Patty16
-
Posts
1,470 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Patty16
-
-
I'll be honest, skating is what gave me good ankle strength. My ankles were garbage before I started playing hockey. It's such a weird motion and way to use your ankles. Calf Raises are probably the only thing I can recommend besides just skating a lot.
True, not much else you can do.
Has anyone ever played at the Northtowns (pepsi) Center during the day? I plan on going tomorrow for open scrimmage at 12, just wanted to see how it is.
Varies quite a bit. Sometimes some poor attendence but usually mostly beginners and a few old timers.
SO anyone got a good exercise to strengthen ankles? Several year ago I bought skates (and returned them) since I couldn't walk around the house without my ankles flopping around. I don't recall what they were (it might even be *way* and I mean *way* upthread), but I'm guessing they weren't the most supportive boots. I'd like something I can work on before I try skating again.
buy pair of inline hockey skates and skate as much as possible, while it won't build ankle strength as quick as ice, it will help speed things along. Also it will help you know what your stride should feel like on crossovers bc it will provide a little more stability.
-
Read what Jay McKee had to say about him. It seems to be the opposite of what you're saying.
Yea its a good read. Bylsma does change his system. It's really only bloggers and msg board posters who think that he doesn't.
-
You admit yourself that it's a complex system. Do you think it's best to bring in a guy with a complex system when the Sabres are going to be icing a very young team over the next few years? You obviously are an advocate for him and seem knowledgeable. I guess, I just read you tearing down other peoples opinions on why he's not a good fit than you proving your point why you think he is the best fit. Not trying to be confrontational as it's a good discussion. Could you just elaborate on why you think that's the best idea?
But on the other hand, if it is a complex system that works wouldn't we want our kids to have familiarity in it this season before we start to really compete in 2016-17? In other words, getting the kinks out this year so they are comfortable next year and beyond?
Just playing devil's advocate here.
That's a fair point but I think it's a big enough jump into the NHL as it is that I don't know if I want my Reinhart's and Eichel's learning a complex system while also getting use to the speed of the NHL etc. To me it's like putting a kid starting highschool in Grade 12 algebra because in three or four years when he's applying to universities he wants him to be a master. Maybe it works out, or maybe the kid is so lost because he hasn't learned the fundamentals that things go sideways for a couple years and the teacher (Bylsma) is gone and we're left learning a new system anyways.
I'm not necessarily advocating for him, just that the CW criticisms of him don't really hold water so to speak, he has pros and cons. I do think this team needs a veteran presence behind the bench so the kids learn from someone who has done it before (or a former NHL player)
A coach's street cred in the room is a huge factor, since hockey is an effort sport.
I see what you are saying tho, that was the system he saw best at that point in time with the rosters he was given, I think his system was better fitted for less skilled Dmen that were on the Pitt roster. Have you worst players get the puck to Crosby and Malkin asap.
Buffalo is going to have a roster that is a little more balances and I think he could emphasize Dmen skating a little more. These are the types of things that happen in an interview.
What kind of system and philosophies do you anticipate running?
How you do feel about giving mins to young players?
aggressive vs D oriented game planning?
That's a fair point but I think it's a big enough jump into the NHL as it is that I don't know if I want my Reinhart's and Eichel's learning a complex system while also getting use to the speed of the NHL etc. To me it's like putting a kid starting highschool in Grade 12 algebra because in three or four years when he's applying to universities he wants him to be a master. Maybe it works out, or maybe the kid is so lost because he hasn't learned the fundamentals that things go sideways for a couple years and the teacher (Bylsma) is gone and we're left learning a new system anyways.
It's most similar to a NFL qb, in college he knew how to make simple reads, run and throw exceptionally well, now he's asked to do that 100x faster and make more reads..... too much thinking
-
I know hockeybuzz gets a bad rep but I thought this was an interesting read on why the author does not want Disco Dan as the next head coach.
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Michael-Pachla/BylsmaBuffalo-inevitable/209/68890
See this blog post is the type of stuff I just don't think adds a lot of insight to the type of person craving more hockey. It's lazy analysis from a blogger who doesn't really understand what he's hearing or seeing.
His system is hard so think lindy Ruff two on ones?? (not exactly but...) No kidding when almost any breakout .... breaks down.. you get odd man chances.
