HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Stop Avoiding the Subject...We Need A Center

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-04-2011, 06:01 PM
  #76
ShaPow
Registered User
 
ShaPow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
Yet another Roy detractor trying to pin team results on one player. Miller doesn't deserve some share of the blame for that two-week span where he was struggling? Leino doesn't deserve some share of the blame for being lost for the first two months of the season? Or Stafford for not producing during the recent slump? Or Boyes for having three (3) ES points in 21 games? Or for Ennis struggling early, getting injured, and not scoring his first point until the calendar said December? Or any number of injuries that resulted in players like Myers, Hecht, and Ennis being replaced by AHL-level players?

I think you're the one who needs to open his eyes. The world is many shades of gray, even if you want to make this out to be a black and white issue.



Roy was on the ice when they scored the game-winning goal, and it was his forecheck that created the defensive-zone turnover by Nashville, and he had the primary assist on that goal. That goal was scored at 15:45 of the 3rd period. You don't call being on the ice with under 5 minutes of a one-goal game as being "crunch time" minutes? He was also on the ice when Legwand scored with 1:15 left after Stafford just missed an empty net. Remember that? That's crunch time, too. But why let the facts get in the way of a good story, right?
I'm talking about the final draws of the game. "Our best center" wasn't on the ice, even with Gaustad out with an injury.

As for his forecheck on the game-winner, hip-hip-hooray. It only became the game winning goal because Roy wandered almost all the way to the opposite faceoff dot on the opposite side of the ice that Legwand scored his goal from. That actually could be the reason why Ruff didn't have Roy out there for the final few draws preventing the tying goal, again, minus Gaustad. Roy was in no man's land, leaving Legwand all alone. Watch it again.

Some of you hfboard all-stars my want to ask yourselves if you actually know what you're watching before treating the new guy like a peon.

ShaPow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2011, 07:06 PM
  #77
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,094
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
I'm talking about the final draws of the game. "Our best center" wasn't on the ice, even with Gaustad out with an injury.

As for his forecheck on the game-winner, hip-hip-hooray. It only became the game winning goal because Roy wandered almost all the way to the opposite faceoff dot on the opposite side of the ice that Legwand scored his goal from. That actually could be the reason why Ruff didn't have Roy out there for the final few draws preventing the tying goal, again, minus Gaustad. Roy was in no man's land, leaving Legwand all alone. Watch it again.
How is Roy's responsibility the offensive RW dot. Watch the play again. Stafford gets caught on his LW, while Ennis ended up over at the RW. Inexplicably, Drew tries to make it back to his RW spot (even though Ennis was over there already) and tries to point Roy to Legwand. Too late. If Stafford just stays over with Legwand the goal doesn't happen.

Stafford drifting away from Legwand and into no-man's land led to that goal more than any other single play on that goal.

EDIT: And a beauty of an assist there by McNabb, as well. Really put it on Legwand's tape beautifully.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Some of you hfboard all-stars my want to ask yourselves if you actually know what you're watching before treating the new guy like a peon.
Who said anything about your tenure on the boards? I surely didn't. Already creating arguments out of thin air? You'll fit in great here.

I'm trying to have a rational conversation about what seems to be a pet issue for you, at least based on your early posts:posts ripping Roy ratio. I asked you to what you attribute all those other factors that contributed to a better second half, but you seem to want to rest on you "Isn't it obvious this team is better without Roy" argument. No, it isn't obvious. You're ripping other posters for not answering your questions; so, why don't you answer mine?

I don't think anyone's arguing Roy's been great so far this season. But I'm not buying the whole "Trade him just cuz" logic.


Last edited by Zip15: 12-04-2011 at 07:12 PM.
Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2011, 07:14 PM
  #78
SoFFacet
Registered User
 
SoFFacet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Are you excluded from answering direct questions? Or are you just a critic on other poster's opinions?
What? You are the one pushing a positive claim in this case. I don't have to share my opinion or even have an opinion to be qualified to point out the shortcomings of yours. Furthermore, why would you care what it is? So you can shift attention away from defending your own opinion by criticizing mine?

SoFFacet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2011, 09:44 PM
  #79
ShaPow
Registered User
 
ShaPow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
How is Roy's responsibility the offensive RW dot. Watch the play again. Stafford gets caught on his LW, while Ennis ended up over at the RW. Inexplicably, Drew tries to make it back to his RW spot (even though Ennis was over there already) and tries to point Roy to Legwand. Too late. If Stafford just stays over with Legwand the goal doesn't happen.

Stafford drifting away from Legwand and into no-man's land led to that goal more than any other single play on that goal.
Roy's responsibility was definitely not the LW offensive dot, which is where he decided to go. He needs to cover that passing lane through the slot. He's the centerman. The right wing covers the point, which is wear Stafford went.

When Stafford moved to cover the point shot, which Roy was aware of, as it almost looks like Roy gestures to Stafford to continue to that area of the ice, Roy has to know that that leaves Legwand all by himself. Instead, he overloads the offensive left side of the ice, leaving Legwand open for an easy one.
Quote:
EDIT: And a beauty of an assist there by McNabb, as well. Really put it on Legwand's tape beautifully.

Who said anything about your tenure on the boards? I surely didn't. Already creating arguments out of thin air? You'll fit in great here.

I'm trying to have a rational conversation about what seems to be a pet issue for you, at least based on your early posts:posts ripping Roy ratio. I asked you to what you attribute all those other factors that contributed to a better second half, but you seem to want to rest on you "Isn't it obvious this team is better without Roy" argument. No, it isn't obvious. You're ripping other posters for not answering your questions; so, why don't you answer mine?
Fair enough. What about my answer don't you like? I can add more reasons, if that's what you're asking for.

