matter2003 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 I completely agree, Miller has been the difference this season. You want to win a Stanley Cup, start thinking outside of the "Hockey Box". Start thinking major trades and minor ones, otherwise, you will have the feeling I have after 39 years. That of "Almosts". Miller has been the difference, but he has also gotten big time help from the defensive style of play the Sabres are using this year. When they have a lead going into the 3rd period, they usually lock it down. Yeah the other team might look like its doing a lot of things in the Sabres zone, but more often than not all they accomplish is getting the puck in, working hard to cycle it along the boards and then turn it over, get the shot blocked, or make a bad pass as the Sabres D patiently waits for them to turn the puck over. Very rarely are they getting really good shots on goal. The other team looks great, but the Sabres just wait and dump the puck down the ice.
matter2003 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 This too, I agree with. But, it must be stated, for clarity of fact, that when Lindy has had the talent to complete the task, he has failed. Granted, injuries, lack of performence and down right bad luck has contributed, but at the end of the day, 11 years without success is just that, 11 years without success. So by this definition 95%+ of all coaches are failures.
Stoner Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 25th in goals, but their +16 goal differential is among the best in the NHL(tied for 7th best in the league). You win games by scoring more than the other team---period. It doesn't matter if its 2-1 or 1-0 or 10-1 or 5-4. You don't get any bonus points for style... Miller has been the best goalie in the NHL and its in no small part because of the Sabres renewed commitment to defensive play. Shots on goal stats don't support the last statement, as DeLuca has pointed out. I'd love to see the internal scoring chance numbers the Sabres keep. My impression is that the Sabres are better defensively this year, but not enough to explain Miller's fantastic season. He's just making more saves. Sometimes we all overthink these things.
static70 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 what do u mean by "serious"? Like a guy who can score 40 goals in a season like Vanek? A couple of others that can get 30-35 like Roy and Pominville? Not sure what we are talking about here. I find it funny people who know hockey are raving about Vanek's defensive play this year and about how good he is playing in games even when he is not scoring, yet people who post on message boards somehow know more than all these people and say he sucks... I am pretty sure he hasn't forgotten how to score after getting 144 goals in his first 4 seasons. Obviously what he is being asked to do by Ruff is a little different this year, as it is for most of the team. I suppose we would rather watch them skate up and down the ice all night and trade odd man rush after odd man rush with the other team tho, even when it results in us missing the playoffs the last 2 years... I will not debate the current players or the issue of "I find it funny people who know hockey are raving about Vanek's defensive play this year and about how good he is playing in games even when he is not scoring, yet people who post on message boards somehow know more than all these people and say he sucks". I do not look at the sport the same as you. It is a business, pure and simple. Tommy G. wants a winner, then the reality is there for all to see. Vanek is an in-sport commodity, no different than any other player. Its nice to find "player" specific loyalty, but my loyalty is to the CUP, not to any individual player. If this group of players cannot achieve the championship we all long for, then your arguement holds no water, so they say.
static70 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 So by this definition 95%+ of all coaches are failures. Absolutely! I'll go ya one better, why do these GM's and Coaches get a job? Is it to come close, or to build a team that can win it all? Nuff said, No?
matter2003 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 Shots on goal stats don't support the last statement, as DeLuca has pointed out. I'd love to see the internal scoring chance numbers the Sabres keep. My impression is that the Sabres are better defensively this year, but not enough to explain Miller's fantastic season. He's just making more saves. Sometimes we all overthink these things. Miller is giving up virtually no rebounds on shots, and usually when he does, the defense are there to clear it. How many times last year did players score on second and third chances? A ton...this year its hard to really even think of many...
