bcsaberks Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 This one still stings this AM. How did that puck get through there? :wallbash:
bunomatic Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 This one still stings this AM. How did that puck get through there? :wallbash: Miller forgot to hug the post ?
nfreeman Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 This is probably a bad time to say this, but watching Landeskog play is great. He's like a young Forsberg, only on the wing. Would be nice if our top line would give this team something, anything, in the way of offensive production. 100% agree. Landeskog was terrific and the Sabres' "top line" was nowhere to be found. So, I know theres a truce on and all,.. but,.. Lindy,.... ...no Vanek in the shoot out,... ...okay. I know Vanek has been banged up, but is he planning on actually showing up at any point during this stretch run? 1 G and 2 A in 7 games in March while your playoff hopes are on life support. Vanek wasn't in the shootout because he's been atrocious for 3 solid months. 6 goals in his last 35 games. What a joke. My game notes: - They missed Myers, but Miller was at fault on the first and last Colorado goals. That was the difference in the game. - I would trade any 2 forwards on the Sabres for Landeskog. - Sulzer was pretty shaky, as was Weber. - Pretty entertaining game. - Complaining about the refs is childish and a loser's lament. There is no "screw the Sabres" conspiracy. The calls even out over time. Get over it. - Foligno's first goal was a Matt Ellis goal, but his 2nd one showed some skill. I can definitely see him sticking with the Sabres next year. - Good to see some signs of life from Stafford. His shortie was the kind of goal he scored quite a few of last year. - It's not over. Washington is fully capable of falling off the table, and Winnipeg has a bunch of road games left. The Sabres do need to sweep this weekend though. To do that they'll need Miller to get back in the zone. Go Sabres.
LabattBlue Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 Vanek wasn't in the shootout because he's been atrocious for 3 solid months. 6 goals in his last 35 games. What a joke. I was told recently that all players slump(a 7 mil a year player having a 3 month slump?). I'm at the point where Stafford, Roy, Pominville or Vanek being traded would not phase me at all. I don't even care what the return is.
waldo Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 I was told recently that all players slump(a 7 mil a year player having a 3 month slump?). I'm at the point where Stafford, Roy, Pominville or Vanek being traded would not phase me at all. I don't even care what the return is. Agree completely.. It is the only way they can escape the Ruff curse. Keep Pom, Ennis, Gerbe, Kaleta, Ellis, Myers, Cody, Leino, Tropp, McCormick etc. I doubt Reghr stays through next year..I think Miller is 50/50..Put them all on waivers, nobody will want them :rolleyes: .Let them escape ..please.. They all deserve a shot at the cup.. It would be really interesting watching the Gm recruit players willing to come to Buffalo and play for Ruff. Maybe a 30% premium would do it.
LastPommerFan Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 one observation from this week: We did not steal a first rounder from Nashville. Goose was a valuable player for exactly the situations we've seen the last 2 games.
Robviously Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 one observation from this week: We did not steal a first rounder from Nashville. Goose was a valuable player for exactly the situations we've seen the last 2 games. We got 3 of 4 points in theses last two games though. Sabres record since trading Gaustad for a 1st rounder: 6-2-1. They were 27-27-8 before that. Gaustad's presence on the team isn't nearly as important as just getting the rest of the team to play like they give a crap. The Sabres core is dysfunctional. We took out one guy and got better.
LastPommerFan Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 We got 3 of 4 points in theses last two games though. Sabres record since trading Gaustad for a 1st rounder: 6-2-1. They were 27-27-8 before that. Gaustad's presence on the team isn't nearly as important as just getting the rest of the team to play like they give a crap. The Sabres core is dysfunctional. We took out one guy and got better. I'm not saying it wasn't a good trade for us, just that these games are exactly why he was worth a 1st rounder.
Marvelo Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 I couldn't watch the game but saw the highlights. I'm appalled that 2 games in a row we blow a lead with 5 seconds left. How is it that Hodgson, Boyes (?) and Leino were our shutdown line at the end of the game?
nfreeman Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 We got 3 of 4 points in theses last two games though. Sabres record since trading Gaustad for a 1st rounder: 6-2-1. They were 27-27-8 before that. Gaustad's presence on the team isn't nearly as important as just getting the rest of the team to play like they give a crap. The Sabres core is dysfunctional. We took out one guy and got better. I'm not saying it wasn't a good trade for us, just that these games are exactly why he was worth a 1st rounder. But isn't it about getting wins? Your post (LPF's, that is) assumes that Gaustad would get those wins locked up. Robvie's post demonstrates that they weren't getting enough wins when they had Gaustad. I suppose we'll have to see whether Gaustad helps Nashville lock down wins down the stretch. I agree that this is what his putative role is, but if wins don't result, it's hard to say that he was worth the steep price.
