Why doesn't this team cycle the puck down low at all?
I'm more dumb-founded why the only real breakout play the Sabres have for coming out of their own zone - either at 5-on-5 or the PP - is this stupid drop-pass play where guys moving forward throw (or leave puck) passes backwards to a player behind them. In Bylsma's misguided thinking, he probably thinks that he has skaters like Eichel and Ristolainen that can skate through a turnstile of opponents but what we see most of the time is the law of physics kick in:
1) Sabre forwards standing still at the opponents blueline, waiting for the delayed puck carrier to catch up - resulting in either an offsides play, a dump-in with no speed or momentum by those waiting forwards to retrieve it or the puck carrier losing the puck because the gauntlet of 3-4 opponents converging on him make it impossible to get through;
2) The opposing forwards skating with momentum towards the Sabres zone pressure the puck carrier before he reaches center ice, which makes odd man rushes on the Sabres goalies easier because all of the Sabre forwards are caught flat-footed at center ice or the opposing blueline.
Despite the low percentage that the play actually works because of either an Eichel stickhandling clinic or an opponents' error, Bylsma keeps going back to this over and over.
That to me shows how flawed his "system" - which he promotes as one built on speed and pressure - really is.
Watching the Leafs battle for a playoff spot while this team continues to sink further in the standings tells me that losing out on Babcock at the very least has slowed down the rebuild. On paper, the Leafs aren't any better than the Sabres. They have a dreadful defense, inconsistent goaltending, and some budding stars on offense. The Sabres have had consistency issues all year, and had some dreadful stretches of play even when mostly healthy.
I'm ready to move on from Byslma. I'm in the 'wait and see' mode with Murray, but he deserves some credit for this hot mess.
Good points - but on Babcock, I think it was widely understood (and backed up by the suitors and contract offers) that he is one of the best motivators. It was a question-mark at the time by the media if he could really adapt to a rebuild situation with inexperienced young players after having a winning, veteran team in Detroit for so long - but he's clearly not only embraced the rebuild but inspired his roster to overachieve. Bylsma clearly doesn't have the same ability with a more experienced roster at his disposal.
On Murray, I agree with you - I'm OK with giving him another year to improve things. He hit a home run with the O'Reilly trade; a base hit with the Kane and Lehner trades; and struck out on the Kulikov trade IMO. His selection of Bylsma may or may not have been entirely his decision, depending on which reports one reads - though the jury's out on that. Murray isn't above admitting his mistakes or misjudgments and is a straight-shooter so I have more faith in him than I do Bylsma.
