LGR4GM Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 You guys are harsh! The Sabres are in second place and all I read is how bad they are. What gives? I stated before they are soft and soft teams don't go deep in the playoffs but they are not bad. I think if anything Miller is a decent goalie at best as well. Not one person can or has explained to me what makes him elite besides the one year. Othet than that they are playing decent hockey. It could be like last year. The difference btw 2nd place and 9th is 2 points thats what gives. Ironically after you ask that question you then go on to say they are bad basically... WHAT GIVES? This team is soft, lacks heart, and is generally not very hard working which is at the route of why people dislike them. In the carolina game they got outplayed at times but they worked hard and protected and fought for eachother so it was a good game. Phoenix they fell apart and were weak during the last part of the game IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopefulFuture Posted November 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 That. And the other....... :blush: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 This is about where I'm at. More disappointed in Stafford than Boyes. Boyes seems to have found some life on PP. We still have problems with scoring depth in the top 6. Vanek and Pommer seemed to have stepped it up but the rest of the scoring forwards are a bit of a disappointment. I can't imagine it gets alot better as the season wears on and teams tighten up in the second half. And center is still a glaring weak spot. Heart and tenacity is a very fleeting thing with this team and only seems to consistantly appear when their backs are against the wall. I'm not sure what the issue is on defence. I don't know if it is chemistry, a bad mix of personalities/skill sets, or if multiple players are just "off" right now. If Myers can get straight and Erhoff get some confidence back I think it'll work out though. I guess I was hoping more than expecting that the offseason aquisitions would be enough to get us closer to the top but at the end of the day the core (both offense and defense) hasn't changed and we are still seeing the same faults as recent seasons. I shouldn't be suprised. Well, I think the core has changed. 2 of the top 3 defensemen are new (and 3 of 6 if you include MAG), which is a pretty significant makeover, and 2 of the top 6 forwards are new (Leino and Boyes) (and 5 of 9 if you include Adam, Tropp and Gerbe). I continue to think the Sabres are suffering from 2 main problems: 1. glitches on team defense -- which can only be remedied with time as the new parts learn the system and become more comfortable with each other 2. lack of heart/leadership/toughness in top 6 -- was not addressed in the offseason and continues to be a problem. The difference btw 2nd place and 9th is 2 points thats what gives. Ironically after you ask that question you then go on to say they are bad basically... WHAT GIVES? This team is soft, lacks heart, and is generally not very hard working which is at the route of why people dislike them. In the carolina game they got outplayed at times but they worked hard and protected and fought for eachother so it was a good game. Phoenix they fell apart and were weak during the last part of the game IMHO. That isn't irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 Anyone who thinks Lindy should stay, feel free to justify WTF he was thinking sending Roy out to take the face off instead of Gaustad at the end of Saturday's game. I'm telling you, the message to the team is stale, they have tuned him out, and he needs to move on. I know, I know..."he ain't going nowhere". Thanks Pegs, for having blind faith when it comes to Ruff and Regier. <_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 Anyone who thinks Lindy should stay, feel free to justify WTF he was thinking sending Roy out to take the face off instead of Gaustad at the end of Saturday's game. I'm telling you, the message to the team is stale, they have tuned him out, and he needs to move on. I know, I know..."he ain't going nowhere". Thanks Pegs, for having blind faith when it comes to Ruff and Regier. <_< Sheeesh. It's a bit early in the season for this, innit? Let's see how they respond on Wednesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 Sheeesh. It's a bit early in the season for this, innit? Let's see how they respond on Wednesday. So you don't have a problem with what should have been an obvious coaching move? Just give him a pass on it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NowDoYouBelieve Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 Anyone who thinks Lindy should stay, feel free to justify WTF he was thinking sending Roy out to take the face off instead of Gaustad at the end of Saturday's game. I'm telling you, the message to the team is stale, they have tuned him out, and he needs to move on. I know, I know..."he ain't going nowhere". Thanks Pegs, for having blind faith when it comes to Ruff and Regier. <_< How do you know that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dEnnis the Menace Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 So you don't have a problem with what should have been an obvious coaching move? Just give him a pass on it? I was at the game, and someone in my section mentioned the same thing as Roy skated to the circle. I was honestly surprised myself, but as Devil's advocate, hadn't Roy won quite a few faceoffs already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2ForTripping Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 Sheeesh. It's a bit early in the season for this, innit? Let's see how they respond on Wednesday. While we hope for some retribution against the Bruins I doubt we actually see it. That'll be the collective response. I sure hope like hell they make me a liar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 How do you know that? A. This would be my opinion or B. I have access to Lindy and the players, and I have found this to be the case. I'll let you figure it out. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 I was at the game, and someone in my section mentioned the same thing as Roy skated to the circle. I was honestly surprised myself, but as Devil's advocate, hadn't Roy won quite a few faceoffs already? A very wise friend of mine calls himself the "angel's advocate" ... that has a better ring to it and probably would not get you in as much trouble!! :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NowDoYouBelieve Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 So you don't have a problem with what should have been an obvious coaching move? Just give him a pass on it? Maybe the coaching move wasn't as obvious as you think. For the sake of argument, let's say that Gaustad wins that faceoff 6 out of 10 times and Roy wins it 5 out of 10 times. So Goose gives you a 20% better chance of gaining the puck. Neither was having a particularly good or bad day at the faceoff dot, so we'll assume their career percentages are reliable. But now that the puck is gained, you have to score. Again for the sake of argument, I'd estimate that Roy has a 100% better chance of scoring than Gaustad (ie. given equal ice time over a season, including on the power play, Roy would pot twice as many goals). Since there are 5 eligible scorers on the ice, the scoring advantage of one single player over another on the bench would be divided by 5. By this logic, any combination of 4 players + Roy has a 20% better chance of scoring than the same combination of 4 players + Gaustad. So using my admittedly crude math, Gaustad's advantage in gaining control of the puck is similar to Roy's advantage of making it count. I'm not saying that I agree with Ruff, but I could certainly see the logic in having your more offensively talented centerman on the ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NowDoYouBelieve Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 A. This would be my opinion or B. I have access to Lindy and the players, and I have found this to be the case. I'll let you figure it out. :) I choose Option B, and I now expect weekly personal newsletters about the status of the team. B-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 Maybe the coaching move wasn't as obvious as you think. For the sake of argument, let's say that Gaustad wins that faceoff 6 out of 10 times and Roy wins it 5 out of 10 times. So Goose gives you a 20% better chance of gaining the puck. But now that the puck is gained, you have to score. Again for the sake of argument, I'd estimate that Roy has a 100% better chance of scoring than Gaustad (ie. given equal ice time over a season, including on the power play, Roy would pot twice as many goals). Since there are 5 eligible scorers on the ice, the scoring advantage of one single player over another on the bench would be divided by 5. So using my admittedly crude math, Gaustad's advantage in gaining control of the puck is similar to Roy's advantage of making it count. My head hurts just thinking about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dEnnis the Menace Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 A very wise friend of mine calls himself the "angel's advocate" ... that has a better ring to it and probably would not get you in as much trouble!! :thumbsup: haha good point :beer: Maybe the coaching move wasn't as obvious as you think. For the sake of argument, let's say that Gaustad wins that faceoff 6 out of 10 times and Roy wins it 5 out of 10 times. So Goose gives you a 20% better chance of gaining the puck. But now that the puck is gained, you have to score. Again for the sake of argument, I'd estimate that Roy has a 100% better chance of scoring than Gaustad (ie. given equal ice time over a season, including on the power play, Roy would pot twice as many goals). Since there are 5 eligible scorers on the ice, the scoring factor of just one player would be divided by 5. So using my admittedly crude math, Gaustad's advantage in gaining control of the puck is similar to Roy's advantage of making it count. Scenario: empty net, ergo 6 skaters: Use Goose on the faceoff. having 6 skaters, you more than likely have 4 forwards, maybe even 5. The idea, and what's been done in the past is that Goose takes the faceoff, then stands in front of the net. The other skaters are generally your scoring forwards (i.e ROY, Vanek, Pommers, etc). Why Ruff didn't do that is I believe what he is questioning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NowDoYouBelieve Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 haha good point :beer: Scenario: empty net, ergo 6 skaters: Use Goose on the faceoff. having 6 skaters, you more than likely have 4 forwards, maybe even 5. The idea, and what's been done in the past is that Goose takes the faceoff, then stands in front of the net. The other skaters are generally your