nfreeman Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 I never flip flop. I base my opinions on the facts at hand. Unlike some who are blindly attached to an opinion and refuse to move off that opinion no matter how drastic a change has occurred in the variables. The rest off your post is flawed simply because you relying on two players that have proven themselves to be unreliable. "If Max Plays like" or "When Connolly Plays"? Why don't you just add "If Peters can score 20 goals" or "Miller has 82 shut outs". They are just as likely to happen. The Sabres did finish 4th in the league in scoring. Thanks to putting up 23 goals in four games against Atlanta and a bunch against bottom feeders like Tampa (22) Carolina (20). Most nights the Sabres struggled to score 3 goals. The idea the Sabres have "plenty of weapons" is a myth. They have Roy, Vanek and Pominville to carry the load. There is a steep drop off to Paille, Hecht and Kotalik. Another drop off to Stafford and Gaustad. That's all the Sabres can rely on in the forward ranks. It would be great if the blue line could chip in on the offensive side. Without Campbell it is not unreasonable to expect a drop off from last years production. This season Roy, Vanek and Pominville are going to be leaned on far more than a season ago. Especially without Gaustad to eat up some PK minutes. Hopefully Paille and Stafford can step up their games to help fill the voids in the forwards ranks. Though I am starting to have doubts about Stafford. My post does not assume that the Sabres will rely on either Max or Connolly -- I was merely pointing out which lines they will play on to start the season. Right now, Stafford is nowhere near the top line, and Max has been playing a lot with Roy (possibly in an attempt to showcase him for trade suitors, but who knows?). I did say that if Max plays like he did last year, he will get dropped. And Connolly appears to be healthy now and will start the season. Certainly Lindy will ride him as long as he can. Indeed, as you rightly point out, it would be foolish to rely on these 2 guys (and I am as unhappy as you are that we have not brought in another center). The Sabres were #4 in the league in scoring last year without much from either Max or Connolly. Anything they get from those 2 this year is a bonus. But it's worth remembering that this time last year, the Canadiens felt the same way about Kovalev (and the Bruins feel the same way right now about Bergeron). As for their goal-scoring ranking being inflated -- I agree that their numbers got fat off of a number of blowouts of crappy teams (and in fact I have posted numbers on this previously). However, I'm confident that all of the top-ranked teams fattened up their numbers with blowouts of crappy teams. And, more importantly, the numbers don't lie about scoring ABILITY. This team can light it up. It can skate, it can pass and it can score. It just wasn't mentally tough enough to get it done in crunch time last year. That's what Drury and, yes, Briere were so good at. That's why this team fell off the table last year. That's why I've been desperately hoping for them to bring in Sundin or Shanahan or someone like that who doesn't shrink when the pressure is on. Rivet was the right guy for the defense, but they haven't brought in one like him for the offense. That's my biggest worry going into this year -- and maybe similar to your concerns -- although you seem to be more fed up with the whole lot of them than I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 to close my loop for now, paetsch got KTFO on an "out of class" basis -- why not kaleta? It was a blowout. Ruff wasn't going to send Kaleta over the boards because he knew what was going to happen. Also he wasn't going to tap anyone to fight Laraque. In a sense, Buffalo was asking to settle this another day, which Laraque wasn't accepting. Just my take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 My post does not assume that the Sabres will rely on either Max or Connolly -- I was merely pointing out which lines they will play on to start the season. Right now, Stafford is nowhere near the top line, and Max has been playing a lot with Roy (possibly in an attempt to showcase him for trade suitors, but who knows?). I did say that if Max plays like he did last year, he will get dropped. And Connolly appears to be healthy now and will start the season. Certainly Lindy will ride him as long as he can. Indeed, as you rightly point out, it would be foolish to rely on these 2 guys (and I am as unhappy as you are that we have not brought in another center). The Sabres were #4 in the league in scoring last year without much from either Max or Connolly. Anything they get from those 2 this year is a bonus. But it's worth remembering that this time last year, the Canadiens felt the same way about Kovalev (and the Bruins feel the same way right now about Bergeron). As for their goal-scoring ranking being inflated -- I agree that their numbers got fat off of a number of blowouts of crappy teams (and in fact I have posted numbers on this previously). However, I'm confident that all of the top-ranked teams fattened up their numbers with blowouts of crappy teams. And, more importantly, the numbers don't lie about scoring ABILITY. This team can light it up. It can skate, it can pass and it can score. It just wasn't mentally tough enough to get