Sabres @ Toronto GDT!!

[Skooby]

Lets go Buffalo!!

[YardRat]

:gosabres:

[Skooby]

It's game time!!!

[2slowtogofast]

CoHo

[SabreEleven]

I thought if you were two men down and got a 3rd penalty, the 3rd penalty didn't start until until the first penalty was over?

Scott might have lost but at least he went...that was a nice sucker punch by Orr when Scott was on his knees.

[gebobs]

Three stupid penalties in a row...dumb, dumber, and dumbest.

[gebobs]

I thought if you were two men down and got a 3rd penalty, the 3rd penalty didn't start until until the first penalty was.
It doesn't.

[SabreEleven]

so if you go down to 2 men, just start hacking and grabbing people...

[gebobs]

so if you go down to 2 men, just start hacking and grabbing people...Sure...and get more penalties. ???

[gebobs]

Pommers from Vanek

[Skooby]

Sure...and get more penalties. ???

No, it extended the penalty.

[gebobs]

What are you guys talking about? You get a third penalty and it doesn't start getting run off until the first is over.

[gebobs]

Jeezuz Ennis....finish!

[Cleve]

Man, Sabres have been shorthanded a lot tonight - 5 or 6 pps with 5:40 in the 2nd. Amazing they've been able to kill also those and keep Toronto scoreless. Miller has been sparkling so far.

[gebobs]

5 pp for the Laffs so far...1 for the Sabs...Buffalo's were all deserved.

[gebobs]

PP come on!!!

[SabreEleven]

What are you guys talking about? You get a third penalty and it doesn't start getting run off until the first is over.

I thought so too but that isn't what happened

- - - Updated - - -

Horrible reputation penalty on Kaleta...That ref had those penalties call before the puck was dropped.

[gebobs]

I thought so too but that isn't what happened.
What do you suppose happened?

[gebobs]

Horrible reputation penalty on Kaleta.
When he mugged Kessel? Or at the end of the period?

[gebobs]

Kaleta got a misconduct? Stats have him with 14 PIM.

[gebobs]

Yes he did

[Crisis]

Kaleta got a 10 minute misconduct for getting crosschecked and talking?

[OpIv37]

Jeezuz Ennis....finish!

Gotta love Vanek taking the offensive zone penalty to create a 4 on 3 too.

Lucky for us the Leafs' PP blows.

[gebobs]

Gotta love Vanek taking the offensive zone penalty to create a 4 on 3 too.

Lucky for us the Leafs' PP blows.
I can't wait until Vanek has a bad game. What the fark will you sound like then?

[OpIv37]

How many pucks are gonna bounce by Sekera tonight?


I can't wait until Vanek has a bad game. What the fark will you sound like then?

He's made some great plays and some terrible ones, most notably getting caught on the ice and not being able to get in the shooting lane on Philly's first goal, not finishing on the play Hogson cleaned up, and that dumb penalty tonight. You will not win with your highest paid player doing things like this that hurt the team.

- - - Updated - - -

and Ennis gets the Vanek Award for not finishing tonight.

[OpIv37]

So glad we ditched Clarke MacArthur. He sucks.

[gebobs]

Jeezuz...have a bong hit will ya?

[gebobs]

Sekera split his pants.

[Crisis]

I love Ott getting on Phanuef for icing Miller

[OpIv37]

another reputation call on Kaleta.

It's Toronto though, so I guess it's too be expected.

[OpIv37]

and here it is, another Buffalo choke in progress, with an assist to the refs.

- - - Updated - - -

what's that sound? Oh, that's the fans. I didn't realize there were any there.

[gebobs]

Count it. Ugly game. 2 points.

[Typ0]

That was tough to listen to ... what was up with Kaleta getting that penalty at the end it was going to be a shutout....

[OpIv37]

Very ugly.

They have to fix the penalties. Most of those were just stupid.

[Crisis]

whats with these ****ty camera angles. am i supposed to watch this game through 20 people's heads?

[Crisis]

We really miss Gaustad as a defensive faceoff specialist. Got killed at the dot

[SkateZilla]

Im still wondering why Kaleta was the only one in the box...

and how they both got 10 minutes for that lil bit of shoving.

[Skooby]

I'm glad this center Ice package is only $50 because it's played in Low-Def. How does Hockey expect to gain new fans when their ancient cameras can't make the game easy to follow?

- - - Updated - - -


Im still wondering why Kaleta was the only one in the box...

and how they both got 10 minutes for that lil bit of shoving.

The refs sure showed them.

[SabreEleven]

I'm glad this center Ice package is only $50 because it's played in Low-Def. How does Hockey expect to gain new fans when their ancient cameras can't make the game easy to follow?
.

Who is your cable/satellite provider?

[OpIv37]

I'm glad this center Ice package is only $50 because it's played in Low-Def. How does Hockey expect to gain new fans when their ancient cameras can't make the game easy to follow?

- - - Updated - - -



The refs sure showed them.
?? I have DirecTV and had both the Sabres and Leafs broadcasts in HD

Granted, MSG's HD is about as bad as it can be while still being considered HD, but it was still much better than SD.

[Skooby]

Who is your cable/satellite provider?

It's Comcast's center ice, is their some HD version I'm not aware of on there?

[SabreEleven]

It's Comcast's center ice, is their some HD version I'm not aware of on there?

Not that I know of. I have DishNetwork; they have a dispute with MSG so they don't carry MSG so they only carry games on other networks and like last nights game, it was only in SD out of Canada. Maybe Comcast doesn't carry MSG.

