Stoner Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 Every series in the NHL is 1-1, except for Chicago-Nashville, which Nashville leads 1-0. No team has held its home ice advantage. Yet I still think most of the favorites, including Buffalo, will win their series. Do you still think the Sabres are the favorites after Games 1 and 2? (Not to mention six games in the regular season.) The maddening frustration of yesterday for me is that the series went from almost a certain lock for the Sabres to what now feels like a pick-em or even slight advantage to Boston. That's a huge swing.
ThePebble19 Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 Every series in the NHL is 1-1, except for Chicago-Nashville, which Nashville leads 1-0. No team has held its home ice advantage. Yet I still think most of the favorites, including Buffalo, will win their series. I came on this morning to post the exact same thing. It's now a best of 5 for everyone. I don't think there was anyone here who expected it to be a 4 game series. I'm back to my non-gameday state of mind.
Stoner Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 Man, i cannot get over the Vanek injury. It has pissed me off for about 10 hours. It was clearly an intent to injury. We cannot afford to lose him. I'm with you. I really can't understand anyone who looks at that play and says it was something you see routinely and/or a harmless attempt to disrupt the play. Remember that Boychuk was clobbered by Myers in Game 1. I think something snapped in the guy. I shouldn't be surprised, but I am sort of flabbergasted that a play like that doesn't get as much attention as some of the head shots. But maybe I should take DD's advice and realize I'm not going to convince anyone otherwise, and they're not going to convince me. On that conciliatory note, I want to publicly apologize to SDS for my outburst. I was fired up about the play and took my response too far. No one on here deserves to be told to shut up. Sorry Scott.
ParkMeadow Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 That's interesting, I do the same thing. And thinking on something Swamp and Ghost wrote, I have the following observation. This board is more interesting now for its psychological profile, than it is for sharing information(which seemed to be more the case back in the 90s). Obviously, at some level, we are all Sabres fans. But seeing how people react to a loss, or other adversity, really gives insight into people. After a loss, there is a sadness to everyone--and a certain amount of anger. But the reactions are then different. You have the very vocal group, I want to blame everyone for this--management, coaching, the soft players, the crowd at the game etc. These folks want to fire everyone, and start over immediately. Bucky Gleason is a good spokemen for this group--if only they were in charge the result would be different. Then you get people who try and remain hopeful, even thought they grow weary-- rooting for the Sabres, or any Buffalo team, they have passion, but they have seen this movie many times and they know how it ends. Less anger, more resignation that they can't do anything to affect the outcome. You hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. This is basically me. Then you get folks who are much more optimistic, that "the boys will shape up" and make a deep run. I'd like to be here, but I'm not. It's also interesting that these different reactions put people at odds with each other here. At bottom, it is all about how people cope with situations totally out of their control--including myself. It's as if they can "control" the board--so to speak--it will perhaps give them some control over what happens on the ice. It is just your own personal way of letting your feelings out--and releasing that emotional pain is a good thing, and the board is important for that. Realizing that, there is no right or wrong response to situations like these--it is just your makeup amd what works best for you. We all need to let people just react their own way--not try and persuade them "how to feel." So I am putting all this aside for now, and locking arms with everyone here to cheer this team going forward--no matter how each fan expresses their fandom in times of difficulty. If we, the most rabid fans cannot come together, what chance does the team have? We win, we win together. We lose, and we do that together too. It's 1-1. Things swing wildly in terms of emotion and momentum in the playoffs. Up one day, down the next. I agree that this team is fragile sometimes, and did not react well to the Vanek injury yesterday. But the fun of this is to see whether with a little time to regroup, they can dust themselves off and bounce back. And we can fight like cats and dogs here about whether they will, but deep down we all want them to do it. So as the great leaders of Animal House said--"LET'S DO ITTTTTTTTTTTTTTT." GO SABRES!!! What an insightful, well thought out post! It is much easier to read and agree with most of what you say the day after such a frustrating loss. Having said that, this forum would be nowhere near as fun and interesting if everyone were so rational! My blood pressure has come back down but I would still like to see an "eye for an eye" mentality in the next game regarding the chop on Vanek by Boychuk...