Against Nashville, is it not significant that even minus Gaustad, Ruff would not use Roy (50% on draws for the night, 4 for 8; Hecht was at 43%, 10 for 23; and Ellis was at 0% on 1 draw attempt) with 1 point in the standings on the line? Roy was the best faceoff man at Ruff's disposal. It's almost like....Roy, Ruff's favorite, did something wrong in his final shift that lead to a goal and had to watch because of it.

The Sabres look quite unimpressive on most nights, no? The Sabres lack at the center position, right? The Sabres are generally a pretty soft team, correct? The forward, up until last night, that's played more minutes than anyone else during 5 on 5 hockey this season has been Derek Roy. Derek Roy is the Sabres least physical forward. He avoids all possible contact. He avoids the blue paint. The Sabres best player thinks that Roy is a detriment to his game. Roy's presence, for whatever reason, makes Ruff play him for over 18 and a half minutes in even strength ice time a game. Luke Adam, the rookie centerman that can actually play with the Sabres best forward, has 1 more point than Derek Roy, and 3 more goals, in over 5 minutes LESS ice time per game.

Derek Roy's playoff numbers (10 points in 41 games, only 7 goals) are the numbers that actually tell the story of what kind of player he is and has been. Not the regular season, in which he's on the ice more than just about everyone, in the past, pissing off the teams most talented player.

Have you noticed that Roy has no chemistry with anyone? Pominville and Vanek have chemistry. Hecht is a nice compliment. Gaustad and Gerbe have chemistry. They typically stick together. Adam has had chemistry with Vanek, Pominville, and now even Kassian and Leino. What about Roy? Who has Roy had chemistry with?

You want to know a big reason why our team is more often than not a soft, underachieving, unispired, mistake-ridden bunch? That guy that's played more minutes than almost everyone is all of those things. When he wasn't in the lineup last year, the team, way more often than not, wasn't any of those things. He's not the only problem, but he is one of the biggest. The coach that's heavily leaning on him and even put a letter on his jersey is another one.

ShaPow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2011, 09:50 PM
  #80
ShaPow
Registered User
 
ShaPow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoFFacet View Post
What? You are the one pushing a positive claim in this case. I don't have to share my opinion or even have an opinion to be qualified to point out the shortcomings of yours. Furthermore, why would you care what it is? So you can shift attention away from defending your own opinion by criticizing mine?
This is a hockey conversation. Not a psychology class.

ShaPow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2011, 11:02 PM
  #81
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,094
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Roy's responsibility was definitely not the LW offensive dot, which is where he decided to go. He needs to cover that passing lane through the slot. He's the centerman. The right wing covers the point, which is wear Stafford went.

When Stafford moved to cover the point shot, which Roy was aware of, as it almost looks like Roy gestures to Stafford to continue to that area of the ice, Roy has to know that that leaves Legwand all by himself. Instead, he overloads the offensive left side of the ice, leaving Legwand open for an easy one. Fair enough. What about my answer don't you like? I can add more reasons, if that's what you're asking for.
Yet the puck didn't go right through the slot. It went from the left point to McNabb's stick, to Legwand's tape. The only way Roy touches the puck is if he's standing four feet in front of Miller, which would be odd positioning. Stafford didn't have to do what he did, especially when it was 6-on-5. Ennis and Roy were in control of the situation. The rotation wasn't necessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Against Nashville, is it not significant that even minus Gaustad, Ruff would not use Roy (50% on draws for the night, 4 for 8; Hecht was at 43%, 10 for 23; and Ellis was at 0% on 1 draw attempt) with 1 point in the standings on the line? Roy was the best faceoff man at Ruff's disposal. It's almost like....Roy, Ruff's favorite, did something wrong in his final shift that lead to a goal and had to watch because of it.
No, not really. He kept Hecht, maybe the ultimate Ruff favorite, on the ice for the final 95 seconds. Jochen’s a better defensive player than Roy; you won’t get any argument from me on that one. Ruff chose to keep on the ice the team’s best defensive forward. I don’t find too much odd about that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
The Sabres look quite unimpressive on most nights, no? The Sabres lack at the center position, right? The Sabres are generally a pretty soft team, correct? The forward, up until last night, that's played more minutes than anyone else during 5 on 5 hockey this season has been Derek Roy.
Given that you concede that we lack at center—there are, in fact, only two players who’ve played center on a regular basis on the entire roster—and only one of them can be described as a top-6 player, why are you surprised that Roy leads the team in ESTOI? Should we just play three wings up front—wait, we do that with two of four lines, badumching! I just don’t see anything remarkable about what you’re saying. Again, I think you’re attempting to attribute team malaise almost exclusively to Roy.

CORRECTION: Leino actually leads the team in ESTOI (14:03/game). In fact, Roy (14:00), Stafford (13:58), and Vanek (13:52) and Leino are within 11 seconds of each other in ESTOI, and Pominville (13:14, but leads team in TOI/G) isn’t far behind. Are you going to allocate any blame to them.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Derek Roy is the Sabres least physical forward. He avoids all possible contact. He avoids the blue paint. The Sabres best player thinks that Roy is a detriment to his game. Roy's presence, for whatever reason, makes Ruff play him for over 18 and a half minutes in even strength ice time a game.
Roy doesn’t play 18:30 in ES minutes/game (see above). So that’s inaccurate, too.

Also, while Roy doesn’t throw too many hits, he leads forwards in blocked shots. That requires some modicum of toughness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Luke Adam, the rookie centerman that can actually play with the Sabres best forward, has 1 more point than Derek Roy, and 3 more goals, in over 5 minutes LESS ice time per game.
Adam has certainly been a revelation of sorts this season. He’s also benefited from playing with the team’s top two players this season, and has an extremely high offensive-zone start percentage (63%--compare to Roy’s 51%). In short, he’s been put in situations more conducive to scoring points.

