TheMatrix31 Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 Great show by the Capitals in the first two rounds. Two best series of the playoffs thus far, IMO. I'm at least glad that if we lost our spot to them, that they didn't waste it.
TrueBlueGED Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 I love that penalty. No subjectivity. Let's Go Devils!!!! Don't get me wrong, I'm all for taking the subjectivity out of penalties as much as possible. Just with everything ignored this game, for a mid-air backhand which happens to knock the puck out to be called because it's automatic...I dunno, it just doesn't sit right with me. I think the hooks and whatnot are much more harmful to the game, and yet those go ignored because the ref has the option of ignoring it. And I think the Devils have a REALLY good shot at knocking off the Rangers. I'm concerned about buying high on them since they just knocked off the Flyers with relative ease...but I like some of the matchups and speed they bring to the table, which the Rangers typically struggle with.
carpandean Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 Don't get me wrong, I'm all for taking the subjectivity out of penalties as much as possible. Just with everything ignored this game, for a mid-air backhand which happens to knock the puck out to be called because it's automatic...I dunno, it just doesn't sit right with me. I think the hooks and whatnot are much more harmful to the game, and yet those go ignored because the ref has the option of ignoring it. Another good reason why it should be the same as an icing: face-off in your own zone with no line change.
dudacek Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 I know I'll soon be reading about all the wonderful things the kings, Coyotes, Rangers and/or Devils have done. How many of you, in late March, we're talking about how much better they were than Buffalo? I recall many wanting first round matchup with NYR because they were beatable. The others were anonymous and fighting for playoff spots. Perception is a funny thing and if you look objectively at it, you'll see how much of it is really determined by bounce here, or a hot or cold streak at just the right or wrong time. There is not much to choose between an 86 point team and a 98 point team these days. Very few teams in this league are significantly better than the Sabres. The Sabres are significantly better than very few as well. It's about parity and about getting hot at the right moment. But first you gotta get in.
deluca67 Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 I know I'll soon be reading about all the wonderful things the kings, Coyotes, Rangers and/or Devils have done. How many of you, in late March, we're talking about how much better they were than Buffalo? I recall many wanting first round matchup with NYR because they were beatable. The others were anonymous and fighting for playoff spots. Perception is a funny thing and if you look objectively at it, you'll see how much of it is really determined by bounce here, or a hot or cold streak at just the right or wrong time. There is not much to choose between an 86 point team and a 98 point team these days. Very few teams in this league are significantly better than the Sabres. The Sabres are significantly better than very few as well. It's about parity and about getting hot at the right moment. But first you gotta get in. The Kings, Rangers, Devils and Coyotes are still playing because they are all significantly better than the Sabres. The Sabres don't have the goaltending, talent, heart and compete that these teams have. The Sabres ended their season where they deserved to end up, with the erst of the dregs of the league, outside of the playoffs looking in. IMO, there isn't one of the 16 teams that made the playoffs this season that the Sabres could beat in a series. Don't look to parity or lucky bounces or getting hot at the right moment. If the Sabres are going to be a playoff team and someday a real Cup contender they need to get a lot better. A lot better at the GM position, at coach and they need a lot more talent, toughness and sense of self sacrifice. If they don't they will remain exactly what they are. A team that keeps their eyes closed for 82 games hoping that when they open them they squeak into 8th place.
dudacek Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 You've maintained that virtually everybody is significantly better than the Sabres for a long time, so I'm not surprised at that response. Don't recall you, or anyone else on the Coyote bandwagon in March. Are the Bruins a dominating Cup champ still? Or are they the team that blew a 3-0 lead to a team without a goalie two years ago and haven't done a thing since Christmas? How about them Canucks? Red Wings? Penguins? Who are the real St. Louis Blues? Who knew Marek Zidlicky and Bryce Salvador were legit top two playoff defencemen? Alec Martinez, Trevor Lewis, and Slava Voinov — no one is surprised they're having a big impact this year. Mike Smith was clearly everyone's choice for breakout goalie. Some of these are trends that will continue. More are blips. THis is not the '70s or the '80s. There are no great teams anymore, just teams that are good enough at the right time.
