Prediction Time: Will Dan Bylsma be fired this offseason?

[WildCard]

I'm good with high expectations, but it was this crowd that was saying last offseason that a 15 point improvement and a first round playoff loss was likely too optimistic. Why is it too optimistic last offseason but not this offseason? They are in the same damned place.

Not I. I don't really feel like hunting it down but I was highly confident in the playoffs this year

 

Also, our rookies aren't rookies anymore, and Byslma has had time to implement his system

Edited April 4, 2017 by WildCard

[Scottysabres]

Yea, he will

[Weave]

Not I. I don't really feel like hunting it down but I was highly confident in the playoffs this year

 

Also, our rookies aren't rookies anymore, and Byslma has had time to implement his system

 

I was also expecting playoffs.  And I'll demand it next season.  But realistically, I don't think it is happening.

[Randall Flagg]

I don't think we should ever talk about Dan's time with the Penguins again. It's irrelevant to what happens here, with 2 full seasons just about in the books. Each side has plenty of material to build their case with (if there even is a pro-Bylsma side, most of those people just hate Murray more than Dan)

[TrueBlueGED]

I'm good with high expectations, but it was this crowd that was saying last offseason that a 15 point improvement and a first round playoff loss was likely too optimistic. Why is it too optimistic last offseason but not this offseason? They are in the same damned place.

I believe the consensus was bubble team. Anyway, the team shouldn't be in the same place. Second years for Jack and Sam (and at least in Jack's case, he's taken a leap in his development), and we added a no-BS 1st line player in Okposo. I just don't think we should let this year's underpeformance reduce our expectations.

Edited April 4, 2017 by TrueBlueGED

[dudacek]

 

What sucks is we've pissed away another season of our core on the cheap.  Frittering away the best years to accumulate depth because the kids are on entry level deals.  It only gets more difficult from here.

 

While I agree with the gist of this, I don't think anyone expected us to do anything in the playoffs.

What we can hope for is that the negative vibes of this season is the crucible that shapes the core for the better.

(and the relative ease for the Leafs is an anchor that slows their growth moving forward :devil: )

 

Playoffs were a hope for everyone that cares about this team this year.

Next year, they should be the expectation for everyone.

[Weave]

I believe the consensus was bubble team. Anyway, the team shouldn't be in the same place. Second years for Jack and Sam (and at least in Jack's case, he's taken a leap in his development), and we added a no-BS 1st line player in Okposo. I just don't think we should let this year's underpeformance reduce our expectations.

 

I agree the team shouldn't be where it is.  But it is.  We don't have what we think we have.  The 15 points we didn't gain are the hardest to gain.  We all talked about that last offseason.  This is the reality of where we are today.  Groundhog Day.

[Taro T]

I believe the consensus was bubble team. Anyway, the team shouldn't be in the same place. Second years for Jack and Sam (and at least in Jack's case, he's taken a leap in his development), and we added a no-BS 1st line player in Okposo. I just don't think we should let this year's underpeformance reduce our expectations.

A-friggin'-men.

[Weave]

Let me clarify.  I'm not suggesting that I will be satisfied with a bubble team next year.  I said in the offseason that this season needed to be a playoff season.  I'd be 100% Ok with GMTM and DD both being shown the door based on missed expectations right now.  If they miss next season, there should be a full blood letting.  However, I don't see how anyone that thought 80 to bubble this season can expect much more than that next season.  The team is in the same boat, with the same problems.

 

So, here's my solution.  Do the bloodletting now because it is inevitable next season.

[Thorny]

Let me clarify. I'm not suggesting that I will be satisfied with a bubble team next year. I said in the offseason that this season needed to be a playoff season. I'd be 100% Ok with GMTM and DD both being shown the door based on missed expectations right now. If they miss next season, there should be a full blood letting. However, I don't see how anyone that thought 80 to bubble this season can expect much more than that next season. The team is in the same boat, with the same problems.

 

So, here's my solution. Do the bloodletting now because it is inevitable next season.

It's because a fair few of those that think we should be have been much better this year, attribute at least a large share of failing to do so to the presence of Bylsma and his system. Those that expect him to be fired this offseason could easily have plenty of reason to hope that that alone will get us well into the playoffs next season, seeing as how "bubble team" was the consensus of what the expectation was THIS year, and next year also includes for the further development of the young players.

