qwksndmonster Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 I think we're better off with DD than with Babcock. Give GMTM credit for not only bringing Bylsma in, but in stocking the pond for him.Why are we better off with HD over Babdick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 I think Babcock is more akin to Scotty Bowman. He's the kind of coach that you throw at an assembled team and he'll push them over the top. The Sabres need more of a developmental coach. I think that's why he was no good for Detroit anymore; they needed development and he doesn't do well with incorporating a lot of young players all at once. My wife is a big Wings fan and she couldn't wait to get rid of him. Of course at the time I saw him as the prize and hoped the Sabres would land him, but I really think he wasn't the right guy for this team. Bylsma is a more forward-looking coach, I think, and taking a year off to study the game just gave him a leg up on assessing the direction the league is going. I think the Sabres will be ahead of the game in terms of style of play in a very short time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtDart Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 I think we're better off with DD than with Babcock. Give GMTM credit for not only bringing Bylsma in, but in stocking the pond for him. No doubt. Everything about the team has improved ten fold. Love the guy, and the team seems to love playing for him. So refreshing after the two years of Nolan. He's really impressed me with his forward pairing system and how he's continued to be a student of the game in his off-time. He's showing that his excellent regular season record with the Pens was no fluke. That said, his real test will be the first playoff series. I want to see how HD reacts to his system being countered. I'm not sure that he's the coach to get this team the cup, but he'll do right by this talented group of kids no matter what. I don't doubt for a minute that he will be the guy to finally bring us a Championship Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 (edited) the team is winning on paper with faceoffs shots on net and Hits.. We just need to translate that to W-L record, but this team is radically different from last year. Losing sucks but you look at the sheets and we are winning much of the crucial parts of the game. Team just needs to grow and gel some.. Looking forward to a smoikng 2nd half run this season Edited November 2, 2015 by ddaryl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 I think Babcock is more akin to Scotty Bowman. He's the kind of coach that you throw at an assembled team and he'll push them over the top. The Sabres need more of a developmental coach. I think that's why he was no good for Detroit anymore; they needed development and he doesn't do well with incorporating a lot of young players all at once. My wife is a big Wings fan and she couldn't wait to get rid of him. Of course at the time I saw him as the prize and hoped the Sabres would land him, but I really think he wasn't the right guy for this team. Bylsma is a more forward-looking coach, I think, and taking a year off to study the game just gave him a leg up on assessing the direction the league is going. I think the Sabres will be ahead of the game in terms of style of play in a very short time. Good stuff. I'm more confident than you are in Babcock's ability to develop a team. I'd say that Bylsma better fits the description of a coach that you throw at an assembled team to push them over the top, considering that's how he won his cup. Babcock was Detroit's coach for 3 regular seasons before he won his cup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 Good stuff. I'm more confident than you are in Babcock's ability to develop a team. I'd say that Bylsma better fits the description of a coach that you throw at an assembled team to push them over the top, considering that's how he won his cup. Babcock was Detroit's coach for 3 regular seasons before he won his cup. I like how you say "Good stuff," and then go on to disagree with me. It's okay, though, I'm not a fancy stats guy. I just tell you what I feel. I'm wrong a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 I appreciate you sharing your point of view, even though I disagree. I think hockey is mostly intuition and you're just as likely as me to be right :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 Brown-noser. :flirt: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 I have a really hard time believing Babdick is poor at developing players. In fact I don't believe it, it seems rather the opposite between him and Byslma. It's something I wanted him over Byslma for actually Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 I appreciate you sharing your point of view, even though I disagree. I think hockey is mostly intuition and you're just as likely as me to be right :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 Well it's a good discussion, I specifically remember a bunch of us having it when Ghost started the DD discussion. I'll dig it up later when I get home. I don't think we can keep saying we got the better guy whenever we lose out on who is universally ranked better I appreciate you sharing your point of view, even though I disagree. I think hockey is mostly intuition and you're just as likely as me to be right :)It's a forum, not a public relations seminar, we come here specifically to have hockey discussions that challenge our intuitions. I think there can be evidence that one or the other is better at developing players Not that I don't respect your opinion, just that I want to challenge it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 Well it's a good discussion, I specifically remember a bunch of us having it when Ghost started the DD discussion. I'll dig it up later when I get home. I don't think we can keep saying we got the better guy whenever we lose out on who is universally ranked better I have to admit, I think Bylsma is a much better coach than I ever gave him credit for from his handling of the Pitt roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 He's really impressed me with his forward pairing system and how he's continued to be a student of the game in his off-time. He's showing that his excellent regular season record with the Pens was no fluke. That said, his real test will be the first playoff series. I want to see how HD reacts to his system being countered. I'm not sure that he's the coach to get this team the cup, but he'll do right by this talented group of kids no matter what. Yup, this was my biggest takeaway from reading Pens forums. That said, I absolutely love the style of play he's preaching: fast, aggressive, pressure. It's everything I've ever wanted from an aesthetic perspective. I have to admit, I think Bylsma is a much better coach than I ever gave him credit for from his handling of the Pitt roster. His GM didn't do him