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 I don't know what the Regehr trade is saying just yet. Is it just a micro move to add a sturdy veteran D? Or is it the start of admitting this team could use a change of strategy and build tougher and with more leadership? We don't need a team full of goons, but if you could somehow find a way to bring in a guy like Hanzal and maybe Doan with him, and sign a Talbot in UFA.....all of a sudden you don't need a giant name #1 center. You build your team a lot like USA in the olympics....hard working guys that are smart and have grit, and enough talent to keep the other team on their toes all game. Phoenix is a nice partner because they are out west, need a goalie, and their ownership and $$ is a big question. Enroth, Sekera, Adam, Boyes, pick for Hanzal and Doan? I don't think Hanzal is available, but this team would turn badass with a trade like that. Then you resign Montador and a decent backup....pick up Talbot in FA....let Kassian get some time here.....D-O-N-E. I want to see this team stop worrying about assignments on the ice, and start taking the game to the other team. I think this D will be fine with Montador back. The forwards are still way too soft and that is the key now in my opinion. You should be able to trust your goalie...and now you should be able to trust your D if you can ship out Sekera. Lindy needs to have guys he can trust up front. Let them take that extra run, or let them cycle and not have to worry about getting back at the first sign they don't have 100% possesion. We're reading what you're saying. But what you're saying is unreasonable. It's as simple as that. The difference between me and you is that I'm not letting my desire to see players shed from this roster, and heart, soul and talent injected into it, blind me from understanding the realities of how the NHL functions. We both want the same things. And today the Sabres took another step towards achieving those things. You just refuse to accept that there are other factors in play besides Darcy. And I'm disappointed that you don't. You've made fun of posters who have proposed crazy NHL 11 trades, but you're acting like making every change we want right now is an easy feat. Talk to me when they're in the Cup Finals. Until then they're nobodies. I predicted Rangers to win the Cup. I am a little surprised they were so close to getting knocked out, but it made for one heck of a wagering opportunity the other night. I am pretty confident in them tonight, but they are -170 as opposed to the gift of -105 the other night. The only team that really surprised me was Boston. Pitt was a lot like the Sabres.....they went parabolic and just started to crumble back down to earth. Vancouver was a surprise as well, but LA is a really nice team with balanced talent. I would like to see LA or Phoenix make it out west. I know I'll soon be reading about all the wonderful things the kings, Coyotes, Rangers and/or Devils have done. How many of you, in late March, we're talking about how much better they were than Buffalo? I recall many wanting first round matchup with NYR because they were beatable. The others were anonymous and fighting for playoff spots. Perception is a funny thing and if you look objectively at it, you'll see how much of it is really determined by bounce here, or a hot or cold streak at just the right or wrong time. There is not much to choose between an 86 point team and a 98 point team these days. Very few teams in this league are significantly better than the Sabres. The Sabres are significantly better than very few as well. It's about parity and about getting hot at the right moment. But first you gotta get in. People have been saying it.......others just don't want to listen. People mocked DeLuca for touting Kovy. People make fun of me for saying I love Phoenix's model with Doan/Hanzal and grinders with talent like Pyatt and Torres. They got their goalie now and that keeps them viable. I've said all year the Rangers are the team and I am truly impressed with the way they have developed their bunch under Torts. Jim Schoenfeld is an assistant GM and Coach their......that's the kind of mojo that takes form when you want to surround yourself with the best and aren't afraid of having someone possibly smarter than yourself looking over your shoulder and contributing. I look at the progression of Myers/DelZotto.....Callahan vs. Pominville......it's just night and day. They haven't been dominating and running away with things, but it is effort, style and attitude that make them a hegemonic force. All 4 teams left are bigger and play a touger brand of hockey than the Sabres. Throw in Philly, Pitt, Boston, Detroit and Vancouver who are both talented and tough.....and the cupboard is relatively empty. That's what's scary.....I can see why Phoenix is there. Winnipeg can be next year's Phoenix in the east. Just making it to the playoffs next year will be a challenge for Buffalo as 90% of the NHL is ahead of the game if the concrete model is becoming big bodied- big effort players.
SwampD Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 I know I'll soon be reading about all the wonderful things the kings, Coyotes, Rangers and/or Devils have done. How many of you, in late March, we're talking about how much better they were than Buffalo? I recall many wanting first round matchup with NYR because they were beatable. The others were anonymous and fighting for playoff spots. Perception is a funny thing and if you look objectively at it, you'll see how much of it is really determined by bounce here, or a hot or cold streak at just the right or wrong time. There is not much to choose between an 86 point team and a 98 point team these days. Very few teams in this league are significantly better than the Sabres. The Sabres are significantly better than very few as well. It's about parity and about getting hot at the right moment. But first you gotta get in. If you're not in, you're bad. Period.
