Will Byslma be the HC Next Year?

[Sabres Fan in NS]

My rebuttal would be that there are stretches where he has had a fully healthy roster, and still played the same style or had the same results, losing and losing badly

 

Sure, but just because they are healthy does not mean that they are the right mix of players.

[WildCard]

Sure, but just because they are healthy does not mean that they are the right mix of players.

A good point. Would you rather configure our roster to fit Dan's needs or Dan configure his coaching style to fit what he has?

[Sabres Fan in NS]

A good point. Would you rather configure our roster to fit Dan's needs or Dan configure his coaching style to fit what he has?

 

I don't think Dan will change much, so it would be easier / better to adjust the roster and I don't think it would take too much.

 

Of course, all this is dependent on the fact that Dan is the coach that Murray wants long-term.

[Randall Flagg]

I don't think Dan will change much, so it would be easier / better to adjust the roster and I don't think it would take too much.

 

Of course, all this is dependent on the fact that Dan is the coach that Murray wants long-term.

I actually think it would take years to build a roster that plays the LA Kings style game, to chip the puck and have the speed/forechecking ability to go get it. We only have two wingers that aren't terrible at it right now. And we have two cerebral possession centers, and a high-skill puck-carrying center. 

 

It makes absolutely no sense to build a system that doesn't use the young pieces we have in a way to maximize their talent.

 

When we play teams that play hockey the right way, with the puck, we get absolutely throttled. Carolina, Tampa, Chicago, Pittsburgh (yeah, we beat them after being outshot something like 51-20something), Washington. The good teams that we beat, like NYR, LA, Ottawa (I don't think they're good but they're way above us in the standings) have rosters, and therefore styles, suited to transition hockey and mediocre possession. The only time this style doesn't fail in the playoffs is when the Kings are all-in on it and they have six wingers comparable to Evander Kane, a top three defenseman in the world, and a goalie that goes .945 for two months.

 

Lindy is an example of a coach that can change his style given different rosters. Don't tell me that 2005, 1999, and 2010 were the same system. This is how it should work. I don't think Bylsma does it at all, let alone well. 

[Drunkard]

I actually think it would take years to build a roster that plays the LA Kings style game, to chip the puck and have the speed/forechecking ability to go get it. We only have two wingers that aren't terrible at it right now. And we have two cerebral possession centers, and a high-skill puck-carrying center. 

 

It makes absolutely no sense to build a system that doesn't use the young pieces we have in a way to maximize their talent.

 

When we play teams that play hockey the right way, with the puck, we get absolutely throttled. Carolina, Tampa, Chicago, Pittsburgh (yeah, we beat them after being outshot something like 51-20something), Washington. The good teams that we beat, like NYR, LA, Ottawa (I don't think they're good but they're way above us in the standings) have rosters, and therefore styles, suited to transition hockey and mediocre possession. The only time this style doesn't fail in the playoffs is when the Kings are all-in on it and they have six wingers comparable to Evander Kane, a top three defenseman in the world, and a goalie that goes .945 for two months.

 

Lindy is an example of a coach that can change his style given different rosters. Don't tell me that 2005, 1999, and 2010 were the same system. This is how it should work. I don't think Bylsma does it at all, let alone well. 

 

Well put. The best coaches are able to alter their systems and game plans to suit the rosters they have at any given moment. They also tend to handle in game adjustments as circumstances change. Overhauling a roster takes multiples seasons. Changing out coaches can be quick. I'd much rather have an adaptable coach.

[WildCard]

Amen, Flagg. My thoughts exactly, although worded better no doubt.

[SwampD]

 

Lindy is an example of a coach that can change his style given different rosters. Don't tell me that 2005, 1999, and 2010 were the same system. This is how it should work. I don't think Bylsma does it at all, let alone well. 

They were way similar than people want to admit. Watching the Sabres try to get out of their own zone was always painful under Lindy.

[WildCard]

They were way similar than people want to admit. Watching the Sabres try to get out of their own zone was always painful under Lindy.

The only Lindy year I really remember I thought we were very good at this. Short, quick passes that were set up to leave the zone. I could be wrong though

[SwampD]

The only Lindy year I really remember I thought we were very good at this. Short, quick passes that were set up to leave the zone. I could be wrong though

How much less do you hear RJ say "...but not out!" now?

[WildCard]

How much less do you hear RJ say "...but not out!" now?

A lot, but I figure that's because we don't touch the puck in our own end to even get it 'close' :lol:

[Randall Flagg]

They were way similar than people want to admit. Watching the Sabres try to get out of their own zone was always painful under Lindy.

They weren't different like Sutter's system is different from Jon Cooper's. They weren't Carlyle versus Quenneville different. I can't confess to watching hockey in 1999, but the videos and descriptions I've had access to via the internet over the years can tell some things. His defensemen were way more active in the rush and we relied a lot more on transition play in 2005-07, when compared to later when Rivet/Montador was often half of our top 4. No way he had his guys doing that stuff in 99, there wasn't nearly enough talent. People I've talked to remember a lot of patiently waiting in the defensive zone for the other team to get frustrated trying to beat Hasek, and then scoring once or twice on an odd-man rush to get the win. 

 

There are some aspects that were constant during my time watching Lindy's teams, which included a very limited amount of point pressure in the d-zone which led to a huge amount of point shot goals, which (IMO) gave Miller the reputation for letting in softies from the point when in reality we just allowed a lot of easy screen shots to get all the way to the goalie. 

 

I don't bring Lindy up as a "wow this guy is perfect and exactly what we need" head coach example, because he was obviously flawed. I don't want him back. I just think he's an example of a coach not being rigid that we can all immediately think about. Other examples from other teams are a lot less-likely to be detailed and correct, because nobody here watches every team every game for years like we did with Lindy. 

