deluca67 Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 When the Sabres set the record back in the early 80's they did so without the use of OT or a shootout. They won 10 straigt in a 60 minute game. Which for me is a bit more impressive. But that's just me. I am also the one who thinks a no-hitter in the American League is more impressive then in the National League because of the DH. Also, Does the NHL keep Shootout stats? I was wondering who the best players have been so far. Who leads the Sabres? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 or OJ running for 2000 in 14 games... winning 10 road games with the aide of OT and a SO makes it slightly less impressive, but just slightly... However, rushing titles, no hitters (don't argue with me on this one... i know it has holes), rebound records, etc. are individual records... team records are far more impressive to me... winning 10 straight in the 80's is more impressive than winning 10 straight now, however, so is chosing the 5.9 carat flawless diamond over the 6.0 carat diamond for your lady. in the end, you've just spent a lot of money for some nice tail... i'll take 10 wins and the bling anyday!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 When the Sabres set the record back in the early 80's they did so without the use of OT or a shootout. They won 10 straigt in a 60 minute game. Which for me is a bit more impressive. But that's just me. I am also the one who thinks a no-hitter in the American League is more impressive then in the National League because of the DH. Also, Does the NHL keep Shootout stats? I was wondering who the best players have been so far. Who leads the Sabres? Yes it is more impressive that none of their wins came in OT, but it was available to them in '83-'84. That was the year the league reintroduced OT. Hard to truly compare that streak to the current one as the Sabres in '83-'84 beat 4 very good teams, 5 bad / VERY bad teams, and 1 that was mediocre that they simply owned all year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 I have an audio clip of Ted Darling calling the final moments of the record-setting win over St. Louis if anyone wants it. Just send me a PM with your email address. I have it in WAV and RM format. And a bunch of other sounds. Just ask if you have one in mind. Just for fun, here's who the Sabres beat during that incredible road streak. Dec. 10 at Boston 4-2 Dec. 11 at Philly 6-5 Dec. 17 at Hartford 4-1 (got that Whaler goal song in my mind now... DAMN. BTW, to hear it, go to brassbonanza.com. Brass Bonanza is the name of the song. And you also can hear some great calls by former Whaler play by play guy Chuck Kaiton, the only guy I would say even deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as Jeanneret.) Dec. 27 at Montreal 7-4 Jan. 7 at Washington 4-2 Jan. 14 at Detroit 2-1 Jan. 17 at Vancouver 5-1 Jan. 18 at LA 4-0 Jan. 21 at St. Louis 2-1 Jan. 23 at Boston 5-3 The streak ended at Boston on Feb. 2 with a 5-3 loss. FWIW, the Sabres finished the season 7-8 on the road after that 10th straight win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTS Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 When the Sabres set the record back in the early 80's they did so without the use of OT or a shootout. They won 10 straigt in a 60 minute game. Which for me is a bit more impressive. But that's just me. I am also the one who thinks a no-hitter in the American League is more impressive then in the National League because of the DH. Also, Does the NHL keep Shootout stats? I was wondering who the best players have been so far. Who leads the Sabres? I was thinking about the exact same thing this morning. That's why I was hoping they would pull it off in OT because OT has been around for a while. If the Sabres beat the current record, they should get an asterik next to it for the SO Win yesterday. It's nice however that we're trying to beat own record from 83. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JujuFish Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 Another thing to think about is, didn't NJ extend their streak to 11 by winning their first road game in the playoffs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickshaw Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 Of course it's legit if they win 10 in a row. Is it legit that 20 years ago goalies equipment wasn't as big as the titanic? Should those records be thrown out as well? Is it legit that 30-40 years ago goalies didn't wear masks and basically anyone could score a goal? Comparing different eras, etc is moot. It is what it is. If Buffalo breaks the road win record, then of coure it's legit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric in Akron Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 I agree with rickshaw. It is legit because at every game someone walks away with 2 points and the Sabres have walked away with it on the road 9 straight times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jp... Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 It's legit because the rules are what they are, sabres have nothing to do with that... Is it the same as the streak in the early 80's?...no The 80's and 90's teams never had the chance for a shootout to bail them out... I would say last night's game was the first game where i truly saw a team play for the shootout...the sabres had no interest in winning that game in regulation or overtime...and that's not a bad thing, i'm just sayin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Playfair Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 I thinks its dumb that regualr wins give you the same amt of pts as shootout wins. If you win in regulation, you shuold get rewarded more than in a shootout. Maybe 3 pts for regualtion win, 2 pts for OT or SO win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JujuFish Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 I thinks its dumb that regualr wins give you the same amt of pts as shootout wins. If you win in regulation, you shuold get rewarded more than in a shootout. Maybe 3 pts for regualtion win, 2 pts for OT or SO win? I disagree. The winning team regardless of the situation should get 2 points. Doing otherwise would devalue games where to very good evenly matched teams had to take it into overtime to decide the game. That doesn't mean they're not as good, or their win doesn't mean as much. If we took Ottawa to OT in the next matchup and won, would you say our win doesn't mean much since we couldn't beat them in regulation, or that we're not a good team because of it? I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jp... Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 I thinks its dumb that regualr wins give you the same amt of pts as shootout wins. If you win in regulation, you shuold get rewarded more than in a shootout. Maybe 3 pts for regualtion win, 2 pts for OT or SO win? I agree with you Mr.Playfair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Playfair Posted December 20, 2005 Report Share Posted December 20, 2005 I disagree. The winning team regardless of the situation should get 2 points. Doing otherwise would devalue games where to very good evenly matched teams had to take it into overtime to decide the game. That doesn't mean they're not as good, or their win doesn't mean as much. If we took Ottawa to OT in the next matchup and won, would you say our win doesn't mean much since we couldn't beat them in regulation, or that we're not a good team because of it? I don't think so. No, what I am saying is that a win in regulation counts more and says more about a teams dominance over the other, than a win in OT or a SO. A regular win indicates one team was better than the other that night, an OT or SO win has less to do with skill and perserverence over 60 minutes, and more to do with luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knightrider Posted December 21, 2005 Report Share Posted December 21, 2005 No, what I am saying is that a win in regulation counts more and says more about a teams dominance over the other, than a win in OT or a SO. A regular win indicates one team was better than the other that night, an OT or SO win has less to do with skill and perserverence over 60 minutes, and more to do with luck. There is plenty of luck in the first 60 minutes, too. In a shootout, you might not get a great reception telling a goalie there is no skill or perseverence involved. The only skill not in evidence in a shootout is defense. However, the reason for resorting to the SO is that the defenses played well enough, at least in the OT, to keep the opposing team from scoring. In a perfect world, both teams ought to play full stength till someone scores. In order to do that, the schedules would have to be drastically changed so that one team doesn't have an unfair advantage, i.e., one team is well rested and the other playing their third in four nights... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.