GDT: Toronto @ Buffalo 4-3-2012 7:00PM
#41
Posted 03 April 2012 - 10:26 AM
#43
Posted 03 April 2012 - 10:37 AM
Rayzer32, on 03 April 2012 - 09:46 AM, said:
The Sabres play like gangbusters and finally reach the 8th spot. They had it to themselves. Once they had it, they lay two consecutive eggs.
I expect the Sabre to revert back to gangbusters tonight now that their destiny is out of their hands.
#44
Posted 03 April 2012 - 10:47 AM
#45
Posted 03 April 2012 - 10:48 AM
#47
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:11 AM
#48
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:15 AM
716, on 03 April 2012 - 06:33 AM, said:
Maybe Roy needs more ice time from the coach? I mean, he's been their 9th best forward all year.. Give him more ice
dEnnis the Menace, on 03 April 2012 - 07:47 AM, said:
I wonder how many goals Stamkos would have if Ruff were his coach?
#49
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:17 AM
MattPie, on 03 April 2012 - 09:46 AM, said:
#50
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:23 AM
apuszczalowski, on 03 April 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:
It would be a logistical nightmare. But if you could bring it down to a 2 game series (which strangely enough, the Kings and Sharks do have to end their seasons), what happens if they split those games? You're still left with a tie breaker scenario.
The best they could do is what the NFL did this year, schedule divisional matchups to close the season. Those are the teams that are most likely to be in close competition in the standings. It does look like they tried for something close to that as all the games on Saturday are inter-conference.
Then again, if they do get the reallignment they were pushing for, the season will definitely end with intra-divisional matchups (well, except for those two divisions that wind up with 7 teams).
#51
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:33 AM
shrader, on 03 April 2012 - 11:23 AM, said:
The best they could do is what the NFL did this year, schedule divisional matchups to close the season. Those are the teams that are most likely to be in close competition in the standings. It does look like they tried for something close to that as all the games on Saturday are inter-conference.
Then again, if they do get the reallignment they were pushing for, the season will definitely end with intra-divisional matchups (well, except for those two divisions that wind up with 7 teams).
Edited by apuszczalowski, 03 April 2012 - 11:35 AM.
#52
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:42 AM
apuszczalowski, on 03 April 2012 - 11:33 AM, said:
#53
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:30 PM
CallawaySabres, on 03 April 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:
Sabres win and the season is alive. If they lose, I don't think there is one fan alive who can say they deserved it. Either way, I will be at peace (until Thursday).
No game against a team that has dominated your division for 4 consecutive years is ever meaningless. It may have less meaning, but it certainly won't be meaningless.
Oakstream, on 03 April 2012 - 07:44 AM, said:
The train to Playoffsville must travel through Pominville.
#55
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:50 PM
I agree that it's three game sevens. But the door just opened a crack!
#56
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:09 PM
LGR4GM, on 03 April 2012 - 11:42 AM, said:
Pretty sure if you win more games that automatically trumps scoring more goals. Not positive though...
#57
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:10 PM
716, on 03 April 2012 - 06:33 AM, said:
How many 5x5 shots has vanek taken after lindy put his new world beating center on that line along with Tropp (an ahl level winger in his first year up). How many of those were scoring chances.In the last six how many shots have Cody Tropp and Vanek taken individually.. Do you see anything wrong with those totals? ..Are opposing teams playing their shutdown lines against the Ennis line? Have you noticed all those times that Tropp and Cody have put the puck on Vaneks stick when he found a seam in the Toronto game or the Pitt game? How about the two games before that.How about the last six? Do you think they lost the last two 1. Because they did not score enough 2. Because Vanek did not score? 3. because Roy did not score 4.because they cannot handle a physical opponet 5. Because the defense was not up to par?
Edited by waldo, 03 April 2012 - 01:14 PM.
#58
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:10 PM
#59
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:19 PM
d4rksabre, on 03 April 2012 - 01:10 PM, said:
#60
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:25 PM
apuszczalowski, on 03 April 2012 - 01:19 PM, said:
I'm free every night there's a game. This could get expensive.
#62
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:31 PM
shrader, on 03 April 2012 - 01:29 PM, said:
True, but then my bartender buddy doesn't see any tips, and that's not nice. Freedom Fries always turns up the music when I play Danger Zone on the jukebox, and for that I am thankful.
#64
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:33 PM
#65
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:34 PM
waldo, on 03 April 2012 - 01:10 PM, said:
How many 5x5 shots has vanek taken after lindy put his new world beating center on that line along with Tropp (an ahl level winger in his first year up). How many of those were scoring chances.In the last six how many shots have Cody Tropp and Vanek taken individually.. Do you see anything wrong with those totals? ..Are opposing teams playing their shutdown lines against the Ennis line? Have you noticed all those times that Tropp and Cody have put the puck on Vaneks stick when he found a seam in the Toronto game or the Pitt game? How about the two games before that.How about the last six? Do you think they lost the last two 1. Because they did not score enough 2. Because Vanek did not score? 3. because Roy did not score 4.because they cannot handle a physical opponet 5. Because the defense was not up to par?
1. I don't know. Also: I'm not sure what a 5x5 shot is.
2. Didn't count.
3. Didn't count.
4. Don't know what the totals are.
5. I haven't noticed.
6. I've seen some chances that were right on his stick, yes, but mostly off rebounds admittedly.
7. Not sure.
8. Not sure about that either.
9. All of the above (choice not offered)
#66
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:51 PM
Stormin Norman, on 03 April 2012 - 12:50 PM, said:
I agree that it's three game sevens. But the door just opened a crack!
Touched by Boyes, on 03 April 2012 - 01:09 PM, said:
Pretty sure if you win more games that automatically trumps scoring more goals. Not positive though...
#68
Posted 03 April 2012 - 02:32 PM
716, on 03 April 2012 - 01:34 PM, said:
2. Didn't count.
3. Didn't count.
4. Don't know what the totals are.
5. I haven't noticed.
6. I've seen some chances that were right on his stick, yes, but mostly off rebounds admittedly.
7. Not sure.
8. Not sure about that either.
9. All of the above (choice not offered)
Have always like your sense of humor...I did laugh after reading your reply.. i think you may be the last honest man.....
Edited by waldo, 03 April 2012 - 02:36 PM.
#71
Posted 03 April 2012 - 03:03 PM
i don't want to get my feelings hurt, but why should this year be any different that the past 41.
#72
Posted 03 April 2012 - 03:34 PM
#74
Posted 03 April 2012 - 03:53 PM
#75
Posted 03 April 2012 - 04:08 PM
shrader, on 03 April 2012 - 01:29 PM, said:
d4rksabre, on 03 April 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:
#76
Posted 03 April 2012 - 04:34 PM
#77
Posted 03 April 2012 - 04:40 PM
#80
Posted 03 April 2012 - 05:06 PM












