Jump to content

Blue and Gold Scrimmage 1/9/21 7pm Streaming


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

He sees a player like Ruotsalainen show flash in the o-zone yet show inexperience leading to positional errors in the d-zone, and says: head to rochester and come back when you've mitigated your faults, instead of, i'm a good enough coach, with the strength of our dominant top 6, to find a matchup for this guy on the big team where his only impacts are considerably positive ones, because I'm masking his weaknesses with my gameplan. He'll learn the positioning through experience in the meantime. 

I'm not saying one is the right way but there's more than one way to handle these types of players. It's always more about what you are asking of a player, how much of a burden you are asking them to shoulder. This is why the perception of Mittelstadt is of spectacular fail because relative the role that was being asked of him he failed miserably. 

That means he isn’t a good coach.  He should be able to look at his squad and realize that he is fielding 5 guys (nearly 50% of his lineup) with little or no offensive upside.  Considering that was the team’s biggest Achilles Heel, he should look for ways to make his bottom 6 more effective on offense.  Sending out Mitts, R2 and Cozens while keeping Lazar and Sheahan is foolish.  

In fact, he could be creative and create one D group to start in our zone and one O group to start in the opponents zone.  Our top 2 lines will probably play 20 minutes a night.  That leaves 20 minutes to divide between the other 2 line.  So Rieder Eakin KO are the D group, while  Skinner Mitts Cozens is the O group.  Each gets 10 minutes a night depending where the faceoff is or who the matchup is.

The mistake Jbot and co made was forcing Mitts into ROR’s role before he was ready.  I’m not worried about Cozens playing 10 minutes in a most Offense oriented role.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

That means he isn’t a good coach.  He should be able to look at his squad and realize that he is fielding 5 guys (nearly 50% of his lineup) with little or no offensive upside.  Considering that was the team’s biggest Achilles Heel, he should look for ways to make his bottom 6 more effective on offense.  Sending out Mitts, R2 and Cozens while keeping Lazar and Sheahan is foolish.  

In fact, he could be creative and create one D group to start in our zone and one O group to start in the opponents zone.  Our top 2 lines will probably play 20 minutes a night.  That leaves 20 minutes to divide between the other 2 line.  So Rieder Eakin KO are the D group, while  Skinner Mitts Cozens is the O group.  Each gets 10 minutes a night depending where the faceoff is or who the matchup is.

The mistake Jbot and co made was forcing Mitts into ROR’s role before he was ready.  I’m not worried about Cozens playing 10 minutes in a most Offense oriented role.

NED. Not enough data. 

- - - 

It's clear he looks at the bottom 6 and sees Eakin differently than you and I, I'd wager to say. They believe that's exactly how they are going to add offence to the bottom 6. Assuming they see Rieder as a close approximate to Girgensons, it looks like their thinking is basically, at LEAST optimistic, that Eakin loses a little to Larry on D, but ads the corresponding offence to make up for it. The believe Eakin gives them 3 solid lines. 

I see it a little bit differently. I love what they did with the top 6. I would have kept Larsson (dun dun DUN!), kept our statistically defensively elite checking line from last season, and been 100% confident we'd be able to field, at all times, 3 lines that are going to be able to win their matchup. How do we add a little O to the B6? While Ralph has to keep a certified defensive component to his 4th line, due to Eakin's line not being all-matchups certified, with 75% of the forward lines already being minutes munching, matchups eating nightmares for the other team in the set-up I used I have no problem loading up the final line with Skinner and two kids, giving them them the cakiest of matchups and letting them do their thing in the opposing zone. We can afford to be very selective with their matchups. 

Lots of other ways to do it, too. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to bring up Lindy Ruff, but he adjusted his system to try to get the best from his players.  In the Peca/Hasek years we were defense first and counter punchers.  The Briere/Drury teams buried teams with offense.  

RK seems to lack that flexibility.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Thorny said:

He sees a player like Ruotsalainen show flash in the o-zone yet show inexperience leading to positional errors in the d-zone, and says: head to rochester and come back when you've mitigated your faults, instead of, i'm a good enough coach, with the strength of our dominant top 6, to find a matchup for this guy on the big team where his only impacts are considerably positive ones, because I'm masking his weaknesses with my gameplan. He'll learn the positioning through experience in the meantime. 

I'm not saying one is the right way but there's more than one way to handle these types of players. It's always more about what you are asking of a player, how much of a burden you are asking them to shoulder. This is why the perception of Mittelstadt is of spectacular fail because relative the role that was being asked of him he failed miserably. 

