Glenn Savior has always been a fan of high flying hockey. If you asked him he'd probably tell you that the NHL's new rules prove that he's been 30 years ahead of the curve! The reality is that he failed to adjust to the changes that took place in the league starting in the mid 90's. Glenn better have paid attention to the Eastern Conference Finals. That series proved beyond a doubt that although the game has definitely opened up a lot, it still takes grit, character, toughness and a good two way game to compete for the cup. Buffalo built its team in the Glenn Savior mode: stacked with high flying gifted offensive players. Although they had tremendous regular season success, they came up short when it counted. Any true hockey fan would have to consider Buffalo's season a failure. The Rangers can't afford to make that mistake.
Most observers noticed that Buffalo could never get it going in the Playoffs. Despite beating the Isles in 5, that series was closer than the score indicated. Despite a huge talent advantage, Buffalo had trouble with the Isles gritty playoff game. The second round could have easily gone either way. Again, despite its talent advantage, Buffalo simply could not match the Rangers commitment to winning. In the end I feel that it was the flawed Rangers roster that lost more than the Sabres who won. Ottawa was different. Buffalo couldn't coast through the series by relying on their talent advantage. Nor could Buffalo hope that Ottawa would self destruct- the Senators are too good. In the end, when faced with its first legitimate opponent, Buffalo came up very short. Why? they're not a playoff team. They lack toughness, desire, willingness and commitment. They are a team blessed with skilled players, an interchangeable flock of very good and talented second line types. They're also a team sorely lacking the gritty third line types that wear down the opposition. Not to mention their utter lack of a top line "power forward" (not necessarily a physical first liner but at least a big one who is hard to defend against).
Like I said, most observer's noticed Buffalo's problems early in the playoffs. Except, that is, the Buffalo media. They consistently referred to the Sabres as "The Presidents Trophy Winners". As if that means anything in the playoffs. Even some Buffalo bloggers refused to acknowledge their teams shortcomings. Here are a couple of comments I posted a while back on some prominent blogs:
"The Rangers series was extremely close. It could have gone either way. I think your team needs a major attitude adjustment if it wants to go further in this tournament. What's with Buffalo's feelings of entitlement to the cup? Even the Buffalo media consistently refers to the Sabres as "The President's Trophy Winners". So what? Does that mean the Sabres are now entitled to the Cup? The attitude that Buffalo can just show up at the rink and expect to take home the cup is why Buffalo has not dictated games thus far in the playoffs. The Cup is won it's not handed out. You guys have a great team, but you've gotta recognize the work it takes to win it all and stop thinking of the Cup as some kind of inheritance. Ottawa will steam roll Buffalo if Buffalo is not prepared to work for its victories.
Last edited by TheHockeyRabbi on May 8th at 3:41 PM. "
Here's the response I got (I've omitted the bloggers name as I have a lot of respect for the guy and I'm not looking to gloat, merely making a point):
"HR-They say the President's Trophy Winners because they are the President's trophy Winners. I don't see how Buffalo isn't working for their victories. They outworked the Rangers, thats why they won. Buffalo, of all teams, knows that the Cup isn't handed out. "
Here's my response:
LGB: Buffalo is a team that is good enough to impose its style of play onto its opponents. Thus far, they haven't done that. The majority of the 2nd round was played at the Rangers' pace. To me it's a matter of desire/will/commitment. Buffalo has to forget about its regular season success, forget about last years playoff run, forget about everything. Instead, focus on playing each game 1 shift at at time and imposing your game on your opponents each and every shift. I don't think Buffalo has reached that point yet. However, I hope that they do. Once I get over the sting of loosing to the Sabres, I'll probably be rooting for them: I think it would be very good for the league to have a talented and offensive minded team win the cup. Hopefully, more teams would then move to that style of play. As a fan of the game, nothing would make me happier (except of course the Rangers winning it all!!!!).
