Lethbridge Broncos Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 GREAT article by jerry sullivan today. he is dead on. lydman and tallinder were on the ice when it happened. they were fine with it -- not even a comment to gomex. TIM CONNOLY actually went after gomez later in the game. YES, TIM CONNOLY -- the new leader of this club. he actually gave gomez a facewash --- pretty funny. EVERYONE on the league, for the last 12 seasons, knows that the sabres are soft down low. that is why they added Rivet -- to police this stuff. RUFF is to blame a little. while he may be mad at what happened, he kept playing -- after in injury -- tallidner and lydman on gomez (as they were marking him for the game). but lindy should have switched over to rivet or spacek and let them take a run at gomez. ruff or maybe james patrick left the two pussies out there -- and they refused to settle the personal score. BTW, paille was a MAN last night. the guy is drilling guys and causing all types of hell out there. he is a lot of fun to watch when he plays like this. he has an identity now -- and he is relishing in it. good for him. his confidence is back -- and he is engaged and showing great emotion and leadership. ABOUT FUKING TIME! he is not a finese player -- he is a lunchpal forechecker -- and he finally figured that out. GREAT GREAT!
darksabre Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 All teams rely on their goaltending. If you don't have it you lose. Yes, I know. But we rely on it so much more. This goes back all the way to the Hasek days. Some teams can win games with average goaltending. Just look at how many backup goalies we make look like stars. The goal here with Lalime is to hold teams to much less shots, and don't give them anything but the outside. This team has a habit of playing soft D and letting teams simply walk in and shoot from wherever they want. Good teams don't let you do that. Just look at New Jersey winning games without Brodeur.
nucci Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 Yes, I know. But we rely on it so much more. This goes back all the way to the Hasek days. Some teams can win games with average goaltending. Just look at how many backup goalies we make look like stars. The goal here with Lalime is to hold teams to much less shots, and don't give them anything but the outside. This team has a habit of playing soft D and letting teams simply walk in and shoot from wherever they want. Good teams don't let you do that. Just look at New Jersey winning games without Brodeur. I see your point but unfortunately this is the team we have. We do not win without good goaltending. We are not good enough but I have seen average teams go far with great goalies.....Hasek. I don't have too much hope without Miller. We can really use Vanek back soon.
darksabre Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 I see your point but unfortunately this is the team we have. We do not win without good goaltending. We are not good enough but I have seen average teams go far with great goalies.....Hasek. I don't have too much hope without Miller. We can really use Vanek back soon. This we can agree on. I also don't see much hope for this team without Miller. What I do hope is that maybe, just maybe, this will open managements eyes to some of the glaring problems on this team that need to be fixed. Whether at the trade deadline or in the off season, the point is that this may be a blessing in disguise for the future of this team. Might it ruin our playoff chances? Yeah. Could it make us a better team next season? Here's hoping.
NowDoYouBelieve Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 Good call........name a team that doesn't rely on goal tending to win. The Red Wings. Osgood has been simply awful this year, arguably the worst goaltender in the NHL. Conklin has been good, but has faltered lately too.
stenbaro 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. Everyone here was hoping for Max to get hurt..lol
deluca67 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 Everyone here was hoping for Max to get hurt..lol Max who? :huh:
Lethbridge Broncos Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 sometimes, adversity creates greatness. it is an odd thing in nature adn in life (not to get too deep here). but if the sabres can fight their collective way out of these injuries (and get miller and vanek back) -- they will be a stronger club -- as a whole. if they can rally around lalime (the frank reich theory) -- and guys like paille keep playing well to offset the vanek injury on the left wing -- they might make some hay if they can keep palying a few games above %500. gaustad back is a huge lift. he is a HUGE part of this team -- not always on the score sheet. he is becoming a presence. what a nice story that young man is. all in all, the sabres beat two crap teams -- the leafs are about as good as nichols high school. and the ranger are shitting the bed on the road. so, we will see what happens when they play the ducks -- and watch for parros v. peters. should be GREAT I see your point but unfortunately this is the team we have. We do not win without good goaltending. We are not good enough but I have seen average teams go far with great goalies.....Hasek. I don't have too much hope without Miller. We can really use Vanek back soon.