Adam was, however, removed from that line because of lack of performance. He's since found his game with other linemates. It has not been all rainbows and butterflies for VAP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Derek Roy's playoff numbers (10 points in 41 games, only 7 goals) are the numbers that actually tell the story of what kind of player he is and has been. Not the regular season, in which he's on the ice more than just about everyone, in the past, pissing off the teams most talented player.
He needs to better in the playoffs, no doubt. So do a lot of players on this team.

Also, could you please provide me with the quote substantiating that Roy pisses off Vanek? I think I know the quote you’re alluding to—the one in which he stated that he has the puck on his stick more when Roy’s not on his line. You, like many, seem to have run with the far-from-remarkable statement that it’s easier to create offense when the puck is on your stick, to Vanek hates Roy. Or are you also relying on Vanek's generally pisspoor body language?


Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Have you noticed that Roy has no chemistry with anyone? Pominville and Vanek have chemistry. Hecht is a nice compliment. Gaustad and Gerbe have chemistry. They typically stick together. Adam has had chemistry with Vanek, Pominville, and now even Kassian and Leino. What about Roy? Who has Roy had chemistry with?
I think this, at its core, a silly, emotional argument. If he truly has no chemistry with anyone, then Roy must be one of the top players in the league to be able to produce completely independent of all his linemates—and, presumably, the defensemen on the ice with him—at the rate he has over recent years.

I think his production his proof in and of itself that he has chemistry with players. Again, unless you believe he is just an eminently superior player that he can produce at this clip without the aid of teammates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
You want to know a big reason why our team is more often than not a soft, underachieving, unispired, mistake-ridden bunch? That guy that's played more minutes than almost everyone is all of those things. When he wasn't in the lineup last year, the team, way more often than not, wasn't any of those things. He's not the only problem, but he is one of the biggest. The coach that's heavily leaning on him and even put a letter on his jersey is another one.
I think your most legitimate point—and it’s one I’m not sure you’re even knowingly making—is that Roy’s role is miscast. Roy shouldn’t have to always play the toughest minutes of any of the top-9 centers, which he does. Roy shouldn’t have to frequently be the guy who closes out tough games, which he often does in tandem with Goose.

Regier’s biggest failing has not been bringing in (or drafting) that 55+ point center who can log the heavy, difficult minutes. The guy who gets the other team’s top line every night, and performs well in that role. The center in the Patty Bergeron-Mike Richards mold. That’s what this team needs more than anything. That guy allows Roy to get offensive zone starts in the 60% range, which is where he should be.

Again, I simply don't believe that trading Roy for whatever makes this a better team. I don't buy the addition by subtraction argument as it pertains to Roy. I think Roy needs to be better cast, but I don't think he's responsible for roster composition. I think the team can, and ultimately will be a contender with the guy on the team.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 06:39 AM
  #82
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,014
vCash: 500
To be honest I think that this whole thing can be boiled down to one point. Roy is what his paycheck says he is. A high end number two center, or possibly 1b Center. He isn't an elite number one. He's not PAID to be an elite number one. Honestly if we were to get that number one center, roy becomes a much better player on the number two line. The fact is that he plays against the Best lines in hockey, and is still able to perform quite well.

Also for every time he is out of position, he more then makes up for it with great positioning on other plays, which is supported by him leading forwards in blocked shots.

Honestly you are complaining about people not addressing your points when you don't address anybody else's arguments all you do is point to the same few arguments you made then whine that were not addressing them. Maybe you don't realize that people get bored repeating themselves after you ignore their arguments.

HiddenInLight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 09:21 AM
  #83
Blitz
Welcome 2 HH Archie!
 
Blitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,124
vCash: 500
I think a couple things have come out pretty clear...

a) This team needs at very least an excellent #2C (like Roy) to work as a #1a/b tandem if we are going to contend - any incoming centreman also needs to have a bit of grit & a decent cap hit (which negates Statsny)

b) Derek Roy is not a premiere #1C, but is quite servicable at the position.

c) The whole roster, specifically the "Rochester Core" needs a swift kick in the arse...

A trade is the only realistic way to improve right now, while also telling the "core" that their jobs are not guaranteed....

We are pretty much stuck dealing with bottom-feeding teams at this point since it is so early in the season, but here are a couple ideas I had....

Option A:

To WPG:
RW Drew Stafford ($4M)
2012 3rd RND pick

To BUF:
C/W Nik Antropov ($4.063M)

Antropov is a big body with a great head on him. instantly adds a ton of size, and good offensive capability as well as being a solid 2-way player. Faceoffs can be an issue from time-to-time.

Winnipeg would get a top line RW to play with Little & Ladd (allowing them to move Burmistrov back to 2nd line C) + a good pick.

Vanek-Roy-Pommer
Adam-Antropov-Leino
Ennis-Hecht-Kassian
Gerbe-Gaustad-Boyes
X. Kaleta, McCormick

Regehr-Myers
Ehrhoff-Sekera
Leopold-Weber
X. Grags, McNabb
.

Option B:

To CGY:
D Jordan Leopold ($3M)
RW Drew Stafford ($4M)
2012 2nd RND pick [CGY]

TO BUF:
C Olli Jokinen ($3M UFA)
D Corey Sarich ($3.6M UFA)
2012 4th RND pick

Olli is an excellent faceoff man, good scoring touch - another Finn in the line-up could wake Leino up as well (think Koivu-Selanne, ok think a little lower). Sarich would be a great addition to the backend, stay at home/very physical d-man, who also happens to want a trade. Both guys are UFA at season's end.

CGY gets a likely top-pairing guy to play with J-Bo, as well a capable top line RW, should they decide to deal Iggy for a king's ransom.