[gebobs]

He's made some great plays and some terrible ones, most notably getting caught on the ice and not being able to get in the shooting lane on Philly's first goal
He was on the ice for a long time and couldn't get off because Hodgson got knocked off the puck on the breakout. Being on the left wing, he can't be the one to change or the Flyers have 3-on-2 or worse. So he evens the rush and and hopes he can help clear once the guys who come on for Hodgson and Pommers get back. He was gassed and couldn't cover the play. What did you want him to do?


not finishing on the play Hogson cleaned up
Not finishing on a partial breakaway where he blows by Voracek and Coburn and with both those guys on his ass fails to bury the puck. Hmmmm...considering that even under the best of circumstances, clear breakaways, the success rate is well below 50%, what do you suppose the success rate is when you have two guys dogging you and you are forced to your backhand? But yeah, he sucks cuz he only got an assist there.


and that dumb penalty tonight.
He was going for the puck, giving the extra effort, missed and took the guys skates out. What was dumb about it? Unfortunate? Sure. Regrettable on hindsight? Definitely.

But the fact remains that without Vanek last night despite Miller's outstanding game, the Sabres probably lose.

[Mski]

How many pucks are gonna bounce by Sekera tonight?



He's made some great plays and some terrible ones, most notably getting caught on the ice and not being able to get in the shooting lane on Philly's first goal, not finishing on the play Hogson cleaned up, and that dumb penalty tonight. You will not win with your highest paid player doing things like this that hurt the team.

- - - Updated - - -

and Ennis gets the Vanek Award for not finishing tonight.you always use this in your argument... did he get a raise this offseason that im not aware of? because im pretty sure there's 2 guys on the blue line, a goalie, and someone in the press box making more than him right now

[gebobs]

you always use this in your argument... did he get a raise this offseason that im not aware of? because im pretty sure there's 2 guys on the blue line, a goalie, and someone in the press box making more than him right nowNot sure about actual paydays, but Vanek has the highest cap hit on the team.

[OpIv37]

you always use this in your argument... did he get a raise this offseason that im not aware of? because im pretty sure there's 2 guys on the blue line, a goalie, and someone in the press box making more than him right now


Not sure about actual paydays, but Vanek has the highest cap hit on the team.

Exactly. I was being lazy- I should have said cap hit rather than salary, because that's what matters.

As a fan, I really don't give a **** how much money Pegula has to fork over. I care about cap hit, because there is only so much of it. When players don't play up to their cap hit, that cap is unavailable for other players and its a recipe for losing. Every time.

Vanek hasn't played up to his cap hit since Edmonton and FO incompetence ****ed us into giving him his big payday.

[gebobs]

Exactly. I was being lazy- I should have said cap hit rather than salary, because that's what matters.

As a fan, I really don't give a **** how much money Pegula has to fork over. I care about cap hit, because there is only so much of it. When players don't play up to their cap hit, that cap is unavailable for other players and its a recipe for losing. Every time.

Vanek hasn't played up to his cap hit since Edmonton and FO incompetence ****ed us into giving him his big payday.

So you're not going to quit whining until he scores 80 goals and goes the whole season without a giveaway or a penalty? If that's the case, spare us please. Jesus, man. That's ancient history. He doesn't have to apologize for his salary.

Vanek had a monster game on Sunday and got the takeaway and feed on the game winning goal last night. If he posts another game like that, he'll be a contender for player-of-the-week for sure. Heck, he might get considered based on those results alone.

[OpIv37]

So you're not going to quit whining until he scores 80 goals and goes the whole season without a giveaway or a penalty? If that's the case, spare us please. Jesus, man. That's ancient history. He doesn't have to apologize for his salary.

Vanek had a monster game on Sunday and got the takeaway and feed on the game winning goal last night. If he posts another game like that, he'll be a contender for player-of-the-week for sure. Heck, he might get considered based on those results alone.

80 goals? Ha, no. It's been forever since he's even gotten 40 so let's start there.

Never take a penalty? No. Never take a ****ty , lazy offensive zone penalty? Yes.

Don't try to exaggerate to make my expectations sound unreasonable. They aren't. I just want him to play up to his contract so the team can win, something he hasn't done since he got this contract.

And btw, I don't care if he scores 10 goals in a single game. If he takes offensive zone penalties and misses wide open nets in the same game, I'm still going to criticize those mistakes because they are inexcusable. Doing good things is NOT a free license to make dumb mistakes.

[gebobs]

Never take a penalty? No. Never take a ****ty , lazy offensive zone penalty? Yes.
I suppose you're talking about the penalty last night. Break it down for me. How was that "lazy"? He made an effort to sweep the puck away before the Leafs could clear it out from right in front of their net. He missed. How is that lazy?


Don't try to exaggerate to make my expectations sound unreasonable. They aren't. I just want him to play up to his contract so the team can win, something he hasn't done since he got this contract.
Exactly. To live up to his contract, he would have to score 80 goals. It's not his fault he got that contract. It's unreasonable to think he will ever live up to it and downright annoying to keep pointing it out like no one else has noticed it.

[OpIv37]

I suppose you're talking about the penalty last night. Break it down for me. How was that "lazy"? He made an effort to sweep the puck away before the Leafs could clear it out from right in front of their net. He missed. How is that lazy?


Exactly. To live up to his contract, he would have to score 80 goals. It's not his fault he got that contract. It's unreasonable to think he will ever live up to it and downright annoying to keep pointing it out like no one else has noticed it.
It was the offensive zone. Let him clear the puck then go chase it. There is no reason to risk a 4 on 3 that deep in your own zone with a 2-0 lead.

