"Accountability"

[Stoner]

It's been the buzzword for months.

 

So, a question.

 

The Sabres lost. After weeks of gum-flapping that this season would be different. It was the home-opener. It was disappointing. The Sabres controlled play in the first and took a 1-0 lead. They stepped back in the second and third, looking a lot like Dick Jauron was behind their bench. Miller was untested but OK. The defense was fine. There wasn't anything horrible about it, but the result was very familiar. They got a point. A point a game will not cut it.

 

Oh yeah, the question. How did the Sabres make themselves accountable for an unacceptable result? How will they continue to do so before the next game?

 

There was a very satisfied vibe surrounding the postgame comments. Miller seemed delighted. Other players accentuated the positive. Ruff was Ruff -- without emotion. There was no anger, no disgust from any corner.

 

No accountability?

[carpandean]

No accountability?

As you so often like to point out (about other things, but it's relevant here), we won't have any (direct) idea about whether they are holding each other accountable, because it will happen in the locker room and during practice. If they are patting each other on the back right now and over the next four days, then it was all lip service. If they each accept their own mistakes in the game or are called out for it by the team's leaders, then they will be true to their words. The only measure of this that we will have will be the results.

[X. Benedict]

This was an odd looking loss.

 

Really the Sabres were dominant in every facet of the game except the score.

If they play like that they will win most nights.

 

Last night they lost. That's hockey. Montreal stole 2 points. Credit goes to them

for keeping it close to win.

 

There was a lot of second period tentativeness and some passes that didn't connect up

the middle.

 

If I were to coach practice today - I would be looking at improving dump-ins against good skating goalies, get some different looks mixing the top 6 forwards and not be too concerned with the final score.

 

Note: Stafford shouldn't have been on the ice. He looked lost on the 4th line.

[DR HOLLIDAY]

First Hab goal was BS, game should have ended 1-0 Buffalo.

[Stoner]

As you so often like to point out (about other things, but it's relevant here), we won't have any (direct) idea about whether they are holding each other accountable, because it will happen in the locker room and during practice. If they are patting each other on the back right now and over the next four days, then it was all lip service. If they each accept their own mistakes in the game or are called out for it by the team's leaders, then they will be true to their words. The only measure of this that we will have will be the results.

 

A good point. But accountability is a lot easier to detect in public utterances than the skill of a captain is. Unless you believe that Ryan can present THAT face the media, then after the media clears out, start cracking skulls with his goal stick. No one is THAT two-faced.

 

They have to be accountable to the fans, too. One more point. Lindy has never been shy about using the bully pulpit to hold his team and certain players accountable.

[tulax]

I guess when we're talking about accountability we're talking about players holding others, rather than themselves, accountable for the mistakes of others. I doubt that this is really happening in the Sabres locker room. However, given that we can never know for sure whether this is going on, because we don't have first hand access, I'd rather focus on another theme: consistency.

 

For this team to be successful, in my opinion, we have to dump the puck in effectively for an entire game to generate meaningful offense during even strength. We don't have a defenseman that can carry the puck up the ice, and occupy a defenses' focus, this year. When a puck is dumped into open corners this team can use their speed to exploit slower defenses and create opportunities through possession. This happened during the first period of last nights game and then disappeared. Only the fourth line seemed to be following through with meaningful forecheck in the two later periods. Their play, in my opinion, led to the only meaningful offensive pressure for the course of the entire game.

 

This needs to change immediately. If Pat Kaleta, Matt Ellis, and insert energy player here (last night Drew Stafford) are going to be the only ones adopting this consistent philosophy then the Sabres are in for another mediocre season. We're not depending on these guys for the type of offense that our other players have to provide. Too many times last season we saw the top lines start off a game with success only to divert from the game plan and play not to lose. I for one would rather see wins than pretty but ineffective passes.

[billsrcursed]

It's been the buzzword for months.

 

So, a question.

