FAIL

[OpIv37]

It doesn't matter if we win in overtime or not.

We missed an opportunity to pull even, technically ahead with tiebreakers.

[Dr. Lecter]

This was the last game of the season tonight?

[TheGhostofJimKelly]

Gained a point on the Rangers.

[YardRat]

Two posts hit in the last minute :ill:

[OpIv37]

This was the last game of the season tonight?

no, just another meaningful game where the Sabres didn't show up.

[Dr. Lecter]

no, just another meaningful game where the Sabres didn't show up.
Apparently you did not watch the game.

They did show up.

The other team did too.

Saying they did not show up is ******ed and I know you are not ******ed.

I agree they need to win one of these games - but whether they are in the 8th spot now or not is not what is important


But I don't get how you can say they did not show up if you watched the game.

[Michael82]

These are the kind of games that the Sabres need to learn how to win. :sigh:

[hydro]

The team played great but Miller didn't show up. If you don't think we showed up tonight you are severely lacking any type of hockey intelligence. That is about the best I have seen this team play this year (excluding Miller).

[PTI]

Sabres had the game. I still think they are poorly coached. Ruff can't do anymore, wich he just left. Giving up goals both times after the lead within a couple minutes, not focused, and Miller loses focus without lots of shots on him it seems, all 3 goals were on him, 2 of them he was completely out of position.

[OpIv37]

Apparently you did not watch the game.

They did show up.

The other team did too.

Saying they did not show up is ******ed and I know you are not ******ed.

I agree they need to win one of these games - but whether they are in the 8th spot now or not is not what is important


But I don't get how you can say they did not show up if you watched the game.

They missed an opportunity to pull even with Carolina for the 8th playoff spot. They didn't show up.

And seriously, if your argument is that they showed up but they lost because the team currently in 8th also showed up, then they don't ****ing deserve to be in the playoffs. If you can't beat the 8th place team when you show up, sneaking into the 8th seed is only going to get you killed by the 1 seed.

[Dr. Lecter]

Sabres had the game. I still think they are poorly coached. Ruff can't do anymore, wich he just left. Giving up goals both times after the lead within a couple minutes, not focused, and Miller loses focus without lots of shots on him it seems, all 3 goals were on him, 2 of them he was completely out of position.The 3rd one was a screen. Not Miller's fault

The other two were sloppy on his part

[Dr. Lecter]

They missed an opportunity to pull even with Carolina for the 8th playoff spot. They didn't show up.

And seriously, if your argument is that they showed up but they lost because the team currently in 8th also showed up, then they don't ****ing deserve to be in the playoffs. If you can't beat the 8th place team when you show up, sneaking into the 8th seed is only going to get you killed by the 1 seed.
Sigh.

Question - (yes or no) Did you watch the game?

[OpIv37]

Sigh.

Question - (yes or no) Did you watch the game?

No. I couldn't find a feed.

But I stand by my statement: if you show up and you can't beat the team currently in 8th place, then you are not a playoff team. Period.

[Michael82]

The team played great but Miller didn't show up. If you don't think we showed up tonight you are severely lacking any type of hockey intelligence. That is about the best I have seen this team play this year (excluding Miller).
Oh come on...sure Miller was at fault for being out of position for the first 2 goals, but that 3rd goal was not on him. And I don't blame him because he has no help from his defense and usually has to do it all by himself. If I'm Lindy, I'm recalling Enroth and giving Miller a night off on Saturday.

[Dr. Lecter]

They missed an opportunity to pull even with Carolina for the 8th playoff spot. They didn't show up.

And seriously, if your argument is that they showed up but they lost because the team currently in 8th also showed up, then they don't ****ing deserve to be in the playoffs. If you can't beat the 8th place team when you show up, sneaking into the 8th seed is only going to get you killed by the 1 seed.
And, btw - they are now 2 behind the Rangers with 3 in hand.

My point is that the Sabres actually played well. Two sloppy plays by Miller killed them.

And Carolina took advantage.

[PTI]

The 3rd one was a screen. Not Miller's fault

The other two were sloppy on his part

Didn't look like he was screened on the replay to me, looked like there was a Sabres player and Canes player engaged in front of the net but the shot came from the far right side. Looked like Miller saw it to me, just went through him. I'd have to watch it again, I already changed the channel and can't watch it again right now.

[rbochan]

This game was ALL on Miller. He was so far out of position on the first 2 goals, then lets in a classic softie, ala the "final with Ottawa".

I'm ****ing pissed off.

[Dr. Lecter]

No. I couldn't find a feed.

But I stand by my statement: if you show up and you can't beat the team currently in 8th place, then you are not a playoff team. Period.
If you did not watch the game do not comment on how they played.

Do you really think you know what actually happened in the game without watching it?


Really?

Come on. That is bull**** and you know it.

[Dr. Lecter]

Didn't look like he was screened on the replay to me, looked like there was a Sabres player and Canes player engaged in front of the net but the shot came from the far right side. Looked like Miller saw it to me, just went through him. I'd have to watch it again, I already changed the channel and can't watch it again right now.
He was screened and it went off of somebody.

The other two were his fault (well the first was half on Morrissonn). The last one was not

[OpIv37]

And, btw - they are now 2 behind the Rangers with 3 in hand.

My point is that the Sabres actually played well. Two sloppy plays by Miller killed them.

And Carolina took advantage.

they played well and lost to the 8th seed? Sorry, I don't need to watch the game to know that is total bull****. If you play well, you beat the 8th seed. Or you finish out of the playoffs. There is no gray area on that one.

[rbochan]

Someone should make a .gif image of Miller flailing around after his turnover.

[Dr. Lecter]

they played well and lost to the 8th seed? Sorry, I don't need to watch the game to know that is total bull****. If you play well, you beat the 8th seed. Or you finish out of the playoffs. There is no gray area on that one.
You do not know how either team played.