An, apparently you and a couple other people haven't noticed because you insist on defending the guy at every turn. You want to talk about unreasonable? It's unreasonable to expect a team to win when they have the cap space for a 50 goal scorer tied up in a guy who's usually in the mid 30's.

So it is what it is- either Vanek plays up to the contract or we keep losing to teams whose players actually do play up to their contracts.

[gebobs]

It was the offensive zone. Let him clear the puck then go chase it. There is no reason to risk a 4 on 3 that deep in your own zone with a 2-0 lead.No reason? You mean no reason other than keeping the pressure on. Breakouts get stripped all the time and I have to tell you, you are the first person I have ever heard advise against it like its some sacrosanct law of hockey. He went for a play. He missed. It's not lazy. Focusing at all on this miscue is overly critical.


An, apparently you and a couple other people haven't noticed because you insist on defending the guy at every turn.
Hell I'll defend anyone, even Derek Roy, if the attacks are stupid.


You want to talk about unreasonable? It's unreasonable to expect a team to win when they have the cap space for a 50 goal scorer tied up in a guy who's usually in the mid 30's.
Please. Every team has cap issues and at least Vanek is still playing and leading the team. Wayne Redden has nearly the same cap hit as Vanek and he hasn't played for three years. Yet that didn't stop the Rangers from signing Richards and Gaborik so don't even try and use this as a reason the Sabres haven't gotten any other offensive weapons. Continually harping about his contract 6 years later is goofy.


So it is what it is- either Vanek plays up to the contract or we keep losing to teams whose players actually do play up to their contracts.
What's your alternative? Do you think cutting Vanek makes the team better? Please say yes and let's all have a good laugh.

[OpIv37]

No reason? You mean no reason other than keeping the pressure on. Breakouts get stripped all the time and I have to tell you, you are the first person I have ever heard advise against it like its some sacrosanct law of hockey. He went for a play. He missed. It's not lazy. Focusing at all on this miscue is overly critical.


Hell I'll defend anyone, even Derek Roy, if the attacks are stupid.


Please. Every team has cap issues and at least Vanek is still playing and leading the team. Wayne Redden has nearly the same cap hit as Vanek and he hasn't played for three years. Yet that didn't stop the Rangers from signing Richards and Gaborik so don't even try and use this as a reason the Sabres haven't gotten any other offensive weapons. Continually harping about his contract 6 years later is goofy.


What's your alternative? Do you think cutting Vanek makes the team better? Please say yes and let's all have a good laugh.

I'm the first person you ever heard criticize a player for taking an offensive zone penalty with a 2-0 lead to create a 4 on 3 PP? How can you possibly call that attack stupid?

As far as Richards and Gaborik, who have the Sabres signed that are even remotely similar? If they can still sign players with Vanek's cap hit, why aren't they?

I never said this team should cut Vanek. Clearly the team has no 30 goal scorers ready to step up and replace him. The only way cutting Vanek would work is if they were able to re-invest that money in a player or players who play up to their cap hit. And that's not gonna happen because a) NHL contracts are guaranteed so we'd still have to eat the cap if he were cut and b) it's in-season so there is no one available to step in.

In an ideal world, Vanek would have a lower cap hit and we'd have that space available to put more talent on the team. And, since NHL contracts are guaranteed, there is no way he's taking a pay cut. So, that's not gonna happen.

The only two options now are a) Vanek continues to not play up to his contract and we continue to get the same mediocre results we've had for the last 4 years, or b) somehow Vanek starts playing up to his contract so this team can win.

And, since I'm not satisfied with the mediocre results of the last few years, I will continue to criticize Vanek until he lives up to the standard and the team starts winning.

You can say it's unfair. You can say it's unreasonable. But it's the reality of the situation, and barring one of the young guys miraculously becoming the next Gretsky out of thin air, it's the only way this team is going to win.

[gebobs]

I'm the first person you ever heard criticize a player for taking an offensive zone penalty with a 2-0 lead to create a 4 on 3 PP? How can you possibly call that attack stupid?
If he even touches the puck, there's no call. But he missed. And if you watched him let the break out proceed unaccosted, you would be all over him for being lazy. Look, I'm no hockey dumbie. I coached on many levels and was offered a position on the Canisius College staff just before I moved to Atlanta. It's hard to criticize a player for making an effort like that, making the decision in the blink of an eye. It ended up badly and he should not have done it in retrospect. But I don't think it was lazy. He was trying to keep the pressure on in a game where the Sabres generated precious little of it.

And in sum...even with that mistake, he was still the difference maker.


As far as Richards and Gaborik, who have the Sabres signed that are even remotely similar? If they can still sign players with Vanek's cap hit, why aren't they?
How is this Vanek's fault? You ***** and moan about his salary. Who cares? It's not stopping the Sabres from signing anyone any more than Redden, who hasn't played for three years, has stopped the Rangers.


And, since I'm not satisfied with the mediocre results of the last few years, I will continue to criticize Vanek until he lives up to the standard and the team starts winning.
Now we've come full loop. Your standard is the contract. We get it. He's not living up to it. He never will. At least not until the rising tide lits the other ships to his level. Continually harping on it is like complaining that rain is wet.


You can say it's unfair. You can say it's unreasonable. But it's the reality of the situation, and barring one of the young guys miraculously becoming the next Gretsky out of thin air, it's the only way this team is going to win.
Look who's exaggerating to make a point now. No one needs a superstar even close to that level to win it all. Heck, the Sabres came within a game or two of winning the Cup with far less than what they have now. And how many thought the Kings would roll like they did last year.

Look...I get the schtick. I do the same thing about the Bills. But for the Bills, it's far more deserved. There has been no hope for that team for a while and it was obvious from the start that they weren't going to make any positive progress with that clown Gailey and it's not hopeful for the future until they replace Fitz.

