GDT: Sabres at LA Kings 10/20/18 3:30PM MSG, WGR

[...]

And to think I wasn't going to watch this game...because.

This is the game that turned me on Skinner a little.  Not because of the hat trick, but because of how he handled Phaneuf.  Still not a fan of the apparent whiny attitude over who he plays with, but I do like his intensity in game.

[hockeyhound]

20 minutes ago, North Buffalo said:

Sabres sat back too much in the third... Need to keep pushing it.  Against a better team it could have gone badly.  Changes seemed to do team well, though Berglund loked like he didnt see the ice in the third... Guessing dog house or bumps and bruised... Skinner is such an emotional guy and great for him getting hatty.  Gonna needs to bring it against Ducks.

Case in point, SJ came out in the 3rd the other night with a more aggressive forecheck than the 2 previous periods. There was an obvious deliberate attempt to up the pace and intensity.

Why the Sabres don't do that I would guess it comes down to coaching philosophy. I thought tonight the Sabres came out in the 3rd and gave as good as they got, and stayed with their man. They kept things tight, didn't overplay, and moved their feet. 

IMO, if this team matches their opponent's pace and intensity, stays out of the box, and remains consistent, they will be on the winning side of things more time's than not. Sure there is room for improvement but, I thought they did a good job and played a complete game tonight.

Edited October 20, 2018 by hockeyhound

[WildCard]

2 minutes ago, ... said:

And to think I wasn't going to watch this game...because.

This is the game that turned me on Skinner a little.  Not because of the hat trick, but because of how he handled Phaneuf.  Still not a fan of the apparent whiny attitude over who he plays with, but I do like his intensity in game.

Must've missed something, but what's the attitude you're referring to?

[...]

Just now, WildCard said:

Must've missed something, but what's the attitude you're referring to?

Hamilton and RR both have mentioned Skinner wasn't happy being taken off of Eichel's line.  They also both pointed out that he appeared to have more jump today due to being back on Eichel's line.

[North Buffalo]

whiny getting old WC? Hey I can still read... might disagree but guy is emotional.

[That Aud Smell]

What a delightful game.

[WildCard]

14 minutes ago, ... said:

Hamilton and RR both have mentioned Skinner wasn't happy being taken off of Eichel's line.  They also both pointed out that he appeared to have more jump today due to being back on Eichel's line.

Ah gotcha. Not a fan of it either but it makes sense

14 minutes ago, North Buffalo said:

whiny getting old WC? Hey I can still read... might disagree but guy is emotional.

Huh?

[Wyldnwoody44]

I was able to stream the last 10 minutes of the 1st and half of the second before Haitian wifi cut out, but I'll take it. 

They looked good from the limited viewing I saw, I still think our forecheck is weak and very passive overall. The line shakeup may have helped, but that could be just a limited response from the shakeup, we shall seeeeee

[WildCard]

Here's the ref catching the flying stick today. Pretty awesome actually

https://streamable.com/zqrjo

[Eleven]

43 minutes ago, hockeyhound said:

Case in point, SJ came out in the 3rd the other night with a more aggressive forecheck than the 2 previous periods. There was an obvious deliberate attempt to up the pace and intensity.

Why the Sabres don't do that I would guess it comes down to coaching philosophy. I thought tonight the Sabres came out in the 3rd and gave as good as they got, and stayed with their man. They kept things tight, didn't overplay, and moved their feet. 

IMO, if this team matches their opponent's pace and intensity, stays out of the box, and remains consistent, they will be on the winning side of things more time's than not. Sure there is room for improvement but, I thought they did a good job and played a complete game tonight.

The Sabres were up 4-0 when the third period stated today.  SJ was up by one the other evening.  Big difference. 

[WildCard]

https://mobile.twitter.com/PR_NHL/status/1053760712768712709

Pommers becomes the 3rd player from the 2001 draft with 700 points, joining Kovalchuk and Spezza

Edited October 20, 2018 by WildCard

[JJFIVEOH]

Housley has no balls. If he did, Ullmark would be starting next game. We'll see. 

[WildCard]

Just now, JJFIVEOH said:

Housley has no balls. If he did, Ullmark would be starting next game. We'll see. 

Not sure that exactly goes hand in hand. Hutton was brought in here to be the starter and has a lot more experience than Ullmark. 

[Randall Flagg]

Never start a goalie two nights in a row. I don't care if he gets a shutout AND scores a hat trick. 

[JJFIVEOH]

8 minutes ago, WildCard said:

Not sure that exactly goes hand in hand. Hutton was brought in here to be the starter and has a lot more experience than Ullmark. 

Hutton is in his 30's and never been a starter. 

Ullmark has allowed one goal in two games. Play the hot hand. 

[WildCard]

1 minute ago, JJFIVEOH said:

Hutton is in his 30's and never been a starter. 

Ullmark has allowed one goal in two games. Play the hot hand. 

Right but I didn't say that. Hutton is the vet and there's a reason he's the starter. Is Ullmark playing better right now? I mean he's played Arizona and the Kings, two bottom feeders, while Hutton got SJ and Vegas, two legit Stanley Cup contenders

[Randall Flagg]

Goalies lose like 20 points off their save percentage the second game of a back-to-back, despite almost every single time that happens being because they're dominant in the first game. 

