Media predictions are starting to come in

[R_Dudley]

Sizzle are you in the closet, is that how you in the know?

 

I dunno whole attitude smacks of another poster I recall around these parts aways back called "The Brain".

 

Boy I am with Wjag on this one....., I'll take Hockey season starts for $100 Alex...

[Stoner]

If I had to guess, he took that as putting Timmy in a helmet like certain mentally challenged children are/were put in, which is often a stereotypical element of tasteless jokes/imitations. I don't believe that this is what you intended with that pic, but I could see someone taking it that way.

 

Not at all. Wow, talk about tunnel vision!

[...]

Personally, I find that picture offensive and one of the low moments in board history.

 

sizzle, you keep bobbing and weaving, rope a doping around the story here. Why so coy? People just want to know what "bringing down the lockerroom" means. You've heard things on boards and through Bulldog. What are they saying?

 

Weird thread.

 

 

Sorry, PA, that I missed your post here. Your non-confrontational demeanor is appreciated. At the point in the thread that you posted this, no one had simply asked what I mean.

 

As I've have already explained, and I'll try and be as simple as I can (for all, not just PA):

 

I did not pick up the idea from anywhere; no board, no blog, no WGR presented this idea to me first. It occurred to me at some point during the first half of last season.

 

THEN, here and there I started seeing other people mention the idea. Lastly, I heard Bulldog mention it this past spring and a few times this summer (of the few times they've talked Sabres this summer that I heard).

 

SO, no one has out and out put this up as a topic anywhere that I am aware. Probably because they do not want to face the kind of sh*t I have faced in this thread. Fair enough.

 

When I mention others have the same opinion, I am only saying that others have come to the same conclusion I have - independently, and obviously without any particular set of specific facts to back up the opinion or theory.

 

I AM NOT trying to take credit for the idea, either, as if that had any merit anyway. What is interesting, though, is that other people seem to have come to the same conclusion.

 

Now, let's breathe for a moment.

 

Good.

 

It seems logical to me that if we can talk about what would benefit the locker room - so called accountability, veteran leadership, camaraderie - that we must also talk about what is harmful in the locker room.

 

Roy is a talent on the ice, no doubt. But many people here were okay with idea of trading him not too long ago.

 

Roy is someone whom I have identified as possibly the most toxic player in the locker room the past two seasons. It's a matter of a whole bunch of little observations over time adding up to the single conclusion. For example, during his interviews he frequently excuses poor play, or seems completely oblivious to it. When Spacek would say "well, all of us in the room thought this would be easy..." and I would ask myself from which player would that attitude spawn - the answer would be Roy. Like I said, a whole bunch of little things.

 

I will completely grant that I could be absolutely wrong, too. I have not said that I am correct - I said this is my opinion based on my perception. I do not obsess over the idea, nor have I actually tried to push it on to anyone else.

 

This thread has been about posting an unpopular opinion and being strung out for it. This has been about some people being in their approach, and then becoming worse when they are treated in kind.

 

I can frankly do with or without the Roy opinion, because I know there's really nothing holding it up. What is most interesting is how people responded to an unsavory opinion about Roy, and how it was (and is) incomprehensible that someone could come to such an opinion without it being first fed to them by someone in the media. It's also interesting to see just how myopic people can be reading threads - these posts of ours don't exist by themselves - there is context to every thread, each post feeds off the post prior to it.

 

Anyway, there you are. Your mid-August entertainment. And I am not "The Brain" or any derivative.

[nfreeman]

Don't take it personally.....it's the offseason.....

 

For my part I don't think Roy has emerged as a natural leader....but I don't think he's toxic either.

 

For his part on the ice...if anything...in terms of ice-time and the double shifting....I don't see how

Lindy can ask any more of him. If anything ...I wonder if his production would go up if he wasn't double shifted.

 

The guy doesn't miss shifts and I'm pretty sure he played about 20 games this past year with bruised ribs.

Not with injury, but he mails in a shift or part of one often enough. It's part of what's holding him back, IMHO.

 

Sure do...2/26/73. It's a classic!

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/cover/featured/8320/index.htm

Nice! I see myself ordering one and getting it framed for my man-cave.

 

Separately -- Sizzle -- for the love of the hockey gods, please chill out. And BTW I agree with just about everything you said about Roy.

[darksabre]

Not at all. Wow, talk about tunnel vision!

 

Sooooo, what then?

[SwampD]

Sorry, PA, that I missed your post here. Your non-confrontational demeanor is appreciated. At the point in the thread that you posted this, no one had simply asked what I mean.

 

As I've have already explained, and I'll try and be as simple as I can (for all, not just PA):

 

I did not pick up the idea from anywhere; no board, no blog, no WGR presented this idea to me first. It occurred to me at some point during the first half of last season.

