Building the best Sabres team ever

[Eleven]

44 minutes ago, Taro T said:

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.

Miller would have won about ninety million Vezinas in Crozier's era.  Maybe even a hundred million.

[Taro T]

14 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Miller would have won about ninety million Vezinas in Crozier's era.  Maybe even a hundred million.

The internet, she is yours.  At least for today.

[dudacek]

Marty Biron will back up Ryan Miller until Hasek decides he's ready to play.

 

Edited May 15, 2020 by dudacek

[Eleven]

10 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Marty Biron will back up Ryan Miller Miller until Hasek decides he's ready to play.

 

That's a nice tandem.

[dudacek]

Last player polls will be kinda different.

The first is the runners-up forwards poll, which basically allows you to augment your offence by picking your favourite from the best of the rest. (HOFers and pending HOFers were ineligible.)

The second is basically for a utility player to round up the lineup, which basically includes a handful of interesting players that didn't really fit into any of our other polls. Vote for your favourite, or the one you think best completes our lineup.

And speaking of the team, here is what you have selected so far:

Forward: Perreault Hawerchuk Drury Martin Gare Vanek Pominville Connolly Ramsay Gaustad Barnaby

Defence: Ramsey, McKee, Dahlin, Numminen, Zhitnik, Tallinder, Spacek, Playfair

Goalie: (Hasek) Miller Biron

And the last one is for fun. Every team needs a whipping boy. ?

Edited May 15, 2020 by dudacek

[Weave]

The first two were straight up favs.  I'm showing my age.  Foligno and Vaive.  One 40 goal scorer in his prime and one 50 goal scorer in his prime.  JP almost made the cut.

Kozlov is easy to hate.  Noone gave up quite like ol Slava.

[Taro T]

Tough call on the 1st 2 but sided with Weave on all 3.

Briere almost always seemed to find ways to get it done in the 3rd & OT.  That's an intangible worth having.  Peca was absolutely fearless & a true shutdown center.  Seeing him with Ramsay would be incredible.    O'Reilly really doesn't have a glaring weakness at either end of the ice & can be used strategically to shut the other team's top line down, too.  Robert was excellent along the boards & if he were on this squad the French Connection could be resurrected.

But Foligno had sooo much heart & was way more effective than he probably should've been.  (The apple didn't fall far from the tree with his kids.)  Was physical, powerful, and still dangerous in the offensive end.  In the morning might let one of the others edge him out.  But he should be on that roster.

The Vaive that played on the Sabres was a beast & took an incredible punishment to earn a ton of Esposito style "garbage" goals.  But in his prime, he could fly (for a big man) & was nearly unstoppable driving into the zone down the wing on a rush.  A case can be made for Dumont, but Vaive at his peak was better.  

Khmylev was underrated and was good enough to be on that monster '87 USSR Canada Cup squad that played in the best 3 game series ever.  And if Ruuttu were on the squad, they could roll Perreault, Hawerchuk, Drury, & Ruuttu at C with Connolly as spare C for the top 6 & Gaustad as spare C for the bottom 6.  That's respectable depth (& doesn't even have LaFontaine, Briere, Eichel, nor Luce).  But Vaive gets the nod.

And, though other guys were whipping boys, none but Kozlov INTENTIONALLY stunk.  #### him.

[Eleven]

Question 1:  Foligno is such a nice sentimental favorite, and Briere was magic so many times, and O'Reilly was a Conn Smythe winner in his prime, if he's even peaked yet.  Tough calls there.  And Peca could crush people and still score 20+ regularly, too.  It's probably going to be O'Reilly because he is/was a Conn Smythe winner in his prime.  That's kind of a big deal.

Question 2:  Dumont and Vaive is another tough choice.  Leaning Vaive; will sleep on it whenever my body decides to actually let me sleep tonight.

Question 3 is the only easy one.  It's going to be Kozlov.

[Taro T]

14 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Question 1:  Foligno is such a nice sentimental favorite, and Briere was magic so many times, and O'Reilly was a Conn Smythe winner in his prime, if he's even peaked yet.  Tough calls there.  And Peca could crush people and still score 20+ regularly, too.  It's probably going to be O'Reilly because he is/was a Conn Smythe winner in his prime.  That's kind of a big deal.

Question 2:  Dumont and Vaive is another tough choice.  Leaning Vaive; will sleep on it whenever my body decides to actually let me sleep tonight.

