Rolston where is the structure/clearly defined roles? and other confusing things

jBuds

pretty damn valuable
Sponsor
Apr 9, 2005
30,885
1,482
Richmond, VA
Only speaking for myself, but when I make derisive comments containing Porter's name, they're aimed at Rolston, not Kevin. I like Porter quite a bit. He does his job, he plays hard, and he's better than a guy like Matt Ellis, who I also appreciated for what he is. It's too bad he's not even a tad better with the puck on his stick (shooting, handling, passing), because he'd be a much better fit for how he's used if he were. Girgensons-Flynn have enough offensive ability that for a team as snakebitten as this one, it's frustrating to see a guy who degrades rather than upgrades the ability of the line to finish. I hope that coach backs off on using McCormick and Scott outside of 'the right' games, so that Larsson and Porter can both be in the line-up, then Larsson can eventually prove to coach that he's a better fit for elevated duties than Porter is.

This is exactly where I stand. My negative commentary with Porter included in context revolves more around the staff, and the lack of responsibility properly executed from most other players.

You're a ****** team when Kevin Porter is playing about as well or better than 11-13 other forwards...
 

struckbyaparkedcar

Guilty of Being Right
Mar 1, 2008
18,243
1,847
Upstate NY
1) how do you operate a possession system with 2? maybe? players with puck possession skills
By sending more than one player into the offensive zone to retrieve the puck at a time? There's no pressure on the opposing breakout through 40% of the ice.

Last night, Ennis stopped at the top of the crease while Foligno, also in the offensive zone, retreated to the blueline while two Bolts dropped back to bail out the puck carrier behind the net. Other teams are sending Ennis immediately below the goal line to push the play towards a Foligno hovering around the slot.

2) who? Foligno and maybe... Girgensons?
Porter, Flynn, Larsson, Kaleta. The team has guys who can be the first men in a pressure system (Ott, despite his terrible corsi last year) and guys like Vanek and Ennis, who can create off of turnovers created by this pressure. The problem is, one guy is expected to come in, retrieve the puck with no systematic help, possess it long enough for the rest of the team to set up, then make the correct play to the open man.

Rolston says he doesn't want to turn games into track meets, but how fast can you run with somebody nipping at your heels the entire race? And this team is so starved for chances, everybody tries to do too much the few times per game the stars align and somebody on the other team does something dumb with the puck on their own.

3) best defensive forwards on the team; Porter, Kaleta, Flynn, Girgensons? so you make that the defensive unit and play it against teams top lines... o wait thats happening and people are complaining about Porter's ice time
Ott's the best defensive forward on the team from a goal prevention standpoint, so it's kind of impossible to have a checking line with him not on it. Rolston is also dividing "scoring minutes" between three centers for half of most games, so the top six is averaging 35% OSZ while Grigorenko does nothing.

4) I'm pretty sure you are talking about Larsson, so let me lay this hypothetical on you.


Larsson plays all of Porter's minutes every game this season
would you then;
- play Hodgson's line, Grigorenko/Ennis's line, or Larsson's line against Crosby, Stamkos, Datsyuk
Why would you play Larsson over Porter? I've repeatedly advocated a Porter-Larsson 3A/3B bottom six center setup (Porter getting the higher QoC, Larsson getting shafted zone-start wise to start) with Grigorenko starting out between Ennis and Stafford. This removes a ton of defensive responsibility from the top six, and also stops the "Grigorenko playing the easiest matchups on the team and doing nothing vs them" problem, because if he's out there, Ennis and Stafford are too, and they have beat that matchup so long as they've gotten it consistently.

this roster is not the place for these kids right now, and even that goes back to Darcy not pursuing any random crap UFAs to prevent them from being here, Girgensons and Larsson should be playing 20+ a night in all situations in Rochester, not experience this disaster in Buffalo, this is why I wanted pending UFA's wearing letters, cause this is going to be a miserable season and I didn't want anyone important to be involved with any more of it than necessary, Darcy is gonna draft all the right players and then destroy them with his inability to manage a hockey team
Histrionics.