static70 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 Miller has been the difference, but he has also gotten big time help from the defensive style of play the Sabres are using this year. When they have a lead going into the 3rd period, they usually lock it down. Yeah the other team might look like its doing a lot of things in the Sabres zone, but more often than not all they accomplish is getting the puck in, working hard to cycle it along the boards and then turn it over, get the shot blocked, or make a bad pass as the Sabres D patiently waits for them to turn the puck over. Very rarely are they getting really good shots on goal. The other team looks great, but the Sabres just wait and dump the puck down the ice. Hate to burst the bubble here, but the Sabres aren't going to lock down Washington or Pittsburg come playoff time. Look, I am not the "GOD" of hockey fans, the fans my age all remember and remember too well. Its purely a matter of talent. We currently do not have the talent on the roster to go all the way to the Cup and win it. No biggy, it is what it is. Darcy is responsible, so is Lindy, lets not forget, Lindy has much input on the roster.
matter2003 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 Hate to burst the bubble here, but the Sabres aren't going to lock down Washington or Pittsburg come playoff time. Look, I am not the "GOD" of hockey fans, the fans my age all remember and remember too well. Its purely a matter of talent. We currently do not have the talent on the roster to go all the way to the Cup and win it. No biggy, it is what it is. Darcy is responsible, so is Lindy, lets not forget, Lindy has much input on the roster. Why not? New Jersey routinely did it to other teams in the playoffs. Miller has been playing good enough to steal games from teams. Its hard to get the talent of Washington and Pittsburgh when they've benefitted from years and years and years of having 1st overall picks from being horrible. Eventually they have to start being good just from that alone...
carpandean Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 No biggy, it is what it is. Darcy is responsible, so is Lindy, lets not forget, Lindy has much input on the roster. Technically, Lindy can't draft, trade, sign, waive or buyout any player, so he has little direct control over the roster. The questions is, how much influence does he actually have on Darcy's decisions. Nobody here knows that. Even if Darcy has said that Lindy has a say, it doesn't mean that when it comes down to the actual decisions to pull the trigger, he has any control over who stays or goes.
static70 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 Why not? New Jersey routinely did it to other teams in the playoffs. Miller has been playing good enough to steal games from teams. Its hard to get the talent of Washington and Pittsburgh when they've benefitted from years and years and years of having 1st overall picks from being horrible. Eventually they have to start being good just from that alone... Take a long look at a defensive serious called "The Trap". New Jersey did it on the trap, after the rule changes, "The Trap" becomes problimatic at best. The "Inbetween the Lockout" years are over. The rules themselves now turn towards offensive ability, which is a selling point for the NHL. Whether or not those rules are being subjegated to an across the board implimentation, thats another story. But at the end of the day, you need to realize, those high-flying other teams (Wash. and Pitt. come to mind for the Eastern Conference) will smoke Miller 4 out of 7 games. That equates out to defeat in a playoff series. There is an old adage that should be adhered to. A great defense is a good offense. What does this mean, well, in a nutshell, the more time you spend in the offensive zone, the less that will be spent in a defensive zone. No one is dabating our goaltending or defense isn't ready, but its time to make changes on the offensive side of this team if we are to go head to head with teams such as Wash. and Pitt. and succeed. If not Kovalchuck or Staal, then a couple of players that are of established scoring. Think on this, take some time to really think on it is all I am saying.
cdexchange Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 21st out of 30 teams is the middle? I consider that bottom third. No, I said "about in the middle". The middle (#15) team is allowing 30.2 SPG. The Sabres are allowing 31.1, less than one more. That's why I called it "minor". The difference is miniscule, and therefore the stat has failed to prove (to me) your (apparent) assertion that the Sabres have not played good team defense this year, when my eyes and common sense tell me otherwise.
static70 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 Technically, Lindy can't draft, trade, sign, waive or buyout any player, so he has little direct control over the roster. The questions is, how much influence does he actually have on Darcy's decisions. Nobody here knows that. Even if Darcy has said that Lindy has a say, it doesn't mean that when it comes down to the actual decisions to pull the trigger, he has any control over who stays or goes. Actually carpandean, this very post is a double edged sword. Lindy does have say, whether or not you want to admit that, well, thats another story. But lets say he does not have a say. This is important, pay attention now: "Even if Lindy doesn't have a say in personell, his system does". Did you get that? There has to be a balancing of the system as well as the intergration of new players. Kovalchuck will not succeed without the "handcuffs" taken off of him. Or any other offensively minded player for that matter.
