The Hopium Den: 10 reasons why the Sabres could be better this year

[Taro T]

3 hours ago, Drag0nDan said:

I do wonder if some of the reliance upon rush scoring was causing defensive lapses and bad turnovers.  

I feel like some of the problems in the offensive zone caused lots of issues defensively too.  We were bad against the rush of opponents.  

Oh yeah, it all feeds on itself.  

But even going back to that 91 point season that seems a lifetime ago even though it was only 3 years ago, they weren't good on the cycle.  They scored on rushes and for about 6-7 weeks they also scored when Tage dropped bombs on the PP.  But that got figured out by other teams and so down the stretch they were back to just scoring on the rush.  They didn't do a good job on the cycle even in that season that Granato had them focusing primarily on offense figuring he'd teach them defense later. 

Well, when looking back on it, it wasn't just D he didn't teach them; he didn't teach them much offensively either, and the same guys that were here back then (except Ellis who's still a coach, just not on the bench) are still here trying to finally figure out how to teach them to play defense and how to work a functional cycle.  Do realize that for whatever reason ownership doesn't want to punt the failed coaches (at least not unless a golden child is available to replace any of them; and how a golden child is defined is anyones guess) but how much money is getting thrown away in lost ticket sales, lost merchandise sales, lost concession sales, and lost playoff revenue.  That has to dwarf whatever these guys still have left to earn this last year of their deals.

And agree, they've been very bad against the rush in the past; and if the last non-ENG of last night is any indication, they're still going to be bad against it.

EDIT: Sorry @dudacek, didn't mean to go negative in the Hopium thread.

[PerreaultForever]

3 hours ago, Drag0nDan said:

I do wonder if some of the reliance upon rush scoring was causing defensive lapses and bad turnovers.  

I feel like some of the problems in the offensive zone caused lots of issues defensively too.  We were bad against the rush of opponents.  

Of course they do. Absolutely right. This relates to team structure as well, and the constant turnover of personnel and young personnel leads to failures in a system where players need to be covering for the D when they rush deep. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. 

The main thing however, and it's been a thing for a long time, is losing board battles. All too often they  play perimeter possession and if they lose the puck they don't battle to get it back effectively and the other team gets to zone exit quickly and there are Sabres caught behind the play. They just don't fight for the puck and every year there's at least 3 or 4 discussions of "soft' that come up. Off season talks about getting tougher but it never seems to happen. 

[DarthEbriate]

46 minutes ago, Taro T said:

And agree, they've been very bad against the rush in the past; and if the last non-ENG of last night is any indication, they're still going to be bad against it.

EDIT: Sorry @dudacek, didn't mean to go negative in the Hopium thread.

Here's a solution.

This season, I hope they're better against the rush and better at cycling in the offensive zone. Like... you know, real NHL hockey teams that make the playoffs year-after-year.