Taro T
-
Posts
35,678 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Taro T
-
-
26 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:
It almost seems they are afraid to expose Ellis to too much action, too soon. I suspect in the long run he is the best of the group
Maybe. But, they were going to play Ellis in TO but he had a stiff back so they went with UPL instead. And they gave him 3 consecutive starts and he spit the bit in that 3rd game.
Have no idea what they're thinking on the goalie situation. For a short while there, they were in the give a guy the next game if he won the last one. Not sure if they're fully out of that or not, because they don't win often enough to tell.
You would think that with all the experience they've had running a 3 headed monster the past few years that Bales would have an idea on how to run a 3 man rotation; but really don't get the impression that there is any plan there. Yeah, they're running with "the guy that gives them the best chance to win on any given night" but there really doesn't seem to be any obvious rationale as to how they're making that determination. And it also doesn't seem that they give any consideration to the possibility that letting a guy not play for 3 or so weeks will get him out of any rhythm he might've had and now he WON'T give them the best chance to win on the particular night that he MIGHT actually have been the one to give them the best chance to win that night.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, JustOneParade said:
So, does Benford track Diggs all over the field as he has with opponent's best WR's for the past 4 weeks or so?
Hope so.
Diggs hasn't been particulary anything to write home about the last 4-5 games; but he'll have his A game on Sunday.
-
2
-
-
Tough question to answer because IMHO UPL is adequate, even kinda good, at home but isn't close to good enough on the road.
At home, especially if the team can be limiiting chances early like they often do, would go off the board and say it's UPL.
On the road, one of the other 2. Expect most will say Ellis, but personally expect it's likely Lyon. They're different, but the results there are fairly similar. Just believe that Ellis playing a more controlled game gives him an edge; though can see wanting Ellis' reflexes to try to steal you a save. And, should he continue to get regular action, expect he could pass Lyon (if he hasn't already) with more experience at the NHL level.
-
1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:
Another well written NHL Rule, Mamba Number 81.
For the purpose of this rule, the point of last contact with the puck
by the team in possession shall be used to determine whether icing
has occurred or not. As such, the team in possession must “gain the
line” in order for the icing to be nullified. “Gaining the line” shall mean
that the puck, while on the player’s stick (not the player’s skate) must
make contact with the center red line in order to nullify a potential
icing.Yes, and the stick was still well on the Eulers side of the line when it stopped making contact with the puck. It was in fact a blown call. Not the 1st that game; not the last.
And, personally, believe that IF they are going to review a significant subset of plays that should've resulted in a whistle to end the play after a goal has been scored then they should review ALL non-judgement calls as to whether play should have been stopped when they lead directly to the goal being scored. They can have somebody watching the game determining whether something is questionable and MIGHT require additional review in real time just like they claim they do with all plays that result in the puck traversing near the net. So, on that 1st goal, have somebody upstairs or in TO beep down and say, uh guys, that puck wasn't close to being over the red line when it was shot into the zone. It was an egreious error and it had a significant effect on how the game played out past that point. It literally led directly to the Eulers' 1st goal. Had the guy who shot it down the ice played it with a high stick that didn't get called, they would've been able to call the goal back. What's the material difference in how the puck was transferred to the goalie from one case to the other. Review them both or review neither of them, but just be consistent.
And would be ok with going back to none of that being reviewable, if that's the way they want it to go; though personally would prefer to see them fix the replay system (as it CAN be a useful tool) rather than get rid of it (and they aren't getting rid of it, no matter how much you want them to). But it is dumb to have stuff like a potential hand pass or the puck hitting the net above the glass being reviewable and not other major potential misses that can result in a team letting up ever so slightly because their players KNOW the play is about to be whistled dead.
Not overly germane to this discussion, but a blown icing call in OT very possibly cost the Sabres a chance to get thumped by the Red Wings back in '98. They changed the video review rules because of other events of that game, but didn't alter that aspect of the review.