Why doesn't the blogger say why it's hard.... and quote someone other than another blogger on that questionable site.
really it's bc there are lots of snap judgments and emphasis on getting the puck up ice.
-
I could point out that Andrew Peters also played well beyond high school and I wouldn't put his technical knowledge of systems above an average message board poster :P
Seriously though, good stuff here :thumbsup:
Ha well played, but he's been around the game and I bet if you get him off to the side he can digest it pretty well. But there's an exception to every rule.
I think part of the Pens fans issue is that they have Malkin and Crosby and prob feel they should be in the Cup Finals every years.... it's easiest to blame the coach.
-
That sounds and awful lot what the Sabres were doing during the 05-07 run. So, Bylsma copied that from Lindy, then?
Yea i think they were pretty similar, but to be fair i don't recall as many games from 10 years ago for a mental comparison right now. I recall lindy has his wingers stay "home" a little more and that the D2 had more leeway to skate up.
-
See, this is good stuff and it is coming from a message board poster.
I don't want to give too much credit to Pittsburgh message board posters, but it is why I won't dismiss them completely either.
The articulate, informed posters on this board aren't unique to this fanbase.
Like Blue said, there is plenty of criticism of Bylsma that goes beyond the typical 'I don't like his attitude' fanbase criticism of coaches.
Personally, if the guy won a cup, won 250 games faster than any other coach, and was thought highly enough of to be handed the reins of Team USA, he's worth giving a chance here. I just hope we get him a better goalie than Fleury.
Agreed. I wasn't trying to say all posters suck or anything like that. But how would one know just reading through random posts. I would postulate that 99% of Pens posters didn't know that his d zone puck retrievals were something of an oddity and were eventually copied around the league. His traditional system had the 1D go get the puck and the 2D be close by for an immediate pass. Normal retrievals have 1D get the puck and 2D skate behind the net or near the far circle for an outlet safety pass. Part of Bylsma's philosphy is to get the puck out of the zone asap so the big horses can skate with it.
I agree as well, you dont accomplish those things by having one rigid system that you refuse to change at all costs. I thought he really blew it in the Olympics not bc of X's and O's as much as giving Orpik way too much ice against top lines on the big ice. He just trusted him too much.
-
So I'm assuming you consider yourself well above the average Pittsburgh poster with both your knowledge of Bylsma and ability to break down a game? Look, you can't have several posts saying message board posters are clueless on systems and then proclaim there are reasons to be weary of Bylsma (but not the reasons found on message boards) and say that he made lots of adjustments in the Boston series, all while providing nary a detail.
Given his posts I'm assuming Dudacek read much of the same things I did, and these posts were not the equivalent of the "Ruff's system ruins talent" posts without any detail we used to see around here. If you want to lob a "message board posters are incapable of analysis" grenade and completely dismiss the criticisms, that's your business. But there was analyses that deserved to be taken seriously.
Nope not my knowledge of Bylsma, but the game sure, I played at a high level well beyond high school, so I'm not the avg poster. What I am saying is I wouldn't get knowledge of a coach's system and in game decision making from regular posters.
IIRC in that series there was an adjustmet wherein he had not only the 2 D and C come down low for D puck retrievals, he had his wingers come back more for add'l puck support during breakouts, the longer passes he liked were being gobbled up by the 2-3 trap laid by Bos.
For zone entries he was having his breakout hit a forward along the boards and look to the center ice for a zig zag type pass to have the Bos D move a little before gaining the zone. After the tweaks they had a ton more chances and shots on goal, but if Malkin and Crosby can't score with 54 shots on goal, coaching isn;'t your main problem. Also Rask was a beast that year.
-
I get your point, as a comparison to what Shero did. There's the un-quantifiable "chemistry" factor that we have no idea, yet, what it will be for the Sabres. Meanwhile, I think it's safe to say Shero bombed on that and was more a Regier-style manager.
With regards to Bylsma, I think TBphD detailed the reasons why I had said in prior threads that Bylsma would be a Hunter S. Thompson-esque choice: there are way too many variables left unanswered with his coaching. For every positive, there seems to be a relatively equivocal negative, or at least a reasonable, albeit ignorant retort (and I don't mean stupid here, just ignorant because fans don't have all of the facts usually). He's like the first round draft pick that fell from top 5 to the mid-round because of "questions". If the variables swing more toward the positive for the Sabres, then, they hit a home-run. If the complaints are valid, well, then we may as well have re-hired Ron Rolston.
