Phil Housley discussion thread

[sabrebuild]

You can hate some of the lineup decisions while still giving Phil credit for doing a terrific job this season.

Here’s the problem when you too far there. Terrific? Really? Is it terrific to keep playing an overwhelmed Thompson? Is it terrific coaching that Berglund goes between helping a great 3/4 shutdown line to scratched to pp1, where he sucks and the pp hasn’t been successful with him there.

Is it terrific that he finally put together a shutdown line, something dumbass internet warriors have said he should have done a calendar year ago, except of course when Housley randomly scratches a member of that line to squeeze in a guy who doesn’t fit on that line?

Here’s the issue from my humble point of view. Many of you see a good start and winning and you don’t know for sure how nhl coaching works or how to see things in game at speed. So the reasonable default position out of ignorance is to assume that Housley has miraculously become a good coach after being bad last year and the team coming in last place.

But here’s the thing. This win streak has been super fun. Exciting games and winning is awesome. But from a technical point of view, they have been getting killed during most of this streak. They should have absolutely lost to Winnipeg. Huge saves against high danger situations everywhere. Blame that for whatever we want, but point blank, Tage Thompson gave the Peg 3-4 high quality chances by himself, while producing nothing. Do you come out and say that it was still terrific coaching if the results had gone bad there? I would suspect no.

And this is the general problem with taking results as gospel over process, particularly in a short run of games.

I mean for example, if we go by results, the Pens are the worst team in the conference this year and without Sidney Crosby and the Sabres still almost got boat raced by this terrible team. Great comeback, enjoy it, I know I did, but games like that and in general rallying from deficits are not signs of terrific coaching, they are signs of sloppy play and a depth of talent to come back once the other team eases up a bit. Consider this, if one of the best goal scorers in the league doesn’t miss a wide open cage with no pressure in the last 3 minutes of the game, thank you hot dog Philly, then we are not pumped about an amazing comeback, your hurting because we just gave up 5 to the worst team in the conference who played without their best player and starting goalie and we had no injuries entering the game.

Personally I’m just happy that we got lucky to win the lottery and got a free top 4 defender who allows most of this to be possible. And my favorite whipping boy Bogo staying healthy. Biggest difference over last year is regularly putting out 6 real deal nhl defenders every night.

I still will give credit for Dahlin’s usage up to this point. I think that has been managed very well. But terrific, that sir is a bridge with no foundation of any kind.

 

[pigpen65]

You cant answer a damn question, you follow up a question with a damn question.

I get it. You have no ****ing clue why Housley is a good coach. Any coach can do team bonding, I want to know what makes him better than coach Q, I want to know what is Housley's in game strategy that he is using that makes you claim he is a good coach? Is his strategy "pray for good goaltending why getting dogged for two periods".

Im done with you, you clearly are trying to bow out because you have no answers. You just feel the need to defend Housley because you like him. I get it.

I like him as a person, so far as a coach hes been trash and until you can show me why he isnt trash and why hes an upgrade over someone like Q take your L, I wont be replying back.

I think Housley is doing a good job coaching because the Sabres have a winning record at home, they have been beating the teams they should, and they have been entertaining to watch. This is the same thing i said to you even before their latest tear through top 10 teams. I think it's been proven even more correct since. Now you go. Same format. Just state what your opinion is so that it's easy to understand.

I'm going to start the post for you. Just reply and fill in the blank. "I think Housley is doing a poor job coaching because....."

 

[Sabre the Win]

I think Housley is doing a good job coaching because the Sabres have a winning record at home, they have been beating the teams they should, and they have been entertaining to watch. This is the same thing i said to you even before their latest tear through top 10 teams. I think it's been proven even more correct since. Now you go. Same format. Just state what your opinion is so that it's easy to understand.

I'm going to start the post for you. Just reply and fill in the blank. "I think Housley is doing a poor job coaching because....."