-
8 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:
It drives me crazy that a goal can be disallowed because Greenway was offside by an inconsequential 1/2 inch, and then the linesman can miss an icing by 3 feet that directly leads to a goal, and that’s not a concern. For clarity, I would prefer that neither can be challenged, but if the missed offside can overturn a goal then it is crazy that the missed icing cannot.
Let them BOTH be reviewable; but the review has a limit of 30 seconds (maybe a minute) of observation and if you can't determine conclusively that the call was wrong then the call stands as originally called.
What's really dumb is a coach can challenge a "missed play stoppage" such as the puck hitting the netting above the glass or a missed hand pass but a blown icing call ISN'T a "missed play stoppage."
This league, quite often, stinks.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:
Did no one see a Sabre pushing the Oiler into Lyon?
Come on now. The officiating has sucked, does suck and always will suck bc it's still a garage league and bc hockey is a tough sport to officiate.
But, please, no one has it out for the Sabres. Every fan base in the league feels the same way.
The Sabres can lose on their own. Don't give them the excuse.
Yes, Byram "drove" Draisatl into Lyon's leg. Sure.
Byram nudged him towards Lyon and then Draisatl chose to use that as an excuse to move Lyon's leg about 2'. Funny how guys that are pretty good skaters lose all control when it's convenient. Yes, skaters on all 32 teams do that. It is what it is. And the Sabres shouldn't have put themselves in the position where Draisatl could do that. But 100% that exact play is a judgement call that doesn't always go as it ended up getting called. Krebs shouldn't have iced it; whomever was supposed to be paying attention to McDavid shouldn't have lost him. They'd had chances to seal the victory with an extra goal on the 5v3; they didn't get that done.
But 100%, that goal might've gotten called back had the reviewers in TO been in a different mood.
-
2
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, Weave said:
I suppose we didn’t respond, did we?
McLeod gave the guy a cross check while he was still lying on the ice. Soooo, no, not really.
-
59 minutes ago, Pimlach said:
Lindy would have challenged and lost. The Edmonton announcer said Lyon left the blue paint on his own, so no interference. 😂
The NHL makes it up as they go. A puck randomly hits the back of Tuch’s glove before a goal, it must be a hand pass.
Winning In OT was fun. 2 points accomplished, Edmonton gets a loser point but they are out of conference so no big deal.
Yes, Lyon did leave the crease on his own (at least his 1 leg was out of the crease, though the rest of him was in the crease). BUT players are NOT allowed to initiate contact with goalies regardless of where they are are the ice. Soooooo ... that one pretty much stays a "judgement" call for the league and they judged the Eulers losing in regulation was less desireable than a bottom feeder like the Sabres finally winning one in regulation.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:
Apparently there's was also an uncalled icing on the final Oilers goal too.
The icing was on the 1st Euler's goal.
-
Just now, Brawndo said:
Illness and tweaked something in warm ups
Tweaked something in warmups. What's that, out for a month?
-
1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:
Maybe Ellis ends up on IR for a while.
Hope not. Means he suffered a pretty bad concussion if he is.
-
Nice win.
Really wanted to see them win it in regulation. Would've been something they could look back on - remember that time we managed to keep our end clean even though the WC defending Eulers were throwing everything they could at us for the last 18 or so minutes. Well, we actually can do it. We did it then, let's do it tonight.
It wouldn't have been truly season altering, but you need something like that to start getting the ship turned around on the road. Winning in OT isn't the same.
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, Brawndo said:
Marty might be a better option
somemost nightsFTFY. ;)
-
33 minutes ago, Gatorman0519 said:
Doan out there looking like McDavid.
No, he's actually scoring. 😉
-
21 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
It wasn't even clear if it was his glove or the stick. You should not overturn a call on a less than obvious review.
Tage gets it back anyway
Yeah, pretty much, if the hand stays on the stick it should be immaterial if it glances off the guy's glove or his stick. At times it really does seem that the powers that be in the league have no idea as to how the game is actually played.