 

THEN, here and there I started seeing other people mention the idea. Lastly, I heard Bulldog mention it this past spring and a few times this summer (of the few times they've talked Sabres this summer that I heard).

 

SO, no one has out and out put this up as a topic anywhere that I am aware. Probably because they do not want to face the kind of sh*t I have faced in this thread. Fair enough.

 

When I mention others have the same opinion, I am only saying that others have come to the same conclusion I have - independently, and obviously without any particular set of specific facts to back up the opinion or theory.

 

I AM NOT trying to take credit for the idea, either, as if that had any merit anyway. What is interesting, though, is that other people seem to have come to the same conclusion.

 

Now, let's breathe for a moment.

 

Good.

 

It seems logical to me that if we can talk about what would benefit the locker room - so called accountability, veteran leadership, camaraderie - that we must also talk about what is harmful in the locker room.

 

Roy is a talent on the ice, no doubt. But many people here were okay with idea of trading him not too long ago.

 

Roy is someone whom I have identified as possibly the most toxic player in the locker room the past two seasons. It's a matter of a whole bunch of little observations over time adding up to the single conclusion. For example, during his interviews he frequently excuses poor play, or seems completely oblivious to it. When Spacek would say "well, all of us in the room thought this would be easy..." and I would ask myself from which player would that attitude spawn - the answer would be Roy. Like I said, a whole bunch of little things.

 

I will completely grant that I could be absolutely wrong, too. I have not said that I am correct - I said this is my opinion based on my perception. I do not obsess over the idea, nor have I actually tried to push it on to anyone else.

 

This thread has been about posting an unpopular opinion and being strung out for it. This has been about some people being in their approach, and then becoming worse when they are treated in kind.

 

I can frankly do with or without the Roy opinion, because I know there's really nothing holding it up. What is most interesting is how people responded to an unsavory opinion about Roy, and how it was (and is) incomprehensible that someone could come to such an opinion without it being first fed to them by someone in the media. It's also interesting to see just how myopic people can be reading threads - these posts of ours don't exist by themselves - there is context to every thread, each post feeds off the post prior to it.

 

Anyway, there you are. Your mid-August entertainment. And I am not "The Brain" or any derivative.

I still say Connelly comes to my mind before Roy. Now don't get yer panties in a bunch, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying(like I did originally, before I was called a sheep) that I would believe this about Connelly before I would believe it about Roy. Timmy just seems like a gray cloud to me.

[Stoner]

Sooooo, what then?

 

Doesn't this thread have enough drama? You want a piece of me?

[...]

I still say Connelly comes to my mind before Roy. Now don't get yer panties in a bunch, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying(like I did originally, before I was called a sheep) that I would believe this about Connelly before I would believe it about Roy. Timmy just seems like a gray cloud to me.

 

 

It's Connolly.

 

The only person who comes close to Roy, IMHO, is Stafford. But who knows! Connolly could be toxic, too, but ALL of the guys have an easy retort for him thanks to all of his injuries.

[18minutesaway]

Really? I don't remember anyone saying that. With Timmy out, he was the de facto #1, but I wouldn't have ever said that he would be guaranteed the spot if they both stayed healthy. He's certainly proven more than Timmy, but they've always been high on Timmy's potential. In my mind, the old Briere/Drury combo was replaced by the Connolly/Roy combo ... or, at least, that's how it was supposed to work, but Timmy's body has not cooperated.

So Roy's the problem huh? and he somehow "lucked" his way into an invite to Team Canada at Center as well...(I can hear the endless "Lindy pulled that favor" banter already). I find it hard to believe this organization has "accepted" his behavior since day one and not only kept him around but signed him as an integral part of their future. Let's be honest in a perfect world you would like this guy to wear the "C", so clearly there is a disconnect between his leadership abilities and Ruff's expectations...so he isn't Captain material....yet, but who knows what the future holds, I just can't accept this is the reason the team missed the playoffs the last two years.

[oddoublee]

Sorry, PA, that I missed your post here. Your non-confrontational demeanor is appreciated. At the point in the thread that you posted this, no one had simply asked what I mean.

 

As I've have already explained, and I'll try and be as simple as I can (for all, not just PA):

 

I did not pick up the idea from anywhere; no board, no blog, no WGR presented this idea to me first. It occurred to me at some point during the first half of last season.

 

THEN, here and there I started seeing other people mention the idea. Lastly, I heard Bulldog mention it this past spring and a few times this summer (of the few times they've talked Sabres this summer that I heard).