it done in crunch time last year. That's what Drury and, yes, Briere were so good at. That's why this team fell off the table last year. That's why I've been desperately hoping for them to bring in Sundin or Shanahan or someone like that who doesn't shrink when the pressure is on. Rivet was the right guy for the defense, but they haven't brought in one like him for the offense. That's my biggest worry going into this year -- and maybe similar to your concerns -- although you seem to be more fed up with the whole lot of them than I am. I am more concerned than fed up. I do not mean to imply the Sabres are void of offensive talent. It is that they are top heavy with a steep decline from level to level. Looking at the season as a whole I just don't see this team, as constructed, being able to make a serious run at the playoffs. That is with the top eight forwards healthy. There is no depth in the forward ranks. If there is any type of long term injury to either of the top three, Roy - Vanek - Pominville? You might as well start planning the Draft Lottery party. The front office's biggest flaw is ego and stubbornness. They will go into this season telling everyone this is a playoff team and no matter how slowly they start a move won't be made. I can not imagine that they could possibly look at the opening day roster and feel confident. There has to be a cap strapped team somewhere that the Sabres can pry a top six forward from. Someone to put in and drop Paillie or Stafford to the third and Max or Connolly (or Timmy's replacement) to the fourth line. They have to do something. They can't afford to give away early season points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted October 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 It was a blowout. Ruff wasn't going to send Kaleta over the boards because he knew what was going to happen. ...Patty is going to have to answer for his actions, why not let him do it then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 It was a blowout. Ruff wasn't going to send Kaleta over the boards because he knew what was going to happen.Also he wasn't going to tap anyone to fight Laraque. In a sense, Buffalo was asking to settle this another day, which Laraque wasn't accepting. Just my take. seems logical. ...Patty is going to have to answer for his actions, why not let him do it then? i think that's where i come out: call kaleta's line a couple times and tell the kid to keep his head on a swivel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 Fascinating discussion on the "code" of fighting. Good stuff, X. Benedict and others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 seems logical.i think that's where i come out: call kaleta's line a couple times and tell the kid to keep his head on a swivel. You would think that's how it would work .....but the enforcer holds the entire bench accountable. Ideally it would be Kaleta ....but in practice it is Peters job to fight in Kaleta's place. If Peters isn't dressing than Laraque is asking who is standing in. Basically that is what is meant when they say it isn't important if you win fights, it is most important to show up. A fight wipes the slate clean. Laraque elbowing Paetsch basically tells the Sabres and the entire league that somebody better show up if he calls a team out for something he doesn't like. It's old school....it's Gordie Howe justice that carries over from game to game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted October 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 I heart Laraque. :wub: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 I don't see why another player from the Pens couldn't have stepped up to fight Kaleta or someone of equal weight class. Why does it have to be enforcers that do all the fighting? Why can't another player say "hey, I'm not cool with what you just did, let's settle this." If the only one on the bench who has to care is the enforcer, then why do we even have these discussions about team mates standing up for one another? Apparently if you have an enforcer the rest of your team doesn't have to care. We wouldn't need this enforcer garbage if everyone else would man the f up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 I heart Laraque. :wub: He was a free agent. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 You would think that's how it would work .....but the enforcer holds the entire bench accountable.Ideally it would be Kaleta ....but in practice it is Peters job to fight in Kaleta's place. If Peters isn't dressing than Laraque is asking who is standing in. Basically that is what is meant when they say it isn't important if you win fights, it is most important to show up. A fight wipes the slate clean. Laraque elbowing Paetsch basically tells the Sabres and the entire league that somebody better show up if he calls a team out for something he doesn't like. It's old school....it's Gordie Howe justice that carries over from game to game. again, i think your take accurately captures the progress of a situation like the one we had with kaleta-malkin-laraque-paetsch. i just think it's a hare-brained construct, and our conversation (which has been very helpful for me) confirms my initial sense that the enforcers' fights are little more than an anemic proxy aimed at resolving the grievances that arise elsewhere in the course of a game, season. that