Nice Article on Connor Clifton and what he brings to the Sabres

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

This is kinda why I started the thread comparing this team to the 2005/06 team.

You never did buy into what development was doing. It wasn’t about biding time until we’re ready to bring in the missing pieces to go for it. It’s been about forging the missing pieces from the pieces at hand.

This team - as it is constructed right now - should not be waiting for Kevyn Adams to acquire Connor Hellebuyck or Brett Pesce, or for Matt Savoie and Zach Benson to turn 25.

Just like the group did in 05/06, Skinner Tuch Thompson Cozens Mittelstadt Dahlin Power Samuelsson Levi can be, and need to be a contender’s core right now. They have enough size and skill and they've reached the point where they can’t plead inexperience any more.

The rest can be, and need to be, a contender’s supporting cast right now. They have talent and they have the depth.

Being realistic is being able to say “Florida nearly did it, why can’t we be as good as Florida?” Being realistic is about saying we’ve reached a critical mass to where we can be in the mix every year, just like Boston and Tampa did 10 years ago, or the Leafs did or the Hurricanes did 5 years ago.

It’s not about waiting for Boston or Tampa to slip and gift them a spot, it’s about playing the hand we’ve got, stepping up and taking it.

It's not that I didn't buy into what they were doing - I've always believed in building by drafting well - it's that I felt they had a timeline that was unnecessarily longer than it had to be. You can take that core, but when you add some key missing pieces you move things along with a nudge in the right direction. The development plan continues, but we could have already been in the playoffs imo. This year we'd be discussing if we can catch and pass Toronto.

Also, that core is what it is, but no matter how good this offense gets, even if we win the President's trophy, we are going out first round just like Tampa did to Columbus unless we make the supporting cast tougher and have a better defensive system (and goaltending, although Levi remains to be seen).

I was one of the first to advocate deconstruction and what this plan ultimately is, so I'm happy with all that and think things are pointed in the right direction finally BUT I just don't want them to blow it again and without making the key additions I see a pathway to doing just that - again. I just can't handle another failure.   

[LGR4GM]

4 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

It's not that I didn't buy into what they were doing - I've always believed in building by drafting well - it's that I felt they had a timeline that was unnecessarily longer than it had to be. You can take that core, but when you add some key missing pieces you move things along with a nudge in the right direction. The development plan continues, but we could have already been in the playoffs imo. This year we'd be discussing if we can catch and pass Toronto.

Also, that core is what it is, but no matter how good this offense gets, even if we win the President's trophy, we are going out first round just like Tampa did to Columbus unless we make the supporting cast tougher and have a better defensive system (and goaltending, although Levi remains to be seen).

I was one of the first to advocate deconstruction and what this plan ultimately is, so I'm happy with all that and think things are pointed in the right direction finally BUT I just don't want them to blow it again and without making the key additions I see a pathway to doing just that - again. I just can't handle another failure.   

We won't go out in the first round. You constantly underestimate this teams resilience and where they actually are at. 

This team will be tough enough, just watch it. Toughness comes from within, not without. This team has team toughness. 

[JohnC]

11 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

My view is we asked too much of him and in doing so his game fell apart. The same thing might happen with Clifton. Clifton's better than Bush by far, but if we ask too much from him idk how he will respond as it hasn't happened before. 

Really tired of hearing "Granato's system" as an explanation for anything though. Hockey is hockey and his "system" so far is severely flawed in terms of defense. 

Yes, hockey is hockey. But in all sports there are different systems and approaches to the game. You don't think that Krueger's troglodyte system is different from Granato's system? Boston certainly has a different system from the Sabres. They have very different roster makeups. Smart coaches adjust their systems/ approaches to the roster they are working with emphasizing player strengths while trying to minimize their weaknesses. 

Your concern over Clifton has me perplexed. We got an upgrade on the blueline, and the coach will determine where he best fits. I don't know what issue you are worried about?

[dudacek]

5 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

It's not that I didn't buy into what they were doing - I've always believed in building by drafting well - it's that I felt they had a timeline that was unnecessarily longer than it had to be. You can take that core, but when you add some key missing pieces you move things along with a nudge in the right direction. The development plan continues, but we could have already been in the playoffs imo. This year we'd be discussing if we can catch and pass Toronto.