TrueBlueGED Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 The Sabres were better than the Rangers the past 2 years. The Rangers added Richards and had some young guys step up (McDonagh and Hagelin in particular....and don't get me started on Del Zotto's "progression"....he was IN THE MINORS LAST YEAR he was so awful after a nice rookie year...that's a roller coaster, not steady progression), went from 8th to 1st. The Sabres were better than the Devils last year. The Devils basically did nothing and jumped 20 points in the standings simply by having Parise healthy a whole year and a nice contribution from Henrique and Larsson. Yes, oversimplifying things here....but the general point is a couple of changes can take a team from fringe playoff team to contender. The Sabres absolutely need to make some changes to be a more balanced roster (particularly the forwards), but to think they're infinitely far away from these two teams is ignoring recent history. Anyway, on topic..... Devils over Rangers in 7 -The Rangers have yet to face a team this deep at forward in the playoffs (the Caps could be, but due to their system I don't think it's an apt comparison), and have struggled mightily to score against a journeyman and a rookie. -The Devils, so far, have had a ridiculously effective forecheck and have carried play in both of their series so far. On the flip side, they have yet to face a defensive machine and goaltending that the Rangers have. Florida plays a similar style to NY, but their horses simply don't compare. And Philly's defense was a total mess. -Is fatigue going to hit the Rangers? They're essentially playing with 9 forwards and 4.5 defensemen. How long can their top-4 D go playing 27 minutes a night in 7 game series, against what I expect to be a hyper-aggressive Devils forecheck? Callahan already started to fade last series, basically being a non-factor for the second half of the series. -Ultimately I think this series is going 7 games, and game 7 is a coin flip to me. Gun to my head I'm taking the Devils because I think their puck possession game will be able to wear down the Rangers. That said, Lundqvist is perfectly capable of winning this series for the Rangers, and it wouldn't surprise me if they won. Ironically, the one thing keeping me from picking the Devils solidly in 6 is the goaltending--Brodeur has been good, but against the Rangers he has to be better than good. Kings over Coyotes in 6 -Again I'm picking the team I expect to dominate (relatively speaking) puck possession and carry the play the majority of the time. The Coyotes have been out-shot by a decent margin in the first two rounds, and at some point I think that's going to bite them. -I have no idea why the Kings struggled to score all season, but I really like their forward group and they're meshing at exactly the right time. -Not much to say about Quick and Smith, I expect them both to be lights-out again this series. If you're not in, you're bad. Period. I agree, if you're not in, you had a bad season. Don't necessarily believe it makes you a bad team. Devils missed last year badly, got a healthy Parise and a couple rookie contributors, and now they're in the Conference Finals. Rangers missed two years ago, barely made it last year, added Richards and a couple rookie contributors, and they're #1 in the conference pretty much all year and a popular Cup pick. The difference between the top and the bottom isn't what it used to be.
SwampD Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 I agree, if you're not in, you had a bad season. Don't necessarily believe it makes you a bad team. Devils missed last year badly, got a healthy Parise and a couple rookie contributors, and now they're in the Conference Finals. Rangers missed two years ago, barely made it last year, added Richards and a couple rookie contributors, and they're #1 in the conference pretty much all year and a popular Cup pick. The difference between the top and the bottom isn't what it used to be. Don't forget new coach. :ph34r:
TrueBlueGED Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 Don't forget new coach. :ph34r: I didn't forget it...I ignored it, because it wasn't convenient enough for my argument :P
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 I didn't forget it...I ignored it, because it wasn't convenient enough for my argument :P Here's how I look at it. 10-12 teams in the NHL have more talent than the Sabres 20-25 teams are bigger in their top 9 forwards Even if you want to say Miller is a top 5-10 goalie and the Sabres give an "average" NHL effort on the ice, you are pretty much left with a middle of the pack team that needs to squeak in the playoffs. Yes, DelZotto was in the minors last year, and if you search, I wanted to target him in a trade if there was a possibility they were down on him. Just like when I suggested trading for Doan and Hanzal last offseason, Enroth still had hopes of being a #1 and Smith wasn't in Phoenix, Adam was listed as the Sabres #1 prospect and is now virtually worthless, Sekera wasn't signed to a big deal yet, and Boyes wasn't confirmed worthless. It's the old....buy low, sell high. If I proposed that trade now it looks silly, but last offseason you had a chance. After 3 weeks, some people here would have wanted Malkin for Adam alone. Sure, you can argue parity, but you need to identify the variables that allow you to be part of that game. NY, PHO, LA and NJ all have a distinct "bigger effort" game than the Sabres for the most part. How anyone expects the Sabres to put up with a 4 round grind and hold up, still confounds me. You can get by on undeniable talent, or 100% guts and physical play with just enough talent. A mix of the 2 is preferable. The Sabres are far from either model.