To start camp:
Foligno-Hodgson-Vanek
Ott-Ennis-Stafford
Leino-Porter-Tropp
Scott-McCormick-Kaleta
Flynn

Not a single waiver-exempt forward had to start the season here. This roster would be a decent place to develop youth if Rolston would stop *****footing around with Grigs.
 

Robert2244

Registered User
Sep 14, 2009
13
0
I don't know if anyone understands but we don't have a good team. Rolston doesn't have much to work with. He can juggle the lines all he wants, and do what all of you "experts" think would be best, but bottom line is, we don't have the talent or enough guys willing to battle to win a lot of games. Grigorenko is very talented but he's lazy and reaches for the puck a lot instead of moving his feet. Doesn't matter if they'r rookies or vets, if you don't work hard and battle hard, then you shouldn't be rewarded with more ice time. Rolston has made it clear in interviews that he wants to see Grigorenko play harder, day in and day out. Porter has been getting killed in these threads because he's one of the guys that is actually willing to work hard and do whatever it takes? He is fighting for a spot and if some of these other guys followed, we might actually have something. Our so called "top end guys" don't show up. Ennis is extremely soft and rarely shows up. What has Stafford done? Besides this past game, I haven't been impressed with Hodgson either. I'm way more frustrated with those guys. Porter has been starting on the 4th line. Doesn't complain or get down about it. He works his ass off and if some of these other guys aren't willing to put in the effort or battle, then he has been rewarded with more ice time. To me, thats how it should be. Its not his fault. Give the kid a break
 

Myllz

RELEASE THE KRAKEN
Jan 16, 2006
19,621
1,424
Vegas
I don't know if anyone understands but we don't have a good team. Rolston doesn't have much to work with. He can juggle the lines all he wants, and do what all of you "experts" think would be best, but bottom line is, we don't have the talent or enough guys willing to battle to win a lot of games. Grigorenko is very talented but he's lazy and reaches for the puck a lot instead of moving his feet. Doesn't matter if they'r rookies or vets, if you don't work hard and battle hard, then you shouldn't be rewarded with more ice time. Rolston has made it clear in interviews that he wants to see Grigorenko play harder, day in and day out. Porter has been getting killed in these threads because he's one of the guys that is actually willing to work hard and do whatever it takes? He is fighting for a spot and if some of these other guys followed, we might actually have something. Our so called "top end guys" don't show up. Ennis is extremely soft and rarely shows up. What has Stafford done? Besides this past game, I haven't been impressed with Hodgson either. I'm way more frustrated with those guys. Porter has been starting on the 4th line. Doesn't complain or get down about it. He works his ass off and if some of these other guys aren't willing to put in the effort or battle, then he has been rewarded with more ice time. To me, thats how it should be. Its not his fault. Give the kid a break

We appreciate the update on that.
 

Push Dr Tracksuit

Gerstmann 3:16
Jun 9, 2012
13,238
3,316
By sending more than one player into the offensive zone to retrieve the puck at a time? There's no pressure on the opposing breakout through 40% of the ice.

Last night, Ennis stopped at the top of the crease while Foligno, also in the offensive zone, retreated to the blueline while two Bolts dropped back to bail out the puck carrier behind the net. Other teams are sending Ennis immediately below the goal line to push the play towards a Foligno hovering around the slot.


Porter, Flynn, Larsson, Kaleta. The team has guys who can be the first men in a pressure system (Ott, despite his terrible corsi last year) and guys like Vanek and Ennis, who can create off of turnovers created by this pressure. The problem is, one guy is expected to come in, retrieve the puck with no systematic help, possess it long enough for the rest of the team to set up, then make the correct play to the open man.

Rolston says he doesn't want to turn games into track meets, but how fast can you run with somebody nipping at your heels the entire race? And this team is so starved for chances, everybody tries to do too much the few times per game the stars align and somebody on the other team does something dumb with the puck on their own.


Ott's the best defensive forward on the team from a goal prevention standpoint, so it's kind of impossible to have a checking line with him not on it. Rolston is also dividing "scoring minutes" between three centers for half of most games, so the top six is averaging 35% OSZ while Grigorenko does nothing.


