GAME DISCUSSION THREAD

[Alaska Darin]

Carolina is still a good team that is going to force errors and create chances. But on the whole, I thought we took the play to them and outplayed them most of the night. Who is this Thomas Vanek guy? We could have used him last spring.

I'd say the reason we're seeing "this" Vanek guy is because we didn't see him last spring. I'm quite sure that's the very first time in his life he'd ever been seriously disciplined where hockey is concerned - and he's responded.

[Assquatch]

 

 

Did anyone hear anything about Kotalik? I heard Jim Lorentz say at one point in the 3rd that Kotalik must be injured b/c he hadn't played in the 3rd.

 

 

 

Lindy said in his press conference something about Kotalik not having it tonight. He put Gaustad on that line instead because he was "stronger on the boards".

[jad1]

As AD pointed out, our inability to win faceoffs is extremely problematic and we let up big time the lat two minutes.

 

Carolina is still a good team that is going to force errors and create chances. But on the whole, I thought we took the play to them and outplayed them most of the night. Who is this Thomas Vanek guy? We could have used him last spring.

 

The Sabres actually won the overall faceoff battle tonight (30-26), but did lose some key ones. I don't recall how many of those key wins were by Brind'Amour.

 

Lindy might have gotten a little greedy on that last 5-3, playing Pominville at the point. Tallinder or Campbell might have done a better job of picking up the trailer (Commodore) on the goal.

 

I liked the way they played this game too. The 4th line controlled play in the first period, the RAV line looked unstoppable, and Miller made some big saves. I'd say that this was a 'gritty' win.

[BetweenThePipes00]

Lindy said in his press conference something about Kotalik not having it tonight. He put Gaustad on that line instead because he was "stronger on the boards".

 

I love it ... first of all, glad he is healthy, but I love that despite the success he is showing them they will still be held accountable.

[SDS]

The Sabres actually won the overall faceoff battle tonight (30-26), but did lose some key ones. I don't recall how many of those key wins were by Brind'Amour.

 

Lindy might have gotten a little greedy on that last 5-3, playing Pominville at the point. Tallinder or Campbell might have done a better job of picking up the trailer (Commodore) on the goal.

 

I liked the way they played this game too. The 4th line controlled play in the first period, the RAV line looked unstoppable, and Miller made some big saves. I'd say that this was a 'gritty' win.

 

Sadly, Drury didn't back check for crap on that goal. He just lazily watched as he strolled back. If he was skating that goal never goes in.

[X. Benedict]

I'd say the reason we're seeing "this" Vanek guy is because we didn't see him last spring. I'm quite sure that's the very first time in his life he'd ever been seriously disciplined where hockey is concerned - and he's responded.

 

Vanek is slimmer, faster, more patient and he is backchecking hard.

 

I think it took some balls for Lindy to bench him in the playoffs knowing this kid's skill.

He has responded, and I just watched his post game interview. His words in paraphrase:

 

"Not everyone here is going to be happy with this game, we did some things good, we did

some things bad, tomorrow is Boston. That is all I care about."

 

Something is rubbing off.

[jad1]

Sadly, Drury didn't back check for crap on that goal. He just lazily watched as he strolled back. If he was skating that goal never goes in.

 

Definitely something for Ruff to chew them out for in the film room. Not neccessarily a bad thing after a win! :D

[caveman]

Nice win, Sabres fans. It would be pretty sweet to have a playoff rematch come spring -- 4 regular season games is not nearly enough because these games are just fantastic to watch. Mair, Gaustad, and Peters were indeed a beast of a 4th line in the first. I kept waiting for us to expose them with speed but they really controlled play physically. What happened to their ice time as the game went on?

 

http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20062007/SC020101.HTM

 

Mair had 1 shift in the 2nd and none in the 3rd, after 4 what looked like good ones in the first. Peters didn't see the ice after the 1st. Is that normal for you guys?

 

-Canes fan

[Screamin'Weasel]

Nice win, Sabres fans. It would be pretty sweet to have a playoff rematch come spring -- 4 regular season games is not nearly enough because these games are just fantastic to watch. Mair, Gaustad, and Peters were indeed a beast of a 4th line in the first. I kept waiting for us to expose them with speed but they really controlled play physically. What happened to their ice time as the game went on?

 

http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20062007/SC020101.HTM

 

Mair had 1 shift in the 2nd and none in the 3rd, after 4 what looked like good ones in the first. Peters didn't see the ice after the 1st. Is that normal for you guys?

 

-Canes fan

Last year, Peters dressed for less than 30 games. He is the local enforcer. Last year, Mair missed alot of games due to injury. So far this year, the fourth line sees limited second period and almost no third period action. However, in the 9-1 victory over Philly, Peters alone logged 10+ mins in the third. :)

[X. Benedict]

Nice win, Sabres fans. It would be pretty sweet to have a playoff rematch come spring -- 4 regular season games is not nearly enough because these games are just fantastic to watch. Mair, Gaustad, and Peters were indeed a beast of a 4th line in the first. I kept waiting for us to expose them with speed but they really controlled play physically. What happened to their ice time as the game went on?