 

SO, no one has out and out put this up as a topic anywhere that I am aware. Probably because they do not want to face the kind of sh*t I have faced in this thread. Fair enough.

 

When I mention others have the same opinion, I am only saying that others have come to the same conclusion I have - independently, and obviously without any particular set of specific facts to back up the opinion or theory.

 

I AM NOT trying to take credit for the idea, either, as if that had any merit anyway. What is interesting, though, is that other people seem to have come to the same conclusion.

 

Now, let's breathe for a moment.

 

Good.

 

It seems logical to me that if we can talk about what would benefit the locker room - so called accountability, veteran leadership, camaraderie - that we must also talk about what is harmful in the locker room.

 

Roy is a talent on the ice, no doubt. But many people here were okay with idea of trading him not too long ago.

 

Roy is someone whom I have identified as possibly the most toxic player in the locker room the past two seasons. It's a matter of a whole bunch of little observations over time adding up to the single conclusion. For example, during his interviews he frequently excuses poor play, or seems completely oblivious to it. When Spacek would say "well, all of us in the room thought this would be easy..." and I would ask myself from which player would that attitude spawn - the answer would be Roy. Like I said, a whole bunch of little things.

 

I will completely grant that I could be absolutely wrong, too. I have not said that I am correct - I said this is my opinion based on my perception. I do not obsess over the idea, nor have I actually tried to push it on to anyone else.

 

This thread has been about posting an unpopular opinion and being strung out for it. This has been about some people being in their approach, and then becoming worse when they are treated in kind.

 

I can frankly do with or without the Roy opinion, because I know there's really nothing holding it up. What is most interesting is how people responded to an unsavory opinion about Roy, and how it was (and is) incomprehensible that someone could come to such an opinion without it being first fed to them by someone in the media. It's also interesting to see just how myopic people can be reading threads - these posts of ours don't exist by themselves - there is context to every thread, each post feeds off the post prior to it.

 

Anyway, there you are. Your mid-August entertainment. And I am not "The Brain" or any derivative.

 

I give you credit...you got me to sign up

 

 

1. What actions on the ice led you to believe he was a bad influence in the locker room? From all the years I watched hockey, it is pretty tough to figure someone is a bad influence bc they double shift. So please give specifics of what YOU SAW on the ice that made you think he is bad for the locker room.

 

2. If you cant answer the above question, please give specific examples of what you heard from the media to make you believe he is a bad influence instead of just giving an opinion with no supporting evidence. It will help enlighten everyone here as to why you feel this way, and maybe change a few peoples minds. You mentioned a whole bunch of little things as your reasoning-but you only gave one.... kind of

 

3. In regards to why your opinion does NOT hold the weight someones in the media does-they have sources-you do not. Not an insult, just a simple fact that they go to all the games and have locker room access.

 

Please, help me out here

[shrader]

It's Connolly.

 

The only person who comes close to Roy, IMHO, is Stafford. But who knows! Connolly could be toxic, too, but ALL of the guys have an easy retort for him thanks to all of his injuries.

 

It all goes back to what exactly being a problem in the locker room means. Take a look at the team's reaction this past season when Connolly got his contract. They seemed to be genuinely happy that he was going to stick around. From a chemistry standpoint in the locker room, that can't be a bad thing. If we're talking about the wrong kind of guy being so liked by his teammates, then it could be a problem. But then again, if he is that kind of guy and so many players on the team like him, that's more a statement against the entire team from top to bottom than it is against one single person.

[SwampD]

It all goes back to what exactly being a problem in the locker room means. Take a look at the team's reaction this past season when Connolly got his contract. They seemed to be genuinely happy that he was going to stick around. From a chemistry standpoint in the locker room, that can't be a bad thing. If we're talking about the wrong kind of guy being so liked by his teammates, then it could be a problem. But then again, if he is that kind of guy and so many players on the team like him, that's more a statement against the entire team from top to bottom than it is against one single person.

Yep. But I do know one thing, it's that I'm positive that I have know idea what the locker room is like.

 

 

Back to the Main topic. Here's another one.

 

If the season ended today...oh, wait...we're still not in the playoffs. I'm trying to figure out how not making Ruff and Regier scapegoats is a good thing. No Change for No Change's sake, I guess.

[darksabre]

Doesn't this thread have enough drama? You want a piece of me?

 

I'm not looking for an argument, I'm just curious as to why it offends you. Honest.

[...]

It all goes back to what exactly being a problem in the locker room means. Take a look at the team's reaction this past season when Connolly got his contract. They seemed to be genuinely happy that he was going to stick around. From a chemistry standpoint in the locker room, that can't be a bad thing. If we're talking about the wrong kind of guy being so liked by his teammates, then it could be a problem. But then again, if he is that kind of guy and so many players on the team like him, that's more a statement against the entire team from top to bottom than it is against one single person.

