News Article: Our sad offense in numbers.

[Sabre Dance]

We could be playing raw young talent into the top 9, especially when form and gamescript dictate. We're not.

We could be involving the defense more in transition, especially Risto/McCabe. We're not. Not even those obvious, straight line activations that Ruff loved.

We could be leveraging to forechecking ability of our forwards to pressure the puck and generate possession far away from our own end, especially combined with a more active defense. We're not.

All examples of "opening the system up" without turning the clock back to 2007.

I saw Ristolainen and McCabe down behind the goalie in the offensive zone at times last game. It made zero difference.

 

[Jame]

The flaw in your logic is you assume playing differently won't lead to worse results. ("But you won't know if you never try!!!!!" Nah, I see this roster and know that won't work, but thanks.)

Or your logic is flawed for the same reason... you assume playing the way we are playing is leading to the best possible result. It's not. And your game day rhetoric reveals that you inherently know this .

We got 2 of the last 10 points, 4 of the last 12, 6 of the last 16. You keep talking about how close we are to playing 500... we are not, we are trending in the wrong direction. And your answer is to keep playing that game.

 

[Sabre Dance]

Or your logic is flawed for the same reason... you assume playing the way we are playing is leading to the best possible result. It's not. And your game day rhetoric reveals that you inherently know this .

We got 2 of the last 10 points, 4 of the last 12, 6 of the last 16. You keep talking about how close we are to playing 500... we are not, we are trending in the wrong direction. And your answer is to keep playing that game.

Right now we don't have the players to open it up. But put Eichel, O'Reilly, Kane, Bogosian, and Kulikov all in the lineup and that changes.

I just don't see the point of constant debate about coaching until at least O'Reilly and the D are back. Most would rate our defense near the bottom when healthy, I know you do.

 

[Jame]

Right now we don't have the players to open it up.

We don't have the players to win 1-0 games either. What are you worried about, losing? We got 2 out of the last 10 points.

The team should be playing the way they intend to play. That's the scary part. When all the talent returns, we'll be playing the same ineffective game we were playing in game 1.

I just don't see the point of constant debate about coaching until at least O'Reilly and the D are back. Most would rate our defense near the bottom when healthy, I know you do.

For some us, coaching/scheme is kind of important.

 

[Sabre Dance]

We don't have the players to win 1-0 games either. What are you worried about, losing? We got 2 out of the last 10 points.

The team should be playing the way they intend to play. That's the scary part. When all the talent returns, we'll be playing the same ineffective game we were playing in game 1.




For some us, coaching/scheme is kind of important.

I do agree with you there. Byslma probably doesn't open it up when healthy either. Who knows though, maybe he will.

I think coaching matters I just don't think it's the difference between a good team and a bad team, or a high scoring team and a low scoring team.

Trust me, I would love to find out and be proven wrong.

 

[Zip15]

What's worse than losing?
No matter how its sliced or diced the net effect is the same, a loss.
Aftrt all, when a team is winning they don't change formulas.

Are we having any level of success with the current tactics?

We've been leading or tied in the 3rd period in three of the last four games and we've ended up with 2 of 8 points. The lack of execution - i.e., scoring goals on our scoring chances, which, in most games, we are generating more of than our opponents - is the problem.

The "current tactics" aren't what made Reinhart fail to beat a prone Allen on the tic-tac-toe play, or McCabe whiffing with a wide-open net, or Kane screwing up innumerable times, or the posts and crossbars. An average group of finishers would have scored three goals on Allen in the first period alone the other night. Finishing is the problem.

Or your logic is flawed for the same reason... you assume playing the way we are playing is leading to the best possible result. It's not. And your game day rhetoric reveals that you inherently know this .

Playing low-event, low-scoring games is the best way for this team to generate points. I cannot fathom how you look at this lineup and say to yourself "open it up, Danny!" We're still outchancing our opponents - our "tactics" and "system" isn't why we're losing. We're losing because we do less with our greater number of chances than our opponents, and because four of the most important 8 or 9 players on this team are in street clothes right now.

You're wrong, and I think we're at impasse here.

We got 2 of the last 10 points, 4 of the last 12, 6 of the last 16. You keep talking about how close we are to playing 500... we are not, we are trending in the wrong direction. And your answer is to keep playing that game.

We were leading or tied heading into the 3rd period in three of the last four games and got 2 of 8 points. We lost the home games to NJ and OTT because we missed a metric ****-ton of opportunities to open up two-goal leads in those games. Playing the way you want to play - wide-open with a lineup missing its two best offensive players and two of its top-4 defenseman - will get us blown off the ice, IMO.

 

[Jame]

We've been leading or tied in the 3rd period in three of the last four games and we've ended up with 2 of 8 points. The lack of execution - i.e., scoring goals on our scoring chances, which, in most games, we are generating more of than our opponents - is the problem.

The "current tactics" aren't what made Reinhart fail to beat a prone Allen on the tic-tac-toe play, or McCabe whiffing with a wide-open net, or Kane screwing up innumerable times, or the posts and crossbars. An average group of finishers would have scored three goals on Allen in the first period alone the other night. Finishing is the problem.



Playing low-event, low-scoring games is the best way for this team to generate points. I cannot fathom how you look at this lineup and say to yourself "open it up, Danny!" We're still outchancing our opponents - our "tactics" and "system" isn't why we're losing. We're losing because we do less with our greater number of chances than our opponents, and because four of the most important 8 or 9 players on this team are in street clothes right now.

