HockeyTruth Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 I read the 4 or 5 Sabres forums (some of them aren't forums they're clubs) and I get the sense that a good percentage of forum fans are excited by lineups with 3rd and 4th lines that look like this: hecht gaustad grier paille mccormick kaleta We know by now that mccormick has been assigned to Portland, which I expected, but these are the type of lineups fans were projecting with approval and excitement. Do you as a fan really believe in the current hockey speak (on buffalo forums anyways) that says that today's NHL is suited for lines like that to succeed? I actually read one post where someone was adding up the weight of one of his proposed lines as if it was football and he was putting a group of linebackers together. Here's what I think... If Lindy Ruff goes that route for any significant portion of the season the Sabres will miss the playoff again. As much as Sabres fans like to debase 'midget' players, the Sabres will need an infusion from one or more of these 'midgets' from Portland to get back into the playoffs. Two full lines of these lunchpail players is overkill and a formula for failure.
wjag Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 I'm okay with the 3rd line. The 4th line will get such little playing time statistically that it doesn't matter who is on there as long as they are 'high energy'. Mair, Kaleta and Paille is my projection for the 4th. The playoffs in my mind do not rest on the performance of the 3rd and 4th lines. They rest on the ability of the team to hold a lead. I heard on the radio the other day that NJ was something like 39-1-1 after two periods with a lead. I don't know what the Sabres were, but it wasn't anywhere near that. Fix that and anything is possible with this team as constituted.
inkman Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Two full lines of these lunchpail players is overkill and a formula for failure. Most NHL teams use this type of set up for their lines. Two scoring lines, a defensive line and a physical line.
tom webster Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 I have no problem with the 3rd and 4th lines and think that they can provide enough offense as well. The problem will be whether Stafford and/or MacArthur can be top 6 forwards and whether Sekera or Butler can emerge as a true, top flight puck carrying defenseman.
HockeyTruth Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Posted September 30, 2009 Most NHL teams use this type of set up for their lines. Two scoring lines, a defensive line and a physical line. Not hardly, tell that to... Pittsburgh Detroit Chicago Boston Washington
nucci Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Tell that to... Pittsburgh Detroit Chicago Boston Washington He did say most, not all.
HockeyTruth Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Posted September 30, 2009 I have no problem with the 3rd and 4th lines and think that they can provide enough offense as well. The problem will be whether Stafford and/or MacArthur can be top 6 forwards and whether Sekera or Butler can emerge as a true, top flight puck carrying defenseman. Give me an idea what you expect each of those 3/4 line players to score for the season
HockeyTruth Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Posted September 30, 2009 I'm okay with the 3rd line. The 4th line will get such little playing time statistically that it doesn't matter who is on there as long as they are 'high energy'. Mair, Kaleta and Paille is my projection for the 4th. The playoffs in my mind do not rest on the performance of the 3rd and 4th lines. They rest on the ability of the team to hold a lead. I heard on the radio the other day that NJ was something like 39-1-1 after two periods with a lead. I don't know what the Sabres were, but it wasn't anywhere near that. Fix that and anything is possible with this team as constituted. Really , so NJ is the model? Where did that take NJ when it came playoff time? That's a rhetorical question. The problem with NJ is that the look invincible playing that trap during the regular season but when the playoff roll around all teams tighten up.
tom webster Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Give me an idea what you expect each of those 3/4 line players to score for the season I think all of Paille, Gaustad, Grier, Hecht and Kaleta are capable of 10 to 14 goals although I doubt that they all will. All you need is for 2 of the to. You get 8 or 9 players scoring in double figures and you are above the norm. If you look at all those teams you mentioned in your other post, they get the majority of their scoring from their first two lines with 1 or 2 players from the 3rd and 4th lines emerging to score closer to 20. The lone exception would be Staal with Pittsburgh and he finished 3rd on their team in scoring but played quite a bit on the top 2 lines and the power play.
LabattBlue Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 The Sabres have so little grit in the top 2 lines(next to nothing), that they have no choice but to get some in the 3rd and 4th lines. I am also a big supporter of the "2 scoring lines, 1 checking line and 1 agitator line" philosophy. The problem comes when your scoring lines are inconsistent, which has been a problem for two years running. If each line does their job, this is a playoff team.