That's like choosing to start prime Michael Leighton when you have prime Tim Thomas. 

Edited October 20, 2018 by Randall Flagg

[SwampD]

18 minutes ago, JJFIVEOH said:

Hutton is in his 30's and never been a starter. 

Ullmark has allowed one goal in two games. Play the hot hand. 

Not to pee in your Cheerios, but

I might want to see him do it against some good teams first.

[Scottysabres]

Well, that was a pleasant surprise.

Not sure LA's protected strength this season, but I am very happy the Sabres won. Would have been awake to watch, but ribs, arm and head a bit sore.

Good win boys! Good effort!

To Sabres!!!!

[TheAud]

48 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

Never start a goalie two nights in a row. I don't care if he gets a shutout AND scores a hat trick. 

Interesting you say that. I just read a book that claims to debunk this. I'll have to go find the exact reference. (Book is called "Stat Shot").

I believe they conclude that the poorer performance of goalies in back to backs is not so much the goalie plays worse but rather the team in front of them is tired and gives up  more quality chances. Something like that.  

[WildCard]

Just now, Sakman said:

Interesting you say that. I just read a book that claims to debunk this. I'll have to go find the exact reference. (Book is called "Stat Shot").

I believe they conclude that the poorer performance of goalies in back to backs is not so much the goalie plays worse but rather the team in front of them is tired and gives up  more quality chances. Something like that.  

Interesting point

[Randall Flagg]

6 minutes ago, Sakman said:

Interesting you say that. I just read a book that claims to debunk this. I'll have to go find the exact reference. (Book is called "Stat Shot").

I believe they conclude that the poorer performance of goalies in back to backs is not so much the goalie plays worse but rather the team in front of them is tired and gives up  more quality chances. Something like that.  

I'd be interested to read how they determined that, but I'm pretty comfortable that the guy playing 60 minutes instead of 18 will have more severe fatigue issues. I'd love to see team records in the second game with the same goalie versus a different one.

And the fact remains that the rested goalie in the second game of a back to back has a far, far higher save percentage, with the same tired team in front of him.

[hockeyhound]

36 minutes ago, Eleven said:

The Sabres were up 4-0 when the third period stated today.  SJ was up by one the other evening.  Big difference. 

  1 hour ago, North Buffalo said:

Sabres sat back too much in the third... Need to keep pushing it.  Against a better team it could have gone badly.  Changes seemed to do team well, though Berglund loked like he didnt see the ice in the third... Guessing dog house or bumps and bruised... Skinner is such an emotional guy and great for him getting hatty.  Gonna needs to bring it against Ducks.

 

I was responding to North Buffalo regarding his observations and comment,"Sabres sat back too much in the third... Need to keep pushing it."

SJ was the better team the other night and they seemed to "Keep pushing it" as North Buffalo suggested and won. 

I'm sorry I don't really understand how your response fits and that's my fault. I guess what I'm trying to say is the Sabres should be the Sabres and I thought tonight they played a complete game. SJ is SJ maybe their style is to "keep pushing it" which is fine; however, if the Sabres would have played SJ the way they played the Kings tonight a complete game then the L might have been a W.

You hear commentators talk about a team identity and I'm not sure the Sabres have established that yet but, they will eventually play to their identity, and learn how to win with the talent they have. I'm sure that is as clear as mud.

[Andrew Amerk]

Maybe the win was due to having two GDT’s, and we should do it again. 

[TheAud]

5 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I'd be interested to read how they determined that, but I'm pretty comfortable that the guy playing 60 minutes instead of 18 will have more severe fatigue issues. I'd love to see team records in the second game with the same goalie versus a different one.

I Just went back and found the section of the book. Pages 222-224. It wasn't the central point of the chapter at all, more of a side note so it's a summary of several published studies. Of course I went to look for the key study they reference but it was on War-on-ice and that appears to be more or less defunct now. 

The main point was that a somewhat famous study showed save % for goalies who played both ends of a back to back dropped about 0.2% but later studies found that was more a fluke of the season studied. One of the seasons was the lockout season which had a weird compressed schedule anyway. So a later study (2015 War-on-Ice that I can't find) apparently looked at every season since the lockout 2005 through 2013-14 and found that the initial study looked at the two seasons with the largest decrease in goalie save%'s in back-to-back's, but in  looking at other seasons they actually found three years where goalie save % was higher in the second game of a back-to-back where they played both games.  Whereas some other studies apparently conclude that teams playing back to backs are "5% worse at attempting close shots and 6% worse at allowing close shots." (Another War-on-ice blog post, both of these are from a guy named Andrew Thomas). 

Nonetheless, intuitively it seems that playing a second day in a row would be harder than playing when fully rested, due to fatigue.

I guess if a "hot hand" effect actually exists for goaltending and your goalie is playing well, it might make sense to play him on the 2nd night as well. Alternatively if you have a goalie really struggling, you might be better off starting the other guy both nights. In the Sabres case although Ullmark has certainly played well I am not sure if he is truly a hot hand per se and I don't feel Hutton is struggling, so I'd start Hutton tomorrow.