Sabres Fan in NS Posted April 5, 2013 Report Posted April 5, 2013 I just saw a book cover in my thoughts. The title was "Road to the Cup" with a Sabres logo in the background. I opened it to look at the first page and first line. It read "It started on April 3, 2013". Awesome! It will be a great read.
qwksndmonster Posted April 5, 2013 Author Report Posted April 5, 2013 I just saw a book cover in my thoughts. The title was "Road to the Cup" with a Sabres logo in the background. I opened it to look at the first page and first line. It read "It started on April 3, 2013". ...when Larsson was traded to the Sabres. That's when his destiny became intertwined with Buffalo. Forty years later he won the cup against the Death Valley Dervishes not on the ice, but from behind the bench.
dudacek Posted April 6, 2013 Report Posted April 6, 2013 The D is pretty much set for next year in my view: Ehrhoff, Myers, Sekera, solid veteran free agent, Weber, Pysyk, McNabb I can live watching us grow with that. Enroth and Hackett (maybe even Leggio) can compete for the backup spot. Up front we should count on five top nine forwards being there next year: Hodgson, Ennis, Leino, Ott, Foligno. Porter and Kaleta are decent role players. Darcy's challenge moving forward this summer is how can Miller, Vanek, Stafford, free agents, picks, Gerbe, Flynn, Tropp, Armia, Larsson and Girgorenko be used to fill in the six holes on the forward lines and the number one goalie slot?
Miller30 Posted April 6, 2013 Report Posted April 6, 2013 I will be suprised to see Ott on the team past the trade deadline next season. He's in the same boat as Miller and Vanek with his contract expiring at end of the season. I don't see him signing here if the team is truly in a rebuild mode. He is a competitor and wants to win now. He hasn't sniffed the playoffs in 5 years and isn't getting any younger, I'm sure he feels the same as Vanek, short term retooling is fine. 3-5 year rebuilding plan isn't attractive.
Johnny DangerFace Posted April 6, 2013 Report Posted April 6, 2013 what is everyone's thoughts on Jonathan Bernier? What would it take to get him?
Trettioåtta Posted April 6, 2013 Report Posted April 6, 2013 what is everyone's thoughts on Jonathan Bernier? What would it take to get him? I've wanted him since 2007 - he was the first NHL goalie i watched in the London season opener. Loved him and have liked his play since then. Bernier/Hackett would be a pretty good tandem for a rebuild I think It would take a fair amount - but we have their draft picks so maybe they would want them back
Johnny DangerFace Posted April 6, 2013 Report Posted April 6, 2013 I've wanted him since 2007 - he was the first NHL goalie i watched in the London season opener. Loved him and have liked his play since then. Bernier/Hackett would be a pretty good tandem for a rebuild I think It would take a fair amount - but we have their draft picks so maybe they would want them back yea he has been a pleasure to watch this year. I'm just saying if miller isn't in the plans I want a young goaltender that has proved he is ready for his shot.
Tondas Posted April 6, 2013 Report Posted April 6, 2013 I think we ned to go back to the tried and true formula. 1st line - Scoring 2nd line - Scoring 3rd line - Checking 4th line - Energy Our problem is that we have a mix of all types of players and we have to force them into the wrong role. This is evident with Gerbe. His type of play is suited for the first two lines, but his talent level is not good enough. Instead of doing the proper thing (cutting/trading him), we play him on the 4th line. Not the proper role for him. Playing Kaleta on any line but the 4th is incorrect as well. We need a GM that realizes this, and drafts/attains players according to roles and not necessarily the best talent overall.
inkman Posted April 6, 2013 Report Posted April 6, 2013 what is everyone's thoughts on Jonathan Bernier? I think he's become the player du jour. Following in the footsteps of Steve Ott, Steve Stamkos, Patrick Kane, Marty Biron, Bobby Ryan, Dustin Brown, Jerome Iginla, Shane Doan, etc.
That Aud Smell Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 I posted this in the Devils GDT, but figured it more belonged here: It's too bad that this is happening. I can give people a pass for booing your team off the ice after a terrible period, but booing them in-game while the play is ongoing -- and not even for failing to play hard, but just for being bad. That's not good. But I understand how it's come to this: Sky-high expectations, followed by a lost season (presumably), and a roster that is arguably one of the 5 weakest in the league (I don't want to say "least talented"; I'm not sure that's the case, what with all the young guys, both here and on the way). Anyway, I was looking at the box score of skaters' ice time this morning -- and man, that is a hound's breakfast of a squad. Good NHL Players (3 (excluding Vanek)) Steve Ott Christian Ehrhoff Andrej Sekera (I wavered on whether he's a role player or a good NHL player) [Thomas Vanek] Under-Performing Talented Players Drew Stafford(needs change of scenery) Tyler Myers (rounding into better form) Tyler Ennis (needs to go back to wing) Role Players/Prospects Patrick Kaleta John Scott Kevin Porter Brian Flynn Marginal Players/Prospects Nathan Gerbe Jochen Hecht Adam Pardy Luke Adam Promising Prospects Cody Hodgson Mike Weber Marcus Foligno Mark Pysyk By my count, that was fully 11 of the 18 skaters who are just ... meh. Dark days.