HockeyTruth Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Posted September 30, 2009 He did say most, not all. Yeah he did, but his most is absent of the teams that went deep, so what good is his most. Not that I concede that most team have a lineup like that by choice. I only went to the trouble of demonstrating that the successful teams don't, I don't in any way concede that the remainder of teams do. This is one of those things I see fans on forums pick up on and run with without there being much truth to it.
wjag Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Really , so NJ is the model? Where did that take NJ when it came playoff time? That's a rhetorical question. The problem with NJ is that the look invincible playing that trap during the regular season but when the playoff roll around all teams tighten up. Your original post spoke in terms of making the playoffs, not going deep into the playoffs. If the question is the model to make the playoffs, then yes 39-1-1 after two makes you a lock for the playoffs. How well you do once you get there is something different. I don't much like their style of play, but you can't argue with the results. I'm not suggesting the Sabres employ the trap, but I am suggesting that they learn to clamp down when they have a lead. Blown leads more than anything else last year was why they missed the playoffs.
HockeyTruth Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Posted September 30, 2009 The Sabres have so little grit in the top 2 lines(next to nothing), that they have no choice but to get some in the 3rd and 4th lines. I am also a big supporter of the "2 scoring lines, 1 checking line and 1 agitator line" philosophy. The problem comes when your scoring lines are inconsistent, which has been a problem for two years running. If each line does their job, this is a playoff team. No I'd say the Sabres top scorers are as consistent enough, the problem is the list is too short. Buffalo WILL need to add a skill player or two to this roster, because right now they are out of balance with what will win. This is why you will probably see them rely on Kennedy and/or other prospects.
Patty16 Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Yeah he did, but his most is absent of the teams that went deep, so what good is his most. Not that I concede that most team have a lineup like that by choice. I only went to the trouble of demonstrating that the successful teams don't, I don't in any way concede that the remainder of teams do. This is one of those things I see fans on forums pick up on and run with without there being much truth to it. I agree. But Buffalo fans have an obsession with lunch pail skaters who play 8 mins and bang around. Scoring depth is what successful teams have. Yes, everyteam has some role players with grit but we dont need a fourth line of recycled has beens who no one will even claim on waivers.
HockeyTruth Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Posted September 30, 2009 If the question is the model to make the playoffs, then yes 39-1-1 after two makes you a lock for the playoffs. How well you do once you get there is something different. I don't much like their style of play, but you can't argue with the results. I'm not suggesting the Sabres employ the trap, but I am suggesting that they learn to clamp down when they have a lead. Blown leads more than anything else last year was why they missed the playoffs. You need to go into the 3rd period with the lead BEFORE you play that trap. You don't have the goalie NJ has. And by playing that style in the regular season you're conditioning your team to play a style that rarely works in the playoffs Forget about how many leads NJ protected in the regular season, look at how many they blew in the playoffs, it came back to bite them. Beyond that what are you suggesting, that these 3/4 lines Buffalo has are there to protect leads as if we have Selke candidates there? Even if you want or believe in that approach just who is it on those 3/4 line that you see carrying that out? Fans are in the bad habit of automatically attributing defense to forwards that lack skill.
deluca67 Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Really , so NJ is the model? Where did that take NJ when it came playoff time? That's a rhetorical question. The problem with NJ is that the look invincible playing that trap during the regular season but when the playoff roll around all teams tighten up. Yep! They'll never win a Cup with that system. :doh:
LabattBlue Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 No I'd say the Sabres top scorers are as consistent enough, the problem is the list is too short. The Sabres scored 2 or less goals(including the ones in OT) 35 times last year. That is 43% of their games. That is how you define consistency?
HockeyTruth Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Posted September 30, 2009 I agree. But Buffalo fans have an obsession with lunch pail skaters who play 8 mins and bang around. Scoring depth is what successful teams have. Yes, everyteam has some role players with grit but we dont need a fourth line of recycled has beens who no one will even claim on waivers. Unless Lindy goes back to that 4th line rotation thing where he give ice time out almost equally the 4th line won't be the main problem. What I see is that one or more of the 3rd liners should be moved to the 4th line in favor of players who can generate some secondary scoring.
carpandean Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Your original post spoke in terms of making the playoffs, not going deep into the playoffs. If the question is the model to make the playoffs, then yes 39-1-1 after two makes you a lock for the playoffs. How well you do once you get there is something different. I don't much like their style of play, but you can't argue with the results. I'm not suggesting the Sabres employ the trap, but I am suggesting that they learn to clamp down when they have a lead. Blown leads more than anything else last year was why they missed the playoffs. I was going to say basically the same thing, specifically in reference to: Here's what I think... If Lindy Ruff goes that route for any significant portion of the season the Sabres will miss the playoff again. If playing that type of a lineup works in the regular season, as you (HockeyTruth) admit it did in New Jersey, then why not use it to get into the playoffs? They can always call up more scoring (or ... gasp ... acquire some at the deadline) and revamp the bottom lines after the roster expansion in March to get set for a deep playoff run with a lines like those exception teams.
