GDT Anaheim Ducks at Sabres 2/9/20 3pm MSG, WGR

[Randall Flagg]

I think part of what makes our defense look bad is that our offense is bottom of the barrel in terms of what they're capable of doing in the offensive zone. So in a game, we see our defense give up chances, looks, passing plays that we haven't seen ourselves in years, and think it's a function of our awful defense. In reality, we may even do better about limiting these chances than the average NHL team, we just never see our offense capable of doing this to other teams.

The issue really is our offense (and backup goaltending). The talent of Jack and Olofsson and Sam and Skinner (until the last few months) has kept the raw goals scored out of the basement but we are the worst chance creation team since Botterill got here, measured by either of expected goals for or scoring chances for.

[triumph_communes]

31 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I think part of what makes our defense look bad is that our offense is bottom of the barrel in terms of what they're capable of doing in the offensive zone. So in a game, we see our defense give up chances, looks, passing plays that we haven't seen ourselves in years, and think it's a function of our awful defense. In reality, we may even do better about limiting these chances than the average NHL team, we just never see our offense capable of doing this to other teams.

The issue really is our offense (and backup goaltending). The talent of Jack and Olofsson and Sam and Skinner (until the last few months) has kept the raw goals scored out of the basement but we are the worst chance creation team since Botterill got here, measured by either of expected goals for or scoring chances for.

Our defense isn't bad (barring Bogosian minutes).  Miller was the weak link, but has come back to his expectation.  McCabe still has dunce moments.  Jokiharju and Dahlin aren't even 20yo and if you compare them appropriately, they are doing amazing.  This has been a great season to watch as we rarely are hemmed in our own zone.  Does nobody remember Bylsma hockey?  We would sit in our own zone for half the game and our only goals came from breakaways.  Now teams respect us, let us break out, and play 1-2-2 jamming it all up because our offense is so thin and they know one of our dunces is going to eventually make a mistake.

 

Our starting goaltending spent half the season being bad, started to play average, then hurt himself.  Our back-up goaltending has been monumentally bad.  Any team is going to struggle with that.  The lack of depth on offense, especially for a team that had multiple top-6 players get injured, is going to struggle.  I'm not sure what people were expecting?  Even though this is year-3 of Botterill, we are depending upon Murray's picks to step-up at this point and he only has one guy who made it (a 7th rounder..) beyond the 2OA picks.

 

The problem here is people's expectations on this season after the injuries.  Or how Botterill is somehow going to make UFA's sign in the least desired city in the country on some sort of discount?  Instead he traded 3/4th round picks for those veterans instead, and they're mostly all underperforming.

Edited February 10, 2020 by triumph_communes

[darksabre]

35 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I think part of what makes our defense look bad is that our offense is bottom of the barrel in terms of what they're capable of doing in the offensive zone. So in a game, we see our defense give up chances, looks, passing plays that we haven't seen ourselves in years, and think it's a function of our awful defense. In reality, we may even do better about limiting these chances than the average NHL team, we just never see our offense capable of doing this to other teams.

The issue really is our offense (and backup goaltending). The talent of Jack and Olofsson and Sam and Skinner (until the last few months) has kept the raw goals scored out of the basement but we are the worst chance creation team since Botterill got here, measured by either of expected goals for or scoring chances for.

Yup.

[rakish]

39 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I think part of what makes our defense look bad is that our offense is bottom of the barrel in terms of what they're capable of doing in the offensive zone. So in a game, we see our defense give up chances, looks, passing plays that we haven't seen ourselves in years, and think it's a function of our awful defense. In reality, we may even do better about limiting these chances than the average NHL team, we just never see our offense capable of doing this to other teams.

The issue really is our offense (and backup goaltending). The talent of Jack and Olofsson and Sam and Skinner (until the last few months) has kept the raw goals scored out of the basement but we are the worst chance creation team since Botterill got here, measured by either of expected goals for or scoring chances for.

So Flagg, what's causing this?

[Randall Flagg]

25 minutes ago, rakish said:

So Flagg, what's causing this?

Aren't you the one that's doing research on this???

[Broken Ankles]

1 hour ago, Randall Flagg said:

I think part of what makes our defense look bad is that our offense is bottom of the barrel in terms of what they're capable of doing in the offensive zone. So in a game, we see our defense give up chances, looks, passing plays that we haven't seen ourselves in years, and think it's a function of our awful defense. In reality, we may even do better about limiting these chances than the average NHL team, we just never see our offense capable of doing this to other teams.