Dave Dryden Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 Do you still think the Sabres are the favorites after Games 1 and 2? (Not to mention six games in the regular season.) The maddening frustration of yesterday for me is that the series went from almost a certain lock for the Sabres to what now feels like a pick-em or even slight advantage to Boston. That's a huge swing. I think you are correct on all points. Right now, the Bruins are the favorites, and we let a great chance to put a strangle hold on this series get away--blowing leads. It's hard to take. I must say, you have a unique talent for expressing all of our worst fears. I think those fears bond us, and we need to face them straight up.
Dave Dryden Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 I believe. Like I said - Get the passing going, and you'll see Boston having a much harder time getting their forecheck going, plus you won't see them being as physical either as a good chunk of their hits came on players struggling with a bad pass. The passing has to be better, it's as simple as that. Fix that, and you'll have a totally different game. This is just right. I have rarely seen so many chip passes by the Sabres right on the stick of a Bruin. When Lucic did that the Ennis on the Pominville goal, I thought it might even out. But alas not. But if they get their passing down, expecially exiting their own zone, I think we see a different result.
Hawk Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 Do you still think the Sabres are the favorites after Games 1 and 2? (Not to mention six games in the regular season.) The maddening frustration of yesterday for me is that the series went from almost a certain lock for the Sabres to what now feels like a pick-em or even slight advantage to Boston. That's a huge swing. It's always funny to me how when a higher seeded team loses a game in a series, that their fans immediately give the lower seed, who is there for a reason, the edge in the series. Series sweeps are rare. Sabres are still the favorite in this series. Dont ruin the arches in your feet from jumping on and off the bandwagon, everytime they lose a game in a series. Enjoy the games, while they last. Dont Worry. Be Happy!! :D :D
Stoner Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 It's always funny to me how when a higher seeded team loses a game in a series, that their fans immediately give the lower seed, who is there for a reason, the edge in the series. Series sweeps are rare. Sabres are still the favorite in this series. Dont ruin the arches in your feet from jumping on and off the bandwagon, everytime they lose a game in a series. Enjoy the games, while they last. Dont Worry. Be Happy!! :D :D Why are they the favorites? I don't see an edge in goal for the Sabres yet. Julien seems solid; Ruff didn't appear to have any answer after Vanek went down. Three of the next four in Boston so home ice isn't there. A few points better in the regular season? I'm not saying Boston is going to win the series. I still believe the Sabres will take it. But at this point, starting a best of five, there's no favorite at all IMHO.
Hawk Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 Why are they the favorites? I don't see an edge in goal for the Sabres yet. Julien seems solid; Ruff didn't appear to have any answer after Vanek went down. Three of the next four in Boston so home ice isn't there. A few points better in the regular season? I'm not saying Boston is going to win the series. I still believe the Sabres will take it. But at this point, starting a best of five, there's no favorite at all IMHO. Would you say that the Sabres were the favorite going in to the series?
Stoner Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 I've watched that Ennis pass a few times now and I'm not sure he deserves the blame he's getting. Connolly was wide open and Ennis was just putting it in a spot for Connolly to go get. It wasn't a perfect pass, but it was just off the tip of the stick. Was Connolly skating hard? I don't know. I wonder if the mistake before all that was not changing just before that. As Ennis came to center, players on the bench stood up. It had been a long shift I think.
