I think so, there was a time where I would have agreed with you. However, is this team could manage to snatch the 8th spot I think we could do some damage. This team has a proven track record against Philly in the postseason. Then again I do think the Sabres 2-3 years down the road has a brighter future and more potential than this years team.
Either way come this April I would like to be either A) sitting in HSBC OR B) partying at the plaza
I find it interesting that only the 8th spot is bantered around as being reachable. If the Sabres get hot, the 7th seed is definitely within reach. Heck, it's in reach just with the games in hand.
I find it interesting that only the 8th spot is bantered around as being reachable. If the Sabres get hot, the 7th seed is definitely within reach. Heck, it's in reach just with the games in hand.
Hopefully, I just didn't curse them...
With the way the Rags are playing anything is possible. 6 teams has a legit shot at the final 2 spots right now. If the spread stays the samw through the deadline I would rule out the Leafs and possibly the Panthers. If we win in Sunrise tomorrow that would seriously dampen the Cats chances.
I find it funny how people think were better off without Roy. Well people have their agendas and look for anything to justify them. Someone with an anti-Roy agenda sees how well the team is playing and see it as the team being better without Roy. People who aren't looking for any reason to crucify players they don't like see how well the teams playing and realize that guys like Vanek and Pominville are producing and playing the way they should have been when Roy was healthy. Stafford's kept his good play up. Also guys like Ennis, Gerbe, and bottom six guys are playing much better. The D's been much better. Myers has been much better, Morrisonn and Weber are playing well together as a pairing.
Ignore all those facts though and just keep thinking were playing well because Roy's out. As great as your boy Vanek is playing if he wouldn't of had his head out of his ass at the beginning of the season we might not have had such a bad start. I bet that fact is convenient for you to ignore though too.
G - the continued fight in the team
B - the continued inconsistency this season
U - Miller on 2 of the 4 goals
Am I in the minority here? I don't want the Sabres to make the playoffs and get rolled in 4 and hurt our draft position. This team is absolutely positively not good enough to make a legit run at the cup. Is it talent? Is it drive? Is it heart? Is it coaching?
All the above?
Why root for draft position when that drafter player probably won't be on the roster for next years team?
With the ownership change coming and what T-Pegs has been saying, things will be changing for the better down at HSBC Arena. So why not go for it, make a round in the playoffs (where anything can happen) and make some cash for the home games they get.
It should be Nieds, but judging by the fact he was the skater of choice on a 3-on-3...I guess Byron will go down
Granted, it's not the worst thing for Byron's development to spend more time in the AHL, but the Sabres are better off with him in the lineup than Nieds.
Even as a healthy scratch, it's better for the Sabres playoffs hopes if he stays up. That allows Ruff to give players "maintenance days" and still have enough forwards to conduct proper practices. If a forward is injured, Ruff doesn't have to dress a dman at forward if one can't arrive in time from Portland. For me, it's a no-brainer to have a full 23 man roster at this time of year when my team is fighting for a playoff spot.
Give Connolly some credit. He made Leopolds GTG happen by not touching the pass between his legs and he played great 2 way hockey for the last 30 minutes. I know he's all but gone, but we will miss his playmaking at some point in time.
Also, Vanek has inched his way back into the top 15 forwards in the game. He's found his role and he's excelled at it. Great Job.
Vanek is playing great, but he's nowhere near a top 15 forward in the game:
In no particular order:
1) Stamkos
2) Crosby
3) Ovechkin
4) Malkin
5) D Sedin
6) H Sedin
7) Datsyuk
8) Zetterberg
9) St. Louis
10) B Richards
11) Parise
12) Getzlaf
13) Perry
14) E Staal
15) Kesler
16) Kopitar
17) Eriksson
18) Carter
19) Giroux
20) Thornton
21) Nash
22) Heatley
23) Iginla
24) Backstrom
etc, etc
There's probably about 20 players on the list I would take over Vanek without a doubt in my mind and probably another 10-20 I would probably take over him. I'd call Vanek a borderline top 40 forward.
I find it funny how people think were better off without Roy. Well people have their agendas and look for anything to justify them. Someone with an anti-Roy agenda sees how well the team is playing and see it as the team being better without Roy. People who aren't looking for any reason to crucify players they don't like see how well the teams playing and realize that guys like Vanek and Pominville are producing and playing the way they should have been when Roy was healthy. Stafford's kept his good play up. Also guys like Ennis, Gerbe, and bottom six guys are playing much better. The D's been much better. Myers has been much better, Morrisonn and Weber are playing well together as a pairing.
Ignore all those facts though and just keep thinking were playing well because Roy's out. As great as your boy Vanek is playing if he wouldn't of had his head out of his ass at the beginning of the season we might not have had such a bad start. I bet that fact is convenient for you to ignore though too.
These people are probably the same people that thought we were better off without Briere in 05-06 as well when the team got hot after he got hurt. Similar circumstances, too. Briere was carrying the offense and no one else was doing much of anything before he got hurt, then the team rallied and went on a tear.
There are so many different things that go into winning and losing that looking at one player's absence/presence is absurd.