Vanek-Roy-Pommer
Leino-Jokinen-Boyes
Ennis-Adam-Hecht
Gerbe-Gaustad-Kaleta
X. Kassian, McCormick

Regehr-Myers
Ehrhoff-Sekera
Sarich-Weber
X. Grags, McNabb
.

To CBJ:
D Andrej Sekera ($2.75M) or Jordan Leopold ($3M)
2012 2nd RND pick [CGY] (possibly 2012 1st instead?)

To BUF:
C Antoine Vermette ($3.75M)

Excellent faceoff guy with wheels, 2-way capability and a some grit, would likely be our #1C. Would have to overpay a little to get CBJ to move him & would require another minor trade or waiver move to clear cap once we get some healthy bodies back.

CBJ get an excellent d-man who would likely be top-pairing in their system, as well as what should be quite a high 2nd RND pick if Calgary continues to struggle.

Vanek-Vermette-Pommer
Leino-Roy-Stafford
Ennis-Adam-Hecht
Gerbe-Gaustad-Boyes
X. Kaleta, McCormick

Regehr-Myers
Ehrhoff-Sekera/Leopold
Grags-Weber
X. McNabb, Finley
.

We could also take a flyer on a guy like Kyle Turris, or Sam Gagner, although Sammy has had his issues, Lindy's system could potentially be very good for him development-wise. More of a gamble for either of these guys though.

Thoughts?

Blitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 09:22 AM
  #84
OkimLom
Registered User
 
OkimLom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,266
vCash: 500
Now, I might be in the small, very small, minority and think Roy should be BACK to wing. I know people will say that we need to worry about the lack of centers which in that case...valid point. But I think since Pominville was taking faceoff duties and handled himself nicely on the Defensive responsibilty of a center then we move him there. People of course will say Roy can do all that and maybe better. Which I can see, but...

In the offensive zone Roy loves to go in the corners. He likes to circle around with the puck. Now if we have a winger(when roy is center) down low covering his responsibilities and all of a sudden Roy comes down and goes for the puck, then you have the third forward either next to the net or down low waiting for the pass to slide over to him, leaving the center of the offensive zone vacant and thats where you see teams start the a 3-on-2 the other way. If Roy is wing we really dont need that center down low patrolling while Roy keeps the puck anyway. He can find the open man in the slot or make a play that goes Roy-to center-to LW next to the net. Would I put him with Vanek? I dont know...if this allows Roy to be the Playmaker everyone thinks he is and leads him to pass more(Might be able to see Vanek better at wing) then I say you do it.

You then can have: (top 9 lines only)
Vanek-Pominville-Roy
Leino-Adam-Kassian
Ennis-Hecht-Stafford
or
Vanek-Adam-Roy
Leino-Hecht-Kassian
Ennis-Pominville-Stafford (I think this is the only combo I havent seen from Ruff)


and now let the "oh, great we have wingers as center" argument commence.

EDIT:Might be a little off-topic, sorry.

OkimLom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 09:36 AM
  #85
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,616
vCash: 500
OkimLom the problem with your idea is Pommer hasn't handled full time center duties. It's one thing to take faceoffs and occassionally handle the center's defensive role. But to do it full time would require an adjustment to his game. He may be able to handle it just fine or he may struggle with the adjustment.

Also Roy played left wing when he was on the wing previously. As a RW he is on he off wing and he may not adjust well to getting moved not only to wing but his off side.

Just something to think about.


Last edited by joshjull: 12-05-2011 at 09:46 AM.
joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 09:53 AM
  #86
JPurp26
Registered User
 
JPurp26's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 5,221
vCash: 300
Stafford and a 2nd (Buffalo) for Paul Stastny

Allows Stastny to get back in his groove with Vanek and Pominville and our wingers get a all star center

Of course salary issues force a trade with Boyes or Hecht being moved



Next option


Gragnani + Boyes (salary) for Brassard

Brassard is a buy low sell high type option but if he booms we dont sell


Other Options

Dustin Jeffrey from Pit
Sam Gagner from Edm
Kyle Turris from Phx
TJ Oshie from Stl
Mathieu Perrault from Wsh


Last edited by JPurp26: 12-05-2011 at 09:59 AM.
JPurp26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 09:56 AM
  #87
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,026
vCash: 500
Paul Stasny will center all 4 lines, play backup goaltender, and be the point man for waterfront development. While skating backwards.

SackTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 10:10 AM
  #88
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,094
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post
Paul Stasny will center all 4 lines, play backup goaltender, and be the point man for waterfront development. While skating backwards.
...and after scoring only 20 pts in his first 30 games with the team will immediately become everyone's favorite new whipping boy and the new poster boy for why Darcy Regier should be fired.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 10:32 AM
  #89
Blitz
Welcome 2 HH Archie!
 
Blitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,124
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPurp26 View Post
Stafford and a 2nd (Buffalo) for Paul Stastny

Allows Stastny to get back in his groove with Vanek and Pominville and our wingers get a all star center

Of course salary issues force a trade with Boyes or Hecht being moved [1]



Next option


Gragnani + Boyes (salary) for Brassard

Brassard is a buy low sell high type option but if he booms we dont sell [2]

Other Options

Dustin Jeffrey from Pit
Sam Gagner from Edm
Kyle Turris from Phx
TJ Oshie from Stl
Mathieu Perrault from Wsh [3]
[1] While I would love to have Statsny on this team, his cap hit is going to cause issues beyond just this year - remember Myers' hit is going way up next year, we also have to resign Ennis, Goose & Kaleta, while either re-signing Hecht/Boyes or replacing them should the kids falter at all. It's a slippery slope to have $13M+ tied up in 2/3 of you 1st line.