R_Dudley Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 In the box? :nana: Seriously, though, I don't question the grit of any of those players. All of them (especially Rivet, Goose and Maire) have shown that they need little reason to drop the gloves, much less a big one like this. If I had to guess, Lindy made a judgment call that, given Miller might be out for a while, those two points were critical and told them not to retaliate. I'm torn on that call, but as others have pointed out, the time to stop this was 30 games ago. Unless they drastically rise or fall in the standings, they will spend the rest of the season on such a fine cusp that every game will be critical. Yep, QFT. 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. Ya know I've always prescribed to the "ask for forgiveness not permission model" myself and I think this is one of those instances he would have defended/accepted his boy's responding even though as a coach if asked he'd have to say No. This is one of those if you have to ask then you don't get it. :rolleyes: 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. Really then it was the the witness protection program not the family intervention that sent you to the desert? :blink: Gotcha :nana: 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. As usual your right on it wolfman. Hey if the team as comprised doesn't have what it takes nows the time to find out rather than the classic High school tease comeon for a short playoff run, it's really that simple for me. Although if believed as Deluca has stated in other posts, the true red blooded american loves the tease. :rolleyes:
nucci Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 IIRC, wasn't that a time when the Instigator Rule didn't exist? Oh yeah, forgot about that wonderful rule.
BamBam Posted February 22, 2009 Author Report Posted February 22, 2009 Really then it was the the witness protection program not the family intervention that sent you to the desert? :blink: Nice... Witness Protection huh? I'm 100% Innocent! :thumbsup:
R_Dudley Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 Nice... Witness Protection huh? I'm 100% Innocent! :thumbsup: I thought so, why else would you leave the lovely shores of lake Erie for the sands of El coupa Chabra. ;)
Bmwolf21 Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 Everyone here was hoping for Max to get hurt..lol Not seriously hurt, just banged up enough to keep him out of the lineup. ;)
el_Polako Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 Who's fault is it? NHL's for allowing teams to rattle Miller and run into him? Gomez for hitting Miller? or the BUFFALO SABRES for not doing jack all season long about players just going after Miller. If getting to Miller get's him off his game why should anyone stop doing it? especially if they are allowed to get away with it....
darksabre Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 Just on a sort of related note, anyone else notice the Sabres stand up for Lalime a lot more than Miller?
deluca67 Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 Just on a sort of related note, anyone else notice the Sabres stand up for Lalime a lot more than Miller? When? Lalime got ran into shortly after Miller did. All the players on the ice did was cry to the refs.
darksabre Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 When? Lalime got ran into shortly after Miller did. All the players on the ice did was cry to the refs. Maybe not in this game (I didn't see it) but in other games I've seen players get rowdy around Lalime. I think generally Lalime is just angrier than Miller is.
deluca67 Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 Maybe not in this game (I didn't see it) but in other games I've seen players get rowdy around Lalime. I think generally Lalime is just angrier than Miller is. I don't remember any response other than Rivet against the Ducks.
Supersabre Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 If and when Miller comes back....I hope that this Sabres team does not allow him to get roughed up again.... :chris:
darksabre Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 If and when Miller comes back....I hope that this Sabres team does not allow him to get roughed up again.... :chris: I'm not gonna hold my breath and hope this team magically grows a pair overnight.
2ForTripping Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 Just on a sort of related note, anyone else notice the Sabres stand up for Lalime a lot more than Miller? Quite the opposite I think they throw him to the wolves. Face it the Sabs are soft, very soft. Will it change I doubt it, they all play the lip service game with the reporters, coulda , woulda, shoulda bullsh!t. Step up and do something about it, they won't. Lindy said the 2 points were more important, hey Lindy stroll on over to your wife's purse and get your ball$ .
