... Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 If last night pissed you off, then you should find a new team because you're not going to get what you seem to think is "heart" out of this Sabres team. If you listened to the Lindy post game interview, then I think it should be clear that HE is the one who told them to not to respond. What was that prolonged conversation about between Lindy and the ref that Lindy wouldn't comment on? I'll bet dollars to donuts the ref told Lindy that "it was an accident: if you respond I'm throwing your players out of the game." Who did make an attempt? The Skill. What if The Skill would have been hurt while trying to get "our" revenge? What would you say then? What if the Sabres lost the game, while doing little more than making Gomez chuckle at "our" attempts at payback? Because you know at the first sign of trouble that guy would have been off the ice. It'd be stupid for Lindy to risk having more players injured in that game when already his #1 goalie and #1 forward are out. He seems to think they have a legit shot and that the playoffs are a more worthwhile goal - now- than anything else they can do. Remember that this was the culmination of an entire season of being soft, of allowing their goalies to be bumped and run. The book was written long before this game - how much of a point would have been made now that the damage is done; the book is closed? And what do pissed off fans do? What do you do with this anger of yours? Stop going to games, stop buying product, stop watching or listening to the games, beat your wife and kids - how exactly, other than through incessant bitching and moaning, which goes on all of the time anyway, how exactly do you get your point across to the team? Do you just become that much more miserable?
BamBam Posted February 22, 2009 Author Report Posted February 22, 2009 I have disagreed with Deluca on many occasions on this board. But, this may be the one, and only time, where I actually agree with him. The lack of response by the Sabres when Miller went down was heartless and gutless. The problem I have is not that they didn't respond, but this should have never happened in the first place. Dubinsky was running Miller all game long and the Sabres did not respond then. How could you expect them to respond after Miller gets hurt when they have been doing nothing all game long? Where is our captain? Where is Kaleta? Where are Mair and Goose? Where are the guys who are supposed to provide the grit on this team when our goalie, leader, and reason for doing so well this year goes down to injury? Why didn't anyone take a run at Lundqvist? This team did absolutely nothing. I can only hope that the players are angry now and do something about it, but knowing these Sabres, they will pretend like nothing happened, continue not defending their goalie and stay the course and come out flat in the next game. That seems to be how they always react to adversity is to come out flat in the next game. I hope the mentality of the Sabres have changed, but my guess would be no. I said the exact same thing only because as a player Lindy never put up for this. If someone ran our guys Lindy was one of the first to jump in. So I get the fact that he has to tell everyone in his presser that he needs the team to focus on the points, but you could tell that he was pissed, and felt sick about the win, and more importantly the lack of response. Maybe it was his call, maybe he is being a good company man, or maybe he is just trying to protect his guys from the fan/media backlash. Whatever it was...you could tell it was eating him up, and he was sick about it.
nucci Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 If last night pissed you off, then you should find a new team because you're not going to get what you seem to think is "heart" out of this Sabres team. If you listened to the Lindy post game interview, then I think it should be clear that HE is the one who told them to not to respond. What was that prolonged conversation about between Lindy and the ref that Lindy wouldn't comment on? I'll bet dollars to donuts the ref told Lindy that "it was an accident: if you respond I'm throwing your players out of the game." Who did make an attempt? The Skill. What if The Skill would have been hurt while trying to get "our" revenge? What would you say then? What if the Sabres lost the game, while doing little more than making Gomez chuckle at "our" attempts at payback? Because you know at the first sign of trouble that guy would have been off the ice. It'd be stupid for Lindy to risk having more players injured in that game when already his #1 goalie and #1 forward are out. He seems to think they have a legit shot and that the playoffs are a more worthwhile goal - now- than anything else they can do. Remember that this was the culmination of an entire season of being soft, of allowing their goalies to be bumped and run. The book was written long before this game - how much of a point would have been made now that the damage is done; the book is closed? And what do pissed off fans do? What do you do with this anger of yours? Stop going to games, stop buying product, stop watching or listening to the games, beat your wife and kids - how exactly, other than through incessant bitching and moaning, which goes on all of the time anyway, how exactly do you get your point across to the team? Do you just become that much more miserable? So we are not allowed to get pissed off anymore? We should not show any passion and just accept the way things are without reacting?
