thewookie1
-
Posts
6,734 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by thewookie1
-
-
10 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:
TNT walks in... and not even a shot on goal.
I had mixed feelings on that play particularly; Thompson was tight to the net and DeSmith was way over to Thompson's side. At that point he either had to pass it in hopes of a deflection/tip or try a wrap around and with his wrist issues I'd guess he doesn't trust his ability to role his wrists over.
Dahlin did everything he could to tie that game and definitely deserves kudos. (The ENG I'm guessing since he's dead to rights against their best player that he was hoping to surprise his countryman with a diving poke check but it failed)
I'm both angry and less annoyed thanks to the last 10 minutes. I both want to give credit for the desperate push they made in the 3rd on the back end of a back to back but also feel angered they lost and didn't exactly play great for about 50min.
As the Ben said on Twitter, if this were earlier in the season this would be a game to chuck into the bad pile and move on but we don't exactly have much wiggle room at this point.
-
2
-
-
Agitation to no end how Vancouver looked disinterested playing Washington but against Buffalo they skate like guns are trained on them.
-
1 hour ago, LTS said:
It does. And Granato is a bit closer to the problem. But even he can't make people expect to win. That comes from confidence and each player has in themselves and their teammates to execute. I know people like to talk about Herb Brooks excellent speech and its absolutely iconic, but that speech alone doesn't translate across the full game. Certainly how Brooks coached that team to believe in themselves matters probably as much as the speech itself. But I don't want to dissect Granato here as his statements have to be different than a players.
I think Tuch, by saying he doesn't want to offer excuses, is prefacing that while he has to acknowledge how young the team is, he doesn't want to. I see that as a statement outward that had the team had a little more experience they could be better. At the same time, he isn't throwing his young team under the bus. He's building them up and keeping their confidence higher. The team is absolutely playing with more confidence but as we saw during the Detroit game, it's easy for them to lose it.
Perhaps I am off, but I read Tuch's statement as a way to not undermine his teammates while still throwing a little shade at how young the team is.. and how it only got younger. Being one of the older guys on the team I have no doubt he wants to be in the playoffs, not just for the Sabres and Buffalo but very much for himself.
And of course.. it's all media speak.. so there's only so much I put into it all.
I don't hate this at all. I'm not sure Tuch was responding specifically to the Detroit game as it sounds like he's just commenting on the overall state of things. I would 100% expect him to reflect on the Detroit game and simply say, "We weren't good enough." A a general reflection I go to what I said above.
Great discourse on this. Love that we can have this kind of discussion. Thanks to both of you.
The interview was recorded prior to the Isles game I believe.
I think your spot on about Tuch’s “excuses” Frankly he’s likely very torn over the whole situation as a whole seeing as he’s a vet now and wants to play in the playoffs but also understands we have a very young roster. Any derogatory comments he made always included himself as a part of the problem and solution. My favorite comment though was about how the new baby affected his play due to sleep disruptions. He downplayed it yet still held it as a fact although minimally so.
In the end facts do not automatically mean he’s hiding something and making excuses through them. Fact is they have a very young team, experience related problems have shown up many times these past two years. (Primarily in consistency) That doesn’t mean the team is excused of all wrong doing but has to be taken into account. Should they have got a couple more vets, probably, but both can be true.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, ska-T Chitown said:
So tonight we cheer for the BJs, Hurricanes, and ... NJ? Pitt? Anything but OT?
(After being lazy, I looked - I think we cheer for NJ. If they win, they are still 1 pt behind us with same games played. Pitty, with a win, would be same points with a game in hand pending the outcome of our game.)
We also need Toronto begrudgingly enough. If Philly keeps falling, it can eliminate 1 of the Metro teams from being a problem.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Doohickie said:
At the end they were protecting a 4 goal lead. I don't mind if they Alamo'ed a bit, especially since they didn't allow any goals.
Mike Grier, perhaps?
Very similar outside his skating which Greenway traded for size and bit more physicality. I’d also say Grier was slightly better offensively in terms of hands but in regards to be a solid defensively responsible forward that PKs like a madman; then yes.
Worst part about Greenway is that he was hurt when we got him last year or else we likely make the playoffs with this year’s Greenway.
-
12 minutes ago, Thorny said:
It’s
the stanley CUP
There’s only one Cup in hockey worth winning so emphasis on Stanley just seems wrong
Well Id say it with emphasis on both.
It's the STAN-ley CUP
There are many cups but only one Stanley Cup; especially in regards to all sports and even other hockey leagues
Also there could also be some degree of front loaded emphasis due to the longer name
Lord Stanley's Cup - in this form the emphasis is naturally placed on whose Cup versus Stanley's what?
-
17 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:
No but what part do you emphasize?
No one says STANley cup
Depends on if I want to sound like an old Canadian broadcaster or how I want to put the inflexion on it.
-
1 hour ago, ... said:
More shots at Meatballs' coaching?
"We wanted to get him in some games, get him a little bit comfortable. I think we practice a little differently here. There's just a lot of new for him here. So [we've been] discussing some of the new, some quickness that can come back into his game, some physicality that could come back into his game."
I honestly don't see it. How i see it is Okposo saying they practice a bit different and that in Florida they want him to tap into some different skillsets than he did in Buffalo. Florida plays more physical than us so that would be an obvious difference in tactics. My only worry is he'll get another head injury in Florida because our staff would of very likely, if not at least unconsciously, looked to protect him from another head injury via tell him to less physical.
-
I have always pronounced it Stan lee Cup, is that wrong?
