I have pointed this out on a few occasions and could not understand how posters thought it was in the best interest of this team to play or give preferable treatment to the rookies. Nolan is a players coach, vets come first plain and simple and Ron Ron could not comprehend this philosophy.
Great that we have some leadership back.
People, People dont you remember the shot across RON RON's bow from Miller. He said that you can not win in this league with all of these rookies.
YOU CAN NOT TREAT VETS LIKE CRAP!
In what universe did the rookies get preferable treatment
Except it really had nothing to do with Rolston, that would have been on Darcy. The Sabres did not 'treat the vets like crap'.
Preferable treatment where they were give roster spots when they weren't ready I'd guess.
I'd rather watch Luke Adam suck in Buffalo, knowing Girgensons is getting quality offensive minutes in Rochester further that part of his game.
Girgensons and Risto don't really look out of place in Buffalo, but would Rochester make them better players in the future? Fans seem to rather watch them here instead of boring vets, at the cost of their development.
The thing is the rookies weren't really gifted spots over veterans, the GM simply didn't supply enough veterans/competition. So the fact all those rookies were on the team probably bothered the players more for what it subconsciously signaled to them, which is that the GM essentially conceded the season as hopeless.
If the players are upset that Ristolainen or Zadorov played over Alexander Sulzer, then they're just a bunch of *****. It's understandable that they'd be upset over so many rookies playing, though. Of course, if the team was playing well, then they'd have pointed to the rookies as being a rejuvenating force within the team, so it's all bull****.
The thing is the rookies weren't really gifted spots over veterans, the GM simply didn't supply enough veterans/competition. So the fact all those rookies were on the team probably bothered the players more for what it subconsciously signaled to them, which is that the GM essentially conceded the season as hopeless.
If the players are upset that Ristolainen or Zadorov played over Alexander Sulzer, then they're just a bunch of *****. It's understandable that they'd be upset over so many rookies playing, though. Of course, if the team was playing well, then they'd have pointed to the rookies as being a rejuvenating force within the team, so it's all bull****.
Sulzer is probably better than Zadorov over an 82 game season though. These vets are not worried about Zadorov's develop as they'll probably be on a different team when Zadorov is in his prime. They want the most competitive team.
Steve Ott was singing their praises in training camps as just that. Then after he slept walked for the first 20 games of the season it was an easy excuse.pointed to the rookies as being a rejuvenating force within the team, so it's all bull****.
Based on the team interviews posted after the game-day skate, it sounds like they all got pounded the same message and were just spouting it back to the press.
And yeah, most of the problems with this team are not purely on the rookies getting limited minutes but that there was no help brought in by the previous regime.
It's classic Nolan. team building thru drama.
"Management didn't believe in us" "they gave spots to rookies" "let's show them who's boss"
Anyways....
I'm not sure Grigorenko will ever fit in the NHL. I know I've been defending him tryin to get him ice time but god is he slowwwww, he almost makes Vanek look fast! In fact if I were to compare him with anyone right now would be a poor mans Vanek.
He's not slow he's just not a burner.Is he really that slow or does his lack of compete and effort make him seem slower than he is?
I'd argue Ristolainen made them a more competitive team than Weber, and with respect to the Nolan era, that's really the only move (the kids were scratched already).
Well, congratz Weber. Here's to going for -30 before the year is out.
He's not slow he's just not a burner.
It's not his style to put his head down and charge up the ice. He skates with his head up slowing down the play by holding onto the puck and dishing the puck off as he draws guys to him. His biggest (on ice) problem is that since he's not a shifty player he needs to have about 20 more lbs of muscle to be able to pull this off in the NHL. In that regard I would say he needs to improve his edge work more than his actual skating speed.
He plays a style similar to Thornton. Whether he ends up like Thornton or the terrible version of Tim Connolly remains to be seen.
He's not slow he's just not a burner.
It's not his style to put his head down and charge up the ice. He skates with his head up slowing down the play by holding onto the puck and dishing the puck off as he draws guys to him. His biggest (on ice) problem is that since he's not a shifty player he needs to have about 20 more lbs of muscle to be able to pull this off in the NHL. In that regard I would say he needs to improve his edge work more than his actual skating speed.
He plays a style similar to Thornton. Whether he ends up like Thornton or the terrible version of Tim Connolly remains to be seen.
He's not slow he's just not a burner.
It's not his style to put his head down and charge up the ice. He skates with his head up slowing down the play by holding onto the puck and dishing the puck off as he draws guys to him. His biggest (on ice) problem is that since he's not a shifty player he needs to have about 20 more lbs of muscle to be able to pull this off in the NHL. In that regard I would say he needs to improve his edge work more than his actual skating speed.
He plays a style similar to Thornton. Whether he ends up like Thornton or the terrible version of Tim Connolly remains to be seen.
Based on the team interviews posted after the game-day skate, it sounds like they all got pounded the same message and were just spouting it back to the press.
And yeah, most of the problems with this team are not purely on the rookies getting limited minutes but that there was no help brought in by the previous regime.
most of the "problems" (as it relates to wins/losses) have little to do with either of those things... in a "why they suck" conversation... it starts and ends with how very little proven talent or high end players they have at the most important positions.
help in the form of veteran depth would allow them to structure a little better... but the results would be little to no different... just like sending down the kids and playing more vets... or bringing in a new coach, isn't going to change where this team is headed in wins/losses