Show me one reputable source that examines those questions?
hes had some legit criticism for his Olympic performance.
-
Average fan =/= average message board poster. And nobody here claimed they were doing a detailed analysis on Bylsma's system. Blue mentioned zone entries, that's it.
As to whether or not fans can understand a coach's system, I'd think that most Pens fans understood Bylsma's system after 5 years, even if they couldn't break it down with words like X.Benedict can.
Nope, but I wouldn't say the avg poster can do much better in that dept. Bylsma's system was hard to understand for the players bc of its complexity, it's one of the legitimate knocks on it so i don't think that fans knew what it was after 5 years. Most Detroit fans weren't that upset that Babcock left..... yet he is considered the best in the game. So no I don't trust posters to evaluate a coaches ability.
Again, it's really freaking hard to watch the game and see the subtle changes a coach makes to his gameplan during a game. He made lots of changes during the Boston series and other series.
-
Only time will tell, but I've said the same thing about TM. No brainers to pick Reinhart and EIchel, we'll see how he does with the rest of his drafts, trades & F/A.
Very true, I've like most of his trades initially, but this summer and next season should give a better picture of his roster building. I'm assuming he'll move pick(s) and prospects for a few more NHL roster players.
-
Because for a decade Pittsburgh has relied heavily on Crosby and Malkin to be their offensive generators and most teams have figured out how to shut them down. The pens did a terrible, dreadful, awful job of surrounding Crosby with other talent. Also looking over their roster they focused too much on getting good scorers or passers for Crosby as opposed to find solid two way players. A lot of Pitts shortcomings rest with Ray Shero and how he constructed the team. I would also say that Marc Andre Fleury is a questionable GT especially in the playoffs.
Indeed, which is why I wouldn't trust message board fans just saying he's a horrible coach and only loves stretch passes.
There's way more to it, and like it or not, Bylsma is respected by people who know the game way more than message board people. (not directed to you)
Shero did a pretty bad job there, it's easy to draft malkin and crosby but harder to surround them with competent talent.
-
Patty, do you really think that message boards aren't a place to learn about a coach? Those fans watched Bylsma 100X more than we ever did. Obviously, you have to sift through the usual internet sewage to get to the good stuff, but when an overwhelming amount of fans dislike the guy it is cause for concern.
Yes I really do NOT think message boards are a great place to learn about a coach's system, as I said. How do you know who respected posters are on a board ? Like I said the average fan and average board poster can't digest the game from watching TV or even at the arena enough in order to state what a coache gameplanning is like.
How he treats the media, his demeanor etc yea I think you could get a vibe from boards....... but not systems.
If the fans were right, and Bylsma was such a horrible coach........why did they not do that much better once the horrible coach left?
-
My hope for Bylsma is that he really has studied and learned, and his system will be different than it was in Pittsburgh. He seems like a smart enough guy to be able to re-evaluate from a distance and evolve. My concern is that even if this is true, if what I got from reading Pens forum posts is true, he's not mentally agile enough to adjust on the fly (in-game or in-series changes). Things can be blatantly not working, and he'll stick with them. Is that stubbornness, lack of ability, or that at the time he didn't have the tools to change? I don't claim to know, but it's a worry.
Along those same lines, Pittsburgh's possession numbers jumped a good amount when he took over, plateau'd for a couple years, then declined. This year, even with huge blue line injuries and a forward group no better than last year, Pittsburgh's score-adjusted CF% jumped 7 points. The way I read the stats since Bylsma took over and then through this season, his system changes worked initially but then the league caught up, and he didn't have any answers for it. It's a pretty serious concern.