-
3 hours ago, Ctaeth said:
Is this the thread where I get to finally unload all my lebowski gifs?
Your time has come
-
1 minute ago, Weave said:
Somebody was sleeping in class the week they covered contractions in grade school.
Effectively I've always know the contraction but always believed "would of" was one of those oddball quirks of the English language that was passed down since the Normans invaded England or something lol
-
1
-
-
Why does this playoff race feel like less of a Nascar race and more of a collection of geriatrics trying to get to the bingo table.
-
2
-
-
6 hours ago, shrader said:
I recently took a little jab at someone for calling a player a “duel threat”. It got me thinking about how there are some recurring posting habits around here that always have me rolling my eyes. We don’t need any public shaming here, I’m more looking for some subtle shaming instead. I won’t name any names, but you know who you are.
So here we go:
1. A certain poster named after a type of hair extension constantly says “noone”. I don’t know if he or she thinks it is old English after spending too much time at ye olde pub at 12pm, but that’s not a word.
2. Sticking to the hair theme, a certain large hairy alien regularly talks about things that he “would of” done. I can’t even think of some witty way where you could actually use those two words together. Maybe if I would’ve had more sleep last night.
There you go. Even the greatest of detectives can’t possibly know who I am talking about. I’m sure there are many other typos and grammar oddities out there, maybe even from me. Let’s hear them. Or feel free to pick something out from this very post. Like I said, limited sleep.
Well I just looked that up since I'm 99% certain you are speaking of me.
Holy *****, I never even knew that
Would've = Would have obviously but Would of = Is akin to "wood of a tree" and while speaking aloud it makes sense doesn't read correctly. Hopefully I remember this for future posts 🙂
-
2
-
2
-
-
For having been out there as long as they were at the end they certainly battled and crashed the net which is good to see.
Sabres seemed to get slowly worked off their game, in part thanks to the refs just letting a lot go after the halfway mark of the game. Detroit has far more dirty players that took advantage of that. Benson literally got cross checked into the net for instance.
-
7 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said:
Learning how to play defense are what coaches are for. Not washed up veterans that can't play in the NHL anymore.
Did you expect the players to say he sucked and we're better with him gone?
We win more games with RJ vs EJ.
Learning how to play defense in theory is the coach’s responsibility. Learning how to actually carry out defensive play on a game to game basis falls on the vets as well as the coaches. A coach can’t go out on the ice and get 1st person information during the game; the vets on the other hand do. You could have a staff of hall of fame coaches and still would need experienced players to help with in game adjustments as well deciphering the coach’s strategy to those finding it difficult to translate to the actual game.
Effectively, no matter the coach, a player is more likely to trust his teammate’s judgement than his coach. It’s plainly how our brains work. If your Dad tells you something you should do and your friend tells you something to do whose opinion are you more likely to actually carry out? Logically it should be your Dad, but more often than not children and young adults aren’t going to connect their parents experiences as being valuable. It’s as you grow up where it slowly dawns on you that Mom and Dad actually know stuff (usually)
-
4 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
I actually disagree with this. You can argue that Adams should have a better back up than Comrie, but it is Comrie and if you piss on him and treat him like garbage there are players on the roster who won't like it. It's not how you build a team bond and a winning culture. Comrie plays if UPL is tired and that should be that. Team has to shut down and elevate their play to go with that (as winning teams do when in a similar position).
I also believe the players do want to win and thus would also be good with Levi spot filling the back to back with UPL before going back to Rochester.
-
6 minutes ago, Buffalonill said:
What does this even mean ? You need vets just not over the hill ones .
Hopefully he said this Wrong
I think what he was saying implied he wasn't planning to sign any babysitter vets anymore. He wants vets still but only if they can still play at a beneficial level.
-
1
-
-
Awesome win and UPL shutout!
Cozens played great
-
1
-
-
Tuch was off and on
Tage was both good and made some terribly lazy passes, but he certainly was hustling which is good to see.
-
1
-
-
Granato was telling someone vehemently that he better protect the ***** puck
-
Honestly I think our only chance of seeing him again in the 23-24 season is if we make the playoffs or at very least a have a play in game against Tampa in #82
-
53 minutes ago, Pimlach said:
Good effort. Not liking the Coture move though.
For me its the only way to get rid of Skinner because otherwise we are likely either stuck with him until the end of next year or worse.
-
-
3 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:
Well that's fine, and maybe it'll work out but I'm just thinking ahead.
We will have a much clearer picture when we see what happens with UPL. That's the first cap/contract issue.
I said long ago I figured Mitts would get traded simply because they had an idea of how much they'd pay a 3C, they saw him as a 3C but he saw himself as a 2C and that was a great divide so he had to go.
Byram sees himself as a top pairing D. He is a top D guy for sure in terms of his offense. The issue for me is just Power and his contract. 30 million for 3 D is a LOT. I asked this earlier so for the capologists out there is there any team out there that has 30 million on their top 3 D? I don't think so. I could be wrong.
SJ Sharks we’re very much akin to 30mil for 3 D in a comparison on percentage of cap. When they lost to St. L in the Conference Finals they had Vlasic, Burns and Karlsson all under contract.
GDT/ Buffalo Sabres @ Vancouver Canucks Tuesday 10pm 3/19, ESPN+ MSG & WGR Radio
in The Aud Club
Posted
Yes, had a couple nice effort plays and a couple turnovers. A rather mixed bag and likely right up the alley of high effort low effectiveness tonight.