Why didnt he have them winning last year? Why did last years assistant coach throw shade at Housley mentioning he didnt know what he was doing? Did he magically figure it out over the off season or could it be he is getting lucky with team bonding in the locker room? New goalie, Dahlin factor, Eichel taking charge, Skinner playing on a level of Patrick Kane. Housley caught lightning in a bottle that any coach could catch behind this team right now.

The question is, are they playing for Housley or are the players playing for themselves because in the coach department, Housley is still bad in game. I never see him on the white board drawing up the plans on the fly, hes just a head behind the bench. The passion he showed last night was great but at some point the team is going to need to be coached and he wont be able to keep this lightning bottled.

 

[old kummelweck]

Clearly the front-runner for the Jack Adams.

 

[vcv]

No, they just have Rasmus Dahlin.

O’Reilly wasn’t a buy-in issue, it was a “playing more defensive zone starts than anyone ever to clear 1k minutes” issue. The team was still hot garbage when Phil was trying to shoehorn Sobotka in that role.

Probably a lot of it, given how many bad decisions the coaching staff has still made. But we don’t know the workflow and our reporters are bad, so it’s hard to say.

Again, you don’t need to get into the amorphous impact of leadership structures. The team’s offensive players are getting high leverage offensive minutes. The lowest upside players are generally playing defense. This is a fundamental change vs last year and the Bylsma tenure.

Replacing a bad goaltender with personal issues has been really good. Everything else is just finally playing guys in appropriate roles and depth upgrades.

We have a lot more good players. Talent added at every position but center.

Dahlin fits our team much like Matthews fit the Leafs. A great player at an important position, in the biggest area of need.

Oh yeah, I think most everyone agrees on 3 of the biggest changes that have made the team better: 1. goaltending 2. Dahlin 3. Player usage

I'm more interesting in the smaller things that have made a difference. I'm not sure those 3 things are a catalyst at all for the third period success.

 

[Zman5778]

The question is, are they playing for Housley or are the players playing for themselves because in the coach department, Housley is still bad in game. I never see him on the white board drawing up the plans on the fly, hes just a head behind the bench.

I'm not here to defend every Housley decision. His lineups going into games leaves me scratching my head and the team always seems to start slowly.

BUT -- Phil seems to know when to change lines mid-game. He's done it several times this season to great effect.

And the fact that the Sabres get stronger as the game goes on? And our 3rd periods are fantastic? Obviously Phil is doing something right there.

And the white board thing? Most NHL teams have their assistants do that.....only rarely will you see the head coaches do it.

 

[1point21Gigawatts]

I'm not here to defend every Housley decision. His lineups going into games leaves me scratching my head and the team always seems to start slowly.

BUT -- Phil seems to know when to change lines mid-game. He's done it several times this season to great effect.

And the fact that the Sabres get stronger as the game goes on? And our 3rd periods are fantastic? Obviously Phil is doing something right there.

And the white board thing? Most NHL teams have their assistants do that.....only rarely will you see the head coaches do it.

#whiteboardgate

 

[Dirty Dog]

Also being able to pinpoint questionable decisions is something every fan base can and will do. That complaint is as ancient as sports!

 

[enthusiast]

The Housley evolution remainds me of Capuano in Brooklyn. Hopefully he doesn't turn back into a pumpkin here.

 

[Abraham de Lacy]

What if Phil Housely is just a catalyst. He was the D men coach for Nashville .. was he just lucky to have those guys there.

I don't think so. There are many parts in a functioning watch.

 

[StlSwedes]

Here’s the issue from my humble point of view. Many of you see a good start and winning and you don’t know for sure how nhl coaching works or how to see things in game at speed. So the reasonable default position out of ignorance is to assume that Housley has miraculously become a good coach after being bad last year and the team coming in last place.

Woof. If I read your post correctly. Humble, and your opinion, do not belong anywhere near each other.

The way I see it, coaching is hard. Win and it is the players. Lose and it's the coach.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

Housley was "a bad coach" last year because he realized many of the players he had couldn't play the style he wanted or didn't have enough time playing with it to be effective. He dumbed it down, and played a simple game while he tinkered with line ups and so on. Posters confuse bad with experimenting or getting a feel for who you have and who's worth playing in certain situations...as if a new coach (new to the team and new as a HC) shouldn't need time, especially with a bad roster. I've coached with the exact same problem, wanting to play a style that my roster mostly couldn't handle.