is: team 1's enforcer takes exception, as he must, to team 2's banger taking a run at team 1's star. so enforcer-1 puts team 2's bench on notice that someone has to go with him to resolve the matter (i.e., there needs to be a fight by proxy). except there's no one from team 2 who can scrap with enforcer-1 on that particular night. "take a rain check," says/implies team 2. "no way," says/thinks enforcer-1. so, rather than take a blood oath to obliterate banger-2, enforcer-1 takes out someone else from team 2. in this way, the enforcer model of dealing with in-game grievances is nothing more than a self-perpetuating side show; one that ironically fails to eradicate the behavior that provokes the challenge from enforcer-1. that's because if banger-2 steps out of line, enforcer-2 is there to answer the bell for him. absent a consequence, banger-2 remains free to run at star players. and in the event team 2 doesn't dress enforcer-2, it's probably someone else from team 2 who has to pay the price. We wouldn't need this enforcer garbage if everyone else would man the f up. in other words, what he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted October 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 again, i think your take accurately captures the progress of a situation like the one we had with kaleta-malkin-laraque-paetsch. i just think it's a hare-brained construct, and our conversation (which has been very helpful for me) confirms my initial sense that the enforcers' fights are little more than an anemic proxy aimed at resolving the grievances that arise elsewhere in the course of a game, season. that is: team 1's enforcer takes exception, as he must, to team 2's banger taking a run at team 1's star. so enforcer-1 puts team 2's bench on notice that someone has to go with him to resolve the matter (i.e., there needs to be a fight by proxy). except there's no one from team 2 who can scrap with enforcer-1 on that particular night. "take a rain check," says/implies team 2. "no way," says/thinks enforcer-1. so, rather than take a blood oath to obliterate banger-2, enforcer-1 takes out someone else from team 2. in this way, the enforcer model of dealing with in-game grievances is nothing more than a self-perpetuating side show; one that ironically fails to eradicate the behavior that provokes the challenge from enforcer-1. that's because if banger-2 steps out of line, enforcer-2 is there to answer the bell for him. absent a consequence, banger-2 remains free to run at star players. and in the event team 2 doesn't dress enforcer-2, it's probably someone else from team 2 who has to pay the price. :unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 I don't see why another player from the Pens couldn't have stepped up to fight Kaleta or someone of equal weight class. Why does it have to be enforcers that do all the fighting? Why can't another player say "hey, I'm not cool with what you just did, let's settle this." If the only one on the bench who has to care is the enforcer, then why do we even have these discussions about team mates standing up for one another? Apparently if you have an enforcer the rest of your team doesn't have to care. We wouldn't need this enforcer garbage if everyone else would man the f up. The enforcer is also a protector. The last thing you want are your skaters getting hurt in fights. But players like Kaleta are going to skate away and try to draw 2 minutes with the instigator penalty if anyone retaliates. So the options are....Kaleta agrees to fight....which is insane because even Laraque doesn't want that to happen.....Pittsburgh gets to take liberties with Vanek or Pomminstein.....which is insane....or somebody has to stand in as protection. Because nobody stood in it ended with the elbow on Paestch the 7th d-man,.....which in the weird world we are talking about was a hell of a lot better than seeing Pomminstein or Vanek down on the ice. Message sent. Nobody hits Malkin high on open ice. Actually by trying to reduce fighting with the instigator, the league has made more room for cheap shot artists like Tootoo, Ruutu, Avery, and other cheap shot artist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 Because nobody stood in it ended with the elbow on Paestch the 7th d-man,.....which in the weird world we are talking about was a hell of a lot better than seeing Pomminstein or Vanek down on the ice. it is a weird world - but i feel like i have a handle on it now. thanks, x. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted October 9, 2008 Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 OK, so after listening to Lindy on the audio vault from this morning (Wednesday), it sounds like the lines on Friday will be: Hecht-Pommer-Paille Roy-Max-Vanek Connolly-Kotalik-Stafford Ellis-Kaleta-Mair Lindy sounded more positive about Stafford than I was expecting. He also said that Connolly is our best playmaking center and he wants to see him with Kotalik and Stafford on the wings. He also said that when Gaustad gets back it's likely that he'll play with Hecht and Pommer. He also said that Ellis is an extremely hard worker and that he and Kaleta were going to be on the fourth line. He sounded like it was a given that Kaleta was going to be on the fourth line -- which I interpret to mean that at this point Lindy is planning on dressing Kaleta every night. Finally, he sounded fairly lukewarm about Max -- so perhaps I've been too optimistic about Max and we will see him in the doghouse pretty soon. Either way, I'm psyched for Friday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted October 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 He also said that when Gaustad gets back it's likely that he'll play with Hecht and Pommer. So where does that put Paille? What if that line is really clicking with Danny? Perhaps when Goose gets back it will finally give Lindy the ability to bench a player based on performance. Does Clarke ever get a sniff? So many questions... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted October 9, 2008 Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 So where does that put Paille? What if that line is really clicking with Danny? Perhaps when Goose gets back it will finally give Lindy the ability to bench a player based on performance. Does Clarke ever get a sniff? So many questions... I was wondering about Paille too. I suspect at that point, IF no one else is injured, there would be a competition between Paille and Stafford for 3rd line/4th line wing spots. As for MacArthur, Lindy mentioned that he and Petey would be in the mix on the 4th line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R_Dudley Posted October 9, 2008 Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 You would think that's how it would work .....but the enforcer holds the entire bench accountable.Ideally it would be Kaleta ....but in practice it is Peters job to fight in Kaleta's place. If Peters isn't dressing than Laraque is asking who is standing in. Basically that is what is meant when they say it isn't important if you win fights, it is most important to show up. A fight wipes the slate clean. Laraque elbowing Paetsch basically tells the Sabres and the entire league that somebody better show up if he calls a team out for something he doesn't like. It's old school....it's Gordie Howe justice that carries over from game to game. Thanks X. The Sherpa status is well deserved :thumbsup: That's the best description of the 'code' and use of a specific game example to define the enforcer role within the code that I have ever heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnabov Posted October 9, 2008 Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 OK, so after listening to Lindy on the audio vault from this morning (Wednesday), it sounds like the lines on Friday will be: Hecht-Pommer-Paille Roy-Max-Vanek Connolly-Kotalik-Stafford Ellis-Kaleta-Mair Don't know about the rest of you, but I'm good with those lines. Maxim gets a chance to either show up & perform consistently on the top line or he gets adios'd out of town. MacArthur hasn't shown enough yet to garner a starting spot but they didn't send him down & risk losing a player to waivers. Peters can be inserted for Ellis when an enforcer is needed. Gaustad I don't know where they put him when he comes back - I thought Connolly was supposed to be the 2nd line center & Hecht to play wing. In all likelihood injuries will solve any over-crowding but it would be a nice problem to have if we had too many healthy bodies all season long & people needing to be sat & get their games in gear felt the pressure of the press box looming. On a side note: have they sent anyone else down yet - is Weber staying up for the opener - I'm assuming he & Paetsch are the odd guys out on D right now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted October 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 On a side note: have they sent anyone else down yet - is Weber staying up for the opener - I'm assuming he & Paetsch are the odd guys out on D right now? Weber is a :chris: . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted October 9, 2008 Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 According to Paul Hamilton ... as of this morning at practice ... Vanek-Roy-Stafford Paille-Hecht-Pominville Kotalik-Connolly-Afinogenov Peters-Mair-Kaleta Tallinder-Rivet Lydman-Numinnen Sekera-Spacek Link - http://wgr550.com/Afinogenov-not-with-Roy-...ractice/3108740 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted October 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 Lydman-Numinnen I wonder if this is a sign pointing to reduced ice time for both. I would suspest the other pairs to get more ice time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted October 9, 2008 Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 I wonder if this is a sign pointing to reduced ice time for both. I would suspest the other pairs to get more ice time. yeah but I bet they get plenty of PK time ... they love Teppo on the PK ... I think he's fine too, but last season Lydman was horrible on the PK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frisky Posted October 9, 2008 Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 I think Lindy will try to divvy up the D time fairly evenly among all of them. I would have liked to seen Ellis on LW for the 4th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted October 9, 2008 Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 I wonder if this is a sign pointing to reduced ice time for both. I would suspest the other pairs to get more ice time. I think it is going to look pretty even. Especially through two periods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.