Confirmed with Link: Phil Housley Hired as Head Coach

[struckbyaparkedcar]

This doesn't make any sense... Are you implying that Bylsma's tactics fit his personnel? Maybe I'm incorrectly making that leap, because I fail to see how the following choices fit our personnel:

• Systematically ceding our blueline on the right side of the ice in order to use our RD's to protect the net
• Employing a system that called for the defenseman to conservatively stay in their own zone and make 2 line passes to stationary forwards
• Using our wingers to forecheck from a stationary position at the blueline following dump-ins
• Having our defensemen bail the offensive zone at the first hint of the opposition gaining possession
• Employing passive 1-2-2 for long stretches with such a young team that had a natural aggressive mindset

It has been said here many times, but overall, Bylsma's system placed least amount of value on our strongest position -center.

So all that being said, I would say Bylsma's core actions didn't fit his personnel AND he didn't optimize those core actions properly. In which case, I would say Housley is better by default...

My take on Disco is that he correctly chose a stretch-passing transition style to minimize his blueline and then proceeded to f*** up all of the stuff you listed.

Meanwhile, Housley put way more responsibility on his defense early, bailed hard when he realized he couldn't run his stuff, and has yet to add value other than taking high risk plays that were leading to goals against off the table and generally implementing low-risk hockey. His system was so dependent on good transition play from his D that it was also bypassing our centers, and the defensive tempo is still pretty passive.

While the offense has remained putrid, at least a couple of our defensive metrics got better once Phil stopped f***ing around - they're the stingiest shots/chances team so far - but the Sabres are still allowing a robust amount of HDCA, and remain a poor xGA team. Additionally, Housley's player usage hasn't been aggressive enough to drive wins, while trying to play to a standstill.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

You argue for/against things that simply do not exist in hockey or make word salad statements that mean nothing. I can list many examples. That's not the totality of your posting by any means but it appears enough.

A bunch of that is you taking me to task for not using the proper coaching clinic vocabulary, even though that level of discussion barely exists outside of those circles, not me describing things that don't exist in hockey.

I find it comical that when I call you on this stuff you resort to personal shots instead of answering the questions. But I'm lording over you.

You're fine trust me. The analytics community did not find some way to re-invent the wheel. Most are nothing like Han when it comes to actually knowing the sport and being able to break it down on the ice. That's because Han is an actual hockey guy who is also a math guy. Most of the analytics crowd are rooted in math and don't have his hockey backround. Granted many of them are very smart. Tierney being one who comes up with a bunch of interesting models, charts and graphs. If understood properly they can be a useful tool to analyze stuff. But at the end of the day doesn't really help anyone that doesn't already have a strong understanding of the sport. Because they rarely if every can get too deep into the why of things. Cause that's kind of hard to do with an equation. They certainly don't break things down on the ice and cling to their modeling slavishly. I wonder sometimes if they fully understand the why part based on the sweeping assertions they try to make based on their models, graphs, charts, etc.

That's some grade-A never laced up the boots-ism, and that's just one paragraph.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

I gave two examples. Neither is made up and one has multiple variants.

You've repeatedly misrepresented the zone start conversation. Regular fans were using usage to downplay more concrete metrics, and the math folks were shooting them down as a minor data point from day one.

As for Corsi, it was never presented as the only thing by the people actually regressing the numbers, just one of the best available skater evaluation tools and a huge step forward vs the NHL's public stats. That's still where we're at now with things like xG and gamescore - best available and big steps forward.

Anyway, once shot attempts became currency, layering on fresh data as it became available, like location and shot type, was common sense. Making good stats better is a part of the whole process, and it doesn't have to invalidate the work that came before it.

The metrics that inspired baseball's statistical revolution have been retired, but adopting them still meant a seismic competitive advantage in their day.

It's not about invalidating.

Misrepresenting the other side kind of has that effect.

It's pointing out the obvious, you can't quantify hockey to the level some want to believe these numbers do. There are too many variables and moving parts involved. But it doesn't stop some from arguing as if the numbers tell the story like it does for baseball. That's especially true with the predictive modeling.