 

 

Here is what I'm looking at when I consider "problems in the locker room":

 

At the end of a good period, the Sabres are leading by 2 or more, the following period they come out flat and lifeless. What happened between those periods, in the locker room, obviously, that led to them playing flat when they have the lead?

 

What is being said in the locker room when Miller is getting run and no one is doing anything about it?

 

What are the players saying to each other before the game to get them ready, especially when the game "means something" and the team comes out playing like it were a pre-season game?

 

In my opinion, the Sabres of the last two season had enough talent to land a spot in the playoffs, and there were games that showed just how talented a team they COULD be. After those particular games, the players always said stuff like "it just shows us what we can do when we stick to the system" or something to that effect. On the flip side, when they lose, the theme seems to be "well, we didn't stay with game plan, we need to be more disciplined". So, where are they breaking down - WHO deviates from the system the most?

 

If the guy (or guys) who plays the most minutes, who plays on special teams, who is "relied upon" on the ice - if they are breaking from the system ON THE ICE, in the middle of the game - what are they saying in the locker room?

 

Again, these guys and their attitudes don't exist in a vacuum, that stuff can spread around.

[shrader]

Sizzle, I had a feeling that's what you meant, as opposed to being a Sean Avery type who can easily be hated by half the teammates. And when I said old man PA would have fun with it, it's because when I read all of that, I can't stop thinking "hey, shouldn't the coach be all over stuff like that?".

[...]

Sizzle, I had a feeling that's what you meant, as opposed to being a Sean Avery type who can easily be hated by half the teammates. And when I said old man PA would have fun with it, it's because when I read all of that, I can't stop thinking "hey, shouldn't the coach be all over stuff like that?".

 

 

I can appreciate thinking it's the coach - but if they admit they win when they play the system, and that they lose when they ignore the system, then it's a player problem IMHO. The coach and his system speaks for itself and you can bet they go over the system 100 ways to Sunday. What else can he do, beat them? It's a player attitude problem, and like any other group of people, the attitude problem starts within the group, which can be synonymous with "the locker room" in this situation.

[SwampD]

I can appreciate thinking it's the coach - but if they admit they win when they play the system, and that they lose when they ignore the system, then it's a player problem IMHO. The coach and his system speaks for itself and you can bet they go over the system 100 ways to Sunday. What else can he do, beat them? It's a player attitude problem, and like any other group of people, the attitude problem starts within the group, which can be synonymous with "the locker room" in this situation.

While I agree with this, I think it may be a bit of an over-simplification. I tend to think that when players use the,"We just didn't stick to the system" line, it's just a way for them not to have to say"We lost because we really sucked tonight." I don't really put much stock in things players say when they are coming of the ice.

 

And I just want to say that if the problem IS Roy...our number one points getter...our second leading goal scorer...our second leading assists getter...If HE is the one bringing the team down, then we are in deeper trouble than I thought.

[shrader]

I can appreciate thinking it's the coach - but if they admit they win when they play the system, and that they lose when they ignore the system, then it's a player problem IMHO. The coach and his system speaks for itself and you can bet they go over the system 100 ways to Sunday. What else can he do, beat them? It's a player attitude problem, and like any other group of people, the attitude problem starts within the group, which can be synonymous with "the locker room" in this situation.

 

If you don't play the system, you don't play at all. He has no problem doing that with Vanek.

[oddoublee]

Here is what I'm looking at when I consider "problems in the locker room":

 

At the end of a good period, the Sabres are leading by 2 or more, the following period they come out flat and lifeless. What happened between those periods, in the locker room, obviously, that led to them playing flat when they have the lead?

 

What is being said in the locker room when Miller is getting run and no one is doing anything about it?

 

What are the players saying to each other before the game to get them ready, especially when the game "means something" and the team comes out playing like it were a pre-season game?

 

In my opinion, the Sabres of the last two season had enough talent to land a spot in the playoffs, and there were games that showed just how talented a team they COULD be. After those particular games, the players always said stuff like "it just shows us what we can do when we stick to the system" or something to that effect. On the flip side, when they lose, the theme seems to be "well, we didn't stay with game plan, we need to be more disciplined". So, where are they breaking down - WHO deviates from the system the most?

 

If the guy (or guys) who plays the most minutes, who plays on special teams, who is "relied upon" on the ice - if they are breaking from the system ON THE ICE, in the middle of the game - what are they saying in the locker room?

 

Again, these guys and their attitudes don't exist in a vacuum, that stuff can spread around.

 

why is this a derek roy problem? could it be the other 19 guys that are the problem? give me some details..