Also, that core is what it is, but no matter how good this offense gets, even if we win the President's trophy, we are going out first round just like Tampa did to Columbus unless we make the supporting cast tougher and have a better defensive system (and goaltending, although Levi remains to be seen).

I was one of the first to advocate deconstruction and what this plan ultimately is, so I'm happy with all that and think things are pointed in the right direction finally BUT I just don't want them to blow it again and without making the key additions I see a pathway to doing just that - again. I just can't handle another failure.   

Being in a position to win the cup and being in a position to contend for the cup arent the same thing. It took Vegas 5 years and a lot of changes to win it, but it has been in a position to contend since day 1.

The reason we arent discussing if we can catch and pass Toronto is not because it’s unrealistic.

It's because - for the 3rd off-season in a row - we refuse to believe the players we have can be as good as they eventually prove that they are.

[JohnC]

12 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Being in a position to win the cup and being in a position to contend for the cup arent the same thing. It took Vegas 5 years and a lot of changes to win it, but it has been in a position to contend since day 1.

The reason we arent discussing if we can catch and pass Toronto is not because it’s unrealistic.

It's because - for the 3rd off-season in a row - we refuse to believe the players we have can be as good as they eventually prove that they are.

 

[PerreaultForever]

10 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

We won't go out in the first round. You constantly underestimate this teams resilience and where they actually are at. 

This team will be tough enough, just watch it. Toughness comes from within, not without. This team has team toughness. 

I'm not "underestimating" it, what I am is in the SHOW ME stage rather than the blind belief and optimism stage. I have HOPE for this group, but until I see it on the ice I'm going to consider it a potential weakness and stumbling block. 

I look at what the competition added and I think what will this team do if Jeannot runs Dahlin into next week? What if Lucic runs Levi? We have no answer. 

And yes, I know it's 2023 and the league isn't what it was and all that, but the teams around us all seemed to think they needed beef, and I just wonder what IF??? 

[PerreaultForever]

8 hours ago, JohnC said:

Yes, hockey is hockey. But in all sports there are different systems and approaches to the game. You don't think that Krueger's troglodyte system is different from Granato's system? Boston certainly has a different system from the Sabres. They have very different roster makeups. Smart coaches adjust their systems/ approaches to the roster they are working with emphasizing player strengths while trying to minimize their weaknesses. 

Your concern over Clifton has me perplexed. We got an upgrade on the blueline, and the coach will determine where he best fits. I don't know what issue you are worried about?

Krueger's plan was outdated. He wanted to balance every line and the players we had made that impossible in any era. He was just a bad coach. 

Granato has checked the boxes on offense, but the team will have to play better D and that remains to be seen. Hopefully we see that this year, even if it means a little less offense as a result.

I've seen Clifton play more than anyone on this site I think. I really like him but he has 2 flaws. One, he's not big. This is okay, but not ideal. Two, he does tend to over pursue and can get caught out of position. On the Bruins he got away with this more often than not as their forwards always come back and his D partners were usually where they should be. On the Sabres, we have a lot of guys who think offense first (and some only offense) and many who over pursue so I'm not sure if, in our system, someone will cover for him. We shall see. 

[PerreaultForever]

8 hours ago, dudacek said:

Being in a position to win the cup and being in a position to contend for the cup arent the same thing. It took Vegas 5 years and a lot of changes to win it, but it has been in a position to contend since day 1.

The reason we arent discussing if we can catch and pass Toronto is not because it’s unrealistic.

It's because - for the 3rd off-season in a row - we refuse to believe the players we have can be as good as they eventually prove that they are.

Honestly, do we really have an argument aside from wording and semantics? I'm not sure what it is.

I like a lot of the players we have. My only problem is the spots around them. The grunts. The support roles. Aside from the issue of veteran solid goaltending (going with a rookie is rolling the dice on a season) I don't like the bottom end of this roster. If we'd added (as an example) Compher and Hathaway I'd be pumped for this season and only goaltending would concern me. As is, I'm not sure. We may still be a few pieces away. 

[dudacek]

11 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Honestly, do we really have an argument aside from wording and semantics? I'm not sure what it is.