And in that game earlier on the road trip agreed 100% that the puck wasn't directed into the net with the guy's glove, BUT if THAT was a hand pass, that other goal absolutely was gloved in.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, quill said:
Surely no other professional sports owner would ever let something like this go on for as long as this has gone on unless it was to prevent some sort of major personal embarrassment by keeping Adams employed. The only explanation that makes any sense to me as to why Pegula won’t fire Adams is that Pegula himself has been calling all the shots when it comes to trades and draft picks, and KA is just a benevolent false front for the GM job.
Or for whatever reason he trusts his buddy Forton to not be an imbecile and Forton's still telling him how great it is to work for Adams and any day now they just know they'll turn the corner. Seth Appert's watched other PP's in action and has been working with the analytics department to improve it.
Shoot, maybe that's Appert's problem. He thinks a long PP is what they want totally neglecting that the motion and getting results is what's really important.
-
4 hours ago, shrader said:
What happened here?
Bills Texasses. Texass KR catches ball in the end zone and then drops it without 1st having taken a knee. Bills recover in the end zone. Refs called it a TD. After conferring (at the backup refs request) they decide improperly to overrule the call; but they didn't even change it to a safety deciding the ball was dead in the endzone (same as if it had rolled out fo the endzone after he'd've controlled it and then lost it) they called it a fair catch, Texass ball on the 20. And the rationale was, well he meant to declare himself down/ take a knee. Problem is, they don't adjudicate plays on what a guy meant to do, they adjudicate plays on what a guy ACTUALLY did. And that guy fumbled the ball and the Bills should've added either 6 or 2 points to their score then.
-
1 hour ago, K-9 said:
That is a damn good question. My take is that if the Eagles recover that fumble, it’s Eagles ball. Reason being is the play wouldn’t be over until it is completed. The int and subsequent fumble are part of the continuation of play and the play isn’t over until whistled dead by the ref.
The reasonable position to take would be that the Iggles keep the ball and continue that 2nd possession of the OT. However, technically, it is the 4th possession of OT and because the Bolts had the lead, the game should be over.
Would be quite surprised if the league thought that far through their new OT rules, and considering they've already ignored a clear rule in a playoff game and allowed the backup refs to overturn the actual refs in said playoff game; expect that the league would ask itself "what would Taylor Swift want done here" and then act accordingly.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
He's on a 2 game goal streak and has 10pts in 29games this season.
He still (or back to being) on McDavid's line?
-
2 hours ago, DarthEbriate said:
I kind of like this one-game non-paper AHL transaction rule. But I also know there will be a rash of injuries in Buffalo right before the AHL playoff roster deadline and suddenly Rosen and/or Östlund will have to magically be in two places at once --- and the Amerks will go into the playoffs without on their best offensive threats.
Sadly, at that point, the Sabres can bring up some of Ra-cha-cha's ECHL callups because it just won't matter in Buffalo at that point. But it might matter in Ra-cha-cha.
Also, don't know if a player on an emergency callup isn't considered to still be on the AHL roster for purposes of the AHL playoff roster deadline. It's possible (unlikely, but possible) that they'd still be included on the AHL roster because though they'd be in the NHL they aren't quite fully in the NHL (even if they're playing).
-
57 minutes ago, St. Pete Gogolak said:
Serious question. Facing a one goal deficit, would this team be better off playing 5 v. 5 until the horn instead of pulling the goalie? Are there any analytics on this? I understand that it would be hockey blasphemy not to pull the goalie but there’s a lot of old school baseball, football and hockey that have been shown to be wrong.
Considering how horrible this team is at entries with an outmanned situation, it couldn't be any worse than what they've been doing. Personally, would still pull the goalie, but not until they have control of the puck in the other team's zone.
And would have to figure out just what the logistics of it would be, but might get the goalie back in the net when the other team dumps the puck down the ice and repull him after they have control in the other end again. Would work it a bit like a lax line change, obviously you don't want the goalie being the one trying to retrieve the puck from coming off the bench, but have the 2nd or 3rd guy back into the zone go to the bench instead up near the F's door and as soon as he's off the ice have the goalie race out from the other door. Let him come up ice towards the bench as the puck goes back up ice, but he doesn't actually go to the bench until they have control. So, it'd be a hybrid goalie pull.
