deluca67 Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Why are some of the words being hyper-linked. actually what chz post I think shows is that our defense is good but our offense sucks to such a degree that everything else is superfluous including our goaltending. Someone find the average for time spent in the defensive zone versus the offensive zone and we will see if that theory holds any water. How do you come to that conclusion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Why are some of the words being hyper-linked. How do you come to that conclusion? Would you call Nashville's defense bad? Would you call our defense bad? The fault is not the defense its the offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 How do you come to that conclusion? By not watching the games and just reading stat lines? Who knows........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Ah yes the classic cherry picking of numbers to prove a worthless point. Hits are incredibly subjective. Try keeping track for one game in the leisure of your home and then compare to the so called official number. Very very subjective. As many posters have said, hits do not prove a team is tough. Some people in Buffalo cannot let go of the blue collar mentality that our sports teams woes would evaporate if we can acquire mean players to bash the other team over the head. If Luongo hadnt crapped the bed last year, the soft skilled team led by some damn Swedes of all people would have won the Cup. Wasnt about physcial-ness. Well, although GoDD is prone to cherry picking (and nice debunking work there, chz), I don't think it's a fair logical leap to conclude that (i) this Sabres team isn't soft or (ii) this Sabres team is remotely close to being as tough as last year's Canucks team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Would you call Nashville's defense bad? Would you call our defense bad? The fault is not the defense its the offense. Stop looking at stats and start watching the games. Every defenseman on this team has been a bad for at least a good part of the season(some for the majority of the season). The bad play varies from giveaways, to guys who become enamored with watching the puck instead of covering opponents, to not playing physical, prone to wilting under a hard forecheck, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 By not watching the games and just reading stat lines? Who knows........ yup you got me. I just read stats, never watch games. who watches hockey? lol... Its amusing that you have to use stats to prove a point around here but when you do you get accused of not actually knowing what the f##k is going on. Sabres defense is fine. I've said it before and I will say it again. The complete lack of backchecking and subsequent ability to sustain zone pressure directly causes the defenses perceived bad play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Stop looking at stats and start watching the games. Every defenseman on this team has been a bad for at least a good part of the season(some for the majority of the season). The bad play varies from giveaways, to guys who become enamored with watching the puck instead of covering opponents, to not playing physical, prone to wilting under a hard forecheck, etc... If you make an exception for Regher, I'll agree with this point. he has has a couple bad individual games, but no stretches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I can't do this with you guys today. I am not in the mode and I already want to say inappropriate things. The one thing I did learn was that I apparently do not watch hockey... thank you for telling me what I do and or do not do. I was clearly confused... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 If you make an exception for Regher, I'll agree with this point. he has has a couple bad individual games, but no stretches. Maybe Regehr has been the best of the lot, but maybe "bad" wouldn't apply to him, but I think his play has tailed off a lot from what I saw in October & November. I was really excited to see his game come playoff time, but it looks like that is going to have to wait until next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Would you call Nashville's defense bad? Would you call our defense bad? The fault is not the defense its the offense. Nashville's defense is top heavy. They have Weber and Suter that play 26+ minutes a game while the other four guys are out there trying not to screw things up until Weber and Suter can get back out on the ice. The Sabres don't have anything close to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patty16 Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Well, although GoDD is prone to cherry picking (and nice debunking work there, chz), I don't think it's a fair logical leap to conclude that (i) this Sabres team isn't soft or (ii) this Sabres team is remotely close to being as tough as last year's Canucks team. My point was only that skill based teams can be successful. That Sabres arent losing because of toughness, they cant score. Its not like they are being beat down and not getting scoring chances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I can't do this with you guys today. I am not in the mode and I already want to say inappropriate things. The one thing I did learn was that I apparently do not watch hockey... thank you for telling me what I do and or do not do. I was clearly confused... WTF is your problem? Every time someone disagrees with you, you feel the need to throw a temper tantrum? Maybe if you are not in the "mode" and "want to say inapproriate things", you should logout, and come back later when you have your big boy pants on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Maybe Regehr has been the best of the lot, but maybe "bad" wouldn't apply to him, but I think his play has tailed off a lot from what I saw in October & November. I was really excited to see his game come playoff time, but it looks like that is going to have to wait until next year. This is where Myers play has really hurt the Sabres this season. He and Regier should be the Sabres shutdown pair. Myers taking chances with joining the rush and Regehr sitting back cleaning up his own end. It just hasn't happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I can't do this with you guys today. I am not in the mode MOOD and I already want to say inappropriate things. The one thing I did learn was that I apparently do not watch hockey... thank you for telling me what I do and or do not do. I was clearly confused... :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I wasn't cherry-picking. Weber was brought up by someone else as a specific example of someone who hits, but picks his spots. Even in picking his spots, he has more offensive talent than any Sabre, and still manages to hit at a level compared to our 5 skilled defensemen combined. I don't think Nashville is a tough team. I was responding to the specific example of Weber. We have Regehr, but he has nowhere near the offense that Weber does. Weber manages to lead in all aspects of play.....that was the point. I "cherry-pick" Callahan because he is everything you want in a player. He is skilled, smart, a true captain and leader.....and he hits almost as much as the Sabres top 9 forwards combined. Again....to prove that skill and grit DO exist in other cities....but not Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patty16 Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Every team is going to get scoring chances. Even the worst teams in the league can get scoring chances. The Sabres don't have the talent up front to be successful playing soft hockey. This team needs