Finally, here's his response to me:
THR-I've watched all but about 5 games this year of the Sabres...they don't take anything for granted. Buffalo is playing fine, they are in the conference finals.
I don't know what games he was referring to but come playoff time Buffalo did not play well at all. Reading the Buffalo newspaper articles and blogs made me feel like I was in the twilight zone. Either these guys are totally in love with their team and unable to take an objective look, or they really don't know how to win- yet. It's probably a little bit of both. Buffalo has never won a cup so you can't blame the city and/or the media for not knowing what it takes. The bottom line is that Buffalo didn't have what it takes. Today, the Buffalo media has finally woken up to that reality. And Glenn Savior better be paying attention. Here are some quotes from the Buffalo News:
The Senators were just as fast, just as skilled, only tougher. Toughness was of concern since the undervalued Jay McKee and Mike Grier walked out the door.
Why wasn’t that addressed? People have been asking all year.
For starters, the organization became full of itself, especially when the Sabres began cruising toward their best season ever. So, rather than sturdy the blue line with a veteran who could help guide them through the postseason, they did almost nothing. Dainius Zubrus was a nice addition. He played well for two rounds, was injured and finished with zero postseason goals.
How about this quote:In the end, the Sabres bought into their own reputation. They thought they were indestructible. They elected to make fancy plays over intelligent ones. They were soft. They lacked the effort required to win. It’s not what Ruff had in mind when he wanted his team playing out of character.
Add up everything, and the end shouldn’t have been shocking at all.
How about this assessment as to whether Briere (all flash no toughness) should be kept over Drury (great two way clutch performer):
It’s hard to imagine the Sabres keeping him. Chris Drury, the team’s undisputed leader and one of the game’s great clutch players, is also an unrestricted free agent and will be a higher priority. Drury is expected to fetch a salary in excess in $6 million.
That same author continues with this:
It’s very unlikely the Sabres will break the bank for Briere. He was a force in the regular season, but he was
not enough of a difference-maker in the playoffs, when finesse players tend to be neutralized.
Paying attention, Glenn??? How about this quote (regarding Briere and the Sabres) which pretty much says it all:
Yes, he came to symbolize a small, dynamic team. But in the end, Briere also reflected the Sabres’ essential flaw. Management gambled that speed and finesse would win out over toughness and grit in the new NHL. But in the critical moments, Ottawa had too much of both.
The Senators were also a little hungrier, maybe because they had failed so many times over the years and become hardened by disappointment.
Hey Glenn, don't make the same bet you've been making for the last 30 years. Forget the old Oilers. You've already got plenty of high flyers on this team. Now go out and get Drury and Smyth so that we can have another victory parade in the parking lot (oops that's the icelanders!!!!) Canyon of Heroes.
Very into your 'piece'. Only thing I might disagree on is the hard hitting physical presence. I think Zubrus provides the opportunity for that, as he showed by frustrating Jagr all series. But in the final 4, he was clearly shot. That doesn't mean that he is not a sufficient physical force- he just burned out. But remember, only 1 out of 30 teams doesn't burn out this time of year. If the rangers had 3 or 4 Zubrus', we'd all be very happy fans. The real issue is that the Rangers don't have that physical presence who can hit & score 30 a year. Now do you understand why I'm calling for Ryan Smyth? They either have a guy who can steamroll others(Avery) or someone who can only score (Jagr, Straka). Come to think of it, it really makes you yearn for a Mess-type. Unfortunately, we don't have anyone close to that caliber, nor is one available anywhere in site.
Posted by: MOSS | May 21, 2007 at 05:44 AM
why? you have blair betts!