You did not see the game.

Both of those are facts.

***** about the team in general - you did not see the game and have no idea what happened.

You sound like Sarah ****ing Pailin.

[PTI]

they played well and lost to the 8th seed? Sorry, I don't need to watch the game to know that is total bull****. If you play well, you beat the 8th seed. Or you finish out of the playoffs. There is no gray area on that one.

That is BS, I agree with Lecter, how can you feel anything you type about tonight's game is legit without actually watching it? Sabres gave up two one goal leads really quick, Miller lost focus, that was the game. Miller is going to take the Sabres to the playoffs, that is the real point of this game to me, along with Ruff being able to keep the team focused. One other point is the power play did not connect, Sabres seemed to try something slightly different with a guy in them middle high slot, but the spacing looked clogged to me.

There you go. No more comments without watching the game bud.

[chernobylwraiths]

They missed an opportunity to pull even with Carolina for the 8th playoff spot. They didn't show up.

And seriously, if your argument is that they showed up but they lost because the team currently in 8th also showed up, then they don't ****ing deserve to be in the playoffs. If you can't beat the 8th place team when you show up, sneaking into the 8th seed is only going to get you killed by the 1 seed.

Well, Carolina is in 7th now, so they didn't lose to the 8th place team. They beat them Tuesday.

I thought the Sabres looked real good in the third, BUT couldn't put one in the net. Miller looked good on the OT goal.

[chernobylwraiths]

This game was ALL on Miller. He was so far out of position on the first 2 goals, then lets in a classic softie, ala the "final with Ottawa".

I'm ****ing pissed off.

Yeah, Miller sucks. :rolleyes:

[rbochan]

...Miller looked good on the OT goal.

Looked to me exactly like the softie he let in against Ottawa in the playoffs.


<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/P3S8Fwm-oic" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[rbochan]

Yeah, Miller sucks. :rolleyes:
He sure as hell did that game.

[OpIv37]

You do not know how either team played.

You did not see the game.

Both of those are facts.

***** about the team in general - you did not see the game and have no idea what happened.

You sound like Sarah ****ing Pailin.

we lost to the 8th place team.

You are telling me we played well.

If you play well and still lose to the 8th place team, you are a loser. There is no logical way around that.

[Nighthawk]

The team played great but Miller didn't show up. If you don't think we showed up tonight you are severely lacking any type of hockey intelligence. That is about the best I have seen this team play this year (excluding Miller).

Typical Miller performance...fades when the team needs him the most. He drives me nuts at times.

[BlackMetalNinja]

This thread is a fantastic reminder of why I haven't read/posted in here hardly at all this season. :up: great job folks

[Dr. Lecter]

we lost to the 8th place team.

You are telling me we played well.

If you play well and still lose to the 8th place team, you are a loser. There is no logical way around that.
And you are telling me you know more about how THIS game went and you saw none of it!

[Dr. Lecter]

This thread is a fantastic reminder of why I haven't read/posted in here hardly at all this season. :up: great job folks
Me too.

And I will go back to the background.

I will not be weak again

[Dr. Lecter]

Typical Miller performance...fades when the team needs him the most. He drives me nuts at times.
Really?

He has save this team way too often the last 2 months or so.

[hydro]

we lost to the 8th place team.

You are telling me we played well.

If you play well and still lose to the 8th place team, you are a loser. There is no logical way around that.

Sorry Op but you are wrong. You are looking really foolish right now because you didn't watch the game. It is so easy to tell you didn't watch the game too because you are speaking in generalities. Stop trying to be right all the time and just stand down for once.

[hydro]

Typical Miller performance...fades when the team needs him the most. He drives me nuts at times.

I am hard on Miller tonight but this isn't the norm. He does have one of these clunkers every so often though.

[Dr. Lecter]

I really think this forum is more absurd than the Spin Zone.

[OpIv37]

Sorry Op but you are wrong. You are looking really foolish right now because you didn't watch the game. It is so easy to tell you didn't watch the game too because you are speaking in generalities. Stop trying to be right all the time and just stand down for once.

I'm not trying to be right. I am right.

We lost to the 8th seed in a very important game for us. Lecter is telling me we played well. You can't play well and lose to the 8th seed. It's a logical impossibility. Whether or not I watched the game can't change that.

[OpIv37]

you know, this team had the opportunity to pull even in points with Carolina and into playoff position.

And they ****ing LOST.

You people are hard on me like there's something wrong with wanting the team to show up and WIN a game like this for once.

[Dr. Lecter]

I'm not trying to be right. I am right.

We lost to the 8th seed in a very important game for us. Lecter is telling me we played well. You can't play well and lose to the 8th seed. It's a logical impossibility. Whether or not I watched the game can't change that.
So it is impossible for the 8th seed to play well?

You are full of ****.

BTW, I am not the only one saying that. I don't think you have read even one post in this thread,

You can play well and lose - in this case it was two mistakes by Miller. The rest of the team was all over the place

BTW - you refuse, as usual, to ever give credit to the other team.

You did not see the game.

Do not offer an opinion on it.

[hydro]

I'm not trying to be right. I am right.

We lost to the 8th seed in a very important game for us. Lecter is telling me we played well. You can't play well and lose to the 8th seed. It's a logical impossibility. Whether or not I watched the game can't change that.

The goalie laid an egg and the rest of the team played very well. That is where the "teaming played well" is coming from. Only from watching the game would you understand that.

[Dr. Lecter]

you know, this team had the opportunity to pull even in points with Carolina and into playoff position.

And they ****ing LOST.

You people are hard on me like there's something wrong with wanting the team to show up and WIN a game like this for once.

No that is not it.

You are not reading.

People are hard on for offering an "expert" opinion on a game THAT YOU DID NOT SEE ANY OF.

