Well I don't see them playing better in these games because they start playing "the system" better. They are standing around like bubble hockey players for 30 mins, and then the d-men start pinching like crazy, or joining the rush, or simply following their own dump in. All that d-support is allowing the forwards a better chance to maintain the puck and make plays.

All that d-support is not part of "the system". "The system" is also not part of getting down 3-0, but the team is going out there like zombies with this general approach of, "stay at home and don't make any risky plays while we're so busy playing sound defensive hockey". They look like they're playing an NFL prevent defense, and eventually they get scored on after repeated pressure before they change up to being aggressive.

The difference is remarkable right now (the last six games). I've seen it rather plainly, the announcers have commented on it, and the players and Ruff have said how their starts are going to catch up with them. Clearly, "the system" is not working very well right now, and it's not all about the effort either.

Again, did I say the system involved getting down 3-0?

Are you even reading my posts?

The system is all about the D men pinching, moving as a 5 man unit, forcing turnovers, controlling the puck...

That's the system. That's how this team is supposed to play for 60 minutes or as close to it as possible.

When it's not working, it's because they're missing passes, they aren't moving their feet, or they're getting themselves into the wrong spots on the ice and others are having to overcompensate.

A perfect example of that was Tallinder going wayyyy up the boards on the penalty kill that forced Myers to shuffle over and leave a man open in front of the net.

Once they buckled down and got their timing and positioning right, they were able to move their feet more and use their energy more efficiently towards creating the turnovers and controlling the puck and getting help from the back end.

It's pretty simple. The system isn't failing. The players are just struggling to complete their assignments early on for whatever reason lately.

_________________
Wheelhouse

Maybe we should start scoring instead of when we are down 3-0... Just a thought...

_________________
"Counting all the assholes in the room, I'm definitely not alone!" ~ Michael Poulsen, Volbeat, Still Standing.

Relax PSP. Maybe we're talking past each other. My last post said that "the system" is not responsible for the slow starts. The last six games "the system" is not showing up at all. The first half of games they are playing super conservative, lazy, scared, or trying to skate past three or four players toward the blue line just before a turnover. This is not "the system".

The last half of games the d-men are being very aggressive, joining the rush, pinching much more, or following their own dump-ins. The extra d-support is allowing the forwards to maintain more puck control and generate more pressure/shots/scoring chances. This is not "the system" either. D-men were pinching a little during the early part of the season, but nowhere near the extent that they have been during the frantic comeback mode they've dug themsleves into lately.

If they came out ready and put in 100% effort to "the system" than they probably wouldn't be digging 0-3 holes. They aren't, and perhaps "the system" is lending itself toward playing too conservatively lately. Maybe not, but either way the aggressive comeback mode of play is definitely not "the system" either. Obviously coming out ready to play is the first correction, but with the success they've had playing aggressively, perhaps they should play that way more often. Playing that way lends itself toward getting players emotionally into the game from the opening faceoff. I'm not advocating a free-for-all style, just to be more aggressive for stretches of the game, and in turn taking the play to the other team instead of vice-versa.

I think if any "system" is "out of sync" it's a pretty shitty system. I also think this is a shitty excuse for poor performance. This team isn't a carburetor screw, and we can't argue pro-something when our reasoning is "for whatever reason". I love ya PSP, and I admire your optimism and passion, but being skeptical is what sometimes makes us feel like sharp, intelligent beings. I can't just assume this "system", which should actually be called a hockey team, is just a 'tweak' away from excellence, because Lindy Ruff has the screwdriver. If we go more offenive, then Miller has to make one more amazing stops/game? How many more amazing stops will their goalie have to make?? Is he usually better than Miller?? Seriously, I would like a legitimate reason(from anyone) why they think we don't try to out-score anyone?

If I could ask any Sabre one question and be sure it was truth, I'd ask them if Lindy Ruff was the most stubborn person they ever met.

From NHL.com:
"Now I'm enjoying the benefit playing for a team that is more focused on backchecking and bringing five players closer to me in the defensive zone," Miller said. "It's something a lot of goalies who have been with a team for a few years enjoy because the coaching staff can look at a system and figure out what works for their goaltender. I think we have a little bit of that going on with the Sabres. The last two years we have been trying stuff and this year it's a closer fit to the personnel that we have."

The more open style of play didn't work for our goaltender and with the players that we have for the past 2 years.. This tight defensive system we have is what this team needs..

_________________
Miller, Myers and Greir are sick, but not Jesus Christ..

KILL OTTAWA

Miller says it, then STFU about it.

_________________

"...STFU..."???

I'm really happy about how the team is playing in the DEFENSIVE zone. As I've said numerous times before, I've called for this the last two years. Miller is their best player, and the team needed to play a type of game that allows their best player to perform that way.

That tight d-zone play doesn't dictate how they attack in the o-zone though. Tight defense doesn't mean the d-men can't pinch or join the rush more. Miller was just talking about the d-zone, not what they do in o-zone.

Let's not overreact, and let's not start with the vulgarity either. The last few games the team has played better from the start, and the skill players have been putting up more points. As long as those players can produce scoring chances by keeping it simple and within "the system", without lagging off again some time soon, then there's no need to have the d-men get more aggressive.

Stop overreacting, it wasn't meant in anyway to be derogatory or anything.

I was just saying, if Miller loves the way they are playing, why complain?

_________________

How was I complaining??

I was agreeing with Miller and he backed up what Ive been trying to say for the past month..

_________________
Miller, Myers and Greir are sick, but not Jesus Christ..

KILL OTTAWA

"STFU" is pretty hard to take any other way. Either way I didn't overreact, and I'm not making anything more out of it. I was going to respond to Vanek King about the difference between d-zone play and o-zone play anyway, and then I saw your response.

BTW, Miller was not happy with how the team was playing during the previous 5-6 games, the same stretch that prompted me to post this topic. He called them out a few times, and I could quote him from after the Atlanta game.

VK, he was referring to me, not you.

From part of this morning's Buffalo News article about using five man units to get the defense more involved offensively...

"It's a good idea," Roy said after a 75-minute practice in HSBC Arena. "A lot of times you don't know who's back on the point with you, if it's a left shot or a right shot. If you know exactly who's out with you and they're going to be jumping in the play every time, it makes it a lot easier to figure out how to make plays.

"He put an offensive defenseman with us and somewhat of a defensive defenseman, so all the time the offensive defenseman would jump in the play and make it a three-on-two or four-on-three or something. I think it was good in the third period. I thought we played well."

The Sabres' tying goal in the 4-3 shootout loss to the Avalanche came because of the players' knowledge of each other. Connolly told his defenseman if they moved up when the Sabres were in the offensive zone, it would clear space for the Buffalo forwards to take a shot.

Tallinder moved toward the net, Hecht skated toward the blue line, and his shot went past goaltender Craig Anderson with 4:12 to go.

"Sometimes the five-man units, which have been used in the past — probably Detroit was the most famous team for using it — if you can breed a little familiarity you can do a lot of cheating," Ruff said. "You can do a lot of rotating. As a five-man unit you can talk about what you want to do."