effort was evident from both sides. 

 

I thought Scandella scored and Beaulois was pushed into the goaltender. We didn't get the call. I'm not going to criticize a player for being around the net. We need more of it. In this game the referees swallowed their whistles. That's fine with me.  The only thing I ask for is consistency. They were consistent. 

 

Although we didn't score in this game what I noticed is that the secondary lines have been more active. Sheary seems more energetic and is driving to the net more. And although Mittelstadt hasn't scored much he seems to be playing more aggressively.   

 

Although disappointed about the outcome I liked the way the Sabres played. If the Sabres duplicated their efforts in this game on the homestand it should be a productive homestand. 

 

I was just coming over here to post that I thought the Sabres played a pretty good road game and both goalies were excellent.  I also have noticed that Mitts and Sheary seem to be developing chemistry.

 

Housley has to start Ullmark when they return home...right?

[K-9]

2 hours ago, eball said:

 

I was just coming over here to post that I thought the Sabres played a pretty good road game and both goalies were excellent.  I also have noticed that Mitts and Sheary seem to be developing chemistry.

 

Housley has to start Ullmark when they return home...right?

One would think Housley would stick with the hotter goalie, but you never know with him. 

 

I think I know what bothers me most about Housley and that is he is just not an in game tactician that gives opposing coaches anything to think about. Last night, for example, he gave Dallas the same look all night which made it easy for them to get desired matchups. Eichel’s line was clamped down pretty much all night and I give Dallas credit as that’s no easy task. But where is it written that Jack can’t get a shift or two with other forwards to change things up a couple times a game? Why not break established, easily figured out patterns from time to time? I see other teams do this a lot. For instance, why not have  Eichel skate with Mitts and Sheary for a shift or two and force opponents to have to deal with that speed and puck skill combination? 

 

One of the things I miss most about Lindy. He was adaptable during games. Housley seems to have to wait and look at the tape after the fact. Frustrating .

Edited January 31, 2019 by K-9

[plenzmd1]

2 hours ago, eball said:

 

 

Housley has to start Ullmark when they return home...right?

 

no..why would you say that?

 

If its Fred turn,  its Fred turn plain and simple. 

 

Now if you are a rookie and the numbers show you are best on the roster at generating high danger chances, you make Risto much better, goals Above Replacement is highest on the team..and you lost 1-0 last night??? Sit and learn young man!!!!

 

https://www.diebytheblade.com/2019/1/28/18200774/buffalo-sabres-benching-lawrence-pilut-has-become-an-inexcusable-decision-phil-housley

[JohnC]

2 hours ago, eball said:

 

 

2 hours ago, eball said:

 

I was just coming over here to post that I thought the Sabres played a pretty good road game and both goalies were excellent.  I also have noticed that Mitts and Sheary seem to be developing chemistry.

 

Housley has to start Ullmark when they return home...right?

Don't be surprised if Hutton gets the assignment. In my view Ulmark has earned the right to be rotated in every other game. 

 

As you have also observed Sheary has recently seemed to be energized with the better play of Mitts and the recent scoring touch of Rodriques.  This speed line is effective when it aggressively drives to the net instead of dickering around the perimeter. When this team gets scoring from the secondary line it can compete with anyone. That's not to say that we are on par with the elite teams but they are capable of coming out any game with a win against even the better teams. 

 

There are some very strong critics of Housley here. I'm not one of them. What I look for from a rebuilding team is the level of compete/intensity. For the most part they exhibit that effort on a regular basis. What has hurt them is the intermittent glaring lapses on the defensive end that result in goals. Our offense isn't good enough to overcome those crushing mistakes. 

 

My assessment of this team when the season started is that I thought they would be a fringe (wild-card contending) team. That's exactly where they are as the season winds down to the last third of the season. Some people are discouraged from what has already transpired while I am encouraged about what I have observed. 

[eball]

31 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

no..why would you say that?

 

If its Fred turn,  its Fred turn plain and simple. 

 

Now if you are a rookie and the numbers show you are best on the roster at generating high danger chances, you make Risto much better, goals Above Replacement is highest on the team..and you lost 1-0 last night??? Sit and learn young man!!!!

 

https://www.diebytheblade.com/2019/1/28/18200774/buffalo-sabres-benching-lawrence-pilut-has-become-an-inexcusable-decision-phil-housley

 

It's frustrating for sure.

 

50 minutes ago, K-9 said:

One would think Housley would stick with the hotter goalie, but you never know with him. 

