nostyle126 Posted October 2, 2011 Author Report Posted October 2, 2011 The positive for someone like Boyes being on a 4th line, is that he should be up against the weakest defensemen on the opposing team. If he's got skills, he should be burning them. Also, being in a contract year, he should be going out of his way to kick butt, no matter where he is. Two very fair points.
nostyle126 Posted October 2, 2011 Author Report Posted October 2, 2011 If a veteran player making millions of dollars needs help to reach his potential, I'd argue he shouldn't be in the NHL. What he ought to be doing is busting his behind to move up from the fourth line--which I suspect is what Ruff wants to see him do. On the flip side, why should someone who is already doing that be demoted? Playing time is earned. EVERYONE in the NHL needs help to reach their potential, outside of a handful of special talents. We knew what Boyes was when we acquired him. He was a high draft pick who had some incredible years, earned a big contract, and has since faded. I've talked to St. Louis fans (my work requires me to go there occasionally) and they loved Boyes but felt he was never put in position to reach his potential, and that the Sabres would give him a much needed fresh start. I don't think this is what they meant by fresh start, putting him on the fourth line with guys like Ellis and McCormick. I guess my real point of contention is that I don't see what Kaleta has ever done to earn 3rd line status. He hits, agitates, takes stupid penalties, and occasionally makes a nice play. That's pretty much the exact definition of the role of a 4th liner. With the small sampling size we've had to see Boyes as a Sabre, how have the coaches, and we fans, already determined that he should be put on the 4th line and forced to "prove himself"? He looked good on the wing to finish out the regular season but struggled at center in the playoffs. That's all the chance he gets? Now he has to make the most of a line with McCormick and Ellis? Jeesh.
nostyle126 Posted October 2, 2011 Author Report Posted October 2, 2011 And don't take my comments to mean that I have some kind of grudge against Kaleta. I was once very high on Kaleta. I thought he could someday develop into a high-end 3rd liner, or even a low end 2nd liner. But since then my opinion has changed. He takes too many stupid penalties and seems more focused on running opponents than being productive during his shifts. I still think he has 3rd line talent, but I think Boyes has 2nd line talent. So if the debate is who should be put on the 4th line, a 2nd line talent or a 3rd line talent, my vote is to put the 3rd line talent on the 4th line.
wjag Posted October 2, 2011 Report Posted October 2, 2011 And don't take my comments to mean that I have some kind of grudge against Kaleta. I was once very high on Kaleta. I thought he could someday develop into a high-end 3rd liner, or even a low end 2nd liner. But since then my opinion has changed. He takes too many stupid penalties and seems more focused on running opponents than being productive during his shifts. I still think he has 3rd line talent, but I think Boyes has 2nd line talent. So if the debate is who should be put on the 4th line, a 2nd line talent or a 3rd line talent, my vote is to put the 3rd line talent on the 4th line. I was all over Kaleta when he first came in. Those teams in his first couple of years needed his energy. I'm not so sure anymore and can see a post Kaleta team doing a-okay... I think I would like to see a forward more focused on scoring than checking in his place. There is enough team grit now that we don't need what he brings. If he stays, so be it. If he goes, so be it.
james duncan Posted October 2, 2011 Report Posted October 2, 2011 And don't take my comments to mean that I have some kind of grudge against Kaleta. I was once very high on Kaleta. I thought he could someday develop into a high-end 3rd liner, or even a low end 2nd liner. But since then my opinion has changed. He takes too many stupid penalties and seems more focused on running opponents than being productive during his shifts. I still think he has 3rd line talent, but I think Boyes has 2nd line talent. So if the debate is who should be put on the 4th line, a 2nd line talent or a 3rd line talent, my vote is to put the 3rd line talent on the 4th line. Maybe I'm just biased; Boyes lost me when he pulled a no-show in the playoffs. I'd rather see Kaleta get a chance. The real issue may be Darcy's trade deadline acquisitions in general. They have not been good IMO to say the least.
james duncan Posted October 2, 2011 Report Posted October 2, 2011 For a scorer like him, he's only as good as his setup men. He's being wasted, like most of our deadline acquisitions. Then why did the Sabres try to pass him off as a center/set-up man? Wasted assumes he can still bury the puck when he gets/make a chance. A very big assumption. Agree it goes to the appropriateness of their deadline acquisitions. I hope if he gets the chance, he proves me wrong.
