Injuries a crutch?

[smallmarketguy]

How could that be? is this guy crazy?

 

http://www.niagara-gazette.com/sabres/gnns...eyword=topstory

[inkman]

(takes off blue and gold lenses) I thought the article was spot on.

[LoveAndWarrener]

(takes off blue and gold lenses) I thought the article was spot on.

.

Gaustad, Paille and Mair would not all play if healthy, and Andrew Peters would be sitting in the same seat he’s filling while injured.

Oh really? Since when has Gaustad missed a game when healthy? And when he is, No. 28 doesn't make any more difference than the others? The Gazette is a joke and this guy just cemented my opinion.

[X. Benedict]

.

 

Oh really? Since when has Gaustad missed a game when healthy? And when he is, No. 28 doesn't make any more difference than the others? The Gazette is a joke and this guy just cemented my opinion.

 

I guess he thinks Mair is out- and that Ryan and McArthur would play instead of Paille and Gaustad.

 

Bullocks.

[Rock DJ]

(takes off blue and gold lenses) I thought the article was spot on.

 

Totally. I've made this case many times many times where they take periods off.

This is NOT to bash. Just to make the point that it's a long season and lapses will happen. But they need to do a better job of minimizing those as they head into the playoff run.

[nucci]

One loss in the last 10 games or so and this is the reaction. What happens when they lose a playoff game ?

[inkman]

Since when has Gaustad missed a game when healthy? And when he is, No. 28 doesn't make any more difference than the others? The Gazette is a joke and this guy just cemented my opinion.

I don't give much crediblity to this fish-wrap but I didn't find this article represetantive of it's usual horrible content. I didn't think he was referring to Gaustad sitting but the others.

[Rock DJ]

One loss in the last 10 games or so and this is the reaction. What happens when they lose a playoff game ?

 

There's nothing in here that says they aren't winning or can't win. They have lapses, plain and simple. Don't make it out to be more than what it is.

[Wraith]

This guy generally writes pretty well when it comes to the Sabres. However, he is known for some very strange logic occasionally. See any of his articles regarding J.P. Losman and the Bills to see what I'm talking about. I think the problem with this article is that he is taking a very strange leap of logic, one he usually reserves for football.

 

First off, he makes it seem like the Sabres themselves have made injuries an issue and are now trying to use it as an excuse. Have the Sabres commented at all about their injury situation, besides giving status updates and predictions for return? The only comments I've seen were from Regier saying the injuries forced his hand at the trade deadline. It was hardly an attempt to use injuries as an excuse for bad play on the ice. The media and the fans certainly talk about the injury situation, but even then I haven't seen excuses. I'd call it more like marveling at the continued success despite the injures.

 

Secondly, he spends an undue amount of time focusing on how a few of the injured come from the lower end of the Sabres talent spectrum and have been adequately replaced. He nevers mentions the fact that losing Max, Ales, Drury, Jaro (and Connolly) is a significant loss with or without the loss of supposedly interchangeable parts Gaustad, Peters and Paille. He says the 8 or 9 regulars injured figure is "exagerated" but he neglects to mention that it's the media that is doing the exagerating not the team. Again, show me where the team has pointed to the number of injured as an excuse.

 

The Sabres played slow, or soft, or both yesterday. That is true. But what makes this article so poor is: A) The timing, and B) The attempt to couple it with the injury situation. This was the first game in three weeks where the intensity level was ramped up to the maximum. If anything, the injuries have caused the Sabres to play at a much higher intensity level. The fact that he tries to say the Sabres are trying to explain away their low intensity last night due to injury is what boggles my mind.

 

If he wanted to write about the lack of intensity last night, he would have been much better off leaving the injury situation unmentioned.

 

P.S. - The fact that he thinks Gaustad is an interchangeable part really makes me doubt his overall hockey knowledge.

[smallmarketguy]

I don't agree with some of this article, but I kind of agree with the Gaustad thing. He is a VERY solid role player. Very solid. But he was sixth or seventh round pick, right? He's never going to score 25 goals in this league. Ever. He's great for energy and clogs up the front of the net, but beyond that?

[wjag]

Totally. I've made this case many times many times where they take periods off.