The issue really is our offense (and backup goaltending). The talent of Jack and Olofsson and Sam and Skinner (until the last few months) has kept the raw goals scored out of the basement but we are the worst chance creation team since Botterill got here, measured by either of expected goals for or scoring chances for.

Agree with all this, plus add in an extremely poor PK unit.   Dovetailing on your point about Scoring chances (raw),  the SCA the Sabres rank #11 in the league.  Now these chances are not qualified as A/B/C but comparatively they are in the company of the Caps, Panthers and Avs, and better than the Preds and Columbus.  They are #18 in total shots against.   And lastly they are #12 in High Danger Chances against.  Not bad.  These positions do not reflect them being a bottom seven points team.   Being third worst in PK% (and really close to the absolute worse), coupled with a below average save percentage (#21) point to goaltending in general. 

Consider this: Winnipeg is in the bottom 5 in all these categories (Shots against, High danger against, Corsi 5v5 against, Scoring chances against) yet somehow in a playoff position.     Losing your top four defense-man will do that to a team.   But their offensive prowess keeps them in games.  And having Helleybuyck doesn't suck.

[Randall Flagg]

1 minute ago, Broken Ankles said:

Agree with all this, plus add in an extremely poor PK unit.   Dovetailing on your point about Scoring chances (raw),  the SCA the Sabres rank #11 in the league.  Now these chances are not qualified as A/B/C but comparatively they are in the company of the Caps, Panthers and Avs, and better than the Preds and Columbus.  They are #18 in total shots against.   And lastly they are #12 in High Danger Chances against.  Not bad.  These positions do not reflect them being a bottom seven points team.   Being third worst in PK% (and really close to the absolute worse), coupled with a below average save percentage (#21) point to goaltending in general. 

Consider this: Winnipeg is in the bottom 5 in all these categories (Shots against, High danger against, Corsi 5v5 against, Scoring chances against) yet somehow in a playoff position.     Losing your top four defense-man will do that to a team.   But their offensive prowess keeps them in games.  And having Helleybuyck doesn't suck.

And I'm pretty sure the Sabres have been around league average at that stuff for a couple of years now, too. They aren't some shutdown defensive unit but it's more than passable to get us where we want to be.

We have forwards who play the perimeter, not because they're scared or weak or not gritty enough to deal with the netfront area, but because they don't have or trust their skills in maintaining possession and creating plays out in the open, they use the boards to aid with puck protection, they're basically a magnet for Sabres players and the puck in the offensive zone. It's better to send the puck back to the point, or into the corner for another 50/50 battle, then to peel away and immediately get stripped and have the opponent off and running in the other direction

That's why I so emphatically oppose the apparent philosophy of our forwards just "being behind their NHL norms for goals and points" as Jason put it. These norms were put up in different systems where the players were almost always used with much better linemates (Vesey and Sheary) compared to what they get here (usually our 3rd and 4th lines) and these players never drove sustainable offensive zone tactics to these results themselves, and film study by pro scouts with competent eyes would have revealed this.

We need to start acquiring forwards, not with their stat sheets in front of us, but in watching their game and seeing what they are capable doing regularly in the offensive zone. It's why I zoned in on Cirelli last summer - I saw a guy that fiendishly drove the puck to the slot and crease area, who had the raw stick skills, core strength, and mental reaction time to not lose the puck every time he tried it. The numbers wouldn't have told you to build a trade centering on Mitts and Risto for him like I had wished we would, but IMO the film says we should have tried desperately to go after him and give him a bigger role. Now that he's pacing for 60 points even though he's playing behind the Point and Stamkos lines, and is in line for a Tampa-like bridge, there's probably no chance to pry him out. We need to find the next under-utilized but incredibly capable forward candidate this offseason. I don't know who that is, but I do know that Tampa and Chicago churn them out like crazy.

[LGR4GM]

39 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

And I'm pretty sure the Sabres have been around league average at that stuff for a couple of years now, too. They aren't some shutdown defensive unit but it's more than passable to get us where we want to be.

We have forwards who play the perimeter, not because they're scared or weak or not gritty enough to deal with the netfront area, but because they don't have or trust their skills in maintaining possession and creating plays out in the open, they use the boards to aid with puck protection, they're basically a magnet for Sabres players and the puck in the offensive zone. It's better to send the puck back to the point, or into the corner for another 50/50 battle, then to peel away and immediately get stripped and have the opponent off and running in the other direction

That's why I so emphatically oppose the apparent philosophy of our forwards just "being behind their NHL norms for goals and points" as Jason put it. These norms were put up in different systems where the players were almost always used with much better linemates (Vesey and Sheary) compared to what they get here (usually our 3rd and 4th lines) and these players never drove sustainable offensive zone tactics to these results themselves, and film study by pro scouts with competent eyes would have revealed this.