Speaking of system, he really did rely on stretch passes that Crosby would chip in and go retrieve. Crosby is so good that it worked when he was on the ice, but I don't think that's the best way to utilize an elite offensive talent. If I were coaching, I'd want Crosby to be controlling play and holding the puck as much as possible, not playing a glorified version of dump and chase. It's one reason they got smoked by Boston in the conference final: Boston's defensive system "layers" neutralized the stretch pass, and Bylsma didn't (or was too stubborn to, if you listen to bitter Pens fans) adjust. Basically the system allowed them to dominate inferior teams with speed and skill, but the best teams could too easily neutralize the system when they weren't outclassed talent-wise. Some fans also blamed this for Fleury's meltdowns--he was left exposed to high quality chances. Not sure I buy that, but Fleury did have a markedly better season this year.
Finally, he played Iginla on the LW side because he didn't want to take Dupuis off Crosby's wing. Yes, he made a future Hall of Famer learn a new position on the fly for the sake of Pascal freakin' Dupuis.
Again, maybe he can learn and mimic other teams effectively, but after reading what I did there's no way I could be excited about a Bylsma hire.
1) if you're basing your opinion off of fan message boards you are likely getting bad info, the average fan really does have a hard time understanding systems from watching the game on TV.
2) Have you seen the playoffs? Virtually every team is giving up big chances and the better goal tending is winning for the most part. Fleury has been pretty horrible for them, and you can't blame his god awful performances on a perceived system.
3) you are describing his "system" in way too generic of terms, and during the boston series, he was playing against a trap and did change up his zone entries to counter the trap. Their roster was geared more toward run and gun which also does not translate into the playoffs as well. Look at some of those Shero trades.
There are some reasons to be weary of Bylsma, (can he simplify a system for a young roster) but the message board ones dont really hold any water.
His former players love him and there's a reason he is well respected around the league, guys earn their reps.
-
Here's something to chew on while we wait. Why does GMTM get such a huge pass for his poor relationship with Nolan? Not a big red flag? Is it just that Ted was not Tim's man? I made a big deal about Battista getting sent down to tell Nolan that Miller had been traded and was roundly criticized for it. That's how it works, Murray was busy and Battista had nothing to do after getting Terry his Whatchamacallit bars from that diabolical vending machine by Darcy's old office. Sometimes you want a Twix and it gives you those awful peanut butter crackers.
But, in hindsight, it was something to be concerned about, no? And it all plays into an image of Murray that apparently concerns Babcock enough that we have to have this waiting game while he figures out if he can work with Murray.
Imagine if we lose Babcock over this. Will GMTM still get a pass? That is, if he's still employed by the Sabres de Buffalo?
He gets a pass bc he's hihgly repsected around the league and this year wasn't a season that mattered other than going for a top pick. And because he knew, as did TP, that nolan wouldnt be back.
This is simply not true and has not been reported anywhere.
It's amazing how hard you dig to find an issue with virtually everything that this team does.
-
Terry has every right to give Lindy Ruff $30 million a year.....
The ACTUAL bottom line is, if Babcock signs for the terms being reported, 1 of 3 things will happen:
1) The owners will attempt to collude on coachs' salary and outcast Pegula as a crazy man
2) The owners will have to pay more to coaches, thus taking the value of the franchise down without offsetting revenue increase
3) The owners will hit the fans in the wallet
If you buy a house for $200,000 and the taxes are $2,000 a year, and the next day the taxes almost triple to $6,000.....try selling that house for $200,000. You can argue that Babcock adds value to the Sabres, but on a whole, he was already an nhl coach. If Detroit loses him, if he really is that value added, they get crushed, plus have to pay more for their next coach in theory and most likely reality.
None of this makes any sense in the context of pro sports. The value added comes from hiring a better coach and recouping some of that through playoff revenue, which is where many teams cash in because players aren't really being paid for those additional games.
When coaching salaries increased in the NFL none of those things happened that you listed. The value of a team isn't linear to the revenue/profit it generates.
The immediate short term Affect on coaching salaries will be minimal since very few coaches have a resume comparable to MB. It will increase the top tier coaches the next time they are up for a contract.
Its quite PA-esque to take this situation and case it as bad for not only TP but for the rest of the league. The Leafs reported offered simialr if not more $$..... would the league try to cast MSLE as crazy? no they wouldn't bc that assessment has virtually no merit.
"Terry has every right to give Lindy Ruff $30 million a year..... " ........ :blink: huh? Lindy Ruff?
They may call Terry crazy, but there is not necessarily any need for collusion. Owners have total control of coaching salaries as it is.