They'd still give up a fair # of ENGs, but not as many; and maybe the extra mechanics would add to the sense of urgency of the guys on the ice. At this point am willing to watch them try almost anything provided Appert isn't drawing it up.
-
14 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
Benson deserves no more than a bridge at this point. I too love him but agree with everything said here.
I think Tuch gets moved before the deadline, they are barreling towards another rebuild.
They are. But there is no reason for a full teardown before beginning this one. Turn the reins over to Kekaleinen prior to making any major moves. Trade Tuch, UPL, and Byram - 3 guys that you can get value for (or at least you could've this past off-season). Dump Quinn for what you can. Let Jarmo decide whether to keep Greenway or not. If you aren't going completely off the board putting him on the 1st line rather than the 4th line where he belongs, you might keep him as the team needs to be getting older, not younger and there'll be a case for having Rosen, Östlund, Helenius on occassion, and at least one of Novikov or Johnson and Levi on the roster.
Dahlin is the one untouchable on this roster.
Get a legit coach and some non-Apperts under him and see what the rest of the team can do the rest of this year realizing that if you wait until the Olympic break to make that move that the team is going to be playing free and loose as they'll have no realistic shot at the playoffs by then, so you'll be effectively viewing what their absolute ceiling together is.
What a waste it's all been.
-
31 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:
Yes but they've also had some good games.
Maybe it's because he's coming off the injury, but Greenway positionally has been much much worse this year than even in the past.
Maybe last year it wasn't a disaster. Putting him with types in temporarily, with this year, with how he's playing, it made zero sense... And the results last night showed.
And remember, they were out there against Calgary. They're not back on their heels, playing Colorado's first line, or a healthy Panthers team. To not generate any offense... Any scoring chances at all... Versus Calgary is beyond unacceptable
What do you mean they generated NO offense? They scored a goal. Wait, goes back, checks notes, Greenway was offside and the goal was negated. Eh, nevermind.
-
1
-
-
They are SOOOOOOO horrible at entries with an extra man, WHY do they insist on pulling the goalie as they're moving the puck up the ice? Lyon made a huge save on the 2 on 1; get the friggin' puck into the zone BEFORE pulling the goalie. So truly dislike Seth Appert.
And @PromoTheRobot, you are right, in that UPL didn't get much help from his teammates. But the 2nd and 5th goals at minimum need to be stopped. The 2nd one getoneg tipped by Timmins had no effect on whether that one was going to go in or not. UPL was sooooooo far over to his left trying to see through the screen that he left 1/2 of the net open and never reacted. The puck was going to go just inside the post, it moved a bit closer to the goalie but still not close enough.
Lyon didn't face much, but he faced 2 high danger chances and stopped both.
Wolf didn't play particularly well, but he stopped Zucker (?) alone in front.
And UPL on the road is now 0-4-1 and hasn't given up fewer than 3 in any of those games. For the love of all that is Holy, if the 3 headed goalie monster must continue, PLEASE only play UPL at home. He actually has been effective there. Ruff can control the matchups and keep from having his team give up too many high quality chances against, especially early as UPL is getting his head into the game. But the team isn't good enough / deep enough to keep from having horrible matchups on the road and UPL is NOT going to steal you a save or 2 (or however many you need) to pull a game off on the road.
In a vacuum, he probably is the best of the 3, but they don't play in a vacuum. And he gives them 0 chance to win on the road. Personally would give Lyon most of the road starts with Ellis getting about 1/3 of them and give UPL most of the home starts with Ellis getting a 1/3 of those. And once Ellis starts to consistently outplay one of the other 2, well then you know which one is on his way out the door.
And @PASabreFan, still say they SHOULD'VE won this one. But they also should've started Lyon. 😉
-
2
-
The Sabres have signed forward Trevor Kuntar to a one-year, two-way contract
in The Aud Club
Posted
Good for him. Does this mean Norris is on IR in addition to Zucker being on IR?