[2] Brassard seems to be more of a project player (& IMO a bit of a headcase), and does not help us right now. I am certainly not against picking him up for 2nd/3rd line duties beyond this year, but I wouldn't bank on him to be our missing piece for contention.

[3] Dustin Jeffrey - Pit - solid, but limited off. upside - likley 3rd liner.
Sam Gagner - Edm- May be worth a gamble, similar situation to Brassard IMO
Kyle Turris - Phx - Similar to Gagner/Brassard, great for depth & potential.
TJ Oshie - Stl - apparently has an attitude issue - only if the price was right.
Mathieu Perrault - Wsh - undersized, good depth player - need a bigger guy IMO.

Blitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 10:35 AM
  #90
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,483
vCash: 500
Awards:
Oshie plays his best hockey on the wing and won't be had for cheap from the Blues. He seems to be turning things around.

__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle
Chainshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 10:54 AM
  #91
static80
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
...and after scoring only 20 pts in his first 30 games with the team will immediately become everyone's favorite new whipping boy and the new poster boy for why Darcy Regier should be fired.
No Stanley Cup Banners in 13 years (12 seasons) with the organization is reason enough as to why he should be fired.

static80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 12:09 PM
  #92
omglolnub
Registered User
 
omglolnub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,176
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by static80 View Post
No Stanley Cup Banners in 13 years (12 seasons) with the organization is reason enough as to why he should be fired.
So you have to win the Cup to keep your job as a coach? Riiiight. You do realize only one team wins it every year, right? This isn't some PC "everyone wins" ******** like in schools these days.

omglolnub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 12:15 PM
  #93
ShaPow
Registered User
 
ShaPow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
Yet the puck didn't go right through the slot. It went from the left point to McNabb's stick, to Legwand's tape. The only way Roy touches the puck is if he's standing four feet in front of Miller, which would be odd positioning. Stafford didn't have to do what he did, especially when it was 6-on-5. Ennis and Roy were in control of the situation. The rotation wasn't necessary.
There is no question Roy over-committed to the wrong area of the ice. I agree with you that the rotation was unnecessary. That's another example of a confused hockey team, which falls on the coach. However, when the rotation happened, Roy over-committed to the complete wrong area of the ice. Will you at least recognize that? Where was he going? He's the center. He needs to be aware of a player standing alone near the slot, no?
Quote:
No, not really. He kept Hecht, maybe the ultimate Ruff favorite, on the ice for the final 95 seconds. Jochen’s a better defensive player than Roy; you won’t get any argument from me on that one. Ruff chose to keep on the ice the team’s best defensive forward. I don’t find too much odd about that.
Now it just appears as though you're disagreeing with me for the sake of disagreeing with me.

The Sabres best faceoff man of the night (that was available) was Derek Roy. Roy is winning 54% of his draws this season. Ruff could have easily put Roy at center, with Hecht on the wing. That's exactly what he would do about 99% of the time if Gaustad is out. Instead, he put Matt Ellis on the wing with Hecht at center. Is Matt Ellis a better defensive forward than Roy? Not in my opinion. Not in Ruff's opinion either, as Roy is a fixture on the PK where Ellis isn't.

The best defense on those final few draws would be to WIN the draws. There is a reason he kept Roy on the bench.
Quote:
Given that you concede that we lack at center—there are, in fact, only two players who’ve played center on a regular basis on the entire roster—and only one of them can be described as a top-6 player, why are you surprised that Roy leads the team in ESTOI? Should we just play three wings up front—wait, we do that with two of four lines, badumching! I just don’t see anything remarkable about what you’re saying. Again, I think you’re attempting to attribute team malaise almost exclusively to Roy.
Correctness doesn't have to be remarkable. I'm not surprised at all that Roy lead all forwards in ESTOI prior to the Nashville game. I'm disappointed and bothered by it. Luke Adam has been a much better centerman than Derek Roy has this season. His minutes/production are plenty of evidence. Jochen Hecht has done a fine job since his return. There is no reason, other than favoritism, to have Roy in the top 6. None. You are wrong here. He's not our team's best center. He's not our team's second best center either. Yet his ice time is through the roof.

Quote:
CORRECTION: Leino actually leads the team in ESTOI (14:03/game). In fact, Roy (14:00), Stafford (13:58), and Vanek (13:52) and Leino are within 11 seconds of each other in ESTOI, and Pominville (13:14, but leads team in TOI/G) isn’t far behind. Are you going to allocate any blame to them.
Roy is leading all forwards (minus Pominville) in TOI/G. Roy was leading all forwards in ES/TOI prior to the Nashville game. I mentioned that in the previous post.

I'll absolutely allocate some blame to Stafford and Leino. Not Vanek and Pominville, however.

Quote:
Roy doesn’t play 18:30 in ES minutes/game (see above). So that’s inaccurate, too.
Not in ES. My mistake. In TOI/G is what I meant. The only froward that is on the ice more often than Roy is Jason Pominville, and he is the team's best two-way forward. The difference between Roy and Pominville is that one of them is having a great season, while the other one has played roughly 3 quality games out of 26.

Quote:
Also, while Roy doesn’t throw too many hits, he leads forwards in blocked shots. That requires some modicum of toughness.
Roy doesn't throw too many hits? Talk about an understatement.

Here are the bottom 6 Sabres in the hit department.

Finley: 2 games, 1 hit
Szczechura: 2 games, 2 hits
Hecht: 6 games, 3 hits
Ennis: 9 games, 3 hits
Gragnani: 24 games, 4 hits
Roy: 26 games, 7 hits

There is something seriously wrong with that list. The next forward on the list is Matt Ellis with 9 hits in 18 games.