deluca67 Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 Don't forget new coach. :ph34r: 2 new coaches in fact when talking about the Devils. The 2011-2012 Devils turnaround started on Dec. 23rd 2010. The job Jacques Lamaire did turning the Devils and Kovalchuk around can't be understated. If the Devils would have stayed with John MacLean they would have likely finished dead last. Lamaire did what he did with the same players John MacLean had. Score one for those that feel coaching does make a difference. Here's how I look at it. 10-12 teams in the NHL have more talent than the Sabres 20-25 teams are bigger in their top 9 forwards Even if you want to say Miller is a top 5-10 goalie and the Sabres give an "average" NHL effort on the ice, you are pretty much left with a middle of the pack team that needs to squeak in the playoffs. Yes, DelZotto was in the minors last year, and if you search, I wanted to target him in a trade if there was a possibility they were down on him. Just like when I suggested trading for Doan and Hanzal last offseason, Enroth still had hopes of being a #1 and Smith wasn't in Phoenix, Adam was listed as the Sabres #1 prospect and is now virtually worthless, Sekera wasn't signed to a big deal yet, and Boyes wasn't confirmed worthless. It's the old....buy low, sell high. If I proposed that trade now it looks silly, but last offseason you had a chance. After 3 weeks, some people here would have wanted Malkin for Adam alone. Sure, you can argue parity, but you need to identify the variables that allow you to be part of that game. NY, PHO, LA and NJ all have a distinct "bigger effort" game than the Sabres for the most part. How anyone expects the Sabres to put up with a 4 round grind and hold up, still confounds me. You can get by on undeniable talent, or 100% guts and physical play with just enough talent. A mix of the 2 is preferable. The Sabres are far from either model. Del Zotto Karlsson Doughty We can start a list of young defensemen that are surpassing Tyler Myers while he continues to remain stagnate under Lindy Ruff.
fan2456 Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 2 new coaches in fact when talking about the Devils. The 2011-2012 Devils turnaround started on Dec. 23rd 2010. The job Jacques Lamaire did turning the Devils and Kovalchuk around can't be understated. If the Devils would have stayed with John MacLean they would have likely finished dead last. Lamaire did what he did with the same players John MacLean had. Score one for those that feel coaching does make a difference. Del Zotto Karlsson Doughty We can start a list of young defensemen that are surpassing Tyler Myers while he continues to remain stagnate under Lindy Ruff. Not to mention James Patrick. I was thrilled when we tied Meyers up for a long time. Now he needs to gain muscle and get nasty. Will it happen under this staff? I am beginning to wonder.
deluca67 Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 Not to mention James Patrick. I was thrilled when we tied Meyers up for a long time. Now he needs to gain muscle and get nasty. Will it happen under this staff? I am beginning to wonder. It's there, we've all seen the flashes.
fan2456 Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 It's there, we've all seen the flashes. I'd just like to see the steady light in the next year or two.
dudacek Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 Here's how I look at it. 10-12 teams in the NHL have more talent than the Sabres 20-25 teams are bigger in their top 9 forwards Sure, you can argue parity, but you need to identify the variables that allow you to be part of that game. NY, PHO, LA and NJ all have a distinct "bigger effort" game than the Sabres for the most part. How anyone expects the Sabres to put up with a 4 round grind and hold up, still confounds me. You can get by on undeniable talent, or 100% guts and physical play with just enough talent. A mix of the 2 is preferable. The Sabres are far from either model. No argument here that the Sabres need to get edgier up front. What I am arguing is the Kings, Coyotes, Devils and (this regular season excepted) Rangers have been as mediocre as the Sabres in the past few years. Take away last year's cup run and you'd say the same thing about the Bruins. The gap the Sabres have to close is not as large as it is made out to be because there are no great teams to chase. The issue is so many teams are in the same position, it's statistically tough to emerge. A hot goalie at the right time, a puck accidentally cleared into the crowd in a tight game seven, a run of injuries, a line playing above its head for a month — right now things like these are enough to make the difference. I'm not saying just sit tight and Derek Roy will soon be hoisting the cup. On the contrary, things are so tight that you need to squeeze out every advantage you can. I am saying the final four aren't that much better than the teams they've left behind. I will be very surprised if at least one of them fails to make the playoffs next year.
