LabattBlue Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 I'm glad to hear it. Any player who takes a benching in stride should be the first ones to be sent packing! http://blogs.buffalonews.com/sabres/2010/01/scratch-has-lydman-in-a-sniff.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 I also didn't think Lydman should have been benched. I thought Chris Butler was the one who needed to grab a seat. I thought he was horrid against San Jose and even worse against Vancouver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffalOhio Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Lindy indicated that someone was banged up and someone was being scratched for poor play. I also thought it was good that he scratched them both at the same time in order to not mess up the other pairings. I do,however, think that Rivet and Butler both need to wake up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Lindy indicated that someone was banged up and someone was being scratched for poor play. I also thought it was good that he scratched them both at the same time in order to not mess up the other pairings. I do,however, think that Rivet and Butler both need to wake up. (I could be wrong) but i thought there was speculation that MacArthur was the "hurt" player... but Lindy in his post-game conference said it was due to poor play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffalOhio Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 (I could be wrong) but i thought there was speculation that MacArthur was the "hurt" player... but Lindy in his post-game conference said it was due to poor play. I've had no problem with Lydman lately. Montador has obviously been playing badly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 I think i'm a minority on this board, but i've liked Monty a lot this season. Kinda reminds me of a more physical version of Teppo. Very simple, rarly made mistakes, always calm, never gets in deep trouble.... but the SJ game and the VAN game he was brutal. I did think he played decent against the Ducks though. Despite the Daniel Sedin pass he put on Monty, which was filthy, can't blame Monty on that too much, overall i still think he played poorly. I wonder if him sitting was a "benching" or a "rest". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffalOhio Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 Don't get me wrong please, I've really been surprised and pleased with Montador this season. He's been an excellent pick up. He just had a bad road trip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted January 28, 2010 Report Share Posted January 28, 2010 I would probably bench Butler for the Boston game and put Lydman in his place. On a tangent, I'd like to see Ellis get to play some shifts with Vanek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Bill wrote an article about this last night.... http://www.sabrespace.com/buffalo-sabres/article/lydman-upset-over-benching/ “I think the message was loud and clear that we need better play out there,” Ruff said. “We could’ve won both games – San Jose and Vancouver – with that pair playing better.” Ouch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R_Dudley Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 I would probably bench Butler for the Boston game and put Lydman in his place. On a tangent, I'd like to see Ellis get to play some shifts with Vanek. THIS! Bill wrote an article about this last night.... http://www.sabrespace.com/buffalo-sabres/article/lydman-upset-over-benching/ “I think the message was loud and clear that we need better play out there,” Ruff said. “We could’ve won both games – San Jose and Vancouver – with that pair playing better.” Ouch. Well I for one don't have a problem with it, it's true they did play bad and you need to be able to call a spade a spade. That said you need to apply it across the board and can not have any untouchables in order to keep the team first and chemistry going. Nothing wrong with knowing if you want to play you need leave it all out on the ice not counting the reality that everyone has a bad game and will make mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 I have no problem with players being held directly accountable when they don't play well, however I have never been a fan of Ruff's weird tendency of regularly sitting the same players while others who perform just as bad, or worse, get 15+ minutes a night. I don't think this means Lydman's in Lindy's doghouse though, Tallinder was scratched last year as well. I wouldn't mind Stafford sitting again, though. He had one good game after coming back and two or three half-decent ones, but other than that he's been invisible. Unfortunately Vanek's been just as poor, but at least he's proven he can play at this level. Stafford's shown glimpses, but has proven zero so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 I would probably bench Butler for the Boston game and put Lydman in his place. On a tangent, I'd like to see Ellis get to play some shifts with Vanek. Butler played 24 min. against NJ. Lindy isn't going to scratch him tonight. Given the win against NJ, which was a pretty solid team effort (although Miller kept them in it in the 1st period), I'd expect Lydman and Monty to stay in the press box tonight. As for Ellis -- it would be great if Vanek could watch him and learn to keep his feet moving the way Ellis does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Butler played 24 min. against NJ. Lindy isn't going to scratch him tonight. Given the win against NJ, which was a pretty solid team effort (although Miller kept them in it in the 1st period), I'd expect Lydman and Monty to stay in the press box tonight. As for Ellis -- it would be great if Vanek could watch him and learn to keep his feet moving the way Ellis does. Lindy? Is that you? Make Vanek more like Ellis... fantastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Lindy? Is that you? Make Vanek more like Ellis... fantastic. Itching to mix it up, eh? OK, here goes, O opposite-of-acute one: do you think Vanek moves his feet well? Do you think there are no parts of Vanek's game that need improvement? Do you think I was advocating to turn Vanek into a 4th-liner who gets 8 min. per game and is a frequent healthy scratch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetweenThePipes00 Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Lindy? Is that you? Make Vanek more like Ellis... fantastic. Itching to mix it up, eh? OK, here goes, O opposite-of-acute one: do you think Vanek moves his feet well? Do you think there are no parts of Vanek's game that need improvement? Do you think I was advocating to turn Vanek into a 4th-liner who gets 8 min. per game and is a frequent healthy scratch? Freeman, you know I am way more on your side when it comes to Lindy, but PA made me giggle on this one. I am sure he knew what you meant ... but you did kinda walk into that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Lindy? Is that you? Make Vanek more like Ellis... fantastic. Getting Vanek to show up game in and game out, huslting and getting every ounce out of his hockey ability. I'd sign ip for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Freeman, you know I am way more on your side when it comes to Lindy, but PA made me giggle on this one. I am sure he knew what you meant ... but you did kinda walk into that one. Well, I didn't think that was one of his better ones, but the curmudgeonly one is certainly funny on a pretty frequent basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Itching to mix it up, eh? OK, here goes, O opposite-of-acute one: do you think Vanek moves his feet well? Do you think there are no parts of Vanek's game that need improvement? Do you think I was advocating to turn Vanek into a 4th-liner who gets 8 min. per game and is a frequent healthy scratch? I don't think Tom's problem is his feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 I don't think Tom's problem is his feet. Nintey percent of the game is fifty percent mental. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Itching to mix it up, eh? OK, here goes, O opposite-of-acute one: do you think Vanek moves his feet well? Do you think there are no parts of Vanek's game that need improvement? Do you think I was advocating to turn Vanek into a 4th-liner who gets 8 min. per game and is a frequent healthy scratch? The more Vanek moves his feet, the less he scores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Getting Vanek to show up game in and game out, huslting and getting every ounce out of his hockey ability. I'd sign ip for that. This is a better way of making the point that I was trying to make. I don't think Tom's problem is his feet. Nintey percent of the game is fifty percent mental. :D The more Vanek moves his feet, the less he scores. I agree that Vanek's problem is between the ears. I guess I think that when he's on his game -- focused, determined, confident, etc -- he's moving his feet, because when a player is into the game, he's moving his feet, not standing around. So I don't agree that the more he moves his feet, the less he scores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 The more Vanek moves his feet, the less he scores. Nail him to the bench and he'll score 40 goals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Nail him on the bench and he'll score 40 goals? We'll he'd be less likely to want to return to the bench, as for Roy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.