Even Pominville has twice as many hits this season than Roy. This is the guy that is leaned on heavily by the head coach? People wonder why the Sabres are so soft? He is a gigantic reason for that moniker, considering how often he's on the ice. No one makes more U-turns than Derek Roy. Only the rookie offensive defenseman Gragnani appears softer. Now that's saying something.

As for his blocked shots, he's played 46:10 in SH/TOI. He's going to be in shot lanes. All of the forwards that log SH icetime are going to have higher blocked shots numbers. That simply comes with the territory. Let me know when you see Derek Roy just laying out to block a shot. It doesn't happen man.
Quote:
Adam has certainly been a revelation of sorts this season. He’s also benefited from playing with the team’s top two players this season, and has an extremely high offensive-zone start percentage (63%--compare to Roy’s 51%). In short, he’s been put in situations more conducive to scoring points.
That's a load of crap. Luke Adam has been put into situations more conductive to scoring points? What?? You come to that hilariously over-blown conclusion strictly based on his offensive-zone start time? How about shifts per game? Minutes per game? Powerplay minutes per game? You have to be kidding me.

Luke Adam's TOI/POINT is 19:22, compared to Roy's TOI/POINT of 28:25.

Derek Roy has played AN ENTIRE PERIOD more powerplay time than Luke Adam this season.

Roy: PP/TOI = 72:14
Adam: PP/TOI = 52:19

Does it get anymore glaring? Adam has 4 points in his last 5 games. He's continued to put up points whether he's been with Vanek and Pominville or not. He's been bounced around from line to line, yet he's on pace for 28 goals. Roy remains in the top 6 no matter what, logging huge minutes, huge powerplay minutes, and producing far, far less.
Quote:
Adam was, however, removed from that line because of lack of performance. He's since found his game with other linemates. It has not been all rainbows and butterflies for VAP.
Bingo! Adam was demoted due to a lack of performance for a few games. Are you trying to drive home my favoritism point for me, or what? Where's Roy's demotion? His play has not merited being a top 6 fixture. If it has, lay out the facts that back it up.
Quote:
He needs to better in the playoffs, no doubt. So do a lot of players on this team.

Also, could you please provide me with the quote substantiating that Roy pisses off Vanek? I think I know the quote you’re alluding to—the one in which he stated that he has the puck on his stick more when Roy’s not on his line. You, like many, seem to have run with the far-from-remarkable statement that it’s easier to create offense when the puck is on your stick, to Vanek hates Roy. Or are you also relying on Vanek's generally pisspoor body language?
Ruff is granting Vanek his wish. Roy is not Thomas Vanek's center anymore. He hasn't been for 98% of the time he's been in the lineup since his quad injury. When Ruff tried it yet again, it barely lasted 2 games. Vanek doesn't have to "hate" Roy in order to not want to play on Roy's line anymore. Do you think that again, it's just a coincidence that Ruff doesn't have Roy and Vanek together? Why aren't Roy and Vanek together, Zip?
Roy tries to do everything all on his own. On a consistent basis. He'll try to skate, pass, or shoot through 3 bodies on the regular. Watch him closely.

I love how every knock I have laid out on Roy, you pretend it's merely coincidence.
Quote:
I think this, at its core, a silly, emotional argument. If he truly has no chemistry with anyone, then Roy must be one of the top players in the league to be able to produce completely independent of all his linemates—and, presumably, the defensemen on the ice with him—at the rate he has over recent years.

I think his production his proof in and of itself that he has chemistry with players. Again, unless you believe he is just an eminently superior player that he can produce at this clip without the aid of teammates.
I have provided far to many facts for this argument to be purely emotional. That's another load of crap. Tell me, who has Roy had chemistry with this season? How come every center on this team has found chemistry with at least one player except for Roy? If he's such a quality hockey player, how come he can't function on the line that includes our best or two best players?

Quote:
I think your most legitimate point—and it’s one I’m not sure you’re even knowingly making—is that Roy’s role is miscast. Roy shouldn’t have to always play the toughest minutes of any of the top-9 centers, which he does. Roy shouldn’t have to frequently be the guy who closes out tough games, which he often does in tandem with Goose.
That's rich. My most legitimate point is one I'm accidentally making? Get over yourself, man. It's getting real ugly.

We have 9 centers now? I assume you mean forwards. If Roy is as good as you think he is, why shouldn't he be called upon to close out games? If he's really a top 1 or 2 centerman, why shouldn't he play the "tougher minutes", whatever those are? If Roy really is as quality a player as you're arguing he is, why is he getting completely outplayed and outperformed by a 21 year old rookie and a left winger turned centerman that's coming off of multiple concussions over the last year?

Quote:
Regier’s biggest failing has not been bringing in (or drafting) that 55+ point center who can log the heavy, difficult minutes. The guy who gets the other team’s top line every night, and performs well in that role. The center in the Patty Bergeron-Mike Richards mold. That’s what this team needs more than anything. That guy allows Roy to get offensive zone starts in the 60% range, which is where he should be.
Again with the offensive zone starts. I'm laughing out loud over here. Whether Roy is here or not, we need another centerman; and the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.....
Quote:
Again, I simply don't believe that trading Roy for whatever makes this a better team. I don't buy the addition by subtraction argument as it pertains to Roy. I think Roy needs to be better cast, but I don't think he's responsible for roster composition. I think the team can, and ultimately will be a contender with the guy on the team.
It's not Roy's fault that Ruff plays him far too often, and leans far too heavily on him in offensive situations. That's a coaching issue. That's why removing Roy from Ruff's options makes the Sabres a better team. Ruff can't screw it up by playing Roy 18 and a half minutes a game if Roy's not around. More effective players like Luke Adam would get the ice.


