Phil Housley discussion thread

[Sabresfansince1980]

I wish more people would realize that the team was winning in spite of management and coaching decisions that are literally getting in the way of sustainablely good hockey, but this has been a fun season.

They're winning in spite of acquiring Skinner, Sheary, and Hutton? In spite of both GM and HC making a huge effort to rehab morale? Advanced stats don't, can't, and never will measure all factors of success.

 

[Sabre the Win]

He does make in game adjustments you just are minimizing them and you completely ignored the part about the active defence. Along with that the strong forecheck, and responsible forwards.

I didnt ignore active defense because that's the one thing I will give credit to him for that he is doing that I like but hes also not the only coach doing that.

 

[CatsforReinhart]

They're winning in spite of acquiring Skinner, Sheary, and Hutton. In spite of both GM and HC making a huge effort to rehab morale. Advanced stats don't, can't, and never will measure all factors of success.

This, people who watch the games either don't get the system or are jaded Murray fans. When I watch play I see an aggressive forecheck, active defense getting into the play and forwards covering, fast break out passes and 2-3 passes before entering the offensive zone.

People seem to think the players decided this system.

 

[CatsforReinhart]

I didnt ignore active defense because that's the one thing I will give credit to him for that he is doing that I like but hes also not the only coach doing that.

It is not relevant about other coaches. What is relevant is if it is working here.

 

[CrazyPsycho]

He doesn't make in game adjustments, he moved Pommer off the top line and moved the 4th line around and a few games later goes back to what was working before in game and you are all amazed.

The game a few days ago where we were down, I said 3 mins before Housley did it to move Reinhart up to where Pominville is and he did it and we came back and won does that make me a good coach too or was it a no brainer move any coach could do?

I look at how our young players have developed and am pleased. It is easily the most important thing this season.

Almost to a man they have improved as the season has progressed.

The improvement from Tage alone should be proof that at the very least, the coaching staff is doing a good enough job.

 

[hizzoner]

Sorry but I think wins and losses are important in deciding the worth of a coach. As to what he has done well? Playing Thompson when most of us wanted him to go down. Housley did not win any popularity contests with his belief that TT could play in the NHL and add something to the team. Playing Beaulieu and Nelson who had been written off. Not top 4 guys but playing fairly well and giving younger prospects a chance to learn in Rochester. Giving Ullmark just enough starts. Starting Pominville when again most posters wanted him gone--then shifting him for games and in games when he thought he should. Sticking with a pressing attack with defence joining, sometimes leading the rush. Limiting the stretch passes. Bringing a sense of calm to the team--not panicking-helping the team to believe in itself.
I did not come to bury Housley nor to praise him. But credit where credit is due. If they were below .500 I would be all over him and Botts like white on rice.

 

[CatsforReinhart]

Housley's system is working. It didn't work last year because our defense was terrible. We need good skating defenders and the team playing together at a high level for Housley's system to work.

 

[slip]

Many teams have had double digit victory streaks over the past 3-4 seasons. None of them went on to win the cup. In fact, most of those teams haven't gone on to do much of anything since those streaks:

Longest winning streaks by NHL franchises

The point is to remain vigilant as an organization and constantly look for ways to improve. The idea the coaching issue is settled in Housley's favor is way premature. The guy still has much to prove, winning streak notwithstanding.

 

[5 Minute Major]

What makes Housley such a good coach without the wins? If we weren't winning, I want to know what makes you think that hes a good coach? If we werent winning what would make you want to keep him?

What does he do specifically in your eyes that makes him a good coach? What game plan is he implementing on a day to day basis that makes him a good coach? Give me something other than the arbitrary recency bias regurgitation of "because wins".

More than enough posters have shown why he isnt a good coach. Please enlighten or LOL on out of here.

I really don’t have to give you anything ither than results.

Second year in Housley’s system.

From worst to first.

Housley, Botterill and the players all deserve praise.

 

[SabresSharks]

^^May not be able to locate the specific post, but I believe I previously posted in the early offseason that I felt Housley was worth -10 points (minus 10) over an 82-game season vs. avg NHL coach.

I can't recall if I built a spreadsheet to estimate that or did "head math". regardless, I doubt I saved the spread sheet.

I'll stick with (minus) 8-10 points, though vs. avg coach. 12-15 vs. a premier coach.

So, in your opinion, Housley costs us at least 8 points and a maximum of 25 points if we had an average or better coach. That's an enormous difference. Obvious playoff implications there.

 

[Royal Thunder]

I have also seen a lot of good in game adjustments. There have been quite a few games where we were getting shelled early, made some adjustments (in terms of our neutral zone defense, breakouts, forecheck, etc) and were the better team down the stretch (Minnesota, Pittsburgh, Winnipeg, Vancouver, at least one of the MTL games, etc).

