Sabres Need Adjustments to Improve Offense

by David Oleksy on Oct 9, 2009 6:09 PM EDT

Count me in as one of the people that loved the way the Sabres played following the lockout. They had a high powered offense that lit up the scoreboard at a record pace. They were also winning games and made it to the conference finals two seasons in row.

Since that time the Sabres have missed the playoffs two consecutive seasons and the offensive has been inconsistent. Every once in awhile you see glimpses of the team that could score goals on command but mostly they manage just one or two goals like they have the last two games.

It's easy to look at the game last night and point towards the numerous chances they created but the end result is what matters. Reality is that this team needs some help offensively. The help they need is right there in the room with a couple of key changes to the lineup.

I think we can all agree that Tim Kennedy and Tyler Myers have earned their spot in the lineup and should not be replaced. Kennedy was not a big factor in the game Thursday night but he looked great last Saturday. He has all the skills to be an outstanding contributor for the years.

With Kennedy becoming a regular in the Sabres lineup they have an opportunity to recreate that offensive magic they had a couple of years ago. Players like Drury and Briere helped that team become a powerhouse but it was the secondary scoring that made them great. They were able to roll four lines on a regular basis and they received offensive contributions from everyone. This team needs a couple of tweeks to be just as good.

Through two games, the Sabres have used traditional lines with a two scoring lines, a checking line and fourth line that is a mixture.

Scoring 1 - Vanek-Connolly-Roy
Scoring 2 - MacArthur-Kennedy-Pominville
Checking - Hecht-Gaustad-Grier
Line 4 - Kaleta-Ellis-Stafford

With the current lines they have players out of position and others that aren't being utilized properly. Stafford is a waste of talent on the fourth line and Kaleta and Ellis are both playing out of position. The first move would be to send Ellis to te press box and play Paille. Paille in the lineup would immediately improve the Sabres offense. He isn't going to score 30 goals but he has much more offensive talent than Matt Ellis.

I would also move Derek Roy and Paul Gaustad down in the lineup while moving Drew Stafford up to a scoring line. My new lines look like this...

Scoring 1 - Vanek-Connolly-Pominville
Scoring 2 - MacArthur-Kennedy-Stafford
Checking - Hecht-Roy-Grier
Line 4 - Paille-Gaustad-Kaleta

By moving Pominville and Stafford up the team will maintain their two scoring lines. I would argue that Pominville would make the top line better because he is naturally a winger unlike Roy. Stafford would be better utilized playing with Kennedy and MacArthur than he is with Ellis and Kaleta.

Derek Roy might not deserve a demotion to the third line but he would give that line an immediate offensive presence. It might also help Roy become a better player because he might shoot more when he is the best player on the line. I think playing with Grier would also force Roy to be more accountable in the defensive zone.

There are many people that would argue that Paul Gaustad is a fourth line player. That argument is futile because that is exactly what he is. He is a hard working player that holds others accountable. He will never be accused of taking a play off but he will never be confused with Thomas Vanek in front of the net either. Gaustad would make an excellent fourth line player while he is a marginal third liner. When you combine Goose with Paille and Kaleta, they could be the best fourth line in the entire league.

The opportunity is there for the Sabres but they need to make a couple of subtle adjustments to return to their high powered offense. With three goals in two games it is clear they need to do something different, let's see how they handle it.

Tweet Comment 18 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I would add to your thoughts

that having basically the same team with the same coaching staff might perhaps lead to similar results……in this case, the same weak offense.

by ccthemovieman on Oct 9, 2009 7:50 PM EDT reply actions

the same weak offense.......Perhaps, but I disagree

Let’s trade our top 2 lines to Washington for Ovechkin.

If not that, maybe shuffling the lines around could help. I’d feel better commenting on these guys if I could see some games. Looking at the stats though, and listening to the greatest NHL announcer ever, I think we shouldn’t do anything too drastic. Were getting a ton of shots ( I know it’s only 2 games). We just need to bury some more (seems to be a recurring theme with these guys). Also, I don’t mind winning games 2 – 1. Miller is a great goalie. Improving our defensive play, I think, would be a great idea. Too many odd man rushes against us. I grew up with the Sabres during the Scotty Bowman era. I love defense. 5 men up, 5 men back. It was the same thing when we had Hasek. Miller is not Hasek (hell, no one is…best goalie ever!), but with a defense first mentality, along with Miller, we would be tough to score on. We just don’t have the goal scorers to go toe to toe with most teams. Let’s let Connolly, and Stafford win some games via the shootout.
Okay, I’m done. Go easy on me. Very nervous to hit the post button……………………………….

by KTyczka on Oct 9, 2009 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions

Nervous? Why?

Very good post. I agree with your take on the defense. The Sabres could be a good defensive team this year. I still think they need to adjust their offensive lines to maximize their offensive potential. There is no reason that Paille is in the press box while Matt Ellis is playing.