BamBam Posted February 22, 2009 Author Report Posted February 22, 2009 If last night pissed you off, then you should find a new team because you're not going to get what you seem to think is "heart" out of this Sabres team. I may be pissed or disappointed in a family member from time to time, but I don't go out and start disowning those people, and find new family. Same goes for being a fan. You're a fan of the team, and it comes with the good and the bad. Doesn't mean you can't point out areas of improvement or something that your dissatisfied with. I think many people are saying is that if we truly are the "Blue Collar" type team that the Execs of the Front Office have been claiming for years on end then start playing like it. Show some toughness, show that like people in WNY you have a spine and that you'll be there for your wingman. Nuff Said.
cilevel Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 I had thought so to. I consider this to be a significant game changer that took place tonight. I'd really like to know if guys like Mair, Rivet, Kaleta wanted to respond tonight. What about Goose? Everyone says this is our Gritty Leader who doesn't wear a letter. What was his take on this whole thing? Why didn't these guys respond. Watching part of the Leafs/Canucks game, and if someone breaths wrong on Luongo there are guys like Bieska out there that simply do not allow it. Why isn't that the same here? I agree, you watch any other team's games and you see them regularly protect their goaltender. In fact, the only team I know of that does not do this is, unfortunately, our Sabres.
... Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 I may be pissed or disappointed in a family member from time to time, but I don't go out and start disowning those people, and find new family. Same goes for being a fan. You're a fan of the team, and it comes with the good and the bad. Doesn't mean you can't point out areas of improvement or something that your dissatisfied with. I think many people are saying is that if we truly are the "Blue Collar" type team that the Execs of the Front Office have been claiming for years on end then start playing like it. Show some toughness, show that like people in WNY you have a spine and that you'll be there for your wingman. Nuff Said. But at what price? So they "get even" with Gomez, or run Lundqvist and someone else gets hurt, or someone gets a few games suspension, and they lose the game. What do they walk away with then? An injured goalie. THEY COULDN'T MAKE A STATEMENT LAST NIGHT EVEN IF THEY TRIED. THE BOOK WAS WRITTEN LONG BEFORE THE GAME. Any statement last night would have been "piss off the Sabres and they will dig themselves into a deeper hole". And then the "fans" would howl and moan about that. This is the team we have this season. Do you want them to make the playoffs? Lindy needed to make a choice and I agree with his decision - why risk the playoffs by doing "something" stupid; he kept his eyes on the prize. What I'm saying is that if these realities aren't acceptable then this Sabres team isn't the team for you. You might want to consider tuning them out until the beginning of next season because you will perpetually be disappointed. You don't choose family. You do choose the team you follow. But if you want to use the family member analogy - wouldn't you use a little more reason than people are showing here? How can you expect a family member to make the same decisions that you would make - especially in situations you weren't involved in and can only evaluate in hindsight? I bet you would give that person a lot more leeway. But if you don't, then what do you do - bitch about that family member to everyone else? Do you confront them through third parties (message boards and media) and tell them "what they need to do"? . The analogy doesn't work like you want it to. The way I see it Lindy had to make a choice: he was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. He decided to cut his losses and walk away with the points. At this point in the season, with the team that he has, that was the wisest choice to make despite not being the most palatable.
deluca67 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 Carp, I think you had it right in the GDT. We all had the benefit replays from every angle. The players on the ice were on the PK and didn't see it. And without replays in the arena the rest of them didn't know what happened. When they go back and watch the tape, I believe that they will see what he did and pay back SG in March. And Miller wasn't getting "run all game", as was stated earlier, any more than any goalie in every game. I call bullzhit on this one. The play happened where the puck was. The other guys on the ice weren't following the play? And if they didn't see the play they certainly saw Miller crawling back to the crease. There will be no pay back in March or at anytime. This team doesn't care enough to.
