Taro T Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 I don't think the Sabres perceived lack of size causes them more injuries than other teams suffer through the course of the regular season. The Sabres for the most part (except at center and in goal) have decent size (most players are 6'0"+, 200 lbs+, or both). They also seem to throw roughly as many "hits" as their opponents (I only went back and checked 10 games, but in the 1st 10 games they were outhit 5 times and outhit their opponent 5 times). I also don't think that the team is willing to be intimidated. They were severely outhit one game by Carolina and ended up winning the game 7-4. Although some here are upset that Ovechkin was still able to skate after Gaustad explained to him that it isn't polite to crosscheck people in the back when they are going to their bench, both Gaustad and Mair immediately went after Caps at the time of the hit. While the Sabres haven't had to kill off instigator penalties at other points in the season, they HAVE stood up for each other and they have done it pretty much across the board. I do agree that in the playoffs the Sabres were bit hard by the injury bug and that they were hit fairly hard during the 2nd 10 game segment of this season, but their injuries this year are not completely out of the ordinary. The Sabres have also shown incredible resiliency as they are 10-4-2 since their 10-0-0 start even with their injuries. That pace carried over an entire season would be 51-21-10. While the team survives its injuries well and it doesn't appear to suffer more injuries than other teams (I don't have time to check the stats to definitively state that they don't suffer more injuries), opponents seem to suffer an unusually few number of serious injuries when playing the Sabres. I don't think this apparent lack of causing injuries is so much due to a lack of team toughness, I think it is more a product of the style the team plays. When an opponent gets control of the puck in the Sabres zone, the Sabres clog the passing/shooting lanes and rarely allow themselves to really try to line someone up because that will create a hole in the defensive zone coverage if the guy misses throwing the big hit. In the offensive zone, the Sabres generally have the puck, and you don't throw as many hits when you are skating the puck in as when you are dumping and chasing. The reason I bring this up is, I have read several posters' views that the Sabres need more team toughness because they are "injury-prone". I disagree with that view, the Sabres do have toughness, they simply play a style where the toughness doesn't necessarily bring itself to the forefront. This team reminds me in many ways of the '80's Eulers. (I'm not claiming that they have multiple HOF'ers on this squad, just that the style and resiliency of this team calls a lot of those past teams to mind.) Those teams typically played a finesse game in the regular season and even in the playoffs until they ran into an East Conference team (and/or Calgary). The thing is, when they needed to, they could play that tight, defensive, earn-what-you-get game as well. I think this team has that capability as well, but much like the Gretzky-led squad, seldom has reason to play that style. IF injuries do end up hurting the Sabres this post-season, I really don't expect it to be due to their injuries, I think it will be more of a case of the Sabres opponent not suffering many. But, I think the Sabres will be able to play the game they need to this post-season, and if they need to play a series physically they will be able to do it. I don't think that other teams will be able to play the gunning style that they will likely have to to get past Buffalo. Long story short - I'm simply not that worried that the Sabres will suffer outrageous injuries or get intimidated by their opponents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodfella25 Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 I am not worried about injuries to the forwards, but the defense continues to concern me. I'm not a fan of Paetsch, nor am I comfortable with Card, Funk, or whoever else they call up from Rochester, especially in a playoff situation. I have been consistent in saying that we need at least one more defender for depth purposes. As I stated in another thread, we are an injury or two away from a depleted defense again. You might be able to get away with that in the regular season, but the playoffs are far more grueling and I can't help but get flashbacks of last year's ECF. Bottom line is I know we are up against the cap, but I hope Darcy can swing something later in the year and bring in a tough, stay-at-home, smart defenseman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 I am not worried about injuries to the forwards, but the defense continues to concern me. I'm not a fan of Paetsch, nor am I comfortable with Card, Funk, or whoever else they call up from Rochester, especially in a playoff situation. I have been consistent in saying that we need at least one more defender for depth purposes. As I stated in another thread, we are an injury or two away from a depleted defense again. You might be able to get away with that in the regular season, but the playoffs are far more grueling and I can't help but get flashbacks of last year's ECF. Bottom line is I know we are up against the cap, but I hope Darcy can swing something later in the year and bring in a tough, stay-at-home, smart defenseman. I would like a little extra depth on the blue line as well. We would have to move someone to do it though. I think we have more than enough depth up front and in goal to make it happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 Does Biron have any trade value at this point? I know many have lobbied for a Kotalik trade but I'm wondering what the guys inside the room think. If I knew more about the salary cap situation maybe we could move a prospect for more D help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopeleslyobvious Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 Does Biron have any trade value at this point? I know many have lobbied for a Kotalik trade but I'm wondering what the guys inside the room think. If I knew more about the salary cap situation maybe we could move a prospect for more D help. If Connolly comes back at all this year we don't have enough cap space to get an extra d-man. IMHO we have more than enough depth up front to trade a forward for a d-man. Biron is another option, but I would want to see the Sabres pick up another backup as well if Biron is moved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 Well said, dave. A lot to think about there. I don't know about anyone else, but I have a heckuva time finding man-games lost due to injury stats. Anyone have any luck? Short of going to each team's web site? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 If Connolly comes back at all this year we don't have enough cap space to get an extra d-man. IMHO we have more than enough depth up front to trade a forward for a d-man. Biron is another option, but I would want to see the Sabres pick up another backup as well if Biron is moved. Which forward would you trade? As I mentioned in another thread I think the only forwards that could possibly be traded are Kotalik, Roy, Pominville and Novotny and even these are highly unlikely. Kotalik is the only one making enough money such that his salary slot would accommodate a decent player in return, and I just don't see us trading Big Al for a #7 defenseman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodfella25 Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 Which forward would you trade? As I mentioned in another thread I think the only forwards that could possibly be traded are Kotalik, Roy, Pominville and Novotny and even these are highly unlikely. Kotalik is the only one making enough money such that his salary slot would accommodate a decent player in return, and I just don't see us trading Big Al for a #7 defenseman. I'm thinking Artem Kriukov :death: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 I'm thinking Artem Kriukov :death: As of August, he was stil considered a prospect...by someone. :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goodfella25 Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 As of August, he was stil considered a prospect...by someone. :blink: Oh baby, 1 goal and 3 points in 33 games last season in Russia...we gotta sign him up........maybe as a janitor at HSBC. DaveB, sorry for degenerating this into an Artem Kriukov thread :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 What I'll never understand is why Buffalo ever drafted him, especially in the first round? It seemed like he was written off 5 min after he was drated. Is he like Kalinin's long lost cousin or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.