shrader Posted October 19, 2010 Report Posted October 19, 2010 But Rivet cannot let Bolland blow past him from the boards on the blue line and walk right in front of the net to score the tying goal when you are protecting a lead in the 3rd period. Inexcusable, especially for a captain. He can no longer keep up with the young skaters in this league and will continue to cost us games, especially on the road when opposing coaches can send out their young legs on matchups. It's not just Rivet that this is happening too. Damn near every d-man on this team has let a forward sneak behind them at one point this year. To me, that looks like a coaching issue.
otis Posted October 19, 2010 Report Posted October 19, 2010 Agree. Hossa was virtually invisible to our entire backline during that home and home series. I haven't seen such profligate goal-hanging since the days of Rick Middleton! But it paid off against our defense. Otis
shrader Posted October 19, 2010 Report Posted October 19, 2010 Agree. Hossa was virtually invisible to our entire backline during that home and home series. I haven't seen such profligate goal-hanging since the days of Rick Middleton! But it paid off against our defense. Otis It's a shame that it was Atlanta and went completely unnoticed, but the days of Hossa-Savard-Kovalchuk had to have been the recent peak of cherry picking.
Marvelo Posted October 19, 2010 Report Posted October 19, 2010 I was at the game in Chicago and the Sabres actually looked like the better team for most of the game. It was an improved effort in a hostile environment, particularly by the 3rd and 4th lines. But Rivet cannot let Bolland blow past him from the boards on the blue line and walk right in front of the net to score the tying goal when you are protecting a lead in the 3rd period. Inexcusable, especially for a captain. He can no longer keep up with the young skaters in this league and will continue to cost us games, especially on the road when opposing coaches can send out their young legs on matchups. Leopold and Morrison are also a huge drop-off from Tallinder/Lydman defensively. I predict both will be -25 or worse by the end of the year. They do not fit in Lindy's system. In Leopold's case, he doesn't fit in anybody's system if you consider he's on his fifth team in three years. Otis all great points.
nfreeman Posted October 19, 2010 Report Posted October 19, 2010 I was at the game in Chicago and the Sabres actually looked like the better team for most of the game. It was an improved effort in a hostile environment, particularly by the 3rd and 4th lines. But Rivet cannot let Bolland blow past him from the boards on the blue line and walk right in front of the net to score the tying goal when you are protecting a lead in the 3rd period. Inexcusable, especially for a captain. He can no longer keep up with the young skaters in this league and will continue to cost us games, especially on the road when opposing coaches can send out their young legs on matchups. Leopold and Morrison are also a huge drop-off from Tallinder/Lydman defensively. I predict both will be -25 or worse by the end of the year. They do not fit in Lindy's system. In Leopold's case, he doesn't fit in anybody's system if you consider he's on his fifth team in three years. Otis I agree that the Sabres played pretty well, and with good effort, vs Chicago, and that Rivet's play on the GTG was awful. However, I disagree on Leopold and Morrisson. I think it takes time for defensemen to work their way into new systems and that they will prove to be an upgrade over Tallinder & Lydman.
nfreeman Posted October 19, 2010 Report Posted October 19, 2010 Balsille replacing Golisano. This is a terrible idea, unless you like the sound of "Hamilton Sabres."
deluca67 Posted October 19, 2010 Report Posted October 19, 2010 Listening to Lindy this morning with Shill & Shill on WGR I am convinced more than ever that he and Darcy need to go. They are both two parts of the same creature. I doubt either could exist with a different partner. The question is can these men build a Stanley Cup Champion? My answer is NO. The second question has to be, if they can't build you a Stanley Cup Champion why are they here? I think the answer to that question is that this organization believes that being a part time contender is enough and that a Cup is a unrealistic goal. They will talk the talk but I get the feeling they just don't mean it. If they did they would do more to achieve that goal. The part that is really sad is seeing fans who buy into it. I have thought for a while that Buffalo sports fans are the beaten dog happy for any treat they can get before the next heart break. Look at Bills fans. Ralph comes out and says that it will take 3 more years to rebuild. I have heard Bills fans that buy into it. Ralph comes out and says they will suck for three more years and some fans are happy with it. I guess what I am trying to say is that if we as fans don't demand more from our sports teams than we have no right to expect more. A silent or docile fan base is worse than a empty arena. We live in area where apathy is a way of life. From politics to professional sports we sit back and except the status quo. Which is why seeing so many of those that responded to this poll is spirit lifting. That so many can recognize the problems this franchise has is a great sign. Ruff and Regier can say it's only six games, we for the most part know it's been three plus years.