Question 3 is the only easy one.  It's going to be Kozlov.

Really?  Could've sworn from the last vote that it didn't matter.

[Eleven]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Really?  Could've sworn from the last vote that it didn't matter.

Well, it was a different question last time, but I still voted O'Reilly:

 

 

[Taro T]

Just now, Eleven said:

Well, it was a different question last time, but I still voted O'Reilly:

 

 

The last Q was goalies not named Hasek.  And "nostalgia" was the reason proffered for why people went with Conn Smythe & Calder winners, rather than their performance excellence.

[Eleven]

7 minutes ago, Taro T said:

The last Q was goalies not named Hasek.  And "nostalgia" was the reason proffered for why people went with Conn Smythe & Calder winners, rather than their performance excellence.

Oh!  I thought you meant the last question about O'Reilly.  If you mean Crozier's Conn Smythe on the losing side, well, can't help you if you want to get back into that. 

Miller was a better goalie, and also managed to win two playoff series as a starter in two different seasons, something Crozier never did.  A Calder is immaterial if we're talking about a player in his prime, and Crozier's losing-side Smythe is equalled by Miller's losing-side MVP in the Olympics.  Crozier also never managed to win a Vezina, even in a six team league.  And Miller would win that trophy ELEVENTY million times in Crozier's day.

So yeah, it seems like nostalgia to me.

Edited May 15, 2020 by Eleven

[Taro T]

9 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Oh!  I thought you meant the last question about O'Reilly.  If you mean Crozier's Conn Smythe on the losing side, well, can't help you if you want to get back into that. 

Miller was a better goalie, and also managed to win two playoff series as a starter in two different seasons, something Crozier never did.  A Calder is immaterial if we're talking about a player in his prime, and Crozier's losing-side Smythe is equalled by Miller's losing-side MVP in the Olympics.  Crozier also never managed to win a Vezina, even in a six team league.  And Miller would win that trophy ELEVENTY million times in Crozier's day.

So yeah, it seems like nostalgia to me.

You're equating a single game losing team MVP award with the Conn Smythe?  Really?  That seems a bit hyperbolic.

Crozier's Calder came at the age of 23.  Still at the early side of his peak years, but it's not like he was a teenager.  And speaking of early experiences in the NHL, he never bawled his eyes out after a loss. ?

As for the Vezina, if the rules for winning one were the same for Miller that they were back when Crozier played, Miller wouldn't have 1 either.  Back then the Vezina was given to the goalie(s) that get the Jennings today.  Had the Vezina been voted on for Roger, Crozier would've won the Vezina the year he won the Calder as he was the 1st team All Star that year.

And Crozier led his team in the Stanley Cup Finals, twice; something Miller never did.  He was within 2 wins of hoisting the Chalice twice.

That Crozier played in the 6 - 18 team NHL isn't on him anymore than Miller hitting the bigs in the '00's is on him.

[Eleven]

22 minutes ago, Taro T said:

You're equating a single game losing team MVP award with the Conn Smythe?  Really?  That seems a bit hyperbolic.

Crozier's Calder came at the age of 23.  Still at the early side of his peak years, but it's not like he was a teenager.  And speaking of early experiences in the NHL, he never bawled his eyes out after a loss. ?

As for the Vezina, if the rules for winning one were the same for Miller that they were back when Crozier played, Miller wouldn't have 1 either.  Back then the Vezina was given to the goalie(s) that get the Jennings today.  Had the Vezina been voted on for Roger, Crozier would've won the Vezina the year he won the Calder as he was the 1st team All Star that year.

And Crozier led his team in the Stanley Cup Finals, twice; something Miller never did.  He was within 2 wins of hoisting the Chalice twice.

That Crozier played in the 6 - 18 team NHL isn't on him anymore than Miller hitting the bigs in the '00's is on him.

I'm glad to have something to do, because my brain won't shut down...

1.  Miller was MVP of the tournament, not the gold medal game.  He started six games.  Not too far from how many Crozier started in the playoffs in 1966.

2.  I don't care if it came at the age of 95.  No star's rookie year is their best, whether it be Roger Crozier or Ryan Miller.

3.  Miller would have won Vezinas in the 60s and 70s.  There's no way Crozier would have done the same in Miller's era (to use a comparison that you proposed) and certainly Crozier didn't back then.

