thewookie1
-
Posts
6,777 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by thewookie1
-
-
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.
-
1 hour ago, Pimlach said:
The potential issue we are discussing is not next year, it is the year after.
All teams have to manage the Cap but the Sabres are the only team I know that paid a then 20 year old defenseman $8M/year after 87 NHL games. How he develops in the next 2 years is going to continue to be a source of discussion. Not so much because people don't like Power, everyone knows that most defenseman take time. But more for the decision by Adams to lock him up so fast. Depending on how much of the cap Adams will allocate to defense, Adams may have created less room to maneuver, not more.
A few people on the board are talking about "Power hate". Nothing I say comes from hate. I am pointing out that things could get very interesting after next season with Byram, Peterka, UPL, and Quinn all looking for a payday. Players that we cannot afford to keep will be traded before they can walk away. We may be very surprised by who stays and who goes. Wayne Gretzky got traded, any player can get traded.
Sanderson on Ottawa got a similar contract with similar results/time in the league
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, inkman said:
Apparently it’s open season on UPL or any other Sabres netminder for that matter. Can anyone explain the lack of response by the Sabres other than being the softest team in the league? Was an explanation given (imho there is no excuse for not decking whoever ran UPL into the upper deck)?
The Berggren one had probably the least physically aggressive line possible.
Skinner-Krebs-Olofsson
Bryson-Byram
Krebs was over with the refs but the culprit was protected by the refs. Byram has concussion history so I'd rather him not fight. The other three are far from physical players.
The Fischer one had
Skinner-Krebs-Peterka
Jokijarju-Power
Again, not exactly a group of players who impose their will on anyone. Plus I honestly think some of the players were confused due to how odd it looked.
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, Thorny said:
My stance is also informed by the fact we need to make the playoffs next year. I feel like that’s an incredibly fair bar for Adams and this regime, but regardless, it’s my bar. @DarthEbriatesaid something to me recently and it was a good reminder and hit home. At some point, it becomes my own fault for putting up with it. My line is 5 years. If we can’t make the playoffs next year and Adams retains his job, I am going to cut ties for my own sanity. I’ll always be a “fan” and they’ll always have a place in my heart but, I can’t in good conscience continue following and contributing to the fandom (and this board) like I do (for some, this will undoubtedly represent a vast improvement to their fandom)
I wouldn’t blame you at all if you choose to disregard my stance in totality because I’m funnelling it so throughly through the prism of needing to make the playoffs next year. It’s certainly a bias. But it’s admitted bias, it’s out there in the open. Feel free to call me out on anything that isn’t congruent.
Ill be angsty until we make it this season, or are eliminated: I’m putting that aside willingly once the offseason/next season starts: I’m sure as shite not spending my last season around here wallowing. It’ll be a fun year and we will either make it, or not.
i may not be a “season ticket holder” but I’ve been signing up for a front row seat for 3 decades. It represents no one but myself but as a die hard fan, this is my feeling at this time
I too want to make the playoffs desperately but not to a point of being willing cut off my arm for a chance.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Thorny said:
I disagree
So where are you getting the cap and roster spots from?
Im not trading the big 4 and Skinner is an anchor barring him wanting to go to SJ to lay on the beaches.
Quinn and Peterka are the most cost effective players your going to find since they are on ELCs
-
All that matters at this time is winning the next 3 games in regulation. You do that and with a bit of realistic help we can be breathing down their necks.
Also I feel Washington will drop off some
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Thorny said:
None of this represents a legitimate obstacle to finding a way to finish 16/32 once in 4 years
By all means: sign up some mercenaries to achieve a goal, to make the playoffs. The connotation is ridiculous but whatever: they are all “mercenaries”
People don’t want to come here because we suck? Field a winner in any way you can: home grown or not. Pay what you need to pay. Stop measuring assets by way of what they will grant you in the future: evaluate and assess how your assets can be parlayed into a playoff berth right now
We already have spent most of our core money on Power, Dahlin, Cozens and Thompson plus Skinner and the first 4 aren’t being dealt for any quick fix to hope we squeak into the playoffs. After that it turns into an ugly mess of multiple younger players who could very well be better than most potential replacements in the case of Quinn and Peterka, and can Benson or could he go to Rochester next year? Trading any of those 3 for minimally better older replacements is just a short sighted decision that will not work out for you. Also, I’m not even saying distant future; I’m referring to the following season. If we can find a great piece for our 1st this year, go get him since we have a backlog of players. But don’t rob from Peter to pay Paul. Don’t spend everything for 24-25 at the cost of the next three seasons through short sighted desperation moves.
As for signing mercenaries, when the last time that actually worked for us? Teams with a solid core and culture can support and fit mercenaries into the periphery; here they are more likely to just be Taylor Hall looking for a payday and an easy escape to a different team when the deadline roles around. For mercenary players to work, you need them to buy in to playing here for the entire year, not at their leisure.
-
1 hour ago, #freejame said:
So why are you so desperate to have him while knowing he’s not going to play?
2 fold, he might play which would be a solid pick up or if he can’t play we have gotten out of Skinner’s deal and will have plenty of cap space due to LTIR
-
2
-
Stanley Cup Finals Here We Come
in The Aud Club
Posted
Depends on if I want to sound like an old Canadian broadcaster or how I want to put the inflexion on it.