New (better) players, more understanding of system by returning players, better understanding of players and usage by Housley. It all runs together for a better result...better than most of us expected at least for now. The process isn't over yet either. But man, the 12th or 13 FWs make all the difference for some.

 

[joshjull]

Oh yeah, I think most everyone agrees on 3 of the biggest changes that have made the team better: 1. goaltending 2. Dahlin 3. Player usage

I'm more interesting in the smaller things that have made a difference. I'm not sure those 3 things are a catalyst at all for the third period success.

A lot of it is the culture they’ve quickly created. I’d give Botts as much, if not more, credit for that. The players seem to really like each other as a whole. There is a tight bond where they are playing for each other. They've all said as much. That’s not something that can really be measured with a stat or put in an equation. But it can play a role in a team’s success and confidence. Particularly when it comes to not quitting in game when your down and believing you can get back into it.

You saw a glimpse of the improvements in the room when they came out of the gate 2-1 and then preceded to get lumped up in 3 of the next 4 games. Didn’t really see the beaten dog mentality we’ve seen before. It helps that we’ve added some more vets as well as young players that don’t have 3 years of getting stomped on here to the NHL roster. Hutton in particular has been great on that front. As they’ve won more since then you can see their confidence grow and build on itself.

 

[joshjull]

I wanted to give him about a month or two to see if the issue was with him or the talent/overall depth. Since I like the way he wanted the team to play. I felt it was the talent and depth that were the issues last year. So far it certainly seems like talent and depth were the issue. I still have my issues with decisions he makes (Thompson) but on balance I think he’s done well.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

Housley was "a bad coach" last year because he realized many of the players he had couldn't play the style he wanted or didn't have enough time playing with it to be effective. He dumbed it down, and played a simple game while he tinkered with line ups and so on. Posters confuse bad with experimenting or getting a feel for who you have and who's worth playing in certain situations...as if a new coach (new to the team and new as a HC) shouldn't need time, especially with a bad roster. I've coached with the exact same problem, wanting to play a style that my roster mostly couldn't handle.

New (better) players, more understanding of system by returning players, better understanding of players and usage by Housley. It all runs together for a better result...better than most of us expected at least for now. The process isn't over yet either. But man, the 12th or 13 FWs make all the difference for some.

This is a pretty revisionist history of that first season. We never really saw much in the way of varied situational usage or purposeful tinkering, and there doesn't seem to be too many lessons taken from it either.

Phil saw the role he crafted for O'Reilly tank his ES production and tried running it back with one of the worst players on the team. He still plays Ristolainen as if he were an effective defensive defenseman. He doesn't trust Evan Rodrigues even though he was the team's only reliable depth scorer last season. We're into another love affair with a low floor, low ceiling guy he perceives as "safe" in Sobotka. Etc.

And until we get some insight into what made him dead the whole faceoff specialist thing and go with a traditional 3a/3b checking line in the Malhotra/Kruger mold, it's hard not to credit the other voices into the room instead of yearly learnings.

Again, Housley's current tinkering would be fine if there was some logic behind it, but we're seeing a surprising amount of shit thrown at the wall for a team that should have 8 set lineup spots. You minimize his insistence on trying to fit Thomspon & Sobotka into the starting lineup, but the Sabres are currently 16th or worse in:

CF%
FF%
SCF%
HDCF%
xG%
PPGF/60

Pretty much purely off the combination of Sobotka's run and subbing quality for Thompson. Phil choosing between the depth chart's 12th and 13th forwards would be actually be a pretty significant improvement over his recent game plans. That inability to get stuff this basic right, and the team outperforming a gang of poor underlying metrics due to goaltending and shooting% is why it's pretty easy to remain skeptical about this team from a coaching perspective.