X. Benedict Posted October 2, 2011 Report Posted October 2, 2011 Then why did the Sabres try to pass him off as a center/set-up man? Mostly out of necessity. With Roy out and then Hecht last year, and finally Connolly in the playoffs options were limited through the middle. Wasted assumes he can still bury the puck when he gets/make a chance. A very big assumption. Agree it goes to the appropriateness of their deadline acquisitions. I hope if he gets the chance, he proves me wrong. Boyes has good hands and vision. 50 to 60 pts is a reasonable expectation. 20 + goals 30 + assists.
james duncan Posted October 2, 2011 Report Posted October 2, 2011 Mostly out of necessity. With Roy out and then Hecht last year, and finally Connolly in the playoffs options were limited through the middle. Boyes has good hands and vision. 50 to 60 pts is a reasonable expectation. 20 + goals 30 + assists. I am usually a glass is half full guy, but then why didn't they make a move for a center at the deadline? Roy went out early. Hecht is awful at center and Boyes was equally terrible. I seriously don't understand the deadline deals Regier makes. I think Leino will work out there and Adam should be ready when the need arises unlike last year. Hate to take us back to last year's shortcomings but this topic sucked me back there. And if Boyes is truly a 50-60 point guy (I don't think he is anymore), he is being wasted on the fourth line to answer the original question.
Weave Posted October 2, 2011 Report Posted October 2, 2011 I am usually a glass is half full guy, but then why didn't they make a move for a center at the deadline? Roy went out early. Hecht is awful at center and Boyes was equally terrible. I seriously don't understand the deadline deals Regier makes. I think Leino will work out there and Adam should be ready when the need arises unlike last year. Hate to take us back to last year's shortcomings but this topic sucked me back there. And if Boyes is truly a 50-60 point guy (I don't think he is anymore), he is being wasted on the fourth line to answer the original question. Takes two to tango. There may not have been one available at a personnel price Darcy was willing to pay. I know the rumored deal for Spezza was steep and Ottawa supposedly turned it down.
X. Benedict Posted October 2, 2011 Report Posted October 2, 2011 I am usually a glass is half full guy, but then why didn't they make a move for a center at the deadline? Centers just weren't moving. Arnott and Steckle were available, but those guys aren't added offense. The week Buffalo dealt for Boyes they were still 24 out of 30 teams in points even though they were on a winning run. Teams weren't selling. Roy went out early. Hecht is awful at center and Boyes was equally terrible. I seriously don't understand the deadline deals Regier makes. I think Leino will work out there and Adam should be ready when the need arises unlike last year. Hate to take us back to last year's shortcomings but this topic sucked me back there. And if Boyes is truly a 50-60 point guy (I don't think he is anymore), he is being wasted on the fourth line to answer the original question. He'll hit 50 pts. IMO. He won't play on the 4th line. At the same time, he's not the kind of guy that is going to dominate play, or take over a game. He's the kind of guy that balances a line, chips in points, and opens the middle of the offense for teammates by pulling defenders to the outside with his shot and passing. He is a 50 point guy, though he's streaky. His assets are his hands and vision. Mostly he was a salary dump in St. Louis.
james duncan Posted October 2, 2011 Report Posted October 2, 2011 Centers just weren't moving. Arnott and Steckle were available, but those guys aren't added offense. The week Buffalo dealt for Boyes they were still 24 out of 30 teams in points even though they were on a winning run. Teams weren't selling. He'll hit 50 pts. IMO. He won't play on the 4th line. At the same time, he's not the kind of guy that is going to dominate play, or take over a game. He's the kind of guy that balances a line, chips in points, and opens the middle of the offense for teammates by pulling defenders to the outside with his shot and passing. He is a 50 point guy, though he's streaky. His assets are his hands and vision. Mostly he was a salary dump in St. Louis. weave and x, I don't disagree with anything you've said. But it still doesn't tell me why we gave up a second rounder on another team's salary dump that doesn't play the position we needed. A guy that doesn't dominate play? Sounds like a Darcy/Golisano kind of guy and what the problem with our roster has been for years. Why add another. Honestly, I'd of rather called Adam up and given him the experience realizing he was not truly ready at that point. Bygones. Hope 2011/2012 ends much differently. I expect it will.