The people - like a certain Rangers fan you might know from the main boards - unflinchingly citing Corsi to define players like Ryan Suter as better stats emerge to fill in the gaps, and the people developing the stats are separate groups.

Also, the issues facing hockey quantification are less about hockey being this impossible beast, and more about valuable data being kept from statisticians. Stuff like passing and puck retrieval is staying at the league and team level unless tracked independently, which is painstaking, thankless work. We'll likely see another big step forward as they become more public.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

You won't find logic here, once again Sabres fans, including me, have overestimated the talent on the roster and in Rochester. Our bottom 6 is the bottom 6 of a bottom feeder. The top 6 ain't no hell either, 3 of the top 6 are playing up to expectations - Eichel, Kane, Pominville - ROR is returning to form, Okposo and Reinhart have disappointed. On defense, Risto and McCabe have been below expectation, Scandella has been fine. Broke-osian is an injury we can't afford. Eff him and his Made in China body.

The goaltending has been mediocre to bad.

Here's logic - inferior talent = inferior performance = inferior results.

I'm not looking for logic here...I'm well past that. I'm well aware of the deficient talent level on the roster, but I still expect some level of logic behind the way the roster is iced.

It boils down to the fact that we've been watching a guy try to open a door by banging his head against it, because he doesn't have the key. That guy finally knocked himself out, so a new guy showed up and we figured he would try something different because maybe he saw how the first guy went out cold on the floor. This new guy is beating his head on the door too and we're wondering why right now, and if he'll at least start looking around for a key, or a screw driver to take the hinges off.

So that's why I'm desperate for logic. I'm hoping there's a certain reason to explain why a 2nd guy in a row is giving himself a concussion.

 

[Fezzy126]

My take on Disco is that he correctly chose a stretch-passing transition style to minimize his blueline and then proceeded to **** up all of the stuff you listed.

Meanwhile, Housley put way more responsibility on his defense early, bailed hard when he realized he couldn't run his stuff, and has yet to add value other than taking high risk plays that were leading to goals against off the table and generally implementing low-risk hockey. His system was so dependent on good transition play from his D that it was also bypassing our centers, and the defensive tempo is still pretty passive.

While the offense has remained putrid, at least a couple of our defensive metrics got better once Phil stopped ****ing around - they're the stingiest shots/chances team so far - but the Sabres are still allowing a robust amount of HDCA, and remain a poor xGA team. Additionally, Housley's player usage hasn't been aggressive enough to drive wins, while trying to play to a standstill.

Thanks, that makes more sense to me...

I'm taking the stance that Housley reeled things in due the injuries, lack of cohesion, and the whole 'too much too soon' for our guys to learn coming from last year's drastically different style. I'd like to think that once we get healthier and aren't icing Rochester's 4th and 5th best dmen major minutes, he'll green light the dmen again.

I also don't think the system is to blame for many of our GA, many have just been bone headed mistakes. The shorties are mostly bad pinches and bad execution of simple passes. Other examples include McCabe getting outmuscled in front, and another time where he just ignored a player right in the crease. I doubt Housley is asking his dmen to ignore the net front. These issues hopefully get sorted when Bogo comes back and McCabe slots down the lineup so he can find his game. (it really is amazing how many GA McCabe is directly responsible for )

Lastly, I do think our personnel is fine to run an attacking system. The other night against Columbus, Foligno's ugly redirect goal was actually beautiful to watch, all 5 guys attacking the zone, lots of options for the puck carrier:

The sabres were in good shape here positionally, but it didn't matter. Columbus got the puck to the net and the shear numbers in transition created the goal. Johnson and Savard were the defensmen on the ice for this one, not exactly world beaters. If those two played for the Sabres, we'd probably be complaining that they don't belong in the league.

I've said it from the beginning, but I'm not judging Housley until i see him with a healthy lineup and time for them to form some cohesion, likely another month or two.

 

[joshjull]

A bunch of that is you taking me to task for not using the proper coaching clinic vocabulary, even though that level of discussion barely exists outside of those circles, not me describing things that don't exist in hockey.

No, the issue is you bringing up ideas or describe things that simply aren't a thing or incorrectly identify something.

