GDT NY Rangers vs Buffalo Sabres at KBC 7pm ET MSG TV and WGR 550 AM

[That Aud Smell]

8 hours ago, Hoss said:

I disagree. I thought they were pretty good across the board.

35% win rate may have been a bit harsh. But they gave up 44 shots (the Corsica raw shot attempts was +10 in favor of Rangers) and Hutton had to be great in order to preserve the win. I don’t think the team can use this as a formula for DeLuca .500 level success.

I did like a lot of what I saw. But they gotta get better if they’re gonna challenge for a playoff spot.

10 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

How many times have the Sabres been beaten this way? Sure, good goaltending, but they didn't allow Rangers to gobble up rebounds, second chance opportunities, and the Sabres were opportunistic. Last year, this game would have ended in regulation 1-1 and gone to a shootout or something and we might just settle for a point. A win is a win and winning is contagious. Let's hope it spreads. 

Well said. Agreed.

[Randall Flagg]

1 hour ago, Hoss said:

Why would we make major changes after a win and why move Reinhart to center?

Even after losses the lines change too much. Build chemistry.

Yeah, they played reasonable last night and the lines make sense, almost all of them seem like what you'd want to do, so no reason to tweak them much at all for now. There's no glaring problem like their almost always is for any given coach/fan base

[Sabres Fan in NS]

14 hours ago, Thorny said:

Hell of a pass by Mittelstadt to set that whole thing up. 

The pass was very nice, pretty blind, but not completely.

More impressive to me was the fact that he took on 2 Rangers for the puck along the boards and when the 3rd Ranger came near to sniff around it really opened the space for Risto.

That work along the boards ... no Sabre was willing, or able, to do that the last 5 years.  This kid is going to be good.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

I don't have time to read the whole thread.  Only got as far as Thorny's post that I quoted above.

I did not watch the game, but just watched the highlights.

These guys played a very good game overall.  After some intial issues Jack showed that he deserves the 'C'.

[bob_sauve28]

6 minutes ago, N S said:

I don't have time to read the whole thread.  Only got as far as Thorny's post that I quoted above.

I did not watch the game, but just watched the highlights.

These guys played a very good game overall.  After some intial issues Jack showed that he deserves the 'C'.

Jack looked nervous in opener, pucks hit his blade and rolled away. He played very well last night. I really like how they reacted when Rangers scored. From the face off the puck went deep into NY zone and stayed there awahile while the precious seconds ticked away. Then he put it away with blocked shot and open netter. He showed real leadership. 

[Randall Flagg]

Jack's early struggles aside, I agree with the above posts about his leadership at the end. He played a full shift, got about 30 seconds of rest, and played the last ~1:10, with the gutsy block and foot-race to the empty net. 

[North Buffalo]

Jack played much better especially late. Loved Ellie and his speed forecheck ability, what I hoped Bailey would be.  Blowieu was much better.

[Doohicksie]

13 hours ago, FuhrUrsinne said:

where does a relatively slow-skating but supposedly very cerebral hockey player best fit on a fast-skating team? In the middle of the action at center? Or in the corner at wing?

I thought Sam played right where and how he should play last night.

Edited October 8, 2018 by Doohickie

[Doohicksie]

1 hour ago, bob_sauve28 said:

winning is contagious

Winning is like Skittles?  Okay then, GO SKITTLES POX!  ?

[WildCard]

We were out shot 44-28 last night. That is not a sustainable winning model

[Huckleberry]

1 minute ago, WildCard said:

We were out shot 44-28 last night. That is not a sustainable winning model

We lost plenty of games out shooting the other guys over the years, its where they come from that would bother me more.

[WildCard]

1 minute ago, Huckleberry said:

We lost plenty of games out shooting the other guys over the years, its where they come from that would bother me more.

The Rangers were shelling us from the slot and around the net

http://hockeyviz.com/game/2018020017

[Huckleberry]

2 minutes ago, WildCard said:

The Rangers were shelling us from the slot and around the net

http://hockeyviz.com/game/2018020017

I believe you , made me look at stats and graphs. ?

