@AuroraBorealis - I'll try to reply to all your points later, but just on goals by periods and what not -
74-55 in P1 (14th for GF, 3rd for GA)
88-80 in P2 (17th for GF, t-11th for GA)
101-83 in P3 (11th for GF, 10th for GA)
6-4 in OT
Our win percentage when leading in the first period was .828 (11th in the league) and we had 24 wins from that position (12th in the league)
We won .914 of the games where we led in the 2nd (7th), which happened 32 times (11th)
We won .227 of the games where we were behind in the 1st (t-17th) which happened 5 times (t-19th).
We won .172 of the games where we were behind in the 2nd (13th), which happened 5 times (t-11th)
I mean something to note from that is that an awful lot of hockey games are effectively decided by who's leading at the end of the 1st. Florida are the only team who were above .5 for games won when trailing at the end of the 1st and .3 for games won when trailing at the end of the 2nd. You don't want to get behind, and it looks like Sully was preaching a locked in turn up early approach given how hard it was to score against us in the 1st period.
So yeah we spent more time leading games than trailing in games - top 10 for both - and maybe that plays into it. But that shouldn't be unusual territory. There is meat on the bone to be better at getting back into games.
And I think if we want to talk about how our speed and system are no longer as dominant as they were, comparing our fairly mild 2nd period performance with the way we'd crush teams on the long change in 16-17 is a fairly good indicator of what we already knew.