 

And if you go to the Penguins board on hfboards and ask them to describe how Bylsma coached in Pittsburgh, they'll refer you to the thread(s) where Sabres fans have already done this in the past. Then you read through them and find the exact same things that a bunch of us bitch about here, starting with the full implementation of his system in the season following the cup run, during which he used a slightly modified version of Therrien's 2-3 with a finally healthy Gonchar. And then they talk about how stubborn and unwilling to change he is, regardless of the pieces on the roster. And here we are today. He does the same stuff he always has and that's not going to change, and we won't see a meaningful increase in even strength scoring because of it, and we will again be out of the playoff chase before March comes. Unless he tweaks things up a bit, which is possible, but there's no evidence to show that he's willing to do it. 

[woods-racer]

They weren't different like Sutter's system is different from Jon Cooper's. They weren't Carlyle versus Quenneville different. I can't confess to watching hockey in 1999, but the videos and descriptions I've had access to via the internet over the years can tell some things. His defensemen were way more active in the rush and we relied a lot more on transition play in 2005-07, when compared to later when Rivet/Montador was often half of our top 4. No way he had his guys doing that stuff in 99, there wasn't nearly enough talent. People I've talked to remember a lot of patiently waiting in the defensive zone for the other team to get frustrated trying to beat Hasek, and then scoring once or twice on an odd-man rush to get the win.

 

There are some aspects that were constant during my time watching Lindy's teams, which included a very limited amount of point pressure in the d-zone which led to a huge amount of point shot goals, which (IMO) gave Miller the reputation for letting in softies from the point when in reality we just allowed a lot of easy screen shots to get all the way to the goalie.

 

I don't bring Lindy up as a "wow this guy is perfect and exactly what we need" head coach example, because he was obviously flawed. I don't want him back. I just think he's an example of a coach not being rigid that we can all immediately think about. Other examples from other teams are a lot less-likely to be detailed and correct, because nobody here watches every team every game for years like we did with Lindy.

 

And if you go to the Penguins board on hfboards and ask them to describe how Bylsma coached in Pittsburgh, they'll refer you to the thread(s) where Sabres fans have already done this in the past. Then you read through them and find the exact same things that a bunch of us bitch about here, starting with the full implementation of his system in the season following the cup run, during which he used a slightly modified version of Therrien's 2-3 with a finally healthy Gonchar. And then they talk about how stubborn and unwilling to change he is, regardless of the pieces on the roster. And here we are today. He does the same stuff he always has and that's not going to change, and we won't see a meaningful increase in even strength scoring because of it, and we will again be out of the playoff chase before March comes. Unless he tweaks things up a bit, which is possible, but there's no evidence to show that he's willing to do it.

My power is out so I read the whole thing????

 

I agree on all points. Especially the *I told you so* from Pens fans. Not saying they pity us, but understand our frustration and have no clue as to why the Sabres hired him.

[Rasmus_]

I voted yes, and I don't have any issue with it at all. 

[WildCard]

As far as SS history goes, this is one of the closest polls I've ever seen

[Sabres Fan in NS]

As far as SS history goes, this is one of the closest polls I've ever seen

 

This must be an example of that 'new math' I've been hearing about, right?

 

25 yes ... and 8 no, is not very close.

[WildCard]

This must be an example of that 'new math' I've been hearing about, right?

 

25 yes ... and 8 no, is not very close.

16-8-10, pretty close I think

[StuckinFL]

As far as SS history goes, this is one of the closest polls I've ever seen

 

Only Because the poll isn't 'Do you WANT Dan Byslma to be Head Coach next year?'

[Thorny]

I actually think it would take years to build a roster that plays the LA Kings style game, to chip the puck and have the speed/forechecking ability to go get it. We only have two wingers that aren't terrible at it right now. And we have two cerebral possession centers, and a high-skill puck-carrying center. 

It makes absolutely no sense to build a system that doesn't use the young pieces we have in a way to maximize their talent.

 

When we play teams that play hockey the right way, with the puck, we get absolutely throttled. Carolina, Tampa, Chicago, Pittsburgh (yeah, we beat them after being outshot something like 51-20something), Washington. The good teams that we beat, like NYR, LA, Ottawa (I don't think they're good but they're way above us in the standings) have rosters, and therefore styles, suited to transition hockey and mediocre possession. The only time this style doesn't fail in the playoffs is when the Kings are all-in on it and they have six wingers comparable to Evander Kane, a top three defenseman in the world, and a goalie that goes .945 for two months.

 

Lindy is an example of a coach that can change his style given different rosters. Don't tell me that 2005, 1999, and 2010 were the same system. This is how it should work. I don't think Bylsma does it at all, let alone well.

 

And adding to this, our best winger on the way is Nylander. Much more suited to a possession game.

[darksabre]

My power is out so I read the whole thing????

 

I agree on all points. Especially the *I told you so* from Pens fans. Not saying they pity us, but understand our frustration and have no clue as to why the Sabres hired him.

My buddy from college who is a Pens fan texted me the day we hired Bylsma and said this:

 

"hahahahahahahaha Dan Bylsma good luck with that"

[Randall Flagg]

His shell he goes into with a lead is just supreme.

[WildCard]

What an embarrassment

[Jacque Richard]

Ray said it's on the players

[PASabreFan]

Will the Sabres pay the price for Terry's sins with the Bills? What I'm driving at is that, all things being equal, Bylsma would be gone, but Terry doesn't think he can afford to get a reputation as a sports owner who pulls the plug too fast.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Ray said it's on the players

 

For a guy that took a lot of punches to the head he still has a functioning brain.

[WildCard]

Ray said it's on the players

The team consistently collapses, that's the coach