 

http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20062007/SC020101.HTM

 

Mair had 1 shift in the 2nd and none in the 3rd, after 4 what looked like good ones in the first. Peters didn't see the ice after the 1st. Is that normal for you guys?

 

-Canes fan

 

I thought Tanabe actually played a great game. Why is everyone on your boards bashing the guy? - he was plus 2.

 

(oh, and nobody ran Miller - just a fantasy subplot.)

[Chilly]

After watching Kalinin in the playoffs last year, I didn't expect him to score that.

 

Helluva goal by him.

[Braedon]

I'll take the lucky win, but they looked very very sloppy tonight: sloppy passing, failing to convert on two long 5 on 3 power plays and giving up a shorthanded up 5 on 3.

 

I hope they look better tomorrow against Montreal. Back to back is hard enough without looking pretty bad in the first of the two.

 

 

LUCKY WIN?!?!?! No idea what you're talking about. This was no lucky win. This is the defending SC Champs we just beat for our 7th win in a row. It wasn't lucky, nor were the 5 games we have won against solid teams (please exclude Philly).

 

The shorthanded goal at the end was a fluke goal in combination with Miller giving up a horrible rebound. They scored two of their goals on plain luck. Tallinder deflected one in with his body (which Erik Cole showed good sportsmanship by patting him for the goal). THE REFS WERE HORRIBLE, as well. Aside from Lydman giving up 2 very bad passes, one of them exited our zone only to be brought in offsides and lead to an eventual goal (no call). And excuse me if I'm wrong, but even if Roy dived, he was tripped. Where's the offset? More often than not you see the offsetting penalty on the unsportsmanlike conduct. You can't convince me he wasn't tripped.

 

Was at the game tonight, and what I saw was spectacular. This team is so quick with passing and with the defense joining the rush. Of course we took some time to warm up, but so is the case with other wins this year. The bottom line is we were fun to watch, the arena was downright electric, and we are now the best team in the NHL.

 

For once I would like to read the game thread and know WE WON. Half the time we dissect the game to the point where the win is second fiddle.

[Screamin'Weasel]

LUCKY WIN?!?!?! No idea what you're talking about. This was no lucky win.

You misunderstand me. By lucky win I meant with all the bad breaks, bounces and calls going against us, we were lucky to win. I accept responsibility for the confusion as the way I worded it it looked like I meant we had no business winning.

 

We were sloppy tonight, however. The passes were not crisp or, often, on target. The outlet pass was near non-existant tonight. The third Canes goal that was deflected off Miller was made from behind the goal line by an completely unmolested Hurricane while Lydman and Tallinder were standing in front of the net. They just stood there about 2 feet in front of Miller and from each other. Blown coverage there. We had two 5-on-3 situations each over a minute in length and failed to capitalize and gave up a short handed goal on one. If this is the Sabres' "A-Game" the laws of probability dictate we will have some tough times coming. That said, I do not believe this was our "A-Game" and have full confidence the Sabres will have a phenominal year.

 

As I pointed out earlier, Roy's "dive" was a horrible call. You don't get your legs chopped out from under you by two opposing players and "dive." Sadly, the league is "cracking down" on diving with fines to repeat offenders and those with a reputation for diving. I say sadly because there is only one way to get a reputation for the purely subjective call of diving: getting a call on it, legitimate or not. Roy now has a reputation for diving (regardless of calls made last year) simply because an official felt that he committed that foul.

[hopeleslyobvious]

Just finished watching the game on the DVR (Had to go see Flags of Our Fathers tonight!) Good to see them come away with the win despite having a lot of bad bounces. Just a few of my thoughts.

 

I was really disappointed with Lydman's giveaway...it reminded me of some plays he made early last season.

 

I thought the call on Roy should have been a trip and a dive. When your guy gets past you, you can't just turn around and swipe at his skates. With that being said, Roy appeared to embelish a little bit.

 

I am still confused as to how Kalinin was called for interference. If anyone interfered there it was Cole.

 

Despite giving up 4 goals on 20 shots, I thought Miller had a pretty solid game. The 1st goal was on a terrible giveaway, and the 2nd and 3rd were patened Carolina fluke goals. I didn't like the rebound he gave up on the 4th goal. But with that being said, he made some huge saves early especially on the Staal breakaway.

[hopeleslyobvious]

Just reading over on the Canes board... :lol:

 

Just to paraphrase and respond to a few of my favoritesv(I don't really feel like registering over there):

 

"The Sabres don't have enough depth. We would have won last year if we carried 8 NHL defensemen."