4.  Yeah, when it took four wins to get there, not twelve.

5.  Crozier led his team to the finals once, not twice, and it only took four wins to get there.  Miller won more games in that Olympics that you discount than it took Crozier to get the Red Wings to the finals.  The other time Crozier went to the finals was in Buffalo, and he played roughly 28% of the available minutes in the playoffs.  Desjardins led that team in that playoffs.

Crozier was a heck of a goalie.  Miller was better.  There's no way I can look at a Miller highlight reel and even imagine Crozier doing the things Miller did.

Anyway.  I'm probably up for a little while longer if you want to go another round!

 

 

Edited May 15, 2020 by Eleven

[Taro T]

6 hours ago, Eleven said:

I'm glad to have something to do, because my brain won't shut down...

1.  Miller was MVP of the tournament, not the gold medal game.  He started six games.  Not too far from how many Crozier started in the playoffs in 1966.

2.  I don't care if it came at the age of 95.  No star's rookie year is their best, whether it be Roger Crozier or Ryan Miller.

3.  Miller would have won Vezinas in the 60s and 70s.  There's no way Crozier would have done the same in Miller's era (to use a comparison that you proposed) and certainly Crozier didn't back then.

4.  Yeah, when it took four wins to get there, not twelve.

5.  Crozier led his team to the finals once, not twice, and it only took four wins to get there.  Miller won more games in that Olympics that you discount than it took Crozier to get the Red Wings to the finals.  The other time Crozier went to the finals was in Buffalo, and he played roughly 28% of the available minutes in the playoffs.  Desjardins led that team in that playoffs.

Crozier was a heck of a goalie.  Miller was better.  There's no way I can look at a Miller highlight reel and even imagine Crozier doing the things Miller did.

Anyway.  I'm probably up for a little while longer if you want to go another round!

 

 

6 games is close to 12? Really?  Were those 6 all against the top 2 or even top 3 teams? No.  2 were against Switzeland & 1 was against Norway.  So he played 3 games against real teams.  And 1 of those games, his team's offense came alive to such an extent that they rested Miller for the final 1/2 way through the 3rd.  Big whoop.  Crozier played all 12 against the top 2 teams.  And, had Miller done what Crozier did, win his 1st 2 games against the top team, then the US would've won its 3rd Gold Medal.  But he didn't.  He gave up a 5 hole goal off a panicked poke check.  Of course he was named the tourney MVP.  He gave Canada the Gold Medal in Canada.  They considered him to be even more valuable than Crosby.  ?

Miller never won a Jennings.  How would he possibly win a Vezina back when that's how you win one?  The one Vezina Miller got was also influenced by his Olympic tournament.  It wasn't supposed to be, but it was.  To EARN a Vezina back in Crozier's day, a goalie had to actually be the best.  Not simply win a popularity contest.  ?

And, it took 8 games to get to the Finals the 2nd time Crozier was there.  Had Crozier been in good health that 2nd time, the Sabres might have won the SC as he surely would've gotten them a single additional point in the regular season & they would've hosted the Finals.  They'd've had a chance to win it with 4 home games.  Having 4 in Filly, there was no way for them to get there.  And the pressure in game 6 became too much for the team.

Miller was very good.  Arguably the best American goalie ever.  But his prime was not better than Crozier's prime.  Crozier's prime came before there was a Sabres team.

[Eleven]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

6 games is close to 12? Really?  Were those 6 all against the top 2 or even top 3 teams? No.  2 were against Switzeland & 1 was against Norway.  So he played 3 games against real teams.  And 1 of those games, his team's offense came alive to such an extent that they rested Miller for the final 1/2 way through the 3rd.  Big whoop.  Crozier played all 12 against the top 2 teams.  And, had Miller done what Crozier did, win his 1st 2 games against the top team, then the US would've won its 3rd Gold Medal.  But he didn't.  He gave up a 5 hole goal off a panicked poke check.  Of course he was named the tourney MVP.  He gave Canada the Gold Medal in Canada.  They considered him to be even more valuable than Crosby.  ?

Miller never won a Jennings.  How would he possibly win a Vezina back when that's how you win one?  The one Vezina Miller got was also influenced by his Olympic tournament.  It wasn't supposed to be, but it was.  To EARN a Vezina back in Crozier's day, a goalie had to actually be the best.  Not simply win a popularity contest.  ?

And, it took 8 games to get to the Finals the 2nd time Crozier was there.  Had Crozier been in good health that 2nd time, the Sabres might have won the SC as he surely would've gotten them a single additional point in the regular season & they would've hosted the Finals.  They'd've had a chance to win it with 4 home games.  Having 4 in Filly, there was no way for them to get there.  And the pressure in game 6 became too much for the team.

Miller was very good.  Arguably the best American goalie ever.  But his prime was not better than Crozier's prime.  Crozier's prime came before there was a Sabres team.

This conversation SO belongs on barstools, but this is the best we can do for now.  More to come...

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Robert.

Ward.

The Vile One.

[Marvin]

6 hours ago, Taro T said:

6 games is close to 12? Really?  Were those 6 all against the top 2 or even top 3 teams? No.  2 were against Switzeland & 1 was against Norway.  So he played 3 games against real teams.  And 1 of those games, his team's offense came alive to such an extent that they rested Miller for the final 1/2 way through the 3rd.  Big whoop.  Crozier played all 12 against the top 2 teams.  And, had Miller done what Crozier did, win his 1st 2 games against the top team, then the US would've won its 3rd Gold Medal.  But he didn't.  He gave up a 5 hole goal off a panicked poke check.  Of course he was named the tourney MVP.  He gave Canada the Gold Medal in Canada.  They considered him to be even more valuable than Crosby.  ?

Miller never won a Jennings.  How would he possibly win a Vezina back when that's how you win one?  The one Vezina Miller got was also influenced by his Olympic tournament.  It wasn't supposed to be, but it was.  To EARN a Vezina back in Crozier's day, a goalie had to actually be the best.  Not simply win a popularity contest.  ?

And, it took 8 games to get to the Finals the 2nd time Crozier was there.  Had Crozier been in good health that 2nd time, the Sabres might have won the SC as he surely would've gotten them a single additional point in the regular season & they would've hosted the Finals.  They'd've had a chance to win it with 4 home games.  Having 4 in Filly, there was no way for them to get there.  And the pressure in game 6 became too much for the team.

Miller was very good.  Arguably the best American goalie ever.  But his prime was not better than Crozier's prime.  Crozier's prime came before there was a Sabres team.

Roger the Dodger's health issues were more important than most remember.  Bromley's save percentage in 1974-5 was .873 while Crozier's was .904.  Give Crozier a few more games and the Sabres are clearly at the top of the league.

That changes three very important things:

• the Sabres have home ice advantage in the Finals, where they were almost unbeatable;
• the Flyers play the Canadiens in the Semi-Finals;
• the Sabres play the Islanders in the Semi-Finals.

The Sabres were 0-3-1 against Philadelphia, 3-0-2 against the Islanders, and 4-0-1 against Montreal.  According to numerous Flyers in interviews, the Forum was almost Philadelphia's version of the Spectrum for the Sabres.  The Sabres are now a big favourite over a young Islanders team, even with rookie Billy Smith and a very good Chico Resch.  The likely scenario is a Buffalo-Montreal final, with the Sabres again having home ice advantage.  Sabres in 6.

[dudacek]

Mike Folino, Rick Vaive and Ville Leino round out the roster.

 

Let's wrap this up with a coach and a GM.

Edited May 18, 2020 by dudacek

[Weave]

Punch and Lindy get my votes.  I think a case can be made for Darcy given the team success he's had.

[Taro T]

Went with Dudley & Imlach.  Dudley mainly to give a guy that deserves consideration his due.  Ruff will win in a landslide & if the voting is close would likely change that vote to Lindy.

Had it not been for "Suffering" Regier might have earned the top slot.  Can't allow that mark against his resume to not count.

[dudacek]

Surprised to see the support for Scotty as GM.

He took a Cup contending 2nd overall team and drove it to dead last in 7 years. The team got worse every year but one during his stint.

[Weave]

7 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Surprised to see the support for Scotty as GM.

He took a Cup contending 2nd overall team and drove it to dead last in 7 years. The team got worse every year but one during his stint.

Scotty does not deserve to be on this all time team.  

[Taro T]

24 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Surprised to see the support for Scotty as GM.

He took a Cup contending 2nd overall team and drove it to dead last in 7 years. The team got worse every year but one during his stint.

Went with Imlach.  But if people are basing it on peak Bowman, rather than peak SABRES Bowman, a case can be made for him.  The Sabres are the only team that never made it to the finals with him as either GM or coach.