Stoner Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 If and when Miller comes back....I hope that this Sabres team does not allow him to get roughed up again.... :chris: How could that possibly be prevented? If a team wants to deal with the penalty (the impact of which would be lessened by the retaliation everyone craves), the suspension (not likely) or the beatdown (oooh, that's scary), in exchange for disrupting or possibly injuring the other team's goalie, if it makes sense strategically, they're going to do it. No way to stop it.
BetweenThePipes00 Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 How could that possibly be prevented? If a team wants to deal with the penalty (the impact of which would be lessened by the retaliation everyone craves), the suspension (not likely) or the beatdown (oooh, that's scary), in exchange for disrupting or possibly injuring the other team's goalie, if it makes sense strategically, they're going to do it. No way to stop it. I agree ... I know it sounds good to say there needs to be retaliation to "send a message," but the fact is Miller would still be out indefinitely even if the whole team would have jumped Gomez. You can say "yeah, but next time the guy will think twice." Really? Have you noticed a difference in the way Chris Neil plays since Stafford jumped him after he hit Drury? I haven't. Ottawa as a whole is still a pain in the ass. Guys like Neil and Ruutu LIVE for that sh!t ... You think if someone had jumped Gomez it would really change the way Ruutu plays against the Sabres? Hell no. If these guys were easily imnimidated they would not have jobs. It's funny, everyone talks about how other teams are SO much tougher than the Sabres, yet they also think they can be intimidated and will back down right away if only the Sabres would have assaulted Gomez. Which is it? The fact is, the problem is NOT that the Sabres won't retaliate and send a message. It's that they are not tough enough and strong enough to keep the guy from getting near the goalie to begin with. I can see this getting better in the future with Butler and Weber taking minutes from finesse guys like Numminen, but that is how you stop it. Theese guys are going to keep coming no matter how many times you punch them in the back of the head after the whistle. Work harder to keep them out of there to begin with and worry less about the macho BS after they run the goalie.
deluca67 Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 I agree ... I know it sounds good to say there needs to be retaliation to "send a message," but the fact is Miller would still be out indefinitely even if the whole team would have jumped Gomez. You can say "yeah, but next time the guy will think twice." Really? Have you noticed a difference in the way Chris Neil plays since Stafford jumped him after he hit Drury? I haven't. Ottawa as a whole is still a pain in the ass. Guys like Neil and Ruutu LIVE for that sh!t ... You think if someone had jumped Gomez it would really change the way Ruutu plays against the Sabres? Hell no. If these guys were easily imnimidated they would not have jobs. It's funny, everyone talks about how other teams are SO much tougher than the Sabres, yet they also think they can be intimidated and will back down right away if only the Sabres would have assaulted Gomez. Which is it? The fact is, the problem is NOT that the Sabres won't retaliate and send a message. It's that they are not tough enough and strong enough to keep the guy from getting near the goalie to begin with. I can see this getting better in the future with Butler and Weber taking minutes from finesse guys like Numminen, but that is how you stop it. Theese guys are going to keep coming no matter how many times you punch them in the back of the head after the whistle. Work harder to keep them out of there to begin with and worry less about the macho BS after they run the goalie. Would Miller be out if the team would have responded earlier against the Sens? The point isn't to change what has already happened. The point is to prevent it in the future. Teams know the Sabres crease and their goalies are fair game. Teams are free to skate through the Sabres crease and their goalie. That won't change until they decide to do something other than cry to the refs.
BetweenThePipes00 Posted February 23, 2009 Report Posted February 23, 2009 Would Miller be out if the team would have responded earlier against the Sens? The point isn't to change what has already happened. The point is to prevent it in the future. Teams know the Sabres crease and their goalies are fair game. Teams are free to skate through the Sabres crease and their goalie. That won't change until they decide to do something other than cry to the refs. Again, that sounds good, but do you really think that someone fighting Ruutu last week would have scared an NHL player away from going after Miller this week? Are these guys really that easily intimidated? I agree teams are too free to skakte through the crease, but like I said, the answer is being stronger in front of the net and keeping them out of there to begin with, not punching them after the fact.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.