Posted by: thedirtyboy | May 21, 2007 at 07:13 AM
Has anyone noticed that Larry Brooks of the NY Post randomly writes articles covering the Yankees? Also, does anyone notice that ever since Brooks was regularly covering the Yankees during the '05 lockout, he adds baseball subtleties to his Rangers coverage? You'll notice alot of "...pitching shutouts", "....5-tool guy", "...striking out with the bases loaded", etc. that leaves me wondering if I'm reading about hockey or baseball. I was a big fan of Brooks, as he was always reliable in calling a trade weeks before it happened, but now he seems to have lost his roots. I don't mean to sound like Phil Mushnik- who I despise as a 'journalist'- but Brooks should just stick to pucks.
Posted by: MOSS | May 21, 2007 at 08:24 AM
Blair Betts!! great name.
Posted by: The Hockey Rabbi | May 21, 2007 at 08:36 AM
Moss:
I think Brooks knew someone in the Neil Smith era because he always got the inside scoop back then. Nowadays, his predictions haven't been accurate. He prints a lot of rumors that are all over the place. Spector loves to rip into him for his "rumors".
Dirtyboy:
Those were some great Sather quotes you posted a few days ago! I might have to bring Glenn in for a little counseling session! If you have any more of those send them in.
Posted by: The Hockey Rabbi | May 21, 2007 at 08:40 AM
Moss:
Here's an interesting quote I found from an old larry brooks interview relating to our earlier discussion:
Bird:
I am convinced that during Neil Smiths' tenure as Rangers GM, you as a writer had more access to inside info on possible story lines as a result of Smiths' openness with the media. Is this accurate ? If so, explain how that showed up in your columns. I admire Glen Sather for his policy of not "floating things out" to the media to judge public opinion. I assume that Glen is not as forthcoming as his predecessor was. How does this effect your ability to gather enough info for your columns ? Also, do Glen Sather and Donald Rumsfeld seem as similar to you as they do to me ?One in the same?
LARRY:
You are correct. Neil was prone to providing off-the-record information to writers covering the team. Glen is not. While some inside information is obviously helpful, I would much rather deal with a general manager who never goes off the record than with one who feeds "favored" reporters. And I see no similarity whatsover between Sather and Rumsfeld.
Posted by: The Hockey Rabbi | May 21, 2007 at 10:07 AM
Rabbi,
I have no more Sather quotes at the time, but I'll give you some Milbury quotes. He is an idiot, but he's very entertaining. Back in the dizzle, he was going back and forth with Palffy's agent Paul Kraus. Negotiations weren't going so well so he just called Kraus out publicly! The 2nd quote might be my favorite of all-time:
1) "I think the agent is a moron and way in over his head."
2) "It's too bad he lives in the city. He's depriving some small village of a pretty good idiot."
3) "We hope that Ziggy will come to his senses. We have no hope Paul Kraus will."
Man, I really miss him.
Posted by: thedirtyboy | May 21, 2007 at 10:44 AM
I never like to feed any energy into anything that has to do with the Isles, but while we are on the subject, I would just like to know how it is that a GM so clearly ahead of the pack in scouting & drafting players could be so behind in the trading department? In all seriousness, I think the isles would be the best team in the East- by far- had they kept all the players they drafted. I'll give him some credit for DiPietro, being that he has immense potential. But how does Bertuzzi, Palffy, Redden, McCabe, Luongo, Jokinen, Chara, etc. become Muller, Linden, & Parish? I guess if he had the payroll the Rangers did, he would win the Cup every year. By the way, before I sign off, I would like to leave you with the greatest quote of all time.
"We'll win tonight...."
Posted by: MOSS | May 21, 2007 at 11:38 AM
And I would like to leave you with another classic by Milbury:
"We're rolling the dice here a little bit. Roberto Luongo is going to be an excellent goaltender in this league. He is a class act and a kid I know we would have been happy to ride with. But hell, I've gotta send him off."
Posted by: thedirtyboy | May 21, 2007 at 12:05 PM
I would also like to add:
80 degrees
when I tell that bitch please
get up off these n-u-tz
cause you gets none of these
at ease
Posted by: thedirtyboy | May 21, 2007 at 12:08 PM