Sabres Practice Report 1/28/2019

[...]

Is it Jack being indecisive or the rest of the unit giving him little to work with? I can't say Jack looks indecisive in other areas of the game. 

[jame]

31 minutes ago, ... said:

Is it Jack being indecisive or the rest of the unit giving him little to work with? I can't say Jack looks indecisive in other areas of the game. 

Jack consistently slows the PP down on the half wall... he has 4 options, but takes to long to take one.... he can shoot, cycle to Reinhart as he comes off the post, try to hit Skinner in the high slot, go low % cross ice to Dahlin, or reset to Risto at the point. The choice is his, but he needs to make it faster or the entire d resets and the rotations were pointless.

 

[Weave]

I think the whole damned squad is slowing things down.  Risto with slow cross ice decisions, Jack with slow decisions, slow to develop entry plays. 

 

The whole damned thing is too deliberate. 

[dudacek]

35 minutes ago, ... said:

Is it Jack being indecisive or the rest of the unit giving him little to work with? I can't say Jack looks indecisive in other areas of the game. 

Chicken/egg.

The amount of deference to Jack is a problem all parties need to address.

Jeff rarely carries the puck out of the corner. Sam rarely moves the puck from the left corner behind the net to the right side of the ice. Nobody bombs from the right circle into a prime Reinhart screen the way ROR used to. Reinhart is the only one who ever passes to Skinner, and that’s about 20 per cent of the time he passes to Jack. Any of those things create ice for Jack.

At least the first two are things those players are very capable of doing. 

Risto to Jack to Reinhart to Jack, to Risto to Dahlin to Jack and except for a bit of high-side sliding from the three top guys, all those passes are in the same spots

[jame]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

Chicken/egg.

The amount of deference to Jack is a problem all parties need to address.

Jeff rarely carries the puck out of the corner. Sam rarely moves the puck from the left corner behind the net to the right side of the ice. Nobody bombs from the right circle into a prime Reinhart screen the way ROR used to. Reinhart is the only one who ever passes to Skinner, and that’s about 20 per cent of the time he passes to Jack. Any of those things create ice for Jack.

At least the first two are things those players are very capable of doing. 

Risto to Jack to Reinhart to Jack, to Risto to Dahlin to Jack and except for a bit of high-side sliding from the three top guys, all those passes are in the same spots

I think deference to jack on the PP is fine so long as he takes advantage of that deference with quicker decisions... everyone will benefit. 

[SABRES 0311]

5 hours ago, jame said:

The drop pass is used because we have two elite zone entry players. It's utilized to put the opponent in static positions, while allowing our elite talent to attack with speed.

It's not a tactic used to attack what the opponent is doing (being "blocked" as you say, or being pressured... it's used entirely because it puts the puck and decision making with the puck entirely in Eichel/Dahlin's hands rather than allowing the opponent to force/dictate the play

How often the Sabres use it defeats the purpose. Four defenders standing on the blue line waiting negates however good Dahlin and Eichel’s hands are. How many times have we seen Eichel lose the puck doing this?

Three or four guys skating together gives lateral options which may force the D to back off the line. If not a dump and chase is in the Sabres favor because you have two to three other guys getting the jump on four D standing on the line. 

[Taro T]

4 hours ago, jame said:

I think deference to jack on the PP is fine so long as he takes advantage of that deference with quicker decisinons... everyone will benefit. 

The problem w/ deference to Eichel by the Sabres IMHO is that he is expected to be the primary set up man and also the primary 1 timer taker.  He can't do both, at least not effectively, again IMHO.  That's why I'd really like to see a better playmaker than Skinner at the high slot.  Have the PP run through the high slot & allow the puck to get distributed to all the spokes & should the other team cheat towards Eichel, send it on net from the high slot.  And for the sake of all that's good & holy DON'T have every player stay within 10' of HIS spot on the whiteboard.

When zone entry is included, Eichel literally runs the entire PP.  He brings it in, sets it up, & takes the 1 timer.  That works, usually, in youth hockey; at the NHL level, not so much.

[thewookie1]

20 minutes ago, Taro T said:

The problem w/ deference to Eichel by the Sabres IMHO is that he is expected to be the primary set up man and also the primary 1 timer taker.  He can't do both, at least not effectively, again IMHO.  That's why I'd really like to see a better playmaker than Skinner at the high slot.  Have the PP run through the high slot & allow the puck to get distributed to all the spokes & should the other team cheat towards Eichel, send it on net from the high slot.  And for the sake of all that's good & holy DON'T have every player stay within 10' of HIS spot on the whiteboard.

When zone entry is included, Eichel literally runs the entire PP.  He brings it in, sets it up, & takes the 1 timer.  That works, usually, in youth hockey; at the NHL level, not so much.

