nfreeman Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 This is a tough call. Normally you don't (and Lindy doesn't) mess with success, but that was such a thuggish display by Philly that I'm sure Lindy is going to seriously consider it. There were at least half a dozen Flyers taking dangerous cheap shots tonight. I think I would play him and sit Vanek, who continues to be ineffective (although at least he was hustling tonight). I will also predict that Lindy plays him, esp. because Brashear will probably be back in the lineup for Philly. FU, Hitchcock. 96 hours until you get freed up to devote yourself to the cabbage soup diet. Go Sabres.
letsgobuffalo45 Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 This is a tough call. Normally you don't (and Lindy doesn't) mess with success, but that was such a thuggish display by Philly that I'm sure Lindy is going to seriously consider it. There were at least half a dozen Flyers taking dangerous cheap shots tonight. I think I would play him and sit Vanek, who continues to be ineffective (although at least he was hustling tonight). I will also predict that Lindy plays him, esp. because Brashear will probably be back in the lineup for Philly. FU, Hitchcock. 96 hours until you get freed up to devote yourself to the cabbage soup diet. Go Sabres. Anyone catch the replay that shows I think Dimitrakos of the Flyers kick his skate blade up at Grier during the Vanek scuffle? WTF was that? I hope the league takes a look at that BS... This series is getting VERY chippy.
inkman Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 I think I would play him and sit Vanek... I normally wouldn't advocate it but they are really going to be taking exceptions on Wed and I'm sure it would be comforting to have that freak lurking from the ice and not the press box.
LabattBlue Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 Philly is not going to "goon it up" in a close game. I just can't justtify dressing Peters knowing he brings nothing to the table and will only see a couple minutes of ice time. Now that the Sabres have given the Flyers a taste of their PP lethalness, look for Philly to cool it with the cheap shots.
haseoke Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 Seriously. Philly may be full of goons, but nobody is stupid enough to throw two full games away in front of their home fans. Expect them to come out with some serious pride and desperation. In fact, I rather expect the Forsberg line to take a more dominant role in game 3, considering Philly gets the last change and they can avoid the Drury line. Lindy hasn't rolled four lines quite the way we assumed he would - that matchup has been pretty set (granted, the amount of 5 on 5 time to which he had to commit them was almost nil). j
sabre31_98 Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 There is no way you dress Peters, or even take him to philly with the team. All of the news and coments are pointing to the classless flyers and their goonery. Lindy has done a great job of keeping the sabres in check and limiting the retaliations. Why start now? Not only have we beaten them twice, but we have also won in "court of public opinion". Let Philly fans be embarrassed for the flyers, I am proud to be a Sabre fan.
SHAAAUGHT!!! Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 I don't want to have to dress Peters, but they really should because Philly stopped playing hockey after...well..they actually never even got going last night - the flyers skated around the whole game with no intent to win, they were headhunting. If Peters was on the bench I don't think they would have been so bold about it. I say dress him because the retards at the next two games are going to want the players to goon it up, and hitchCOCK's comments are not going to inspire his players to play any cleaner. At this point it is fairly obvious that Philly isn't any sort of contender so Peters won't hurt our chances.
BetweenThePipes00 Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 Dressing Peters would be playing right into their hands ... it's what they want. The Sabres have shown they can stand up to them just fine with their current lineup, and like someone said above, it only got ugly because the score got out of hand. You can't count on that happening again. Besides, who do you sit? Gaustad has been great, Pominville just scored an HT and Vanek seemed to wake up after getting knocked around a little ... Don't mess with it ...
Hirly5 Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 I wouldn't dress Peters. I would rather have the Sabres up 3-0 with someone losing a fight or getting bullied around than be up 2-1 putting the pressure right back on the Sabres. Philly can't chance stupid penalties to send a message because Buffalo will turn their message into a PP goal. Peters' limited ice time and skills is not worth it. Buffalo has some guys that can mix it up if things need to be taken care of.
Spandrel Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 I agree that you sit him. This game got out of hand last night because the Flyers very early on had little to play for, and they were frustrated. No way do they make those foolish plays in a close game. Mike Robitaille made some good points last night, on Shootout after the game. The Flyers simply do not have an answer for the Sabres' speed. If they try and get physical, they have to deal with our lethal power play, and that got them nowhere last night. They are in between a rock and a hard place, and unless Orca can find a way to play the Knuble-Forsberg-Gagne line for 15 minutes a period or get Esche to play way above his head again, I don't see how they can keep this one close. Philly is trying to cling to the old-style of play that no longer "flys" under the new rules. The Flyer fans bemoan the changes, but in reality, they are frustrated that they are getting beat by a team that quickly adapted. Had their team made the change, you'd hear fewer complaints. I also think that is what was so frustrating about Campbell's hit. The speed and finesse team made the hit heard 'round the world on the physical team.
