BarDown

Great post...this is exactly what happened. As for all the people complaining who was on the ice at the end of the third period, it's a no brainer you play to go to overtime...gotta get at least a point.

There's a lot of good stuff here, but really it's just basic hockey. The reason they lose, or win, is not the system, it's the players. Most teams collapse in the defensive zone. The weak side wing (the one furthest away from the puck) plays defense in the slot...he's there in case one of the forwards becomes uncovered, he's backing the def and center up. If his man (the other team's d man in the middle) gets the puck, he's in the shooting lane to block the shot. That's hockey 101. As for breakouts, the Sabres try to possess the puck as much as possible...I think they actually have been a patient team in that regard over the past few years. They do lose the puck sometimes because they aren't skilled enough or they just make bad decisions. When they do, they give up easy scoring chances. I was at the game Friday night, and they looked patient on breakouts and regroups, but I actually think they were too aggressive sometimes...personally I like puck control...but hey, high risk, high reward. All NHL teams skate the puck in if they have room, dump it if they don't...the idea is to get it deep and gain control. The Sabres have used different forechecks this season on their dumps...1-4, 1-2-2, 2 men deep with the def pinching...they've shown a lot of versatility this year. When they do get control deep, they cycle the puck...just like every other team. Sometimes they have set plays (screens and picks) and sometimes they are just reading the play. They use the points well when they're available, and seem to get traffic in front of the goalie. On special teams, they're penalty kill is sound, I've always been a fan. On the power play, they have been using a 1-3-1 set up lately (see Ott's first goal)...and guess what? Almost every team is using it as well...it's the power play of choice around the league lately. So what is the point? The Sabres are sound when it comes to X's and O's...it's hockey, not rocket science. I mean every now and again over the years someone thinks of something new (Jersey's neutral zone trap, Tampa's 1-3-1 forecheck, Detroit's left wing lock for example). What it really boils down to is do they have the talent...a bounce here and there and they could be 5-0-0, or 0-5-0. The difference between winning and losing is so small. If there 5-0-0 right now, are we even talking about "the system". Wake up!! The coach is sound, what they do is sound...are the players sound? Can they finish their chances, finish their checks, block shots, make saves, crash the net, draw penalties better than their opponent on a given night? Will they play with passion and heart? Will they find a way? Those are the questions to ask.

Totally agree.

I doubt they would tell us if it was a mess up OR a new strategy!

I guess you could be right, but I can't figure out any strategy why you would pull the goalie and not have the extra man in the offensive zone. Miller could wait by the boards to see who wins the draw, then Hodgson goes. But the whole reason to pull your goalie is to have an extra attacker...he should be where the puck is or you lose that advantage. I suppose Miller could have messed up...maybe he wasn't supposed to be off the ice yet.

Saw the play, and noticed it right away. I'm a coach, and without a doubt it's the players fault. It happens all the time actually (usually not in the pros though). A coach draws up a play or strategy...the team goes out...one of the players isn't out there. Totally on the player, either he wasn't paying attention, or he "zoned out". Not saying it's ok, but hey, they're human. I'm 100% sure it's not a set play. In that situation, you need the extra skater in case you lose the face-off. Two guys on the puck, and the rest cutting off the lanes to get the puck out. If you win the draw, you need the extra skater so the defense can't account for everyone (like a power play). More than likely, Hodgson messed up.

Wow...tried to read all the responses this morning as I missed most of the game...just caught the last 13 minutes. All the talk before the game was so positive. People saying we should get 4 points vs the Canes, or at least 3 of 4. The Canes were desperate...they didn't want to be 0-3. You gotta give the other team some credit, they're pros too. The little I did see has been mentioned earlier. The power play I saw was suspect at best, and Myers was awful (and I only saw 13 minutes). We had chances, but didn't finish. Way to early to panic, but if Myers doesn't become an elite defenseman, the team is in big trouble. He needs to dominate and he's far from it. I love the guy and I'm pulling for him, but he looks lost at times (what were he and Leopold doing on the 5th goal?). Looks like a confidence thing, or maybe he's hurt. I don't want to make excuses for him but there's something wrong. He needs to be a guy other teams hate playing against. The power play can be fixed, it's early. The Myers' thing is beginning to scare me though.

Grigorenko should stay. For a lot of reasons already stated. Going back to juniors will not help his defensive game, which is what Ruff is looking for. Coaches need to develop trust in young players so they can give them more ice time in tight games. Playing with NHL veterans who can talk to him after every shift, is far more valuable than putting up points in juniors. Watching him play you can see he's trying hard to be defensively responsible, which is critical to Ruff (or any coach really) with his centers. His offensive game will continue to grow as well...when he's used to the speed, when his defensive game becomes more natural, and when he gets used to his linemates he'll be a real offensive threat. That being said, if all that happens the team will have 3 legitimate scoring lines. A fourth line centered by Hecht, with Kaleta and Gerbe (Scott and McCormack when needed) would be great. It also provides us with some depth for injuries.

Sorry Bro. Sounds like he had a good run. RIP.

Cup

Great to be back talking hockey again. Not to change the topic, but here are what i think the lines will look like opening night: Vanek-Hodgson-Pommer Foligno-Ennis-Stafford Leino-Ott-Grigorenko Kaleta-Hecht-Scott (or Ellis) Too many questions to pick the starting defense.

Holy crap...I just got teary-eyed over a lockout video.

I have to believe that the Sabre's front office and coaches has taken all things under consideration...the new CBA, Doan's age, his reputation as a leader, all his intangibles. They know what the team needs in order to get better. If they are willing to pay Doan all that money, then for this organization, he must be worth it.

I'm gonna give this a shot...keeping in mind that i think some guys will be moved before the season starts... Vanek-Hodgson-Pommer Foligno-Ennis-Stafford Ott-Grigs-Leino Adam/Gerbe-McCormick-Kaleta/Tropp Myers-Sekera Erhoff-Weber Leopold-Regehr Sulzer

OUT-standing! That should be the end of this discussion.

I certainly hope we try to improve the roster for next year, but if we weren't to add anyone I think these lines would be interesting... 1st Vanek - Hodgson - Pommer 2nd Foligno - Ennis - Stafford 3rd Leino - Roy - Tropp 4th Gerbe - McCormick - Kaleta I think it gives us 2 legit scoring lines, plus I like Leino and Roy vs other teams 3rd lines...and a hard working 4th line.

Dirty hit

Well said