Why would you play Larsson over Porter? I've repeatedly advocated a Porter-Larsson 3A/3B bottom six center setup (Porter getting the higher QoC, Larsson getting shafted zone-start wise to start) with Grigorenko starting out between Ennis and Stafford. This removes a ton of defensive responsibility from the top six, and also stops the "Grigorenko playing the easiest matchups on the team and doing nothing vs them" problem, because if he's out there, Ennis and Stafford are too, and they have beat that matchup so long as they've gotten it consistently.


Histrionics.

To start camp:
Foligno-Hodgson-Vanek
Ott-Ennis-Stafford
Leino-Porter-Tropp
Scott-McCormick-Kaleta
Flynn

Not a single waiver-exempt forward had to start the season here. This roster would be a decent place to develop youth if Rolston would stop *****footing around with Grigs.

i think you are confusing what I mean by these players cant play possession hockey, so when you send them in to forecheck and try to gain possession they fail at it, regardless of what system you are playing

again you are missing the point of how you play possession hockey, you gain possession AND THEN you need to have players who can pull off sustained pressure. However, they cant handle the puck well enough, they cant pass well enough and they make bad decisions when they carry it so they can never pull off sustained pressure regardless of if they gain possession in the zone. So you could send 5 guys they cant play with the puck well enough to cycle it, please reference the first 3 games PP that couldnt possess the puck on a 5 on 3. The one line that can sustain pressure has Flynn and Porter on it. When you forecheck hard and fail you give up odd man rushes, please see all of Ruff's time here last season. To counter the huge number of odd man rushes a game this team was giving up (because they cant forecheck) Rolston reigned them in and played defense first

The Ott point is whatever, Ott is probably one of the better defensive players on this team and that's just an example of how little defensive talent is on this roster.

the Larsson/Porter 3a/3b is rediculous, you only use that line against high QoC opponents because we dont have another line that can do it, so Larsson never sees the ice and ends up next to John Scott again

you dont want Grigorenko here and you are blaming Rolston so you dont quite understand that either
 

littletonhockeycoach

NOT the Hanson Bros.....
Sponsor
Oct 26, 2008
15,981
11,419
Littleton, Co
And for ****'s sake, if miller starts to hinder the full charge of the tank, ill move him out myself.

Joe Sacco will finish the season as interim head coach. Then a LEGITIMATE SEARCH, WITH REAL CANDIDATES, would occur? And interviews and due diligence and the like? Waaaaooooowwwww! Management !

Be careful what you wish for....... Darcy's likely impressed with Sacco as it is and it would be so easy to hand over the reigns to him.

(Plse God, anything but that!!:cry:)

Seriously, I had no problem with Ron Ron replacing Ruff last season. And I was fairly impressed with his handling of the players and the adjustments he made to Buffalo's game (even though it cost us a couple of positions draft wise....).

But the line/position/roster shuffling that's now occurring is indicative IMHO of a coaching staff that doesn't have the confidence in, patience with, or the conviction of its decisionmaking strategy, tactics and personnel management.

I hate to harp on this but the Sabres rotating door a la line assignments 3 games into the season looks alot like the past couple of seasons in Colorado. It's a major concern to me because it set the local team here back a couple of years.

And led the premature exit (and almost exit) of several quality players.
 

littletonhockeycoach

NOT the Hanson Bros.....
Sponsor
Oct 26, 2008
15,981
11,419
Littleton, Co
Spot. On. Preference. Not structure.

And it comes into play most heavily along the point walls in the offensive zone. All other areas - ESPECIALLY d zone coverage - side preference is overblown. Without a doubt.

Coaches think alike.

Yep.... that's been my experience as a lefty playing RD most of his life.

I work handedness in as per situations. Like face off draws, shooting off the wing back position or curling along the circle from the sideboards hash-mark off of draws.