I like a lot of the players we have. My only problem is the spots around them. The grunts. The support roles. Aside from the issue of veteran solid goaltending (going with a rookie is rolling the dice on a season) I don't like the bottom end of this roster. If we'd added (as an example) Compher and Hathaway I'd be pumped for this season and only goaltending would concern me. As is, I'm not sure. We may still be a few pieces away. 

I think you’ve nailed the debate right there:

I like Johnson, Clifton, Jokiharju, Okposo, Krebs, Girgensons, Greenway, Peterka as a bottom half of a roster a lot more than I think you do.

[thewookie1]

24 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Honestly, do we really have an argument aside from wording and semantics? I'm not sure what it is.

I like a lot of the players we have. My only problem is the spots around them. The grunts. The support roles. Aside from the issue of veteran solid goaltending (going with a rookie is rolling the dice on a season) I don't like the bottom end of this roster. If we'd added (as an example) Compher and Hathaway I'd be pumped for this season and only goaltending would concern me. As is, I'm not sure. We may still be a few pieces away. 

I certainly wouldn’t based on the contracts those two received.

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I think you’ve nailed the debate right there:

I like Johnson, Clifton, Jokiharju, Okposo, Krebs, Girgensons, Greenway, Peterka as a bottom half of a roster a lot more than I think you do.

I was only referring to the forwards. I like the starting 6 D as an upgraded D. I don't think we have good depth at D and the prospect pool for D is less impressive than forward, but it's upgraded and, if healthy, maybe good enough. 

The forwards, yes, I'm not sold on Krebs or Greenway and wish we'd moved on from Kyle and Girgs. Peterka would be good on a 3rd line bottom 6 but at the moment he's top 6. 

Your lines to start are likely:

Skinner-Thompson-Tuch

Olofsson (place holder for Quinn) - Cozens-Peterka

Mitts-Jost-Greenway

Girgs-Krebs-Okposo

I hate line 3 and line 4 is not very good either. If they deviate from that and Mitts is in Quinn's spot line 3 is a disaster. That's my opinion, and yes, I guess that's where we disagree. 

 

[dudacek]

Semantics maybe, but there’s no doubt that Mitts is this team’s #5 forward, and I think it’s highly like Quinn would be #6 if healthy.

Peterka may beat out Olofsson and Krebs for #6 while Quinn is out, but JJ was #10 in ice time last season, regardless of the fact he was often on Cozens wing.

Krebs Girgensons and Okposo was an effective line last year, statistically the only line on the Sabres that actually played good defence and the type of hockey you seem to like, but I guess mileage may vary.

[JohnC]

14 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Krueger's plan was outdated. He wanted to balance every line and the players we had made that impossible in any era. He was just a bad coach. 

Granato has checked the boxes on offense, but the team will have to play better D and that remains to be seen. Hopefully we see that this year, even if it means a little less offense as a result.

I've seen Clifton play more than anyone on this site I think. I really like him but he has 2 flaws. One, he's not big. This is okay, but not ideal. Two, he does tend to over pursue and can get caught out of position. On the Bruins he got away with this more often than not as their forwards always come back and his D partners were usually where they should be. On the Sabres, we have a lot of guys who think offense first (and some only offense) and many who over pursue so I'm not sure if, in our system, someone will cover for him. We shall see. 

Krueger was a disaster. He was a dinosaur in a computer world. He set this franchise back. And the worst part of his coaching philosophy was that it was soul-crushing to watch. He essentially killed the product in order to subordinate it to his rigid system. Foolishness taken to a level beyond one's imagination. 

You bring up the right issues about Granato and the balance between offensive and defensive play that will determine success this season. He has openly admitted that when he took over as a coach his first emphasis was on offense. Now, his challenge is to properly calibrate the balance between the offense and defense. While most people are fixated on our goalie situation, I'm more concerned about the transition to a better two-way game. Will that change in style affect the offense?  Yes. Will that change in style improve the record? Yes. 

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, JohnC said:

Krueger was a disaster. He was a dinosaur in a computer world. He set this franchise back. And the worst part of his coaching philosophy was that it was soul-crushing to watch. He essentially killed the product in order to subordinate it to his rigid system. Foolishness taken to a level beyond one's imagination. 