LastPommerFan Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 But isn't it about getting wins? Your post (LPF's, that is) assumes that Gaustad would get those wins locked up. Robvie's post demonstrates that they weren't getting enough wins when they had Gaustad. I suppose we'll have to see whether Gaustad helps Nashville lock down wins down the stretch. I agree that this is what his putative role is, but if wins don't result, it's hard to say that he was worth the steep price. Right, you can't analyze it based on what happened or will happen with the Sabres, you have to look if he is on the ice at the end of close games for the Preds, and if he: wins the defensive zone faceoff doesn't fall to the ice during the 6-5 mayhem, and successfully prevents the Goal Agents. We've: gone 1W- 5L on d-zone faceoffs in the last minute of our games this week. Multiple payers couldn't defend because they fell down. we let in goals each time.
Robviously Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 But isn't it about getting wins? Your post (LPF's, that is) assumes that Gaustad would get those wins locked up. Robvie's post demonstrates that they weren't getting enough wins when they had Gaustad. I suppose we'll have to see whether Gaustad helps Nashville lock down wins down the stretch. I agree that this is what his putative role is, but if wins don't result, it's hard to say that he was worth the steep price. The trade could really work out for both teams, even before you factor in that 1st round pick for the Sabres. I've been saying for a while that the Sabres have a lot of players who need a fresh start, and that the Sabres themselves could use a fresh start. Based on the Sabres' performance since they traded Gaustad, they didn't lose anything by moving him. But that doesn't mean the Preds didn't gain anything. Maybe he really helps them. And even if Nashville wins the Cup thanks to Paul Gaustad, that doesn't mean we shouldn't have traded Gaustad. It wasn't going to happen for him here (either for him or for the Sabres). It's time for a fresh start. The post-Black Sunday core didn't work these past five years. Maybe they were always doomed; Briere and Drury were a tough act to follow. If we're going to contend again, it's going to be that 2008 draft (Myers, Ennis, Hodgson, Adam) leading the way with the 2009 draftees (Foligno and McNabb) not far behind. I like Pominville and Vanek as the veterans we keep.
TrueBlueGED Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 The trade could really work out for both teams, even before you factor in that 1st round pick for the Sabres. I've been saying for a while that the Sabres have a lot of players who need a fresh start, and that the Sabres themselves could use a fresh start. Based on the Sabres' performance since they traded Gaustad, they didn't lose anything by moving him. But that doesn't mean the Preds didn't gain anything. Maybe he really helps them. And even if Nashville wins the Cup thanks to Paul Gaustad, that doesn't mean we shouldn't have traded Gaustad. It wasn't going to happen for him here (either for him or for the Sabres). It's time for a fresh start. The post-Black Sunday core didn't work these past five years. Maybe they were always doomed; Briere and Drury were a tough act to follow. If we're going to contend again, it's going to be that 2008 draft (Myers, Ennis, Hodgson, Adam) leading the way with the 2009 draftees (Foligno and McNabb) not far behind. I like Pominville and Vanek as the veterans we keep. All of this. I also think the Hodgson-Kassian trade can work for both teams. Gaustad wasn't re-signing here, certainly not for $3 million per season (at least I hope not, that would be awful) but he can play a very important role in the playoffs for the Preds. He's been playing good minutes since going there, continuing to be proficient at the dot, and has chipped in I believe 3 assists. The Preds are essentially Rangers West, limited only by offensive consistency, and have a chance at a Cup (especially if Radulov comes back and produces).
Sabre Dance Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 Just let him go man, he's been riding the hyper-emotional train for like three days now. Been meaning to say - love the avatar! Oddball is one of my favorite movie characters ever. Just stay away from those negative waves, man!