 

Last time I checked we went down to #10 on the depth chart. It was also suggested that the Sabres should have made some moves when we had injury trouble....That's a good idea...oh wait the NHL has a trading deadline. DOH.

 

They had 5 players out of the lineup tonight...So when we have that many guys out of the lineup and lose it's an excuse. When they have that many out and lose, it just shows they are a better team? I am failing to see the logic there.

 

My absolute favorite is that the officiating was suspect. Brind'Amour holding Vanek's stick was apparently a bad call. Now maybe I am missing something but I watched that play twice. Brind'Amour grabbed Vanek's stick, held it, let go and grabbed it again for good measure. Hmmm. Suspicious indeed!

[hopeleslyobvious]

1 more reply, and then I'm done with this thread, I swear...

 

Hey Canes.......

 

YOU GOT SLUGGED!

[Claude_Verret]

 

Last time I checked we went down to #10 on the depth chart. It was also suggested that the Sabres should have made some moves when we had injury trouble....That's a good idea...oh wait the NHL has a trading deadline. DOH.

 

I live in Raleigh and dealing with idiots who can't admit that maybe, just maybe us losing 4 of our 6 d-men for game 7 could have had an effect on the outcome of that series is absolutely draining. This is the discussion that I now begin with Caniacs who can't admit to this.

 

Q: Please name for me the Hurricanes' #7-10 defensemen on their depth chart last year.....

 

A: Some can name one, maybe two of them.

 

My response is then: Now imagaine that these guys, WHO YOU CAN'T EVEN NAME, are ALL playing in a game seven for you.

 

A: Usually silence or stammering. The best answer I ever received though was: We don't even have 10 defensmen!

 

I'm now up to 32 people I have had this discussion with. I'll stop asking when someone comes up with all four defensmen.

[SCSabresFan!]

Just finished watching the game on the DVR (Had to go see Flags of Our Fathers tonight!) Good to see them come away with the win despite having a lot of bad bounces. Just a few of my thoughts.

 

I was really disappointed with Lydman's giveaway...it reminded me of some plays he made early last season.

 

I thought the call on Roy should have been a trip and a dive. When your guy gets past you, you can't just turn around and swipe at his skates. With that being said, Roy appeared to embelish a little bit.

 

I am still confused as to how Kalinin was called for interference. If anyone interfered there it was Cole.

 

Despite giving up 4 goals on 20 shots, I thought Miller had a pretty solid game. The 1st goal was on a terrible giveaway, and the 2nd and 3rd were patened Carolina fluke goals. I didn't like the rebound he gave up on the 4th goal. But with that being said, he made some huge saves early especially on the Staal breakaway.

 

How was Flags of our Fathers? Details???

[caveman]

I thought Tanabe actually played a great game. Why is everyone on your boards bashing the guy? - he was plus 2.

 

It's kind of habit at this point -- there are definitely people sticking up for his performance last night.

 

Q: Please name for me the Hurricanes' #7-10 defensemen on their depth chart last year.....

 

You might be referring to my post. First of all, you might notice that nowhere do I say that we were deeper, or better. But that aside:

 

Commodore

Hedican

Kaberle

Ward

Wallin

Wesley

Hutchinson

Tverdovsky

Babchuk

 

All 9 of those defensemen played 20+ regular season games for Carolina last year. #10 on the depth chart was Chris Hajt, who with only 6 career NHL games would have been indeed scary to see.

 

This year's top 9:

 

Commodore

Hedican

Kaberle (maybe in January)

Wesley

Gleason

Wallin

Hutchinson

Babchuk

Tanabe

 

And #10 on the depth chart this year is Derrick Walser, who I would not mind at all seeing in red this year. 82 career NHL games and not a terrible player, especially offensively.

[Claude_Verret]

It's kind of habit at this point -- there are definitely people sticking up for his performance last night.

You might be referring to my post. First of all, you might notice that nowhere do I say that we were deeper, or better. But that aside:

 

I wasn't totally referring to your post. My reason for asking Caniacs to name their #7-10 d-men from last year is two fold:

 

1.) To demonstrate how they really don't know their team all that well

 

2.) To attempt to demonstrate to them that losing 4 of your top 6 d-men would represent a HUGE blow to their team's chances of success.

 

Commodore

Hedican

Kaberle

Ward

Wallin

Wesley

Hutchinson

Tverdovsky

Babchuk

 

All 9 of those defensemen played 20+ regular season games for Carolina last year. #10 on the depth chart was Chris Hajt, who with only 6 career NHL games would have been indeed scary to see.

 

Thanks for doing the work for me. I never really have bothered to look and see who their top 10 were from last year. I was waiting until someone could actually give me four names before I bothered to check for myself. ;)

 

T

[hopeleslyobvious]

How was Flags of our Fathers? Details???

 

 

Flags of our Fathers was great. It was a really good story, and I think Clint Eastwood did an amazing job with it. I would highly reccomend it.