Post-Game Talk (GBU): Lindy's revenge

[B U F F A L O]

You're using effective to mean "he does stuff that impacts the game."

Everyone else is using effective to mean "he positively impacts the game," which Tyler Ennis absolutely has not done this season.

He's a passenger because you have to bend over backwards to accommodate what he can't do before his work rate turns into positive aggregate production.

Ennis hasn't positively impacted a game at all this season -- "absolutely has not done" -- that's the biggest exaggeration I've seen. 2nd on the team in production, and played a vital role as to why we beat Vancouver just last week.

 

[sabrebuild]

Ennis is 3rd in points with 2 less games. Sounds like he is being used as a scapegoat.

Thanks for the typically wonderful analysis.

 

[OkimLom]

All these responses are MY opinion.

I hate the concept of a team being penalized for a **** job by the linesmen. They should make those calls consistently. Had they blown the play dead, the sabres wouldn't have scored the false goal and maybe the team wouldn't have lost so much momentum.

Also, and i know the two aren't strongly related, but how can the league want higher scoring games, but offer up a rule that reduces goals. Again, a bit of a stretch, but i am mad an venting.

The Ref's jobs isn't to make the games entertaining. It's their job is to call the game fairly, and make sure the game is being called correctly. All the replay offers is a resource for them to make sure this is being done correctly. There has always been a rule where if you're offside then a goal doesn't count. The only difference is that they are allowing you to go back to the entrance of the zone to see if it's a legal or not.

It's a stupid rule. Blaming Ennis for being 2 inches offside on that random instance is pointless. I'm sure other guys were offside on other plays that didn't get challenged because no goal was scored.

Be mad at the guys that are going offside, don't be angry with the rule/refs/NHL. We're all just mad because they can now review the goals and coaches can check to see if they're offside.

it's a stupid ****ing rule that does nothing except:
slow the game
make the linesmen look like idiots
deflate any momentum a team may gain

Do you want the game called correctly, or do you want the game exciting? It's all about perspective right now with how you feel about the replay system. Buffalo has lost every chance they have had. Therefore Buffalo fans will more than likely hate it then.

Put yourself in this position, game 7 of the playoffs, Stanley Cup Finals, let's say it's Edmonton vs Buffalo 2-2. McDavid brings the puck over the line, but Hall has lifted his skate up to put himself offside. Linesman misses it. After 45 seconds of zone time Edmonton scores to make it 3-2 with 1:45 remaining. Everyone sees on the Jumo Tron that Hall was offside, but faceoff takes place. Buffalo must now pull their goalie to try and tie it, but Edmonton scores the ENG and wins the game 4-2.

Pre-Coach's challenge that GWG goal doesn't get reviewed at all. Currently, that goal would be reviewed, not count, and Buffalo doesn't need to pull the goalie at any point. Do you want to have the feeling that the linesman screwed you out of a possible win and there was nothing you can do, or would you like to have the ability to get the correct call on the ice?

I know that's a very specific situation, but my point still stands, I'd rather have the right call on the ice, than have the games in the refs' hands more than they have with the way they call penalties nowadays.

It also just makes the game less fun. Can't enjoy goals until we're sure that this BS isn't going to be invoked.

Were goals scored after being offsides really ever that much of an issue beforehand?

Blech. Hopefully once all of the fanbases have had a taste of this it'll be pretty clear that no one will want it. I don't even care that it's going to eventually work in our favor at some point, it hurts the entertainment value of the game.

Honestly, outside of probably the Duchne one, probably not, but most people usually played the "can't catch a break" line to make themselves feel better. There's now an option to actually have it questioned, and you're seeing the interference and the offside stuff happen more often.

As we have seen in years' past, the subjective nature of the officials can influence a game. Instead of offsides being more a grey area, the rules of offsides has become more of a black and white issue when it comes to goals.

For players, I'm sure they would rather have games ran fairly. To me, it seems like the only ones that have issue with this are the fans. What's funny to me is that there are more players who have issue with the 3 on 3 OT than with the coach's challenge. One is designed strictly for entertainment purposes(with a wide margin from the secondary purpose to end a game) and one is for competition quality purposes.

Get the games called right. I don't care if it's entertaining.

 

[jBuds]

Hockey IQ and decision-making within a game aren't the same thing.

Eichel has a problem with the latter. It's coachable, fixed with film as well as maturation.


He knows where to be, he's not making the smart choice in that split second that makes a successful or **** shift. Usually on the defensive side of the puck. I take issue with the lack of engaging physically, the hesitance to initiate contact... That should improve with time.