inkman Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Buffalo WILL need to add a skill player or two to this roster, because right now they are out of balance with what will win. They are almost up against the cap, what do you propose they do? Scoring depth is what successful teams have. Not for long. In the salary cap era, teams can only carry so many 30+ goal scorers and 70 point players. Pittsburgh has lost players, Chicago will lose players, and Detroit is an anomaly as no team seems to be able to build a team as shrewdly as they do. Basically, it takes a perfect blend of having your entire core in it's prime, a bunch of rookies/second year guys blowing up, and a wily vet or two contributing above their career norms. While I don't think the Sabres young guys will put up the numbers that will make this scenario come true, next year is a possibility with Kennedy, Ennis, Kassian and Gerbe in the wings.
SwampD Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 You need to go into the 3rd period with the lead BEFORE you play that trap. You don't have the goalie NJ has. And by playing that style in the regular season you're conditioning your team to play a style that rarely works in the playoffs Forget about how many leads NJ protected in the regular season, look at how many they blew in the playoffs, it came back to bite them. Beyond that what are you suggesting, that these 3/4 lines Buffalo has are there to protect leads as if we have Selke candidates there? Even if you want or believe in that approach just who is it on those 3/4 line that you see carrying that out? Fans are in the bad habit of automatically attributing defense to forwards that lack skill. The bolded part says it all. Playing the trap in the playoffs wasn't the reason NJ left the playoffs early, it was who they had playing it. They weren't that good last year. The trap worked just fine for them when they won all those SCs, because they had the players to do it. I personally don't care about what kind of lines the Sabres have as long as they are better than the lines of the team they are playing.
Patty16 Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 They are almost up against the cap, what do you propose they do? Not for long. In the salary cap era, teams can only carry so many 30+ goal scorers and 70 point players. Pittsburgh has lost players, Chicago will lose players, and Detroit is an anomaly as no team seems to be able to build a team as shrewdly as they do. Basically, it takes a perfect blend of having your entire core in it's prime, a bunch of rookies/second year guys blowing up, and a wily vet or two contributing above their career norms. While I don't think the Sabres young guys will put up the numbers that will make this scenario come true, next year is a possibility with Kennedy, Ennis, Kassian and Gerbe in the wings. Great post. Thats exxactly what teams need to do. who was the guy for pitt last year who scored all those huge playoff goals. was is talbot ? The sabres need to hope they get some scoring from guys like kennedy and pray paille, pominville etc return to form.
HockeyTruth Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Posted September 30, 2009 The Sabres scored 2 or less goals(including the ones in OT) 35 times last year. That is 43% of their games. That is how you define consistency? Exactly, they had little to no secondary scoring. You have players like Vanek ,Roy and Connolly, they produce but no team's top players score every game. And when they do they don't necessarily score hat tricks. Look at Ottawa, they had the same problem. Are you going to tell me that the problem with Ottawa was that Heatley Spezza and Alfredson are inconsistent. It doesn't exist on any team. If the Sabres coaching staff adopts something equivalent to this most recent forum hockey speak and goes the majority of the season with that approach they'll end up on the golf course. Many people on forums talk in cliches and sound bites that circulate, but I'm talking about the reality of what happens in the NHL.
LabattBlue Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Exactly, they had little to no secondary scoring. You have players like Vanek ,Roy and Connolly, they produce but no team's top players score every game. And when they do they don't necessarily score hat tricks. Look at Ottawa, they had the same problem. Are you going to tell me that the problem with Ottawa was that Heatley Spezza and Alfredson are inconsistent. It doesn't exist on any team. If the Sabres coaching staff adopts something equivalent to this most recent forum hockey speak and goes the majority of the season with that approach they'll end up on the golf course. Many people on forums talk in cliches and sound bites that circulate, but I'm talking about the reality of what happens in the NHL. So in the 35 games I referenced it was nothing but your top 2 lines who scored the goals?
SwampD Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Many people on forums talk in cliches and sound bites that circulate, but I'm talking about the reality of what happens in the NHL. Ah! You speak... The Truth... The Truth about Hockey... The Hockey Truth... the HockeyTruth... Hey, now I get it.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.