You bring up the right issues about Granato and the balance between offensive and defensive play that will determine success this season. He has openly admitted that when he took over as a coach his first emphasis was on offense. Now, his challenge is to properly calibrate the balance between the offense and defense. While most people are fixated on our goalie situation, I'm more concerned about the transition to a better two-way game. Will that change in style affect the offense?  Yes. Will that change in style improve the record? Yes. 

Krueger was JBot's attempt to placate and motivate Eichel (and to a lesser extent Samson). It was a horrible decision. Did it set us back? idk. In a way it triggered the rebuild and that has been good for everybody (including Eichel). If Krueger had been better, and we were a bubble team under him we might be floundering around with Eichel, Risto and Reinhart on long term deals. So thank you Ralph!

My question on Granato is I haven't heard anything from him about a better defensive system. Maybe I've missed it, but until he starts talking about it and owning defensive failure (if it fails) I won't be sold on his ability as a good head coach. As always, I'm in the show me stage. 

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

 

My question on Granato is I haven't heard anything from him about a better defensive system. Maybe I've missed it, but until he starts talking about it and owning defensive failure (if it fails) I won't be sold on his ability as a good head coach. As always, I'm in the show me stage. 

Not aware of anything about tweaking the system and I’m not really expecting that; he’s made no bones about his team playing fearless, attacking hockey on offence and defence.

What I have heard is talk about holding the players more accountable for playing good defence within the system. The emphasis was on inexperience no longer being a crutch, that by and large the roster has played enough NHL games to know what they need to do. Basically, it’s now about winning over development.

If I have time to look up Granato’s quote from early in the off-season, I’ll post it.

If you’re talking show-me, I think we were already shown a glimpse down the stretch. The goals against over the last 11 games was a respectable 2.91, down from the overall 3.62 and guys who were struggling within the system like Bryson, Clague, VO, Peterka, Jost, Stillman and Lyubushkin had their ice time cut back, or were nailed to the bench

Edited September 12, 2023 by dudacek

[French Collection]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

If you’re talking show-me, I think we were already shown a glimpse down the stretch. The goals against over the last 11 games was a respectable 2.91, down from the overall 3.62 and guys who were struggling within the system like Bryson, Clague, VO Peterka, Jost, Stillam and Lyubushkin had their ice time cut back, or were nailed to the bench

That’s how I remember the last few weeks.

They seemed to have tightened up defensively which helped win games and protect Levi from getting shelled.

[PerreaultForever]

12 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Not aware of anything about tweaking the system and I’m not really expecting that; he’s made no bones about his team playing fearless, attacking hockey on office and defence.

What I have heard is talk about holding the players more accountable for playing good defence within the system. The emphasis was on inexperience no longer being a crutch, that by and large the roster has played enough NHL games to know what they need to do. Basically, it’s now about winning over development.

If I have time to look up Granato’s quote from early in the off-season, I’ll post it.

If you’re talking show-me, I think we were already shown a glimpse down the stretch. The goals against over the last 11 games was a respectable 2.91, down from the overall 3.62 and guys who were struggling within the system like Bryson, Clague, VO, Peterka, Jost, Stillman and Lyubushkin had their ice time cut back, or were nailed to the bench

The bold is what I want. It's what I'm hopeful for. 

The show me will be based on this season though. Been fooled by glimpses and brief runs in previous seasons before. A lot of home games to start the year. I want to see them come out hungry and determined. It's time to reclaim a home ice advantage and make Buffalo a place people don't want to come play in, and not just a rest stop for chicken wings.

[PerreaultForever]

I'm going to add one more thought on Clifton. If you want to place your bets on FanDuel the smart money could be on Clifton throwing Buffalo's first hit of the year and I wouldn't be surprised if he is the first to drop the gloves this year too. I am hopeful he sets a tone early and it's infectious. 

[JohnC]

4 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Krueger was JBot's attempt to placate and motivate Eichel (and to a lesser extent Samson). It was a horrible decision. Did it set us back? idk. In a way it triggered the rebuild and that has been good for everybody (including Eichel). If Krueger had been better, and we were a bubble team under him we might be floundering around with Eichel, Risto and Reinhart on long term deals. So thank you Ralph!