Last edited by ShaPow: 12-05-2011 at 01:20 PM. Reason: ice time #'s
ShaPow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 12:21 PM
  #94
Stop Winnin
TANK ON BOYS
 
Stop Winnin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Buffalo
Posts: 8,513
vCash: 500
This team has too many players trying to do fancy dangles or make cute tape to tape passes that never hit their intended target because they are trying to pass through 4 defenders. Just need to shoot the puck, crash the net, cycle the puck and capitalize on our opportunities.

Stop Winnin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 12:59 PM
  #95
NoClue4u
Registered User
 
NoClue4u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz View Post
I think a couple things have come out pretty clear...

a) This team needs at very least an excellent #2C (like Roy) to work as a #1a/b tandem if we are going to contend - any incoming centreman also needs to have a bit of grit & a decent cap hit (which negates Statsny)

b) Derek Roy is not a premiere #1C, but is quite servicable at the position.

c) The whole roster, specifically the "Rochester Core" needs a swift kick in the arse...

A trade is the only realistic way to improve right now, while also telling the "core" that their jobs are not guaranteed....

We are pretty much stuck dealing with bottom-feeding teams at this point since it is so early in the season, but here are a couple ideas I had....

(Well, thought out trade proposals)

Thoughts?
That was a great post, but I had to cut it down some. Anyway, I like the idea of trading Stafford to get a center, but I think we should do it in off-season for a couple reasons:
1. Stafford may turn it around. That makes his contract seems a little better, and might mean we can leverage the deal more in our favor.
2. If Stafford doesn't turn things around, I would want to have more time to see where Kassian is at in his development and if we can count on him to play full-time in the top 9. Of course, depending on injuries he may have plenty of time...

Though waiting until the off-season does change the Jokinen trade, which might have been favorite of the three.

NoClue4u is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 01:08 PM
  #96
Afinogretzky
Registered User
 
Afinogretzky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,008
vCash: 500
for the record, Roy has 25 points in 41 playoff games, not 10 like ShaPow stated.

Other than that, I generally agree with ShaPow's comments. I think Roy's negative influence on the team is greater than we all know.

Afinogretzky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 01:16 PM
  #97
ShaPow
Registered User
 
ShaPow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Afinogretzky View Post
for the record, Roy has 25 points in 41 playoff games, not 10 like ShaPow stated.

Other than that, I generally agree with ShaPow's comments. I think Roy's negative influence on the team is greater than we all know.
Thanks. My mistake on the playoff numbers.

7 goals in 41 playoff games is the glaring aspect of the point either way.

ShaPow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 02:14 PM
  #98
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,094
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post

I'll absolutely allocate some blame to Stafford and Leino. Not Vanek and Pominville, however.
After reading all your posts, I get the sense that you probably don't ever blame those two. For anything. They've both been off to nice starts. You've demonized Roy to the point where I have little doubt that you've convinced yourself that any of Vanek's poor performances have been a product of Roy's "poisoning," and through no fault of Vanek. I'm almost to the point where I"m waiting for you to blame Tommy's past poor conditioning on Roy bringing him doughnuts before every practice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Not in ES. My mistake. In TOI/G is what I meant. The only froward that is on the ice more often than Roy is Jason Pominville, and he is the team's best two-way forward. The difference between Roy and Pominville is that one of them is having a great season, while the other one has played roughly 3 quality games out of 26.
Again, why is that surprising? He's the only center who plays all three phases of the game. We have two centers (Gaustad, Roy) who've played the position more often that not in their careers. Why is it surprising that one of our two natural centers, and one who can score 70 pts/season is towards the top in TOI/G?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Roy doesn't throw too many hits? Talk about an understatement.

Here are the bottom 6 Sabres in the hit department.

Finley: 2 games, 1 hit
Szczechura: 2 games, 2 hits
Hecht: 6 games, 3 hits
Ennis: 9 games, 3 hits
Gragnani: 24 games, 4 hits
Roy: 26 games, 7 hits

There is something seriously wrong with that list. The next forward on the list is Matt Ellis with 9 hits in 18 games.

Even Pominville has twice as many hits this season than Roy. This is the guy that is leaned on heavily by the head coach? People wonder why the Sabres are so soft? He is a gigantic reason for that moniker, considering how often he's on the ice. No one makes more U-turns than Derek Roy. Only the rookie offensive defenseman Gragnani appears softer. Now that's saying something.
Show me a definitive study or statistic that correlates hits and winning and I'll start paying more attention to hit statistics. Until then...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
As for his blocked shots, he's played 46:10 in SH/TOI. He's going to be in shot lanes. All of the forwards that log SH icetime are going to have higher blocked shots numbers. That simply comes with the territory. Let me know when you see Derek Roy just laying out to block a shot. It doesn't happen man. That's a load of crap. Luke Adam has been put into situations more conductive to scoring points? What?? You come to that hilariously over-blown conclusion strictly based on his offensive-zone start time? How about shifts per game? Minutes per game? Powerplay minutes per game? You have to be kidding me.
What are Pommer's blocked shot numbers like?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Luke Adam's TOI/POINT is 19:22, compared to Roy's TOI/POINT of 28:25.

Derek Roy has played AN ENTIRE PERIOD more powerplay time than Luke Adam this season.

Roy: PP/TOI = 72:14
Adam: PP/TOI = 52:19
Roy's PP pts/60 mins played: 2.74
Adam's PP pts/60 mins played: 2.29

There, we took total ice times out of the equation and Roy comes out on top in a per 60 minutes played analysis.