 

I.e. - Our point total this season was artificially low, due to the Bylsma effect, much the same way that we were able to improve so drastically the season after the artificialy low tank year, with the difference being one was the intentional icing of an inferior team, and the other was a scenario where they unintentionally shot themselves in the foot.

Edited April 5, 2017 by Thorny

[Derrico]

Should we let Bylsma's second season failure define for us what is reasonable? I'm not lowering the bar of what is acceptable just because our coach is inept.

 

Edit: And FWIW, I think Toronto wins a series this year and, yes, is competitive in round 2. From last place. We need to set our sights higher than the low bar we're used to.

I hate to say it but I agree with this.  They may very well end up playing Ottawa in the first round.  Not a cakewalk but Ottawa has a ton of injuries on the back end and look very vulnerable.  Then it's Montreal who have problems of their own.  Easy division means It would not surprise me if the leafs have an ok shot at the Conference finals.

[PASabreFan]

Team progression is not usually linear. Maybe we're spoiled as Sabres fans because of 96-99 and 03-07. A common scenario is a team breaks through one year, slides back the next and then makes a serious run the third year, sometimes winning it all.

[MattPie]

I'm trying to figure out the staunchly pro-Byslma guys. What's the attraction? Do you like his system?

 

If you read his wikipedia entry (as I just did), it sounds pretty impressive. He won the cup in his first NHL coaching season (although I've read here he kept Therien's system that year). Since then, his teams have been good in the regular season but didn't get back to the finals. Can you really pin all that on Fleury? Even though Crosby and Malkin are two of the best centers in the game? I wonder how much of Fluery's post-season woes are him and how much is a system that gives the puck away constantly.

[pi2000]

I'm trying to figure out the staunchly pro-Byslma guys. What's the attraction? Do you like his system?

 

If you read his wikipedia entry (as I just did), it sounds pretty impressive. He won the cup in his first NHL coaching season (although I've read here he kept Therien's system that year). Since then, his teams have been good in the regular season but didn't get back to the finals. Can you really pin all that on Fleury? Even though Crosby and Malkin are two of the best centers in the game? I wonder how much of Fluery's post-season woes are him and how much is a system that gives the puck away constantly.

 

It's the grass is always greener mentality... that another coach would be better just because he'd do something different.    That's fools gold, you don't look a gift horse in the mouth.  If they brought somebody else in and suddenly Jack's numbers plummeted because it's all about possession, not getting pucks up ice, then it would fly in the face of all the Bylsma haters.

 

Bylsma's PIT teams had the 10th best team Corsi% in the league over those 6 seasons... was top 5 a few of those.    His teams made the playoffs every year, averaging 105 points per season, escaped out of the 1st round in 4 of the 6 years, made 2 conference finals, and won a Cup.   Sure he had Crosby and Malkin, but he had to be doing something right to have that amount of success.    

[Sabres Fan in NS]

It's the grass is always greener mentality... that another coach would be better just because he'd do something different.    That's fools gold, you don't look a gift horse in the mouth.  If they brought somebody else in and suddenly Jack's numbers plummeted because it's all about possession, not getting pucks up ice, then it would fly in the face of all the Bylsma haters.

 

Bylsma's PIT teams had the 10th best team Corsi% in the league over those 6 seasons... was top 5 a few of those.    His teams made the playoffs every year, averaging 105 points per season, escaped out of the 1st round in 4 of the 6 years, made 2 conference finals, and won a Cup.   Sure he had Crosby and Malkin, but he had to be doing something right to have that amount of success.    

 

Perfect answer.

 

You are now the official mouth piece for all (I think there are 3 of us) the Bylsma supporters here.

[MattPie]

It's the grass is always greener mentality... that another coach would be better just because he'd do something different.    That's fools gold, you don't look a gift horse in the mouth.  If they brought somebody else in and suddenly Jack's numbers plummeted because it's all about possession, not getting pucks up ice, then it would fly in the face of all the Bylsma haters.

 

Bylsma's PIT teams had the 10th best team Corsi% in the league over those 6 seasons... was top 5 a few of those.    His teams made the playoffs every year, averaging 105 points per season, escaped out of the 1st round in 4 of the 6 years, made 2 conference finals, and won a Cup.   Sure he had Crosby and Malkin, but he had to be doing something right to have that amount of success.    