deluca67 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 But at what price? So they "get even" with Gomez, or run Lundqvist and someone else gets hurt, or someone gets a few games suspension, and they lose the game. What do they walk away with then? An injured goalie. THEY COULDN'T MAKE A STATEMENT LAST NIGHT EVEN IF THEY TRIED. THE BOOK WAS WRITTEN LONG BEFORE THE GAME. Any statement last night would have been "piss off the Sabres and they will dig themselves into a deeper hole". And then the "fans" would howl and moan about that. This is the team we have this season. Do you want them to make the playoffs? Lindy needed to make a choice and I agree with his decision - why risk the playoffs by doing "something" stupid; he kept his eyes on the prize. What I'm saying is that if these realities aren't acceptable then this Sabres team isn't the team for you. You might want to consider tuning them out until the beginning of next season because you will perpetually be disappointed. You don't choose family. You do choose the team you follow. But if you want to use the family member analogy - wouldn't you use a little more reason than people are showing here? How can you expect a family member to make the same decisions that you would make - especially in situations you weren't involved in and can only evaluate in hindsight? I bet you would give that person a lot more leeway. But if you don't, then what do you do - bitch about that family member to everyone else? Do you confront them through third parties (message boards and media) and tell them "what they need to do"? . The analogy doesn't work like you want it to. The way I see it Lindy had to make a choice: he was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. He decided to cut his losses and walk away with the points. At this point in the season, with the team that he has, that was the wisest choice to make despite not being the most palatable. This is just a another lame excuse for this team unwillingness to protect their own. Of course some will be happy with a team of pu$$ies. Some of us who have been here a lot longer remember the days when this franchise had some sack and the running of their goalie wouldn't have tolerated. What isn't acceptable is having a team unwilling to defend it's self and fans who defend such cowardice. Last night the franchise paid a heavy price for their continued cowardice.
NowDoYouBelieve Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 This is just a another lame excuse for this team unwillingness to protect their own. Of course some will be happy with a team of pu$$ies. Some of us who have been here a lot longer remember the days when this franchise had some sack and the running of their goalie wouldn't have tolerated. What isn't acceptable is having a team unwilling to defend it's self and fans who defend such cowardice. Last night the franchise paid a heavy price for their continued cowardice. You act as if the team has a long history of not standing up for its key players. Give me some other examples. I seem to remember a brawl with Ottawa. I also remember the game when Ovechkin shoved Briere into the boards. Gaustad and Mair got thrown out of that one. Seriously, what incidences besides last night would make you qualify the Sabres as being pu$$ies.
carpandean Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 I call bullzhit on this one. The play happened where the puck was. The other guys on the ice weren't following the play? And if they didn't see the play they certainly saw Miller crawling back to the crease. There will be no pay back in March or at anytime. This team doesn't care enough to. For the guys on the ice, they were definitely following the play, including following the puck when Miller sent it around the boards before being hit. Watch their heads and their reactions when the whistle is blown. They saw Miller crawling in the crease, but not why. Since Lydman, the only one who saw it first-hand wasn't pounding on Gomez, why would they assume that he deserved to be? For the rest of the guys on the bench, I'm sure most everyone saw the hit. Whether they thought it was intentional/dirty or not, only they know. Whether Lindy told them not to retaliate, again, only they know. In a two goal game, the only "safe" opportunity that they had would have been to put out Mair, Gaustad, Kaleta, Rivet and, I guess, Butler for the faceoff at 19:05. If they could have kept the Rangers from scoring for 30 or 40 seconds, then Gomez and/or Lundqvist could have been run by Kaleta and/or Mair (don't want anyone else in that group suspended.) Not sure what the Rangers would have done when those five came out to take a faceoff against Drury, Gomez, Dubinsky, Zherdev, Naslund and Redden. No doubt, a brawl would have ensued, but with those guys, that would have been OK for us, even though we would have been outnumbered (assuming Patty Lalime wouldn't have gotten into it against a skater ... actually, somebody probably would have gone after him.)