These guys aren't peewees who need to be on their forehands in order to keep the puck in at the blue line or start the rush breakout in their own zone.
 

jc17

Registered User
Jun 14, 2013
11,031
7,760
What would people think of lines:
vanek Larsson Flynn
Girgensons Hodgson Foligno
Ennis Grigorenko Ott
Stafford Porter kaleta

I know they are a little weird, but I think they would be an improvement.
1st line: Vanek and Hodgson is a defensive liability. Even though the first isn't made of all stars, Flynn and Larsson can play 2 ways and also seem to be decent at getting plays moving up ice and feeding the puck. They could set Vanek up.

2nd: Really solid line. Foligno and Girgs help Hodgson defensively and contain the puck on the wall, Hodgson provides offense.

3rd: Ennis and Grigorenko can get creative, while Ott can provide the size and physicality.

4th: Stafford and Porter I think could do well together and could be defensive with kaleta and still provide offense (at least more than scott and mccormick)
 

Dubi Doo

Registered User
Aug 27, 2008
19,358
12,848
Unfortunately we have an extremely young and fresh team that's battered and bruised at the moment. As a poster mentioned, there is going to be some trial and error going on. Also, structure and defined roles comes with time. Especially if we're talking about rookies and young players. Some of the younger guys aren't ready for certain roles. Then the issue becomes, are you hurting their confidence by putting them in roles they may not be ready for? 07-08 Sabres is a great example of players being put in roles they weren't ready for. Myers as well. It's a fine line to walk.

My biggest beef is his treatment with Larsson. I actually think Scott can play a regular 4th line shift, but Larsson needs to be in there. He's not getting comfortable with the pro game watching from the press box...
 

Paxon

202* Stanley Cup Champions
Jul 13, 2003
29,004
5,174
Rochester, NY
What would people think of lines:
vanek Larsson Flynn
Girgensons Hodgson Foligno
Ennis Grigorenko Ott
Stafford Porter kaleta

I know they are a little weird, but I think they would be an improvement.
1st line: Vanek and Hodgson is a defensive liability. Even though the first isn't made of all stars, Flynn and Larsson can play 2 ways and also seem to be decent at getting plays moving up ice and feeding the puck. They could set Vanek up.

2nd: Really solid line. Foligno and Girgs help Hodgson defensively and contain the puck on the wall, Hodgson provides offense.

3rd: Ennis and Grigorenko can get creative, while Ott can provide the size and physicality.

4th: Stafford and Porter I think could do well together and could be defensive with kaleta and still provide offense (at least more than scott and mccormick)

I like the boldness. Wouldn't mind seeing it in a game at all.
 

Lloydchristmas138

Registered User
Aug 3, 2010
522
386
We really should have looked at guys like Brunner and Morrow to spare us a rook or two from our lineup.. I think this should be the year Stafford gets dealt at the deadline for some different assets. Right now he's nothing more than a less than ideal 3rd liner, it's as if he's lost all confidence or offensive ability. He's trying but his stick is where offense goes to die. Who knows maybe a change of scenery could help a little. Hopefully Armia becomes good Stafford.

Such a shame Tropp's hurt. Adding Foligno, Larsson, and Tropp to the top 9 could jumpstart our offense. I'm also not crazy about the Hodgson-Vanek duo anymore, Pommers was Vanek's main man, and they're slow and a defensive liability. I know everyone hates Ennis at center but for now it is what it is, Foligno can take draws. When a little healthier I'd like to see:

Foligno-Ennis-Vanek
Grigs-Hodgson-Tropp
Ott-Larsson-Stafford
Flynn-Porter-Kaleta(or a more banger line)
 

SamuraiArt

Balso Par Big John S
Sep 17, 2013
947
0
Buffalo
I think this line-up could be a reasonable compromise between what we've seen already from Rolston and a good mix of grit/talent. I don't like seeing Larsson on the 4th but it seems like that's where RR will have him for the next little while. If/when Grigorenko shows signs of cracking, we can switch him and Larsson. Stafford has been gifted a first line position but we have to remember that the only way he's geting traded is if he starts producing.