We need to start acquiring forwards, not with their stat sheets in front of us, but in watching their game and seeing what they are capable doing regularly in the offensive zone. It's why I zoned in on Cirelli last summer - I saw a guy that fiendishly drove the puck to the slot and crease area, who had the raw stick skills, core strength, and mental reaction time to not lose the puck every time he tried it. The numbers wouldn't have told you to build a trade centering on Mitts and Risto for him like I had wished we would, but IMO the film says we should have tried desperately to go after him and give him a bigger role. Now that he's pacing for 60 points even though he's playing behind the Point and Stamkos lines, and is in line for a Tampa-like bridge, there's probably no chance to pry him out. We need to find the next under-utilized but incredibly capable forward candidate this offseason. I don't know who that is, but I do know that Tampa and Chicago churn them out like crazy.

This is odd to me because I zoned in on him because of the underlying stats compared to his production. It was obvious he was driving play. 

[Randall Flagg]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

This is odd to me because I zoned in on him because of the underlying stats compared to his production. It was obvious he was driving play. 

Try this with Conor Sheary's season the year before he came to Buffalo. Even away from Crosby he had excellent "underlying stats" that didn't come close to telling the story of his struggles to do the things I'm referring to in that post.

[Doohickie]

2 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

In reality, we may even do better about limiting these chances than the average NHL team, we just never see our offense capable of doing this to other teams.

There was that portion of the mid-to-late 3rd period where the Sabres did everything but score, for several shifts in a row.  They need to execute like that.  Typically thought they're one & done when it comes to shot attempts.  In term of offensive zone pressure, I think back to something I think RFK said early in the season, to the effect that he didn't want players wasting energy in losing puck battles; that he wanted them to engage in puck battles that were greater than 50-50 odds.  I think this ended up with a lack of pressure, especially in the offensive zone.  For a while they contested everything and it prevented the Ducks from getting the puck cleared for quite a while (including several consecutive icings).  By *not* battling whenever they can, the end up with teams clearing more easily and the Sabres appearing "soft."  We saw what happened when they competed for every puck and closed the gaps yesterday.  The problem is they typically don't play that way.

[Curt]

2 hours ago, Doohickie said:

That's the point:  They *are* good enough, just not consistently.  If they're good enough some of the time, they should be good enough.... well maybe not all of the time, but at lot more of the time than they currently are.

It's up to the coach to get this out of them.  He did it for 10 games, the rest of the league adjusted, and he's had nothing to counter with since then.

I don't care if it's a tank quality team, over the last decade, when the Sabres play with energy and close the gaps defensively, they're a good team.   When they don't, the look terrible.  It's that simple.

No team gets its best results every game.  Between qulaity of competition, luck, and travel schedules, a team will show better some days than others.

Im not excusing lackluster, uninspired play, but I truly believe that the team lacks the talent to consistently put forward playoff team type performances.

[LGR4GM]

19 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

Try this with Conor Sheary's season the year before he came to Buffalo. Even away from Crosby he had excellent "underlying stats" that didn't come close to telling the story of his struggles to do the things I'm referring to in that post.

I'm good. Cirelli met my threshold for a 2c. His production matched certain stat markers. Then his game tape matched that underlying numbers. You implied we should ignore the stats or at least not "acquire forwards with their stat sheets in front of us." I don't agree. As stated previously with my assessment of prospects, you look at the numbers to see who is popping, you check that against the production, and finally you look at the tape to see if it all lines up. You need all three pieces IMO. As someone who also wanted us to acquire cirelli last year, I agree with you though. Any scout with any skill should have been able to review his game and understood why he was succeeded. I think that requires a new age scout to be able to break that down properly and I am unsure of Buffalo's scouting skill. Thus far their pro scouting is highly questionable when it comes to forwards. 

[Doohickie]

16 minutes ago, Curt said:

Im not excusing lackluster, uninspired play, but I truly believe that the team lacks the talent to consistently put forward playoff team type performances.

It's the inconsistency that drives me nuts.  You see it:  At times they look like world beaters but settle into a slow-footed, reactive style.  As long as they have a coach that tolerates that we'll never have a good team.