deluca67 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 You act as if the team has a long history of not standing up for its key players. Give me some other examples. I seem to remember a brawl with Ottawa. I also remember the game when Ovechkin shoved Briere into the boards. Gaustad and Mair got thrown out of that one. Seriously, what incidences besides last night would make you qualify the Sabres as being pu$$ies. Miller getting run against the Sens the other night and pretty much every other night over the past few seasons. The times this season when teams have taken runs at Vanek. How about after Connolly got knocked out this season? Clean hit or not other teams defend their players. The Sabres don't. The word is out on the Sabres and that's why Gomez went into Miller with no fear.
deluca67 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 For the guys on the ice, they were definitely following the play, including following the puck when Miller sent it around the boards before being hit. Watch their heads and their reactions when the whistle is blown. They saw Miller crawling in the crease, but not why. Since Lydman, the only one who saw it first-hand wasn't pounding on Gomez, why would they assume that he deserved to be? For the rest of the guys on the bench, I'm sure most everyone saw the hit. Whether they thought it was intentional/dirty or not, only they know. Whether Lindy told them not to retaliate, again, only they know. In a two goal game, the only "safe" opportunity that they had would have been to put out Mair, Gaustad, Kaleta, Rivet and, I guess, Butler for the faceoff at 19:05. If they could have kept the Rangers from scoring for 30 or 40 seconds, then Gomez and/or Lundqvist could have been run by Kaleta and/or Mair (don't want anyone else in that group suspended.) Not sure what the Rangers would have done when those five came out to take a faceoff against Drury, Gomez, Dubinsky, Zherdev, Naslund and Redden. No doubt, a brawl would have ensued, but with those guys, that would have been OK for us, even though we would have been outnumbered (assuming Patty Lalime wouldn't have gotten into it against a skater ... actually, somebody probably would have gone after him.) The score and time remaining is meaningless. It's always the excuse the Sabres use. There isn't one player on that roster I wouldn't gladly give up to a 10-20 game suspension in order to send a message league wide that running the Sabres goaltender will get your goalie knocked out of the game. You were right earlier, this should have been addressed 30 games ago. I'll go one further and say it should have have been addressed 4-5 years ago. Their unwillingness has cost them their most important player and at the most critical time of the year. They have no one to blame but themselves.
Buffalo Wings Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 My 2 cents.... I agree with Deluca and those who think the Sabres should have responded. I don't think they should have "responded" right away (during the PK), but once they went up 4-1, Gomez should have been considered fair game. I understand why they didn't. I know they usually don't respond to things like this and their "softness" prevails more often than not, but I wouldn't be surprised if Lindy spread the word to the bench to not take a run at Gomez. The Sabres had control of the game and there's no reason to even risk taking a penalty to give the Rags an advantage. I'd like to see some business taken care of on March 21st, but they probably won't....but not necessarily because they're soft. They may be in a more precarious position in the standings in a month to risk losing a game, so I don't expect it for that reason unless they're leading comfortably in that game. As for Gomez, I have zero doubt that he intentionally tried to run into Miller, but I doubt he meant to injure him. Outside of names like Chris Neil or Darcy Tucker, I don't know many hockey players who intend to injure another. But because Miller is injured because of this, I'd be calling the league to review the whole thing (yes, I know they wouldn't do anything).
darksabre Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 I'm glad Miller is hurt. Now we get to see Lalime for a while and this team's true weaknesses will come through. I think Patty is solid, but he's no Miller. When this team screws up, we'll know it, because Lalime wont be able to bail them out as well as Miller. Anyone who is calling for trades, this is going to be the time to see who really is the problem on this team.
nucci Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 I'm glad Miller is hurt. Now we get to see Lalime for a while and this team's true weaknesses will come through. I think Patty is solid, but he's no Miller. When this team screws up, we'll know it, because Lalime wont be able to bail them out as well as Miller. Anyone who is calling for trades, this is going to be the time to see who really is the problem on this team. You're glad Miller is hurt?
deluca67 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 I'm glad Miller is hurt. Now we get to see Lalime for a while and this team's true weaknesses will come through. I think Patty is solid, but he's no Miller. When this team screws up, we'll know it, because Lalime wont be able to bail them out as well as Miller. Anyone who is calling for trades, this is going to be the time to see who really is the problem on this team. Here's hoping that Lalime can muster up some good goaltending. The Sabres only have three games until the deadline. If Lalime drops all three it can change the Sabres plans at the deadline. If they have any.
