PASabreFan Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 Zemgus was lost in OT. Concussion? Wouldn't he have gone to the dark room, the light room, the quiet room, whatever? That OT shift was 1:36, which couldn't have helped. They had trouble changing being at that end of the ice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 Wouldn't he have gone to the dark room, the light room, the quiet room, whatever? That OT shift was 1:36, which couldn't have helped. They had trouble changing being at that end of the ice. It seemed to me he made a very un-Zemgus-like play in overtime tapping the puck to nobody. Which San Jose jumped on to win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyldnwoody44 Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 Wouldn't he have gone to the dark room, the light room, the quiet room, whatever? That OT shift was 1:36, which couldn't have helped. They had trouble changing being at that end of the ice.As you earlier stated, idk why Gionta starts OT with O Reilly. Anyone in the top 6 is better. Then Eichel and Ennis did zilch for 30 seconds, except take a terrible shot. And then Larsson and girgs just get stuck out there forever (2 guys you don't want out there) and viola, game. Where was Samson, how about someone good with o, Reilly. Me thinks our team needs some 3 on 3 work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR HOLLIDAY Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 Notes: Â Zemgus was lost in OT. Concussion? Â Two well coached teams. Â Needed more from Sabres bottom 6. Delauries played a nice game, but the bottom 6 left sharks too comfy. Â Colliacovo is really playing well. Â EICHEL was getting a ton of attention from San Jose, first team to really game plan him to try to freeze him on the walls. Â I think Ennis might need a few days off. He was a human pinball last night. Â I was at the game with my family last night and I agree with all of what you said.......Ennis went into those board really hard I was worried big time......When Eichel made a burst down the wing late in the third the entire arena stopped breathing, it was magical seeing him turn on the Jets......ROR's goal was a beauty.........I thought the first goal was really bad, I was sitting behind that net and it looked like a very salable shot..........It was a lot of fun feeling the positive vibe in the arena before, during and after the game..........Gonna see about 4 or 5 games this year........Price is steep with the exchange rate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jsixspd Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 (edited) aren't both Sabre goalies backups? Â LOL, well there is that. Â I guess he's backup to Linus who is the backup to whatshisname? Â I only saw him for like 5 minutes this season before he left injured - the name doesn't stick. Â Watkins..... I think that's our injured starting goalie's last name. Â Edited November 15, 2015 by Jsixspd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 A point was enough to move the 2015-16 Sabres ahead of the 2005-06 Sabres through 17 GP. Who didn't get excited reading this? It seemed to me he made a very un-Zemgus-like play in overtime tapping the puck to nobody. Which San Jose jumped on to win. I think he just got caught out there too long and had nothing left in the tank. I hope that's all it was anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 I absolutely hate 3 on 3 OT. Â Â Yes, it makes it more likely a goal will be scored. Â It also makes it 0% likely that anything resembling good hockey will take place. Â 4 on 4 was exciting and still looked like NHL hockey. Â Why not just make OT 10 minutes of 4 on 4? Â Â Anyways, not my favorite game of all-time. Â Glad we got the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JujuFish Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 I absolutely hate 3 on 3 OT.   Yes, it makes it more likely a goal will be scored.  It also makes it 0% likely that anything resembling good hockey will take place.  4 on 4 was exciting and still looked like NHL hockey.  Why not just make OT 10 minutes of 4 on 4?   Anyways, not my favorite game of all-time.  Glad we got the point. With shootouts and now 3-on-3 OT, it makes more sense than ever that regulation wins should be worth 3 points. They're clearly more indicative of team play as a whole, so it makes sense to be worth more. It would also make every game a 3-point game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 Who didn't get excited reading this? Â . To match the 05-06 team's next 17 games, we only need to go 15-1-1. We got this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted November 15, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 (edited) Who didn't get excited reading this? Â I think he just got caught out there too long and had nothing left in the tank. I hope that's all it was anyway. To match the 05-06 team's next 17 games, we only need to go 15-1-1. We got this. And we need Ullmark to become Ryan Miller. And Ullmark to start, for that matter Edited November 15, 2015 by WildCard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 