 

Thank you, I appreciate the answer. I said above his record does seem pretty good. To me, it seems like his real success was early on and became less effective as time went on (or the league moved on and/or learned how to counter his system), but cognitive dissonance is powerful so I can't say I'm evaluating with an unbiased eye. Do you feel he's a good enough coach to keep and turn over most of the roster to fit his system?

 

In my limited viewing this year, I'd say Jack is *not* playing the system; how often does he take a long pass from the D vs does he go blowing through the neutral zone with the puck on his stick? I'm not sure if that's condoned by the coach or if Jack is giving HHDCRGDDB the finger every time he does it.

[WildCard]

It's the grass is always greener mentality... that another coach would be better just because he'd do something different.    That's fools gold, you don't look a gift horse in the mouth.  If they brought somebody else in and suddenly Jack's numbers plummeted because it's all about possession, not getting pucks up ice, then it would fly in the face of all the Bylsma haters.

 

Bylsma's PIT teams had the 10th best team Corsi% in the league over those 6 seasons... was top 5 a few of those.    His teams made the playoffs every year, averaging 105 points per season, escaped out of the 1st round in 4 of the 6 years, made 2 conference finals, and won a Cup.   Sure he had Crosby and Malkin, but he had to be doing something right to have that amount of success.    

I didn't want Byslma to begin with, so it's not the grass is always greener. 

 

And yeah, if our possession numbers were worse it would fly in my face. Their what? 30th in the league right now? So good luck getting worse at that

 

'escaped out of the 1st round' is not an accomplishment. It's a spin on the reality of him failing to make it past the 2nd 4/6 years. 

[TrueBlueGED]

It's the grass is always greener mentality... that another coach would be better just because he'd do something different.    That's fools gold, you don't look a gift horse in the mouth.  If they brought somebody else in and suddenly Jack's numbers plummeted because it's all about possession, not getting pucks up ice, then it would fly in the face of all the Bylsma haters.

 

Bylsma's PIT teams had the 10th best team Corsi% in the league over those 6 seasons... was top 5 a few of those.    His teams made the playoffs every year, averaging 105 points per season, escaped out of the 1st round in 4 of the 6 years, made 2 conference finals, and won a Cup.   Sure he had Crosby and Malkin, but he had to be doing something right to have that amount of success.    

 

These are all passive reasons. Do you have any active reasons for supporting him? What has he done this year and last year that make you think he's good?

[Taro T]

It's the grass is always greener mentality... that another coach would be better just because he'd do something different. That's fools gold, you don't look a gift horse in the mouth. If they brought somebody else in and suddenly Jack's numbers plummeted because it's all about possession, not getting pucks up ice, then it would fly in the face of all the Bylsma haters.

 

Bylsma's PIT teams had the 10th best team Corsi% in the league over those 6 seasons... was top 5 a few of those. His teams made the playoffs every year, averaging 105 points per season, escaped out of the 1st round in 4 of the 6 years, made 2 conference finals, and won a Cup. Sure he had Crosby and Malkin, but he had to be doing something right to have that amount of success.

 

Seems to me that most of the pro-Bylsma talk is actually attemped Jedi-mind tricking to get a larger anti-Murray brigade going. (Speaking of grass being greener. ;))

 

Most here see that the way Bylsma is coaching the team to play is not effective. Therefore most here want Dan gone. IF Murray doesn't share that sentiment, several people here (current poster included) will reconsider their support (or at minimum neutrality) of Tim. So, by keeping a coach that is a poor fit, the anti-Murray brigade gets their wish sooner than will occur w/ a coach being relieved of his duties next week. As that will likely result in Murray being relieved of his duties by next off-season at the latest.

 

[EDIT:Though THAT will likely backfire as a combination of youth maturing, falling back towards a normal amount of injuries, & personnel moves will have this team sneaking into the playoffs EVEN w/ Bylsma behind the wheel. And we'll be stuck w/ suboptimal results even longer as Dan doesn't get canned until the middle of the following year at the earliest. :doh: ]

Edited April 5, 2017 by Taro T

[pi2000]

Thank you, I appreciate the answer. I said above his record does seem pretty good. To me, it seems like his real success was early on and became less effective as time went on (or the league moved on and/or learned how to counter his system), but cognitive dissonance is powerful so I can't say I'm evaluating with an unbiased eye. Do you feel he's a good enough coach to keep and turn over most of the roster to fit his system?