Big difference

[Dr. Lecter]

The goalie laid an egg and the rest of the team played very well. That is where the "teaming played well" is coming from. Only from watching the game would you understand that.
It does not matter

Op is like Chuck Norris - he knows it all about the game even if he did not watch it.

Or maybe he is omniscient - kinda like Jesus or something

[psubills62]

What if it was the #1 seed instead of the #8 (now #7) seed? And didn't the #1 seed last year lose the playoff series to the 8th seed? A 6 seed in the NFL won the championship...is it really that unbelievable that a 7 seed managed to play decently and win a game in overtime?

It's not a logical fallacy to say the 8th seed can play well because it's one night. Any one team can play great if you give them one night (I believe that's what the Boise State/TCU haters say all the time, IIRC).

Despite my mixing other sports in...you're doing the exact opposite logical fallacy that you accuse others of doing, Op. You're using the rule (i.e. saying they're a relatively bad team by labeling them the 8th seed) and saying it applies to every exception, being every game. Doesn't work that way.

[hydro]

We have gotten 34/52 points since the start of 2011. We have not been beaten since Pegula took over. Why can't you just enjoy something for once in your life. The team is in a playoff race and has a chance. You complain that they failed tonight but don't give them enough credit when they beat the Rangers just two nights before. You are worse then the sensationalist reporters at TBN.

[OpIv37]

So it is impossible for the 8th seed to play well?

You are full of ****.

BTW, I am not the only one saying that. I don't think you have read even one post in this thread,

You can play well and lose - in this case it was two mistakes by Miller. The rest of the team was all over the place

BTW - you refuse, as usual, to ever give credit to the other team.

You did not see the game.

Do not offer an opinion on it.

Let me restate my position on this slightly. Yes, the 8th seed can play well. But if your team plays well and loses to the 8th team, then you suck. You can't be a good team and lose to the 8th seed while playing well. Good teams beat the 8th seed when playing well, regardless of how the 8th seed plays.

If you can't see that, I don't know what to tell you.

[OpIv37]

We have gotten 34/52 points since the start of 2011. We have not been beaten since Pegula took over. Why can't you just enjoy something for once in your life. The team is in a playoff race and has a chance. You complain that they failed tonight but don't give them enough credit when they beat the Rangers just two nights before. You are worse then the sensationalist reporters at TBN.

we played well and lost to the 8th seed. We may technically have a chance, but any team that can't beat the 8th seed while "playing well" is doomed to failure.

If you want to enjoy that, go right ahead, but I have higher standards.

[THATHURMANATOR]

They missed an opportunity to pull even with Carolina for the 8th playoff spot. They didn't show up.

And seriously, if your argument is that they showed up but they lost because the team currently in 8th also showed up, then they don't ****ing deserve to be in the playoffs. If you can't beat the 8th place team when you show up, sneaking into the 8th seed is only going to get you killed by the 1 seed.
No they did show up with max effort. The other team did too. It does hurt to lose but they did get 3 out of 4 against teams they are chasing...

[OpIv37]

Despite my mixing other sports in...you're doing the exact opposite logical fallacy that you accuse others of doing, Op. You're using the rule (i.e. saying they're a relatively bad team by labeling them the 8th seed) and saying it applies to every exception, being every game. Doesn't work that way.

wow, that's a stretch.

[THATHURMANATOR]

I respect that you are disappointing though Op. I am super pissed!!!!

[OpIv37]

No they did show up with max effort. The other team did too. It does hurt to lose but they did get 3 out of 4 against teams they are chasing...

ok, if max effort can't beat the 8th seed, where exactly do you think this team is headed? If max effort doesn't beat 8, how are we even going to get into the playoffs, let alone beat the 1 or 2 seed once we get there?

Think about that for a second.

[Dr. Lecter]

Let me restate my position on this slightly. Yes, the 8th seed can play well. But if your team plays well and loses to the 8th team, then you suck. You can't be a good team and lose to the 8th seed while playing well. Good teams beat the 8th seed when playing well, regardless of how the 8th seed plays.

If you can't see that, I don't know what to tell you.
And if you think that you know more about this individual game than the people that actually watched it, you are either arrogant or ignorant or stubborn or some combination thereof.

Both of these teams are average teams. So they will play close games.

Right now the Sabre still have a bit of an advantage. They have the games in hand with Carolina and the Rangers.

My point still stands - you do not know the particulars of this single game.

that is undeniable

[psubills62]

wow, that's a stretch.

Not really, since all you're doing is repeating "8th seed, 8th seed!"

[THATHURMANATOR]

ok, if max effort can't beat the 8th seed, where exactly do you think this team is headed? If max effort doesn't beat 8, how are we even going to get into the playoffs, let alone beat the 1 or 2 seed once we get there?

Think about that for a second.


Why is it always that you are right and countless 10, 20, 30 people against you are the idiots?

Think about that for a second...

[THATHURMANATOR]

And if you think that you know more about this individual game than the people that actually watched it, you are either arrogant or ignorant or stubborn or some combination thereof.

Both of these teams are average teams. So they will play close games.

Right now the Sabre still have a bit of an advantage. They have the games in hand with Carolina and the Rangers.

My point still stands - you do not know the particulars of this single game.

that is undeniable
Wait he didn't even watch the game?? What a douche!!!

[Dr. Lecter]

Wait he didn't even watch the game?? What a douche!!!
Op does not need to watch the game to know all about it.

He is all knowing.

[THATHURMANATOR]

Op does not need to watch the game to know all about it.

He is all knowing.
What a joke. I refuse to speak with him on this game.

[Electrici]

The 12th seed in the East is playing better than pretty much everyone in the league. Its just a number. From what I've heard the Sabres game tonight was a pretty good one, just didn't work out that we took the 2 points in regulation, or OT for that matter. I'd offer more of my opinion on it, but I worked and didnt get to watch it.

Op should be happy, i think he predicted a 5-0 win by the Canes in the prediction thread... you must be surprised BUF atleast pulled a point out????