 

The Sabres lost. After weeks of gum-flapping that this season would be different. It was the home-opener. It was disappointing. The Sabres controlled play in the first and took a 1-0 lead. They stepped back in the second and third, looking a lot like Dick Jauron was behind their bench. Miller was untested but OK. The defense was fine. There wasn't anything horrible about it, but the result was very familiar. They got a point. A point a game will not cut it.

 

Oh yeah, the question. How did the Sabres make themselves accountable for an unacceptable result? How will they continue to do so before the next game?

 

There was a very satisfied vibe surrounding the postgame comments. Miller seemed delighted. Other players accentuated the positive. Ruff was Ruff -- without emotion. There was no anger, no disgust from any corner.

 

No accountability?

 

I'll reply to this question the same way I do to people who say the same thing about Jauron's pressers;

 

It means nothing. We'd all like to see coaches/players throw stuff, blame people, say publicly who stunk it up. What does that prove? Does it earn wins? No, simply, it makes "some" fans happy.

 

Bill Belichek (?) doesn't do this during his pressers, he's as dull as they come. They somehow still win and have happy fans.

 

Showing emotion during a presser is as valuable as Tallinder is... I'd rather see it on the ice (which is lacking as well 1 game in).

[Stoner]

This was an odd looking loss.

 

Really the Sabres were dominant in every facet of the game except the score.

If they play like that they will win most nights.

 

Last night they lost. That's hockey. Montreal stole 2 points. Credit goes to them

for keeping it close to win.

 

There was a lot of second period tentativeness and some passes that didn't connect up

the middle.

 

If I were to coach practice today - I would be looking at improving dump-ins against good skating goalies, get some different looks mixing the top 6 forwards and not be too concerned with the final score.

 

Note: Stafford shouldn't have been on the ice. He looked lost on the 4th line.

 

Are you and John Vogl the same person? Seriously, I've never seen you two together. :)

 

Vogl was getting into the "Sabres dominated" angle in his story. I didn't see it that way. The Sabres did dominate territorially in the first period. (Would love to see a "zone time" stat in hockey.) But using the rough "oooh and ahhhh" measure, think about how few times the crowd really reacted to a scoring chance. Indeed, MSG had the chances at 3-1 Buffalo after one.

 

In the second and third, it was just an ugly slog. Only one shot for Montreal in the third? But I never felt like Buffalo was dominating in any way. Montreal had the better of play for a lot of the second period.

 

I don't think they stole two points or Price stood on his head. It was a fairly even game. IMHO. I just don't want the Sabres to fall into the "everything was great, we just didn't win" trap. The power play was atrocious. Speaking of accountability, what coach wants to take credit for that warthog afterbirth?

[deluca67]

First Hab goal was BS, game should have ended 1-0 Buffalo.

No! It wasn't "BS." Moen went to the net with no fear because of the Sabres reputation.

 

This issue on the table is "accountability." To me it's just a buzz word or catch phrase like "team toughness." I didn't see any Sabre playing "out of character", as Lindy put it last year. Kaleta tried to throw his body around. Grier was Grier. Myers physicality was a nice surprise. Tallinder looked awful and many scoring chances were left out on the ice uncashed. I didn't see anything different than what I saw the past two years. I'll be looking to the Detroit game to see if "accountability" will be a part of this team this season. I hope to see players out side of their comfort zone. IMHO, that will the first sign of "accountability."

[bob_sauve28]

This was an odd looking loss.

 

Really the Sabres were dominant in every facet of the game except the score.

If they play like that they will win most nights.

 

Last night they lost. That's hockey. Montreal stole 2 points. Credit goes to them

for keeping it close to win.

 

There was a lot of second period tentativeness and some passes that didn't connect up

the middle.

 

If I were to coach practice today - I would be looking at improving dump-ins against good skating goalies, get some different looks mixing the top 6 forwards and not be too concerned with the final score.

 

Note: Stafford shouldn't have been on the ice. He looked lost on the 4th line.

 

Nice post, I totally agree. Sometimes you just gotta shrugged your shoulders and get ready for the next game.

