bob_sauve28 Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 In my opinion, it's tough to justify keeping him, especially at his current cap hit or more for future years. However, he's an amazing talent when healthy. I think what will most likely happen is that the Sabres will let Kotalik and Max walk at the end of the year (if not sooner through trade), and they will try to re-sign Connolly to a one year deal at $1 million. If they do that, then I'm fine with keeping him. I just don't see how you can give the guy another long term deal without him proving that he can play a full season healthy. And, he owes the Sabres after taking $8.7 million. My hunch is that Gerbe and Mancari will be with the Sabres next year and that Kennedy will likely start in the AHL to further his transition to playing center. If they don't re-sign Connolly, then that tells me Kennedy is ready to be an NHL level centerman after only playing one year in his career at center, which I'd be a little concerned about. I also think this is Drew Stafford's last season with the Sabres as someone will sign him to an offer sheet way more than he's worth, and the extra money will likely go to giving Connolly another shot with the team is my guess. Of course, Connelly could just wait it out and see what his offers are at the end of the season. I'm sure someone would be willing to throw 6 million a year at him. That would not surprise me at all. No way to we pay that or anything near that. I think we are seeing the last of Timmy this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 It's been a while since I've been a good contrarian. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your analysis here, just the tendency we ALL have of breaking down plays in an unrealistic fashion. Hockey is an insane asylum unleashed on ice. The game takes a schizo turn every two seconds. It's a frozen puck on ice! Pucks can go anywhere, off almost anything. Pucks can go through the side of the net and be counted as goals, and it happens so fast no one can do a damn thing about it. We all want every Sabre to be in the perfect position every moment they are on the ice. But they can't be everywhere at once and can't predict where that puck is going next. It's madness. A player can't move 30 feet in half a second. Only Harry Neale has mastered the space-time continuum -- pucks from 45 feet away have to travel only 20 feet to enter the net. Not even sure where I'm going with this. You might be spot on with your analysis. I just think in general we are all guilty of thinking hockey is football or basketball where everything can be drawn up and diagrammed. It's not and that's why you need your goaltender to make saves in impossible situations. That's true of every goalie in the league. Even the Wings can't prevent a certain number of glorious chances. If your goalie stops a certain percentage of impossible chances -- and an even greater percentage in crunch time -- then you have something. It's like criticizing the Sabres for not working hard for 60 minutes. It's a crock. There is another team on the ice. Carolina started the game last night with its hair on fire to break a four game losing streak. They were hell bent to come back in the third. Were the Sabres not trying? What people like DeLuca are really responding to is a stretch in a game where one team is outplaying the other. It's going to happen half a dozen times a night, at least. The 60-minute effort is an urban legend. A-FREAKIN-MEN... Last night was a great win by the Sabres.. They fend off a desperate team to start the game, get a 3-0 lead and then defend the zone for the win. In the midst of that, they had some glorious chances, Vanek, Roy and Rivet, to score the knock out punch. Sure they left a puck right in the crease. It happens. I'm with you PA. There is way too much anticipation of playing 60 minutes of hockey. I've said repeatedly that I don't believe you can. The other team has a lot to say about how things go. If at the end of the night you out chance your opponent and don't take stupid penalties then you'll win more than you will lose. The great part of sports is that humans play it and make great decisions and bad decisions in a split second. We tend to overlook the bad ones when things are going well and focus on them when things are going bad. Every player on the ice makes good and bad decisions. If it was predictable, no one would watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 It's like criticizing the Sabres for not working hard for 60 minutes. It's a crock. There is another team on the ice. Carolina started the game last night with its hair on fire to break a four game losing streak. They were hell bent to come back in the third. Were the Sabres not trying? What people like DeLuca are really responding to is a stretch in a game where one team is outplaying the other. It's going to happen half a dozen times a night, at least. The 60-minute effort is an urban legend. This is probably my #1 pet peeve here. For some, it is like the Sabres exist in a vacuum and only they dictate the flow of the game. No one else is allowed to apply pressure, no one else is allowed to "work hard", no one else is allowed to