GDT: Oilers at Sabres 3-9-2024 12:30 start MSG

[thewookie1]

30 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

I'm going to stop commenting on individual games this year I think. You can be excited by the win, but this is the late season illusion we get. Edmonton was absolute garbage today compared to what I saw when they played Boston a few nights ago. They got the quick one and fell asleep. We had another in the long list of low event games. This was so low event their "hit of the game" segment was about goal posts, because they couldn't find a solid body check to show. 

Granato has FINALLY had enough with Mr. Lazy Giveaway Skinner and is in the process of Kreugering him. Will be interesting to see if this time the coach wins, or will Skinner kill another one. Either way could be a win for us. 

So yay, but it's little more than exhibition hockey at this point. 

Is it not possible we just played a very good defensive low event style game and just grinded Edmonton down? We had 40 hits credited to us which seems a tad overzealous but is that not what Boston tends to do on a game to game basis? If they are struggling they'll just throw a wrench into the machine and just play a game of next goal wins. Its a large reason why those dastardly Bruins are successful; they can play different styles depending on the circumstances and presently the Sabres are having a miserable time generating offense but they have certainly embraced low-event hockey in order to have a shot at winning every night. It's been a bad year for most the team but I can't fault them for trying to win by whatever means they can find.

[bg17]

43 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

 

I'm going to stop commenting on individual games this year I think.

 

Thank you. 

[Getpucksdeep]

36 minutes ago, Porous Five Hole said:

My OnlyFans search of Inkman returned zero results. DM me. 

Did you try any variations? Maybe add a preceding letter. A constantant we know from our beloved GM perhaps.

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, SDS said:

 

After every single Sabres game you come here and discount the win by saying the only reason why the Sabres won is because the other team played like garbage. Beyond tiresome.

Not every game but it happens a lot. 

Turning your frustrations for another dismal season onto Sabrespace posters is, beyond tiresome. 

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, thewookie1 said:

Is it not possible we just played a very good defensive low event style game and just grinded Edmonton down? We had 40 hits credited to us which seems a tad overzealous but is that not what Boston tends to do on a game to game basis? If they are struggling they'll just throw a wrench into the machine and just play a game of next goal wins. Its a large reason why those dastardly Bruins are successful; they can play different styles depending on the circumstances and presently the Sabres are having a miserable time generating offense but they have certainly embraced low-event hockey in order to have a shot at winning every night. It's been a bad year for most the team but I can't fault them for trying to win by whatever means they can find.

So you think they are playing good defense? Is that correct?

[Broken Ankles]

2 hours ago, Buffalonill said:

No he didn't he's Learning more about the pros 

You honestly think playing with kids would be better ? 

 

  It’s not just about Benson’s development.  It’s about filling that roster spot with a quality forward to contribute at the level of VO in 22/23 or better. Did he accomplish that?   Clearly not based on his individual stats and the Sabres standing in the East.  Let me ask you this, if Sam Reinhart wasn’t ready after his draft year what makes you think Benson would be?  Sam was bigger and more physically mature yet they sent him back to Junior to work on conditioning.  And that Sabres team (2014/15) wasn’t  filled with world beaters and competing for a playoff spot, so it would be easier to justify his making that team.

  It’s also about cap management, and aligning his ELC and pending RFA year with the conclusion of Skinners current deal. Instead, the Sabres will have to negotiate both Tuch and Bensons contracts and still have Skinners $9m on the books. (Unless he is bought out).  
 

 

[Buffalonill]

8 minutes ago, Broken Ankles said:

  It’s not just about Benson’s development.  It’s about filling that roster spot with a quality forward to contribute at the level of VO in 22/23 or better. Did he accomplish that?   Clearly not based on his individual stats and the Sabres standing in the East.  Let me ask you this, if Sam Reinhart wasn’t ready after his draft year what makes you think Benson would be?  Sam was bigger and more physically mature yet they sent him back to Junior to work on conditioning.  And that Sabres team (2014/15) wasn’t  filled with world beaters and competing for a playoff spot, so it would be easier to justify his making that team.

  It’s also about cap management, and aligning his ELC and pending RFA year with the conclusion of Skinners current deal. Instead, the Sabres will have to negotiate both Tuch and Bensons contracts and still have Skinners $9m on the books. (Unless he is bought out).  
 

 

They went full tank mode that year.

And different Management so I don't understand how those are comparable

[thewookie1]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

So you think they are playing good defense? Is that correct?

Defense in general no, a defensive low event style hockey yes. There's a difference; and in many cases this is how the Isles accomplish anything; they bore you to tears with nothing happening for 55 minutes and score a goal or two to win.

[Doohicksie]

4 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

I'm going to stop commenting on individual games this year I think.

2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Not every game but it happens a lot. 

Turning your frustrations for another dismal season onto Sabrespace posters is, beyond tiresome. 

2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

So you think they are playing good defense? Is that correct?

You can't even stay away for a couple of hours after saying you're giving up GDTs.  You need help.

[PerreaultForever]

11 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

You can't even stay away for a couple of hours after saying you're giving up GDTs.  You need help.

Says the guy with a chicken on his head. 

[PerreaultForever]

55 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

Defense in general no, a defensive low event style hockey yes. There's a difference; and in many cases this is how the Isles accomplish anything; they bore you to tears with nothing happening for 55 minutes and score a goal or two to win.

Well that's an interesting subjective view. Whether or not their low event hockey is an intentional strategy or whether that's just what it is. You see if that is a strategy that they are doing like the Isles have been, it goes against everything Granato says about how they want to play. It goes against the type of players they are drafting and bringing in. It would mean they are far more capable than I believe they are. So I will give the idea the benefit of a doubt for now, but I don't think that's the case at all. I think they are just not very good and most teams come in underprepared and uninterested thinking it's an easy night. 

Probably no way to know unless we get close enough to some team to make a game actually matter. 

[SwampD]

10 hours ago, Doohickie said:

So I'm rewatching portions of the game with the other coverage.  Their color guy just sounds like Jim Lorentz to me.

Their PBP guy sounds like Gonzo.

[That Aud Smell]

Mildly amusing to see Sabre fans getting  activated by a Bruins fan.

Once I learned and remembered that factoid, I understood what I needed to know.

There’s a guy in my office who is a “Bills fan” because he’s lived in WNY for 20+ years and his kids are Bills fans. But he’s actually a Steelers fan. He often drives the *real* Bills fans crazy in the workplace Bills group chat because he’s weirdly critical of the team (and especially Allen) and, although he’s ostensibly a Bills fan … he isn’t, really. And it shows.

[JohnC]

12 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

I'm going to stop commenting on individual games this year I think. You can be excited by the win, but this is the late season illusion we get. Edmonton was absolute garbage today compared to what I saw when they played Boston a few nights ago. They got the quick one and fell asleep. We had another in the long list of low event games. This was so low event their "hit of the game" segment was about goal posts, because they couldn't find a solid body check to show. 

Granato has FINALLY had enough with Mr. Lazy Giveaway Skinner and is in the process of Kreugering him. Will be interesting to see if this time the coach wins, or will Skinner kill another one. Either way could be a win for us. 

So yay, but it's little more than exhibition hockey at this point. 

I have the opposite take on what these games mean than you do. In general, for most teams at this stage of the season these are meaningful games. It seems that half the teams are either vying to get in the playoffs, or even if assured of a playoff spot, are playing to improve their position for a variety of reasons, such as home game advantages. The problem with the Sabres this season, as it was last season, is that it didn't play with the same desperation/intensity in the first half of the season. When reviewing this season, it will become apparent that for the most part this team was often lackluster against teams that they were superior to, the two Anaheim games standout to demonstrate that point.  This team let too many points that were there for the taking to get away. When all is said and done, your record is what your record is. And you have to live with that. 

It just seems that every time the Sabres win you diminish the win and make the assumption that the other team didn't care. And every time they lose you spotlight the loss. You may not recognize it but you are applying an inconsistent standard when the Sabres either win or lose. There isn't anyone here who doesn't recognize that this has been a disappointing season, especially when the expectations were high entering it. But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't acknowledge the positive when it does happen. 

[Broken Ankles]

10 hours ago, Buffalonill said:

They went full tank mode that year.

And different Management so I don't understand how those are comparable

Your first point is cogent, and surprising to see on a Saturday night.  For that, I’m proud of ya!  Be your best SabreSpacer possible. 

The second point was to show that even a novice GM like Murray saw the value in waiting for a player to mature before rushing him to the NHL club.  If you want to look outside at other organizations, please do.  Don’t see another GMs filling their roster with kids who are not physically strong enough to play.  Bensons scoring rate is ~.33 per game.  The lowest of any forward who came out their first year in recent memory.  Even Sillinger had more PPG for Columbus and he was a much lower draft selection.  The over arching point is 99.5% of kids not selected in the top three do not play their draft year.  For good reason.  Teams competing for a playoff spot do not need kids “developing” or learning on the job. It’s just one of many decisions made by KA which contributed to another failing year. 

[JohnC]

11 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

So you think they are playing good defense? Is that correct?

Yes. 

[nfreeman]

18 hours ago, Big Guava said:

The dude is 20 years old. My God what the hell has happened to the IQ level of posters.

This is obnoxious.  Do not communicate like this here.

 

17 hours ago, inkman said:

I will stick giant things in my butthole if they make the playoffs 

I'm not sure who benefits from this...

[inkman]

11 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

This is obnoxious.  Do not communicate like this here.

 

I'm not sure who benefits from this...

Me 

/probably 

[Stoner]

52 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I have the opposite take on what these games mean than you do. In general, for most teams at this stage of the season these are meaningful games. It seems that half the teams are either vying to get in the playoffs, or even if assured of a playoff spot, are playing to improve their position for a variety of reasons, such as home game advantages. The problem with the Sabres this season, as it was last season, is that it didn't play with the same desperation/intensity in the first half of the season. When reviewing this season, it will become apparent that for the most part this team was often lackluster against teams that they were superior to, the two Anaheim games standout to demonstrate that point.  This team let too many points that were there for the taking to get away. When all is said and done, your record is what your record is. And you have to live with that. 

It just seems that every time the Sabres win you diminish the win and make the assumption that the other team didn't care. And every time they lose you spotlight the loss. You may not recognize it but you are applying an inconsistent standard when the Sabres either win or lose. There isn't anyone here who doesn't recognize that this has been a disappointing season, especially when the expectations were high entering it. But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't acknowledge the positive when it does happen. 

You lost me at superior to another team. They are not superior to anyone. The Oilers showed yesterday they are not superior to the Sabres... Because they couldn't be bothered.

Fans can feel this way. God help us if the Sabres ever look past anyone.

[JohnC]

58 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

You lost me at superior to another team. They are not superior to anyone. The Oilers showed yesterday they are not superior to the Sabres... Because they couldn't be bothered.

Fans can feel this way. God help us if the Sabres ever look past anyone.

You misread what I wrote. The Sabres certainly were the superior team when compared to Anaheim and Columbus, teams that they lost to. The losses to these inferior teams set us back in the standings. In general, the Sabres have a tendency to play to a higher level against superior teams. If you disagree with that, so be it. 

[Crusader1969]

17 hours ago, Broken Ankles said:

Insanity.  If this organization was properly developing players, Benson would be in junior, and competing for 4th line winger role next year.  The third line would be ‘identity’ (as in who Buffalo is).  But you want to crown him with top 5v5 TOI. He has 6 goals this year.  Can’t we dream bigger? 

Our top line $9mill winger has 20 goals but is probably a net negative.  If benson gets to 12-15 next season and brings his dog on a bone mentality to the top line and high end hockey sense,  I'll take that over a floater like skinner. 
If you think Benson is they type of player you want on your 4th like, I can't take anything you say seriously 
 

[PerreaultForever]

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

I have the opposite take on what these games mean than you do. In general, for most teams at this stage of the season these are meaningful games. It seems that half the teams are either vying to get in the playoffs, or even if assured of a playoff spot, are playing to improve their position for a variety of reasons, such as home game advantages. The problem with the Sabres this season, as it was last season, is that it didn't play with the same desperation/intensity in the first half of the season. When reviewing this season, it will become apparent that for the most part this team was often lackluster against teams that they were superior to, the two Anaheim games standout to demonstrate that point.  This team let too many points that were there for the taking to get away. When all is said and done, your record is what your record is. And you have to live with that. 

It just seems that every time the Sabres win you diminish the win and make the assumption that the other team didn't care. And every time they lose you spotlight the loss. You may not recognize it but you are applying an inconsistent standard when the Sabres either win or lose. There isn't anyone here who doesn't recognize that this has been a disappointing season, especially when the expectations were high entering it. But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't acknowledge the positive when it does happen. 

Not true. I do recognize the good games, but there haven't been that many of them. I will admit that I have no time for fanboy stuff where I say "oh wow did you see that shot by Tage, what a rocket" or whatever. These things are obvious when they happen. Discussion is far more interesting when you look at the flaws and issues and think about how they need to be fixed. That's just me, but I find a critical objective analysis more interesting than cheering after the fact. 

Now as to the team, I'd just say anybody getting excited about wins now has a very short memory. Right now I do not see a team that is in any way better than the team that missed the playoffs last year. We are in exactly the same situation.

[Crusader1969]

21 hours ago, Believer said:

Hater was too strong a word… but it was the label @Crusader1969 used in his question… Power was thrown into the deep end and is learning…

I’m not a fan because the kid has no physical game despite his size advantage…

Today for example, our team had 40 Hits and our team physicality was largely responsible for slowing down a faster and more explosive Oiler team… D-man Hits:

Dahlin 7
Jokiharju 4  
Byram 4  
Bryson 0  
Power 0

Bryson played 14 mins… Power played 23 mins…

Maybe I missed it, but have yet to see this kid come to the defense of a teammate despite his size… Power is not an intimidating personality and displays no aggression, and you can’t coach it… 

So, I’ll watch his development… 

 

It's not his game.  We've all known that since he was drafted.  You're going to be really disappointed if you want him to become something he is not 

 

[Broken Ankles]

11 hours ago, thewookie1 said:

Defense in general no, a defensive low event style hockey yes. There's a difference; and in many cases this is how the Isles accomplish anything; they bore you to tears with nothing happening for 55 minutes and score a goal or two to win.

   Not sure where you define this game as a low event win.  If you look at the advanced stats for this game, in every metric (Corsi, Fenwick, Scoring Changes F/A, High Danger F/A) the Sabres had more chances in this game than their average for the season.  Similarly the oilers had more offensive chances than their average.  As an example, Oilers average SCF per game this season is 25.5.  Yesterday they had 27.  Average HD chances - 12 per game.  Yesterday Edmonton had 16. They are top 2 in Corsi averaging CA of 40 per game.  The Sabres had CF of 44.  

You should also find another team than the Islanders to support the low even hockey example.  the NYIs are a bottom 10 in Scoring Chances against, bottom 5 in High Danger chances against, and bottom 4 in Corsi against.  Perhaps that was their identity a few years ago under Trotz but no longer.  But you know if is top 3 in these defensive categories (CA, FA, HDA and SCA)?   Edmonton.  We think of them as an offensive juggernaut, which they can be with McDavid and Draisatl on the ice, but their success is also driven by playing better defensively. 

  So I'll take a slightly different tact from you and Perreault.  The Sabres played exceptionally well offensively yesterday and despite being out chanced in a high event hockey game, the Sabres had solid goaltending, and Skinners gaff on a weak shot from Bryson was a deciding factor for Edmonton losing the game.  The Sabres also showed superiority in a shootout, which has been a weakness for years. 

 

[SwampD]

2 hours ago, inkman said:

Me 

/probably 

TIL