Vanek-Hodgson-Stafford
Ennis-Grigorenko-Foligno
Girgensons-Porter-Ott
Kaleta -Larsson-Flynn
 

jBuds

pretty damn valuable
Sponsor
Apr 9, 2005
30,885
1,482
Richmond, VA
Be careful what you wish for....... Darcy's likely impressed with Sacco as it is and it would be so easy to hand over the reigns to him.

(Plse God, anything but that!!:cry:)

Seriously, I had no problem with Ron Ron replacing Ruff last season. And I was fairly impressed with his handling of the players and the adjustments he made to Buffalo's game (even though it cost us a couple of positions draft wise....).

But the line/position/roster shuffling that's now occurring is indicative IMHO of a coaching staff that doesn't have the confidence in, patience with, or the conviction of its decisionmaking strategy, tactics and personnel management.

I hate to harp on this but the Sabres rotating door a la line assignments 3 games into the season looks alot like the past couple of seasons in Colorado. It's a major concern to me because it set the local team here back a couple of years.

And led the premature exit (and almost exit) of several quality players.
Sacco was despised. More maligned by his own fanbase at the end of his tenure than any coach in recent memory.


Yep.... that's been my experience as a lefty playing RD most of his life.

I work handedness in as per situations. Like face off draws, shooting off the wing back position or curling along the circle from the sideboards hash-mark off of draws.

These guys aren't peewees who need to be on their forehands in order to keep the puck in at the blue line or start the rush breakout in their own zone.

Agreed. I make my defensemen line up on their off side on all offensive zone Faceoffs.

I like having the shooting lanes in the middle of the ice.
 

Corto

Faceless Man
Sep 28, 2005
15,994
943
Braavos
Add me to the bunch that doesn't believe Rolston is a high-quality/NHL tier head coach.

I was hoping to see a team that gave the young guys EVERY chance to succeed... Losing while learning and trying your best is acceptable.
Losing AND stifling the development of your projected core players is just silly. And boring.

Also, guys like Stafford, Ennis etc., who (IMO) are never going to amount to top-6 players on contending teams seem to have the trust and belief of Rolston, while the guys who actually have the potential to be those players.... Don't.
 

SabresBillsBuffalo

Registered User
May 4, 2010
5,551
22
Buffalo
Add me to the bunch that doesn't believe Rolston is a high-quality/NHL tier head coach.

I was hoping to see a team that gave the young guys EVERY chance to succeed... Losing while learning and trying your best is acceptable.
Losing AND stifling the development of your projected core players is just silly. And boring.

Also, guys like Stafford, Ennis etc., who (IMO) are never going to amount to top-6 players on contending teams seem to have the trust and belief of Rolston, while the guys who actually have the potential to be those players.... Don't.
Ennis can be, stafford no.
 

old kummelweck

Registered User
Nov 10, 2003
25,221
5,326
This team still looks totally disorganized in their defensive zone - long after letting Ruff go. Is that a personnel issue or a coaching issue? Maybe Ristolainen and Pysak are a start to fixing that? I'm not sure the veterans are capable of offering the type of D we need, especially Myers.

What about this whole notion this was going to be a puck control team? You need players with the confidence and ability to do that. Right now, most of these kids unload the puck as soon as they touch it, or chip it into space where they lose the battle or race to puck. Puck control teams don't dump and chase.

Maybe so many years of being a rush team has caused a hangover?
 

French Connection

Registered User
Aug 16, 2007
739
0
This team still looks totally disorganized in their defensive zone - long after letting Ruff go. Is that a personnel issue or a coaching issue? Maybe Ristolainen and Pysak are a start to fixing that? I'm not sure the veterans are capable of offering the type of D we need, especially Myers.

What about this whole notion this was going to be a puck control team? You need players with the confidence and ability to do that. Right now, most of these kids unload the puck as soon as they touch it, or chip it into space where they lose the battle or race to puck. Puck control teams don't dump and chase.

Maybe so many years of being a rush team has caused a hangover?


A good coach has a system and a very good coach adjusts his system to the players he has to work with. "Off the Glass" Ron Ron will not or is incapable in adjusting his coaching philosophy to his players or as the game dictates.