play with passion or desperation. The entire pace/flow of the game is only dictated by our guys and the the other team is just along for the ride. Urban legend indeed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 This is probably my #1 pet peeve here. For some, it is like the Sabres exist in a vacuum and only they dictate the flow of the game. No one else is allowed to apply pressure, no one else is allowed to "work hard", no one else is allowed to play with passion or desperation. The entire pace/flow of the game is only dictated by our guys and the the other team is just along for the ride. Urban legend indeed... I wouldn't say that it is entirely an urban legend. There have been some games where they skated slowly, didn't backcheck with any urgency and let up every time that they could have battled for a puck. That's not entirely the other team dictating play. Some of that is, actually, not giving full effort. The best teams don't do this as often and certainly not seemingly as a team (not just one or two players.) However, I will agree that every loss leads to someone posting "not a 60 minute effort" even when the other team does apply the pressure and dictates play. There are teams that are better than the Sabres. There are games where a desperate opponent plays with extra effort and dictates play. It happens to every team. You can lose games where you play hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 It's been a while since I've been a good contrarian. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your analysis here, just the tendency we ALL have of breaking down plays in an unrealistic fashion. Hockey is an insane asylum unleashed on ice. The game takes a schizo turn every two seconds. It's a frozen puck on ice! Pucks can go anywhere, off almost anything. Pucks can go through the side of the net and be counted as goals, and it happens so fast no one can do a damn thing about it. We all want every Sabre to be in the perfect position every moment they are on the ice. But they can't be everywhere at once and can't predict where that puck is going next. It's madness. A player can't move 30 feet in half a second. Only Harry Neale has mastered the space-time continuum -- pucks from 45 feet away have to travel only 20 feet to enter the net. Not even sure where I'm going with this. You might be spot on with your analysis. I just think in general we are all guilty of thinking hockey is football or basketball where everything can be drawn up and diagrammed. It's not and that's why you need your goaltender to make saves in impossible situations. That's true of every goalie in the league. Even the Wings can't prevent a certain number of glorious chances. If your goalie stops a certain percentage of impossible chances -- and an even greater percentage in crunch time -- then you have something. It's like criticizing the Sabres for not working hard for 60 minutes. It's a crock. There is another team on the ice. Carolina started the game last night with its hair on fire to break a four game losing streak. They were hell bent to come back in the third. Were the Sabres not trying? What people like DeLuca are really responding to is a stretch in a game where one team is outplaying the other. It's going to happen half a dozen times a night, at least. The 60-minute effort is an urban legend. Not disagreeing with you -- there is a lot of chaos on the ice, and in Buffalo probably moreso, given Lindy's penchant for throwing lines together on the fly. Throw in the defensive injuries causing mishmash D-pairings, and it's not real surprising that there are defensive breakdowns (and a lack of offensive chemistry). I'm just saying that on that play, there were a couple defensive breakdowns (mostly by Spacek, which is unusual) that really put Carolina in a good position to get a goal, and that's what happened. This one just stuck in my mind because as soon as I saw Spacek's neutral-zone turnover I knew that play was going to be trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Lindy's penchant for throwing lines together on the fly. Lindy mentioned in one presser that the media guys don't get to see the reports that the team gets on upcoming opponents, but he said that most other teams change lines before and during almost every game, too. Injuries, matchups and who's hot/cold all lead to changes, not just on the Sabres. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Lindy mentioned in one presser that the media guys don't get to see the reports that the team gets on upcoming opponents, but he said that most other teams change lines before and during almost every game, too. Injuries, matchups and who's hot/cold all lead to changes, not just on the Sabres. Since I didn't see the presser and honestly don't see enough of other teams regularly, I really can't comment on that either way. It just seems that the Sabres do a lot of shuffling - sometimes from shift to shift - and I wonder if some guys would be more effective and productive if they had regular linemates and d-pairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Since I didn't see the presser and honestly don't see enough of other teams regularly, I really can't comment on that either way. It just seems that the Sabres do a lot of shuffling - sometimes from shift to shift - and I wonder if some guys would be more effective and productive if they had regular linemates and d-pairs. And Lindy did say after the game he wants to keep Vanek-Connolly-Kotalik and Hecht-Roy-Pominville together for awhile. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 This is probably my #1 pet peeve here. For some, it is like the Sabres exist in a vacuum and only they dictate the flow of the game. No one else is allowed to apply pressure, no one else is allowed to "work hard", no one else is allowed to play with passion or desperation. The entire pace/flow of the game is only dictated by our guys and the the other team is just along for the ride. Urban legend indeed... It's not just here. That line of thinking is everywhere. The Sharks or Bruins only lose when they're not motivated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cereal Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Just watched my recording of the game... I thought every member of the defense played very well in our own zone, especially right in front of Miller, getting physical, whacking away those rebounds before the Canes could get to 'em. Also, it was awesome to see some aggressive forechecking by our forwards. Got Carolina to give the puck away several times. I think we played one of our more physical games last night, and it was fun to watch! Cheers! :beer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foligno's Nose Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Zagrapan, Schutz, Slattengren, Fretter, and Gerbe Sounds like an F'd up Law firm. Hurt in a car?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 And Lindy did say after the game he wants to keep Vanek-Connolly-Kotalik and Hecht-Roy-Pominville together for awhile. We'll see. Was that last night or after Dallas? During one of the interviews after Dallas but before Carolina, I remember him saying something about how they seemed to be working well, so we'll try them for a while. Basically, we'll use them until they don't work and then we'll change them up again. Not super committal, by any means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foligno's Nose Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 And Lindy did say after the game he wants to keep Vanek-Connolly-Kotalik and Hecht-Roy-Pominville together for awhile. We'll see. Doesn't make sense to me to leave Stafford off one of these lines - simply based on the way he has been playing lately. I feel he is deserving to be a top-six forward. Kotalik? Too hot and cold. Bring him off the third line for PP's and SO's. That's it for me. His point slap shot on PP's is one of my favorite things they should set-up to a fault when up a man. I guess Pittsburgh is interested in keeping pace with the lower seeds in the East. 3 - 0 Penguins in the 2nd. Emrick not one of my faves, but what choice do you have. Plus McGuire is all over Milbury today - pretty funny stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InRodWeTrust Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Grats on the win. That was the best game effort by the Canes in a long time. Damn that Ryan Miller guy! We'll get ya next time, or maybe the time after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Grats on the win. That was the best game effort by the Canes in a long time. Damn that Ryan Miller guy! We'll get ya next time, or maybe the time after that. Really? They look like a team without much jump altogether. Except for maybe the Walker line, it looks like a team playing in their heads. Or maybe just adjusting to Maurice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Was that last night or after Dallas? During one of the interviews after Dallas but before Carolina, I remember him saying something about how they seemed to be working well, so we'll try them for a while. Basically, we'll use them until they don't work and then we'll change them up again. Not super committal, by any means. My mind has been malfunctioning lately, but I would bet a hundred clams it was last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 Of course, Connelly could just wait it out and see what his offers are at the end of the season. I'm sure someone would be willing to throw 6 million a year at him. That would not surprise me at all. No way to we pay that or anything near that. I think we are seeing the last of Timmy this year. You really would not be surprised if some team offered Connolly $6M per year?? How could you sell that to the owner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 Of course, Connelly could just wait it out and see what his offers are at the end of the season. I'm sure someone would be willing to throw 6 million a year at him. That would not surprise me at all. No way to we pay that or anything near that. I think we are seeing the last of Timmy this year. You really would not be surprised if some team offered Connolly $6M per year?? How could you sell that to the owner? You beat me to it, although I was going to ask it a bit more rudely -- something like "are you on drugs?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.