"What's wrong with Dad?" Thoughts on the core problem with the Buffalo NHL franchise

[calti]

On 3/7/2020 at 8:20 AM, Brawndo said:

This is from the Athletic’s Tim Graham.

The last paragraph is contradictory to the “Starting Today the Sole Purpose of The Buffalo Sabres is to win The Stanley Cup” and I’ll drill another well opening press conference. 

 

Beane assembled a fantabulous scouting department, consisting of several evaluators who have served upper-level roles with other teams or are considered attractive candidates to do so eventually: assistant GM Joe Schoen, pro personnel director Malik Boyd, college scouting director Terrance Gray, player personnel director Dan Morgan, college scouting assistant director Lake Dawson, senior scout Dennis Hickey and personnel adviser Brian Gaine. We at The Athletic Buffalo have written feature stories on most of them.

Think back to previous Bills GMs and their top lieutenants; most never got another NFL job.

Back to the Sabres … I don’t think a hockey czar is needed just as the Bills’ front office proves a football czar is unnecessary. Jason Botterill could be the Sabres’ boss man in the same way Beane commands the Bills.

The significant difference is that Botterill’s staff doesn’t resemble his Orchard Park counterpart’s deep crew.

Sabres assistant GM/Rochester Americans GM Randy Sexton previously was Ottawa Senators GM for two and a half years and Florida Panthers GM for seven months, and his teams failed to reach the postseason. He worked with Botterill in Pittsburgh as amateur scouting director. Sexton oversaw the Penguins’ drafts in 2016 and 2017. None of those picks have played in the NHL. The Penguins didn’t have any first-round selections, but they did take three second-rounders with Sexton.

Buffalo’s other assistant GM, Steve Greeley, is considered a front-office riser. The 39-year-old former Boston University associate head coach interviewed for the Carolina Hurricanes’ top job in 2018.

Amateur scouting director Ryan Jankowski was assistant GM with the New York Islanders from 2005 to 2010 and oversaw player personnel for Canada’s world junior and under-18 teams before joining Buffalo.

An answer to fortifying the Sabres’ front office would be to spend money to make those lieutenant jobs more attractive to top scouts with better credentials. But with rumblings of more personnel cutbacks across Pegula Sports and Entertainment offices, a substantial cash infusion into hockey operations seems unlikely.

 

 

one good year in the last 20 and the bills are the shining example of how to run a franchise?

[bunomatic]

2 hours ago, calti said:

one good year in the last 20 and the bills are the shining example of how to run a franchise?

Maybe they finally figured it out ? The problem I see is many people in these positions are constantly tripping over their ego and there’s a certain amount of arrogance. They don’t look to others that have ‘ made it ‘ and try to emulate what brought them success because there is the feeling that they are smart enough to do it on their own. When you think you know it all you stop learning. Fact is even the simplest of people can have a moment of clarity and say something that gives you insight into the problem you face. 

[PerreaultForever]

11 hours ago, Pimlach said:

You can’t build an “old style “ team anymore.  The players are different today.  Even the Blues, Flyers, Caps, Bruins are not “old style”.  Its just that they have size and speed and they have players that work hard, set the example, and expect everyone else to follow. 

Google the post game comments from Cassidy and the Bruins about the fight filled Tampa game. It might not be old styled hockey any more, but that's not Sabres hockey either. 

7 hours ago, bunomatic said:

You forgot grit, determination and never say die. 

This is pretty much all I mean. People latch onto the fighting aspects and that's an easy target but that's not what it's about. It's about caring, emotional play, and not being pushed around when and if it does get tough. 

What I really meant was building a team the old way. A balanced line up with some skill, some toughness. A mix of scorers and checkers. Not this deep analytical nonsense that thinks it can reinvent the game by using computers. 

[bunomatic]

35 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Google the post game comments from Cassidy and the Bruins about the fight filled Tampa game. It might not be old styled hockey any more, but that's not Sabres hockey either. 