 

Price made a big difference in the game by acting like the third d-man back there. Nice assest to have

[X. Benedict]

Are you and John Vogl the same person? Seriously, I've never seen you two together. :)

 

Vogl was getting into the "Sabres dominated" angle in his story. I didn't see it that way. The Sabres did dominate territorially in the first period. (Would love to see a "zone time" stat in hockey.) But using the rough "oooh and ahhhh" measure, think about how few times the crowd really reacted to a scoring chance. Indeed, MSG had the chances at 3-1 Buffalo after one.

 

In the second and third, it was just an ugly slog. Only one shot for Montreal in the third? But I never felt like Buffalo was dominating in any way. Montreal had the better of play for a lot of the second period.

 

I don't think they stole two points or Price stood on his head. It was a fairly even game. IMHO. I just don't want the Sabres to fall into the "everything was great, we just didn't win" trap. The power play was atrocious. Speaking of accountability, what coach wants to take credit for that warthog afterbirth?

 

I haven't read Vogl yet....but I have had nice correspondences with him in the past.

[Stoner]

I haven't read Vogl yet....but I have had nice correspondences with him in the past.

 

Dear John...

[R_Dudley]

It's been the buzzword for months.

 

So, a question.

 

 

.. the question. How did the Sabres make themselves accountable for an unacceptable result? How will they continue to do so before the next game?

 

There was a very satisfied vibe surrounding the postgame comments. Miller seemed delighted. Other players accentuated the positive. Ruff was Ruff -- without emotion. There was no anger, no disgust from any corner.

 

No accountability?

 

..... we won't have any (direct) idea about whether they are holding each other accountable, because it will happen in the locker room and during practice. ..... The only measure of this that we will have will be the results.

 

 

..... We'd all like to see coaches/players throw stuff, blame people, say publicly who stunk it up. What does that prove? Does it earn wins? No, simply, it makes "some" fans happy.

 

Bill Belichek (?) doesn't do this during his pressers, he's as dull as they come. They somehow still win and have happy fans.

 

Showing emotion during a presser is as valuable as Tallinder is... I'd rather see it on the ice (which is lacking as well 1 game in).

 

 

...press was getting into the "Sabres dominated" angle in his story. I didn't see it that way. The Sabres did dominate territorially in the first period. (Would love to see a "zone time" stat in hockey.)

 

In the second and third, it was just an ugly slog. Only one shot for Montreal in the third? But I never felt like Buffalo was dominating in any way. Montreal had the better of play for a lot of the second period.

I don't think they stole two points or Price stood on his head. It was a fairly even game. IMHO. I just don't want the Sabres to fall into the "everything was great, we just didn't win" trap. The power play was atrocious.

 

 

 

....Moen went to the net with no fear because of the Sabres reputation.

 

This issue on the table is "accountability." To me it's just a buzz word or catch phrase like "team toughness." I didn't see any Sabre playing "out of character", as Lindy put it last year. .... I didn't see anything different than what I saw the past two years. I'll be looking to the Detroit game to see if "accountability" will be a part of this team this season. I hope to see players out side of their comfort zone. IMHO, that will the first sign of "accountability."

 

I did not see the game so I have to rely on what I have read here from the fans and then the press. Interesting the fan reaction isn't in a majority agreement with the press's opinion of how they dominated. The posts and points I selected above to me are really all saying some simular things minus the the other stuff. What caught my eye and concern was the sense of satisfaction portrayed in the news by the players/team afterward of being satisfied with "dominating" and coming close but not winning...

 

I really have to agree with the "out of character" response is what I am also looking for and to me that would be 'it doesn't matter what we or the other team did or didn't do', "losing is unacceptable ever". That's the change I am looking for this year not the we outplayed em but had a bad bounce loser laments, <_< get mad,. get angry about it, take charge... to be clear that doesn't mean call out people and things to the press it means to show/say it's not good enough if we do not win end of story

[Eleven]

They played most of that game like they were the Sabres of '05-'06 or '06-'07, and if they keep that up for the whole season, I think most of us are going to be pretty happy.