 

[Randall Flagg]

51 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I'm good. Cirelli met my threshold for a 2c. His production matched certain stat markers. Then his game tape matched that underlying numbers. You implied we should ignore the stats or at least not "acquire forwards with their stat sheets in front of us." I don't agree. As stated previously with my assessment of prospects, you look at the numbers to see who is popping, you check that against the production, and finally you look at the tape to see if it all lines up. You need all three pieces IMO. As someone who also wanted us to acquire cirelli last year, I agree with you though. Any scout with any skill should have been able to review his game and understood why he was succeeded. I think that requires a new age scout to be able to break that down properly and I am unsure of Buffalo's scouting skill. Thus far their pro scouting is highly questionable when it comes to forwards. 

That's not what I implied, I was referencing Jason's propensity to stare at the even strength goal column when acquiring players, with his "not playing up to their NHL norms for goals and points" comments

 

Edited February 10, 2020 by Randall Flagg

[Randall Flagg]

3 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

I think part of what makes our defense look bad is that our offense is bottom of the barrel in terms of what they're capable of doing in the offensive zone. So in a game, we see our defense give up chances, looks, passing plays that we haven't seen ourselves in years, and think it's a function of our awful defense. In reality, we may even do better about limiting these chances than the average NHL team, we just never see our offense capable of doing this to other teams.

The issue really is our offense (and backup goaltending). The talent of Jack and Olofsson and Sam and Skinner (until the last few months) has kept the raw goals scored out of the basement but we are the worst chance creation team since Botterill got here, measured by either of expected goals for or scoring chances for.

The more I think about this, the more shocked I am. My case against Bylsma (and I guess Murray?) centered solely on the fact that our offense couldn't sustainably create given our transition preferences. The Sabres were fifth-last in xGF and scoring chances during their two years here.

Botterill made it worse. Three offseasons and 220 NHL games later, we have fallen to dead last since he came in, and this isn't simply weighted by his first, last place season, as we are last and second last respectively (detroit is only slightly worse at generating scoring chances, less than one scoring chance for per game worse than us) THIS season. His forwards are literally incapable of playing modern offensive hockey, and this is even while Eichel and Reinhart are well above average, to elite, in doing so. That's how far back Jason's forwards set us

[rakish]

9 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

The more I think about this, the more shocked I am. My case against Bylsma (and I guess Murray?) centered solely on the fact that our offense couldn't sustainably create given our transition preferences. The Sabres were fifth-last in xGF and scoring chances during their two years here.

Botterill made it worse. Three offseasons and 220 NHL games later, we have fallen to dead last since he came in, and this isn't simply weighted by his first, last place season, as we are last and second last respectively (detroit is only slightly worse at generating scoring chances, less than one scoring chance for per game worse than us) THIS season. His forwards are literally incapable of playing modern offensive hockey, and this is even while Eichel and Reinhart are well above average, to elite, in doing so. That's how far back Jason's forwards set us

and that's why he needs to go

[LGR4GM]

29 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

That's not what I implied, I was referencing Jason's propensity to stare at the even strength goal column when acquiring players, with his "not playing up to their NHL norms for goals and points" comments

 

I completely misunderstood then. Sorry about all that. I agree that seems to be jason's go to stat, even strength scoring. The problem he doesn't get is that he has no idea who is an offensive driver and who is an offensive passenger. 

[LGR4GM]

26 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

The more I think about this, the more shocked I am. My case against Bylsma (and I guess Murray?) centered solely on the fact that our offense couldn't sustainably create given our transition preferences. The Sabres were fifth-last in xGF and scoring chances during their two years here.

Botterill made it worse. Three offseasons and 220 NHL games later, we have fallen to dead last since he came in, and this isn't simply weighted by his first, last place season, as we are last and second last respectively (detroit is only slightly worse at generating scoring chances, less than one scoring chance for per game worse than us) THIS season. His forwards are literally incapable of playing modern offensive hockey, and this is even while Eichel and Reinhart are well above average, to elite, in doing so. That's how far back Jason's forwards set us

All of this. We keep saying how boring Sabres hockey is, uneventful is used. It is that way because we keep acquiring uneventful forwards who do not create offense on their own. It is a team of offensive passengers with the results not shocking at all. Every once in a while they break out of that role for a game or two but they always regress too it. 

I think Jason Botterill to date has been terrible at identifying and acquiring forwards and that runs all the way into his drafts. Cozens might be the singular outlier just like Skinner might be on offense. 

[triumph_communes]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

All of this. We keep saying how boring Sabres hockey is, uneventful is used. It is that way because we keep acquiring uneventful forwards who do not create offense on their own. It is a team of offensive passengers with the results not shocking at all. Every once in a while they break out of that role for a game or two but they always regress too it. 