But the Sabres are not that far off. Vanek is not a detriment to the team. Any team in the league would kill to have him though admittedly his contract makes him less appealing. It would take a confluence of development, not just the addition of one "Wayne Gretzky". Perhaps a perfect storm is unlikely, but such is the way champions are made these days.

I'm not saying it's going to happen, but it could. Myers starts to come into his own. Vanek becomes the steady go-to guy. Pommers and Stafford turn in All-Star years. Ehrhoff and Regier settle in and turn in top level seasons. Leino loosens up. Ennis gets hot. Gerbe gets back on the ice. Foligno, Grigorenko, Hodgson make noise. Matt Ellis wins the Selke (ok....that's a reach).

A few of these things happen and the Sabres could be in for a memorable year. Most importantly, Miller has to return to Vezina level. Of course, now that I've said this, they'll probably lose the next two to Carolina and you can claim this thread. But for crying out loud, can you at least try and enjoy this brief moment of optimism while it lasts?

[OpIv37]

You keep saying the Sabres can sign guys like Richards and Gaborik, but they aren't. In fact, they're only big FA get since Vaneks contract was Ville ****ing Leino. Not Vanek's fault tha Leino sucks, but Pegulaa has said money is no object and yet we have one big FA in his two seasons. That would fly against your assertion that Vanek's contract isn't keeping us from signing guys.

As far as what I would have said if Vanek hadn't gone for the puck, you are basing am argument on your guess as to what my reaction would be to a situation that never actually occurred. That's just absurd. Vane has to a) get the puck first or b) not attempt to make that play. He ****ed up. You are defending the guy for taking an offensive zone penalty to create a 4 on 3 PP when the team had a two goal lead. That's just as absurd. I can't believe you don't see how ****ing ridiculous that is

And I've been a Bills and Sabres can far too long to enjoy a brief moment of optimism be size they are always followed by sole-crushing moments of reality. I'll enjoy it when the things you said start happening consistently. The Sabres are in better shape than the Bills, but I also have a higher standard for them. They should be farther along than they are.

[OpIv37]

I will say this, though: there was something oddly satisfying about seeing the Sabres completely suck balls, yet still be able to out-suck Toronto. I know it's early in the season and a lot can still happen, but the Leafs looked absolutely terrible. They were good on face offs and the PK but did pretty much everything else wrong.

[gebobs]

You keep saying the Sabres can sign guys like Richards and Gaborik, but they aren't.
So? My point is that Vanek's contract doesn't prevent them from doing it. Redden has nearly the same cap hit and isn't even playing.


As far as what I would have said if Vanek hadn't gone for the puck, you are basing am argument on your guess as to what my reaction would be to a situation that never actually occurred. That's just absurd. Vane has to a) get the puck first or b) not attempt to make that play. He ****ed up. You are defending the guy for taking an offensive zone penalty to create a 4 on 3 PP when the team had a two goal lead. That's just as absurd. I can't believe you don't see how ****ing ridiculous that is
I agree he made a mistake. But it wasn't for a lack of effort. He was trying to make a play and keep the pressure on. Vanek has been the difference in both games so far. Give him some credit.

[chernobylwraiths]

Op is, and will always be, about the contract, and it will be Vanek's fault that he doesn't "live up to it".

I like the makeup of this team very much now. One more power forward would be nice as would a good faceoff man. But as it stands, we have a little grit right now and got rid of some of what I thought kept this team back. For me, it all ties in together. Why has Miller been off? Well, he gets little support and worries about guys in his crease. In the Philly game when a Philly defender crosschecked Vanek through the net and stopped play, I had no problem with that at all. I WANT to see our guys do that. Let them know the crease is not a place to be comfortable and Miller's job will get easier. Have forwards willing to finish checks and the defenders will make more mistakes. The only thing that worries me about the team is I believe a coaching philosophy, because as far as I can remember, opposing teams have always been comfortable skating around in our zone. I think Lindy teaches them to keep the offense to the perimeter and let them skate around while keeping between them and the goalie. I believe they need to pressure the offense more. There are other little things, but the fact that opposing offenses look too comfortable in our zone is frustrating at times.

[chernobylwraiths]

Hey Op, how many great players have come out of free agency the last couple of years? There must be a whole bunch better than Vanek.
And what is the biggest need of this team in your opinion?

[OpIv37]

Hey Op, how many great players have come out of free agency the last couple of years? There must be a whole bunch better than Vanek.
And what is the biggest need of this team in your opinion?

Off the top of my head: Richards, Kovalchuk, Parise, Sutter, Hossa. I'm sure I am forgetting some.

Biggest need is still a big C. See the face-off percentage against TO.

[OpIv37]

And you can argue whether its Vaneks fault that he doesn't live up to the contract or whether the contract is too high for anyone to live up to all day. It's irrelevant.

What's relevant is that when players use cap space and don't play up to the cap space they are using, then the team can't go out to get other players and they struggle. It's just the reality of a salary cap league. So, either Vanek finds a way to play up to the contract, or we lose. You won't get different results by doing the same thing.

[gebobs]

What's relevant is that when players use cap space and don't play up to the cap space they are using, then the team can't go out to get other players and they struggle. It's just the reality of a salary cap league.
No, the reality of the salary cap league is that every team has players that don't perform at a level commensurate with their contract, not to mention dead cap. If you think Vanek is an exception, you are dead wrong.


So, either Vanek finds a way to play up to the contract, or we lose.
False dichotomy.