Eleven Posted October 20, 2010 Author Report Posted October 20, 2010 Listening to Lindy this morning with Shill & Shill on WGR I am convinced more than ever that he and Darcy need to go. They are both two parts of the same creature. I doubt either could exist with a different partner. The question is can these men build a Stanley Cup Champion? My answer is NO. The second question has to be, if they can't build you a Stanley Cup Champion why are they here? I think the answer to that question is that this organization believes that being a part time contender is enough and that a Cup is a unrealistic goal. They will talk the talk but I get the feeling they just don't mean it. If they did they would do more to achieve that goal. The part that is really sad is seeing fans who buy into it. I have thought for a while that Buffalo sports fans are the beaten dog happy for any treat they can get before the next heart break. Look at Bills fans. Ralph comes out and says that it will take 3 more years to rebuild. I have heard Bills fans that buy into it. Ralph comes out and says they will suck for three more years and some fans are happy with it. I guess what I am trying to say is that if we as fans don't demand more from our sports teams than we have no right to expect more. A silent or docile fan base is worse than a empty arena. We live in area where apathy is a way of life. From politics to professional sports we sit back and except the status quo. Which is why seeing so many of those that responded to this poll is spirit lifting. That so many can recognize the problems this franchise has is a great sign. Ruff and Regier can say it's only six games, we for the most part know it's been three plus years. Nice post. I can't blame the coach and the front office at the same time. Knowing what Lindy has done with little (and it is more than penciling a goalie's name, DeLuca!), I choose to direct my frustration to the front office, which I think is Quinn and not Regier. Quinn can't build a champ because (a) he doesn't need to, and more importantly, (b) how the hell would he know how? But dammit, his ego is going to prevent anyone from making good hockey decisions. Hell, his ego prevented anyone from objecting to the slug; you think an actual trade gets by him? Lose Quinn, maybe get some long-term success. And if I'm wrong, well, get rid of Regier. Whoever is making those decisions, just go. Please. But again, that's long-term, to me. For a near-term shake-up, I'll go with a core trade.
wonderbread Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 It's a shame that it was Atlanta and went completely unnoticed, but the days of Hossa-Savard-Kovalchuk had to have been the recent peak of cherry picking. Well put I remember cursing everytime they'd play ATL about just that.
Marvelo Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 This is a terrible idea, unless you like the sound of "Hamilton Sabres." I want a great owner. We've had too many half-assed owners in a row.
shrader Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 Well put I remember cursing everytime they'd play ATL about just that. Well, except for every time Kovalchuk wouldn't bother skating back as he was manning the point on the powerplay, leading to countless shorthanded goals.
UncleWally Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 Richard, I'm going to say trade one of the core fellows. Specifically a guy with a number between 18 & 22. Twenty is not applicable.
North Buffalo Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 Do the TRADE Now and then bring up one of the scorers from Portland. Have you seen Adam's and Mancari Stats through 6 six games. 10 points each 5 and 5. And Adam proved he can score with the big boys.
nfreeman Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 I want a great owner. We've had too many half-assed owners in a row. Fine, but you do understand the point about Balsillie and Hamilton, right? More to the point, the number of owners in the NHL who are demonstrably superior to TG is very small. Richard, I'm going to say trade one of the core fellows. Specifically a guy with a number between 18 & 22. Twenty is not applicable. If a core trade is needed, the range needs to extend from 19 to 29, inclusive.