Bring Back Sanderson Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 Peters no, Pyatt yes. He's a big enough guy and can play tough enough to offset some of Philly's physical advantage while maintaining the clear talent dominance that Buffalo has over Philly on the 3rd and 4th lines. I'd sit Vanek in his place. If the series gets to 3-0 somehow and the Flyers resort to more goonery in the end of game 3, I'd consider going with Peters. But it's too early in the series to start considering a major strategic change like reducing the effectiveness of your 4th line in favor of added toughness.
elcrusho Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 I'd have to say no to Peters... Everyone Flyers fan calls the Sabres a bunch of pu$$ie$ which I think is HI-LARIOUS, considersing Mr. Esche had a hissy fit and dropped his gloves to go with just about anyone, haha Derek Roy I mean c'mon, why doesn't esche go against Mair or Peters, I'd love to see that, oh yeah and without his little saftey net goalie mask... The Sabres still play a physical game, just not a Stupid Physical game like the Pre-Lockout Flyers...
topshelfcookies Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 I think people are crazy for suggesting a change to the lineup. Why would you mess with a team that is completely on fire right now, skating well and dealing with Philly's "physical" style of play fine? Dressing Peters simply doesn't make sense...you're basically losing a body by doing so. 1- If the game is close, Peters won't even get on the ice 2- Dressing him renders Guastad and Pominville pretty much useless 3- In a close game, Lindy would be forced to shuffle the lines, in-game, in order to get Gaustad and Pominville on the ice, thus messing up the chemistry for the other lines that are clicking 4- If the game is getting chippy, it's not as if Peter's will draw a penalty, and then allow the Sabres to get a man-advantage. He'll retaliate and get tossed into the box as well. 5- In a chippy game, Peters is most likely to do something to receive a major penalty or misconduct, thus rendering his limited services useless anyways. In regards to Pyatt? Why? If Buffalo had been pounded into oblivion these first 2 games, and was really struggling to maintain puck posession, forecheck or get any type of physical play going...that's one thing. But fact is, Buffalo has had no problems so far in this series. Why change? Finally, I'm no HUGE Don Cherry fan, but last night during one of his intermission segments, he noted that there were 4 coaches whose teams won Game 1, then changed their lineup around slightly for Game 2. All four teams lost Game 2. Cherry's point was that in the playoffs, you simply don't mess with a good thing. AMEN!
rickshaw Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 Sanderson, Excellent point. Put Pyatt's big body in there. He can stand up to others if need be. Vanek's neck will probably be pretty sore today after it almost got broken last night, anyway. No Peters. We just need to continue playing our game and keep scoring. No need to play their game, as their game is about losing. Ours is about winning.
SHAAAUGHT!!! Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 Peters no, Pyatt yes. He's a big enough guy and can play tough enough to offset some of Philly's physical advantage while maintaining the clear talent dominance that Buffalo has over Philly on the 3rd and 4th lines. I'd sit Vanek in his place. If the series gets to 3-0 somehow and the Flyers resort to more goonery in the end of game 3, I'd consider going with Peters. But it's too early in the series to start considering a major strategic change like reducing the effectiveness of your 4th line in favor of added toughness. LOL, i forgot Pyatt was still on the team....he makes a lot more sense to dress than Peters.
X. Benedict Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 LOL, i forgot Pyatt was still on the team....he makes a lot more sense to dress than Peters. I think Pyatt plays game 3 and Vanek is scratched. Pyatt has shown he is more sound defensively, and now that Philly has the last line change, you don't want the Forsberg line out there with Vanek on the ice to backcheck.
Saber61 Posted April 25, 2006 Report Posted April 25, 2006 id say no simply because we don't want to revert to their game... we play our style they can play theres... we'll just walk all over them again
Two or less Posted April 26, 2006 Report Posted April 26, 2006 no peters, but i do think we need to add some size. I wouldn't mind playing Taylor Pyatt and hope he uses his size to a huge advantage. Pyatt can hit... we've all seen it at times this season and who did he fight earlier this year when he totally kicked the dudes a$$?
nfreeman Posted April 26, 2006 Author Report Posted April 26, 2006 Well, so much for my idea -- one of the articles in the buff. news today says Peters will not be dressing. I can't believe Lindy isn't reading this board and coaching according to my suggestions. It's probably the right move. The 4th line is pretty effective the way it is and as long as the refs keep calling the game the same way, Philly won't goon it up unless the game is out of reach. However, I can totally see us getting another 3-goal lead and them starting up with the cheap shots again. I suppose this would be a good problem to have. Prediction for tonight: Sabres 4, Philly 2. Go Sabres.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.