X. Benedict Posted October 2, 2011 Report Posted October 2, 2011 weave and x, I don't disagree with anything you've said. But it still doesn't tell me why we gave up a second rounder on another team's salary dump that doesn't play the position we needed. A guy that doesn't dominate play? Sounds like a Darcy/Golisano kind of guy and what the problem with our roster has been for years. Why add another. Honestly, I'd of rather called Adam up and given him the experience realizing he was not truly ready at that point. Bygones. Hope 2011/2012 ends much differently. I expect it will. If you can get a 50 pt. player for a second round pick, it is generally a great deal. (salary aside) Much less than half of 2nd round players picked ever play a full NHL season. Adam just wasn't ready last year - without Boyes Buffalo wouldn't have made the postseason. Boyes has been streaky....but his career numbers still average out to about .7 pts per game. Nothing to sneeze at. Stafford should get 50, Pominville 50, Boyes 50.....that is enormous production from the Right Side for teams to match up against. And that is probably what Darcy was thinking.
Eleven Posted October 3, 2011 Report Posted October 3, 2011 If you can get a 50 pt. player for a second round pick, it is generally a great deal. (salary aside) Much less than half of 2nd round players picked ever play a full NHL season. Adam just wasn't ready last year - without Boyes Buffalo wouldn't have made the postseason. Boyes has been streaky....but his career numbers still average out to about .7 pts per game. Nothing to sneeze at. Stafford should get 50, Pominville 50, Boyes 50.....that is enormous production from the Right Side for teams to match up against. And that is probably what Darcy was thinking. Right on.
RazielSabre Posted October 3, 2011 Report Posted October 3, 2011 Hopefully Boyes will produce, and his probably an insurance policy if Stafford or Pom get injured/don't produce. We'll see what happens. I think he has more potential than his utilising certainly.
nostyle126 Posted October 3, 2011 Author Report Posted October 3, 2011 Per the article in the paper today, Ruff has changed the lines with the return of Roy and Boyes. Going into our exhibition against Adler Mannheim our lines look like this: Vanek-Adam-Pominville Gerbe-Roy-Stafford Ennis-Leino-Boyes McCormick-Ellis/Gaustad-Kaleta http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/sabres-nhl/article579583.ece
nfreeman Posted October 3, 2011 Report Posted October 3, 2011 Per the article in the paper today, Ruff has changed the lines with the return of Roy and Boyes. Going into our exhibition against Adler Mannheim our lines look like this: Vanek-Adam-Pominville Gerbe-Roy-Stafford Ennis-Leino-Boyes McCormick-Ellis/Gaustad-Kaleta http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/sabres-nhl/article579583.ece I'm happy with those lines.
korab rules Posted October 3, 2011 Report Posted October 3, 2011 Per the article in the paper today, Ruff has changed the lines with the return of Roy and Boyes. Going into our exhibition against Adler Mannheim our lines look like this: Vanek-Adam-Pominville Gerbe-Roy-Stafford Ennis-Leino-Boyes McCormick-Ellis/Gaustad-Kaleta http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/sabres-nhl/article579583.ece I'm happy with those lines. I'm not in love with it. We'll see how it works. Spreading your offensive talent across three lines instead of concentrating it in two is a risk, but it could pay dividends if the other team doesn't know who to put their best defenders against. Ruff either really likes Adam, or is giving him a bunch of rope to see what he does with it. They are breaking up the most feared line in the league of Goose, Gerbe and Kaleta? So much for all that work in the off-season. I would like to see a line of Leino, Gerbe and Ennis - we can call them Leino and the Lilliputians.
nostyle126 Posted October 3, 2011 Author Report Posted October 3, 2011 I was never in love with the Gerbe-Gaustad-Kaleta line, so I don't mind the change-up. But again this goes to show that Ruff always changes his lines, even when it seems like he has found a combination that makes sense. I think we can all agree to that. As for these combinations, I actually like the 2nd and 3rd lines. I am also curious to see how Adam does on our "top" line. I think Adam is really ready to be in the NHL and by midseason can earn his way onto the 3rd line, but 1st line??? He must be loving life right now getting to center our top line for at least this last preseason game. The Ennis-Leino-Boyes line intrigues me because Ennis and Leino are the kinds of setup men that Boyes needs. That line could really be dangerous, AND they should get favorable matchups since they're the 3rd line.