 

[littletonhockeycoach]

Thanksgiving analogy:

Problem is... we're growing our head coach. He didn't come fully cooked and ready for consumption. And it's not an instant process.

Good news is...... he's learning, he's developing and while there's a long way to go, he's headed in the right direction.

And he took a step forward in my book last night when he bitch slapped the refs for ignoring the trip on Bogo and resultant Pens goal. The guys on the bench hear that stuff and know that the coach is going to bat for them.

And they respond accordingly.

 

[sabrebuild]

Oh yeah, I think most everyone agrees on 3 of the biggest changes that have made the team better: 1. goaltending 2. Dahlin 3. Player usage

I'm more interesting in the smaller things that have made a difference. I'm not sure those 3 things are a catalyst at all for the third period success.

There have been definite variables that we could look at, and I don’t think Okposo is getting enough credit for producing as much as he had in a secondary role with Mitts still developing.

But I think those three things really are the biggest additions while not being the only answer in this short term. The goaltending keeps games close enough to be worth staying in the fight and makes you feel confident to take chances. The decision to make a shutdown line has been great to see and creates consistent rolling lines that stay strong thru the whole game.

But I look at Dahlin, and he just brings so much already. He fills a huge need just as a traditional top 4 guy, but then the offensive game creates such an additional layer to their attack that has been nonexistent. And I’m loving McCabe this year, which i think is great on him for getting healthy and attacking this year, but to me Dahlin’s addition has really allowed the defense to take proper shape much quicker than I expected. Risto is still eating too much, but that will ease up by next year if things continue. He just creates a swagger back there. Bogo and McCabe see an 18 year old throwing hits and taking chances and Jack’s them up. Risto gets a breather finally, not from minutes yet, but from expectations to have to be the main offensive threat.

I can’t be rational anymore, I’m completely untrustworthy regarding Dahlin. I find myself excusing the goals against except for Pearson last night, and that shimmy shake he put on Malkin and the other Pen last night was one of my favorite walk in the parks since Eichel walked through Nashville in ot a couple years ago.

 

[sabrebuild]

Clearly the front-runner for the Jack Adams.

I would a hundred percent expect him to win if they make the playoffs, let alone stay in the top 4-5 of the conference.

 

[Fezzy126]

Thanksgiving analogy:

Problem is... we're growing our head coach. He didn't come fully cooked and ready for consumption. And it's not an instant process.

Good news is...... he's learning, he's developing and while there's a long way to go, he's headed in the right direction.

And he took a step forward in my book last night when he ***** slapped the refs for ignoring the trip on Bogo and resultant Pens goal. The guys on the bench hear that stuff and know that the coach is going to bat for them.

And they respond accordingly.

My thought process when reading this post;

1. yeah, that was great that he showed some emotion, the team did seem to feed off of it. But.... why did he challenge that call? It seemed obvious that it wasn't a good challenge.
2. why not just save the challenge in case there was another actual questionable goal, or you needed it late in the game?
3. Man, it would have been great if, instead of using a coaching challenge, he went bananas on the refs and started throwing shit on the ice, and then got shown the door like in the old days

***Hijacking thread warning***

I then thought - when was the last time a coach lost it and got tossed from an nhl game? When's the last time a coach tried to climb the glass to fight another team's coach? These robots really have sapped a lot of the old time fun from the sport

 

[Royal Thunder]

My thought process when reading this post;

1. yeah, that was great that he showed some emotion, the team did seem to feed off of it. But.... why did he challenge that call? It seemed obvious that it wasn't a good challenge.
2. why not just save the challenge in case there was another actual questionable goal, or you needed it late in the game?
3. Man, it would have been great if, instead of using a coaching challenge, he went bananas on the refs and started throwing **** on the ice, and then got shown the door like in the old days

***Hijacking thread warning***

I then thought - when was the last time a coach lost it and got tossed from an nhl game? When's the last time a coach tried to climb the glass to fight another team's coach? These robots really have sapped a lot of the old time fun from the sport

Tortorella tried to get into the flames dressing room to fight Hartley a few years back

 

[littletonhockeycoach]