This is pretty much all I mean. People latch onto the fighting aspects and that's an easy target but that's not what it's about. It's about caring, emotional play, and not being pushed around when and if it does get tough. 

What I really meant was building a team the old way. A balanced line up with some skill, some toughness. A mix of scorers and checkers. Not this deep analytical nonsense that thinks it can reinvent the game by using computers. 

Oh I agree . Nothing worse than a team that has to turtle and look to the official for help. The officials will let you down. Not that it matters to the Sabres but they let a lot of stuff go in the playoffs. It’d be nice to at least be an equal at dishing it out when you come up against a team that plays like that in the playoffs. In a war of attrition you want the other team to suffer as well.

Edited March 9, 2020 by bunomatic

[Curt]

33 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

What I really meant was building a team the old way. A balanced line up with some skill, some toughness. A mix of scorers and checkers. Not this deep analytical nonsense that thinks it can reinvent the game by using computers. 

Is there a team out there actually trying to doing this?  Certainly not the Sabres!  

[Marvin]

2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Google the post game comments from Cassidy and the Bruins about the fight filled Tampa game. It might not be old styled hockey any more, but that's not Sabres hockey either. 

This is pretty much all I mean. People latch onto the fighting aspects and that's an easy target but that's not what it's about. It's about caring, emotional play, and not being pushed around when and if it does get tough. 

What I really meant was building a team the old way. A balanced line up with some skill, some toughness. A mix of scorers and checkers. Not this deep analytical nonsense that thinks it can reinvent the game by using computers. 

As a math person, I go the other way on this: things like grit, determination, etc. DO turn up in the numbers if you know how to measure and infer them.  Managers I know of have attempted to model and quantify factors that allow them to measure grit.  Indeed, there are at least two books on management and managerial decision theory that explain how to quantify grit, mental toughness, etc. in the corporate setting.  These are done via indirect means, but with quantifiable metrics.

Example 1: I worked on a project where one person who moved from one part to another invariably got people to feel happier about their productivity, even though the concrete metrics initially looked mixed.  Eventually, we saw that the parts she worked on might come out a bit more slowly, but NEVER failed QA and performance tests.  Then their code was updated to be used by other groups within the project.  We determined that she increased the mental discipline and quality of thought wherever she worked.  We checked with her superiors and, after some reflection, they agreed.

Example 2: I was at a company where we hired this kid fresh out of college.  He was added to a software project with a pile of legacy code that other people more-or-less had given up on.  Two months later, that group had made more progress with this person than they had the previous year.  Moreover, the enthusiasm of the group was higher and they were now pushing through issues rather than putting them off.  The kid had added grit, determination, and mental toughness.  They even said so at the salary determination meeting.

You would need to do this with hockey as well.  But to model these well, you must choose the proper metrics.  I know a couple of Big Data companies in Buffalo that would like to hire you if you can get the Sabres to buy in.

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, Curt said:

Is there a team out there actually trying to doing this?  Certainly not the Sabres!  

Well ya there is. As I said, Tampa was clearly the most skilled and talented team in the league but they lost first round and have since spent all their efforts getting tougher and more balanced. Bruins have always built their teams this way and continue to do it. St. Louis followed a similar model. Dallas was fast and soft and got tougher, bigger and focused on team defense and are now a much more balanced team. Colorado is built that way too. Washington. Even Pittsburgh has tried to get tougher and bigger (to limited success). Philly looks like their rebuild has followed a similar path as well and they too got tougher at the deadline. 

It's not rocket science to realize you need to be balanced, it's a team sport. You need a little of every aspect so you can play against any and every type of opponent. 

JBot imo based everything on the idea of an incredibly skilled Pittsburgh team (which is rare) and was blinded by the local idea that a team like Toronto was the new way, the new hockey, and that's what he followed. So, since our skill level isn't off the charts, we are left with a mediocre hockey team that is soft and lacks character. That results in what you see, 6 "meaningful" losses in a row. 