I find advanced statistics to be very interesting but unlike baseball, the correlation to real-life success is still very much up for debate. You definitely get some fans putting way too much stock into them when the proven track record of predictability just isn't there. The Caps were dead last in at least one advanced stat last year (I believe it was high danger chance generation).

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

Advanced stats collectively amount to a proxy for results, i.e. points. Let's talk points, because that's the only metric that really matters.

For the sake of argument, let's assume the Sabres would finish the 2018/2019 season with 85 points with an average NHL coach behind the bench. (I think that's a reasonable number, given last year's result and the undeniable improvement in the team, but the number is somewhat arbitrary.) How many points would they accumulate by employing:

1. The best NHL coach imaginable, let's say prime Scotty Bowman for example, but substitute your own choice.
2. Phil Housley.
3. The worst NHL coach imaginable, let's say Willie Desjardins to use a current example, but, again, substitute your own choice.

What I'm trying to get at here is where Phil falls on the spectrum of coaching competence, and the maximum opportunity cost the Sabres incur by not employing the best coach possible.

I’m basically recalibrating my expectations for the version of Phil Housley that doesn’t use the faceoff specialist role with every game.

Looking at the in-season turnaround once that role was shelved, plus obviously the year/year improvement, you can argue that Phil was impossible to evaluate until like 15 games ago, because his player usage was cratering everything.

 

[Sabre the Win]

A lot of the stuff I am seeing is general coaching stuff, nothing that really sets him apart and makes him different from what any other coach could do in the same situation.

Develop players? Maybe hes better than most but I look around at other teams and see young guys succeeding everywhere.

This year more accountability is being held, comrodary that wasnt there in years past is there. The team is actually fun to watch because it looks like they actually like hockey and want to win.

It might be on Housley or I personally think it's on Eichel going out of his way to take players out to dinner and congratulate draft picks on being a Sabre, flying out to Minnesota to play golf with a few players and inviting Housley.

I think the new players also came in and added to the locker room.

You may think it was Housley but I dont think it really was and I think Housley is riding the coat tails of this resurging team where the players here before said enough of losing and feeling bad for ourselves.

If it really was on Housley, why didnt he get any of that last year? At least get ROR happy and more involved?

Housley's system is working. It didn't work last year because our defense was terrible. We need good skating defenders and the team playing together at a high level for Housley's system to work.

A good coach would have adjusted his system to make it work with what he had to work with. Bylsma was not a good coach but he understood this and while we hated his style he used the the type of players we had to their strengths and we finished better than Housley did last year in both of Bylsmas years.

I'm glad Housley got some things worked out but when other teams start playing to defend against his system we will see how much adversity he can actually overcome.

 

[SabresSharks]

I’m basically recalibrating my expectations for the version of Phil Housley that doesn’t use the faceoff specialist role with every game.

Looking at the in-season turnaround once that role was shelved, plus obviously the year/year improvement, you can argue that Phil was impossible to evaluate until like 15 games ago, because his player usage was cratering everything.

You've provided 2 examples of a still-green head coach discarding what didn't work. So Phil is improving, as do most people as they gain experience. Good news, right?

 

[brian_griffin]

So, in your opinion, Housley costs us at least 8 points and a maximum of 25 points if we had an average or better coach. That's an enormous difference. Obvious playoff implications there.

8 point minimum, 15 points max.
Yeah, it is huge.

You've provided 2 examples of a still-green head coach discarding what didn't work. So Phil is improving, as do most people as they gain experience. Good news, right?

The obvious rejoinder is the old saw "blind hog and an acorn".

The more relevant concern is, if the apparent changes are intentional applications of learning, and not accident, either his pace of learning is far too slow, or his reluctance to test something and learn from it is far too high. Or both.

This squad suffers a key injury, or more than a couple minor ones, we'll see far better.
The goaltending returns to NHL norms, and we'll see far better.

Let's enjoy it while we can, but I think Housley is far from Jack Capuano level, let alone Jack Adams.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

They're winning in spite of acquiring Skinner, Sheary, and Hutton? In spite of both GM and HC making a huge effort to rehab morale? Advanced stats don't, can't, and never will measure all factors of success.

Congrats, they did all that and the team is still a middle third group riding a PDO spike.

Meanwhile you keep ignoring advanced stats entirely to push this incoherent narrative.

You're pointing to Sheary, Berglund and Hutton as major acquisitions while chiding me for criticizing the team’s depth situation last year.

You talk about Phil’s system as if it takes years to comprehend, when though a glut of brand new players are driving this success.

You point to “morale” for turnarounds like Larry, Bogosian and McCabe instead of health.

You also ignore that for all the good vibes, the team didn’t take off until the coach got out of his own way in terms of player usage.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

You've provided 2 examples of a still-green head coach discarding what didn't work. So Phil is improving, as do most people as they gain experience. Good news, right?

It didn’t work all of last season and it didn’t stop him from running it back with a worse player.

I still have no idea if Phil has better instincts or if the structure of the staff has changed to take these things out of his hands.