Agree with you entirely here. 

Someone else on the PP needs to at minimum be either a solid passing threat or shooting threat from the side opposite Eichel.  Right now, Eichel gets effectively trapped between endlessly trying cycle with Risto/Reinhart or trying to pick the corner. There is far too little movement on the PP and Reinhart needs to do more than merely stand beside the net and play catch with Eichel. Maybe occasionally pass around the boards and try to loosen the box or get them moving side to side. Presently the other team can practically sit 3 guys on one side to guard against Eichel, Reinhart, Risto, and whomever is in the high slot.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

12 hours ago, jame said:

What you hear... is on you. 

 

Even though I hate it I am going to insist that you use what some in NS  use as the plural of you ... yous ... since I am not the only you in this case.

It is on everyone here to try to make it as enjoyable as possible for everyone else.

[SABRES 0311]

14 hours ago, jame said:

No team runs their PP from behind the net. That's a fact. Unless you have some non-colloquial definition of "runs", then it's a factually incorrect statement.

The Sabres run a 1-3-1 PP from the halfwall. That's a fact.

What you hear... is on you. 

 

1-3-1 is the defensive trap. The PP as is provides two options. A screen shot from Jack coming off the wall or he passes below the goal line to Sam. Sam then passes to Skinner. I could definitely be wrong but when someone said “behind the net” they may have inferred below the goal line. 

[Doohickie]

20 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Just doing it to do it is silly. 

Yes, and at this point they look like they're just going through the motions.  When they do that drop pass into their own zone it just saps the momentum out of the rush.

19 hours ago, inkman said:

PH will always be Paul Hamilton in my book, unfortunately. 

PH will always be, well, my initials.

[Doohickie]

15 hours ago, jame said:

What you hear... is on you. 

I've never noticed you before this recent exchange, but no, what they hear is on you.

[...]

9 hours ago, Taro T said:

The problem w/ deference to Eichel by the Sabres IMHO is that he is expected to be the primary set up man and also the primary 1 timer taker.  He can't do both, at least not effectively, again IMHO.  That's why I'd really like to see a better playmaker than Skinner at the high slot.  Have the PP run through the high slot & allow the puck to get distributed to all the spokes & should the other team cheat towards Eichel, send it on net from the high slot.  And for the sake of all that's good & holy DON'T have every player stay within 10' of HIS spot on the whiteboard.

When zone entry is included, Eichel literally runs the entire PP.  He brings it in, sets it up, & takes the 1 timer.  That works, usually, in youth hockey; at the NHL level, not so much.

This is how it looks, for sure, but the question remains on why they're playing this way.  Is it everyone else not named Eichel not willing/able to make the PP work, is it all of them, or are they being coached to play it this way?

Has any one who enjoys the stats broken down the success and failure rates of each player who plays on a PP unit and the most successful combinations?  I would be curious to see if they have been deviating from an obviously successful formula.

[Doohickie]

15 hours ago, erickompositör72 said:

I don't think our PP problems have anything to do with the drop pass. They are mostly because- as @WildCard alluded to- we never change up the look when we have possession. We're too static. Every NHL team has the book on our power play. They know which passing lanes to cover and which one-timers to watch out for. 

While I agree with most of your post, I disagree with the first sentence.  The problem with the drop pass is that they use it so much, and often are not very crisp with it, that it becomes a time waster during the power play, especially on the frequent occasions that it is not a clean pass and the receiver has to skate out of their way to get the puck.  It wastes time and gives the penalty killers more time to set up.

[LTS]

20 hours ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Harrington is such a drama queen.

He probably learned it from here.

18 hours ago, jame said:

You don't run a PP from behind the net.

We run a 1-3-1 PP, it's run from the halfwall.

No. 

Yes, some teams actually do run a power play from behind the net.

15 hours ago, jame said:

No team runs their PP from behind the net. That's a fact. Unless you have some non-colloquial definition of "runs", then it's a factually incorrect statement.

The Sabres run a 1-3-1 PP from the halfwall. That's a fact.

What you hear... is on you. 

 

 

https://thecoachessite.com/2018/05/20/behind-net-powerplay-formation-driven-analytics/

https://www.coppernblue.com/2011/9/29/2435373/behind-the-net-power-play-tactics-with-coach-bob-nielsen

https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/canucks-have-already-used-similar-tactics-to-switzerland-s-world-junior-power-play-1.23564814

So, for what it's worth.  You are wrong.  Simply and decisively.  If you put more energy into searching than asserting you'll also find references to the Gretzky led Oilers running PPs time from behind the net/below the goal line.  The 1-3-1 is flavor of the month.  Like any system, it can be effective. At the same time, given that so many teams are running with the 1-3-1 it also makes it easier for defenders to defend.  They see it night in and night out.  That's the point of changing it up.