any favors with the roster depth in Pittsburgh, that's for sure. Frankly, I think this Sabres roster has better depth than he ever had in Pittsburgh save more maybe his first year or two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 I have to admit, I think Bylsma is a much better coach than I ever gave him credit for from his handling of the Pitt roster.He is much better than I initially gave him credit for, definitively. I like him as a coach and his personality makes me like him more than Babcock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 He is much better than I initially gave him credit for, definitively. I like him as a coach and his personality makes me like him more than Babcock At least in press conferences and interviews, Babcock reminds me a lot of Lindy. Very dry humor and always good for a one liner or two. Bylsma is just dull in front of the mic...but if Beyond Blue and Gold is any indication, he's a much different guy with the team. And I'm fine with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 That said, I absolutely love the style of play he's preaching: fast, aggressive, pressure. It's everything I've ever wanted from an aesthetic perspective. Oddly, that's everything that Nolan summed up as "work harder." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 2, 2015 Report Share Posted November 2, 2015 At least in press conferences and interviews, Babcock reminds me a lot of Lindy. Very dry humor and always good for a one liner or two. Bylsma is just dull in front of the mic...but if Beyond Blue and Gold is any indication, he's a much different guy with the team. And I'm fine with that. The pairs are really something Lindy did, or still does. The difference is how they are implemented. Lindy paired LW-C for years, and would float all the RW's onto different lines. Byslma has pairs, but uses them to double shift his best players regardless of position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted December 8, 2015 Report Share Posted December 8, 2015 From the Vancouver GTD... thought it might spur some discussion here: The thing that's curious to me is that we see these things in games and we talk about the obvious solutions. What's really going on? Is Bylsma incompetent that he can't address such obvious issues? Is he following some other plan that will all become clear at some point? Is Jack sinking and not ready for the NHL? There is pretty good consensus here on the forums that certain line combinations probably aren't the best.... what does DD see in pairing Eichel with Gionta, for instance... and why doesn't he shift Jack to other linemates that would have a better opportunity to help him thrive? Is Bylsma mismanaging Eichel's development, or does he just have a longer view in mind? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted December 8, 2015 Report Share Posted December 8, 2015 Just finished that paper True have me on dumping vs carrying it in. I'm going to fundamentally hate DD if he insists on dumping the puck and 'forcing' the other team to carry r in against us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) From the Vancouver GTD... thought it might spur some discussion here: The thing that's curious to me is that we see these things in games and we talk about the obvious solutions. What's really going on? Is Bylsma incompetent that he can't address such obvious issues? Is he following some other plan that will all become clear at some point? Is Jack sinking and not ready for the NHL? There is pretty good consensus here on the forums that certain line combinations probably aren't the best.... what does DD see in pairing Eichel with Gionta, for instance... and why doesn't he shift Jack to other linemates that would have a better opportunity to help him thrive? Is Bylsma mismanaging Eichel's development, or does he just have a longer view in mind? I think the difference is that we aren't entirely privy to the game plan. We tend to project complementary skill sets outside the structure of what the coaches are expecting. The coaches are looking at how the pieces they have at their disposal will best implement their game plan. As X pointed out earlier, Gionta is the best on the team at chipping the puck into the right corner and bringing pressure. He also blows through the neutral zone with speed and creates a target for the defenceman to pass to on the breakout. If these plays are a key part of Bylsma's strategy, it explains why we see a lot of Gionta. As for Eichel, his role is pretty obvious and has been since day one: he is the second line centre with an emphasis on offensive. Developmentally that is the best place for him and in terms of skill set that is also where he can best help the team. Kane, Ennis, Reinhart, Gionta have been our top wingers and those are the guys he has played with the most, with the odd physical guy mixed in on one side from time to time. You could ask why not O'Reilly of Girgensons? And the answer is they are the first and third line centres. That basically leaves Moulson. I have no idea why Moulson hasn't had a shot, but I bet Bylsma has a reasonable answer if he was willing to share. They did look like crap the one game they were paired. When Grigorenko and Reinhart struggled in previous years we could legitimately point to the 4th line minutes with Flynn and John Scott. That hasn't been the case with Eichel. Maybe it's time to look at Eichel's struggles as mostly being a product of Eichel. Kid has never really dealt with adversity before. It's a learning experience everyone needs. Should Bylsma be doing something different? Cut back his ice time? Try him on the wing? I'm sure he has considered it, but so far decided it's best to let him play through it. Oh, and JACK EICHEL WILL BE FINE! Edited December 9, 2015 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 I don't know what DD's game plan is, but I know when a team looks absolutely terrible. And the last couple games, well, I dunno, DD..... that game plan sucked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 I don't know what DD's game plan is, but I know when a team looks absolutely terrible. And the last couple games, well, I dunno, DD..... that game plan sucked. You thought he changed the game plan? I was blaming the players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 It's his job to plan for his players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) I have no doubt that Bylsma has well thought out reasons for what he does. That still doesn't mean he's correct. With Jack so clearly struggling for an extended stretch, is trial by fire and no usage changes really the best approach? Edited December 9, 2015 by TrueBlueGED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 I have no doubt that Bylsma has well thought out reasons for what he does. That still doesn't mean he's correct. His player usage is calculated and maddening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.