This is NOT to bash. Just to make the point that it's a long season and lapses will happen. But they need to do a better job of minimizing those as they head into the playoff run.

I just don't think it is possible to play 60 minutes every night for 98 games + preseason. There isn't a fan base in an any sport that doesn't make this statement about playing 60 minutes. Every team takes plays off, shifts off and games off. You just can't be on all the time.

 

nonetheless....

 

That wasn't the problem last night. The problem was the AVs. They shut down every centering pass, every attempt to cross the blue line, every dump in. They were more physical. They played harder or smarter last night than the Sabres did. Plain and simple. They were the better team last night in all facets of the game. It was a total and complete beat down.

 

Let's take a positive out of it. At least it prepares us for playing the next two games.

[hopeleslyobvious]

I just don't think it is possible to play 60 minutes every night for 98 games + preseason. There isn't a fan base in an any sport that doesn't make this statement about playing 60 minutes. Every team takes plays off, shifts off and games off. You just can't be on all the time.

 

nonetheless....

 

That wasn't the problem last night. The problem was the AVs. They shut down every centering pass, every attempt to cross the blue line, every dump in. They were more physical. They played harder or smarter last night than the Sabres did. Plain and simple. They were the better team last night in all facets of the game. It was a total and complete beat down.

 

Let's take a positive out of it. At least it prepares us for playing the next two games.

 

You're dead on that it was the Avs. There was a huge difference in how the game looked when the Sabres were winning and when it was tied compared to when the Avs had the lead.

 

If Minnesota and NJ gets leads on us, Friday and Saturday are going to look exactly the same. If the Sabres can get a couple early, the games will look much different.

[Stoner]

As usual, Schmitt nailed it. Best Sabres writer out there, IMHO. He's just saying what everyone here will be saying if this particular weakness costs us in the playoffs. Call him Paul Revere.

[X. Benedict]

I don't agree with some of this article, but I kind of agree with the Gaustad thing. He is a VERY solid role player. Very solid. But he was sixth or seventh round pick, right? He's never going to score 25 goals in this league. Ever. He's great for energy and clogs up the front of the net, but beyond that?

 

face-offs

[shrader]

I don't give much crediblity to this fish-wrap but I didn't find this article represetantive of it's usual horrible content. I didn't think he was referring to Gaustad sitting but the others.

 

I didn't read the whole article, but that quote mentioned before says that Gaustad, Mair and Paille would not all play if healthy. All it takes to make that true is for one guy to be a healthy scratch, not all three.

[apuszczalowski]

As usual, Schmitt nailed it. Best Sabres writer out there, IMHO. He's just saying what everyone here will be saying if this particular weakness costs us in the playoffs. Call him Paul Revere.

Exactly, I think we have booth said it before, at times people make this team out to be better then it really is (and thats not taking a shot at the Sabres, they are one of the best teams in the league). The problem is, sometimes they just seem to try to coast through a game and expect something to happen that will get them the win later on. Yesterday the Av's came to get some respect, and get a win. And they did just that, which is kind of embarrassing considering the top team in the league has been off since Saturday, and they lost to a team that has played 2 games (one the night before) during that time period and they should have been the tired ones taking a period off.

[Wraith]

As usual, Schmitt nailed it. Best Sabres writer out there, IMHO. He's just saying what everyone here will be saying if this particular weakness costs us in the playoffs. Call him Paul Revere.

 

You think he's correct in his assertion that the Sabres are using injuries as an excuse to not play a complete game? Really? Wow.

[inkman]

You think he's correct in his assertion that the Sabres are using injuries as an excuse to not play a complete game? Really? Wow.

Nobody but you has said that.

[Bmwolf21]

Schmitt is correct in his assertation that injuries should not be an excuse for poor effort; however the way he presented that nugget o' wisdom made it appear that the Sabres were using the injuries as an excuse for one poor game in the last ten.

[deluca67]

Why would anyone read the Niagara Gazette? You have a computer. You can search out the best hockey writers in the world. :doh:

[Wraith]

Nobody but you has said that.