My thought process when reading this post;

1. yeah, that was great that he showed some emotion, the team did seem to feed off of it. But.... why did he challenge that call? It seemed obvious that it wasn't a good challenge.
2. why not just save the challenge in case there was another actual questionable goal, or you needed it late in the game?
3. Man, it would have been great if, instead of using a coaching challenge, he went bananas on the refs and started throwing **** on the ice, and then got shown the door like in the old days

***Hijacking thread warning***

I then thought - when was the last time a coach lost it and got tossed from an nhl game? When's the last time a coach tried to climb the glass to fight another team's coach? These robots really have sapped a lot of the old time fun from the sport

Yeah. In this day and age of masculine feminization, I'm afraid that's all yer gonna get.

Except for Laviolette who appears to be pissed off all of the time and has the ref's asking him first if they can or should make a call....

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[vcv]

A lot of it is the culture they’ve quickly created. I’d give Botts as much, if not more, credit for that. The players seem to really like each other as a whole. There is a tight bond where they are playing for each other. They've all said as much. That’s not something that can really be measured with a stat or put in an equation. But it can play a role in a team’s success and confidence. Particularly when it comes to not quitting in game when your down and believing you can get back into it.

You saw a glimpse of the improvements in the room when they came out of the gate 2-1 and then preceded to get lumped up in 3 of the next 4 games. Didn’t really see the beaten dog mentality we’ve seen before. It helps that we’ve added some more vets as well as young players that don’t have 3 years of getting stomped on here to the NHL roster. Hutton in particular has been great on that front. As they’ve won more since then you can see their confidence grow and build on itself.

I am always skeptical to buy into that when it comes from the players during the good times. I see it as a little bit of chicken/egg. Are they winning because they bonded and are close and trust each other? Or are they bonding, close and trusting each other because they are winning, where the winning has other catalysts?

I do think a healthy locker room can have real effects, I just don't trust that coming from the players. That's just one of those things they say automatically when it's going well.

 

[joshjull]

I am always skeptical to buy into that when it comes from the players during the good times. I see it as a little bit of chicken/egg. Are they winning because they bonded and are close and trust each other? Or are they bonding, close and trusting each other because they are winning, where the winning has other catalysts?

I do think a healthy locker room can have real effects, I just don't trust that coming from the players. That's just one of those things they say automatically when it's going well.

I stated that we first saw the cultural difference when the they ran into trouble early. When they got lumped up 3 of 4 and had a losin record again. The reactions weren’t of the whipped dog variety we had been used to in previous years. The change in mentality was present before the winning.

If you don’t believe the players then who exactly has the cred to get you to believe it.

The effort to build a closer team with a better culture was started well before camp even happened. Then was built upon at camp. All of this has been discussed by Botts, Phil and the players. The press has covered it from locker clean out to training camp as well. If you’re not familiar with this it may be due this forum’s reaction to that stuff at the time. Consistently dismissing that talk all offseason and into camp.

Now that the fruits of that effort by all involved are being realized. It’s getting dismissed with the simplistic “they’re happy because they’re winning”.

 

[vcv]

I stated that we first saw the cultural difference when the they ran into trouble early. When they got lumped up 3 of 4 and had a losin record again. The reactions weren’t of the whipped dog variety we had been used to in previous years. The change in mentality was present before the winning.

If you don’t believe the players then who exactly has the cred to get you to believe it.

The effort to build a closer team with a better culture was started well before camp even happened. Then was built upon at camp. All of this has been discussed by Botts, Phil and the players. The press has covered it from locker clean out to training camp as well. If you’re not familiar with this it may be due this forum’s reaction to that stuff at the time. Consistently dismissing that talk all offseason and into camp.

Now that the fruits of that effort by all involved are being realized. It’s getting dismissed with the simplistic “they’re happy because they’re winning”.

I get you.

I've been burned so many times by the sales pitch from the teams about "culture change", "this year feels different" and all that. I would lean towards believing it this year because the proof is in the pudding and all that. I'm just not 100% there yet. Close.