BetweenThePipes00 Posted November 5, 2008 Report Share Posted November 5, 2008 I assume this was not posted because it is not news when The Skill misses practice anymore .. http://wgr550.com/Connolly-hurt--Hecht-ready/3263243 ... sore groin, might not need to miss any game time ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted November 5, 2008 Report Share Posted November 5, 2008 I assume this was not posted because it is not news when The Skill misses practice anymore .. http://wgr550.com/Connolly-hurt--Hecht-ready/3263243 ... sore groin, might not need to miss any game time ... I was expecting this. He blocked a couple shots the other night. One IIRC was a slapper from the point that hit him mid-section. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayFinkle Posted November 5, 2008 Report Share Posted November 5, 2008 ...One IIRC was a slapper from the point that hit him mid-section. I imagine a slapper to the can be quite painful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted November 5, 2008 Report Share Posted November 5, 2008 Ruff doesn't expect him to miss Friday's game, and him sitting out practice was just a standard thing, like Mac missing practice last week. Right, I guess judging by Ruff's commments on Timmy's earlier injuries that means he'll be back early December :wallbash: This is just getting old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted November 5, 2008 Report Share Posted November 5, 2008 I imagine a slapper to the vigina can be quite painful. LOL :worthy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayg Posted November 5, 2008 Report Share Posted November 5, 2008 Cause it's funny or the spelling? LOL :worthy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 I imagine a slapper to the vigina can be quite painful. I think U meant viginal. And sometimes it feels good :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 I'd say Max sits. He's just out of control. And we need Stafford for the shootout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 I'd say Max sits. He's just out of control. And we need Stafford for the shootout. Basing a roster decision on the shoot out instead of the 60-65 minutes of actual hockey is pure lunacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sloth Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Basing a roster decision on the shoot out instead of the 60-65 minutes of actual hockey is pure lunacy. I wouldn't say it's pure lunacy. Stafford has been red hot in the shootouts and he is a better hitter than Max. I'm still up for Max playing, though. He can create more scoring chances, which could prevent a shootout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted November 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 I wasn't going to get into it, so I won't go so far as "pure lunacy" ... but I have to say I strongly disagree with it as a reason to keep Stafford in the lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 I wasn't going to get into it, so I won't go so far as "pure lunacy" ... but I have to say I strongly disagree with it as a reason to keep Stafford in the lineup. Yeah, it's a bit of an exaggeration, but it is still a very flawed reason to keep a guy in the lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Yeah, it's a bit of an exaggeration, but it is still a very flawed reason to keep a guy in the lineup. As is often the case, it is a factor, but there are many other factors that are more important. If two players are otherwise similar, I'll take the one who money in shootouts verses the one that is not. However, I would take better skills in the first 65 minutes first, even if it means sitting the better SO guy. It's up to Lindy to decide how the rest of their skill sets compare, in terms of contribution, in order to know if their SO abilities are needed as a tie-breaker. As similar illustrative example, Yanic Perreault is not a center on this team despite being a far better face-off performer than anyone on this team, perhaps in the league. Why? Because all of our centers beat him in terms of speed, passing, shooting, stickhandling, grit ... Faceoff ability is a factor, but it is outweighed by several others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 If only teams could find a way to have Yanic take the faceoff and then immediately get off the ice. Every team would want him. I wish I could find that old chart of where he was good on the ice. That thing was hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 For the record, somethings gotta give. If Hecht is coming back they need to either: Put Connolly on IR, so he's out 7 days Put down Sekera, Stafford, or Kaleta. All of which don't have to clear waivers Put down Paetsch or Ellis. Both of which have to clear waivers. I'd guess if Connolly is back, then Stafford is down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 I wasn't going to get into it, so I won't go so far as "pure lunacy" ... but I have to say I strongly disagree with it as a reason to keep Stafford in the lineup. Sit Max and Stafford and bring Gerbe up. If you need a roster spot send Max to Portland and hope someone picks him up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 If only teams could find a way to have Yanic take the faceoff and then immediately get off the ice. Every team would want him. I wish I could find that old chart of where he was good on the ice. That thing was hilarious. Hire him as an assistant coach to teach our centers how to take faceoffs? Can that be taught? In his worst season in the last eight (don't have numbers for before that), he was 61.3%. Over those eight, he's a combined 62.7%! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted November 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Sit Max and Stafford and bring Gerbe up. If you need a roster spot send Max to Portland and hope someone picks him up. Well, let's try to stay in the realm of possibility here ... you know they are not going to do that. As I mentioned in the other Gerbe thread ... why rush him? The Sabres have been SO much better this season in their own and and away from the puck ... why bring in a kid who you KNOW is going to have growing pains in this area? If they go on a skid and need an offensive spark, maybe, but not now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Well, let's try to stay in the realm of possibility here ... you know they are not going to do that.As I mentioned in the other Gerbe thread ... why rush him? The Sabres have been SO much better this season in their own and and away from the puck ... why bring in a kid who you KNOW is going to have growing pains in this area? If they go on a skid and need an offensive spark, maybe, but not now. The kid is hot right now. Give him a taste of the NHL as extra motivation. The call up doesn't have to been permanent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimiVbaby Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 The kid is hot right now. Give him a taste of the NHL as extra motivation. The call up doesn't have to been permanent. Just let him play the Boston game and let him bite at Chara's ankles. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Well, let's try to stay in the realm of possibility here ... you know they are not going to do that.As I mentioned in the other Gerbe thread ... why rush him? The Sabres have been SO much better this season in their own and and away from the puck ... why bring in a kid who you KNOW is going to have growing pains in this area? If they go on a skid and need an offensive spark, maybe, but not now. Very true. Gerbe is putting in a lot of goals, especially on the PP, but he still needs to work on his game away from the puck. Kennedy is definitely a more complete player at this point. I do find it a little ironic that somebody with an anti-B-rod avatar wants to rush a one-way player due solely to his offensive production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 The kid is hot right now. Give him a taste of the NHL as extra motivation. The call up doesn't have to been permanent. You'd have to sit Max, send down Stafford and Kaleta (or waive Ellis) to bring Gerbe up with Hecht coming back. I'd like to see Gerbe before the end of the season, but not now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted November 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 The kid is hot right now. Give him a taste of the NHL as extra motivation. The call up doesn't have to been permanent. Extra motivation? Like, "All you have to do is score, don't worry about learing to play a complete game, and you get rewarded!" Not sure that's the message to send to him or others in the organ-eye-zation. Not to mention it's the polar opposite of the message they have been sending Vanek for 4 years. Why is Gerbe special? I do find it a little ironic that somebody with an anti-B-rod avatar wants to rush a one-way player due solely to his offensive production. :unsure: (Not saying anything ... interested in the response, though ... ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 I still don't get why Gerbe would deserve a callup before Kennedy or Mancari. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 I still don't get why Gerbe would deserve a callup before Kennedy or Mancari. Golly doesn't have to pay for the plane ticket, he fits in the overhead compartment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.