TrueBlueGED Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 I posted this in the Devils GDT, but figured it more belonged here: Good summary, don't disagree with much. I don't think Ennis is really underperforming this year--he's putting up numbers you'd expect from a second line winger. Second, by "good players" do you mean good at what they do, or they belong in the top-6 forwards or top-4 D? I ask because while I love Ott, on a good team he's a 3rd line player IMO. On a good team, only considering our current players and how they're currently playing, I see something like this for our forwards: Vanek-xxx-xxx Ennis-Hodgson-xxx Ott-xxx-xxx Foligno-xxx-Kaleta If the mission is to build a contender, that's a lot of holes.
Taro T Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 I posted this in the Devils GDT, but figured it more belonged here: Taking a slightly different look at it, but similarly, (didn't bother to look at contract status for Pardy & Sulzer, expect they should be resignable if becoming UFA's if the Sabres want them back) this team as currently constructed has (when healthy) 1 1st line LW (Vanek), 1 borderline 1st line C (Hodgson), a hole at 1st line RW (hopefully Armia fills this in a couple of years); a couple of 2nd line LW's (Ennis, Leino) and also Gerbe, no 2nd line C (hopefully Grigorenko can fill this w/in 1-2 years), a 2nd line RW that I'd really like to see gone (Stafford), can Flynn step up to this role next year(?); a 3rd line C (Porter), a couple of 3rd line LW's (Ott, Foligno), a 3rd line RW (Flynn) that is more suited defensively to a 2nd line role, and a 3rd line RW (Kaleta) more suited to 4th line/PK, and a 3rd line RW recovering from injury (Tropp); no 4th line C (Hecht won't be back) unless you count McCormick; this should be an easy spot to fill, a 4th line LW (Scott), and 1 of the 3rd line RW's should be able to fill this spot, if not 4th line RW should also be easy to fill. There's also Adam and Ellis floating around available to be put into the mix. On D, I'm fine with leaving Ehrhoff and Myers as the top pair - Myers has played much better since both Ruff and Leopold have been gone (yes, he still has 1 brain cramp per game, but it's better than where it was and Tallinder could overcome both Lydman's and Myer's brain cramps, Ehrhoff seems capable of doing that as well); Weber - Sekera works as well; and Pardy - Pysyk are also servicable; leaving Sulzer and McNabb as spares. Those pairings are fairly well balanced and should be good enough to allow Pysyk and McNabb to grow into roles with the big club. In net, until 1 or both are gone, I'll assume it's Miller and Enroth. So, D and G are solid (not spectacular, but solid and Miller COULD be spectacular) heading into next year. But as you mentioned, the forwards are a mess. A center and a couple of RW's and then it isn't looking too bad. Somebody'd mentioned that Horton turns UFA this year. If they could pick him up and 'stop winnin' for MacKinnon' and then they aren't too far off. I don't see the need for the total blowup of removing Vanek and Miller but they definitely need to do something up front. IF Grigorenko and Armia BOTH pan out, if they have a goalie then, they aren't in bad shape in 2 years. I'd prefer to see them do something to get the team out of bad shape now, so if those guys pan out down the road they're additional pieces not "core" pieces. We've done the 'hoping the core matures;' I don't expect anyone wants to go through that again. But man oh man, as currently constructed, that right side don't look right.
That Aud Smell Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 I don't think Ennis is really underperforming this year--he's putting up numbers you'd expect from a second line winger. Holy crud -- I hadn't even realized that he was projecting to a ~55 point season. Still, I want him on the wing. by "good players" do you mean good at what they do, or they belong in the top-6 forwards or top-4 D? good catch. i just mean good at what they do and who they are. i think ott can have a place on a 2nd line if you have a team that's fairly balanced in terms of scoring. I see something like this for our forwards: Vanek-xxx-xxx Ennis-Hodgson-xxx Ott-xxx-xxx Foligno-xxx-Kaleta If the mission is to build a contender, that's a lot of holes. Well done. When you frame it that way -- it becomes difficult to imagine moving Vanek in the offseason. A couple of observations: I don't want to project Foligno to the 4th line. Both he and Ott play LW, though. Could one move to the right side? (Small aside: The Sabres list Ott as a Center on their website; the Stars cached page says he's a LW. I don't think that's an accident or mere happenstance.) I think Flynn slots well into the 4th line; I've liked his game enough to see him there long-term. I'm not enough of a prospect nerd (and maybe this isn't the right thread?), but I took a stab at putting notional thoughts about how the lineup is expected to look in the future, based strictly on who's in the team's system now. Vanek-[Grigorenko]-[Armia] Ennis-Hodgson-[XXX] Ott-[Larsson/Giergensons]-[Tropp] Foligno-[Flynn]-Kaleta I plunked our two young grinding centers on the third line. Appears we're short on RWs now. That makes sense, since we shipped our top one out and have another who's presumably on his way out. EDIT: I forgot about the Leino. #Ashamed. I'm done. SECOND EDIT: I agree that the D corps are in decent shape.
... Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 Vanek-xxx-xxx Ennis-Hodgson-xxx Ott-xxx-xxx Foligno-xxx-Kaleta If the mission is to build a contender, that's a lot of holes. Agreed for an ideal world. I was going to propose a more realistic (but less than ideal, with all due respect) template that they may use to determine their holes over the summer, but, man, way too many lefties. As I'm looking these up to try and sort out who would play where I noticed that the difference between what side they shoot and what position they play is blurred. For example, I'm seeing Ennis listed as a LW, with a left-handed shot. How does that work?
Taro T Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 Agreed for an ideal world. I was going to propose a more realistic (but less than ideal, with all due respect) template that they may use to determine their holes over the summer, but, man, way too many lefties. As I'm looking these up to try and sort out who would play where I noticed that the difference between what side they shoot and what position they play is blurred. For example, I'm seeing Ennis listed as a LW, with a left-handed shot. How does that work? Typically, wings play on their 'strong side' meaning lefties (who are typically right handed) play on the LW and righties play on the RW. Vanek prefers to play on his 'off-wing' as he shoots right but is preferentially a LW. The benefit to playing on your strong side is as you are rushing up the ice, you are catching passes on your forehand and you are passing / shooting on your forehand. However, once you are set in the zone you'd be able to get a shot off quicker and at a better angle if you're on your off-wing.
Trettioåtta Posted April 8, 2013 Report Posted April 8, 2013 Typically, wings play on their 'strong side' meaning lefties (who are typically right handed) play on the LW and righties play on the RW. Vanek prefers to play on his 'off-wing' as he shoots right but is preferentially a LW. The benefit to playing on your strong side is as you are rushing up the ice, you are catching passes on your forehand and you are passing / shooting on your forehand. However, once you are set in the zone you'd be able to get a shot off quicker and at a better angle if you're on your off-wing. More for defense, but if you play 'on-wing' then it is easier to stop pucks along the boards/battle at the boards
... Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 I suppose that makes sense, but I always thought it was players' choice, most choosing to play with their sticks on the inside. And I still play once in a while! I'm watching the Boston game and paying attention...there seems to be no rhyme or reason to stick position.
Taro T Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 I suppose that makes sense, but I always thought it was players' choice, most choosing to play with their sticks on the inside. And I still play once in a while! I'm watching the Boston game and paying attention...there seems to be no rhyme or reason to stick position. A player will have a natural affinity for shooting 1 way or the other. Right handed people tend to shoot left and lefties tend to shoot right. (the correlation is probably about 75%). The power in your shot comes from your upper hand, so that's probably why people shoot opposite of their dominant hand.
LastPommerFan Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 A player will have a natural affinity for shooting 1 way or the other. Right handed people tend to shoot left and lefties tend to shoot right. (the correlation is probably about 75%). The power in your shot comes from your upper hand, so that's probably why people shoot opposite of their dominant hand. Except it's the opposite in the US vs. Canada.
Eleven Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 Except it's the opposite in the US vs. Canada. That's because of the coriolis effect.
LastPommerFan Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 That's because of the coriolis effect. I thought it was just the Metric way of holding a stick.
Eleven Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 I thought it was just the Metric way of holding a stick. Probably that, too.
bunomatic Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 A player will have a natural affinity for shooting 1 way or the other. Right handed people tend to shoot left and lefties tend to shoot right. (the correlation is probably about 75%). The power in your shot comes from your upper hand, so that's probably why people shoot opposite of their dominant hand. I shoot left , I'm right handed but I swing right in golf. I always wondered if everyone in golf swings the opposite to what they shoot in hockey ? I also bat right.
Eleven Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 I shoot left , I'm right handed but I swing right in golf. I always wondered if everyone in golf swings the opposite to what they shoot in hockey ? I also bat right. Like Glass Case said...
... Posted April 9, 2013 Report Posted April 9, 2013 A player will have a natural affinity for shooting 1 way or the other. Right handed people tend to shoot left and lefties tend to shoot right. (the correlation is probably about 75%). The power in your shot comes from your upper hand, so that's probably why people shoot opposite of their dominant hand. Okay, please believe me that I'm not trying to be difficult, but that sounds crazy to me. Everyone I know shoots on their dominant side. The power comes from the lower hand on slaps and wrist shots. And if your shot is on the right, you'd want to come down the wing with your blade on the net side. Ever play the opposite wing and try and make a pass or shot through the slot? Anyway, this is OT, sorry for the tangent. If this is interesting perhaps we can start a new thread. For the time being I'm just going stick with the official position designation.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.