Thank goodness someone at the Buffalo News knows how to write an article. This takes a critical position and backs it up with player quotes and statistics. If Bucky or Jerry knew how to write this well, the News might not seem like such a baselessly embittered piss-ant organization.
Maybe I'm approaching this the wrong way, but 13 all season doesn't strike me as terrible.
You have 246 minutes all season played under that condition -- the last minute of a period (3x82). That's the equivalent of about four games. They allowed a little less than three goals a game -- so you'd expect to see about 11 goals scored in those four hypothetical games.
The argument can be made that there's more emphasis on preventing a goal in the final minute, I guess.
Yeah, it's an incredibly stupid point meant to fit a preconceived narrative. 246 minutes represents exactly 5% of the season so a team that gives up 230 goals would be expected to give up 11.5 goals in any 5% segment. I haven't looked at his numbers, but I'm guessing he includes goals that opponents put into an empty net in the last minute of the game, so it's possible that the team actually performed better than one should expect.
I'd have to see numbers comparing the Sabres last minute goals vs the rest of the league to be able to form a reasonable opinion about what it means. For all we know they could have been the best in the league. :p
No kidding. They were unbearable to watch before February because nobody on the team cared or tried. Whether that was more the coach's fault or the players', I don't know, but something major has to change with the culture of this team.
They were unbearable, but not because nobody cared or tried. I think some players went outside the system to make plays they weren't really capable of, and in turn the team broke down defensively quite often. I think they care a lot, but perhaps don't have the mental discipline or are really frustrated playing Ruff's system, and try too much that ends up being counter-productive.
I don't think any player said anything, despite what TBN tried really hard to make of Vanek and Roy's comments, that amounted to a smoking gun. But, there wasn't a whole lot of defending Ruff either, aside from the usual, "it's not the coach, it's me/us". I'm still suspicious that the team has grown tired of Ruff's system, style, or both.
They also did a terrible job of playing the talent they had. Is there any reason your leading scorer and only constant offensive forward should be sixth in ESTOI (and he was averaging less during the slump)?
A player can only play so much during a game. Pommers is both on the PK and PP, if you expect him to lead the team in ES minutes too that can wear a player down to the point he's not productive at all
They were unbearable, but not because nobody cared or tried. I think some players went outside the system to make plays they weren't really capable of, and in turn the team broke down defensively quite often. I think they care a lot, but perhaps don't have the mental discipline or are really frustrated playing Ruff's system, and try too much that ends up being counter-productive.
I don't think any player said anything, despite what TBN tried really hard to make of Vanek and Roy's comments, that amounted to a smoking gun. But, there wasn't a whole lot of defending Ruff either, aside from the usual, "it's not the coach, it's me/us". I'm still suspicious that the team has grown tired of Ruff's system, style, or both.
Okay, they might have tried. But it seemed like about a 70% effort level for a lot of the guys.
Thank goodness someone at the Buffalo News knows how to write an article. This takes a critical position and backs it up with player quotes and statistics. If Bucky or Jerry knew how to write this well, the News might not seem like such a baselessly embittered piss-ant organization.
I dunno. Quoting Derek as saying "yeah" and making it sound like he was confirming John's premise seems very suspect to me.
Every Sabre article in the News written Vogl-style? No thanks.
It's quite striking to see how people just don't even want to hear anything they disagree with anymore. Just shut people up. Sign of the times I suppose.
Quote:
From final-minute collapses to folding under adversity, from zero confidence to not knowing how to win, the Sabres spent almost half of 2011-12 feeling inferior and small. They felt mentally weak.
"Yeah," alternate captain Derek Roy admitted. "You've got to go out and make a difference. You've got to want the puck. You've got to want to change and score a goal and be the difference in the game. I thought that's something we needed to do."
I dunno. Quoting Derek as saying "yeah" and making it sound like he was confirming John's premise seems very suspect to me.
Every Sabre article in the News written Vogl-style? No thanks.
It's quite striking to see how people just don't even want to hear anything they disagree with anymore. Just shut people up. Sign of the times I suppose.
No, the rest of the Derek Roy quote was meaningful, and supportive of the thesis. You're not going to get pro-athletes coming out and saying things as starkly as John presents them, but Derek Roy's quote in total definitely makes it sound like the problem with the team was mental.
No, the rest of the Derek Roy quote was meaningful, and supportive of the thesis. You're not going to get pro-athletes coming out and saying things as starkly as John presents them, but Derek Roy's quote in total definitely makes it sound like the problem with the team was mental.