Edit: grammar

[OpIv37]

And if you think that you know more about this individual game than the people that actually watched it, you are either arrogant or ignorant or stubborn or some combination thereof.

Both of these teams are average teams. So they will play close games.

Right now the Sabre still have a bit of an advantage. They have the games in hand with Carolina and the Rangers.

My point still stands - you do not know the particulars of this single game.

that is undeniable

this is your problem: you think watching the game has something to do with it.

You and the other people who watched the game told me the Sabres played well. So be it- I am accepting your opinion that they played well.

However, if you play well and lose to the 8th seed, you are not a good team. It's impossible for a good team to play well and lose to the 8th seed. The only way a team loses to the 8th seed is if they a) don't play well or b) play well and lose because the 8th seed is better than they are.

If I accept your premise that the Sabres played well, the only possible conclusion is that they are not a good team.

[OpIv37]

Why is it always that you are right and countless 10, 20, 30 people against you are the idiots?

Think about that for a second...

lmao.

there are always 10, 20, 30 people against me, but at the end of the day, the Bills and the Sabres end up sucking and most (if not all) of my criticisms are well warranted.

Think about that for a second...

[OpIv37]

The 12th seed in the East is playing better than pretty much everyone in the league. Its just a number. From what I've heard the Sabres game tonight was a pretty good one, just didn't work out that we took the 2 points in regulation, or OT for that matter. I'd offer more of my opinion on it, but I worked and didnt get to watch it.

Op should be happy, i think he predicted a 5-0 win by the Canes in the prediction thread... you must be surprised BUF atleast pulled a point out????


Edit: grammar

It's not just a number. We have to be 8th or better to get into the playoffs. If we can't beat the 8th seed while playing well, how the hell are we supposed to do that?

[THATHURMANATOR]

lmao.

there are always 10, 20, 30 people against me, but at the end of the day, the Bills and the Sabres end up sucking and most (if not all) of my criticisms are well warranted.

Think about that for a second...
Are you laughing at yourself for being dumb?

[G Wolly]

If you play well and still lose to the 8th place team, you are a loser. There is no logical way around that.

Unless you're the 9th place team.



this is your problem: you think watching the game has something to do with it.

Generally viewing something helps you form a better opinion on how it was performed.

With that said, Miller was real stupid tonight, I lend that to 38 starts in 39 games. Why isn't Enroth being utilized more, we know he can hold his own. The thought of Lalime starting a game is way out there.

Bring back Enroth.

[JD]

I shattered my remote when Sekera didn't shoot in the dying seconds. What a ****ing tool.

[JD]

We played a good road game. Miller was a let down, but he's been great for us lately.

If we can't beat the Canes on a game to make the 8th seed, how the **** do we win a best of 7 against a #1 seed, assuming we take that last spot? I'd rather miss the playoffs to get Pegula pissed off so he lands Richards.

[Dr. Lecter]

this is your problem: you think watching the game has something to do with it.

You and the other people who watched the game told me the Sabres played well. So be it- I am accepting your opinion that they played well.

However, if you play well and lose to the 8th seed, you are not a good team. It's impossible for a good team to play well and lose to the 8th seed. The only way a team loses to the 8th seed is if they a) don't play well or b) play well and lose because the 8th seed is better than they are.

If I accept your premise that the Sabres played well, the only possible conclusion is that they are not a good team.


It does have something to do with it.

Can you really tell how well a team played WITHOUT watching the game? Think about that for a second.

And you completely ignore the fact that the other team might have played well or that a team had some bad bounces or that any number of other things happened that caused a loss.

Do you think there was only ONE team on the ice or do you assume that it is impossible for the other team to play well?

You are the one making a faulty assumption - namely that the other team did can't play well.

You have NEVER given the other team some credit.

The Sabres record in the last 30 games is something like 16-10-4.

[BlackMetalNinja]

"They get a point, too," Ward said. "In the perfect world, you'd like a win in regulation, but the guys competed really hard. They're a really good team."
On the winning play, defenseman Joni Pitkanen rushed the puck over the Sabres' blue line and waited for the trailing McBain. McBain's slap shot made it through traffic before sneaking through goalie Ryan Miller's legs.
"It kind of had eyes," McBain said. "Any shot's a good shot in overtime. You never know what's going to happen. I was just trying to get it to the net."
All was not lost for the Sabres. Even though Buffalo lost, it earned a point for reaching overtime. And because the New York Rangers fell to Minnesota, Buffalo is only two points behind the eighth-place Rangers in the Eastern Conference with three games in hand.
"I guess this is not so bad, but we let it go," Miller said.
Newly acquired Brad Boyes scored his second goal in two games for the Sabres, Steve Montador also had a goal and Miller made 21 saves.
Buffalo, which had won four in a row on the road, is in the midst of a seven-game trip.



The Hurricanes tied the score less than 2 minutes later. Miller went behind his net to corral a dump-in and sent the puck into a corner. Carolina's Jeff Skinner intercepted it and centered the puck to LaRose, who was out in front. LaRose outwaited Miller, who tried to scramble back into the net, before shoveling the puck into the net.
"My fault on that one," Miller said. "That second one is a tough play. My guys told me to play it, and I whiffed. I thought with (LaRose) being a righty, he was going to one-time it. He just held on to it. It would've worked to my favor had I just come back and gotten position."
With the score still tied at 2, Boyes had a breakaway early in the third but backhanded the puck into Ward's glove. Buffalo's Tyler Ennis then hit the post on a power play late in the third period. "I thought we played great," Buffalo coach Lindy Ruff said. "We had a couple of really good looks. When they don't go in, you lose the game, but when you compete like that for 60 minutes, you're going to win a lot of hockey games."


http://www.wralsportsfan.com/hurricanes/story/9213181/

[chernobylwraiths]

Looked to me exactly like the softie he let in against Ottawa in the playoffs.