Babcock is in a small class that can command this kind of money( N=2). Quinneville is the other.
Coaching is not a very secure profession. Owners don't need to collude to scale this.
I predict nobody will touch Babcock's salary for coaching for years to come (in either salary or scale or term, Quinevlle being the possible exception).
Though average salaries for coaches by definition will rise, this is a minimal blip in the big picture of NHL costs.
Heck, a guy like Pronger is making similar money not playing hockey. Wade Redden was warehoused in the AHL, as was Mike Richards for similar hits.
This is nothing.
Agreed.
-
Chz has the credibility of a long-haul trucker black-fishing a hornets nest of sports fan boys.
i havent seen chz accurately predict anything, not saying it hasnt happened but most of her stuff is vague allusions to stuff and emoticons.
-
Source "predicts" would be a better way of putting it.
well until Terry meddles and screws it all up
-
I don't believe I have ever posted here with info because I don't like to involve other people. For this one, all I got was "getting whispers from people in the know that he is coming".
OK fair enough. Have they been right before and you just not posted (I have been in same position)
-
I can't exactly name names....
Have they ever called anything before?
how about GMMB
-
Murray and Terry Pegula met with Mike Babcock. They have a relationship. He hired Babcock in Anaheim. It's not like Terry is going over GMTM's head.
"In Tim Murray's perfect world, the Sabres' general manager would be good buddies with his coach. They would respect each other, chat often and agree on how personnel decisions should be made. Murray didn't have that with Ted Nolan, so the GM is looking for a new coach.
Buffalo fired Nolan on Sunday, one day after the Sabres finished their second straight last-place season. There is no timetable for hiring a replacement.
"We both said it's too bad it didn't work out," Murray said in First Niagara Center. "Is it chemistry? Maybe it's just chemistry. Maybe it's just two different personalities. You need chemistry on the ice, and you need chemistry off the ice.
"You have to find a perfect fit to be really successful, and maybe it just wasn't a perfect fit.""
That doesnt equal 100% on board or agreeing to share "running" the team. It's a journalist saying GMTM prefers his coach agrees on personnel.
He's also on record as saying coaches coach and was clear that TN had no say in the roster bc he's the coach.
What you said doesn't match what is said in the linked article.
-
GMTM is 100% on board with getting Babcock. He'd also be fine with being part of a team running the Sabres. He's already comfortable with Babcock.
This narrative that Tim Murray is a megalomaniac who must exert 100% control with an iron fist is just some nonsense invented by the same few suspects on this board.
Ummm where is this coming from or even close to substantiated???
-
Seriously.
Has there even been such a pairing of positions? What'd GM TM be, then, as a practical matter? Chief scout and an assistant GM?
And if what you're saying is true, and we *don't* manage to grab the hot Babcock, then are the Sabres still cool with GM TM?
I would think GMTM handles trades and functions as director of scouting. If Babs wants roster input it prob has more to do with calling guys up and retaining players as opposed to draft related things.
One of the reported beefs Babcock had in DET was no say in who was called up and signing vets.
I don't see how this automatically means GMTM is gone
-
Is this legit?
Kyper has called a few things connected to Buf
Advice on skating and playing hockey
in The Aud Club
Posted · Edited by Patty16
Those are great too, will build your ankles some but will really firm up all of your leg and core stability muscles.
Yea but i've found inline hockey skates, at least Missions, to be a lower cut which helps the ankles, that plus your ankles get help from a wider base, wheels vs thin blade, lets you ease into building ankles instead of just suffering on the ice.
The best advice I have is to go out and skate as much as possible, do open hockey and push yourself, work on your crossovers, C cuts going backwards, and making sure your weight is over your feet when striding.
I have a few guys on one of my teams who despite years of playing never get better because they are too afriad to fall down, and they remain bad skaters. Test yourself, push your limits.
Another thing I notice with beginners is that their skates are either too soft and buckle or they have them laced up or taped too tight too high so they have ski boots on, you'll never build your ankles or learn the proper technique in either of those situations. you need to have some forward flex but also lateral support, squeeze the top of your skates together, if you can do it easily, get rid of them.
Here's a link to what your strides should look like, notice the weight shifting and power stance...
I'd be happy to answer any other questions anyone has