 

Please show me where I've said "that." PA thought Schmitt "nailed it." I am surprised, considering Schmitt's main point seems to be that the Sabres will try to use injuries as an excuse for one flat game in their last ten or more. The title of his article says it all, but let's assume Schmitt didn't choose the title and go with what appears in the body. He devotes the first three paragraphs to a discussion of the Sabres interchangeable parts and then comes right out with:

 

"The excuse that Buffalo had nine regulars out of the lineup, or whatever the exaggerated number was heading into Wednesday?s lone date with the Colorado Avalanche, is incorrect."

 

As if the Sabres themselves had quoted an injury number and then tried it out as an excuse. It doesn't fly. Schmitt was illogical to try to link the bad performance on Wednesday night with the injury situation at all. I've already written a post above in this thread about why it was illogical. But suffice it to say, if he used his second to last paragraph:

 

"With the playoffs approaching, Buffalo needs to learn to play three periods, rather than using minutes of momentum to put teams away, no matter who?s on Ruff?s lineup card."

 

As his first paragraph, and totally omitted the "injury excuse" tangent he goes off on (or in this case, starts off on), he would've had a good article. Instead, the article flops. Given that, I have a hard time seeing how Schmitt "nailed it."

[inkman]

You think he's correct in his assertion that the Sabres are using injuries as an excuse to not play a complete game? Really? Wow.

here

 

So set aside the excuse that Buffalo is still without half its roster for a second and it?s easier to focus on the fact that Buffalo still, despite its lofty spot atop the Eastern Conference, rarely plays with intensity for 60 minutes. Because of their aptitude for scoring in bunches, the Sabres seem to float through large sections each night, using Ryan Miller as the ultimate get-out-of-jail-free card.

 

I thought this was the main point of the article, but what do I know.

[Wraith]

here

 

So set aside the excuse that Buffalo is still without half its roster for a second and it?s easier to focus on the fact that Buffalo still, despite its lofty spot atop the Eastern Conference, rarely plays with intensity for 60 minutes. Because of their aptitude for scoring in bunches, the Sabres seem to float through large sections each night, using Ryan Miller as the ultimate get-out-of-jail-free card.

 

I thought this was the main point of the article, but what do I know.

 

Going back to the main points of my two lengthy points in this topic:

 

1) Why even mention the fact that the SABRES may try to use the injuries as an excuse? Whether or not he intended to, he definitely IMPLIED that the SABRES (not the fans or the media) will try to use injuries as an excuse. If he's trying to prevent readers from dismissing his point altogether using the "it's the injuries" excuse, come right out and say that. Instead, a lot of readers dismiss his point altogether because he sounds like he is trying to blame the excuse. It's very odd.

 

2) The timing of the article is horrible. If he had written this exact article in the first week of February, without mentioning injuries, he would've been DEAD on. Instead he writes it after the Sabres come out flat for the first time in weeks. Let's be real here, the Sabres got by on INTENSITY ALONE for a week and a half. The come out flat once and suddenly it's back to the "they're incapable of playing 'up' for an entire game" line of thought.

 

Count me in the camp that blamed a lack of intensity for a bad January. Count me in the camp that is very interested in seeing how much intensity we play with when the scrappy minor leaguers are back in the scrappy minor leagues. But also count me in the camp that says it's impossible to play "up" for every game of an 82 game season, or even 11 out of 11 games.

 

I just this think this author failed to get across what could've been a very valid point because: A poor title; A poor tangent about injuries; Poor timing. Given that, I really can't see how this article is worthwhile at all. Certainly not "nailed it" status.

[Stoner]

here

 

So set aside the excuse that Buffalo is still without half its roster for a second and it's easier to focus on the fact that Buffalo still, despite its lofty spot atop the Eastern Conference, rarely plays with intensity for 60 minutes. Because of their aptitude for scoring in bunches, the Sabres seem to float through large sections each night, using Ryan Miller as the ultimate get-out-of-jail-free card.

 

I thought this was the main point of the article, but what do I know.

 

 

Inkman, you nailed it.

[wnyguy]

I gotta agree with this columnist. It sure looked like the Sabres used injuries as an excuse to coast through two games in Toronto and at home against the Canadians last weekend. Two teams fighting for their playoff lives and what do we do? Coast.