"Hockey IQ" on the offensive side of the puck is clearly more prominent

 

[Jame]

Hockey IQ and decision-making within a game aren't the same thing.

Eichel has a problem with the latter. It's coachable, fixed with film as well as maturation.


He knows where to be, he's not making the smart choice in that split second that makes a successful or **** shift. Usually on the defensive side of the puck. I take issue with the lack of engaging physically, the hesitance to initiate contact... That should improve with time.

"Hockey IQ" on the offensive side of the puck is clearly more prominent

I think the bolded is very much up for debate right now. Without the puck, I think you're very wrong right now.

And decision making is part of hockey IQ, without question

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

Ennis hasn't positively impacted a game at all this season -- "absolutely has not done" -- that's the biggest exaggeration I've seen. 2nd on the team in production, and played a vital role as to why we beat Vancouver just last week.

I was talking on aggregate throughout the season.

Speaking of which, here are the things at ES - out of scoring, conceding, aggregate scoring chances and corsi% - that the Sabres do better at with Ennis on the ice:

 

[dire wolf]

Ennis is 3rd in points with 2 less games. Sounds like he is being used as a scapegoat.

He is. Ennis makes a lot of bad plays and deserves some criticism. But he also makes a lot of good plays that many on here choose to ignore. The bottom line is that he is a frustrating player right now because he has the talent to be better than he is. I still like him a lot and am confident he will improve as the season goes on.

 

[stokes84]

Bolded doesn't make sense...

Regardless, the issue here seems more about your limited understanding of what impacts the game.

Pot/kettle. You need to learn more about hockey. This is fun and productive.

 

[jBuds]

I think the bolded is very much up for debate right now. Without the puck, I think you're very wrong right now.

And decision making is part of hockey IQ, without question

I can't really vehemently argue you on the first point, other than basing my belief on hearing him speak the game and hearing his coaches talk about him (and scouts who have more viewings of him.

Second is semantics. Personally, if one of my underclassmen (elite talent, comparatively speaking at the HS level) makes a decision incorrectly, and we look at the tape the next day, he's cutting me off before I finish pointing out the mistake and correcting it visually. Then it turns into execution through repetition.

I bring that up because I'm of the belief Eichel sees tape and sees these mistakes right away, and will work to fix them as he progresses through his rookie year as a 19 year old.

Even for so-called "generational talents".... Perfection and excellence in the D zone is tough to mandate right off the bat while not expecting hiccups. I'm very, very much NOT worried.

 

[jBuds]

Summary: criticism of his D zone game and play away from the puck in the neutral and D zones is fine right now.

But I don't like how dramatic and over the top the rhetoric is carrying. I see a kid who oozes talent out of every orafice. The way he finds space and plays away from the puck in the attacking zone speaks volumes to how he thinks the game and how high the IQ is.

Now, it's about extracting that at the pro level in the other two zones.


Not worried. At all. Pretty ****ing amped. This team is light years ahead of where we were a year ago, and Eichel is a big part of that already.

 

[Jame]

Summary: criticism of his D zone game and play away from the puck in the neutral and D zones is fine right now.

But I don't like how dramatic and over the top the rhetoric is carrying. I see a kid who oozes talent out of every orafice. The way he finds space and plays away from the puck in the attacking zone speaks volumes to how he thinks the game and how high the IQ is.

Now, it's about extracting that at the pro level in the other two zones.


Not worried. At all. Pretty ****ing amped. This team is light years ahead of where we were a year ago, and Eichel is a big part of that already.

I think we are largely in agreement then.

 

[Der Jaeger]

Summary: criticism of his D zone game and play away from the puck in the neutral and D zones is fine right now.

But I don't like how dramatic and over the top the rhetoric is carrying. I see a kid who oozes talent out of every orafice. The way he finds space and plays away from the puck in the attacking zone speaks volumes to how he thinks the game and how high the IQ is.

Now, it's about extracting that at the pro level in the other two zones.


Not worried. At all. Pretty ****ing amped. This team is light years ahead of where we were a year ago, and Eichel is a big part of that already.

Agree. I see a player with elite talent and high hockey IQ. Better application through repetition is required.

 

[Reddawg]

Hockey IQ and decision-making within a game aren't the same thing.

Eichel has a problem with the latter. It's coachable, fixed with film as well as maturation.

Gosh, did I ever read this wrong...

 

[joshjull]

With ROR 4th in the NHL in faceoffs and being able to single-handedly carry any wingers they put with him, I'm not sure he's not going to be a C for a long, long time.

He can still take faceoffs as a winger and putting him with Eichel sort of elimates the need to carry anyone.

But I do agree he wont be leaving center any time soon nor should he.