We’re dealing with 10-15 games of him not being the worst coach in the league. Until he goes another 20 at this rate, I won’t be able to shake the feeling that another shoe is about to drop.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

Congrats, they did all that and the team is still a middle third group riding a PDO spike.

Meanwhile you keep ignoring advanced stats entirely to push this incoherent narrative.

You're pointing to Sheary, Berglund and Hutton as major acquisitions while chiding me for criticizing the team’s depth situation last year.

You talk about Phil’s system as if it takes years to comprehend, when though a glut of brand new players are driving this success.

You point to “morale” for turnarounds like Larry, Bogosian and McCabe instead of health.

You also ignore that for all the good vibes, the team didn’t take off until the coach got out of his own way in terms of player usage.

Berglund? Try Skinner. I don't entirely ignore advanced stats, they boil down to very general indicators and something that's nice to have when they are good.

All your other points are cherry picking. You keep pointing to advanced stats, while I say there's more...a lot more. Time in system, better talent, health, morale...on and on. Just because I don't list them ALL in EVERY post the way you focus on advanced stats every post doesn't mean I don't include them all as factors for improvement.

 

[SabresSharks]

The obvious rejoinder is the old saw "blind hog and an acorn".

The more relevant concern is, if the apparent changes are intentional applications of learning, and not accident, either his pace of learning is far too slow, or his reluctance to test something and learn from it is far too high. Or both.

Not using Sobotka as a faceoff specialist. Adjusting lines and pairings. These are conscious decisions, not accidents. Billy Martin pulling numbers from a hat to determine his batting order - that's an accident.

Let's acknowledge that Phil has made some correct decisions, however belatedly.

 

[Mit Yarrum]

First exciting start to a season in forever, 1st in the NHL in points, players playing up to their potential, and finally some light at the end of a long, miserable tunnel. I would fire the coach ASAP.

 

[Dingo44]

It's just amazing how it's more important for some people to feel they are right than to enjoy the Sabres winning.

I read a good quote today:

Anxiety is just conspiracy theories we invent for ourselves.

Winning is good. Good teams win. Winning is fun. Sabres are winning. Sabres are fun.

Some people want to think it's all going to come crashing down and the Sabres are going to go on some long extended losing streak and drop right out of the playoffs. But is there any evidence that is going to happen? Does it have to happen? Does anyone want that to happen (other than fans of other teams)?

Are the Sabres perfect? No. Are the Lightning perfect? No. Is Toronto perfect? No. Preds, Jets, Bruins? No, no, no.

Confidence and great goaltending can win you a lot of games and right now we have both.

No one is planning any parades next summer. You don't have to stop anyone taking days off or making deposits. Just let people enjoy it.

And Housley deserves a lot of credit and Botts a TON of credit and if you can't give him any then at least admit you don't like the guy and it has nothing to do with the product on the ice.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

Congrats, they did all that and the team is still a middle third group riding a PDO spike.

Meanwhile you keep ignoring advanced stats entirely to push this incoherent narrative.

You're pointing to Sheary, Berglund and Hutton as major acquisitions while chiding me for criticizing the team’s depth situation last year.

You talk about Phil’s system as if it takes years to comprehend, when though a glut of brand new players are driving this success.

You point to “morale” for turnarounds like Larry, Bogosian and McCabe instead of health.

You also ignore that for all the good vibes, the team didn’t take off until the coach got out of his own way in terms of player usage.

I've never coached and frankly probably don't know half of what a coach actually does in the NHL, so I don't really have strong opinions on coaches. But I would think that the fact that our roster was pretty damn crappy last year gives Phil an extremely small margin or error compared to most coaches. That opening day lineup last year was brutal. Many coaching mistakes on other teams are ostensibly covered up by having a full line-up of quality players, whereas Phil didn't have that luxury.

You REALLY have to understand what a coach does, and which decisions the coach is actually making (as opposed to the owner, GM, asst coaches) to fully be able to assess his ability. I'm not sure I trust that anyone on these boards has that insight. I mean, this is a league where Jack Adams award winners are routinely fired within a year or two of winning.

The only thing I know for sure about NHL coaching is that there is very little-to-zero consensus on any coach, as far as overall quality.

All of that said, I dislike Phil and desperately want another coach

 

[CatsforReinhart]

I guess this is biased
https://www.diebytheblade.com/2018/...rs-an-early-favorite-for-the-jack-adams-award

 

[Jim Bob]

I guess this is biased
Housley an early favorite for the Jack Adams Award

Dan Bylsma has a Jack Adams trophy.

Just saying...

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

I guess this is biased
Housley an early favorite for the Jack Adams Award

The Jack Adams award is basically the "most improved team" award most seasons. To use that as a measuring stick for greatness is laughable. You're allowed to think he's a great coach, but this is not a great argument. Coaches get fired within a year or two of winning that thing all the time.