PerreaultForever
-
Posts
13,031 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by PerreaultForever
-
-
On 1/27/2021 at 11:39 AM, JohnC said:
I'm a minimalist with a less than delusionary expectation to be great. What I'm looking for is to steadily get better and move up the ranks.
My theory why the Sabres for the past recent years have started off like of ball of fire and then predictably flamed out is that the roster was thin to begin with not having much margin of error to work with. As the season would advance and the rigors of it took its toll from injuries and players not playing to expectation there wasn't a reservoir of talent to draw from. Hopefully, the difference this season is that the talent base has increased and credible replacements are more available.
It's not that. We've had healthier rosters than many teams many years. It's just that hockey gets tougher, more physical, teams bear down and it's simply harder in the second half (roughly) of a season and we don't elevate our game to match that. We have been soft and have lacked team effort for a long long time.
3 hours ago, pi2000 said:I've come to the realization that it's simply lack of talent on this team.
I know it's sour grapes, but it's terribly frustrating thinking about what could have been, we end up with...
Reinhart instead of Draisaitl
Eichel instead of McDavid
Nylander instead of Sergachev
Dahlin instead of Svechnikov or Q. Hughes
...and with $15m/yr going to Skinner + Okposo there's simply no way to recover.
They keep trying different coaches but it's like we keep watching the same game over and over for the past 10 years.
I'm not advocating for a complete rebuild, but their only way out of this is to get some kind of steady production from Skinner and find a way to unload Okposo maybe in expansion, but they're going to have to get creative.
This season is already a wash.
All those mistakes are valid, so poor drafting is a reason for sure, but there is still a lot of talent on this team. We have way more talent for example than New Jersey but they still beat us. We lack a work ethic, team spirit and a winning culture.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, 7+6=13 said:
There's several of our players that need some verbal abuse, I'd bring him in.
Why stop there? I hear Mike Danton's out on parole..........................
(ya, just what this broken culture needs, a guy the Rangers can't stomach).
-
1 hour ago, pi2000 said:
Maybe he lost his love of the game.
damn. you beat me to it.
-
maybe he's playing hurt?
-
1
-
3
-
1
-
-
Coming in later and reading over all these comments the one thing that can be agreed upon is that there is enough blame to spread around that there is pretty much at least one or two people here putting the blame on pretty much everybody on the roster and in management and in ownership. Some say this guy some say that guy etc. but I think only Reinhart got a pass cause he didn't play 🙂 (there's few others but you get the point).
We go through this every year and you can argue forever but at some point you need to consider the constants year to year (at least since the tank). I think a complete tear down would mean several more lean years, but is there any real way to erase the baggage for the guys who have been here? idk.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Weave said:
Dave Andrechuck was also a power forward who did not hit many people. What he did do that made him a power forward was use his size and strength to create chaos and space. If Thompson would use his size and strength in the same way he'd be quire effective. But that is an attitude as well.
Dave was a different kind of power forward entirely. He was (still is) a barrel chested big upper body kind of guy. Solid and strong and thus really hard to move out from the slot area. And that was in an era when you could hack and whack pretty good in there. Thompson is a gangly giraffe with nowhere near the same solidness in his upper body. For him to be similar to Dave he'd have to have a physique like Chara, and he does not.
More importantly perhaps, he simply doesn't play that way or drive the net with his body forward. He just tries to snap that wrist shot whenever he gets anywhere near the slot and most are easy pickings for the goalie.
If we had a Dave Andreychuk Kreuger wouldn't have to put Risto in front all the time on the PP 🙂
-
5 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
Remember I’m the guy who just posted that his 3 year deal is worrisome.
TT was 6-4 185 on draft day is now 6-7 219. Once I learned he is still growing I realized I’m not seeing a finished product. It might be two more years before he fills out and becomes the power forward we hope. Therefore, I’m not yet willing to write him off as a tweener.
He simply does not have the attitude or style to become the power forward we all want. Pretty sure Cozens has already hit more guys in 1 year than Thompson has in all his time here. and I know it's not just about hitting, but for brevity, he just doesn't play a power forward type game.