D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere

by David Oleksy on Oct 9, 2009 9:14 PM EDT up reply actions

Everyone takes time to develop both skills and chemistry

I think Lindy Ruff has pioneered enough high-powered offenses to understand what it takes to score goals in the NHL.

by cwel87 on Oct 10, 2009 8:34 AM EDT up reply actions

Insanity

The definition of insanity is repeating the same actions and expecting a different result.

Same mediocre team from last year…we’ll be scraping to get into the playoffs only to get kicked out in the first round. Golisano is completely content with this. Of course he’ll keep “developing” players and losing them after their rookie contracts expire instead of picking up a difference maker. It’s all about money with Golisano. He went from Buffalo’s Hero to Buffalo’s Zero.

by Tony Starx on Oct 10, 2009 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions

I respectfully disagree

I keep hearing people say “they will continue to develop players and then lose them after their rookie contract expires”. I challenge you to name a player that left after their rookie contract.

This is the horse and pony show that people want to believe. The goal of this organization is to win and you think any different you are kidding yourself. If Golisano was concerned ONLY with money, he would have never bought the team.

D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere

by David Oleksy on Oct 10, 2009 1:44 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

Adjustments

I thought that Connolly was playing right wing on the top line for the first two games with Roy centering. I like the look of your re-vamped lines and agree that we are just a couple of tweaks away from being that much better on offense.

by Sabresfan67 on Oct 9, 2009 10:51 PM EDT reply actions

I actually agree with the points you’ve made, much to my own surprise. My first reaction to seeing Roy on the third line was that you must have gone bat shit insane – but after thinking about it for a minute and reading your reasoning I actually don’t think it’s a terrible idea.

That being said, I still trust Lindy more then you (no offense) and while it seems to you and I that these changes would be common sense (especially moving Stafford up and swapping Ellis for Paille) I have to believe there’s a reason they haven’t been made – yet. Unlike the Bills – the Sabres coaching staff still gets the benefit of the doubt in my book every time.

"We want to win immediately. To say you're building is an incomplete sentence. ... You're building for a future coach and general manager."
-Marv Levy

by TEMSON on Oct 9, 2009 11:45 PM EDT reply actions

I meant to add that if I remember correctly Roy was one of the rare players that seemed to score regardless of who he was lined up with (according to your excellent statistical breakdown) so we’d probably be assured of some production from our third line in the form of Derek Roy alone if nothing else – that would be nice.

"We want to win immediately. To say you're building is an incomplete sentence. ... You're building for a future coach and general manager."
-Marv Levy

by TEMSON on Oct 9, 2009 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions

you are more confident in the coaching staff than I am. I was part of a small faction of people that thought Ruff should have been fired.

D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere

by David Oleksy on Oct 10, 2009 8:12 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions

Much too hasty a conclusion

We would have made the playoffs last year if Ryan Miller hadn’t gone down with the ankle sprain. You can’t possibly blame a cheap shot (unintentional or otherwise) on the coach.

The team needs to improve overall from last season to this one, but that’s the entire point of having a young nucleus. As they get comfortable in the NHL and get closer to their prime, they not only become better individually, but as a collective squad.

I’m not really concerned about the playoffs this year. I’d just like to see some consistency established during the regular season and challenge for the Northeast – and I think they’ll do that.

by cwel87 on Oct 10, 2009 8:38 AM EDT up reply actions

Some comments...

With the current lines they have players out of position and others that aren’t being utilized properly.

Really agree with this. But Ruff has always played around with his lines a lot….almost Scotty Bowman like.

I almost like agree with your line changes….but then I don’t.

I would argue that Pominville would make the top line better because he is naturally a winger unlike Roy

Can’t argue that. But I don’t like Pominville there. And even thought I think Stafford doesn’t play like what he’s supoosed to play, I’m inclined to let him run on that line.

I’m bumping down Pominville to a line with MacArthur…and Roy. Roy isn’t a third line center, even if he has a past with Grier. I’m not crazy about this line, but I’m okay with it.

I’d like to see Kennedy centering Hecht & Grier for your third line. If this kid is sticking with the team, I can’t see two guys better for him to play with. If he learns to play defensively, his offense will naturally come out down the line.

Paille and his head are a mess; he just doesn’t seem to “get it”. But if you gave me a line with a “healthy” him, Goose, and Kaleta as a 4th line….I’d be thrilled with that.

I think a problem Ruff runs into is that he (like all coaches) would like to run 4 lines out there constantly. But, you have such an extreme talent in Vanek, and even Timmy to an extent. You have to give those guys minutes; they win you games.

I’ll go on record here…if:

Guys stay healthy, and if….

Ruff can figure out a way to get Vanek and Connolly 20+ minutes a game, and if….