<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/P3S8Fwm-oic" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I meant bad. That should have been stopped. It looked like he was screened momentarily, but it looked as though he had a good view of the shot.

I get irritated by the "softie" crap. Yeah, he lets in bad goals sometimes. I used the hear the same crap about Hasek. They have bad games. The Sabres only had two goals all game. You know, usually 2 goals isn't enough to win a lot of games. Miller had a bad game, he has some of those, the team has to score more than the opposition. In the first three games of the homestand, Miller played very well, and we lost all three.

And bringing up a goal he let in four years ago is going a "little" overboard. Score more and the bad games won't seem so bad.

[chernobylwraiths]

This thread is a fantastic reminder of why I haven't read/posted in here hardly at all this season. :up: great job folks

So, you're saying there are good points to these bad posts?

[MikeInRoch]

So let me get this straight, Op. By your logic, if a "good" team plays "well", they can never ever lose. So what happens when two "good" teams play "well" against each other?

[hydro]

So let me get this straight, Op. By your logic, if a "good" team plays "well", they can never ever lose. So what happens when two "good" teams play "well" against each other?

It's not possible! If you don't get 2 points as a result of a game you played bad. /op logic

[chernobylwraiths]

So let me get this straight, Op. By your logic, if a "good" team plays "well", they can never ever lose. So what happens when two "good" teams play "well" against each other?

This is theoretically impossible. Just like two bad teams can't possibly play well against each other. One team MUST SUCK! There is no middle ground, no alternative.

[TMu11]

So let me get this straight, Op. By your logic, if a "good" team plays "well", they can never ever lose. So what happens when two "good" teams play "well" against each other?

It's a tie.. duh

[THATHURMANATOR]

It's a tie.. duh
If it were 7 years ago maybe.... No ties anymore sir.

[MikeInRoch]

It's a tie.. duh

Or at least it would go to overtime.

Oh wait....

[OpIv37]

It does have something to do with it.

Can you really tell how well a team played WITHOUT watching the game? Think about that for a second.

And you completely ignore the fact that the other team might have played well or that a team had some bad bounces or that any number of other things happened that caused a loss.

Do you think there was only ONE team on the ice or do you assume that it is impossible for the other team to play well?

You are the one making a faulty assumption - namely that the other team did can't play well.

You have NEVER given the other team some credit.

The Sabres record in the last 30 games is something like 16-10-4.
I gave the other team credit. My whole premise is that if they played well, and we played well, and they won, then we are just not as good a team as they are. It's quite simple, really.

Your argument is that we couldnt beat the 8th sees because the 8th seed was playing well. Well, what happens when we have to play the 1 or 2 seed and those teams are playing well? Logically, we lose.

[chernobylwraiths]

One thing I will say, though they seemed to be playing well, they could only muster 2 goals. That won't win many hockey games.

[OpIv37]

So let me get this straight, Op. By your logic, if a "good" team plays "well", they can never ever lose. So what happens when two "good" teams play "well" against each other?
The only way this question makes sense is if you consider good and equal to be synonyms. Even if two teams are good, one will be slightly better, and that team will win if both teams play well.

Sorry if you guys are satisfied with an OT loss that kept us from taking the 8th spot. I'm certainly not. Playing well but not getting results is fruitless.

[THATHURMANATOR]

When I read the title of this thread I think of most of Op's posts...... :ill:

[DraftBoy]

It does not matter

Op is like Chuck Norris - he knows it all about the game even if he did not watch it.

Or maybe he is omniscient - kinda like Jesus or something

Don't insult Jesus like that, and for the record he's not a fan of hockey.

[G Wolly]

Don't insult Jesus like that, and for the record he's not a fan of hockey.

Oh yeah?

http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/7065/jesussavesgoalie.jpg

[TMu11]

If it were 7 years ago maybe.... No ties anymore sir.

If it never ends, there cant be a winner

[chernobylwraiths]

When I read the title of this thread I think of most of Op's posts...... :ill:

lol

[chernobylwraiths]

Oh yeah?

http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/7065/jesussavesgoalie.jpg

But Vanek puts in the rebound.

[G Wolly]

If it never ends, there cant be a winner

The games DO end...

I have no idea what you're on about.

[THATHURMANATOR]

The games DO end...

I have no idea what you're on about.
Seriously.

[PTI]

Seriously.

One team essentially "ties" in every OT game. Ugh. 3 point games. Here I go, off tangent in the thread....

I remember either last year or the year before listening to the Thrashers announcers saying they had a winning record against Buffalo, but the reality is they both had winning records. Sabres were 2-0-2, and Thrashers were 2-1-1, Sabres actually had a better record against them.

Sabres win in Reg time. Buff 1-0-0 ATL 0-1-0
Thrash win in OT/shoot Buff 1-0-1 ATL 1-1-0
Sabres win in OT/shoot Buff 2-0-1 ATL 1-1-1
Thrash win in OT/shoot Buff 2-0-2 ATL 2-1-1

Did Atlanta have a winning record against Buffalo? Not really.

[G Wolly]

One team essentially "ties" in every OT game.

No.

They don't.

[PTI]

No.

They don't.

I understand, not really a tie, OT loss. Florida got screwed a few years ago, tied Canadians in points, Canadians got the playoff spot, more wins, even though Florida had I think it was 4 more regulation wins. So, those OT losses do hurt.

[G Wolly]

So, those OT losses do hurt.

I agree.

Your post made sense and I understand, but there are no more literal "ties" which is the ongoing point.

[tampabay25690]

I thought the Sabres played a great game.
Problem was they let Carolina back in after every goal....
It was 1 game we move on...

[Mski]

However, if you play well and lose to the 8th seed, you are not a good team. It's impossible for a good team to play well and lose to the 8th seed. The only way a team loses to the 8th seed is if they a) don't play well or b) play well and lose because the 8th seed is better than they are.