Patty16 Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 Fine, but you do understand the point about Balsillie and Hamilton, right? More to the point, the number of owners in the NHL who are demonstrably superior to TG is very small. If a core trade is needed, the range needs to extend from 19 to 29, inclusive. 29's contract makes him untradeable. I think this was discussed on TSN recently
Stoner Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 Fine, but you do understand the point about Balsillie and Hamilton, right? More to the point, the number of owners in the NHL who are demonstrably superior to TG is very small. Tom has made some mistakes, but I think he could quickly get back into the good graces of a lot of fans. Showing up on opening night and having the guts to go on the ice was good start. HIs disappearance in recent years after thrusting himself in front of the cameras during the good times was bush league. He's a multibillionaire, the team has made money -- even above his original modest goal of basically breaking even -- and the value of the franchise has gone up well above what he paid for it, so I see no reason the Sabres should be so many millions under the cap. He could make some statement showing his interest in what's going on, his commitment to winning a Cup, his unhappiness with the start, etc. He could send LQ packing and bring in a hockey guy to be president and reevaluate the situation. The guy's a good businessman and clearly didn't turn a few bucks into Paychex by having cronies without experience run his company. Beyond any of those unlikely scenarios occuring, they really need to sell the team ASAP. Every day I pray the right deal comes along, as LQ has hinted at.
shrader Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 Do the TRADE Now and then bring up one of the scorers from Portland. Have you seen Adam's and Mancari Stats through 6 six games. 10 points each 5 and 5. And Adam proved he can score with the big boys. He scored a couple goals in the preseason with a good amount of roster fodder on the ice. How exactly did Adam prove he can score with the big boys?
nfreeman Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 29's contract makes him untradeable. I think this was discussed on TSN recently I completely agree that he's untradeable. I just think from the Sabres' perspective he shouldn't be off limits. Tom has made some mistakes, but I think he could quickly get back into the good graces of a lot of fans. Showing up on opening night and having the guts to go on the ice was good start. HIs disappearance in recent years after thrusting himself in front of the cameras during the good times was bush league. He's a multibillionaire, the team has made money -- even above his original modest goal of basically breaking even -- and the value of the franchise has gone up well above what he paid for it, so I see no reason the Sabres should be so many millions under the cap. He could make some statement showing his interest in what's going on, his commitment to winning a Cup, his unhappiness with the start, etc. He could send LQ packing and bring in a hockey guy to be president and reevaluate the situation. The guy's a good businessman and clearly didn't turn a few bucks into Paychex by having cronies without experience run his company. Beyond any of those unlikely scenarios occuring, they really need to sell the team ASAP. Every day I pray the right deal comes along, as LQ has hinted at. The Sabres are spending about 92% of the cap. They are less than $5MM below a $59.4MM salary cap. They are spending well over double what they spent on payroll when TG bought the team. As for whether they should spend more -- this is a rehash of an argument we've had many times, but no owner is going to be interested in losing millions of dollars per year on a hockey team, regardless of whether the team has appreciated in value. As for LQ, he is clearly TG's guy to have final income/loss accountability for the Sabres "asset." I agree that LQ should have no input into hockey decisions. None of us really knows whether or not this is the case. However, LQ is also a successful businessman and I certainly don't see anything wrong with a guy like that being responsible for the team's financial results.
North Buffalo Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 He scored a couple goals in the preseason with a good amount of roster fodder on the ice. How exactly did Adam prove he can score with the big boys? Agreed it is not all the big boys, but common Adam or Stafford you decide. Fodder for a poll...
spndnchz Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 Tonight the most effective shake-up will be margaritas. :clapping:
nfreeman Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 Agreed it is not all the big boys, but common Adam or Stafford you decide. Fodder for a poll... Stafford has been the 2nd-least-bad member of the "top 6" this year. He ain't the problem. Also, who is "common Adam?"
Eleven Posted October 20, 2010 Author Report Posted October 20, 2010 Stafford has been the 2nd-least-bad member of the "top 6" this year. He ain't the problem. Also, who is "common Adam?" In some religions, he is the universal male ancestor, common to us all.
PotentPowerPlay22 Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 I didn't add things that won't be any type of shake-up, such as trading role players, etc. How about a bus ticket out of town for Connolly and Hecht? Will Edmonton still give the Sabres four 1st round draft picks for Vanek? The Vanek deal will go down in history as the worst in Sabres history.
shrader Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 Stafford has been the 2nd-least-bad member of the "top 6" this year. He ain't the problem. Also, who is "common Adam?" Exactly. He sucked in the past so he must suck now. We're focusing on the wrong people around here. I'm just waiting until someone blames Pominville for this slide.
korab rules Posted October 20, 2010 Report Posted October 20, 2010 Exactly. He sucked in the past so he must suck now. We're focusing on the wrong people around here. I'm just waiting until someone blames Pominville for this slide. Well, if his head wasn't so soft...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.