wjag Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 After 1 period the teams were tied in shots on goal 11-11. From that point Buffalo only managed 8 more shots over three periods. Meanwhile, the Rangers get 28 more shots. What the heck happened? The Jagr line was on the ice for 26 minutes which is around 4 minutes longer than Briere. It seemed that they played all 26 minutes in the Buffalo zone. The Sabres didn't get a shot in OT (thanks to a PK) but come on, you can't play this style effectively for the long haul. The Sabres are lucky that Straka left the ice late in the game. He wasn't on the ice for the PP in OT and he wasn't available for the shootout. Miller played a respectable game. After the team played so well in the first period, it just seemed like they were content to play defense. I don't have a problem with that if it leads to odd man breaks. But that was gone from last night's game after the first period. Where did the O go? How great was Drury's goal? He seemingly gets the only decent chance of the 3rd and he buries it on Weekes. Anyone who needs further proof that this team needs both Briere and Drury only need review last night's game. They both made THE play when we needed it. Drury in the 3rd to get one point and Briere in the Shootout to get the other one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 After 1 period the teams were tied in shots on goal 11-11. From that point Buffalo only managed 8 more shots over three periods. Meanwhile, the Rangers get 28 more shots. What the heck happened? The Jagr line was on the ice for 26 minutes which is around 4 minutes longer than Briere. It seemed that they played all 26 minutes in the Buffalo zone. The Sabres didn't get a shot in OT (thanks to a PK) but come on, you can't play this style effectively for the long haul. The Sabres are lucky that Straka left the ice late in the game. He wasn't on the ice for the PP in OT and he wasn't available for the shootout. Miller played a respectable game. After the team played so well in the first period, it just seemed like they were content to play defense. I don't have a problem with that if it leads to odd man breaks. But that was gone from last night's game after the first period. Where did the O go? How great was Drury's goal? He seemingly gets the only decent chance of the 3rd and he buries it on Weekes. Anyone who needs further proof that this team needs both Briere and Drury only need review last night's game. They both made THE play when we needed it. Drury in the 3rd to get one point and Briere in the Shootout to get the other one. I think the main reason the O left the arena after the third, is a bit of "overconfidence" starting to creep it's way in to some players. Once we went up 2-0, we stopped skating, checking, we made too many passes, constantly looking for the pretty play rather than the simple one. It bordered on hot-dogging before The Rangers got back into it. Then once The Rangers tie it up, the team seems to wake up yet again. The Rangers score another quick one, and suddenly it's The Sabres ALL OVER The Rangers. Two minutes later it's 3-3. I think what we're seeing here, is a team that in some cases are head and shoulders better than opposition that they have not one but two extra gears they can kick into when needed, and nobody's able to stay with them. The refs did a good job screwing up the game last night, calling nothing in the first two, and then everything on Buffalo in the third and OT. This IMHO, allowed The Rangers to look better than they ever were. They now know they're good, but I also think they know WHY they're good. They know if they want to win, they have to play hard an not give an inch, which I think was quite evident in the way we responded to the 3-2 goal. They also know however, that on most night, when they go up 2-0 or 3-0 nothing, that should someone come back and tie it up, well to heck with it, we'll just bang home a few more pucks and call it a day. The Carolina game comes to mind. The DivingCanes spend 40 minutes coming back from a 3-0 deficit, and the boys roar right back to bang home 4 quick ones, and call it a night. The Tampa game was somewhat similar, and last night would've looked the same I think, had the refs not intervened. The 4-1 loss to Ottawa showed what happened when they take the whole night off, and I think the players took note of that as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted December 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 Some tidbits taken from New York paper.... Without the puck, Rangers coach Tom Renney decided early in the first period to withdraw into a neutral-zone trap that, after a brief acclimation period, nullified Buffalo's rush. After an even first period in which the shots were 11-11, the Rangers outshot the Sabres 22-8 over the second and third periods and 6-0 in overtime. "We knew we were playing a well-rested team and everyone was expecting them to take it to us. And we wanted to take it to them," Shanahan said. "And as the game wore on, we seemed to get stronger. "And if it weren't for Miller and some of the saves he made in overtime, I think we'd be celebrating in here." NOT FEELIN' IT: Jagr told Renney that he didn't feel sharp enough yet to shoot among the Rangers' first three in the shootout. So he was penciled in for fourth - behind Shanahan, Nylander and Petr Prucha - and never went. ... Straka said he stepped in a rut and overextended his right leg late in the third period, suffering the hamstring pull. Renney termed Straka "day-to-day." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR HOLLIDAY Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 You have to learn how to win games in different types of ways........... :beer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlecap Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 even though we were up 2-0, we stole one last night. I just couldn't believe how many unforced giveaways we had coming out of our own end. Like all we had to do is clear the puck down the ice on that last power play in OT and we try to make that fancy maneuvre to spring someone instead and we got tentative. This was most alarming to me. I think RJ was picking up on this too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blugold43 Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 Some tidbits taken from New York paper.... Without the puck, Rangers coach Tom Renney decided early in the first period to withdraw into a neutral-zone trap that, after a brief acclimation period, nullified Buffalo's rush. After an even first period in which the shots were 11-11, the Rangers outshot the Sabres 22-8 over the second and third periods and 6-0 in overtime. "We knew we were playing a well-rested team and everyone was expecting them to take it to us. And we wanted to take it to them," Shanahan said. "And as the game wore on, we seemed to get stronger. "And if it weren't for Miller and some of the saves he made in overtime, I think we'd be celebrating in here." since the lockout ended and the game opened up, i have always thought it was just a matter of time until someone figured out how to bring the trap back into it. this could be a turning point one way or the other for this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 since the lockout ended and the game opened up, i have always thought it was just a matter of time until someone figured out how to bring the trap back into it. this could be a turning point one way or the other for this team. Teams have been trapping the Sabres, clogging up the neutral zone, all season. The Sabres love to go D to D in their own zone, then pass it up the middle. Teams have been hanging back in the neutral zone to take away that break-out pass. The Sabres also love to make plays at the opponent's blue line, whether skating it in or making a drop pass. Opponents have worked to challenge the Sabres at the blue line and force them to dump the puck deep. The "issue" is that the Sabres are sometimes too stuborn to make adjustments. They still rather try the breakout up the middle, and they still try to make plays at the opponents blue line, both of which result in turnovers. With all that said, I still don't think it's that big of deal. The D has been banged up lately, and they're the ones who start the transition game. Tallinder is capable of setting up 2 or 3 odd man rushes a game. He's excellent at reading the defense and moving the puck. And while teams have forced the Sabres to turn the puck over at the blue line, they still are able to make devastating plays like the one Drury and Max made to tie the game against the Rangers. With all our hand wringing over 'sub-par' wins, they've still winning 80% of their games, and averaging 4 goals a game. They haven't lost two in a row all season. Not every game is going to be a blowout; not every game is going to be a clinic. The test isn't if the Sabres can blow out teams, as every team is capable of catching fire and a cold goalie a few times a year (see the Flyers win over the Ducks). The test is to win when the calls aren't going your way; when the opposing goalie is standing on his head; when the other team's star line is on fire; when there are six rookies in the lineup. If the team can pass that test, they're on to something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 since the lockout ended and the game opened up, i have always thought it was just a matter of time until someone figured out how to bring the trap back into it. this could be a turning point one way or the other for this team. Not really. Florida, NJ and Anaheim all used the trap against the Sabres last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blugold43 Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 Not really. Florida, NJ and Anaheim all used the trap against the Sabres last year. i guess the word i left out was "effectively." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 i guess the word i left out was "effectively." NJ 3-1 against Buffalo last year. Florida 3-1 against Buffalo last year. The Sabres did beat the (Mighty) Ducks in OT, but Anaheim shut them down the whole game. The trap seemed pretty effective to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blugold43 Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 i realize i made a reference to last season, and your examples are duly noted. but i am also i'm referring to this year's team, and the potential for other teams to slow them down in this way. the point i'm trying to make is that i can only imagine we'll see more and more teams defending the sabres the way the rangers did last night. i'm certainly not ruling out the possibility that the sabres will handle it just fine. for that I trust ruff. But i also suspect they're going to have to adapt as the season goes on if they are to maintain themselves offensively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 i realize i made a reference to last season, and your examples are duly noted. but i am also i'm referring to this year's team, and the potential for other teams to slow them down in this way. the point i'm trying to make is that i can only imagine we'll see more and more teams defending the sabres the way the rangers did last night. i'm certainly not ruling out the possibility that the sabres will handle it just fine. for that I trust ruff. But i also suspect they're going to have to adapt as the season goes on if they are to maintain themselves offensively. Yet last season, 3 teams showed the ability to shut down the Sabres offense effectively and other teams did not adopt this system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blugold43 Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 i wonder how long that's going to last? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 i wonder how long that's going to last? The trap is not unbeatable. If the other team wants to take away the neutral zone, get it up to the red line, dump it in and aggressively forecheck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR HOLLIDAY Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 The trap is not unbeatable. If the other team wants to take away the neutral zone, get it up to the red line, dump it in and aggressively forecheck. Plus if the refs do their job and call penalties for hooking and what not, the trap is not unbeatable..........Sabres will have to get used to trying to beat it and they have enough talent to do so........... :beer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted December 2, 2006 Report Share Posted December 2, 2006 The trap is not unbeatable. If the other team wants to take away the neutral zone, get it up to the red line, dump it in and aggressively forecheck. Exactly, it's not like the Sabres can't score from down low or off the cycle. They just have to switch up the game plan a little sooner when the opponent starts trapping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.