carpandean Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 Actually carpandean, this very post is a double edged sword. Lindy does have say, whether or not you want to admit that, well, thats another story. I didn't say that he did or did not, I merely said that nobody here knows for sure how much he does. But lets say he does not have a say. This is important, pay attention now: "Even if Lindy doesn't have a say in personnel, his system does". Did you get that? There has to be a balancing of the system as well as the intergration of new players. Kovalchuck will not succeed without the "handcuffs" taken off of him. Or any other offensively minded player for that matter. <_< Condescending tone aside, maybe Lindy has chosen the system based on the players. When he had the offensive tools (and the "new NHL" rules), he went with a freewheeling, high-flying system. Now, with less potent offensive tools and a strong goaltender, he has logically chosen to go with a more defensive system.
static70 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 I didn't say that he did or did not, I merely said that nobody here knows for sure how much he does. <_< Condescending tone aside, maybe Lindy has chosen the system based on the players. When he had the offensive tools (and the "new NHL" rules), he went with a freewheeling, high-flying system. Now, with less potent offensive tools and a strong goaltender, he has logically chosen to go with a more defensive system. I know, I know, sorry for the tone, but you should already know that. :) And you should also know, you fit the system to the players strong points. :) Which is why I say that Lindy needs to go, he may very well be holding back some strong points on this team. Whats the old saying: "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink"? Ya, that comes to mind about now.
cdexchange Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 21st out of 30 teams is the middle? I consider that bottom third. Tonight they gave up 35 to a team averaging 29.4 per game. It's interesting you think stats like shots against, turn overs, takeaways and power plays are "relatively minor stats." The leading after two periods stat falls directly on Miller and his ability to close teams out this year. Again it is a stat that the Sabres do well in and Lindy has little influence on. Haha, I love how you just threw those two in there now and allege that I called them "minor" when of course I never once mentioned either of them. Holy straw man Batman! :lol: Weren't you the guy trying to run Miller out of town a few years ago because his eyes were asymetrical or something? Perhaps you jumped the gun there too. Just let the season play out is all I'm sayin'. It's not like this is Miller's last year and we only have a one-year window with him. If we miss the playoffs or get spanked in the first round then by all means. But to fire the coach now while we're in first place is just dumb, IMHO.
matter2003 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 I know, I know, sorry for the tone, but you should already know that. :) And you should also know, you fit the system to the players strong points. :) Which is why I say that Lindy needs to go, he may very well be holding back some strong points on this team. Whats the old saying: "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink"? Ya, that comes to mind about now. Here are your statements in a nutshell: -The strong points on our team are being held back because they are not allowed to be more offensive like the last 2 seasons when they missed the playoffs. -Lindy needs to go because he has coached the Sabres to a Northeast division best 50 points to this point in the season by forcing them to play a more defensive style. So by your statements you are more happy when the Sabres score lots of goals and lose, but not happy when they score fewer goals and win. You also think that the coach needs to be fired because he is winning games this way. Makes perfect sense only to you I guess...
static70 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 Haha, I love how you just threw those two in there now and allege that I called them "minor" when of course I never once mentioned either of them. Holy straw man Batman! :lol: Weren't you the guy trying to run Miller out of town a few years ago because his eyes were asymetrical or something? Perhaps you jumped the gun there too. Just let the season play out is all I'm sayin'. It's not like this is Miller's last year and we only have a one-year window with him. If we miss the playoffs or get spanked in the first round then by all means. But to fire the coach now while we're in first place is just dumb, IMHO. I completely disagree with the final predication of this statement. May I ask why an NHL coach or GM's job should be safe due to a "season"? Did I not just see Philly fire their coach in the season? What gives Lindy or Darcy the right to hold these jobs at this time? A first place showing? 1st place in the division at the beginning of Jan. means absolutely nothing. The real justification (and little or no mention of it from those that are defending them) is the record they hold to date. That record clearly dictates Lindy and Darcy should be removed immediately and without delay. No Stanley Cup in 11 years, combined with this teams current scoring woes (placement in the current standings mean nothing in the larger scheme of the team itself) speak for themselves. When its time to go, its time to go in my opinion.