deluca67 Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 I'd just like to see the steady light in the next year or two. Makes wonder what the future holds for McNabb and Foligno. Are they going to improve or will they end up like Myers.
fan2456 Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 The trend has been for guys not to progress up to initial expectations in this organization. Coaching? Inflated expectations? I'm not sure. From the kids we loved in 2005-06, who has progessed? Miller? Vanek? Pommer? Have they, even lived up to early expectations? I don't know.
fan2456 Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 Phoenix in 7. New Jersey in 5. LA -6 Rangers-6
fan2456 Posted May 13, 2012 Report Posted May 13, 2012 Here's how I look at it. 10-12 teams in the NHL have more talent than the Sabres 20-25 teams are bigger in their top 9 forwards Even if you want to say Miller is a top 5-10 goalie and the Sabres give an "average" NHL effort on the ice, you are pretty much left with a middle of the pack team that needs to squeak in the playoffs. Yes, DelZotto was in the minors last year, and if you search, I wanted to target him in a trade if there was a possibility they were down on him. Just like when I suggested trading for Doan and Hanzal last offseason, Enroth still had hopes of being a #1 and Smith wasn't in Phoenix, Adam was listed as the Sabres #1 prospect and is now virtually worthless, Sekera wasn't signed to a big deal yet, and Boyes wasn't confirmed worthless. It's the old....buy low, sell high. If I proposed that trade now it looks silly, but last offseason you had a chance. After 3 weeks, some people here would have wanted Malkin for Adam alone. Sure, you can argue parity, but you need to identify the variables that allow you to be part of that game. NY, PHO, LA and NJ all have a distinct "bigger effort" game than the Sabres for the most part. How anyone expects the Sabres to put up with a 4 round grind and hold up, still confounds me. You can get by on undeniable talent, or 100% guts and physical play with just enough talent. A mix of the 2 is preferable. The Sabres are far from either model. 10-12 have more skill is arbitrary and strictly opinion. Facts say 16 made the playoffs and they didn't 20-25 are bigger in their top nine. Did you do the averages or this that a arbitrary guess. I can't be bothered doing the math, but I would bet 25-30 are bigger. Sabres are tough to do an average for, because with Ruff who knows who the top 9 are from night to night.. LOL I fully agree with your last line. They are far from either model.
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted May 14, 2012 Report Posted May 14, 2012 10-12 have more skill is arbitrary and strictly opinion. Facts say 16 made the playoffs and they didn't 20-25 are bigger in their top nine. Did you do the averages or this that a arbitrary guess. I can't be bothered doing the math, but I would bet 25-30 are bigger. Sabres are tough to do an average for, because with Ruff who knows who the top 9 are from night to night.. LOL I fully agree with your last line. They are far from either model. I'm trying to behave and be conservative. I even said Miller might be a top 5-10 goalie. If you needed a goalie right now, would you rather have Miller over Lundqvist, Quick, Brodeur or Smith? That's only 4!
TrueBlueGED Posted May 14, 2012 Report Posted May 14, 2012 I'm trying to behave and be conservative. I even said Miller might be a top 5-10 goalie. If you needed a goalie right now, would you rather have Miller over Lundqvist, Quick, Brodeur or Smith? That's only 4! I'll take him over Brodeur and Smith. Obviously Brodeur's career speaks for itself, but at this point in it, I think Miller is the better goaltender. And as great as Smith has been this year, which I will take nothing away from on its own...did you watch him in Tampa? Did you watch Bryzgalov once he was out of the Coyotes' system? However, I'll take Lundqvist and Quick over Miller without thinking twice....especially Quick while he's on a cheap contract for another season ;)
TrueBlueGED Posted May 14, 2012 Report Posted May 14, 2012 I take back everything positive I said about Quick (not really). Holy crap, that was horrible.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.