[Skooby]

We have really sucked at faceoffs, I swear we're 30% at best.

[OpIv37]

No, the reality of the salary cap league is that every team has players that don't perform at a level commensurate with their contract, not to mention dead cap. If you think Vanek is an exception, you are dead wrong.


False dichotomy.
No, it's really not- at least not in the situation that the Sabres are in. Whether its because of Vanek's contract or not, the Sabres haven't added much talent. Size and grit, yes, but not talent. If the Sabres are going to win, that extra talent has to come from somewhere. I suppose other players could step up, but do you really expect that to happen? CoHo's decent but nothing spectacular. Pominville is, well, Pominville. Grigs hasn't showed much offense yet, and even if he does, he's mired on a line with Kaleta and Ellis most of the time. Ennis has Afinogenov syndrome. He makes some great moves but can never seem to finish and struggles to put the puck on net.

We aren't getting any better. Something has to change. If not Vanek playing up to his contract, then what?

[OpIv37]

And one more thing: yes, every team has players not playing up to their contract. For most teams- or a least for the ones that win- it's NOT the guy with with the biggest cap hit.

[chernobylwraiths]

And you can argue whether its Vaneks fault that he doesn't live up to the contract or whether the contract is too high for anyone to live up to all day. It's irrelevant.

What's relevant is that when players use cap space and don't play up to the cap space they are using, then the team can't go out to get other players and they struggle. It's just the reality of a salary cap league. So, either Vanek finds a way to play up to the contract, or we lose. You won't get different results by doing the same thing.

What I know you understand but are totally discounting is that Vanek is not the only player on this team. You just said that we need a big center, one who can get him the puck and set him up to score. The best part of Vanek's game is playing in front of the net and tipping in goals. He needs people to get the puck through for him to score. He needs good teammates. He cannot do it alone, but you want him to. AND you want him to play good defense and not make mistakes. If he doesn't trip that guy in the offensive zone the other night, I believe Toronto gets an odd man rush. He was trying to make a play.

[rbochan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3DppaXz4-o

[OpIv37]

Well, most of the other players on the team are playing at a level that would justify their cap hit, Leino being the notable exception. I suppose players could outplay their contracts, but it seems like a long time since anyone has done that in Buffalo. That speaks to the quality of the FO, but that's another issue.

Of course, other guys could step up, but after watching them play for so long, I just don't expect them to. I saw Vanek ply well during the conf final runs a few years back, and I see him get opportunities that he doesn't finish, so I think he can do more. Obviously the Oilers and Sabres do, too, or else he wouldn't be in this contract situation.

[gebobs]

No, it's really not- at least not in the situation that the Sabres are in. Whether its because of Vanek's contract or not, the Sabres haven't added much talent.
You're all over the place. First you say the Sabres can't, unequivocally, win unless Vanek plays to the level of his contract. Now you say, though the contract might not be the issue, the FO hasn't signed enough talent.

We all know Regier overpaid for Vanek. But that's not stopping him from signing big money free agents. He has. They haven't panned out, at least not yet, but he has...Leino, Regehr, Ehrhoff from other teams as well as signing RFAs like Myers. So why does it fall to Vanek's shoulders? I would rather have Vanek on my team than any of those four with the possible exception of Myers because of his upside.

Cripes...one skater has shown up and played both games like he's in midseason form and you get all hypercritical about his play.


Something has to change. If not Vanek playing up to his contract, then what?

Plenty of ways. That you don't see a single other option just reiterates that false dichotomy.

Consider the 2010-11 Bruins. Not only were they saddled with a huge contract when they overpaid for Marc Savard, but he didn't even contribute in any meaningful way. But did the Bruins just throw up their hands and say we can't possibly improve unless Savard starts earning his contract. Nope. But they got a career season from their goalie. They got decent if unspectacular results from their veterans like Krejci, Bergeron, Lucic and Recchi. They got breakout years from Marchand and Seguin. They had solid defense led by Chara. They played hard, they stayed healthy, and they had a Cinderella-esque run through the playoffs.

None of that is beyond the Sabres potential.

[gebobs]

Of course, other guys could step up, but after watching them play for so long, I just don't expect them to.
So it's all up to Vanek? One skater is not going to make a difference. Only a goalie can possibly elevate a team by himself. The Sabres need the whole team to step up. That's how championships are won.

[OpIv37]

And do you honestly expect that to happen? I sure as hell don't.

[gebobs]

Sabres are 2-0.

The Caps, Rags, Flies, and Canes are all winless.

If it's hopelessly optimistic to think that's a good thing, count me in. If it's naive to be happy with our top forward's play through just two games, pass me the bong.

[gebobs]

And do you honestly expect that to happen? I sure as hell don't.

I'm sure everyone felt the same way about the Kings last year.

Is it probable? Of course not. Is it possible? Absolutely. It happens for some team every year. Why not us?

Until such time as the team gives me reason to doubt, I'll choose to believe.

[OpIv37]

Oh, and here we go again with using the expecting to prove the rule. One team win once with their too player not playing well because the entire rest of the team stepped up. That doesn't mean it can or will happen to the Sabres.

They need Vanek to step up.

And listen to what you guys are saying- making excuses for his contract, ignoring or defending his bone-headed plays because he got a couple goals, etc. this is exactly what I mean when I say Buffalo fans have accepted mediocrity. I'm no being hypercritical. You guys are holding him to too low of a standard.

[OpIv37]

I'm sure everyone felt the same way about the Kings last year.

Is it probable? Of course not. Is it possible? Absolutely. It happens for some team every year. Why not us?

Until such time as the team gives me reason to doubt, I'll choose to believe.

