Building the best Sabres team ever

[SwampD]

8 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Depends on which net.  Again, if it is the net above the glass, he was an expert.

I don't know how or why he gets any love around here, especially from posters whose opinions I respect.

He was a heavy skater at both ends, and that's it.  He couldn't clear his zone, he couldn't run a power play, and he sure couldn't shoot.

Durable. Absolutely could clear his zone. Played heavy minutes against top lines. Had 15 pts in 21 games of the best Sabres post-season I ever saw.

What can I say, I like defensive defensemen. 

 

He really couldn't shoot though.

[Weave]

16 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Depends on which net.  Again, if it is the net above the glass, he was an expert.

I don't know how or why he gets any love around here, especially from posters whose opinions I respect.

He was a heavy skater at both ends, and that's it.  He couldn't clear his zone, he couldn't run a power play, and he sure couldn't shoot.

Zhitnick is the 90's version of Risto.  On teams that had some success. 

[Eleven]

I am too young to remember Guevremont; any pointers?

[dudacek]

Zhitnik was a fire hydrant of a man who could skate well and forever.

He rarely lost one on one physical battles, or got beat one on one skating, and he was usually positionally sound. He was the rare sort of defender who could match up against strength and skill equally well. And he was skilled enough with the puck too. I usually felt good with him out there in any situation, or against any opponent. (Well, except teeing up the slapper).

He’s 3rd all-time in games played, goals and points for Buffalo defencemen and was used as a #1 for most of his tenure here. For what it’s worth Bodger and Korab are 4 and 5 on the all-time points list for Sabres D. It is kinda sad some just remember 44 for that shot, because he was a horse out there.

Cant offer you much on Big Josh. He was mostly a hockey card to me.

Edited May 10, 2020 by dudacek

[dudacek]

Bodger wasn’t physical, but he was a big, strong man who could play the game in a rocking chair.

Very cool with the puck and able to slow the game down. He had a good shot and worked a PP as good as anyone we’ve had on this team.

He had all the tools, just not elite at any of them and was maybe a tad too laid back.

[dudacek]

I really liked Hank, and we never had prime Teppo in Buffalo; at their Sabres peak, they were pretty much pick ‘em: smart, smooth and responsible. 

But in his prime, Teppo was one of the best defencemen in the world. Three Olympics medals, 1300  NHL games a lot of them as a #1 D, leader on and off the ice.

Cant really think of a better role model for Ras.

Edited May 10, 2020 by dudacek

[Eleven]

8 hours ago, dudacek said:

Bodger wasn’t physical, but he was a big, strong man who could play the game in a rocking chair.

 

And seemed to, often.

[Marvin]

Guevremont was a good defenceman with an excellent shot, decent defencive positioning, very strong (as well all the Sabres' defencemen at the time), was a solid skater, but his limited hockey sense meant that you needed a very aware partner for him.  Bill Hajt was an ideal partner for him.

[nfreeman]

Korab, Teppo and Risto.

[dudacek]

Locking the poll now to prevent the need for a tiebreaker.Will update with goalies later.

Talinder Numminen and Zhitnik advance.

Edited May 12, 2020 by dudacek

[dudacek]

No point doing an open goalie poll since the Sabres had the greatest goalie in NHL history.

To make it more interesting, we are going to pick from the field to determine the Sabres 2nd best starter, and their best backup.

[Eleven]

34 minutes ago, dudacek said:

No point doing an open goalie poll since the Sabres had the greatest goalie in NHL history.

To make it more interesting, we are going to pick from the field to determine the Sabres 2nd best starter, and their best backup.

The only other option is to debate best tandem, but Hasek/Biron would own that, too.  So yes, let's get on with Ryan Miller and his backup.

[Weave]

What an embarrassment of riches this organization has had at goalie.  The only stretch with mediocre goaltending has been the post-Miller stretch.  Sure, we put up with Tom Draper for a season, but this organization has been able to follow one very good GT with another in pretty short order.  Are some better than others here?  Probably.  Could you ice an awesome team with almost every goalie on this poll?  Absolutely.

Edited May 12, 2020 by Weave

[Taro T]

Went with Crozier & Roloson both for their work as non-Sabres which is when they were in their primes.

If not for health issues that plagued him later in his career, Crozier would be a HoFer.  He was the 1st Conn Smythe winner from a team that didn't win the Stanley Cup.  Won the Calder & led the league in shutouts twice.  Was a butterfly goalie long before Allaire even knew how to spell the word much less thought of the concept.

Roloson was a stand up goalue in Buffalo and only barely made the NHL.  Totally remade himself as a butterfly goalie the year after he left the Sabres down in the minors then signed with the Wild as a FA.  Became a quality starter after a year of using those concepts against NHLers.  The rest of the options there, except for Malarchuk never reached that distinction.

If only making the decision off what they did as a Sabre would go with Miller & Biron.  Though would make a case that Sauve should be in the 2nd category rather than the 1st and if he were he'd get the nod.  His best work came as Edwards' backup getting the easier matchups and helping the Sabres to the Vezina.

[Weave]

I agree that I'd easily choose Sauve if he were in the second category.  His work with Edwards as the starter was fantastic.