 

I think I know what bothers me most about Housley and that is he is just not an in game tactician that gives opposing coaches anything to think about. Last night, for example, he gave Dallas the same look all night which made it easy for them to get desired matchups. Eichel’s line was clamped down pretty much all night and I give Dallas credit as that’s no easy task. But where is it written that Jack can’t get a shift or two with other forwards to change things up a couple times a game? Why not break established, easily figured out patterns from time to time? I see other teams do this a lot. For instance, why not have  Eichel skate with Mitts and Sheary for a shift or two and force opponents to have to deal with that speed and puck skill combination? 

 

One of the things I miss most about Lindy. He was adaptable during games. Housley seems to have to wait and look at the tape after the fact. Frustrating .

 

Good points.

 

 

Edited January 31, 2019 by eball

[shrader]

If both Hunwick and Beaulieu are going to get starts over Pilut, it's time for him to go back to Rochester, regardless of whether or not he's better than them.  Thanks to the scheduling oddity, he now hasn't played a game in two weeks.  I know he's not the typical rookie, but that's not good for any 23 year old.  Beyond that, there's really nothing to be gained from carrying 8 d-men.  If you don't intend on playing him, send him down and then recall him any time when you do want him in there.

[plenzmd1]

22 minutes ago, shrader said:

If both Hunwick and Beaulieu are going to get starts over Pilut, it's time for him to go back to Rochester, regardless of whether or not he's better than them.  Thanks to the scheduling oddity, he now hasn't played a game in two weeks.  I know he's not the typical rookie, but that's not good for any 23 year old.  Beyond that, there's really nothing to be gained from carrying 8 d-men.  If you don't intend on playing him, send him down and then recall him any time when you do want him in there.

agreed!!!!

 

Edited January 31, 2019 by plenzmd1

[Big C]

3 hours ago, K-9 said:

 

One of the things I miss most about Lindy. He was adaptable during games. Housley seems to have to wait and look at the tape after the fact. Frustrating .

 

That's just what Buffalo coaches need to do these days. 

 

All in all I thought it was a tough-fought game. Dallas is a much bigger, more physical team and the Sabres couldn't do their thing. Only a couple moments Jack had the puck where I got that usual "he's about to make something happen" feeling. Credit Dallas for clamping our first line down, but as some have said, maybe Housley could have made some adjustments. 

 

The game came down to two things for me: 1) Bogo's turnover to set up the game's lone goal 2) Questionable goalie interference call. Didn't like the call especially after review. But, it is what it is.

[K-9]

4 hours ago, JohnC said:

 

Don't be surprised if Hutton gets the assignment. In my view Ulmark has earned the right to be rotated in every other game. 

 

As you have also observed Sheary has recently seemed to be energized with the better play of Mitts and the recent scoring touch of Rodriques.  This speed line is effective when it aggressively drives to the net instead of dickering around the perimeter. When this team gets scoring from the secondary line it can compete with anyone. That's not to say that we are on par with the elite teams but they are capable of coming out any game with a win against even the better teams. 

 

There are some very strong critics of Housley here. I'm not one of them. What I look for from a rebuilding team is the level of compete/intensity. For the most part they exhibit that effort on a regular basis. What has hurt them is the intermittent glaring lapses on the defensive end that result in goals. Our offense isn't good enough to overcome those crushing mistakes. 

 

My assessment of this team when the season started is that I thought they would be a fringe (wild-card contending) team. That's exactly where they are as the season winds down to the last third of the season. Some people are discouraged from what has already transpired while I am encouraged about what I have observed. 

John, what has Housley done since he got here that inspires confidence in you? Other than not having stars at every position? Is it his handling of personnel in the lineup every night? His in game decision making? His demeanor with the media? What is it you see in him that screams, “great coach?” I’ve been looking for a year and a half and I need your help in finding it. And it has to be more than we don’t need another HCing change so soon, imo. If a coach reveals himself to be less than ideal, why wait for the inevitable?

[BillsFan4]

https://www.nhl.com/news/fantasy-reaction-from-2019-nhl-all-stars/c-304213724?tid=277729150

 

Quote

Forward Jeff Skinner, a potential 2019 unrestricted free agent, credits elite center Jack Eichel for him being second in the NHL in goals (31) behind Washington Capitals forward Alex Ovechkin (37). Skinner went as far to say Eichel is the best linemate he has had in nine NHL seasons.

 

"It's probably the best production I've had [with a center], and he's probably the most talented player I've played with," Skinner said. "I don't know if you call that chemistry or talent, but I think for me -- reading off him is easy because he's so talented. The game seems slower for him, and as a result he draws people to him and he opens up space and time for everyone else on the ice, not just me, the defensemen and the other wingers."