Uhhh you're looking at it backwards. This team has done absolutely nothing to earn the benefit of the doubt. You shouldn't believe in them until they do something to earn it. 2-0 is a nice start but it hardly makes up for 4 years of mediocrity.

[Skooby]

Uhhh you're looking at it backwards. This team has done absolutely nothing to earn the benefit of the doubt. You shouldn't believe in them until they do something to earn it. 2-0 is a nice start but it hardly makes up for 4 years of mediocrity.

If Toronto beats the Pens tonight, will that prove to you that the Sabres are legit?

[gebobs]

Oh, and here we go again with using the expecting to prove the rule. One team win once with their too player not playing well because the entire rest of the team stepped up. That doesn't mean it can or will happen to the Sabres.
Did I say it would? No.


They need Vanek to step up.
Did I say they didn't? No.


And listen to what you guys are saying- making excuses for his contract,
No one is making excuses for the contract. It's history and absolutely no reason to bring it up other than to grind your ax.


ignoring or defending his bone-headed plays because he got a couple goals, etc.
Conversely, ignoring his contributions on offense because of a few mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes, pal. The key is to weigh the contributions from the costs.


I'm no being hypercritical.
Sure you're not. You completely wave off a 5-point monster game as well as a herculean single-handed effort to wrest a turnover and then set up a game winner all because of a few mistakes. That is the essence of hypercriticism.

And the one mistake you cite is stupid. He gets caught on the ice because Hodgson turns over the puck in the neutral zone and since he's on the far boards he can't get off and has to cover for Pominville and Hodgson changing...Vanek's fault. He sucks.

[Skooby]

Sabres are 2-0.

The Caps, Rags, Flies, and Canes are all winless.

If it's hopelessly optimistic to think that's a good thing, count me in. If it's naive to be happy with our top forward's play through just two games, pass me the bong.

Tough crowd.

[OpIv37]

Did I say it would? No.


Did I say they didn't? No.


No one is making excuses for the contract. It's history and absolutely no reason to bring it up other than to grind your ax.


Conversely, ignoring his contributions on offense because of a few mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes, pal. The key is to weigh the contributions from the costs.


Sure you're not. You completely wave off a 5-point monster game as well as a herculean single-handed effort to wrest a turnover and then set up a game winner all because of a few mistakes. That is the essence of hypercriticism.

And the one mistake you cite is stupid. He gets caught on the ice because Hodgson turns over the puck in the neutral zone and since he's on the far boards he can't get off and has to cover for Pominville and Hodgson changing...Vanek's fault. He sucks.

Stupid? He failed to get off the ice then failed to get in the shooting lane. If you don't expect more from the guy who's supposed to be the best player on the team, you have accepted mediocrity. You insist on making excuses and blamin everyone but him rather than holding him to a higher standard.

[OpIv37]

If Toronto beats the Pens tonight, will that prove to you that the Sabres are legit?

Uhh, no. It would suggest that maybe Toronto is not as big a joke as I thought, but one game in a 48 game season never proves anything.

[Skooby]

Uhh, no. It would suggest that maybe Toronto is not as big a joke as I thought, but one game in a 48 game season never proves anything.

Does 2 wins to start a season prove we haven't lost yet? What is the goal of this season, to lose so you could be right? Until the Sabres find a way to lose (which they will), don't complain about not losing.

[gebobs]

Uhhh you're looking at it backwards. This team has done absolutely nothing to earn the benefit of the doubt. You shouldn't believe in them until they do something to earn it. 2-0 is a nice start but it hardly makes up for 4 years of mediocrity.

Sorry you're so pessimistic, but I can think of plenty of reasons to be hopeful:

* For the most part, last season hinged on Lucic running Miller. Prior to that game, they were 10-5. It took them two months to recover. That was the difference. The Sabres made changes to make the team tougher.

* The Sabres added a bunch of free agents prior to last year. They didn't gel last year. I'm hopeful they will this year..

* Having a top-pick on the team right out of juniors is always exciting.

* Miller is playing well and Vanek is going to contend for player-of-the-week.

* Cody Hodgson instead of Derek Roy. I can't see how anyone wouldn't look at this as a big step in the right direction. Hell, the fact that we got anything for that POS Roy is cause for celebration.

* Steve Ott instead of Gaustad...Goose was a one-trick pony. When he wussed out after Lucic killed our season, he was dead to me. Again, that we got anything for that jackalope made me happy.

* A full season of Marcus Foligno gives me a chub.

* Matt Ellis just might be the next Guy Charbonneau...if he gets that job at AutoZone in Trois Rivieres.

[gebobs]

Stupid? He failed to get off the ice
Oh you think so? He was on the off wing after a neutral zone turnover. Compounding that, it was the 2nd period and the Sabres bench is on the other side of the red line. It wasn't a mistake to stay on. Quite the contrary. It would have been a mistake to come off. Philly would have had a 5-on-2 break.


then failed to get in the shooting lane.
No doubt he was gassed. What's he supposed to do? Just will the fatigue out of his legs? Vanek made the best out of a bad situation. Unfortunately it wasn't enough. He had to stay on the ice to even up the rush and hope it was enough until the guys replacing his linemates got back in the zone. You can't lay that goal on Vanek. If you want to blame anyone, blame Hodgson. Vanek was just trying to cover for Coho's mistake.

Of course, I explained all this before but it's anyone's guess if you understand because you never respond. And it's odds on you'll come back in a couple of posts whining how Vanek messed up on that play.


You insist on making excuses
I'm not excusing a mistake at all. I'm saying it wasn't a mistake. I've laid out my line of reasoning. If you want to argue it, be my guest.