matter2003 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 (placement in the current standings mean nothing in the larger scheme of the team itself) speak for themselves. When its time to go, its time to go in my opinion. Maybe in the fantasy land you appear to be in, placement in the standings don't matter, but in real life it is ALL THAT MATTERS.
static70 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 Here are your statements in a nutshell: -The strong points on our team are being held back because they are not allowed to be more offensive like the last 2 seasons when they missed the playoffs. -Lindy needs to go because he has coached the Sabres to a Northeast division best 50 points to this point in the season by forcing them to play a more defensive style. So by your statements you are more happy when the Sabres score lots of goals and lose, but not happy when they score fewer goals and win. You also think that the coach needs to be fired because he is winning games this way. Makes perfect sense only to you I guess... Or, you could wake up out of your little world and make the following statements on what I have said to date: 1. The potential strong points that may be brought in might be hesitant to sign with Buffalo due to the Coaches current system. Offensive minded players that may be interested in leaving their current rosters in the season may look at Buffalo and see a team that will not use them proplerly. (Kovalchuck, Staal, Sharp or any other offensive minded player). 2. Lindy has coached the team to absolutely nothing. Take a good, close look in the rafters at HSBC Arena. Do you see any Stanley Cup Championship Banners? Didn't think so. 3. So by your statements, your happy with a defensively run team with absolutely no chance (0, zilch, nill, notta, not a chance) of winning a Stanley Cup and are satisfied with the "Status Quo" based on what fact again? I forgot what your facts were to the contrary. Well now, this makes perfect sense only to you I guess........... In the meantime this team will fail and fail at the expense of not only the organization, but the fans. Ya, that makes alot more sense to me than you stated.
cdexchange Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 Did I not just see Philly fire their coach in the season? When they were in first place? No, you did not see that. What gives Lindy or Darcy the right to hold these jobs at this time? A first place showing? Yes. 1st place in the division at the beginning of Jan. means absolutely nothing. Actually, it means that they are winning a comfortable majority of their games so far this season, and are well on their way to the playoffs. I consider both of these points quite important, rather than "absolutely nothing".
cdexchange Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 absolutely no chance (0, zilch, nill, notta, not a chance) of winning a Stanley Cup Ridiculous.
static70 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 Well, ok, if you believe this Sabres team has a snowballs chance in hell of runnin and gunnin with Pitt and Wash, I want what your smokin. Take a good look at those rosters, Playmakers, finishers, skills and the coaching staffs that let them play their game, looks like a great combination to me. Not to mention the fact both teams are "AHEAD" of Buffalo in the standings and have what it takes to smoke the Sabres in a 7 game series. Don't pretend you don't see it, just admit it and move on.
matter2003 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 Or, you could wake up out of your little world and make the following statements on what I have said to date: 1. The potential strong points that may be brought in might be hesitant to sign with Buffalo due to the Coaches current system. Offensive minded players that may be interested in leaving their current rosters in the season may look at Buffalo and see a team that will not use them proplerly. (Kovalchuck, Staal, Sharp or any other offensive minded player). 2. Lindy has coached the team to absolutely nothing. Take a good, close look in the rafters at HSBC Arena. Do you see any Stanley Cup Championship Banners? Didn't think so. 3. So by your statements, your happy with a defensively run team with absolutely no chance (0, zilch, nill, notta, not a chance) of winning a Stanley Cup and are satisfied with the "Status Quo" based on what fact again? I forgot what your facts were to the contrary. Well now, this makes perfect sense only to you I guess........... In the meantime this team will fail and fail at the expense of not only the organization, but the fans. Ya, that makes alot more sense to me than you stated. How many cups did the Devils win playing a defensive style of hockey?
matter2003 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 Not to mention the fact both teams are "AHEAD" of Buffalo in the standings and have what it takes to smoke the Sabres in a 7 game series. Don't pretend you don't see it, just admit it and move on. Yes, those 3 points show they are so much better...
static70 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Posted December 28, 2009 The Devils ran the trap from 93 to 03, they have not won a cup since the rule changes. Hate the game, not the player.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.