If I accept your premise that the Sabres played well, the only possible conclusion is that they are not a good team.

so by your reasoning, the Browns beat the Patriots, therefor the Browns were a better team and more deserving of a playoff spot than the Patriots?

[chernobylwraiths]

so by your reasoning, the Browns beat the Patriots, therefor the Browns were a better team and more deserving of a playoff spot than the Patriots?

I believe his point is that if two teams play "good" the "better" team will win.

[THATHURMANATOR]

No.

They don't.
Yeah no team ties EVER. Always 1 winner and 1 loser!

[OpIv37]

so by your reasoning, the Browns beat the Patriots, therefor the Browns were a better team and more deserving of a playoff spot than the Patriots?
No. The Patriots didn't play well.

You guys are making this much too complicated in attempt to trap me, and makin yourselves look foolish.

[CuseJetsFan83]

plain and simple the sabres played a really good game, had great positioning but couldn't find that 3rd goal before regulation ended....

the 2 goals that carolina scored (which btw were not long after the sabres scored) were all millers fault.

as far as the reasoning of "if you can't beat the 8th seed you don't deserve" so with that reasoning carolina should have beaten buffalo anyways?!

[MikeInRoch]

No. The Patriots didn't play well.

You guys are making this much too complicated in attempt to trap me, and makin yourselves look foolish.

The person who can assess how a team played without actually watching the game looks the most foolish, actually...

[Nighthawk]

Really?

He has save this team way too often the last 2 months or so.

Lecter, do your homework, this team won in spite of Miller's play during most of the past 2 months. They started scoring more and Miller's play was not the reason. Now, in the past two weeks, Miller has started playing better, but lets not say he's been the reason for the winning over this stretch because he isn't.

[Ebenezer]

Personally, anybody *****ing can just leave.

[Dr. Lecter]

Lecter, do your homework, this team won in spite of Miller's play during most of the past 2 months. They started scoring more and Miller's play was not the reason. Now, in the past two weeks, Miller has started playing better, but lets not say he's been the reason for the winning over this stretch because he isn't.
Here is my homework

Since January 1st Millers save % is .913.

His record is 14-6-4. His GAA is 2.82 in that time.

A number of those games he has been very good to outstanding keeping them in games.

I know you hate him, but give him some credit.

[Nighthawk]

Here is my homework

Since January 1st Millers save % is .913.

His record is 14-6-4. His GAA is 2.82 in that time.

A number of those games he has been very good to outstanding keeping them in games.

I know you hate him, but give him some credit.

I've got news for you, those aren't good numbers from a goalie's perspective and they sure aren't numbers for a goalie who is the reason for a team winning. I don't hate him, I just don't believe he is a great goalie...he's good, but he is not a difference maker. I've never said trade him, I think he is good enough to build a good team around, he's just not a goalie who can win anything on his own...he has never been that goalie.

[bosshogg21]

I've got news for you, those aren't good numbers from a goalie's perspective and they sure aren't numbers for a goalie who is the reason for a team winning. I don't hate him, I just don't believe he is a great goalie...he's good, but he is not a difference maker. I've never said trade him, I think he is good enough to build a good team around, he's just not a goalie who can win anything on his own...he has never been that goalie.


Absolutely 100% correct. Couldn't have said it better.

[OpIv37]

The person who can assess how a team played without actually watching the game looks the most foolish, actually...

Did we win? No. Did we miss an opportunity to jump into the 8th spot? Yes.

Therefore, we failed and I stand by my thread title.

As far as how we played during the game, well, I've already covered that. If you want to dismiss it as me trying to evaluate the team when I didn't watch the game, fine. Just don't be surprised when this team continues to lose while "playing well."

[G Wolly]

Did we win? No. Did we miss an opportunity to jump into the 8th spot? Yes.


Did the opposite of both just happen tonight?

Yes.

[Dr. Lecter]

Did we win? No. Did we miss an opportunity to jump into the 8th spot? Yes.

Therefore, we failed and I stand by my thread title.

As far as how we played during the game, well, I've already covered that. If you want to dismiss it as me trying to evaluate the team when I didn't watch the game, fine. Just don't be surprised when this team continues to lose while "playing well."


They are 3-0-1 on the roadtrip.


Is that a fail in your eyes?

[OpIv37]

Did the opposite of both just happen tonight?

Yes.

So?

"Sorry I punched you in the face yesterday. But it doesn't matter cuz I brought you a cake today!"

It doesn't work like that.

[OpIv37]

They are 3-0-1 on the roadtrip.


Is that a fail in your eyes?

see my post in the other thread. 2 of those 3 wins happened AFTER I created this thread.

Sabres failed in the game being discussed here. I stand by that. What happened afterward can't change that.

[hydro]

We can't win in regulation! :( /optimist /never happy

[THATHURMANATOR]

Op stop trying to save face... YOU FAILED...

[G Wolly]

So?

"Sorry I punched you in the face yesterday. But it doesn't matter cuz I brought you a cake today!"

It doesn't work like that.

More like

"Sorry I tried my best the other day, but it wasn't enough. So I thought I 'd make it up to you by doing much better tonight"

[OpIv37]

We can't win in regulation! :( /optimist /never happy

Winning in OT against WC teams is irrelevant. A win is a win.

Winning in OT against EC teams- particularly ones close to the Sabres in the playoff race- isn't good enough. It manufactures points in the standings that wouldn't otherwise be there and could easily come back to bite the Sabres later.

[OpIv37]

More like

"Sorry I tried my best the other day, but it wasn't enough. So I thought I 'd make it up to you by doing much better tonight"

so, when a team tries their best and it still isn't enough, how do you expect that team to even make the playoffs, let alone go anywhere if they somehow do make it?

This is the NHL- they don't get ice cream and trophies for effort like tee-ball.

[THATHURMANATOR]

Winning in OT against WC teams is irrelevant. A win is a win.