[OpIv37]

Argh I can't argue that without seeing the play again and I already deleted off my DVR. I'll have to see of I can find the video online when I get home.

[Mski]

You keep saying the Sabres can sign guys like Richards and Gaborik, but they aren't. In fact, they're only big FA get since Vaneks contract was Ville ****ing Leino. Not Vanek's fault tha Leino sucks, but Pegulaa has said money is no object and yet we have one big FA in his two seasons. That would fly against your assertion that Vanek's contract isn't keeping us from signing guys.

As far as what I would have said if Vanek hadn't gone for the puck, you are basing am argument on your guess as to what my reaction would be to a situation that never actually occurred. That's just absurd. Vane has to a) get the puck first or b) not attempt to make that play. He ****ed up. You are defending the guy for taking an offensive zone penalty to create a 4 on 3 PP when the team had a two goal lead. That's just as absurd. I can't believe you don't see how ****ing ridiculous that is

And I've been a Bills and Sabres can far too long to enjoy a brief moment of optimism be size they are always followed by sole-crushing moments of reality. I'll enjoy it when the things you said start happening consistently. The Sabres are in better shape than the Bills, but I also have a higher standard for them. They should be farther along than they are.
they brought in regier and erhof, and went hard after richards. Richards just wanted to go to NY, not that the sabres couldnt afford him, or tried to get him.

[gebobs]

Argh I can't argue that without seeing the play again and I already deleted off my DVR. I'll have to see of I can find the video online when I get home.
NHL.com

http://www.nhl.com/ice/boxscore.htm?id=2012020014

[OpIv37]

they brought in regier and erhof, and went hard after richards. Richards just wanted to go to NY, not that the sabres couldnt afford him, or tried to get him.

How do you know that the Rangers didnt offer him more and the Sabres couldn't afford to match because of the cap situation?

[gebobs]

OK...here's the way I see it.

Here you see Hodgson pick up the loose puck in the slot and gets it out of danger. Well played.

16231

[gebobs]

Unfortunately, he has trouble getting momentum and Coburn catches him from behind, knocks the stick out of his hands

16232

[gebobs]

Coburn gets the puck nicely to Foster. Hodgson goes to the bench. Vanek makes a swing. Pominville will stays on too.

16233

[gebobs]

Foster sends it up to Voracek who wheels in along the Sabres blue line. At this point, it's a 3-on-2 with Vanek and Pominville trying to cover up.

16234

[gebobs]

Sekera follows Voracek. Pominville continues into the slot to cover the pass to Read. Ehrhoff is down low guarding for a pass to Courturier. Vanek stays out top to cover the point. Grigorenko, coming on for Hodgson, rushes in but doesn't turn to cover high until he's inside the faceoff circle.

16235

[gebobs]

Voracek tries to feather a pass through Sekera and Pominville to Read on the back door but it deflects off of Sekera well out of the reach of Vanek )(who is obviously gassed) and right to Foster at the left point.

16236

[gebobs]

At that point, Vanek has no prayer to cover and Foster let's it go. Typically not a problem from that far out, but Pommers and Ehrhoff forget all about Couturier and let him get behind them for the tip in.

16237

[gebobs]

Plenty of blame to go all around on that one. Hodgson for getting caught. Grigorenko for not knowing his position. Ehrhoff for letting Courturier slip in. Vanek for doing the big wheelhouse when he's spent.

Why the eff do these pictures change to links?

[SkateZilla]

wouldnt a link to a video with time stamps be easier than 7 or 8 messages?

[OpIv37]

No doubt there is blame to go around. I never said there wasn't.

The way it looks to me is at the end of that play, there are two Flyers on the blue line. Vanek isn't in position to cover either one of them. The Flyers player does the smart thing and gets the puck to the player further from Vanek, and as you can see in your #7, the puck is already gone and Vanek is still a full step from even getting his stick in the lane. It looks like Vanek cheated too much toward the half board and didn't have the time or the gas to get back.

[Electrici]

in other unimportant news, the Sabres won the hockey game.

[Skooby]

How you debate wins is beyond me, yeah there were errors made on both sides but WTF?

[Skooby]

Uhh, no. It would suggest that maybe Toronto is not as big a joke as I thought, but one game in a 48 game season never proves anything.

Toronto won 5-2, so step away from the edge:

http://scores.espn.go.com/nhl/recap?gameId=400442510

Your statement is also a little hypocritical based on the Sabres 2 first games / wins.

[OpIv37]

Toronto won 5-2, so step away from the edge:

http://scores.espn.go.com/nhl/recap?gameId=400442510

Your statement is also a little hypocritical based on the Sabres 2 first games / wins.


hypocritical how?

My statement about the Sabres is that they won 2 games but two games in a 48 game season isn't proof of anything, especially given that they are still showing some of the problems in the past.

My statement about the Leafs is that they looked awful against the Sabres but if they win tonight, they may not be as bad as I thought because 1 game in a 48 game season isn't proof of anything.

Seems pretty damn consistent to me.

[OpIv37]

How you debate wins is beyond me, yeah there were errors made on both sides but WTF?

I'm not debating wins.

Remember last year when the Sabres started out 10-5 before sucking balls and missing the playoffs?

Remember last year when the Bills started 5-2 before finishing 6-10?

Flaws in the team can be-and often are-still revealed in wins. We've been over this 100 times.

[Skooby]

I'm not debating wins.

Remember last year when the Sabres started out 10-5 before sucking balls and missing the playoffs?

Remember last year when the Bills started 5-2 before finishing 6-10?

Flaws in the team can be-and often are-still revealed in wins. We've been over this 100 times.