First, Adam should be getting more PP time. Take that out on Ruff, not Roy. Second, Adam's 5-on-5 scoring is markedly better than every player on the team, including Vanek and Pominville. If they moved Luke back to LW--and given how poor he can be defensively and at the dot (43.9%), that may end up happening, anyways--would you advocate him getting more ESTOI than Thomas Vanek? After all, Luke's a better offensive player at 5-on-5 (based on pts/60 mins at 5-on-5), and that's what matters, right? It's hypothetical, but I'm interested in your answer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Does it get anymore glaring? Adam has 4 points in his last 5 games. He's continued to put up points whether he's been with Vanek and Pominville or not. He's been bounced around from line to line, yet he's on pace for 28 goals. Roy remains in the top 6 no matter what, logging huge minutes, huge powerplay minutes, and producing far, far less.Bingo! Adam was demoted due to a lack of performance for a few games. Are you trying to drive home my favoritism point for me, or what? Where's Roy's demotion? His play has not merited being a top 6 fixture. If it has, lay out the facts that back it up.
Roy is fourth on the team in pts/60 mins played at 5-on-5. He's in a mix of four players separated by 11 seconds in ESTOI. Roy also has a far higher relative qualcomp than Luke, likely because Ruff doesn't yet trust Adam defensively at center.

Adam has great offensive splits. He also has a high amount of offensive zone starts--in your own famous words to joshjull, "What the hell are you laughing at?"--while playing with the team's two best offensive players to date. Why are you surprised he has more points?

Second, I understand why you're attempting to draw the Roy/Adam comparison--because you believe he best demonstrates your point regarding Ruff's favoritism--but Adam isn't even playing center right now! He's playing LW on Leino's line. He may not even be a center in the long-term, which goes back to Devine's answer this past summer about what Adam's position is: "It depends on who you ask within the organization." Maybe Ruff realized that after a brief stint of success between Vanek and Pommer, Adam is better off at wing. So, again, considering he's outplayed Vanek at 5-on-5, at least offensively, do you advocate him taking Vanek's ES minutes? I'm guessing no.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Ruff is granting Vanek his wish. Roy is not Thomas Vanek's center anymore. He hasn't been for 98% of the time he's been in the lineup since his quad injury. When Ruff tried it yet again, it barely lasted 2 games. Vanek doesn't have to "hate" Roy in order to not want to play on Roy's line anymore. Do you think that again, it's just a coincidence that Ruff doesn't have Roy and Vanek together? Why aren't Roy and Vanek together, Zip?
Because he finally figured out that they're both playmakers and want the pucks on their sticks, so it'd be silly to put them on the same line in the long-term? And because he wants to spread out his offense and not make the lines too top-heavy? I'm sure you've thought of these answers, too, but it's just easier to look at Roy as the poison.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Roy tries to do everything all on his own. On a consistent basis. He'll try to skate, pass, or shoot through 3 bodies on the regular. Watch him closely.
I know he does. Those are his faults. Vanek frequently blows the defensive zone early trying to get a breakaway pass (see JvR's Game 6 goal as a prime example) or frequently doesn't support the breakout well enough; those are his faults. Do you see those, too? Pommer doesn't go to scoring areas when he's slumping; that's his fault. We could sit here and pick apart every player on our team.

But if the good outweighs the bad relative to that player's role--and I think it does with Roy--then, on the whole, I'm fine with the player.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
I love how every knock I have laid out on Roy, you pretend it's merely coincidence.
I have provided far to many facts for this argument to be purely emotional. That's another load of crap. Tell me, who has Roy had chemistry with this season? How come every center on this team has found chemistry with at least one player except for Roy? If he's such a quality hockey player, how come he can't function on the line that includes our best or two best players?
Leino-Roy-Stafford was our best line for two weeks until Ruff broke them for the 3rd period in Montreal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaPow View Post
Again with the offensive zone starts. I'm laughing out loud over here. Whether Roy is here or not, we need another centerman; and the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.....It's not Roy's fault that Ruff plays him far too often, and leans far too heavily on him in offensive situations. That's a coaching issue. That's why removing Roy from Ruff's options makes the Sabres a better team. Ruff can't screw it up by playing Roy 18 and a half minutes a game if Roy's not around. More effective players like Luke Adam would get the ice.
First, do you not understand the importance of offensive zone starts? You seem far too intelligent to be poo-pooing them the way you have. If you don't have to traverse nearly 200 feet before even getting near a scoring area, it's far easier to score.

Second, it seems your disdain for Roy is so vociferous that me convincing you of his merits is an impossibility. But your assertion that Roy doesn't belong in the top-6 is ludicrous.


Last edited by Zip15: 12-05-2011 at 02:21 PM.
Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 02:20 PM
  #99
SECRET SQUIRREL
Registered User
 
SECRET SQUIRREL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Clarence
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,179
vCash: 500
ShaPow, hell of a job saying what I have thought for a very long time! Keep it up!

SECRET SQUIRREL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 04:01 PM
  #100
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,094
vCash: 50
For all the complaining about Roy's ES performance, especially offensively (No chemistry with anyone! Breaks the flow!), here are players who've produced less on a per/60 mins of 5-on-5 play than Derek Roy (2.28 pts/60 mins ES)

N. Backstrom (2.26)
H. Sedin (2.25)
B. Richards (2.19)
J. Spezza (2.17)
M. St. Louis (2.17)
J. Benn (2.16)
T. Plekanec (2.15)
J. Tavares (2.00)
M. Richards (1.88)
M. Ribeiro (1.87)
H. Zetterberg (1.87)
R. Kesler (1.78)
M. Duchene (1.78)
Z. Parise (1.73)
I. Kovalchuk (1.72)
D. Briere (1.69)
J. Carter (1.54)
E. Staal (1.17)
P. Stastny (1.10)
M. Koivu (1.07)

I'm not saying Roy's a better hockey player than all those guys--and I fully expect a strawman coming my way that I'm arguing Derek Roy is better than some of the names on that list--merely injecting some context to make abundantly clear that how bad Roy's allegedly been has been, unsurprisingly, vastly overstated.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:07 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.