GDT: Buffalo Sabres @ Colorado Avalanche 01/02/25 9PM --MSG

[Mustache of God]

5 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

The Sabres have never been a bigger bummer than they are this season. It's not even close.

Every year they manage to re-invent the meaning of rock bottom.

[SwampD]

Wow. Glad I went to bed at 2-1.

There is nothing positive to take away from this game,… I mean, unless you don’t care about winning.

It shows once again that they just aren’t good enough. I don’t think it’s mental. I just think when the other team decides they are going to win, they win. The Sabres don’t have that extra gear. I just wish I thought it would come with the growth of the players on the team, but I don’t. Tage will never be McKinnon.

This sucks.

[That Aud Smell]

9 minutes ago, Mustache of God said:

Every year they manage to re-invent the meaning of rock bottom.

I mean -- they get down there -- way the f**k down there -- and then somehow manage to procure a bunch of jackhammers and go even farther down.

[bob_sauve28]

Glass half full take: They got a point where most teams wouldn't have, in order to collapse they actually do have to play really well to get a lead before a collaspe, so there is that, and Quinn actually might be the answer on the PP, he is really good operating off the wall. 

[Stoner]

25 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

The Sabres have never been a bigger bummer than they are this season. It's not even close.

Are you saying this is the lowest point in franchise history?

8 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

I mean -- they get down there -- way the f**k down there -- and then somehow manage to procure a bunch of jackhammers and go even farther down.

 

[Pimlach]

1 hour ago, Jorcus said:

Talk about coaching. Was the timeout with 20 seconds to go a good move? Helping the Aves best players time to rest and set up a play? We would have been better off replacing our players with a fresh group and tell them to attack the Ave's and with 20 seconds left if you have to tackle a guy or smash him to the ice go do it. By the time they would sort out the penalty there would be less then 10 seconds left in the the worst case scenario. What a stupid end to the game. Bad coaching for sure and that was Lindy's fault. 

They could not change players with all the stupid icings that they took in the 6 on 5.  

Ruff needed the timeout because he played the same guys for most of the 6 on 5.  Tuch and Malenstyn and Dahlin played way too much and they were gassed.    

The Sabres played very good hockey for 56 minutes and 8 seconds.   After that they fell apart.  They played the entire 6v5 by trying not to lose.   They set up a very passive box in an attempt to take away shooting lanes but they gave up lots of room for Colorado to move the puck unchallenged.  In the 6v5 they had no puck possession, no puck pressure, no faceoff wins, no won puck battles on loose pucks, no D zone breakouts, almost no neutral zone time, nothing.   

They became the Washington Generals playing against the Globetrotters. 

Muel had time and space with the puck and he blindly iced the puck. He could have easily carried it into the neutral zone and/or took a better shot at the EN.  It was right there and he choked   They all choked, even the coaches   

They almost never had the puck after their 5th goal.  I’ve never seen a team fold that badly.  

Edited Friday at 03:12 PM by Pimlach

[Stoner]

That's what we need. A protest song.

[thewookie1]

1 minute ago, Pimlach said:

They could not change players with all the stupid icings that they took in the 6 on 5.  

Ruff needed the timeout because he played the same guys for most of the 6 on 5.  Tuch and Malenstyn and Dahlin played way too much and they were gassed.    

The Sabres played very good hockey for 56 minutes and 52 seconds.   After that they fell apart.  They played the entire 6v5 by trying not to lose.   They set up a very passive box in an attempt to take away shooting lanes but they gave up lots of room for Colorado to move the puck unchallenged.  In the 6v5 they had no puck possession, no puck pressure, no faceoff wins, no won puck battles on loose pucks, no D zone breakouts, almost no neutral zone time, nothing.   

They became the Washington Generals playing against the Globetrotters. 

Muel had time and space with the puck and he blindly iced the puck. He could have easily carried it into the neutral zone and/or took a better shot at the EN.  It was right there and he choked   They all choked, even the coaches   

They almost never had the puck after their 5th goal.  I’ve never seen a team fold that badly.  

They actually won a draw with about 25 seconds left and shot it out but it hit a Colorado bench glove and the refs rules it as if it were a Sabres glove.

[Stoner]

1 minute ago, Pimlach said:

They could not change players with all the stupid icings that they took in the 6 on 5.  

Ruff needed the timeout because he played the same guys for most of the 6 on 5.  Tuch and Malenstyn and Dahlin played way too much and they were gassed.    

The Sabres played very good hockey for 56 minutes and 52 seconds.   After that they fell apart.  They played the entire 6v5 by trying not to lose.   They set up a very passive box in an attempt to take away shooting lanes but they gave up lots of room for Colorado to move the puck unchallenged.  In the 6v5 they had no puck possession, no puck pressure, no faceoff wins, no won puck battles on loose pucks, no D zone breakouts, almost no neutral zone time, nothing.   

They became the Washington Generals playing against the Globetrotters. 

Muel had time and space with the puck and he blindly iced the puck. He could have easily carried it into the neutral zone and/or took a better shot at the EN.  It was right there and he choked   They all choked, even the coaches   

They almost never had the puck after their 5th goal.  I’ve never seen a team fold that badly.  

You pull for Samuelsson, but I don't see that play getting developed out of him or coached out of him. That's his hockey IQ.

[bob_sauve28]

3 minutes ago, Stoner said:

That's what we need. A protest song.

??

 

[Stoner]

1 minute ago, thewookie1 said:

They actually won a draw with about 25 seconds left and shot it out but it hit a Colorado bench glove and the refs rules it as if it were a Sabres glove.

Marty explained the ruling. The puck emanated from the D zone; it doesn't matter who it hit from there.

Just now, bob_sauve28 said:

??

 

You don't get a vote. You support Nixon.

[mjd1001]

Another thought regarding the first line and Peterka...

Zucker has played well all year, but when you put him with Tage and Tuch, he turns into a scoring machine.

Peterka has been up and down, but take him off the line with Tage and Tuch and he kinda disappears.

Have we somewhat over-rated Peterka?  His production might be a bit less a result of him being a 30-40 goal talent/scorer, and a little more the opportunities he would get with Tage and Tuch?

[thewookie1]

Just now, Stoner said:

Marty explained the ruling. The puck emanated from the D zone; it doesn't matter who it hit from there.

You don't get a vote. You support Nixon.

Never knew that frankly. Although if the Avs player purposely makes contact from the bench I do think there is a slightly different rule but I'm not sure.

[SwampD]

4 minutes ago, Stoner said:

Marty explained the ruling. The puck emanated from the D zone; it doesn't matter who it hit from there.

What? Even a guy on the bench?! That doesn’t sound right.

[Bangarang]

31 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Wow. Glad I went to bed at 2-1.

There is nothing positive to take away from this game,… I mean, unless you don’t care about winning.

It shows once again that they just aren’t good enough. I don’t think it’s mental. I just think when the other team decides they are going to win, they win. The Sabres don’t have that extra gear. I just wish I thought it would come with the growth of the players on the team, but I don’t. Tage will never be McKinnon.

This sucks.

 

Just for your own personal enjoyment, the goal the Avs scored to make it 2-1 was called off for being offside. We actually were leading 3-0 at one point...then 4-2....then 5-3, before blowing that lead with roughly 4 minutes  left in the game.

Edited Friday at 03:26 PM by Bangarang

[HumanSlinky39]

12 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Muel had time and space with the puck and he blindly iced the puck. He could have easily carried it into the neutral zone and/or took a better shot at the EN.  It was right there and he choked   They all choked, even the coaches   

This was one of the most brain dead hockey plays I've ever seen and completely emblematic of the terminal issues with this team. 

 

And he wears a letter.

Edited Friday at 03:24 PM by HumanSlinky39

[SwampD]

1 minute ago, Bangarang said:

 

Just got your own personal enjoyment, the goal the Avs scored to make it 2-1 was called off for being offside. We actually were leading 3-0 at one point...then 4-2....then 5-3, before blowing that leaf with roughly 4 minutes  left in the game.

Sorry. I meant 3-1.

[Archie Lee]

2 hours ago, Believer said:

Yep. Our roster has plenty of overpaid and overhyped pretenders. 

Coming to the conclusion it may take a partial tear down and rebuild with a new GM and Coach. Hard to fathom the failure over Adams tenure.

A tear-down or rebuild, even partial, means moving vets for younger players.  This would be the 4th attempt at a tear-down or rebuild in the Pegula era.  I'm not sure why we would think the next one would go better than the last 3.

I'm not opposed to moving out some of the core 12 players. For clarity, the core 12 are from two categories:  1.) The players who Adams has extended long-term; and 2.) The players he has clearly referenced, if not by name, as those who will need to be re-signed in the next two off-seasons and thus are preventing him (in his misguided opinion) from adding veterans with term.  These core players are, from the net out: 1.) UPL, Dahlin, Power, Samuelsson, Thompson, Cozens; and 2.) Levi, Byram, Tuch, Peterka, Quinn, and Benson. Based on how committed we have been to keeping Kulich in the line-up this year, he may be core-player #13.

So, yes, I think we should most definitely entertain moving 2-4 of these core players.  But the return needs to be players who are older than the average age of this group, which is 23(!!).  What team and what GM, other than the Sabres and Adams, would state they are in a "must make the playoffs" year, and then trot out a large core of 12-13 players with an average age of 23(!!)? No other team or GM would do that.

Tearing this down or doing another partial rebuild, would almost certainly put us into years 15-16-17 of missing the playoffs. It's a path that would only make things worse.

The most logical path is to fire Adams/Ruff and bring in a new GM/HC with the goal of modifying/fixing the roster, not tearing it down and starting over. I think, at this moment, we have a team that could be made into a playoff team next year with the combination of committed ownership, smart/targeted decisions by a qualified GM, and upgraded coaching. The most likely outcome though, is that Pegula/Adams/Ruff stay the course, we pick top 5 this year, go into next season with one of the 2-3 youngest teams in the league, and miss the playoffs for the 15th straight season.  Unfortunately, I think we are closer to being a franchise that has a 17-18 year-old top-5 pick tell us: "Pick someone else. I'm not putting on your jersey", than we are to being a playoff team.

Edited Friday at 03:31 PM by Archie Lee

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

A tear-down or rebuild, even partial, means moving vets for younger players.  This would be the 4th attempt at a tear-down or rebuild in the Pegula era.  I'm not sure why we would think the next one would go better than the last 3.

I'm not opposed to moving out some of the core 12 players. For clarity, the core 12 are from two categories:  1.) The players who Adams has extended long-term; and 2.) The players he has clearly referenced, if not by name, as those who will need to be re-signed in the next two off-seasons and thus are preventing him (in his misguided opinion) from adding veterans with term.  These core players are, from the net out: 1.) UPL, Dahlin, Power, Samuelsson, Thompson, Cozens; and 2.) Levi, Byram, Tuch, Peterka, Quinn, and Benson. Based on how committed we have been to keeping Kulich in the line-up this year, he may be core-player #13.

So, yes, I think we should most definitely entertain moving 2-4 of these core players.  But the return needs to be players who are older than the average age of this group, which is 23(!!).  What team and what GM, other than the Sabres and Adams, would state they are in a "must make the playoffs" year, and then trot out a large core of 12-13 players with an average age of 23(!!)? No other team or GM would do that.

Tearing this down or doing another partial rebuild, would almost certainly put us into years 15-16-17 of missing the playoffs. It's a path that would only make things worse.

The most logical path is to fire Adams/Ruff and bring in a new GM/HC with the goal of modifying/fixing the roster, not tearing it down and starting over. I think, at this moment, we have a team that could be made into a playoff team next year with the combination of committed ownership, smart/targeted decisions by a qualified GM, and upgraded coaching. The most likely outcome though, is that Pegula/Adams/Ruff stay the course, we pick top 5 this year, go into next season with one of the 2-3 youngest teams in the league, and miss the playoffs for the 15th straight season.  Unfortunately, I think we are closer to being a franchise that has a 17-18 year-old top-5 pick tell us: "Pick someone else. I'm not putting on your jersey", than we are to being a playoff team.

It does not have too. You and Kevyn say it does. You could move vets and young players for other vets. This team could rebuild and be playoff bound next season if they did it correctly, but missing in year 15 is almost a guarantee if they do nothing. 

 

[_Q_]

23 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

They could not change players with all the stupid icings that they took in the 6 on 5.  

Ruff needed the timeout because he played the same guys for most of the 6 on 5.  Tuch and Malenstyn and Dahlin played way too much and they were gassed.    

The Sabres played very good hockey for 56 minutes and 8 seconds.   After that they fell apart.  They played the entire 6v5 by trying not to lose.   They set up a very passive box in an attempt to take away shooting lanes but they gave up lots of room for Colorado to move the puck unchallenged.  In the 6v5 they had no puck possession, no puck pressure, no faceoff wins, no won puck battles on loose pucks, no D zone breakouts, almost no neutral zone time, nothing.   

They became the Washington Generals playing against the Globetrotters. 

Muel had time and space with the puck and he blindly iced the puck. He could have easily carried it into the neutral zone and/or took a better shot at the EN.  It was right there and he choked   They all choked, even the coaches   

They almost never had the puck after their 5th goal.  I’ve never seen a team fold that badly.  

 

I agree with most of this and I was really encouraged with the mid third period.  They were pressuring in the neutral zone and back into the Ave's zone and had them stymied for awhile.  In fact that is how the Tage to Zucker goal happened to make it 5-3.  I was very encouraged watching that as they were not playing passively.

That being said, the 6 on 5 was a disaster.

I think they should feel positive all the way up to 6 on 5 and figure out how to fix that next.  They went  back to being passive and got burned.

[Believer]

27 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Muel had time and space with the puck and he blindly iced the puck. He could have easily carried it into the neutral zone and/or took a better shot at the EN.  It was right there and he choked   They all choked, even the coaches   

Couldn’t agree more.

It was a clueless performance when it mattered most.

No poise. 

[rickshaw]

I’m surprised to see so many Ruff apologists. He was a terrible hire. I’d rather they kept Donny and he changed some of his attributes (like taking off the kid gloves)

But even firing Granato, surely there was a better hire than the aging Ruff. He had a very good NJ team and they missed the dance. He is doing nothing for this squad. His timeout last night proves it. This team is a disaster.

[SwampD]

There is not a coach in the league that would have not taken that time out there.

[Archie Lee]

34 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

It does not have too. You and Kevyn say it does. You could move vets and young players for other vets. This team could rebuild and be playoff bound next season if they did it correctly, but missing in year 15 is almost a guarantee if they do nothing. 

 

What? A tear-down or rebuild, by all definitions, means getting younger. Nobody refers to  the act of trading young players for veterans as a tear-down or a rebuild. Vegas does this year after year and it is typically referred to as "reloading"; it is the opposite of a tear-down or rebuild.

I am arguing the same thing as you.  That it is ok to trade young players and veterans from our core, so long as it is for older, veteran players who can help us win now.  My position has not changed from June, when I argued that if we are serious about winning this year we should consider trading one or two of our younger forwards for veterans. 

Edited Friday at 04:13 PM by Archie Lee

[Stoner]

As an aside, those Av fans are pretty awesome. Afterwards Byram said how much he loved playing in front of them.