The Sabres are getting the calls, bounces & plays needed to win. How in the world do you expect a NHL team with less than a organized week of practice to come out & be perfect ?

[OpIv37]

The Sabres are getting the calls, bounces & plays needed to win. How in the world do you expect a NHL team with less than a organized week of practice to come out & be perfect ?

how the hell do you expect a Buffalo team to keep getting the calls, bounces and plays?

[Skooby]

hypocritical how?

My statement about the Sabres is that they won 2 games but two games in a 48 game season isn't proof of anything, especially given that they are still showing some of the problems in the past.

My statement about the Leafs is that they looked awful against the Sabres but if they win tonight, they may not be as bad as I thought because 1 game in a 48 game season isn't proof of anything.

Seems pretty damn consistent to me.

If one game never proves anything, how is your whole argument about Vanek failing to live up to his contract hold water right now? The man had a 5 point performance in the first game, out of the 5 goals scored & we won 5-2. Could Vanek have possibly messed up more than costing us 2 goals scored in that game if it's all the opponent scored ? That leaves the Toronto game & 1 game doesn't prove nothing, right? So Vanek hasn't failed to live up to anything yet because he has only had one bad game possible.

You better wait until there is something to complain about. We have 2 conference wins without OT so how much more can you ask for ?? Geez.

[Skooby]

how the hell do you expect a Buffalo team to keep getting the calls, bounces and plays?

I don't any team but the whole league has this crash Miller thing going & you'll get a goal thing running, it's not getting them anything but a fist / head-pounding.

[OpIv37]

If one game never proves anything, how is your whole argument about Vanek failing to live up to his contract hold water right now? The man had a 5 point performance in the first game, out of the 5 goals scored & we won 5-2. Could Vanek have possibly messed up more than costing us 2 goals scored in that game if it's all the opponent scored ? That leaves the Toronto game & 1 game doesn't prove nothing, right? So Vanek hasn't failed to live up to anything yet because he has only had one bad game possible.

You better wait until there is something to complain about after we have 2 conference wins without OT, geez.

Here's the problem: Vanek's career has spanned more than two games. You are letting one 5 point performance (in which Vanek still made some terrible plays) overshadow the previous 4 years.

And teams are different than individual players.

[Skooby]

Here's the problem: Vanek's career has spanned more than two games. You are letting one 5 point performance (in which Vanek still made some terrible plays) overshadow the previous 4 years.

And teams are different than individual players.

If Vanek continues to perform anywhere near his first game, his contract would be cheap. I understand the whole previous year argument but your current argument involves his play in wins, one game being a monster game & another by your own admission 1 game doesn't make or break you.

The team around him over the previous 4 years wore maxi-pads & bled all season. This team has thrown more hands in 2 games than we had through 1/4 of last season, they've manned up. You want to win in the NHL today, beat your opponent's body & score to crush their spirit, the Toronto game was 58:00 minutes of that kind of hockey. Pepper in a few errors here & there (huge d-giveaway) but in general a good all around team effort.

[OpIv37]

Well we are straying from the Vanek topic, but I guess we were already off topic since this was a game day thread.

I will admit that the team has been much more physical, and that is the major reason why they were able to win the first two games.

However, the season is 48 games in 99 days. It's basically a game every other day with a couple extra days peppered in. Will they have the energy to sustain that level of effort? Can they do it without injury? Just like with Vanek, two games isn't enough to convince me. We've heard the "we need to be more physical" line from the FO for the last 5 years with no results until the last two games. So, I'll believe it when they prove it.

[gebobs]

Just like with Vanek, two games isn't enough to convince me.
On this we can agree. I just want to be optimistic though. I'm sick of having nothing but shee-ite to root for.

I'll be at the game tonight. Sec. 106, Row J.

16240

[gebobs]

No doubt there is blame to go around. I never said there wasn't.

The way it looks to me is at the end of that play, there are two Flyers on the blue line. Vanek isn't in position to cover either one of them. The Flyers player does the smart thing and gets the puck to the player further from Vanek, and as you can see in your #7, the puck is already gone and Vanek is still a full step from even getting his stick in the lane. It looks like Vanek cheated too much toward the half board and didn't have the time or the gas to get back.
This isn't basketball. Let's be clear, the pass was intended for Read and deflected off Sekera's skate to Foster. It wasn't a "smart" play. It was a lucky play. I'm sure you understand how difficult it is to track a bounce as oppose to a straight pass. Vanek did all he could here. He doesn't deserve anything more than the least bit of responsibility for that goal. I'd put it like this...

1. Ehrhoff for not tying up Courturier.
2. Grigorenko for doing nothing.
3. Coho for getting stripped.

I really can't see how you can give Vanek anything but the slightest responsibility. He was gassed. He had to stay on. At that point, all you can hope for is if that bounce gets within his reach.

[gebobs]

wouldnt a link to a video with time stamps be easier than 7 or 8 messages?
This was from NHL.com, not YouTube. I can only provide a link to the recap, not the video, let alone time stamps.

[Skooby]

Well we are straying from the Vanek topic, but I guess we were already off topic since this was a game day thread.

I will admit that the team has been much more physical, and that is the major reason why they were able to win the first two games.

However, the season is 48 games in 99 days. It's basically a game every other day with a couple extra days peppered in. Will they have the energy to sustain that level of effort? Can they do it without injury? Just like with Vanek, two games isn't enough to convince me. We've heard the "we need to be more physical" line from the FO for the last 5 years with no results until the last two games. So, I'll believe it when they prove it.

Yeah, no problem here. I'd like to see them continue to play physical as well, wearing down opponents.