[dudacek]

I did struggle on where to put Sauve. He was only a clear-cut starter for one season, but he wasn’t the clear-cut backup for more than a couple years either. He shared the starter’s role for a while with both Edwards and Barrasso. He is 6th all-time in Sabre games played.

 I would have voted for him as the team’s Best backup if he was in that category.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Edwards and Malarchuk.

I have missed a few votes here.  Next ...

 

[nfreeman]

Tommy B. and Cloutier.

I loved Miller but I'm generally inclined towards prior generation goalies, who didn't get to wear huge brick walls as their pads.

[dudacek]

Glad to see Miller on top.

To me, he was the heart and soul of that edition of the team.

[Eleven]

3 hours ago, dudacek said:

Glad to see Miller on top.

To me, he was the heart and soul of that edition of the team.

The nostalgia for Crozier et al. notwithstanding, there is no way, in their primes, that they would have stopped the offenses Miller had to face, in his prime.

[Taro T]

14 minutes ago, Eleven said:

The nostalgia for Crozier et al. notwithstanding, there is no way, in their primes, that they would have stopped the offenses Miller had to face, in his prime.

The recency bias of Miller heroics not withstanding, there is no way, in his prime, that he would've stopped the opponents Crozier had to face in his prime in the '60's.

(Crozier wasn't in his prime as a Sabre & there's no way a skinny lanky guy like Miller could've performed like he did in the equipment back then - Crozier was a butterfly goalie, Esposito was a butterfly goalie (there was a reason there were very few & those were 2 of the best at it), Miller would in almost all likelihood not been and his efficiency would've suffered; and truly doubt he could've held up to the pounding he'd've taken back then.)

[Eleven]

15 minutes ago, Taro T said:

The recency bias of Miller heroics not withstanding, there is no way, in his prime, that he would've stopped the opponents Crozier had to face in his prime in the '60's.

(Crozier wasn't in his prime as a Sabre & there's no way a skinny lanky guy like Miller could've performed like he did in the equipment back then - Crozier was a butterfly goalie, Esposito was a butterfly goalie (there was a reason there were very few & those were 2 of the best at it), Miller would in almost all likelihood not been and his efficiency would've suffered; and truly doubt he could've held up to the pounding he'd've taken back then.)

It's actually recognition of false nostalgia for Crozier/Edwards/etc., combined with the recognition that offenses in 2005 are different than they were in 1970, that would lead one to vote Miller.

It's pretty much the exact opposite of recency bias.

Those guys were pretty great goalies.  They also didn't play against anyone nearly as fast as Ovechkin or Crosby.

And who is to say whether Miller would have been a butterfly goalie (he wasn't here, anyway--he was a hybrid) or not?  And why would that matter?

[Taro T]

49 minutes ago, Eleven said:

It's actually recognition of false nostalgia for Crozier/Edwards/etc., combined with the recognition that offenses in 2005 are different than they were in 1970, that would lead one to vote Miller.

It's pretty much the exact opposite of recency bias.

Those guys were pretty great goalies.  They also didn't play against anyone nearly as fast as Ovechkin or Crosby.

And who is to say whether Miller would have been a butterfly goalie (he wasn't here, anyway--he was a hybrid) or not?  And why would that matter?

Can't see Miller being a stand up goalie.  That's why his not being able to butterfly with that equipment would matter.  He was too big to be a scrambler either, so stand up it would've been.  Also, can't see him playing without a mask or doing well with the scrums that happened around the net.

When the question of how guys from different eras would fare relative to each other, the comparison is almost always madd from the point of view of how they'd fare today. Rarely seems to be that we consider how the modern player would do in the old days.  Just don't see Miller with his very lanky build and narrow frame doing well back then. 

And with that said, if the question was who would be best, not in their prime, but in their Sabres prime that Miller would've gotten my vote.  He was one of the best in his era.  Not convinced his play would translate backwards.

And notice, there was no mention of Edwards in any of my posts except for spaying he and Sauve made a great tandem.

[Eleven]

15 hours ago, Taro T said:

Can't see Miller being a stand up goalie.  That's why his not being able to butterfly with that equipment would matter.  He was too big to be a scrambler either, so stand up it would've been.  Also, can't see him playing without a mask or doing well with the scrums that happened around the net.

When the question of how guys from different eras would fare relative to each other, the comparison is almost always madd from the point of view of how they'd fare today. Rarely seems to be that we consider how the modern player would do in the old days.  Just don't see Miller with his very lanky build and narrow frame doing well back then. 

And with that said, if the question was who would be best, not in their prime, but in their Sabres prime that Miller would've gotten my vote.  He was one of the best in his era.  Not convinced his play would translate backwards.

And notice, there was no mention of Edwards in any of my posts except for spaying he and Sauve made a great tandem.

Yeah, someone else had mentioned Edwards.

[Taro T]

13 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Yeah, someone else had mentioned Edwards.

Which really was a minor point.

The larger one being that, though Crozier may not have excelled in today's NHL; then again he may have as his style of play would not be overwhelmingly transformed; he likely would fare better in the NHL of Miller's prime better than Miller would in that of Roger's prime.

Not sure why the comparison between players of differing eras gets set to the conditions of the more recent era to reduce the degree of them inevitably being apples to oranges comparisons rather than setting them to the earlier conditions.  It might actually be most useful to envision each transformed to the other's era and try to base the analysis on how overall each would perform.  My 2 cents.