Your tone with people on here is ridiculous. The point of a forum is engage in discussion and the very way you phrase things work in opposition to having a discussion. You already admitted you are aware of it. Perhaps you might want to put some of the energy to use on improving your communication skills.

[Doohickie]

15 hours ago, jame said:

The value of the 1-3-1 is that it creates movement easily, and provides multiple options to the half wall. 

When the Sabres do it though, the opponents know to clog up the middle witch takes two of the options away.  So Jack either shoots, passes to the top or passes behind the net.  Passing it through the middle most often results in the Sabres chasing down the puck in their own zone.

[...]

4 minutes ago, LTS said:

Your tone with people on here is ridiculous. The point of a forum is engage in discussion and the very way you phrase things work in opposition to having a discussion. You already admitted you are aware of it. Perhaps you might want to put some of the energy to use on improving your communication skills.

Why should he/she?  People are responding.  He/she is getting attention. That's the goal, not building relationships.

[Doohickie]

Well yeah, until people finally start putting said person on Ignore.

[jame]

1 hour ago, SABRES 0311 said:

1-3-1 is the defensive trap. The PP as is provides two options. A screen shot from Jack coming off the wall or he passes below the goal line to Sam. Sam then passes to Skinner. I could definitely be wrong but when someone said “behind the net” they may have inferred below the goal line. 

1-3-1 PP and a 1-3-1 neutral zone scheme are two totally different things.

[SABRES 0311]

4 minutes ago, jame said:

1-3-1 PP and a 1-3-1 neutral zone scheme are two totally different things.

That’s what I’m saying. What is a 1-3-1 PP?

Edited January 29, 2019 by SABRES 0311

[LTS]

16 minutes ago, ... said:

Why should he/she?  People are responding.  He/she is getting attention. That's the goal, not building relationships.

Why?  Because wouldn't this forum be better if we were focused on having a discussion with the intent of being more educated as opposed to playing the equivalent of the 5 year old "I know you are but what am I" game?  For the record, I said nothing of building relationships in my post. 

4 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said:

That’s what I’m saying. What is a 1-3-1 PP?

https://www.icehockeysystems.com/blog/1/1-3-1-power-play-5-options

Basically, 1 player around the goal crease, 3 player across the mid-ice with two shooters on their off-hands on each wall and a player at the top of the zone on the blue line.  The link above will show different methods of employing it.

 

[jame]

16 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said:

That’s what I’m saying. What is a 1-3-1 PP?

Go watch our pp

[SABRES 0311]

Just now, jame said:

Go watch our pp

I do during the game. Could never get past the whole barely ever scoring.

[jame]

37 minutes ago, ... said:

Why should he/she?  People are responding.  He/she is getting attention. That's the goal, not building relationships.

The goal is to have actual conversations about Sabres/hockey..... the goal is the back n forth. Not attention. Not relationships.

[jame]

1 hour ago, LTS said:

He probably learned it from here.

Yes, some teams actually do run a power play from behind the net.

 

https://thecoachessite.com/2018/05/20/behind-net-powerplay-formation-driven-analytics/

https://www.coppernblue.com/2011/9/29/2435373/behind-the-net-power-play-tactics-with-coach-bob-nielsen

https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/canucks-have-already-used-similar-tactics-to-switzerland-s-world-junior-power-play-1.23564814

So, for what it's worth.  You are wrong.  Simply and decisively.  If you put more energy into searching than asserting you'll also find references to the Gretzky led Oilers running PPs time from behind the net/below the goal line.  The 1-3-1 is flavor of the month.  Like any system, it can be effective. At the same time, given that so many teams are running with the 1-3-1 it also makes it easier for defenders to defend.  They see it night in and night out.  That's the point of changing it up.

Your tone with people on here is ridiculous. The point of a forum is engage in discussion and the very way you phrase things work in opposition to having a discussion. You already admitted you are aware of it. Perhaps you might want to put some of the energy to use on improving your communication skills.

First link, Stimson

EDIT: My mistake on the first link. It is a great example of HOW a team could run the PP from behind the net, not an example of an NHL team actually doing it.

Second link, has nothing to do with RUNNING a PP from behind the net in TODAY's NHL. Yes... the Gretzky led Oilers ran their PP from behind the net.... that was over 30 years ago... and really no one does that anymore.

Getting the puck to Reinhart below the goaline does not equal "Running the PP from behind the net"

Sorry, your googling failed you....

Third link, ok...you got me, if Vancouver has taken Switzerland's behind the GOALINE (I'll give it to you :) ) PP scheme... then that would count as RUNNING the PP from behind the net/goaline. I haven't seen that... an NHL team, using Swiss PP scheme would be something.

 

 

Edited January 29, 2019 by jame