My question on Granato is I haven't heard anything from him about a better defensive system. Maybe I've missed it, but until he starts talking about it and owning defensive failure (if it fails) I won't be sold on his ability as a good head coach. As always, I'm in the show me stage. 

You did miss his commentary on offense vs defense. He made multiple comments about it on WGR. So, there's a good chance that didn't hear him expound on that issue. He pointed out on a number of occasions that he felt that his first priority after taking over was to stress the offensive side of the game because it was more difficult to implement than installing a defensive system, which is more basic. 

What's encouraging is that in our end of the season playoff run the team did embrace two-way hockey. Although the scoring was down it was evident that the style of play was much tighter. And what also needs to be emphasized is our PK. It was atrocious last year. The additions of Johnson and Clifton on the backend should help in that regard. 

[PerreaultForever]

7 hours ago, JohnC said:

You did miss his commentary on offense vs defense. He made multiple comments about it on WGR. So, there's a good chance that didn't hear him expound on that issue. He pointed out on a number of occasions that he felt that his first priority after taking over was to stress the offensive side of the game because it was more difficult to implement than installing a defensive system, which is more basic. 

What's encouraging is that in our end of the season playoff run the team did embrace two-way hockey. Although the scoring was down it was evident that the style of play was much tighter. And what also needs to be emphasized is our PK. It was atrocious last year. The additions of Johnson and Clifton on the backend should help in that regard. 

Ya, I heard that one, and I didn't like it, because it's simply not true. Good D is way harder to play. Just ask the Leafs. 

[JohnC]

5 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Ya, I heard that one, and I didn't like it, because it's simply not true. Good D is way harder to play. Just ask the Leafs. 

You missed the material point. I agree with you that defense is harder to do. But the system is much simpler for defense than it is for offense. That's the point. 

[PerreaultForever]

4 hours ago, JohnC said:

You missed the material point. I agree with you that defense is harder to do. But the system is much simpler for defense than it is for offense. That's the point. 

You'd have to break down what the system actually is in order to answer that. D systems can be more intricate than you think. Look how Cassidy took Vegas over the top. D is hard, and flashy forwards often don't like it. It remains to be seen if this team can play it. 

[LTS]

On 9/11/2023 at 5:25 PM, PerreaultForever said:

Krueger's plan was outdated. He wanted to balance every line and the players we had made that impossible in any era. He was just a bad coach. 

Granato has checked the boxes on offense, but the team will have to play better D and that remains to be seen. Hopefully we see that this year, even if it means a little less offense as a result.

I've seen Clifton play more than anyone on this site I think. I really like him but he has 2 flaws. One, he's not big. This is okay, but not ideal. Two, he does tend to over pursue and can get caught out of position. On the Bruins he got away with this more often than not as their forwards always come back and his D partners were usually where they should be. On the Sabres, we have a lot of guys who think offense first (and some only offense) and many who over pursue so I'm not sure if, in our system, someone will cover for him. We shall see. 

This is an excellent point.  The Sabres forwards and in many cases were out of position in the defensive zone.  Many times I watched Tuch or Thompson overcommit. I watched Cozens not recognizing the changing coverage of the ice. 

Ideally you don't want players out of position (duh?) but a player who has a tendency to play out of position will cause other players to try and compensate and they won't always agree in how that should be done... thus you get 1,2, or 3 additional players out of position.. and open ice.. and goals scored against you.

The Sabres have to tighten up the coverage and discipline in their zone.. no single player can resolve that.

[JohnC]

37 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

You'd have to break down what the system actually is in order to answer that. D systems can be more intricate than you think. Look how Cassidy took Vegas over the top. D is hard, and flashy forwards often don't like it. It remains to be seen if this team can play it. 

It's not a surprise that flashy forwards don't like his defensive scheme because it requires the forwards and blueline players to play a responsible two-way game. Cassidy's defense is not complicated; it requires his players to be tough defenders when the puck is going the other way. 

[dudacek]

Defence is not hard to learn or to execute, the issue is self-discipline not ability.

Offence tends to be the opposite.