[IKnowPhysics]

35 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

We lost plenty of games out shooting the other guys over the years, its where they come from that would bother me more.

That's too wide of a margin, for just about any normal shot map.  We were outplayed by the Rangers, with exceptions to the PP and Hutton.

35 minutes ago, WildCard said:

The Rangers were shelling us from the slot and around the net

http://hockeyviz.com/game/2018020017

Yeah.  Not good.

[That Aud Smell]

36 minutes ago, WildCard said:

We were out shot 44-28 last night. That is not a sustainable winning model

 

32 minutes ago, WildCard said:

The Rangers were shelling us from the slot and around the net

http://hockeyviz.com/game/2018020017

This is in line with what I saw. 

I love the outcome, and agree that Jack showed well, especially toward the end. But Carter Hutton had to be great/terrific. The Sabres need to carry the play more in order to be a 90+ point team.

[Randall Flagg]

Has anyone score-adjusted the shot attempts, and then let the sample size rise to about 20 games?

If not, stop wringin' yo hands and enjoy the win.

[LTS]

3 hours ago, WildCard said:

We were out shot 44-28 last night. That is not a sustainable winning model

I think we knew this would happen. They are going to be more open and that's going to result in many more shots. I recall the thread last year that people would rather lose 6-4 than 3-1.  This is what we are in for until they can improve their puck possession (and overall defense).

[WildCard]

4 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

Has anyone score-adjusted the shot attempts, and then let the sample size rise to about 20 games?

If not, stop wringin' yo hands and enjoy the win.

I mean I'm not gonna wait 20 games to point out things that we need to imrpove on

[Radar]

2 hours ago, LTS said:

I think we knew this would happen. They are going to be more open and that's going to result in many more shots. I recall the thread last year that people would rather lose 6-4 than 3-1.  This is what we are in for until they can improve their puck possession (and overall defense).

It may be more open and the end of our coaches career in Buffalo. Our goaltending was superb in this game and really won the game for us. Just have bad feeling about Housley style for this team. Actually seeing he had a lot of defensive talent in Nashville and this team doesn't match that. More and more doubting our coach.

[erickompositör72]

7 minutes ago, Radar said:

It may be more open and the end of our coaches career in Buffalo. Our goaltending was superb in this game and really won the game for us. Just have bad feeling about Housley style for this team. Actually seeing he had a lot of defensive talent in Nashville and this team doesn't match that. More and more doubting our coach.

If our game starts clicking with the forwards, that'll be a great accomplishment for this season. Let JBot have another offseason to fix the D. [insert platitude. eg. rome wasn't built in a day, trust the process...]

[Randall Flagg]

1 hour ago, WildCard said:

I mean I'm not gonna wait 20 games to point out things that we need to imrpove on

Valid, but hand-wringing about actual numbers (I checked - shot attempts stayed even into the third, which is typical and more important than the team up by two goals conceding more shots as the 3rd goes on) is a bit misleading this early on.

[Randall Flagg]

For example, should Boston fans be worried too? Because the ES shot attempts got worse for them earlier than they did for us against NYR: 

[Stoner]

He's so getting re-elected.

[SDS]

1 hour ago, Radar said:

It may be more open and the end of our coaches career in Buffalo. Our goaltending was superb in this game and really won the game for us. Just have bad feeling about Housley style for this team. Actually seeing he had a lot of defensive talent in Nashville and this team doesn't match that. More and more doubting our coach.

So, is the problem that a coach isn’t able to make chicken salad out of chicken xxxx? At least you know he can handle talent when he has it. 

[Radar]

7 minutes ago, SDS said:

So, is the problem that a coach isn’t able to make chicken salad out of chicken xxxx? At least you know he can handle talent when he has it. 

Yes. I think he had the talent defensively in Nashville to play the style they did. Also had good to very good goaltending. Not saying he was a bad coach but didn't need to be a great one to coach defense there. Now he has to coach a team and with less talent on defense and offense. What worked in Nashville was not all coaching. The chicken salad out of chicken xxx has a lot of merit. I'm not sure he's a good coach as much as the stars aligned perfectly for him to be attractive to Buffalo being his alma mater.