 

Quote

Skinner said rookie defenseman Rasmus Dahlin is another player he would like to play with for the rest of his NHL career.

 

"He's pretty good, yeah? I'd sign up to watch him too," Skinner said of Dahlin. "Seeing a guy that's 18 years old and a defenseman, obviously he's got a lot of adjustments coming to a new country and to see how he's sort of made that adjustment so seamlessly I think is a testament to his off-ice character. But on the ice, he's super talented. He's going to continue to get better and be fun to watch for a long time."

 

I wonder if they’ll wait until after the trade deadline to finalize a deal with Skinner or if they’ll try to get it done before then just to be safe (though I can’t see him getting traded unless the contract gap is huge).

 

Skinner can’t sign for 8 years until after the deadline. Max before the deadline is 7 years. 

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, K-9 said:

John, what has Housley done since he got here that inspires confidence in you? Other than not having stars at every position? Is it his handling of personnel in the lineup every night? His in game decision making? His demeanor with the media? What is it you see in him that screams, “great coach?” I’ve been looking for a year and a half and I need your help in finding it. And it has to be more than we don’t need another HCing change so soon, imo. If a coach reveals himself to be less than ideal, why wait for the inevitable?

Some of the assumptions that you are attributing to me are not only wrong but off the wall. Who said that he had the makings and the attributes of a great coach? You are trying to support your negative position of him by falsely making fictitious claims that I have said. You constantly propound the notion that I defend him because he doesn't have a roster full of stars. Where did you come up with such nonsense. All I have said about the roster is that it is not a full or well balanced roster.   How can anyone disagree with the obvious?

 

Don't waste your time trying to judge him as a coach in his first year with the Sabres.  He took over a team that was stripped and was deliberately tanking. From a talent standpoint we were the worst team in the league. How are you going to fairly judge him or any other coach under such a planned decimation of a roster? In the end the strategy of blowing up the roster or more accurately deliberately not adding to the roster worked. We ended up with Dahlin. Count that as a resounding success for the organization. 

 

I have said from the start of this season that this is a fringe playoff team. That's exactly what they are and where they are. I have also pointed out that for the most part this team consistently plays hard for him. If you disagree with that judgment then so be it. Yesterday's game was an example of that. They lost but without question it was a full effort on a back to back game. 

 

You criticize Housley for not juggling the lines. That's inaccurate. He certainly has juggled the secondary lines and has kept the primary line in tact. I agree with that strategy. I think it is wiser to retain one of the most productive lines in the league together. I understand the reasoning for spreading out the talent wealth from the first line. But I disagree that it would be the smart thing to do. Having a different judgment on that  issue is okay. 

 

Where I strenuously disagree with you is your advocacy that changing the HC will improve the play of this team. That makes no sense to me at all. What this rebuilding franchise doesn't need is starting over with another system when the team is for the most part responding to the coach. (I'm well aware that you disagree with that judgment.) This team as currently constituted is where it should be slotted in the standings. You have some disagreements as to who should be playing and who shouldn't. But the players in question for the most part are on the back end of the roster. So why be so bothered by the personnel decisions that the coach is making? I'm not saying your judgments are right or wrong but they are judgments that all coaches have to make. 

 

Let's put things in perspective. The Sabres earned 62 points last year. This year in my estimation they should earn somewhere in the vicinity of 85 points, or maybe a little more. You may not consider improving by 25 points or so progress but I do. Botterill has an abundance of draft assets heading into the offseason. If he can come up with a deal similar to the Skinner deal and continue with the talent development in Rochester then this team should be in position to continue moving up the ranks. You may not see that as progress but I do. 

[K-9]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

Some of the assumptions that you are attributing to me are not only wrong but off the wall. Who said that he had the makings and the attributes of a great coach? You are trying to support your negative position of him by falsely making fictitious claims that I have said. You constantly propound the notion that I defend him because he doesn't have a roster full of stars. Where did you come up with such nonsense. All I have said about the roster is that it is not a full or well balanced roster.   How can anyone disagree with the obvious?

 

Don't waste your time trying to judge him as a coach in his first year with the Sabres.  He took over a team that was stripped and was deliberately tanking. From a talent standpoint we were the worst team in the league. How are you going to fairly judge him or any other coach under such a planned decimation of a roster? In the end the strategy of blowing up the roster or more accurately deliberately not adding to the roster worked. We ended up with Dahlin. Count that as a resounding success for the organization. 

 

I have said from the start of this season that this is a fringe playoff team. That's exactly what they are and where they are. I have also pointed out that for the most part this team consistently plays hard for him. If you disagree with that judgment then so be it. Yesterday's game was an example of that. They lost but without question it was a full effort on a back to back game. 