Not saying you're not right, but am curious as to how Krueger would handle the guys that are problematic defensively if he had more faith in the GT?  With bad GT, and they'll get it once every 3rd or 4th game without a move, it's a LOT harder to gameplan away a kid's defensive shortcomings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Not saying you're not right, but am curious as to how Krueger would handle the guys that are problematic defensively if he had more faith in the GT?  With bad GT, and they'll get it once every 3rd or 4th game without a move, it's a LOT harder to gameplan away a kid's defensive shortcomings.

Well ok all the more reason to bring in a GT then. I don't think Krueger gets the "has to work with the roster he's given" excuse because every farmer and their mom knows he's co-GM. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I hate to bring up Lindy Ruff, but he adjusted his system to try to get the best from his players.  In the Peca/Hasek years we were defense first and counter punchers.  The Briere/Drury teams buried teams with offense.  

RK seems to lack that flexibility.  

I don't think we have close to a large enough sample size to make that claim.

Edited by Shootica
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for the update on the scrimmage. 
 

My source very close to the Sabres is telling me Skinner is “not adapting” to RK’s system and that the teams top players are growing tired of him.  Hence his 3rd or 4th line status.  He better wake up and do what is asked of him.  

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thanks (+1) 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Well ok all the more reason to bring in a GT then. I don't think Krueger gets the "has to work with the roster he's given" excuse because every farmer and their mom knows he's co-GM. 

Pretty sure you're reading my comment wrong.  (Sorry, if not clear enough.)  Not trying to say that the lack of quality goaltenting (at the backup at a minimum) excuses poor personnel choices, but rather the lack of quality goaltending can make what may be a questionable decision in other circumstances the correct one.  And further, was wondering if he would be making the same decisions with more reliable GT?

Filling the bottom 6 with guys that are reliable in their own end could be a reaction to the reality that Hutton is going to be relied upon in a backup role rather than necessarily being Ralph's preferred lineup.  (Not saying it is, wondering if it is.)

And considering how the PK was run last year, really believe that GT did effect strategy.  Nobody runs a PK that passively if they aren't concerned that any shot from the slot is essentially a goal.  Aggressive PKs sometimes break down.  NHL goalies are expected to cover for them.  Hutton didn't & post injury, Ullmark had issues w/ it as well.

Edited by Taro T
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Pretty sure you're reading my comment wrong.  (Sorry, if not clear enough.)  Not trying to say that the lack of quality goaltenting (at the backup at a minimum) excuses poor personnel choices, but rather the lack of quality goaltending can make what may be a questionable decision in other circumstances the correct one.  And further, was wondering if he would be making the same decisions with more reliable GT?

Filling the bottom 6 with guys that are reliable in their own end could be a reaction to the reality that Hutton is going to be relied upon rather than necessarily being Ralph's preferred lineup.  (Not saying it is, wondering if it is.)

And considering how the PK was run last year, really believe that GT did effect strategy.  Nobody runs a PK that passively if they aren't concerned that any shot from the slot is essentially a goal.  Aggressive PKs sometimes break down.  NHL goalies are expected to cover for them.  Hutton didn't & post injury, Ullmark had issues w/ it as well.

On a new topic, if they think goalies were the driving issue on the PK why didn't they address the goaltending when they attempted to address the PK this offseason?

Edited by Thorny
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thorny said:

It would be hard for a guy like Rieder to stink in camp when he's not a timing player. All he has to do is show up and work and Krueger is going to see what he wants to, to confirm what he already wants to happen. 

 

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Which is not a positive for RK.  

Personally, I want my coach to put more stock in what a player did over a full season than what he did in training camp. Camp is to confirm and challenge your previous perceptions - essentially change minds.

Thompson came into camp as a guy they thought could play in their starting lineup. His play has forced them to look at him as potentially something more.

Rieder came into camp as a guy they wanted to improve PK and add to their speed and defensive responsibility in the bottom six. His play has confirmed that and that’s where he is.

Ruotsalainen came into camp as a guy they hoped might force his way into the lineup. He didn’t, so he isn’t there. Cozens is ahead of him in the pecking order but is facing a similar situation. He will get a similar, but longer, look.

41 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Thanks again for the update on the scrimmage. 
 

My source very close to the Sabres is telling me Skinner is “not adapting” to RK’s system and that the teams top players are growing tired of him.  Hence his 3rd or 4th line status.  He better wake up and do what is asked of him.  

The body language between Skinner Reinhart and Staal in the 1st scrimmage totally looked like this.

Count me among the many on this board who respects Carolina’s hockey judgement. It is increasingly obvious there was a reason they wanted Jeff gone. 