*Like your assertion that ROR best shifts of the season were on Sam's wing in the offensive zone. That's not a thing. Everything is F1, F2 and F3 on the forecheck and cycle. When I pointed this out you responded with, 'it was done as an oversimplication for those who need it'. No its an inaccurate description of how Ozone play works.

* You then argued Sam ended up as the 'primary Ozone puck handler' with ROR spotting up off of him in that game. That's also not a thing in hockey and a great example of you trying to merge a basketball concept with hockey analysis and getting it wrong because it. There is no role of 'primary puck handler' that's assigned when a cycle is designed, so no one can end up in that role. Nor do the other players spot up around them as if he is a point guard. Its 3 guys (F1, F2 and F3) reading and reacting off each other. Or 5 guys with the Dmen getting involved as well. But I'll stick with the forwards for now. Each forward will move through each part of the cycle as they attempt to create a defensive zone breakdown. During that if a guy has the puck longer its due to their reading of the play or what the d-coverage gave them. Its not because he is playing the non existent 'primary puck handler' role.

You were then disappointed Sam shifted back to being a winger in the neutral zone (again not a thing) and in our zone. Plus you thought ROR was the full time wing based on their Ozone play which is... well odd.


* When I described two breakouts involving Girgs/Jack/Pommer leading to goals due to breaking out the right way. You made a comment that the reason one worked was due to something I 'misdiagnosed'. That being Girgs making a 'hinge play' along the boards. I didn't misdiagnose it because that's not what hinging is in hockey. Its a term in reference dmen and how they play. It had nothing to do with Girgs and the play he made. Again, not about coaching clinic terms but about accurately describing a situation.

There are tons of other examples I could put forth on this topic.

Inaccurately describing or not understanding things isn't about 'coaching clinic' terms. Its simply being wrong.

 

[joshjull]

You've repeatedly misrepresented the zone start conversation. Regular fans were using usage to downplay more concrete metrics, and the math folks were shooting them down as a minor data point from day one.

As for Corsi, it was never presented as the only thing by the people actually regressing the numbers, just one of the best available skater evaluation tools and a huge step forward vs the NHL's public stats. That's still where we're at now with things like xG and gamescore - best available and big steps forward.

Anyway, once shot attempts became currency, layering on fresh data as it became available, like location and shot type, was common sense. Making good stats better is a part of the whole process, and it doesn't have to invalidate the work that came before it.

The metrics that inspired baseball's statistical revolution have been retired, but adopting them still meant a seismic competitive advantage in their day.

You missed my point. I'll chalk it up to me probably not explaining it well. I don't have an issue with the numbers, modeling, graphs, charts, etc. Those I like those a lot and use them to broaden my understanding of things. What I don't like is when some in the analytics community make strong assertions based on them. Assertions that can and do go beyond what the numbers can really tell us.

I agree they will move on when better models or ideas to track things come along. But boy did the fight tooth and nail to defend the old model as gospel not that long ago.

The people - like a certain Rangers fan you might know from the main boards - unflinchingly citing Corsi to define players like Ryan Suter as better stats emerge to fill in the gaps, and the people developing the stats are separate groups.

Also, the issues facing hockey quantification are less about hockey being this impossible beast, and more about valuable data being kept from statisticians. Stuff like passing and puck retrieval is staying at the league and team level unless tracked independently, which is painstaking, thankless work. We'll likely see another big step forward as they become more public.

I have no idea who the Ranger fan you're referencing is. I rarely go on the main boards I'm also well aware that random fans making arguments with terrible stats usage is one group and the analytics community is another. You seem to be not so subtly trying to portray me as a knuckle dragger yelling at my computer that MATH SUCKS!!!!

Thank you for admitting in this post and others that there are flaws and/or gaps in the info at the moment. Which is roughly what I'm saying as it pertains to then numbers. Then expanding out form there to say they don't tell as much as some like to argue they do.

 

[sabrebuild]

No, the issue is you bringing up ideas or describe things that simply aren't a thing or incorrectly identify something.

*Like your assertion that ROR best shifts of the season were on Sam's wing in the offensive zone. That's not a thing. Everything is F1, F2 and F3 on the forecheck and cycle. When I pointed this out you responded with, 'it was done as an oversimplication for those who need it'. No its an inaccurate description of how Ozone play works.