Winning in OT against EC teams- particularly ones close to the Sabres in the playoff race- isn't good enough. It manufactures points in the standings that wouldn't otherwise be there and could easily come back to bite the Sabres later.
Guess it is good enough because we currently sit in the 8th seed.

[Ebenezer]

Op, I think you really should shut the **** up. You're making a huge ass out of yourself, seriously.

[OpIv37]

Op, I think you really should shut the **** up. You're making a huge ass out of yourself, seriously.

I'm not the one defending the team for losing a game that would have put us in the 8th playoff spot.

I'm not the one trying to say that we "played well" in a game where we lost to a team ahead of us in the standings.

And yet, people are criticizing ME? Who cares if I watched the game or not? WE ****ING LOST. So what if I said that we "didn't show up" in a game I didn't watch? Does that change the outcome?

People in this thread are saying nonsense like "we played well but we let them back into the game after each goal" or "we played well except for those softies by Miller." I'm not really sure what you people use as your definition of "playing well" but giving up softies and letting teams back into the game certainly doesn't fit my definition of "playing well."

The team blew a lead and lost a game that would have put them in playoff position, and you people are defending them because you disagree with how I characterized the game? It's not about me- some of you have lost sight of that. You're so intent trying to trap me or prove me wrong that you can't see how the team failed.

[Ebenezer]

I'm not the one defending the team for losing a game that would have put us in the 8th playoff spot.

I'm not the one trying to say that we "played well" in a game where we lost to a team ahead of us in the standings.

And yet, people are criticizing ME? Who cares if I watched the game or not? WE ****ING LOST. So what if I said that we "didn't show up" in a game I didn't watch? Does that change the outcome?

People in this thread are saying nonsense like "we played well but we let them back into the game after each goal" or "we played well except for those softies by Miller." I'm not really sure what you people use as your definition of "playing well" but giving up softies and letting teams back into the game certainly doesn't fit my definition of "playing well."

The team blew a lead and lost a game that would have put them in playoff position, and you people are defending them because you disagree with how I characterized the game? It's not about me- some of you have lost sight of that. You're so intent trying to trap me or prove me wrong that you can't see how the team failed.
They are in 8th and have games in hand. I'm not trying to do anything. I'm barely reading your posts. You are pushing it from looking like an ******* to being an *******.

[MikeInRoch]

WHY do you think that it's not possible to "play well" and lose, even if you are a good team?

[OpIv37]

WHY do you think that it's not possible to "play well" and lose, even if you are a good team?

Logic.

If two teams both play well, the better team wins. Otherwise, they can't be the better team by definition.

Did you really just ask this question?

[OpIv37]

They are in 8th and have games in hand. I'm not trying to do anything. I'm barely reading your posts. You are pushing it from looking like an ******* to being an *******.

they are in 8th NOW.

They weren't in 8th when I started this thread.

[helmetguy]

WHY do you think that it's not possible to "play well" and lose, even if you are a good team?

Like the "No Goal" Game? Not possible. Nope!

[Philagape]

Op, I'm usually with you, but give it up. A serious commentator knows when not to push an ill-advised point. You are clearly arguing for the sake of arguing, out of spite.

Good teams lose to lesser teams, regardless of effort. It happens. It has happened to every team that has ever played every year.
Hockey has too many bounces and other randomness, and too much inconsistency to judge the state of a team by any one game, especially one that ends in overtime. That's why teams play 82 games. A playoff race is a marathon. There are no snapshots.

[Dr. Lecter]

they are in 8th NOW.

They weren't in 8th when I started this thread.
So you started it prematurely?

[Philagape]

Logic.

If two teams both play well, the better team wins. Otherwise, they can't be the better team by definition.


See post above. That does not follow, especially in hockey.

[helmetguy]

So you started it prematurely?

Premature epostulation?

[MikeInRoch]

Logic.

If two teams both play well, the better team wins. Otherwise, they can't be the better team by definition.

Did you really just ask this question?

Yes, I really did. Because I wanted to emphasize something that you are failing to grasp.

Sometimes bad bounces and other random things happen in games. It has nothing to do with how good your team is or how well they played sometimes. A team might catch all the breaks and beat a better team. Or they might get unlucky and lose to a team they are better than.

The only way your "logic" works in sports is in the long term where random events and breaks tend to even out. You can't apply that logic to a single game, and expect it to hold. That's why they playoffs are best of seven series.

[Dr. Lecter]

Logic.

If two teams both play well, the better team wins. Otherwise, they can't be the better team by definition.

Did you really just ask this question?
Not in hockey. **** happens in hockey more than other sports.

Especially in one game.

[MikeInRoch]

See post above. That does not follow, especially in hockey.

Damn you for typing faster than me. :D

[Ebenezer]

Yes, I really did. Because I wanted to emphasize something that you are failing to grasp.

Sometimes bad bounces and other random things happen in games. It has nothing to do with how good your team is or how well they played sometimes. A team might catch all the breaks and beat a better team. Or they might get unlucky and lose to a team they are better than.

The only way your "logic" works in sports is in the long term where random events and breaks tend to even out. You can't apply that logic to a single game, and expect it to hold. That's why they playoffs are best of seven series.
Seven games and upsets still happen and teams still play poorly and win.

[MikeInRoch]

Seven games and upsets still happen and teams still play poorly and win.

No doubt, but it happens less often than in single games.

[OpIv37]

Yes, I really did. Because I wanted to emphasize something that you are failing to grasp.

Sometimes bad bounces and other random things happen in games. It has nothing to do with how good your team is or how well they played sometimes. A team might catch all the breaks and beat a better team. Or they might get unlucky and lose to a team they are better than.

The only way your "logic" works in sports is in the long term where random events and breaks tend to even out. You can't apply that logic to a single game, and expect it to hold. That's why they playoffs are best of seven series.

So you're saying Carolina got lucky?