SwampD Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 That's interesting, I do the same thing. And thinking on something Swamp and Ghost wrote, I have the following observation. This board is more interesting now for its psychological profile, than it is for sharing information(which seemed to be more the case back in the 90s). Obviously, at some level, we are all Sabres fans. But seeing how people react to a loss, or other adversity, really gives insight into people. After a loss, there is a sadness to everyone--and a certain amount of anger. But the reactions are then different. You have the very vocal group, I want to blame everyone for this--management, coaching, the soft players, the crowd at the game etc. These folks want to fire everyone, and start over immediately. Bucky Gleason is a good spokemen for this group--if only they were in charge the result would be different. Then you get people who try and remain hopeful, even thought they grow weary-- rooting for the Sabres, or any Buffalo team, they have passion, but they have seen this movie many times and they know how it ends. Less anger, more resignation that they can't do anything to affect the outcome. You hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. This is basically me. Then you get folks who are much more optimistic, that "the boys will shape up" and make a deep run. I'd like to be here, but I'm not. It's also interesting that these different reactions put people at odds with each other here. At bottom, it is all about how people cope with situations totally out of their control--including myself. It's as if they can "control" the board--so to speak--it will perhaps give them some control over what happens on the ice. It is just your own personal way of letting your feelings out--and releasing that emotional pain is a good thing, and the board is important for that. Realizing that, there is no right or wrong response to situations like these--it is just your makeup amd what works best for you. We all need to let people just react their own way--not try and persuade them "how to feel." So I am putting all this aside for now, and locking arms with everyone here to cheer this team going forward--no matter how each fan expresses their fandom in times of difficulty. If we, the most rabid fans cannot come together, what chance does the team have? We win, we win together. We lose, and we do that together too. It's 1-1. Things swing wildly in terms of emotion and momentum in the playoffs. Up one day, down the next. I agree that this team is fragile sometimes, and did not react well to the Vanek injury yesterday. But the fun of this is to see whether with a little time to regroup, they can dust themselves off and bounce back. And we can fight like cats and dogs here about whether they will, but deep down we all want them to do it. So as the great leaders of Animal House said--"LET'S DO ITTTTTTTTTTTTTTT." GO SABRES!!! Good stuff. Now I'm curious what I said because I talk out of my ### a lot. I'm with you. I really can't understand anyone who looks at that play and says it was something you see routinely and/or a harmless attempt to disrupt the play. Remember that Boychuk was clobbered by Myers in Game 1. I think something snapped in the guy. I shouldn't be surprised, but I am sort of flabbergasted that a play like that doesn't get as much attention as some of the head shots. But maybe I should take DD's advice and realize I'm not going to convince anyone otherwise, and they're not going to convince me. On that conciliatory note, I want to publicly apologize to SDS for my outburst. I was fired up about the play and took my response too far. No one on here deserves to be told to shut up. Sorry Scott. If I'm not allowed to be upset immediately after a playoff loss then what's the point of watching. Now, if it was still affecting me this morning then there is a problem. I, too, told someone to shut up yesterday for which today,.. I'm still not sorry. :lol:
kishoph Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B46lOWEwfLo BTW, you'll see that Vanek is favoring his left knee when skating off the ice, even though the slash was on his right knee... He probably injured it when he crashed into the boards. I agree that it does seem that the injury is to the left leg/foot, hopefully there's no break or tear. As far as intention, it certainly looks as if it was an attempt to injure, and making the decision to hurt someone in a fraction of a second is not something that can't happen. Better athletes make decisions in fractions of a second. I can easily believe that the Boston player could recognize it was VANEK and could decide to slash him with the intent to injure him.
SwampD Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 I agree that it does seem that the injury is to the left leg/foot, hopefully there's no break or tear. As far as intention, it certainly looks as if it was an attempt to injure, and making the decision to hurt someone in a fraction of a second is not something that can't happen. Better athletes make decisions in fractions of a second. I can easily believe that the Boston player could recognize it was VANEK and could decide to slash him with the intent to injure him. I still think SDS is right. To me it looks like a stick check that hit Vanek's leg.
Marvelo Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 Just wanna say hang in there everybody. Get behind the team and don't waiver. They need you. It's going to be a rough ride but they're doing it for Buffalo.
tulax Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 I agree that it does seem that the injury is to the left leg/foot, hopefully there's no break or tear. As far as intention, it certainly looks as if it was an attempt to injure, and making the decision to hurt someone in a fraction of a second is not something that can't happen. Better athletes make decisions in fractions of a second. I can easily believe that the Boston player could recognize it was VANEK and could decide to slash him with the intent to injure him. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obvY5XcJEPc I knew I had seen this intentional check before. If you go to the 3:30 min. mark you will see the exact same injury. Johnny, if you're going to hit with intent to injure, at least don't completely copy a move from a Disney movie.
Chief Enabler Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 Replay of Game 2 on NHL network from 11am-1pm Right Now
SwampD Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obvY5XcJEPc I knew I had seen this intentional check before. If you go to the 3:30 min. mark you will see the exact same injury. Johnny, if you're going to hit with intent to injure, at least don't completely copy a move from a Disney movie. That's pretty funny. Did Emilio's left leg get injured as well?
Stoner Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 Would you say that the Sabres were the favorite going in to the series? Slight favorites, although I feared meeting Boston (Chara, Rask, Bruins of last season getting it together, etc.). I picked Sabres in five with my heart. I guess my feeling is that slight favorites has turned into pick'em based on the first two games.