* You then argued Sam ended up as the 'primary Ozone puck handler' with ROR spotting up off of him in that game. That's also not a thing in hockey and a great example of you trying to merge a basketball concept with hockey analysis and getting it wrong because it. There is no role of 'primary puck handler' that's assigned when a cycle is designed, so no one can end up in that role. Nor do the other players spot up around them as if he is a point guard. Its 3 guys (F1, F2 and F3) reading and reacting off each other. Or 5 guys with the Dmen getting involved as well. But I'll stick with the forwards for now. Each forward will move through each part of the cycle as they attempt to create a defensive zone breakdown. During that if a guy has the puck longer its due to their reading of the play or what the d-coverage gave them. Its not because he is playing the non existent 'primary puck handler' role.

You were then disappointed Sam shifted back to being a winger in the neutral zone (again not a thing) and in our zone. Plus you thought ROR was the full time wing based on their Ozone play which is... well odd.


* When I described two breakouts involving Girgs/Jack/Pommer leading to goals due to breaking out the right way. You made a comment that the reason one worked was due to something I 'misdiagnosed'. That being Girgs making a 'hinge play' along the boards. I didn't misdiagnose it because that's not what hinging is in hockey. Its a term in reference dmen and how they play. It had nothing to do with Girgs and the play he made. Again, not about coaching clinic terms but about accurately describing a situation.

There are tons of other examples I could put forth on this topic.

Inaccurately describing or not understanding things isn't about 'coaching clinic' terms. Its simply being wrong.

You two are having a fun little debate...

But as it relates to a primary puck carrier in the ozone, for sure there is no hard bright line role, but if a line of Eichel, girgs and Kane are out, and over several shifts Eichel is not getting the puck quickly while the other two dangle around and try to make plays, heads will roll.

Maybe a better example is on a generic cycle, the two guys closest to the free puck should engage right away, but once you have control, most lines will try to shift into the best roles. So say you have a line of mcdavid maroon and strome. Mcdavid and maroon win a battle and start a cycle. At some point if given the time, maroon better get his big ass away from the puck and try to interfere all the way to the front of the net. And strome is gonna do his best to feed mcdavid the puck to make the decisive play, unless he gets a completely free chance. Mcdavid could therefore be looked at as the primary puck carrier or catalyst.

It’s obviously less focused for lines with even skill or close enough.

It could be looked at as a terminology difference, if your not nit picking.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

11-8: PHIL HOUSLEY ON WGR (12:41)

#Sabres head coach Phil Housley joins Howard and Jeremy next on WGR! Tune in:

Housley - I thought it was a pretty complete game by our group. We did it for 60 minutes. We've had some good stretches in other games, but last night was a full-60 minute game #Sabres

Housley - we were able to play in the offensive zone more because we protected our net more. When you do the right things more often, you get rewarded #Sabres

Housley - since moving up to the line with ROR and Okposo, Pouliot has been playing with confidence. That line has been very productive for us #Sabres

Housley - Okposo had a tough start, he'd be the first to admit it. He expects a lot from himself. It starts with his work, and he has to continue to work through it. He'' eventually get rewarded #Sabres

Housley - I have no problem if we win without a defenseman scoring. We just have to defend. We do have to find ways to get pucks to the net, have to continue to get more bodies in front of the net. #Sabres

Housley - Baptiste is a big body. He can bring a physical presence too. He has to use his speed and get on the forecheck. I really liked his line with Reinhart and Griffith last night #Sabres

Housley - we have to have an attack, shot mentality on the powerplay. That will set us up and get us out of the gate right away. I have total faith that this will turn a corner, the shots are coming. We have to stay with it #Sabres

Housley - I think this team has turned for the better. We still have areas to work on, but I liked our effort last night. We have to focus on what we do best and what we can control #Sabres
Housley - we have to build off our effort last night, and find some consistency in our game now #Sabres

Housley - Guhle is in a good spot right now in Rochester. He's playing a lot of minutes there. I like where he is at right now. The AHL is a very good league to develop. #Sabres

Housley - Nathan Beaulieu and Josh Gorges will join us today for their first full practice since their injuries #Sabres

Housley - Jack has been playing pretty consistently. He's an unselfish player, but we're going to try and get him focusing more on shooting the puck. He tends to agree on getting more shots on goal #Sabres

Housley - he's a proud guy, a true competitor. He wants to win, so we have to continue to reinforce our message #Sabres

 

[Snippit]

#HouseOut

 

[Moskau]

Not an NHL coach. The guy has no balls at all. He's coaching like someone who is afraid to lose his job. Just rolling out the same lines every night.