But this whole thread, Lecter was chastising me for not giving Carolina credit and everyone was telling me how they played well too. So which is it- did Carolina play well or did they beat the Sabres because they got lucky?

Honestly, I think you're giving too much credit to things like "luck" and "bad bounces," because they usually result from teams doing the right things. For example, if you put the puck to the front of the net enough times, it's eventually going to go in off a leg or a skate. If you dump the puck deep rather than trying to skate it through 2 defenders, eventually it's going to take a funny rebound off the end boards to an open teammate. Luck is rarely just pure luck.

[Ebenezer]

So you're saying Carolina got lucky?

But this whole thread, Lecter was chastising me for not giving Carolina credit and everyone was telling me how they played well too. So which is it- did Carolina play well or did they beat the Sabres because they got lucky?

Honestly, I think you're giving too much credit to things like "luck" and "bad bounces," because they usually result from teams doing the right things. For example, if you put the puck to the front of the net enough times, it's eventually going to go in off a leg or a skate. If you dump the puck deep rather than trying to skate it through 2 defenders, eventually it's going to take a funny rebound off the end boards to an open teammate. Luck is rarely just pure luck.
You just can't stop do you?

[OpIv37]

You just can't stop do you?

Did the team win? No. FAIL.

End of story. If people want to argue with me all day, I'll argue. But it doesn't get much simpler than that.

[Ebenezer]

Did the team win? No. FAIL.

End of story. If people want to argue with me all day, I'll argue. But it doesn't get much simpler than that.
You've crossed the line in assville.

[MikeInRoch]

So you're saying Carolina got lucky?

But this whole thread, Lecter was chastising me for not giving Carolina credit and everyone was telling me how they played well too. So which is it- did Carolina play well or did they beat the Sabres because they got lucky?

I didn't say that Carolina got lucky. I said that YOU HAVE NO FREAKING IDEA IF THEY DID OR NOT.


Honestly, I think you're giving too much credit to things like "luck" and "bad bounces," because they usually result from teams doing the right things.

Which represents a fundamental lack of hockey knowledge then. That's ok, we'll teach you. :D

[bosshogg21]

I didn't say that Carolina got lucky. I said that YOU HAVE NO FREAKING IDEA IF THEY DID OR NOT.



Which represents a fundamental lack of hockey knowledge then. That's ok, we'll teach you. :D


Ya man up Op and spend the $140 on the package so you can back up your arguments.

[G Wolly]

Did the team win? No.


On Thursday, no.

But yesterday and today, yes.

And as of now we're in 8th place.

So I think you need to reserve your negativity for the next loss.

[OpIv37]

On Thursday, no.

But yesterday and today, yes.

And as of now we're in 8th place.

So I think you need to reserve your negativity for the next loss.

First, we lost the game, so it's not negativity, it's realism.

Second, I could just as easily say "I think you need to reserve your positivity until we actually make the playoffs."

[G Wolly]

First, we lost the game, so it's not negativity, it's realism.

Second, I could just as easily say "I think you need to reserve your positivity until we actually make the playoffs."

"It's not positivity, it's realism"

Nothing in my post is overly optimistic, simply the truth.

It's an 82 game season.

We're in the final stretch, but theres 17 games left.

[CuseJetsFan83]

but even though they lost to carolina... they still retained a precious point.... that single point is our margin OVER carolina......

[G Wolly]

but even though they lost to carolina... they still retained a precious point.... that single point is our margin OVER carolina......

BUT WE LOST!!!!!

[CuseJetsFan83]

BUT WE LOST!!!!!

meh we deserved to lose blowing the lead twice BUT we did get a point.... moral victory i tell ya!

[chernobylwraiths]

Did the team win? No. FAIL.

End of story. If people want to argue with me all day, I'll argue. But it doesn't get much simpler than that.

Is there any color in your black and white world? Any shades of gray?

[Dr. Lecter]

How NHL teams have had undefeated seasons?

[chernobylwraiths]

How NHL teams have had undefeated seasons?

many?

Formulate your thought, type it up, READ IT, then hit the submit button.

:D

[Ebenezer]

meh we deserved to lose blowing the lead twice BUT we did get a point.... moral victory i tell ya!

there are no M columns!

[OpIv37]

Is there any color in your black and white world? Any shades of gray?
Not when it comes to wins and losses. Again, it's not tee ball. There are no trophies for effort.

[OpIv37]

meh we deserved to lose blowing the lead twice BUT we did get a point.... moral victory i tell ya!
Moral victories don't get you into the playoffs.

[THATHURMANATOR]

Moral victories don't get you into the playoffs.
Does beating the top team in the conference??

[G Wolly]

Does beating the top team in the conference??

In addition to beating a Western Conference team the next day, yes.

[JD]

I wish OP would just say he's been playing devils advocate all along and really isn't this big of a douchebag

[chernobylwraiths]

I wish OP would just say he's been playing devils advocate all along and really isn't this big of a douchebag

One of the nicest guys I've met from this site. He just likes to complain. Out with the bad, in with the good, though I don't know what goes in. Maybe drugs.

[G Wolly]

One of the nicest guys I've met from this site. He just likes to complain. Out with the bad, in with the good, though I don't know what goes in. Maybe drugs.

Op is clearly Charlie Sheen...

























...http://cache.blippitt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Charlie-Sheen-Winning-Poster.jpg

[chernobylwraiths]

Op is clearly Charlie Sheen...

I'm pretty sure if that were the case, his wife would cut off the only part of Charlie Sheen he would want to be.

[Dr. Lecter]

They just failed again against Boston. :(

I am VERY angry right now.

[OpIv37]

They just failed again against Boston. :(

I am VERY angry right now.

I ****ing HATE giving up the extra point to EC teams, but going into the game Boston was 12 points ahead of us with 16 games to play. We aren't catching them.

It's more important to just get the 2.