I absolutely hate 3 on 3 OT. Â Â Yes, it makes it more likely a goal will be scored. Â It also makes it 0% likely that anything resembling good hockey will take place. Â 4 on 4 was exciting and still looked like NHL hockey. Â Why not just make OT 10 minutes of 4 on 4? Â Â Anyways, not my favorite game of all-time. Â Glad we got the point. Players won't agree to 10 minute OT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 To match the 05-06 team's next 17 games, we only need to go 15-1-1. We got this. You just had to be that guy, didn't you? :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 Suddenly Blue is anti-numbahs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 You just had to be that guy, didn't you? :angry::) And 18-2-2 in the next 22. That was an unbelievable run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 Sign me up for the anti-3-on-3 brigade. It's ugly and terrifying. Â Gionta was out the because he was one of the best Sabrs last night. I was yelling at Zemgus to get off at least 30 seconds before the goal. I'd like to see Reinhart get a look in OT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 Sign me up for the anti-3-on-3 brigade. It's ugly and terrifying. Â Gionta was out the because he was one of the best Sabrs last night. I was yelling at Zemgus to get off at least 30 seconds before the goal. I'd like to see Reinhart get a look in OT. I agree that Gionta has been playing well the past few games, but I think he starts OT because he's the captain/a veteran, because he also started at least one of the Philly/Toronto overtimes (I believe both) and got a full shift or two in each, and, well, let's just say the stretch of games including those are going to be absent from his career highlight video... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JujuFish Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 And we need Ullmark to become Ryan Miller. And Ullmark to start, for that matter  Actually, Biron was the backbone of that 15-1-1 stretch. He went 13-0-1 during those 17 games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 I absolutely hate 3 on 3 OT.   Yes, it makes it more likely a goal will be scored.  It also makes it 0% likely that anything resembling good hockey will take place.  4 on 4 was exciting and still looked like NHL hockey.  Why not just make OT 10 minutes of 4 on 4?   Anyways, not my favorite game of all-time.  Glad we got the point.  It sure beats the shootout IMO. It still looks like NHL hockey to me because I remember when it was NHL hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 Actually, Biron was the backbone of that 15-1-1 stretch. He went 13-0-1 during those 17 games.  That's right.  Miller had a broken thumb, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JujuFish Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 That's right.  Miller had a broken thumb, right? Yup. Broke his thumb the morning of the 10-4 loss to Ottawa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 You just had to be that guy, didn't you? :angry:  I was going to point out that we are also below three non-playoffs year (2008-09, 2011-12 and 2012-13), so ...  ;)   As for 3-on-3, I though that they were going to do 5 min 4-on-4 followed by (if necessary) 5 minutes of 3-on-3. I would have preferred that. 3-on-3 is almost as cheesy as the shootout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 Suddenly Blue is anti-numbahs. I just want to enjoy the ride this season. That's all, this one season is all I ask! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted November 15, 2015 Report Share Posted November 15, 2015 I absolutely hate 3 on 3 OT.   Yes, it makes it more likely a goal will be scored.  It also makes it 0% likely that anything resembling good hockey will take place.  4 on 4 was exciting and still looked like NHL hockey.  Why not just make OT 10 minutes of 4 on 4?   Anyways, not my favorite game of all-time.  Glad we got the point.  Gotta say, I am not a fan of it either. I rather liked 4 on 4. 3 on 3 basically just comes down to repeated odd-man rushes going both ways.  With shootouts and now 3-on-3 OT, it makes more sense than ever that regulation wins should be worth 3 points. They're clearly more indicative of team play as a whole, so it makes sense to be worth more. It would also make every game a 3-point game.  For sure. It doesn't make sense right now that some games are worth 2 points, and others 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 (edited) Sign me up for the anti-3-on-3 brigade. It's ugly and terrifying.  Weird, that's precisely why I like it. I think part of it is that coaches haven't yet figured out the ideal strategies for 3v3 yet. The coaches don't know how to coach for it, the players don't know how to play it. I love the extreme riskiness of it, and prefer it to the shootout. Edited November 16, 2015 by The Big Johnson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 Like it or not, the three on three is working almost to a tee. The percentage of games ending in overtime is way up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.