The problem is that you don't get the context of the question that Roy said "Yeah" to.
A player can only play so much during a game. Pommers is both on the PK and PP, if you expect him to lead the team in ES minutes too that can wear a player down to the point he's not productive at all
And you're missing the point. Pominville was our only consistent offensive forward all season, but his minutes don't reflect that. Looking at the Sabres icetime breakdown for the season, you'd think that we were a three line team for the whole year, not just the last 20 games of the season. We had one line of offense for the first 40 games and Lindy straight up did not change his coaching style to reflect that. For the first half of the year, the right decision would've been to cut Pominville's PK time and gas him and Vanek at ES + PP, because they were literally the only dangerous forwards on a night to night basis. That didn't happen, and as a result, we left points on the board.
b. did not stand up the following couple of days when our goalies were run again, actually, I think Ernhoff did once. And the first game back for Miller he was run again.
c. They were called out on the carpet by every hockey player, writer and fan after the Lucic incident as a bunch of pansies.
d. They collasped the entire middle of the season. I think we were something like 15-5-5 before the Lucic incident, and we know how strong we finished, so that middle stretch (40 games) was horrible.
Face it, this team is a bunch of pansies they way it is assembled. You can call it mental weakness or whatever but the bottom line is; "you're a professional hockey play, you're tough!" Friggin little guy Danny Briere speared Ovie because they were taking liberties with him, you want to wonder why he's an elite talent?!?!?!!? Paul Newman: "Put a stick in his side, let 'em know you're there!" The way this team is assembled, it has no balls.....Vanek, Roy, Stafford and Pomms....not a set between them. Vanek takes punishment but hardly ever dishes any, time for a change, get rid of at least half this offseason.
Maybe I'm approaching this the wrong way, but 13 all season doesn't strike me as terrible.
You have 246 minutes all season played under that condition -- the last minute of a period (3x82). That's the equivalent of about four games. They allowed a little less than three goals a game -- so you'd expect to see about 11 goals scored in those four hypothetical games.
The argument can be made that there's more emphasis on preventing a goal in the final minute, I guess.
That was my thought too. I don't know how to get stats like this for other teams other than by doing it manually, going game by game. That seems like a lot of work to do it for 30 teams -- but I decided to do it for at least one other team just to see. So, I chose Vancouver, which won the President's Trophy this year with 111 points. According to my quick review of all 82 Vancouver box scores, they gave up 12 goals in the final minute of a period -- only 1 fewer than the Sabres. This assumes I didn't miss any, which I easily could have. Also, although I didn't keep track of this, it seemed like they gave up a huge number of goals in the 18th minute of periods - way more than in the 19th minute.
Bottom line - this is really shoddy journalism.
EDIT: Nothwithstanding the foregoing, I agree that the Sabres were plagued by a losing mentality for several months. Once they got back into a winning mind-set, their record was excellent.
And you're missing the point. Pominville was our only consistent offensive forward all season, but his minutes don't reflect that. Looking at the Sabres icetime breakdown for the season, you'd think that we were a three line team for the whole year, not just the last 20 games of the season. We had one line of offense for the first 40 games and Lindy straight up did not change his coaching style to reflect that. For the first half of the year, the right decision would've been to cut Pominville's PK time and gas him and Vanek at ES + PP, because they were literally the only dangerous forwards on a night to night basis. That didn't happen, and as a result, we left points on the board.
Why? Poms is one of our best penalty killers. Under your strategy, we might have given up more PP goals and lost even more games. How do you know you're right?
And you're missing the point. Pominville was our only consistent offensive forward all season, but his minutes don't reflect that. Looking at the Sabres icetime breakdown for the season, you'd think that we were a three line team for the whole year, not just the last 20 games of the season. We had one line of offense for the first 40 games and Lindy straight up did not change his coaching style to reflect that. For the first half of the year, the right decision would've been to cut Pominville's PK time and gas him and Vanek at ES + PP, because they were literally the only dangerous forwards on a night to night basis. That didn't happen, and as a result, we left points on the board.
Like Dire Wolf said, once you take Pommers Pk minutes away you are weakening the PK. Sure we seemed offensively challenged at times, but we have to have balance in our game, and weaking our PK for a couple more ES shifts from Pommers doesn't do that.
The problem is that you don't get the context of the question that Roy said "Yeah" to.
I don't care what Derek said "yeah" too, and it probably wouldn't even help for John to tell us. What John gave us was a longer quote that stands on its own in support of the article's thesis.