nfreeman Posted October 3, 2011 Report Posted October 3, 2011 I was never in love with the Gerbe-Gaustad-Kaleta line, so I don't mind the change-up. But again this goes to show that Ruff always changes his lines, even when it seems like he has found a combination that makes sense. I think we can all agree to that. As for these combinations, I actually like the 2nd and 3rd lines. I am also curious to see how Adam does on our "top" line. I think Adam is really ready to be in the NHL and by midseason can earn his way onto the 3rd line, but 1st line??? He must be loving life right now getting to center our top line for at least this last preseason game. The Ennis-Leino-Boyes line intrigues me because Ennis and Leino are the kinds of setup men that Boyes needs. That line could really be dangerous, AND they should get favorable matchups since they're the 3rd line. It's worth noting that none of those 3 lines appears to be a clear-cut #1 line. I would guess that the 3 lines will be pretty close in terms of 5-on-5 ice time most nights, and that it will fluctuate based on which line is playing better or worse.
X. Benedict Posted October 3, 2011 Report Posted October 3, 2011 It's worth noting that none of those 3 lines appears to be a clear-cut #1 line. I would guess that the 3 lines will be pretty close in terms of 5-on-5 ice time most nights, and that it will fluctuate based on which line is playing better or worse. Basically. If they get balanced scoring from each line, they will exploit weak 2nd and 3rd pairings on opposing defenses.
korab rules Posted October 3, 2011 Report Posted October 3, 2011 Basically. If they get balanced scoring from each line, they will exploit weak 2nd and 3rd pairings on opposing defenses. That's a big if. I hate obsessing over lines, because Ruff doesn't keep them together long ehough to worry about it. If you can dream up a line, chances are Ruff will have it on the ice at some point this year. Maybe Ruff gets his line ideas from the board. What's the over/under on seeing a line of Roy Vanek and Stafford?
nfreeman Posted October 3, 2011 Report Posted October 3, 2011 That's a big if. I hate obsessing over lines, because Ruff doesn't keep them together long ehough to worry about it. If you can dream up a line, chances are Ruff will have it on the ice at some point this year. Maybe Ruff gets his line ideas from the board. What's the over/under on seeing a line of Roy Vanek and Stafford? You're certainly right about the lines being a fluid situation, and I'd expect to see R-V-S sooner rather than later. I think the real point though is that there are 9 forwards (assuming Adam can cut the mustard) who can legitimately be considered members of a scoring line -- and that doesn't include Yo-yo. The emergence of Gerbe and Ennis (and hopefully Adam), the maturing of Stafford, the addition of Leino and the return of Roy all combine to make the Sabres much deeper offensively than they have been in several years.
RazielSabre Posted October 3, 2011 Report Posted October 3, 2011 Per the article in the paper today, Ruff has changed the lines with the return of Roy and Boyes. Going into our exhibition against Adler Mannheim our lines look like this: Vanek-Adam-Pominville Gerbe-Roy-Stafford Ennis-Leino-Boyes McCormick-Ellis/Gaustad-Kaleta http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/sabres-nhl/article579583.ece Apart from a small concern about a rookie centre on the top line (sort of, any line Vanek is on can be assumed to be the top line to some small degree) I like it, I'd still swap Leino for Adam though. Maybe.
korab rules Posted October 3, 2011 Report Posted October 3, 2011 You're certainly right about the lines being a fluid situation, and I'd expect to see R-V-S sooner rather than later. I think the real point though is that there are 9 forwards (assuming Adam can cut the mustard) who can legitimately be considered members of a scoring line -- and that doesn't include Yo-yo. The emergence of Gerbe and Ennis (and hopefully Adam), the maturing of Stafford, the addition of Leino and the return of Roy all combine to make the Sabres much deeper offensively than they have been in several years. Now that is a point I can whole heartedly agree with.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.