to bang bodies and stay on top of the D with their forecheck and create turnovers. A strong, physical and agressive forecheck would cure many of the Sabres offensive ills. If they cant score now when getting chances, how are they going to if they go caveman? Trade any resemblence of offense for more bangers and somehow that translates to more goals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 If they cant score now when getting chances, how are they going to if they go caveman? Trade any resemblence of offense for more bangers and somehow that translates to more goals? "Caveman?" I love any mention how the Sabres getting more physical results in the second coming of the Broad Street Bullies. Like that is the next step. Is there a chart out there that shows hockey toughness and right above playing like wussies is "caveman." :doh: Strong physical hockey wears down the opposing D, a tired D is a D prone to turnovers. Crashing the net creates scoring chances and making the defensive zone a place where opposing forwards will have to pay a physical price will help the Sabres D. These are not radical ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 WTF is your problem? Every time someone disagrees with you, you feel the need to throw a temper tantrum? Maybe if you are not in the "mode" and "want to say inapproriate things", you should logout, and come back later when you have your big boy pants on. My problem is that everytime I "disagree" someone it turns into "You don't watch hockey" "You don't know what your talking about" "STOP THROWING TEMPER TANTRUMS" The defense is fine the offense sucks. I can't use stats to back it up because hits don't matter at all and even though I have already demonstrated that at the halfway mark this teams GPGA had dropped by 24% which is 3 times the league average since 06 and their defense (ga) has stayed exactly the same, clearly our DEFENSE sucks, is below average, and we should trade tyler myers. So go get your big boy pants on and prove me wrong. Prove that the defense is bad and that it is not directly a result of the offense being HORRENDOUS. :flirt: Okay? :P I actually meant MODE. I am not in the mode of defending a simple a comment from my ditractors who tell me I am throwing a "temper tantrum" after saying that I don't want to deal with the bs today so ttyl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 "Caveman?" I love any mention how the Sabres getting more physical results in the second coming of the Broad Street Bullies. Like that is the next step. Is there a chart out there that shows hockey toughness and right above playing like wussies is "caveman." :doh: Strong physical hockey wears down the opposing D, a tired D is a D prone to turnovers. Crashing the net creates scoring chances and making the defensive zone a place where opposing forwards will have to pay a physical price will help the Sabres D. These are not radical ideas. I don't disagree with the first part, there is plenty of difference between being "wussy" and "Caveman", But the second part makes me think of the many arguements over on the Bills board and about football. There are many ways to build a successful, winning team. It always comes up when discussing football that "Defence wins championships", "You have to have a great defence", "The best teams run a 3-4 defence", "You have to draft and build with linemen", "You have to have an Elite QB to win", "You have to sign Big name FA's to fix a team", etc, etc, etc. Its the same here with Hockey, "You have to have a physical team to win", "You don't need an elite goaltender", "Speed kills", "No Europeans, you need to build with more North Americans/Canadians", etc, etc. Theres no right or wrong way to build a team. Just look at last years SC finals, those 2 teams were almost complete opposites. Tougher/physical mostly NA Bruins vs the speedier/skillful mostly euro Canucks. The similarities, both teams were stacked with talent that fit the system their teams both play. Some teams build up the team infront of their goaltenders and live with lesser talent in net witht eh theory that if the other team scores, they can come right back and score 2 more to get back into the lead (Philly). Other teams build around the goaltender and hope that the goalie can keep them in the game and hold it close (Buffalo, NJ somewhat) The Sabres problems this season appear to be that they have just given up and are hoping for a mulligan/ride out the year. I think that once the injury bug started hitting hard, and they started to get into a slump, they just gave up and thought the season is over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Other than hits, what signs of toughness do the Sabres exemplify. Sincere question or bait? How about any hockey team? I suspect you know the answers. My point would be that lack of physicality has not kept the Sabres from winning as much as a diminished positional strength at center, and a gradual erosion of team speed at forward. The design was to create a roster that can attack in waves and across lines. It hasn't worked. Even adding Cal Clutterbuck to the roster (one tough SOB which I would love to have) does not address the fundamental issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fan2456 Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Sincere question or bait? How about any hockey team? I suspect you know the answers. My point would be that lack of physicality has not kept the Sabres from winning as much as a diminished positional strength at center, and a gradual erosion of team speed at forward. The design was to create a roster that can attack in waves and across lines. It hasn't worked. Even adding Cal Clutterbuck to the roster (one tough SOB which I would love to have) does not address the fundamental issue. IMO hits are entertaining, but you win by being tough on the puck, winning one on one battles for both the puck and the proper position on the ice. In todays game you need the size, speed and WILLINGNESS to do that. We lack much more than strength at center. To answer DeLuca67, the Sabres in general, don't show any of these signs of toughness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Sincere question or bait? How about any hockey team? I suspect you know the answers. My point would be that lack of physicality has not kept the Sabres from winning as much as a diminished positional strength at center, and a gradual erosion of team speed at forward. The design was to create a roster that can attack in waves and across lines. It hasn't worked. Even adding Cal Clutterbuck to the roster (one tough SOB which I would love to have) does not address the fundamental issue. Bring over the Wellander, maybe even get fellow home towner Nathan horton away from the Bruins, that could bring some added toughness to the lineup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnkirishone Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 I wouldn't care if the sabres were last in the league every year in body checks. IF at the same time they led the league in takeaways and time on attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Ya know guys, toughness doesn't have to be purely physical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChimp Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Weird, Myers and a few others went all "caveman" tonight and they dominated the Habs. Intimidated the holy hell out of them. It was like listening to another team. I haven't heard Sylvester and Gare that crazy in a long time. Crap. Was it OK to say that here??? God I hope I didn't miss a better thread to say that in. Because that would really bite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.