LGR4GM Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 I was told recently that all players slump(a 7 mil a year player having a 3 month slump?). I'm at the point where Stafford, Roy, Pominville or Vanek being traded would not phase me at all. I don't even care what the return is. I dont wanna go there but i will, if you could move Vanek (which is fine) and then use that cap space on Parise that would be great. Back to reality, The young guys continuously show up the vets... love it. If Ennis moves back to wing Ruff is a moron. He has 21pts in 37 games now and if he can do what he has been doing we could be on the verge of solving our center problem. As for Hodgson, I actually feel bad for him. He creates chances but no one is cashing them in. He was clearly overwhelmed in the last 3-4 games by everything and I still think he has the ability to be a very consistent center. These 2 days off may do wonders for him. Actually Versus or NBC sports or whatever they are called discussed that trade last night. Basically they put Hodgson down citing his lack of production thus far. I would argue that he has played some very good games for buffalo and he is (up until the last 2 games) defensively sound. Final thought, I am amazed that Foligno has made the impact he has but I caution that many players show up for the first 10 games then disappear. Ennis being his pivot might help and I truly think that line could have some long term potential but I remain cautiously optimistic.
LastPommerFan Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 Final thought, I am amazed that Foligno has made the impact he has but I caution that many players show up for the first 10 games then disappear. Ennis being his pivot might help and I truly think that line could have some long term potential but I remain cautiously optimistic. I like the Ennis-Foligno combo because Foligno's size is a perfect compliment to Ennis's speed.
LGR4GM Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 I like the Ennis-Foligno combo because Foligno's size is a perfect compliment to Ennis's speed. 4g, 4a in the last 14days for Ennis and that display he put on last night was amazing. Kid is special. I think he has played the last 3 games at centers and in that time he has 3g and 4a
Robviously Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 I like the Ennis-Foligno combo because Foligno's size is a perfect compliment to Ennis's speed. Same reason I liked Adam and Ennis earlier this season.
bcsaberks Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 I couldn't watch the game but saw the highlights. I'm appalled that 2 games in a row we blow a lead with 5 seconds left. How is it that Hodgson, Boyes (?) and Leino were our shutdown line at the end of the game? I thought Leino had a very good game especially in the 3rd maintaining possession in the offensive zone, though I suppose that doesn't translate to shutdown D. It was Pommers (not Boyes) who failed to tie up the goal scorer at 19:58.
spndnchz Posted March 15, 2012 Author Report Posted March 15, 2012 I thought Leino had a very good game especially in the 3rd maintaining possession in the offensive zone, though I suppose that doesn't translate to shutdown D. It was Pommers (not Boyes) who failed to tie up the goal scorer at 19:58. I'd blame Pommers too. I'd also blame Weber for following the puck carrier behind the net and getting stuck on the wrong side. If he had stopped and let his man go to the other d-man he would have been covering Miller's backside.
nfreeman Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 I'd blame Pommers too. I'd also blame Weber for following the puck carrier behind the net and getting stuck on the wrong side. If he had stopped and let his man go to the other d-man he would have been covering Miller's backside. But Miller just cannot let that puck leak through like that.
Gramps Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 But Miller just cannot let that puck leak through like that. Backtrack a bit ... why wasn't one of our forwards shadowing Landeskog on the breakout from the Av's defensive zone ? As dangerous as he is ... let the defenseman carry the puck up the ice.
nfreeman Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 Backtrack a bit ... why wasn't one of our forwards shadowing Landeskog on the breakout from the Av's defensive zone ? As dangerous as he is ... let the defenseman carry the puck up the ice. All true. But still. Miller is their horse. If they are going to make the playoffs he needs to carry them. That was a harmless shot from the corner (just like one of the goals he gave up recently -- vs. Boston I think), and he just let it leak through and lie there in the crease like a big fat matzo-ball. It's a 99.9% save percentage save. If he smothers it the game is over.
TrueBlueGED Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 All true. But still. Miller is their horse. If they are going to make the playoffs he needs to carry them. That was a harmless shot from the corner (just like one of the goals he gave up recently -- vs. Boston I think), and he just let it leak through and lie there in the crease like a big fat matzo-ball. It's a 99.9% save percentage save. If he smothers it the game is over. Ultimately if Miller plays it correctly, it doesn't matter that those around him failed miserably. But it's just another example that hockey is a team game and no 1 player wins or loses things...if only 1 thing goes wrong on that play, we probably win, but in true Buffalo style they went Murphy's Law and we lose.
bcsaberks Posted March 15, 2012 Report Posted March 15, 2012 I'd blame Pommers too. I'd also blame Weber for following the puck carrier behind the net and getting stuck on the wrong side. If he had stopped and let his man go to the other d-man he would have been covering Miller's backside. Yup, just read Hoppe's write up, Lindy sold Weber out. And Miller says "bounce for the ages". I agree. The puck went through two guys and Miller.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.