Combination of shaky goaltending and inexperience. Beagle and Sutter would sure help here. But still good to see the kids playing well. They just need a bit more seasoning.
- LordHumungous

Most of these kids are just beginning to understand. There will be mistakes along the way.

I know we al love our shiny new things, like Petterson, but his (frank) up on the 2nd goal, cost the game.
Not just the blown coverage issue, but the Sedinitis, staying out far to long, on that shift, turned the momentum in the Sabres comeback.

I know we al love our shiny new things, like Petterson, but his (frank) up on the 2nd goal, cost the game.
Not just the blown coverage issue, but the Sedinitis, staying out far to long, on that shift, turned the momentum in the Sabres comeback.
- Reubenkincade

Bust!

Bust!
- Bettmanhatesus

Not at all.
Acknowledging the cause of a loss, instead of blaming it on others, like Goldobin, Pouliot, Leipsic etc, is not a popular thing around here.
Petterson cost the game, kid is very young and has a lot to learn. no big deal.

I know we al love our shiny new things, like Petterson, but his (frank) up on the 2nd goal, cost the game.
Not just the blown coverage issue, but the Sedinitis, staying out far to long, on that shift, turned the momentum in the Sabres comeback.
- Reubenkincade

I'd say Tanev standing by the side of the net with his thumb up his ass was a contributing factor as well lol.

Markstrom didn't help matters either with the rebound gift on the third goal either.

Pettersson was a factor but nowhere near the sole reason the Nucks blew that lead lol.

I don’t know what this is but it’s dumb.
- bloatedmosquito

odd
- VANTEL

Yes.

I'd say Tanev standing by the side of the net with his thumb up his ass was a contributing factor as well lol.
- LordHumungous

Just pointing out that, Our savior, is not untouchable for some criticism.
He made several mistakes on that shift, ultimately turning the momentum of the game and costing the win.

Not at all.
Acknowledging the cause of a loss, instead of blaming it on others, like Goldobin, Pouliot, Leipsic etc, is not a popular thing around here.
Petterson cost the game, kid is very young and has a lot to learn. no big deal.
- Reubenkincade

You could say that about any player whose fck up ended in the back of the net.

See:

Goldobin cost us the game with his inability to convert.
Pouliot cost us the game by repeatedly failing to hold the line and general all around suckage.
Markstrom cost us the game by giving up a juicy rebound on what was a pretty low danger shot.
Etc.

I for one hope that Pettersson continues to take risks. It will win us more games than it costs us.

But I’m just another sheep concerned with being popular.

Just pointing out that, Our savior, is not untouchable for some criticism.
He made several mistakes on that shift, ultimately turning the momentum of the game and costing the win.
- Reubenkincade

I wonder where Tiny Jump or little Brooksy are? They seldom post after a loss. I hope they are getting the support that they need.

I wonder where Tiny Jump or little Brooksy are? They seldom post after a loss. I hope they are getting the support that they need.
- Marwood

I was at the game yesterday - certainly sucked blowing a 2 goal lead - pretty great day for you tho, Lots of ammo to b*tch and whine about!! Maybe you can go smoke some weed and brag about it?

Just saying that neither guy is a sure bet to stop a goal against. They might be the two best defensive C's, but they aren't bullet proof
- 1970vintage

I would rather have those two alternating to preserve the lead.

So instead of speculating they may have helped win instead of watching the meltdown, we can just assume no one would have helped.

But hey they’re not bulletproof, so back to saying how useless both are and not needed.

I was at the game yesterday - certainly sucked blowing a 2 goal lead - pretty great day for you tho, Lots of ammo to b*tch and whine about!! Maybe you can go smoke some weed and brag about it?
- Brooks_Light

Just pointing out that, Our savior, is not untouchable for some criticism.
He made several mistakes on that shift, ultimately turning the momentum of the game and costing the win.
- Reubenkincade

I also observed several mistakes, but everyone seems fine with this because he is a superstar, hopefully Green teaches him to be more responsible.

BTW any criticism of Pettersson will not be accepted as criticism but will be labeled as a hater.

I guess the narrative has shifted. Last season (and the off season) the Gaunce haters were all about his 5 career goals, and Beafles 10 ( or whatever) he scored last year.

Now, it appears a two way player can just be one way (defense) if he is of high moral character, and is good in the room.

As to why Gaunce isn’t in the lineup? Clearly because Green is an idiot.



- 1970vintage

Your posts are suspiciously like Prezs these days. That’s special

As useless as +/- is as a statistic, Sutter's indicates he gets scored on plenty, and other than one big year for Beagle, he also has fished more than his fair share of pucks out of the net. Half of your statement was stupid, and you have absolutely nothing to back it up.
- 1970vintage

They are essentially the same role players.

Good service bottom 6 centers who can log minutes killing penalties and taking defensive zone face offs.
Sutter at least can shoot the puck. Beale can win face offs.