And he's being paid millions to do it.

 

[Ness]

I'm quickly souring on Housley. Then again, I'm souring on the entire Sabres organization.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

Sure do love finding out we played probably the organization's 6th best RD in the top four for almost every game.

 

[The Red Helmet]

Housley coaches like he played, soft. Seriously, bring back Ruff.

 

[ZZamboni]

I’m still fine with Housley. Less than two months into the regular season.

Yea... I see the issues. But I’ll gladly give him some leeway and time to figure out a few things.

Frustrating? Yep. Sure is.
That’s about it right now.

 

[Rasmus CacOlainen]

I’m still fine with Housley. Less than two months into the regular season.

Yea... I see the issues. But I’ll gladly give him some leeway and time to figure out a few things.

Frustrating? Yep. Sure is.
That’s about it right now.

You are turning into a minority with every week that passes by. Many of his decisions stink and he's refusing to acknowledge this by refusing to make the necrssary adjustments. Not good enough and aldo sounds like a conplete broken record - that Nolan penalty was supported by him after the game, really Phil? We will keep doing this thing where someone on the team will do something completely Pejorative Slured and you will keep saying you are fine with it and then go into generalizations with the excuses?

 

[Rasmus CacOlainen]

In another line of thinking, Phil is clearly the Dahlin Tank commander so maybe there is one good reason to keep him till the end of the season.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

In another line of thinking, Phil is clearly the Dahlin Tank commander so maybe there is one good reason to keep him till the end of the season.

Problem with that is that it will kill every long term piece's trade value without uncovering any useful long term tactics or player usage.

And then we're stuck with this dumbass organization getting a full offseason coaching pool to sign the next fraudulent "up and comer."

 

[Chainshot]

I haven't seen anything inventive, exploratory or forward thinking so far. He appears to be a traditionalist who attempts to minimize a units shortcomings vs. maximizing advantages. I haven't seen anything yet that points to someone who can push the right buttons, get good combos, or hold players to account. Yes, it's early, yet the initial movement of players and wingers around the lineup in the first weeks of the season has dried up into the same players doing the same things and to paraphrase the Duke of Wellington, they play in the same old way and they lose in the same old way.

 

[Der Jaeger]

Housley’s was able to implement a forward thinking attack system in Nashville because he had four great defenseman and was 6 deep on defense every night. Weber-Irwin would be our second best pair right now, maybe best.

GMBOT needs to go get another top 4 defender, at least, for Housley’s to make this work.

 

[Sabre Dance]

Housley’s was able to implement a forward thinking attack system in Nashville because he had four great defenseman and was 6 deep on defense every night. Weber-Irwin would be our second best pair right now, maybe best.

GMBOT needs to go get another top 4 defender, at least, for Housley’s to make this work.

Took a year even with their D. Not to mention Housley was coaching under a guy that knew what he was doing.

 

[Duddy]

I hope he finds his balls soon and starts trying new lines or else we've lost another two years before he gets fired.

There is no excuse for the complete lack of adjustments.

 

[Chainshot]

Is there a silver lining that Tocchet has done f*** all with the Coyotes? Seems like the two consensus top choices have both stunk up the place.

 

[Aladyyn]

Maybe Sutter will be open to a job after taking a break this season.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

Housley’s was able to implement a forward thinking attack system in Nashville because he had four great defenseman and was 6 deep on defense every night. Weber-Irwin would be our second best pair right now, maybe best.

GMBOT needs to go get another top 4 defender, at least, for Housley’s to make this work.

If Housley's system demands a plus group of defensemen, he literally should not have made it through his first interview.