I think Jason Botterill to date has been terrible at identifying and acquiring forwards and that runs all the way into his drafts. Cozens might be the singular outlier just like Skinner might be on offense. 

What? How on earth can you make this statement?

 

Botterill has yet to 'overspend' on a UFA target, and has signed nobody except Eichel and Skinner, a play driver (albeit streaky), to a long-term deal.  Every forward he has acquired has been a complimentary cap dump that other teams have seemed at least content with getting rid of-- and most teams don't get rid of their play drivers.  These acquisitions cost us nothing in trade capital or long-term commitment and everyone is coming off of the cap at the end of this season.  All of his draft picks are too young to make any credible assessment for.  Also, on the topic of play drivers, Mittelstadt was always one of those players for the leagues he played in.  Just because he lost his touch when the physicality of his competition amped up to 11 doesn't undermine this-- and his recovery since being demoted to the AHL points to exactly the jump in physicality drowning him being his only issue.  He is a play-driving player or he's nothing.  And he was an amazing play-driver in the WJC back when he couldn't even do a pull-up.  One off-season of babyfat conversion isn't changing that.

 

When Botterill trades in the family farm for Evander Kane, or gives huge contracts to UFA's like Moulson and Okposo, then you have enough material to judge Botterill on.  But you can't.  You can hardly judge Thompson when he was rushed into the NHL by both St Louis and Buffalo due to a large number of injuries, and has been LTIR his entire first year of expected output.

 

If you look at Botterill's work and think the last couple of years were 'the year' then you aren't on the same timeline he is.  His first year he got the best UFAs he could sign in Buffalo of the lot, and the superstars didn't bite, and the trash that did retired from the league.  He then went to option B and at least got guys that might get another contract (Sheary, Vesey, etc.), but that doesn't make up for the total lack of depth we have.

[Doohickie]

56 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

It is that way because we keep acquiring uneventful forwards who do not create offense on their own.

Frolic is a poster child for this.  "Defensively responsible."  We need "Offensively capable."

[Tondas]

18 hours ago, Crosschecking said:

I follow the Sabres and the Bills, but they are not the primary focus in my life. Christ is.

Fantastic.  My primary focus in life is my wife,  She is my god.  We can all get along, right.

[SwampD]

1 hour ago, Randall Flagg said:

The more I think about this, the more shocked I am. My case against Bylsma (and I guess Murray?) centered solely on the fact that our offense couldn't sustainably create given our transition preferences. The Sabres were fifth-last in xGF and scoring chances during their two years here.

Botterill made it worse. Three offseasons and 220 NHL games later, we have fallen to dead last since he came in, and this isn't simply weighted by his first, last place season, as we are last and second last respectively (detroit is only slightly worse at generating scoring chances, less than one scoring chance for per game worse than us) THIS season. His forwards are literally incapable of playing modern offensive hockey, and this is even while Eichel and Reinhart are well above average, to elite, in doing so. That's how far back Jason's forwards set us

I think the problem is that they are even more incapable of playing old time offensive hockey.

[dudacek]

35 minutes ago, SwampD said:

I think the problem is that they are even more incapable of playing old time offensive hockey.

This is true, but whatever style you want to frame it in, it comes back to the inability to create scoring chances.

There aren't many guys who create chances virtually every game like Jack, but there are dozens of guys who can do it every two or three games — the Al Kotaliks or JP Dumonts. We just haven't been able to create that middle class that's so crucial for success over 82 games. It's so bad that when someone who actually fits that profile surfaces, like Marcus Johansson, we're shocked and tend to overrate how good he is, just because he's got some basic offensive competence.
 

Edited February 10, 2020 by dudacek

[Randall Flagg]

37 minutes ago, dudacek said:

This is true, but whatever style you want to frame it in, it comes back to the inability to create scoring chances.

There aren't many guys who create chances virtually every game like Jack, but there are dozens of guys who can do it every two or three games — the Al Kotaliks or JP Dumonts. We just haven't been able to create that middle class that's so crucial for success over 82 games. It's so bad that when someone who actually fits that profile surfaces, like Marcus Johansson, we're shocked and tend to overrate how good he is, just because he's got some basic offensive competence.
 

I personally got caught up in the Johansson thing myself. (He's still fine, just, I am very disillusioned at this point)

[Curt]

1 hour ago, SwampD said:

I think the problem is that they are even more incapable of playing old time offensive hockey.

Modern or old time, it doesn’t matter. They are adequate at neither.