scoring forwards (i.e ROY, Vanek, Pommers, etc). Why Ruff didn't do that is I believe what he is questioning. Ah. Well I clearly didn't think of that. But I stand by my rambling! :ph34r: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 So you don't have a problem with what should have been an obvious coaching move? Just give him a pass on it? Well... Maybe the coaching move wasn't as obvious as you think. For the sake of argument, let's say that Gaustad wins that faceoff 6 out of 10 times and Roy wins it 5 out of 10 times. So Goose gives you a 20% better chance of gaining the puck. Neither was having a particularly good or bad day at the faceoff dot, so we'll assume their career percentages are reliable. But now that the puck is gained, you have to score. Again for the sake of argument, I'd estimate that Roy has a 100% better chance of scoring than Gaustad (ie. given equal ice time over a season, including on the power play, Roy would pot twice as many goals). Since there are 5 eligible scorers on the ice, the scoring advantage of one single player over another on the bench would be divided by 5. By this logic, any combination of 4 players + Roy has a 20% better chance of scoring than the same combination of 4 players + Gaustad. So using my admittedly crude math, Gaustad's advantage in gaining control of the puck is similar to Roy's advantage of making it count. I'm not saying that I agree with Ruff, but I could certainly see the logic in having your more offensively talented centerman on the ice. Beat me to it (and good post). It might not have been such an obvious move. They still needed to score after the faceoff. Now, if the Sabres had the lead late in the game? Of course Gaustad should be the one. But having your best scorers out at the end of the game when you have a minute or so to go doesn't seem so whacked-out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 Not before Darcy is. When was the last time Regier made a great deal? I'm getting sick of the "This team just needs to gel". How many new players are there on the roster this year compared to last season? Regher, Ehrhoff and Leino, and to an extent Adams. Everyone else has been part of the organisation and played here before. Why is this an issue with the Sabres? I would think that the majority of the NHL teams have around 3 new players on their roster every season Not two of your top 4 defensemen and what is supposed to be ur number one or two center. That is rare. Plus you throw in MAG, Adam and with all the injuries that we have had and all the call ups. That is basically every single line and defense pairing changing over one off season. That does not happen to the majority of NHL teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopefulFuture Posted November 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 Not two of your top 4 defensemen and what is supposed to be ur number one or two center. That is rare. Plus you throw in MAG, Adam and with all the injuries that we have had and all the call ups. That is basically every single line and defense pairing changing over one off season. That does not happen to the majority of NHL teams. Not to play "Angels Advocate" here, just to point something out though. Regier and his team were well aware of the absence of any depth at center, combine that with the mandate Pegula set forth in his "Cup Run" within 3 seasons statement and people of course, are going to question what Regier is thinking when he brings in Leino and Lindy immediately trys to slot him at center. That looks like a hail mary pass to many fans, and rightfully so. Luke Adam most certainly addresses the Line 3 center position, but that still leaves Roy for the top 2 scoring lines. Hecht? No way is he top 2 scoring line center material, never actually has been and with age creeping up on him, I don't expect to see some dynamic punch of an offensive explosion from him. He does have his value in defensive forward, but the center position needs to be addressed still, and that falls on Regier. This team has assets it can move, and there are deals that can be struck to be sure. What the Sabres are willing to pay is the question, and that decision rests with Regier once again. Just sayin......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 Anyone who thinks Lindy should stay, feel free to justify WTF he was thinking sending Roy out to take the face off instead of Gaustad at the end of Saturday's game. Getting your player suspended for fighting in the last 5 minutes for what happened in the first period is a bad coaching move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabres1970 Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 The fact that we lead the division despite some awful hockey is a tremendous sign in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fiftyone Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 Well... Beat me to it (and good post). It might not have been such an obvious move. They still needed to score after the faceoff. Now, if the Sabres had the lead late in the game? Of course Gaustad should be the one. But having your best scorers out at the end of the game when you have a minute or so to go doesn't seem so whacked-out. And the difference between Roy and Goose in the faceoff circle this year? Probably not as much as you'd think. Goose is at 58.2% while Roy wins 'em 55.4% of the time which is one of the more respectable numbers in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.