He can keep rolling lines out so that every forward is getting 10+ minutes a game, then…

This is a pretty solid team. Oh….if the young D can………[[saved for next post?]]

by krytime on Oct 9, 2009 11:56 PM EDT reply actions

I don’t hate Kennedy on the third line. He would probably be okay there but I think he would contribute more with more talented players.

D.O.
www.diebytheblade.com - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere

by David Oleksy on Oct 10, 2009 8:15 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions

Lindy must read DBTB….

Check out the line combos for tonite, from WGR:

http://www.wgr550.com/sports/5406623

Now if only Paille could get in the lineup…

by krytime on Oct 10, 2009 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions

Count me in as one of the people that loved the way the Sabres played following the lockout.

The problem is, the game has changed, and for to many years, the Sabres players didn’t. They kept going for the risky play, not coming back on D and not “sticking w/ the system”. These first two games, while frustrating from an offensive perspective, I believe, are encouraging. They’ve been pretty disciplined, solid in their own end, and when they haven’t been, Miller has been very good.
If we want the Sabres in the playoffs, they need to learn to win 1-0, 2-1 games and play solid defense, epecially if we want them to win some of the games. Let’s give it some time for the new lines and new grit to get comfortable and see where we are a month from now.

by bluecollarbuffalo on Oct 10, 2009 7:03 AM EDT reply actions

I agree with most of what you said, only a little change in your lines. I love Stafford playing opposite Mac and Pommer opposite Vanek with Connolly as 1st line center. ALthough I would put Roy on the second line. he doesn’t deserve the demotion and Kennedy would benefit from playing with some grittier players at this point. I would put Kennedy between Paille and Hecht and put Grier with Goose and Kaleta. Love the fact that they are finally rolling 4 lines. I do appreciate the hard-nosed balls-out play that Ellis brings, but the truth is that you’re right, Paille is just a better player, offensively and defensively. Not sure why he gets odd man out, Lindy frustrates me with these decisions sometimes. Let the kid play.

"Potential just means you haven’t done sh## yet"

by willgarr15 on Oct 10, 2009 12:20 PM EDT reply actions

a few things to point out.

I know somebody did a piece on here with the best line combinations from last year and I know Vanek, Connolly and Pominville was the best in terms of point production. I’ve been lobbying for that line since last year when Ruff handcuffed Pominville with Hecht, essentially destroying his season. Last year we were awful at even strength and this is the only line combination that resembles a top line in anyway.

While you may make the third and fourth lines a lot better in this scenario. The second line of MacArthur, Kennedy and Stafford is just plain bad. Sure Kennedy has looked good so far, by would you pair him with too young players who have mostly disappointed so far in their career? Are you really going to count on a rookie as the guy that’s going to help MacArthur and Stafford elevate their game to the 60 point plateau? That just doesn’t make sense. Roy is the guy who has to center that line, and that line actually produced very well together last year in the two stints they played together.

There is one way Lindy Ruff has always frustrated me, and apparently like him, you do not understand the importance of the faceoff. Gaustad and Roy are our two best players in the circle and demoting them to the lines that take the least draws is just bad hockey. Playing Roy on wing was moronic. He was one of the best in the league in the circle the second half of last year and couldn’t beat be in the world’s after the season. It’s the same way with Moore last year. Why trade for a guy that in the top 20 in the league in faceoff percentage and then play him as a wing? Very simply, more faceoff wins means more puck possession and more scoring chances. Meanwhile Hecht is routinely one of the worst in the league at the draw, and until the end of last year Ruff refused to move him out of the circle.

I really don’t get the knock on Gaustad. No he likely won’t ever be a guy you put in the top 6, but I’ve always seen him as the ideal center for the third line. He’s big, plays hard, wins draws, is great defensively and has enough offensive talent to put up 35 points a season. Do you really expect a third line center to put up 50-60 points a year? How many third line centers in the league actually do that?

Anyway back to the original. I fixed the second line moving Roy back up. Now for the bottom two lines. Kennedy played great last game with Grier and Hecht, but I’d personally rather keep the defensive line of Hecht/Goose/Grier together. Besides, I honestly think that Paille and Kaleta have more offensive potential than Hecht and Grier. I’d rather put the better playmaker in Kennedy with them and leave the bruiser in Gaustad on the checking line.

That would leave my lines as Vanek/Connolly/Pominville, MacArthur/Roy/Stafford, Hecht/Gaustad/Grier, and Paille/Kennedy/Kaleta. You may not like Kennedy down on the fourth line, but in reality its only until when/if Connolly gets hurt.

by SabreBowie on Oct 12, 2009 5:18 PM EDT reply actions

That would leave my lines as Vanek/Connolly/Pominville, MacArthur/Roy/Stafford, Hecht/Gaustad/Grier, and Paille/Kennedy/Kaleta. You may not like Kennedy down on the fourth line, but in reality its only until when/if Connolly gets hurt.

I’d be okay with this.

by krytime on Oct 12, 2009 8:34 PM EDT up reply actions