-
Just disgraceful. We have so much more "talent" on the roster and we get out worked and beaten down by a bunch of nobodys really and they don't even have their #1 goalie. Good job Lindy, you are getting the most out of what you have, which isn't much.
When we don't have a goalie bail us out we are sunk. Just disgraceful and yet, the same as every other year.
Dump some of our "stars" and get me a bunch of Miles Wood types.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
He’d get claimed if waived.
Understatement
No, not useless, but not utilized properly. He is 6-7 and 219. He is awkward with a capital A. He has good instincts but needs to not to be playing yet in a top 6 role. He should be playing every night on a 3rd scoring line and be allowed to learn from his mistakes. As I’ve said before I wanted Cozens centering that line but with him excelling in a top 6 role we’ll have to settle for Lazar centering that line. My guess is a Skinner Lazar Thompson line could work.
I disagree. He's just awkward. I was hoping he'd become something and use that size, but he doesn't and he doesn't really have an identity. Doesn't do any particular thing well and thus has no real role.
I'm pretty much done with hoping for him or Mitts and would rather the bottom six was filled with Lazars and Reiders or other similar hard workers and grinders.
-
1
-
-
I don't think they are playing very good at all, but they are picking up the points and a win is a win so let it slide and see what happens.
The Giraffe needs to be sent to Rochester. He is useless.
-
1 hour ago, nfreeman said:
I didn't think it looked even close to being lazy. Of course, neither of us can know what was in his mind.
I get being dissatisfied with the Sabres' top guns -- Eichel, Hall, Dahlin and Skinner have all been pretty disappointing to very disappointing this year. Skinner has 1 freaking point in 8 games. But he's hustling, including on the backcheck, and his line IMHO has been much better than expected. He screwed up on an attempted zone clear. That's all it was. And while I think petulance and general bad attitude crept into Skinner's play last year, I think he's been working hard this year and I haven't seen any laziness.
Maybe. Skinner's definitely an enigma. I don't think he is going to the net or shooting as well as he did first year but of course he played with a better center that year. I can't really say which of those is more accurate or causal. Maybe both.
-
-
21 minutes ago, nfreeman said:
You have got to be kidding me.
I said it ALMOST LOOKED intentional. I don't think it was, but it was the laziest dumb play I've seen from a Sabre this year by far. There are coaches in this league that would bench a player for it.
-
If Reinhart can't go, this is the perfect opportunity for Ralph to try Skinner with Jack and see what happens. Switch Olofsson over to RW and play Skinner-Eichel-Olofsson and not the giraffe.
If it works, Skinner earns his top line spot and we have Skinner-Eichel-Reinhart again when Sam is back. If it doesn't, back to line 4 Skinner goes. Ralph gets to save face as it was an injury move and nobody has to placate their ego. It's the perfect opportunity and if Ralph isn't taking it it means he will never give Skinner another real chance to prove himself.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Radar said:
The only part of this I'll question is your comment lack of effort. I've not seen lack of effort.
To be clear, the lack of effort was for the entire team, not Eichel specifically. When you are being outshot 14-4 in the opening period it means either the other team is really good or your team hasn't shown up. The Rangers are not really good.
-
1
-
-
The nonchalant way he did it is what got to me. Almost looked intentional.
-
1 hour ago, Slack_in_MA said:
When you have as many #1/2 overall picks, “generational talents”, it comes down to scheme, chemistry, and leadership. It’s never one single thing. I’m (still) trying to figure out which is the primary root cause.
Scheme and chemistry don't account for a lack of effort. Leadership I agree with and have commented on it before. Eichel is a crap captain. Good player, crap leader.
-
1
-
-
I can only imagine how this conversation might have gone had Skinner's incredibly lazy puck flip over the glass resulted in the game winning goal for the Rangers.
-
5 hours ago, nfreeman said:
This is a bit of an oversimplification. Carolina has indeed improved since trading Skinner, but they've made a bunch of moves in that time frame, so their improvement can't really be attributed solely to them unloading Skinner.
Basically just saying he was not missed.