Stoner Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 I knew I had seen this intentional check before. If you go to the 3:30 min. mark you will see the exact same injury. Johnny, if you're going to hit with intent to injure, at least don't completely copy a move from a Disney movie. LMAO! Carbon copy. Seriously. Or was he innocently going for the stick and happened to "miss"?
deluca67 Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 I think the key to winning this series is our passing. Pressure or not, the passing HAS to be better. I remember Torres being put off-side late in the third streaking down the wing because a completely un-hassled centerman put the puck in his skates instead of on his stick. That's a 15ft pass people, those simply HAVE TO CLICK. Kudo's to the B's putting pressure on the Sabres, but at least some of that pressure was increased tenfold by the Sabres's own poor passing plays. Passing and just better decisions in general. There was a play where the Sabres had sub stained pressure in the Bruins zone. The puck went went to Lydman on the point and he dumped it to a corner where there were no Sabres just a Bruin. Bruins got possession headed up ice and a few minutes later they tied the game. I battled a lot this season on the idea that this defensive corp was vastly overrated by Sabre fans. I've seen nothing over the last two games that makes me think other wise. They have given up 70 shots. 70 shots to a team that has trouble generating offense.
bunomatic Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 I think in the 2 games and in the last in particular we've been outcoached,the Bruins have shown more heart,Rask has outplayed Miller,And the Bruins have been better on face offs and controlling puck possession.The only reason we had a edge on hits in game 1 was the Bruins had possession of the puck.We have to be better in every facet of the game.
repster Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 I battled a lot this season on the idea that this defensive corp was vastly overrated by Sabre fans. I've seen nothing over the last two games that makes me think other wise. They have given up 70 shots. 70 shots to a team that has trouble generating offense. The make-up of this defense corp is still designed for the early post-lockout years. There's little toughness outside of maybe Montador and Rivet, but they are not top two defensemen. Myers will be a key component moving forward, but he's still learning and at this point and could use a few more pounds to his frame. At the end of this year, Tallinder and Lydman are UFAs and at the end of next year Rivet and Montador are UFAs. I think there should be an overhaul of the D, which should this summer include a trade of one of our small talented forwards (and whatever else it would take i.e. draft pick) for an established top two defenseman with some decent size to play with Myers. Maybe they will graduate Weber to the Sabres next year (despite Paul Hamilton's dislike of him), but with the present shakiness of Butler and Sekera, I really think they need to upgrade at this position. I think Miller's stellar play has covered up the inadequacies of our D. I still like the overall mobility, but there needs to be one key component to play with Myers - to have a shutdown pair.
cilevel Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 I think in the 2 games and in the last in particular we've been outcoached,the Bruins have shown more heart,Rask has outplayed Miller,And the Bruins have been better on face offs and controlling puck possession.The only reason we had a edge on hits in game 1 was the Bruins had possession of the puck.We have to be better in every facet of the game. I have to agree. Momentum at this point is clearly in the B's favor. Our PP is not up to par and running around in our own zone has to stop.
carpandean Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 70 shots to a team that has trouble generating offense. Shots <> offense. Boston was tied with SJ for 6th best in the league with 31.7 shots/game (just slightly ahead of Buffalo, who was 9th.) The Bruins were, however, dead last in the league with 7.58% shooting (goals/shot = 0.0758.) Even with the empty netter, they're only at about 8.5% in the series (7.2% if you ignore the EN shot and goal, which I doubt occurred in half of their games during the regular season, so it artificially inflates their stat here.) Buffalo is at about 8.2%, down from 8.92% during the regular season.
FearTheReaper Posted April 18, 2010 Report Posted April 18, 2010 I'm with you. I really can't understand anyone who looks at that play and says it was something you see routinely and/or a harmless attempt to disrupt the play. Remember that Boychuk was clobbered by Myers in Game 1. I think something snapped in the guy. I shouldn't be surprised, but I am sort of flabbergasted that a play like that doesn't get as much attention as some of the head shots. Yes, a true shot of "retribution" was presented in front of Boychuk, and he did not hesitate to take the swing. There are plays in the game that are slightly similar, but nowhere near as lethal. Boychuk isn't an offensive guy, nor is he relied on to do anything but check and such. What else is he out there to do, but injure Van? I'm sure he could care less that he injured our best offensive gun. "Hey guys, i injured Vanek, should we send a card or something?" (sarcasm off) :angry:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.