Terrible coach and no way NHL ready.
 

wunderpanda

Registered User
Apr 9, 2012
5,528
522
A good coach has a system and a very good coach adjusts his system to the players he has to work with. "Off the Glass" Ron Ron will not or is incapable in adjusting his coaching philosophy to his players or as the game dictates.

Terrible coach and no way NHL ready.


I want to agree, but it's still too soon to judge. Lets wait and see if he adapts by the Olympic break. Yes, I'm unrealistic in my optimism. :laugh:
 

struckbyaparkedcar

Guilty of Being Right
Mar 1, 2008
18,243
1,847
Upstate NY
i think you are confusing what I mean by these players cant play possession hockey, so when you send them in to forecheck and try to gain possession they fail at it, regardless of what system you are playing
Based on? They haven't played uptempo hockey in any fashion since the spring of 2011. I don't think they can be a "good" possession team, I think they can be solidly in the middle third (like they were between 2009 and 2011) with the right system, and that combined with the depth on the blueline and above average goaltending that would be enough. At least, it would be far more entertaining than the current strategy.

again you are missing the point of how you play possession hockey, you gain possession AND THEN you need to have players who can pull off sustained pressure. However, they cant handle the puck well enough, they cant pass well enough and they make bad decisions when they carry it so they can never pull off sustained pressure regardless of if they gain possession in the zone.
And they gain fewer possessions in the zone (meaning they have to do more of the things that they aren't good at) because of where Rolston's system pressures the puck hardest.

So you could send 5 guys they cant play with the puck well enough to cycle it, please reference the first 3 games PP that couldnt possess the puck on a 5 on 3. The one line that can sustain pressure has Flynn and Porter on it. When you forecheck hard and fail you give up odd man rushes, please see all of Ruff's time here last season. To counter the huge number of odd man rushes a game this team was giving up (because they cant forecheck) Rolston reigned them in and played defense first
Ruff didn't forecheck hard, he "transitioned" hard, which he learned from Babcock back when Babs had the best defenseman of a generation (he now plays a simpler, more straightforward down-low forechecking and cycle system). Trap at your blueline, stretch pass and jump the D into the play on the rush and once the cycle is established. There's your recipe for odd-man situations (the D being out of position), not multiple forecheckers heading blow the goal line.

The Ott point is whatever, Ott is probably one of the better defensive players on this team and that's just an example of how little defensive talent is on this roster.
The "Ott point" is that Rolston hasn't put together an actual checking line.

the Larsson/Porter 3a/3b is rediculous, you only use that line against high QoC opponents because we dont have another line that can do it, so Larsson never sees the ice and ends up next to John Scott again
What? Larsson sees the ice through a regular fourth line shift (especially when Scott isn't dressed) and taking over for Grigorenko when protecting leads or when Rolston isn't happy with Grigs' compete level. By not having him in the lineup at all, Rolston loses the opportunity to adjust by putting a reliable, straight-ahead pivot in the top 9 and has to resort entirely to Hodgson-Ennis-Porter regardless of how those players are actually playing. This is bad. This isn't rocket surgery.

you dont want Grigorenko here and you are blaming Rolston so you dont quite understand that either
And you're putting words in my mouth completely unrelated to the subtleties of the team at the moment, so I don't think you understand that much either. Grigorenko can be up, that's fine.

The problem is, asking Grigorenko to generate offense with two borderline NHL wingers for 10 minutes a game before being invariably benched. It takes opportunities away from the forwards who could actually do something with the most sheltered minutes on the team, and relegates one of the better defense/possession forwards (Flynn) to bodyguard duty.
 

struckbyaparkedcar

Guilty of Being Right
Mar 1, 2008
18,243
1,847
Upstate NY
Seriously, if the team can't win 1-on-1 battles or pass well, why in the entire **** would Rolston run a system predicated on maximizing the importance of 2-3 points of contention (our blueline), that also requires the puck to travel the maximum distance possible (while winning a few more battles) before our offensive possession can be established. It's pants-on-head dumb.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad