Is Op's Assesment of the Sabres/Devils game Wrong?

[THATHURMANATOR]

Yes or No

[OpIv37]

This poll is irrelevant. Unscientific surveys of public opinion do not determine what is correct and what isn't.

[THATHURMANATOR]

Your thread was irrelevant but it didn't stop you.

[Ingtar33]

This poll is irrelevant. Unscientific surveys of public opinion do not determine what is correct and what isn't.


very true; i still think you're wrong, but about this at least you're right.

[OpIv37]

Your thread was irrelevant but it didn't stop you.

Really? Talking about a Sabres game in the Sabres forum almost immediately after the game ended is irrelevant?

You can like or dislike what I have to say. You can agree with me or disagree with me. But saying it's irrelevant is simply untrue.

[LtFinFan66]

couldn't let you get shut out Op

[THATHURMANATOR]

First LT licks the Fins now OPs ass? :limp:

[THATHURMANATOR]

Really? Talking about a Sabres game in the Sabres forum almost immediately after the game ended is irrelevant?

You can like or dislike what I have to say. You can agree with me or disagree with me. But saying it's irrelevant is simply untrue.
Really.

[RockStar36]

I think it is dead wrong.

But I guess I just accept mediocrity because the Sabres don't go 82-0-0 every season.

Oh well.

[Crisis]

yes, the same argument can be made for every team in the league.

op just likes the attention for being "that guy"

[Crisis]

and you can flip it

if the devils won the shootout, would there be any devil fans crying that their team gave away a point to a team they're competing against?

no.

i don't even know what op is arguing about really, that we won in overtime vs one of the best teams in the league?

[CuseJetsFan83]

in all fairness to op, was his assessment wrong in terms of still winning yes.....

in terms of only gaining a point no.......


plenty of hockey still left to be played before and after the olympic break

[Meathead]

<embed id=VideoPlayback src=http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=7055314962676563392&hl=en&fs=true style=width:400px;height:326px allowFullScreen=true allowScriptAccess=always type=application/x-shockwave-flash> </embed>

[Jan Reimers]

We beat a very good team, with the best goalie in history, after a long and exhausting road trip. We should be very happy with that.

There are no S***ty wins.

[OpIv37]

yes, the same argument can be made for every team in the league.

op just likes the attention for being "that guy"

Say what you want about my opinions- I really don't care. But I absolutely NOT doing it for attention. The last thing I care about is attention from a bunch of people I either don't know or barely know on a message board.

The NHL's system of "A game is worth two points unless it's worth 3" infuriates me, and it infuriates me even more when the Sabres give up that 3rd point to a team competing with them in the standings, not to mention their pathetic effort in the 3rd. You can agree or disagree with those opinions and I will be happy to discuss it, because that is the point of a message board. But I assure you that post came from my honest feelings in the moments after that game and had NOTHING to do with wanting attention.

[OpIv37]

We beat a very good team, with the best goalie in history, after a long and exhausting road trip. We should be very happy with that.

There are no S***ty wins.

thanks to the NHL's system, there are full wins and half wins. This win only counted as a half a win as far as catching up with NJ is concerned. This isn't football, where a 6-3 OT win counts the same in the standings as a 63-0 blowout. There are consequences in the standings for not winning in regulation in the NHL.

[Crisis]

i'd agree with you but aren't the sabres like 20-0 when leading heading into the 3rd period?

that's not giving away free points.

[Ebenezer]

thanks to the NHL's system, there are full wins and half wins. This win only counted as a half a win as far as catching up with NJ is concerned. This isn't football, where a 6-3 OT win counts the same in the standings as a 63-0 blowout. There are consequences in the standings for not winning in regulation in the NHL.

how can we take you seriously when you don't even know how the game works. :shakeno:

[OpIv37]

i'd agree with you but aren't the sabres like 20-0 when leading heading into the 3rd period?

that's not giving away free points.

That's an incomplete assessment without knowing how many of those games were won in OT and not in regulation. Every game that goes into OT creates a point in the standings.

[OpIv37]

how can we take you seriously when you don't even know how the game works. :shakeno:


what the hell are you talking about? In football, a win is a win and a loss is a loss, regardless of how it occurs. In hockey, a game that ends in regulation is worth 2 points in the standings- 2 to the winner, 0 to the loser- but a game that ends in OT or a SO results in 3 points in the standings- 2 to the winner and one to the loser.

That is absolutely correct. There is nothing even close to wrong about what I said.

[Crisis]

10/13/09 - 6-2 over Detroit (5-1 heading into 3rd)

10/16/09 - 6-3 over NYI (4-2 heading into 3rd)

10/21/09 - 5-2 over Florida (5-1 heading into 3rd)

10/28/09 - 4-1 over NJD (2-1 heading into 3rd)

10/30/09 - 3-2 over Toronto in OT (2-1 heading into 3rd)

11/04/09 - 3-0 over NYI (2-0 heading into 3rd)

11/11/09 - 3-1 over Edmonton (2-1 heading into 3rd)

11/14/09 - 3-2 over Philadelphia (2-0 heading into 3rd)

11/30/09 - 3-0 over Toronto (1-0 heading into 3rd)

12/03/09 - 6-1 over MTL (4-1 heading into 3rd)

12/09/09 - 3-0 over Washington (3-0 heading into 3rd)

12/11/09 - 2-1 over Chicago (2-0 heading into 3rd)

12/12/09 - 3-2 over NYR (3-2 heading into 3rd)

12/14/09 - 4-3 over MTL (2-1 heading into 3rd)

12/18/09 - 5-2 over Toronto (4-1 heading into 3rd)

1/3/10 - 1-0 over MTL (1-0 heading into 3rd)

1/6/10 - 5-3 over Tampa (5-3 heading into 3rd)

1/8/10 - 3-2 over Toronto (3-0 heading into 3rd)

1/18/10 - 7-2 over PHX (5-1 heading into 3rd)

1/29/10 - 2-1 over Boston (2-1 heading into 3rd)




You're right, we've given away one point to the TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS when blowing a lead we're carrying into the 3rd period.

[Crisis]

This team protects a lead as well as ANYONE in hockey and you can still find a way to ***** about it.

[OpIv37]

This team protects a lead as well as ANYONE in hockey and you can still find a way to ***** about it.

when it counted, they failed. They gave up a point to NJ and missed an opportunity to tie them in the standings. Spin it any way you want, but that's what happened.

[Crisis]

you're right, they're not playing against other professionals, they should easily be able to run up the score on the best goaltender of all time just so they don't give up a point to a team they're competing with in the standings.

your argument is ridiculous, i don't know how you can't understand that. there's no team that will EVER live up to what you're trying to say.

you don't seem to understand that new jersey is also a team competing for the president's trophy/#1 seed in the east, i guess they "failed" and let us take them into overtime? and then failed twice by losing the shootout?

every single team in the league will go into overtime and "give" away points to teams throughout the year. seriously, i don't know what you're trying to prove other that you can find the most ridiculous things to complain about when things are going well.

[OpIv37]

you're right, they're not playing against other professionals, they should easily be able to run up the score on the best goaltender of all time just so they don't give up a point to a team they're competing with in the standings.


your argument is ridiculous, i don't know how you can't understand that. there's no team that will EVER live up to what you're trying to say.

you don't seem to understand that new jersey is also a team competing for the president's trophy/#1 seed in the east, i guess they "failed" and let us take them into overtime? and then failed twice by losing the shootout?

every single team in the league will go into overtime and "give" away points to teams throughout the year. seriously, i don't know what you're trying to prove other that you can find the most ridiculous things to complain about when things are going well.

You simply don't get it. The Sabres had an opportunity to tie NJ for points in the standings. They failed. Yes, NJ is good. Yes, Brodeur may be the best goalie in history. But that doesn't change the goal for the Sabres: win the game and move up in the standings.

And here we go again with the hyperbole. I never said anything about running up the score. Score one more or allow one fewer before regulation ends- that's all I'm asking.

Yes, every team will go into OT and give up points. It's a crappy system but there's nothing the Sabres can do about it, except WIN THE GAME IN REGULATION SO THOSE POINTS AREN'T AVAILABLE TO OPPONENTS.

Yes, NJ failed and if I was a Devils fan I'd be pissed about the loss. They could have gone up by 3 points and gained more ground in terms of tiebreakers with a win over the Sabres.

Like I already said in the other thread, each game has 4 possible outcomes:

Regulation Win
OT/SO win
OT/SO loss
Regulation loss

The optimal outcome is a regulation win. The Sabres failed to obtain that, due largely to a crappy 3rd period and one of the worst PP's I've ever seen. And because they failed to obtain that outcome, they failed to tie NJ in points in the standings.

That's what I'm trying to prove. The team, and you people on here, seemed to say "An OT win and remaining behind NJ in the standings is good enough." I say it's not.

[Ebenezer]

That's an incomplete assessment without knowing how many of those games were won in OT and not in regulation. Every game that goes into OT creates a point in the standings.
it was a joke...you can't have a 6-3 OT hockey game...geez...lighten up.

[Ebenezer]

You simply don't get it. The Sabres had an opportunity to tie NJ for points in the standings. They failed. Yes, NJ is good. Yes, Brodeur may be the best goalie in history. But that doesn't change the goal for the Sabres: win the game and move up in the standings.

And here we go again with the hyperbole. I never said anything about running up the score. Score one more or allow one fewer before regulation ends- that's all I'm asking.

Yes, every team will go into OT and give up points. It's a crappy system but there's nothing the Sabres can do about it, except WIN THE GAME IN REGULATION SO THOSE POINTS AREN'T AVAILABLE TO OPPONENTS.

Yes, NJ failed and if I was a Devils fan I'd be pissed about the loss. They could have gone up by 3 points and gained more ground in terms of tiebreakers with a win over the Sabres.

Like I already said in the other thread, each game has 4 possible outcomes:

Regulation Win
OT/SO win
OT/SO loss
Regulation loss

The optimal outcome is a regulation win. The Sabres failed to obtain that, due largely to a crappy 3rd period and one of the worst PP's I've ever seen. And because they failed to obtain that outcome, they failed to tie NJ in points in the standings.

That's what I'm trying to prove. The team, and you people on here, seemed to say "An OT win and remaining behind NJ in the standings is good enough." I say it's not.
you're ****ing right...that's all you want to hear...now shut up.

[chernobylwraiths]

So, if the game is tied, the Sabres should pull their goalie instead of risk letting the opponent get a point. Got it.

[OpIv37]

So, if the game is tied, the Sabres should pull their goalie instead of risk letting the opponent get a point. Got it.

no, if the game is tied, the Sabres should put up more effort instead of just half-assing it to get to the OT period. Putting up effort is not the same as being stupid.