Bmwolf21 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 I'm glad Miller is hurt. Now we get to see Lalime for a while and this team's true weaknesses will come through. I think Patty is solid, but he's no Miller. When this team screws up, we'll know it, because Lalime wont be able to bail them out as well as Miller. Anyone who is calling for trades, this is going to be the time to see who really is the problem on this team. I'd like to propose a ban on anyone calling Lalime "Patty." I read "Patty" and I think of LaLa, not a backup goalie. JUst like when I see someone write about LT I think Lawrence Taylor, not Tomlinson. Not calling you out, just yours was the latest example I saw of this. You're glad Miller is hurt? I wonder about that, but I doubt he means he's glad Miller is hurt, more like he's glad we get to see a better picture of the Sabres' play and defensive coverage without their security blanket back there to bail them out. I hope no one ever hopes for an injury to a Sabre.
Buffalo Wings Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 I wonder about that, but I doubt he means he's glad Miller is hurt, more like he's glad we get to see a better picture of the Sabres' play and defensive coverage without their security blanket back there to bail them out. I hope no one ever hopes for an injury to a Sabre. I had the same reaction to his comment, but I knew what he meant. I was thinking last night that now it's time to actually play good defense in front of our goalie, which may help down the stretch.
FogBat Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 You can criticize DeLuca all you want. I don't always agree with him but he is right about this. You do not let the opponent touch your goalie! It is very simple. Even if the response is a shove, push, cross-check, whatever. You let the other team know to stay away from the goalie. What would Korab, Playfair , or Mike Ramsey have done? IIRC, wasn't that a time when the Instigator Rule didn't exist?
Stoner Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 IIRC, wasn't that a time when the Instigator Rule didn't exist? Ah, yes, Pre-Instigator Rule. When respect for fellow player was so high! Sigh.
darksabre Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 Here's hoping that Lalime can muster up some good goaltending. The Sabres only have three games until the deadline. If Lalime drops all three it can change the Sabres plans at the deadline. If they have any. I wonder about that, but I doubt he means he's glad Miller is hurt, more like he's glad we get to see a better picture of the Sabres' play and defensive coverage without their security blanket back there to bail them out. I hope no one ever hopes for an injury to a Sabre. I had the same reaction to his comment, but I knew what he meant. I was thinking last night that now it's time to actually play good defense in front of our goalie, which may help down the stretch. I'm glad you guys all get where I'm coming from. I'm not happy our franchise goalie is hurt, but I think it's good for the team that they wont be able to rely on goaltending to get them to the playoffs.
nucci Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 I'd like to propose a ban on anyone calling Lalime "Patty." I read "Patty" and I think of LaLa, not a backup goalie. JUst like when I see someone write about LT I think Lawrence Taylor, not Tomlinson. Not calling you out, just yours was the latest example I saw of this. I wonder about that, but I doubt he means he's glad Miller is hurt, more like he's glad we get to see a better picture of the Sabres' play and defensive coverage without their security blanket back there to bail them out. I hope no one ever hopes for an injury to a Sabre. Figured that. I guess I'm just pissed he's hurt. However, we all see how they play with Miller in net. We are just fortunate to have him in there. The main reason this team is where they are is because of Miller. I don't expect them to play any different than they have all year.
deluca67 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 Figured that. I guess I'm just pissed he's hurt. However, we all see how they play with Miller in net. We are just fortunate to have him in there. The main reason this team is where they are is because of Miller. I don't expect them to play any different than they have all year. Why would they? Another angle on this whole mess is that the Sabres missed a real opporntunity to have one of the moments where they come together as a team. Coming to the defense of their goalie regardless of the costs. That final 19 minutes of the game should have lasted three hours.
nucci Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 I'm glad you guys all get where I'm coming from. I'm not happy our franchise goalie is hurt, but I think it's good for the team that they wont be able to rely on goaltending to get them to the playoffs. All teams rely on their goaltending. If you don't have it you lose.
SabreInFla Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 All teams rely on their goaltending. If you don't have it you lose. Good call........name a team that doesn't rely on goal tending to win.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.