 

In my limited viewing this year, I'd say Jack is *not* playing the system; how often does he take a long pass from the D vs does he go blowing through the neutral zone with the puck on his stick? I'm not sure if that's condoned by the coach or if Jack is giving HHDCRGDDB the finger every time he does it.

 

A lot of folks here complain about the Sabre's poor possession stats (Corsi/SAT%) and blame his system specifically as the reason.    They also claim (and I would agree) that your chances of playoff success are greater the better your team Corsi/SAT%.  

 

That said, in 08-09 when he won his Cup, there were no team Corsi/SAT% numbers kept (at least on nhl.com), so that remains a mystery.   However, the years following they did keep track and here's where his PIT ranked:

 

09-10:  6th 52.10%     101 points lost in 2nd round

10-11:  4th 52.78%     106 points lost in 1st round (7 games to 103 point TBL)

11-12:  3rd 54.24%     108 points lost in 1st round (6 games to 103 point PHI)

12-13:  18th 48.99%     72 points lost in 3rd round (strike shortened season)

13-14:  22nd 44.86%  109 points lost in 2nd round

 

Both times they lost in the first round were to teams who had worse Corsi/SAT% during the season.   

 

The last 2 seasons their possession numbers suffered.... lets take a closer look:  

 

11-12:  46.80 SATfor/game   39.39 SATagainst/game  (3rd best Corst/SAT% in the league)

12-13:  42.41 SATfor/game   44.17 SATagainst/game

13-14:  40.63 SATfor/game   42.87 SATagainst/game

 

In the strike shortened 12-13 season both Malkin and Crosby missed 10+ games.    Malkin missing a quarter of the season.   In 13-14 Malkin also missed 20+ games.

 

Now, that alone doesn't explain the drop in possession numbers, but in 12-13 they finished 2nd in the entire NHL in points and won 2 playoff series, eventually losing to BOS in the ECF.  

 

In 13-14 they finished 6th in the league with 109 points, won a playoff series and lost in 7 games to the NYR, who evetually went to on met LA in the SCF.    

[WildCard]

This says they were 8th in 5v5 in 2010-2011, and 5th in 2011-2012

 

TBL were 14th and Philly 6th

 

https://puckalytics.com/#/teams?season=201011&situation=5v5&Team=

[TrueBlueGED]

Never, ever, use NHL dot com for the "advanced" stats. It is not accurate.

[WildCard]

Really curious to know who outpossesed who in those serious

[pi2000]

These are all passive reasons. Do you have any active reasons for supporting him? What has he done this year and last year that make you think he's good?

 

The young players are doing well.   Risto, Eichel, Kane have really come on the last couple seasons under him.     That's a big part of what he was brought in here to do.... teach the kids, and IMO he's been successful in doing so.    I think he deserves at least another season with a revamped bottom 6 and some NHL caliber depth on defense to see what he can do.     

 

Again, they're 7th in the league in giveaways, which is excellent.... the problem is defending, they can't get the puck back, they rank 24th in takeaways... which tells me they need some defensively skilled players... i don't think it's so much of a system thing as it is a one-on-one inability of this team to generate any takeaways.

 

ROR has 55 takeways (30th in the league), the next best Sabre is Eichel at 35 which ranks 144th!    That's awful.     Their best defenseman McCabe has 27 takeaways which ranks 44th amongst all defensemen!  Again, terrible at defending and getting pucks back.

 

Eveybody talks about how D are always giving the puck away with long stretch passes, well Risto leads our team in giveaways but he ranks only 39th worst among defensemen and he's out there half the game.    If Bylsma's system was such garbage, we'd be leading the league in giveaways.

Edited April 5, 2017 by pi2000

[WildCard]

1) Risto, Eichel, and Reinhart would have progressed regardless IMO. Kane seems to do really well with Byslma.

 

2) Why can we only take the puck away in our own zone? Why can't we do it offensively? 

 

3) Interesting stat. So RoR, who has been voted for a Selke trophy multiple times, has less takeaways than Jack? So does a vet Gionta, and Kane? We've all seen Jack in the defensive zone, he's not good, at all. This tells me your stat means, well, nothing.

 

Where are you getting these stats anyways? If it's nhl.com I can tell you with first hand experience they have bad data

Edited April 5, 2017 by WildCard