-
Another uninspired effort pretty similar to the previous one. Slightly better in the 3rd and Ullmark saved a point for us but really, this kind of effort won't get us in the playoffs. Bot even close.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, LabattBlue said:
HC's always have a double standard when it comes to "performance determines play". Early into this season, but Dahlin has arguably been the worst Sabre on some nights, yet he still dresses every game, still plays significant minutes, and still gets PP time. So for all those who say Skinner deserves what he gets for not buying in, I say BS.
I agree with this. Dahlin needs to sit a few games.
When Mcavoy was struggling in Boston I think it was 2 seasons back they benched and then sat him out and it caused rumblings there about him not being as good as first thought. Woke him up or he took a step back or whatever and they paired him with a veteran (to say the least) and now, in the bruins game I watched this year he looked like a Norris candidate.
We have a history of developing D men poorly and we might be doing it again. I still think this falls on Steve Smith and he should have gone with Housley. But whatever, it's time he sat.
-
5 hours ago, JohnC said:
I have never heard anyone say that Skinner is a malcontent or is defiant toward the coach and what he is espousing.
Buffalo has been quiet on it and good for them as any issues shouldn't be fought in the media or on twitter or whatever IF they exist. Not saying they do, just saying it's pretty obvious that Skinner and Kreuger have some sort of issue(s).
As for you not hearing, did you not pay attention to the things coming out of Carolina? Pretty much well known. Uncoachable was a word often used, and Carolina, as a team, got better without him. That's old news.
-
6 hours ago, Zamboni said:
Age has nothing to do with it… And I’m not a youngster… At all. and that’s where you and I differ and will always differ … Regarding Reinhart. I see him go to the net, stand around the net, go in the corners to dig out the puck. I see him take a beating some nights. You do not see it obviously. So thanks for showing your bias regarding Sam once again. You and I both know it’ll never change. you should really stop trying to hide behind age without knowing who you’re talking to. There’s a difference between knowing stats, knowing how to look at stats, understanding stats… And then just flat out refusing to believe the data.
Dude, I'm not "hiding." I watch hockey with friends and none of us talk about corsi and fenwick and all that stuff cause it's just not interesting or fun to look at team sports that way. Go play videogames if you want to look at everything in a dissected analytical way. We watch sports for fun and entertainment. Analytic worship tends to be an age thing, but if you are old and into stats too good for you. Pretty sure you're in a minority view for your age cohort but it DOESN'T MATTER. Enjoy your thing and I'll enjoy mine Ok?
Now as for Sam, the eyes don't lie. The stat will tell you he was in that part of the ice but it won't tell you that he backed away at the moment the other guy gave him a stern look. (Obviously exaggerating there to make a point, but I think you know what I mean). By the way, it's not a bias. He's played better this season than usual imo. Better than Eichel at times. That's what my eyes say.
I'm not going to do this, cause I'm not into stats, but since you are I have a challenge for you out of curiosity. Take Sam's stats and run a comparison with other wingers who clearly do go to the dirty areas often. Tell me how they stack up. I'd suggest Marchand. Maybe Tkachuk. Somebody like that. How do they stack up? Cause if Sam's stats say he's in there as much as those guys, then the stats clearly don't tell you everything they need to.
-
3 hours ago, Zamboni said:
The Reinhart “haters” hate those facts. Ignore the facts. And come up with eye test “data” or random and completely false things like “slow skater” or “doesn’t do any one thing really really like super duper great”, or my favorite one “doesn’t go in the dirty areas”. 😂
Maybe but I'm too old to start watching hockey like a mathematician. Where's the fun in that? We old timers might not bother to try to understand all these fancy dancy numbers but we've seen winning hockey and know what it takes to win. And for you youngsters believe it or not, we've seen winning Sabres hockey too lol.
many a night those stats have said Sam was good but that top line was held scoreless. Go figure.
and no, he DOESN'T go into the dirty areas. 🙂
-
1
-
GDT: 1/31/21 1pm ET, NJ Devils at Buffalo, MSG, NHL Network, WGR
in The Aud Club
Posted
I'm not going to argue that we've had great coaching, but we've had several different ones with different styles and different systems. They have all been lauded when they arrived and run out of town later. If the results are the same, even with these changes, don't you have to look at the things that didn't change?