Edited by dudacek
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Thorny said:

On a new topic, if they think goalies were the driving issue on the PK why didn't they address the goaltending when they attempted to address the PK this offseason?

Purely speculation here, but expect they thought they had a deal worked out to address the issue with at a minimum AZ and Calgary.  By the time it was obvious those reservations ran deeper than initially expected most everybody else looking to move a goalie (including the GOOD FA goalies) already had a dance partner.  And really believe that the introduction of the taxi squad is what killed an opportunity w/ AZ should that officially fall through.

Don't know how Adams should've played this differently, but unless something happens this week, that plan didn't work out.  Hopefully Ullmark can handle a Fuhrian or Brodeurian workload because we need him to be able to do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

Thanks again for the update on the scrimmage. 
 

My source very close to the Sabres is telling me Skinner is “not adapting” to RK’s system and that the teams top players are growing tired of him.  Hence his 3rd or 4th line status.  He better wake up and do what is asked of him.  

Our owners have every reason to ‘trust the process’ and this is Kruegers attempt to enforce that. We were so thin last year he had to play Skinner in a second line since we had no third line to speak of. Now we have players and prospects and Skinner can figure it out at 10 min a night or he will waive his NMC.  There’s vets in the room that the youth look up to more than Skinner and he’s losing the others.

Edited by triumph_communes
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

Personally, I want my coach to put more stock in what a player did over a full season than what he did in training camp. Camp is to confirm and challenge your previous perceptions - essentially change minds.

Thompson came into camp as a guy they thought could play in their starting lineup. His play has forced them to look at him as potentially something more.

Rieder came into camp as a guy they wanted to improve PK and add to their speed and defensive responsibility in the bottom six. His play has confirmed that and that’s where he is.

Ruotsalainen came into camp as a guy they hoped might force his way into the lineup. He didn’t, so he isn’t there. Cozens is ahead of him in the pecking order but is facing a similar situation. He will get a similar, but longer, look.

The body language between Skinner Reinhart and Staal in the 1st scrimmage totally looked like this.

Count me among the many on this board who respects Carolina’s hockey judgement. It is increasingly obvious there was a reason they wanted Jeff gone. 

I never want to hear an argument that Botterill wasn't the worst sabres gm ever. 

13 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Purely speculation here, but expect they thought they had a deal worked out to address the issue with at a minimum AZ and Calgary.  By the time it was obvious those reservations ran deeper than initially expected most everybody else looking to move a goalie (including the GOOD FA goalies) already had a dance partner.  And really believe that the introduction of the taxi squad is what killed an opportunity w/ AZ should that officially fall through.

Don't know how Adams should've played this differently, but unless something happens this week, that plan didn't work out.  Hopefully Ullmark can handle a Fuhrian or Brodeurian workload because we need him to be able to do that.

It would be a heartbreaking misstep after the top 6 work we've seen. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I never want to hear an argument that Botterill wasn't the worst sabres gm ever. 

It would be a heartbreaking misstep after the top 6 work we've seen. 

Agreed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Skinner seems to feed on, off chaos. He seems to rely on a fair amount of freelancing. He does play with his hair on fire, which is great. It appears that RaKru doesn't like his game.

Finally, it really struck (strikes) me that Carolina got better without him on the team.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, That Aud Smell said:

Skinner seems to feed on, off chaos. He seems to rely on a fair amount of freelancing. He does play with his hair on fire, which is great. It appears that RaKru doesn't like his game.

Finally, it really struck (strikes) me that Carolina got better without him on the team.

Carolina got better as a result of finding a great coach in Rod Brindamour and having a front office heavily invested in analytics who excel at finding talent. 
 

The same front office would have calculated that Skinner was probably not worth an 8 year 72 Million Dollar Deal. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Brawndo said:

Carolina got better as a result of finding a great coach in Rod Brindamour and having a front office heavily invested in analytics who excel at finding talent. 
 

The same front office would have calculated that Skinner was probably not worth an 8 year 72 Million Dollar Deal. 

it is my understanding that Brind'Amour was one of those who felt that Skinner needed to go.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, dudacek said:

 

 

Count me among the many on this board who respects Carolina’s hockey judgement. It is increasingly obvious there was a reason they wanted Jeff gone. 

They sent him away for Poo. 

If anyone remembers Skinner scoring his 40th goal. The effort he showed, the enthusiasm and desire to get that 40th was so obvious. He took it to that top level that makes him a superior player. Have not seem much of that since. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, dudacek said:

it is my understanding that Brind'Amour was one of those who felt that Skinner needed to go.

The Truth about what actually happened was very unfair to Skinner. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...