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, E4 ... Ke2 said:

As a math person, I go the other way on this: things like grit, determination, etc. DO turn up in the numbers if you know how to measure and infer them.  Managers I know of have attempted to model and quantify factors that allow them to measure grit.  Indeed, there are at least two books on management and managerial decision theory that explain how to quantify grit, mental toughness, etc. in the corporate setting.  These are done via indirect means, but with quantifiable metrics.

Example 1: I worked on a project where one person who moved from one part to another invariably got people to feel happier about their productivity, even though the concrete metrics initially looked mixed.  Eventually, we saw that the parts she worked on might come out a bit more slowly, but NEVER failed QA and performance tests.  Then their code was updated to be used by other groups within the project.  We determined that she increased the mental discipline and quality of thought wherever she worked.  We checked with her superiors and, after some reflection, they agreed.

Example 2: I was at a company where we hired this kid fresh out of college.  He was added to a software project with a pile of legacy code that other people more-or-less had given up on.  Two months later, that group had made more progress with this person than they had the previous year.  Moreover, the enthusiasm of the group was higher and they were now pushing through issues rather than putting them off.  The kid had added grit, determination, and mental toughness.  They even said so at the salary determination meeting.

You would need to do this with hockey as well.  But to model these well, you must choose the proper metrics.  I know a couple of Big Data companies in Buffalo that would like to hire you if you can get the Sabres to buy in.

You know you're probably right. There probably are ways to quantify grit etc.  I'm not sure they'd be easily made universal or comparable but there probably could be some data on that you could use. Having said that though, I'm sure having guys who can recognize it by meeting, talking to, watching these guys on your scouting staff will still be the real deciding factor because experience and intuition based on experience does matter.

[Curt]

3 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Well ya there is. As I said, Tampa was clearly the most skilled and talented team in the league but they lost first round and have since spent all their efforts getting tougher and more balanced. Bruins have always built their teams this way and continue to do it. St. Louis followed a similar model. Dallas was fast and soft and got tougher, bigger and focused on team defense and are now a much more balanced team. Colorado is built that way too. Washington. Even Pittsburgh has tried to get tougher and bigger (to limited success). Philly looks like their rebuild has followed a similar path as well and they too got tougher at the deadline. 

It's not rocket science to realize you need to be balanced, it's a team sport. You need a little of every aspect so you can play against any and every type of opponent. 

JBot imo based everything on the idea of an incredibly skilled Pittsburgh team (which is rare) and was blinded by the local idea that a team like Toronto was the new way, the new hockey, and that's what he followed. So, since our skill level isn't off the charts, we are left with a mediocre hockey team that is soft and lacks character. That results in what you see, 6 "meaningful" losses in a row. 

Yeah, you are describing slightly unbalanced teams with more skill than toughness.  Of course those exist.

Just as there are teams with lots of grit/toughness, but not enough skill.  Those teams are also not good enough.  Recently/currently Islanders, Columbus, Arizona.

But what I really meant was are there teams out there trying to use deep analytical nonsense to reinvent the game by using computers?  Who?  Toronto?  Carolina?

I was just wondering where that came from.

9 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Not this deep analytical nonsense that thinks it can reinvent the game by using computers. 

 

[PerreaultForever]

11 hours ago, Curt said:

Yeah, you are describing slightly unbalanced teams with more skill than toughness.  Of course those exist.

Just as there are teams with lots of grit/toughness, but not enough skill.  Those teams are also not good enough.  Recently/currently Islanders, Columbus, Arizona.

But what I really meant was are there teams out there trying to use deep analytical nonsense to reinvent the game by using computers?  Who?  Toronto?  Carolina?

I was just wondering where that came from.

 

T-dot. Definitely. 

[Curt]

18 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

T-dot. Definitely. 

Fair I guess, if that’s who you had in mind.  They are the only ones I could think of where it kinda made sense.