 

You criticize Housley for not juggling the lines. That's inaccurate. He certainly has juggled the secondary lines and has kept the primary line in tact. I agree with that strategy. I think it is wiser to retain one of the most productive lines in the league together. I understand the reasoning for spreading out the talent wealth from the first line. But I disagree that it would be the smart thing to do. Having a different judgment on that  issue is okay. 

 

Where I strenuously disagree with you is your advocacy that changing the HC will improve the play of this team. That makes no sense to me at all. What this rebuilding franchise doesn't need is starting over with another system when the team is for the most part responding to the coach. (I'm well aware that you disagree with that judgment.) This team as currently constituted is where it should be slotted in the standings. You have some disagreements as to who should be playing and who shouldn't. But the players in question for the most part are on the back end of the roster. So why be so bothered by the personnel decisions that the coach is making? I'm not saying your judgments are right or wrong but they are judgments that all coaches have to make. 

 

Let's put things in perspective. The Sabres earned 62 points last year. This year in my estimation they should earn somewhere in the vicinity of 85 points, or maybe a little more. You may not consider improving by 25 points or so progress but I do. Botterill has an abundance of draft assets heading into the offseason. If he can come up with a deal similar to the Skinner deal and continue with the talent development in Rochester then this team should be in position to continue moving up the ranks. You may not see that as progress but I do. 

It’s not my intention to pick a fight and piss you off here. It was an honest question and I was genuinely curious. Forget I even inquired.

 

I guess I don’t see a 20 point improvement as any great accomplishment when in his first season, with essentially the same personnel, Housley led the team to a 16 point reduction from Bylsma’s squad the previous season.  

 

And I’m not looking at “line juggling” as some litmus test for greatness in a coach. The point is Housley shows little in the way of in game adjustments and makes it easier on the opposition as a result. And his game to game line up decisions plain suck. There is no excuse for keeping Pilut out of the lineup. 

 

The seven game home stand is going to dictate where this season ends up. I hope Housley is up for the task.

Edited February 1, 2019 by K-9

[plenzmd1]

8 hours ago, JohnC said:

 

 

Don't waste your time trying to judge him as a coach in his first year with the Sabres.  He took over a team that was stripped and was deliberately tanking. From a talent standpoint we were the worst team in the league. How are you going to fairly judge him or any other coach under such a planned decimation of a roster? In the end the strategy of blowing up the roster or more accurately deliberately not adding to the roster worked. We ended up with Dahlin. Count that as a resounding success for the organization. 

 

 

2

Do you believe they went to the bottom last year on purpose? With Kane, ROR, Jack, Sam, Okposo, Risto and Scandella on the roster? I ain't buying that in the least. They wanted to win last year, but they ended up last..big difference in my mind. I believe a big part of why they ended up last was coaching. And i don't give him a pat on the back for coming up from that point..he drove em there. As we have discussed, you give the Sabres a .500 record in that win streak, they are still at same .38 win percentage of available points. To me, little to no improvement over an awful 17-18.

 

In terms of replacing the HC, I do believe it makes a huge difference. Two teams thought to be far behind the Sabres in terms of talent are ahead of them comfortably now..both have proven, successful coaches. Sabres need to do whatever it takes to get Q in here..if they could do it now, I am all for it. Think it more likely to be in the summer, but I would sign up for that for tonights game against his old team if I could..yes I think he would be a better game coach walking off the street than Housley is.

 

I am also one who thinks continuity is overblown. Teams have continuity when they win..shocking. Losing coaches tend to continue to lose..no matter how much time they are given

[snafu]

8 hours ago, JohnC said:

Where I strenuously disagree with you is your advocacy that changing the HC will improve the play of this team. That makes no sense to me at all. What this rebuilding franchise doesn't need is starting over with another system when the team is for the most part responding to the coach.

 

There will be a time (hopefully very soon) where the talent on this team will be better than Housley’s coaching ability. Then a change will need to be made. I generally agree with you that repetitive coaching changes are more likely to be counterproductive. However, I think that’s more true for a football team than a hockey team. Unfortunately, like in the NFL, both Bylsma and Housley were each brought in as “system” guys who needed to get their players to conform to a style of play, rather than adjusting their style to the personnel (and gradually implementing their system). 

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, snafu said:

 

There will be a time (hopefully very soon) where the talent on this team will be better than Housley’s coaching ability. Then a change will need to be made. I generally agree with you that repetitive coaching changes are more likely to be counterproductive. However, I think that’s more true for a football team than a hockey team. Unfortunately, like in the NFL, both Bylsma and Housley were each brought in as “system” guys who needed to get their players to conform to a style of play, rather than adjusting their style to the personnel (and gradually implementing their system). 

