matter2003 Posted April 12, 2009 Report Posted April 12, 2009 Somehow the Sabres managed to miss the playoffs with a better goal differential than 7 of this years playoff teams(+16). In fact 3 of them had negative goal differentials, led the the Rangers dreadful -9. Of the teams that didn't make it, only 3 had positive goal differentials---Minnesota(even better than Buffalo at +19), Buffalo, and Florida(+3)... That honestly takes some skill to do...
Stoner Posted April 13, 2009 Report Posted April 13, 2009 Also this: until quite late in the season, the Sabres had both special teams units in the top 10. PP remained there until the end; PK went into the dumper. This team also took one shot per game more than the 2006-07 team did, which seems to challenge Lindy's notion that chances are way down in the new old NHL.
carpandean Posted April 13, 2009 Report Posted April 13, 2009 Take out three games: yesterday's game against a shell of Bruins team (+5), the Islanders blowout in the second game of the season (+6) and the Edmonton blowout (+8), and we're left with a -2 in the remaining 79 games.
Stoner Posted April 13, 2009 Report Posted April 13, 2009 Take out three games: yesterday's game against a shell of Bruins team (+5), the Islanders blowout in the second game of the season (+6) and the Edmonton blowout (+8), and we're left with a -2 in the remaining 79 games. Sabres lost only one game this season by more than three goals, the 6-1 loss to Columbus. It's easy to sort through the numbers and convince yourself things aren't too bad. I keep going back to 91, the same number of points the SCF team had in 98-99.
bob_sauve28 Posted April 13, 2009 Report Posted April 13, 2009 Take out three games: yesterday's game against a shell of Bruins team (+5), the Islanders blowout in the second game of the season (+6) and the Edmonton blowout (+8), and we're left with a -2 in the remaining 79 games. You can do that for any team
carpandean Posted April 13, 2009 Report Posted April 13, 2009 You can do that for any team I agree that you could take any team's best games out and reduce their stats, but Buffalo's top three were particularly large margins. Not every team had an 8-goal margin in a game. I only remember one other team scoring 10 goals in a game this season. The Boston game was a stat booster in which Boston wasn't all there. I would bet that their +19 in their top three is 5-6 above most teams.
Kristian Posted April 13, 2009 Report Posted April 13, 2009 Sabres lost only one game this season by more than three goals, the 6-1 loss to Columbus. It's easy to sort through the numbers and convince yourself things aren't too bad. I keep going back to 91, the same number of points the SCF team had in 98-99. And what's really funny is that team finished 1st in the conference at new years, and dropped to 8th in the second half of the season. Very atypical of a Lindy Ruff team.
Team Strike Force Posted April 13, 2009 Report Posted April 13, 2009 Somehow the Sabres managed to miss the playoffs with a better goal differential than 7 of this years playoff teams(+16). In fact 3 of them had negative goal differentials, led the the Rangers dreadful -9. Of the teams that didn't make it, only 3 had positive goal differentials---Minnesota(even better than Buffalo at +19), Buffalo, and Florida(+3)... That honestly takes some skill to do... I think it goes back to what we've been saying on this board for the last month (I know some were saying this before that). When the Sabres were up big, they were great. They were Alex Rodriguez hitting a home run in the 8th with a 6 run lead. In the tight games, their lack of mental fortitude caused them to make bad giveaways, take dumb penalties, and miss scoring opportunities. I looked at their schedule, and there were lots of big wins, not just the three that carp mentioned. 7-1 vs Islanders. 5-0 vs. Kings. 5-0 vs. Caps. 5-0 vs. Leafs. The worst losses I can remember from this year were a 7-4 game against Boston where they fell apart in the 3rd, and one particular Ottawa game recently where they lost 4-2. That'll skew the goal differential.
Stoner Posted April 13, 2009 Report Posted April 13, 2009 I think it goes back to what we've been saying on this board for the last month (I know some were saying this before that). When the Sabres were up big, they were great. They were Alex Rodriguez hitting a home run in the 8th with a 6 run lead. In the tight games, their lack of mental fortitude caused them to make bad giveaways, take dumb penalties, and miss scoring opportunities. I looked at their schedule, and there were lots of big wins, not just the three that carp mentioned. 7-1 vs Islanders. 5-0 vs. Kings. 5-0 vs. Caps. 5-0 vs. Leafs. The worst losses I can remember from this year were a 7-4 game against Boston where they fell apart in the 3rd, and one particular Ottawa game recently where they lost 4-2. That'll skew the goal differential. And discarding the routs won't?
Team Strike Force Posted April 13, 2009 Report Posted April 13, 2009 And discarding the routs won't? http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.htm?fetch...wName=goalGames They were 16-7-9 in one goal games (.500), 13-12 in two goal games, and 12-13 in three goal or more games. That third category explains the high goal differential. They were +14 in games decided by 3 or more goals. They were +2 in games decided by one or two goals.
matter2003 Posted April 14, 2009 Author Report Posted April 14, 2009 Take out three games: yesterday's game against a shell of Bruins team (+5), the Islanders blowout in the second game of the season (+6) and the Edmonton blowout (+8), and we're left with a -2 in the remaining 79 games. True, but you could say that about virtually any team, other than about 3 or 4 that have huge goal differentials...where would Carolina be after taking out their 9-0 shellacking of the Islanders a few games ago?
silvermike Posted April 14, 2009 Report Posted April 14, 2009 It's the sign of a streaky team with pretty good goaltending. They'll score zero and lose 3-0 (thus picking up a -3) while winning a few 5-0, 6-1 and racking up points.
tom webster Posted April 14, 2009 Report Posted April 14, 2009 Anybody else notice that Minnesota was a +19 in goal differential. You can make the numbers say anything you want but once again my favorite sports quote ala Bill Parcells. "You are what you are" and what the Sabres have been for 2 years running is not good enough.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.