These people are probably the same people that thought we were better off without Briere in 05-06 as well when the team got hot after he got hurt. Similar circumstances, too. Briere was carrying the offense and no one else was doing much of anything before he got hurt, then the team rallied and went on a tear.
There are so many different things that go into winning and losing that looking at one player's absence/presence is absurd.
I couldn't agree more, and was going to use a similar analogy as the Briere one. And that's not a heartfelt defense of Roy - it's a fact of the matter. SO MANY factors go into the game's outcome (small and large factors) that, as you said, focusing on one particular player being there or not doesn't make sense.
Good:
- Stafford
- the PP continues to look for offense and generate. No more ****** perimeter passes. Make the needed passes and shoot for goal.
- Vanek
- The Grier forecheck on the goal
Bad:
- Speshil Kneads as the choice on the 3on3. YES, the session was 20 seconds long, but you need to have some more speed on in that scenario IMO
Ugly:
- Downie
- Rollie's DIVE and then loss of composure
______________
A solid win. Absolutely on fire, and I hope it continues.
I find it funny how people think were better off without Roy. Well people have their agendas and look for anything to justify them. Someone with an anti-Roy agenda sees how well the team is playing and see it as the team being better without Roy. People who aren't looking for any reason to crucify players they don't like see how well the teams playing and realize that guys like Vanek and Pominville are producing and playing the way they should have been when Roy was healthy. Stafford's kept his good play up. Also guys like Ennis, Gerbe, and bottom six guys are playing much better. The D's been much better. Myers has been much better, Morrisonn and Weber are playing well together as a pairing.
Ignore all those facts though and just keep thinking were playing well because Roy's out. As great as your boy Vanek is playing if he wouldn't of had his head out of his ass at the beginning of the season we might not have had such a bad start. I bet that fact is convenient for you to ignore though too.
which is exactly what you are doing.
Fact: Vanek can't play the way he has been playing lately...with Roy. Vanek and Ruff have both admitted as much.
I don't think the team is BETTER without Roy. I think the team is the same with or without him.
BUT...Vanek IS BETTER without Roy.
The 2nd bolded is just an acknowledgement of you having your own bias.
Give Connolly some credit. He made Leopolds GTG happen by not touching the pass between his legs and he played great 2 way hockey for the last 30 minutes. I know he's all but gone, but we will miss his playmaking at some point in time.
Also, Vanek has inched his way back into the top 15 forwards in the game. He's found his role and he's excelled at it. Great Job.
Pretty amazing - Vanek has more points (just barely) than: Nash, Heatley, Toews, Briere, Thornton and a bunch of other big names
Vanek has carried this team offensively since roy went out. he deserves a lot of credit, he's just under a point per game now. staff has also been great when healthy.
I cant belive the way this guy has been playing he is finally showing he cares about more than scoring goals .This guy looks like a much more complete player this season he wants to win and is showing more grit all over the ice and not just in front of the oppositions net!While he will never win a selke he is starting to mature into a leader .
I cant belive the way this guy has been playing he is finally showing he cares about more than scoring goals .This guy looks like a much more complete player this season he wants to win and is showing more grit all over the ice and not just in front of the oppositions net!While he will never win a selke he is starting to mature into a leader .
Maybe he is finally getting a chance to show he can do more than score goals? Saying he only cared about scoring goals before is naive. He's been the primary puck handler when he's on the ice now, giving your best player the puck more = success.
I don't think the team is BETTER without Roy. I think the team is the same with or without him.
Funny, I said the same thing when Roy got hurt, and I was told (not by you) NO NO NO, you are so wrong, this team will get even worse. At the time of his injury the team was 14-17-4 after 35 games. I think after 70 games they will be around 28-34-8. Well the team is on pace to be even better than that ... Interesting. But I am sure it has everything to do with every reason in the book besides... This team is the same with or without him. I've said it before, Roy is an asset to the team, just not a difference maker.
van and staff since Roy injury are both OVER PPG. and that's in about half the total games Roy played this year. so its a fair measurement IMO
If they keep it up this team will make the playoffs. Let's also not forget that at the same time Ennis began finding his niche and Connolly got injured, allowing other people to fill in ice-time.
Here's a stat for you. The only guy to get less 5 on 5 ice time vs. Tampa than Tim Connolly was Cody McCormick. Is Ruff is sending him the message with reduced ice-time? Just over 12 mins. total for Connolly. Here's hoping.
If they can win without Roy and Connolly, then I'm not willing to write off the 'Rochester Core' yet. Just some of it.
Fact: Vanek can't play the way he has been playing lately...with Roy. Vanek and Ruff have both admitted as much.
I don't think the team is BETTER without Roy. I think the team is the same with or without him.
BUT...Vanek IS BETTER without Roy.
The 2nd bolded is just an acknowledgement of you having your own bias.
agreed.
it can't be just luck that three of our struggling wingers start producing when Roy is out.
I don't say that the team is better without roy. But I'd say Roy doesn't make this team better.
It seems that vanek and miller have a way bigger impact to the team than roy has.
Another point of view:
If Roy is out, the other seem to think the game is up to them.
when roy is in the lineup the others might think thats up to roy....