I'm not disagreeing with you that each of our recent HCs had their systems. Every HC has their own system with their own emphasis. Bylsma was primarily let go because he didn't connect with the players. When your star player doesn't like you or have a positive relationship with you then you are in trouble. That scenario applies to all sports. 

 

There is nothing radical about Housley's "system". He basically wants his defensemen to quickly move the puck out of the zone and have then join the rush toward the offensive zone with the forwards. There is nothing radical about his system because it is very much part of the current conventional norm in the NHL. The NHL play of today has little to do with the muscular and brutish style of play of the past. It's about speed and skill. He emphasizes the same things that most of the other coaches emphasize. Also, what he is trying to do is have more presence/bodies in front of the net on offense. Or another way of saying it is do the dirty work. That again is a standard emphasis for all coaches.   

 

Will this organization make a change at the HCing position when the talent is upgraded? Possibly. But that wouldn't be surprising because organizations make changes at certain stages of where there teams are at. On the other hand if this franchise made a change now it would not improve our situation. It will set us back!  Acting out of frustration is usually an act of futility. It makes no sense to me. 

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, plenzmd1 said:

Do you believe they went to the bottom last year on purpose? With Kane, ROR, Jack, Sam, Okposo, Risto and Scandella on the roster? I ain't buying that in the least. They wanted to win last year, but they ended up last..big difference in my mind. I believe a big part of why they ended up last was coaching. And i don't give him a pat on the back for coming up from that point..he drove em there. As we have discussed, you give the Sabres a .500 record in that win streak, they are still at same .38 win percentage of available points. To me, little to no improvement over an awful 17-18.

 

In terms of replacing the HC, I do believe it makes a huge difference. Two teams thought to be far behind the Sabres in terms of talent are ahead of them comfortably now..both have proven, successful coaches. Sabres need to do whatever it takes to get Q in here..if they could do it now, I am all for it. Think it more likely to be in the summer, but I would sign up for that for tonights game against his old team if I could..yes I think he would be a better game coach walking off the street than Housley is.

 

I am also one who thinks continuity is overblown. Teams have continuity when they win..shocking. Losing coaches tend to continue to lose..no matter how much time they are given

The team as it was constituted was not working. So it was deconstructed in order to be reconstructed. The system that Housley brought in emphasized speed. We lacked that. The mix of players was not right on the ice and in the locker room. So a remake happened in the offseason.  

 

We can go in circles about where this team is at and where it is going. I'm simply not as pessimistic as you and some of your cohorts are. What I strongly believe is that the chorus for a coaching change is misguided and destructive. I'm not in the long-term wedded to this HC. But divorcing him from the organization at this early juncture would be an act of foolishness. Before you drown yourself in your self-induced misery let this season play itself out and see where the chips fall. The reality is that self-flagellation hurts not the people you are angry with so much as it hurts the people who are punching themselves in the face. My kindly advice to you is be more patient!

[JohnC]

9 hours ago, K-9 said:

It’s not my intention to pick a fight and piss you off here. It was an honest question and I was genuinely curious. Forget I even inquired.

 

I guess I don’t see a 20 point improvement as any great accomplishment when in his first season, with essentially the same personnel, Housley led the team to a 16 point reduction from Bylsma’s squad the previous season.  

 

And I’m not looking at “line juggling” as some litmus test for greatness in a coach. The point is Housley shows little in the way of in game adjustments and makes it easier on the opposition as a result. And his game to game line up decisions plain suck. There is no excuse for keeping Pilut out of the lineup. 

 

The seven game home stand is going to dictate where this season ends up. I hope Housley is up for the task.

I'm not pissed off. I just have a very different perspective on the situation. Quite the opposite of what you think I enjoy the discussion. What I said to the increasingly angry Plezmd is let's allow the season to play out. It's understandable that the vicissitudes of the season can frustrate and exhaust this historically abused fanbase. What I'm trying to suggest here with my responses to this topic is to have more of a perspective on what is happening in this season. I'm recommending patience because I believe that in the not too distant future this team will be a serious team. It's not there now. You have been objective enough to point out that this team still lacks enough talent throughout its roster to be where we all want it to be. What I don't want to see is resorting to short-term solutions at the expense of the longer term and more meaningful goals. We still have a way to go but we are not as far away as many are suggesting. 

 

Again, I apologize if my tone suggests anger. That's not my intention. I enjoy these discussions even when Plezmd is nipping at my ankles.