[bob_sauve28]

I did not see the game so I have to rely on what I have read here from the fans and then the press. Interesting the fan reaction isn't in a majority agreement with the press's opinion of how they dominated. The posts and points I selected above to me are really all saying some simular things minus the the other stuff. What caught my eye and concern was the sense of satisfaction portrayed in the news by the players/team afterward of being satisfied with "dominating" and coming close but not winning...

 

I really have to agree with the "out of character" response is what I am also looking for and to me that would be 'it doesn't matter what we or the other team did or didn't do', "losing is unacceptable ever". That's the change I am looking for this year not the we outplayed em but had a bad bounce loser laments, <_< get mad,. get angry about it, take charge... to be clear that doesn't mean call out people and things to the press it means to show/say it's not good enough if we do not win end of story

I don't know that we "dominated," so to say. But what really made me happy was how different the team looked. This is a tougher team. Just seeing Mike Greer out there was a reason for joy. Him slamming a defenseman in front of the net was heart warming. I just think the team made a positive move forward. Matador looked good, Kennedy looked great, we didn't give up hardly any scoring opposrtunities. And then there was Tyler Myers. Wow, that kid is ours for the foreseeable future? Thank you god!

 

Of course, they need to win. Vanek, Roy, Pomminstein and Stafford didn't show anything, really. I guess if I was going to criticise it would fall on them, not on the whole team.

[...]

 

Of course, they need to win. Vanek, Roy, Pomminstein and Stafford didn't show anything, really. I guess if I was going to criticize it would fall on them, not on the whole team.

 

 

This.

 

I thought the D gave them a chance. In fact, I think the D gave them more of a chance than Miller if we take the OT goal and stats into account.

 

The offense - the so-called "skill" - lost this game for the Sabres. And the only post-game interview I saw/heard from anyone of the offensive guys was from Kennedy, who was quite visibly disappointed in the loss.

 

I also thought LR seemed rather disappointed, but he obviously can't come out with that stuff so soon. I wonder what he's thinking, actually, I wonder if HIS confidence took a hit with that loss. I mean, I'm not a mind reader, a sanctioned body-language expert, or a practicing psychologist, but I would not at all be surprised if LR is as lost and weak over this team as the players seem. I picked up "that vibe" from him since about last Christmas - but it has only made sense since April.

[Sabre Dance]

If I was a Sabre (which I am obviously NOT), I would have been madder than hell after last night's game. Moen gets a goal by bowling over Miller (he was "checked" into Miller? Hmm...maybe). No one decided to even give Moen a shove after the goal. The Sabres missed all kinds of chances to score in the third, and then lose on a flukey goal in OT. What is there to be happy about? Being all emotional and angry in a post-game presser won't make the loss any easier to take, but at least if a few players said they were upset about the result I would have a little more respect for the team. Even though they played well and "dominated" the game, they still lost in OT and they gave an easy point to a division rival.

I did see some reasons to have hope. I thought Sekera and Myers both played great. Miller was solid (even though he had to take matters unto himself and whack one of the Canadiens players who was in his crease in the third period). Rivet played much more like a captain than he did for most of last season. Kennedy proved he won't back down from anyone. Montador may not have the offensive flair that Spacek has, but he played solid defense.

Time will tell......

[Eleven]

If I was a Sabre (which I am obviously NOT)

 

 

Are you Andrew Peters?

[R_Dudley]

I don't know that we "dominated," so to say. But what really made me happy was how different the team looked. This is a tougher team. Just seeing Mike Greer out there was a reason for joy. Him slamming a defenseman in front of the net was heart warming. I just think the team made a positive move forward. Matador looked good, Kennedy looked great, we didn't give up hardly any scoring opposrtunities. And then there was Tyler Myers. Wow, that kid is ours for the foreseeable future? Thank you god!

 

Of course, they need to win. Vanek, Roy, Pomminstein and Stafford didn't show anything, really. I guess if I was going to criticise it would fall on them, not on the whole team.

Looking different is good but if in the end the result isn't different then it's not that great.