You're wrong, and I think we're at impasse here.



We were leading or tied heading into the 3rd period in three of the last four games and got 2 of 8 points. We lost the home games to NJ and OTT because we missed a metric ****-ton of opportunities to open up two-goal leads in those games. Playing the way you want to play - wide-open with a lineup missing its two best offensive players and two of its top-4 defenseman - will get us blown off the ice, IMO.

this "wide open" straw man can end...

We lose games because we play not to lose.

 

[Sabre Dance]

this "wide open" straw man can end...

We lose games because we play not to lose.

Or we lose because we aren't good enough. Some people are acting like Bylsma took over a playoff team and is losing. He took over a losing team and is losing.

This is where the divide is I believe. Coaches with great systems have finished 30th because the talent wasnt there.

 

[Icicle]

the center is behind the redline when we're in the o-zone and we don't have complete control of the puck

we will never win a hockey game like this. there's 0 talent to counter-attack mistakes.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

Has chance data evolved to being more nuanced than corsi?

Because corsi has shown the same amount of predictive power and is better in smaller sample sizes due to volume. And our chance volume is so low that it needs more games to normalize.

 

[AustonsNostrils]

this "wide open" straw man can end...

We lose games because we play not to lose.

We lose games because we're out-talented right now. With a healthy full roster we win our share of games even with Bylsma's low risk system.

If your point is we're damned if we do damned if we don't so we should play the system that makes us a better team when we do have a healthy roster then I agree.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

Buffalo won't win enough playoff games to get to a SC under this system. Not even with a healthy roster, not with another top four Dman or scoring W. Bylsma proved this in Pitt already. What else matters?

 

[sabrebuild]

We were leading or tied heading into the 3rd period in three of the last four games and got 2 of 8 points. We lost the home games to NJ and OTT because we missed a metric ****-ton of opportunities to open up two-goal leads in those games. Playing the way you want to play - wide-open with a lineup missing its two best offensive players and two of its top-4 defenseman - will get us blown off the ice, IMO.

So two things, one there is no evidence to suggest this isn't the way bylsma wants this team to play when fully healthy. Considering this was how they played last year, started this year before most of the injuries and play very similar to how he ran pittsburgh, it's difficult to believe bylsma adjusted all of his plans for the season just to handle an unexpected set of injuries.

Second, all teams miss chances, great chances. I'm not sure if someone has stats on who converts at a higher rate, but I think its fair to say their inability to finish is more likely sample size than indicator of talent.

But my thought for what you presented, is it possible that coaching with a lead or tie in the third, has bylsma turtling? Visually it looks to me in a lot of these games they carry play aggressively until they get a lead and then the reins get super tight.

I don't think they should play wide open. But they should play more aggressively and they have the defensive minded forwards to do so. Most of their forwards are already inclined to responsible play, so you don't need to hammer them into staying super conservative.

With the current defensive injuries, playing tight d is not feasible anyway. I mean you mention gorges all the time, and i agree he is terrible. But do you really want him in the d zone regularly as the plan. We don't have the defensive horses to sit back, because your top 2 pairs have a trainwreck on each, and your 3rd is putrid. Now that situation is exacerbated by the more recent d injuries, but at this point if I'm rolling the dice on a bad situation, I'd rather trust the strength of the team than the biggest liability.

 

[CatsforReinhart]

I hope Murray stands by his statement that injuries are not an excuse.

What is Murray's excuse?

 

[CatsforReinhart]

Another coach isn't going to put this team on another level. This team has no heart.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

Another coach isn't going to put this team on another level. This team has no heart.

That's what people thought about Pitt last season.

 

[CatsforReinhart]

That's what people thought about Pitt last season.

I hope you are not comparing us to Pittsburgh

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

I hope you are not comparing us to Pittsburgh

Yeah I am. If you choose to mistake that as claiming the Sabres are talented enough to win the SC then that's entirely your fault.

 

[CatsforReinhart]

Yeah I am. If you choose to mistake that as claiming the Sabres are talented enough to win the SC then that's entirely your fault.

So Eichel is our Crosby and ROR is our Malkin and Moulson is our Kassel?

So you want to compare is to the Stanley cup winner but not them winning the cup...

 

[ZZamboni]

So Eichel is our Crosby and ROR is our Malkin and Moulson is our Kassel?

So you want to compare is to the Stanley cup winner but not them winning the cup...

I get what he's talking about. You're being purposely obtuse. Why?

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

So Eichel is our Crosby and ROR is our Malkin and Moulson is our Kassel?

So you want to compare is to the Stanley cup winner but not them winning the cup...

Someone might spell it out to you in crayon.

 

[Yatzhee]

Oh look, another scoring explosion game

 

[Moskau]

Vancouver who was shutout like 7 games in a row has more goals than us. Now officially last in the league in scoring. We make the 14-15 Arizona team that had 2 NHL players for the last 30 games of the season look good offensively. Even with injuries we have twice as much talent as that team had and people still want to argue the system isn't holding players back. Amazing.

 

[EichHart]

The Leafs have scored 25 more goals than we have already this season. They also have 5 more pts than us. Pretty sad season.

 

[jrb2590]

And the leafs 18 goals in their last 3 home games....things are not looking good here but what else is new. Let's keep bylsma I'm sure the dump and chase strategy will payoff in due time. Just kill me now