As a 21 year old, one player scored one nhl goal in his 20 game debut. The other player didn't play in the nhl.

As a 22 year old, one player won 51 percent of their faceoffs in their 57 game sophomore season, they also had 5 assists but 0 goals and 33 PIMs, the other player didn't play in the NHL.

As a 23 year old, one player scored 4 goals including one game winner in their 37 game season, the other player played 3 NHL games had zero points and won 37 percent of their faceoffs.

As a 24 year old, one player had a 58 percent faceoff percentage to go with their single goal and pair of assists in the 2 games that they played. The other player, at 24, played 7 games and had a 55 percent faceoff win record to go with their single goal and single assist.

One player has been written off by the majority of the fan base who want instant results and the other has been embraced as a sacrifice of sorts for the next 4 seasons.

Based fully on the statistics listed above, I would hazard that both players will end up having very similar careers by the time all is said and done, with the first player having a slight edge in faceoff percentage, games played and points.

Now, if you were building a team, not to win this season, but to win in two or three years down the road, which player should you pick?

Hint, it's a player that will be in his prime and won't have a large cap hit.

One player didn't score 4 goals until they were 26 years old, the other did it at 23. Which one is better at the same age?

They are essentially the same role players.

Good service bottom 6 centers who can log minutes killing penalties and taking defensive zone face offs.
Sutter at least can shoot the puck. Beale can win face offs.

As a 21 year old, one player scored one nhl goal in his 20 game debut. The other player didn't play in the nhl.

As a 22 year old, one player won 51 percent of their faceoffs in their 57 game sophomore season, they also had 5 assists but 0 goals and 33 PIMs, the other player didn't play in the NHL.

As a 23 year old, one player scored 4 goals including one game winner in their 37 game season, the other player played 3 NHL games had zero points and won 37 percent of their faceoffs.

As a 24 year old, one player had a 58 percent faceoff percentage to go with their single goal and pair of assists in the 2 games that they played. The other player, at 24, played 7 games and had a 55 percent faceoff win record to go with their single goal and single assist.

One player has been written off by the majority of the fan base who want instant results and the other has been embraced as a sacrifice of sorts for the next 4 seasons.

Based fully on the statistics listed above, I would hazard that both players will end up having very similar careers by the time all is said and done, with the first player having a slight edge in faceoff percentage, games played and points.

Now, if you were building a team, not to win this season, but to win in two or three years down the road, which player should you pick?

Hint, it's a player that will be in his prime and won't have a large cap hit.

One player didn't score 4 goals until they were 26 years old, the other did it at 23. Which one is better at the same age?
- Pres.cup

TLDR....a team needs solid young and veteran players to win, which is the ultimate objective. Last night showed what missing both Beagle and Sutter looks like.

Buttman wants 20 teams in the PO's. it's going to happen one way or the other.

As long as he is lining the pockets of his top American ownership base and handing them a few cups once in awhile they just love him.
- LordHumungous

31 possible games just to win the cup. Another half a season. Insane.

I'd say Tanev standing by the side of the net with his thumb up his ass was a contributing factor as well lol.

Markstrom didn't help matters either with the rebound gift on the third goal either.

Pettersson was a factor but nowhere near the sole reason the Nucks blew that lead lol.
- LordHumungous

Post's. Easy missed chances. Team is winning because they have been converting those chances. Yesterday they didn't.

I also observed several mistakes, but everyone seems fine with this because he is a superstar, hopefully Green teaches him to be more responsible.

BTW any criticism of Pettersson will not be accepted as criticism but will be labeled as a hater.
- Makita

31 possible games just to win the cup. Another half a season. Insane.
- manvanfan

I know as a fan I would like hockey 11 of 12 months but that doesn't mean I would like more playoff games.

I think the league would look at it as more gate revenues , more televised revenue , more advertising revenue .

Owners would look at it the same way and a better chance of their team making the playoffs.

I think you will be fighting a losing battle.

I know as a fan I would like hockey 11 of 12 months but that doesn't mean I would like more playoff games.

I think the league would look at it as more gate revenues , more televised revenue , more advertising revenue .

Owners would look at it the same way and a better chance of their team making the playoffs.

I think you will be fighting a losing battle.
- VANTEL

More games were the players don't get paid.

I know as a fan I would like hockey 11 of 12 months but that doesn't mean I would like more playoff games.

I think the league would look at it as more gate revenues , more televised revenue , more advertising revenue .

Owners would look at it the same way and a better chance of their team making the playoffs.

I think you will be fighting a losing battle.
- VANTEL

I think I prefer quality over lining the pockets of the owners.

I think I prefer quality over lining the pockets of the owners.
- manvanfan

Tell them that. If they see a way to make more money you know they probably will take it.

So if I read it correctly it’s giving the greatest odds to a wild vs flyers Stanley Cup final?
- bloatedmosquito