This.

 

I thought the D gave them a chance. In fact, I think the D gave them more of a chance than Miller if we take the OT goal and stats into account.

 

The offense - the so-called "skill" - lost this game for the Sabres. And the only post-game interview I saw/heard from anyone of the offensive guys was from Kennedy, who was quite visibly disappointed in the loss.I also thought LR seemed rather disappointed, but he obviously can't come out with that stuff so soon. I wonder what he's thinking, actually, I wonder if HIS confidence took a hit with that loss. I mean, I'm not a mind reader, a sanctioned body-language expert, or a practicing psychologist, but I would not at all be surprised if LR is as lost and weak over this team as the players seem. I picked up "that vibe" from him since about last Christmas - but it has only made sense since April.

I also noticed that the press and fans posts here seem pretty much void of any positive comments about those so called skilled players..

 

If I was a Sabre (which I am obviously NOT), I would have been madder than hell after last night's game. Moen gets a goal by bowling over Miller (he was "checked" into Miller? Hmm...maybe). No one decided to even give Moen a shove after the goal. The Sabres missed all kinds of chances to score in the third, and then lose on a flukey goal in OT. What is there to be happy about? Being all emotional and angry in a post-game presser won't make the loss any easier to take, but at least if a few players said they were upset about the result I would have a little more respect for the team. Even though they played well and "dominated" the game, they still lost in OT and they gave an easy point to a division rival.I did see some reasons to have hope. I thought Sekera and Myers both played great. Miller was solid (even though he had to take matters unto himself and whack one of the Canadiens players who was in his crease in the third period). Rivet played much more like a captain than he did for most of last season. Kennedy proved he won't back down from anyone. Montador may not have the offensive flair that Spacek has, but he played solid defense.

Time will tell......

That's exactly what I am looking for as well.

[VansTheMans]

Are you and John Vogl the same person? Seriously, I've never seen you two together. :)

 

Vogl was getting into the "Sabres dominated" angle in his story. I didn't see it that way. The Sabres did dominate territorially in the first period. (Would love to see a "zone time" stat in hockey.) But using the rough "oooh and ahhhh" measure, think about how few times the crowd really reacted to a scoring chance. Indeed, MSG had the chances at 3-1 Buffalo after one.

 

In the second and third, it was just an ugly slog. Only one shot for Montreal in the third? But I never felt like Buffalo was dominating in any way. Montreal had the better of play for a lot of the second period.

 

I don't think they stole two points or Price stood on his head. It was a fairly even game. IMHO. I just don't want the Sabres to fall into the "everything was great, we just didn't win" trap. The power play was atrocious. Speaking of accountability, what coach wants to take credit for that warthog afterbirth?

 

Im with you on this one.

 

The home opener was a sloppy, uninspired mess. We didn't dominate that game. Price was not tested. The only memorable save he mad was on Pommer's one timer, but Pommers shot it right into his chest (so there isn't much to be said on that).

 

After all the build up this summer about coming out of the gates strong, the Sabres managed to score one goal. The crowd was NOT into the game; I was there.

[carpandean]

The crowd was NOT into the game; I was there.

Sure they were. I heard the "oleeee, ole ole oleee, oleee, o-ole." :nana:

[VansTheMans]

Sure they were. I heard the "oleeee, ole ole oleee, oleee, o-ole." :nana:

 

Haha.

 

Funny thing about that is, some young guys in the stands responded with, "so gaaaayyyyyyy, so gaaaaay, so gaaaaay" in an attempt to drown out the Canadians fans.

[bottlecap]

When I tuned in near the end of the first, the Sabres looked faster, sharper. However, as time went on, it became apparent to me that they were being forced to the sides by the Canadiens. Nowhere was this more apparent than on the PP where they were mechanically dumping and chasing time and time again. (I hate the dump and chase on the PP.) I think the difference in shots were an illusion, with most of them in the easy category. I was very disappointed in Vanek who was invisible. The Sabres are still the hardest working team in hockey that can't score. Frustrating!