That's all fine and good powerplayer, but you're talking about things from well before this series started. Going in Buffalo should have been fine, after another two injuries they are worse off than Boston.

Savard is not some savior anyway. If he had a full season he'd be at 62 pts...not that big a deal. That's like missing Connolly...oh wait he's at 70% with a broken foot anyway.

As for the Bruins prior inuries...so what? They're better off than Buffalo now, and now kinda counts more than several months ago.

Just because the officials are letting the same infractions go doesn't mean it's even. Let's say for the sake of argument, the officials decide not to call any interference penalties. Now if one team tends to commit interference more often, that's going to be an advantage to them even though the same calls are not being made for either team.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual

Irony, please take a breath and understand what I'm saying. Last night there were a few important non-calls against Buffalo, but that's not the point.

If a skill team is matched against a physical team and the series is called tightly, the skill team gets the advantage because they should be getting PPs and eventually more free ice when the physical team pays with a penalty each time they obstruct.

If the series is called loosely, the physical team has the advantage because they can dictate play simply by obstructing and such without paying for it. Sure, the skill team can try to play the same way, but it's not their strength. It doesn't matter how many PPs each team gets, the 5-on-5 play is going to be at the physical team's strength because it's their style.

We all know Buffalo is not good or built for a physical game, so this is not whining about some conspiracy. This is a simple logical observation.

its the playoffs, the playoffs have always been more physical, and more defensive oriented. its the nature of the beast. if the players dont like it, theres the big ass door. the bruins are winning the puck battles, and they are playing amazing defense. if the bruins are exploiting loopholes, and the sabres arnt, thats the sabres fault.

i think if the sabres had 10 powerplays while the bruins had 2, but the bruins won, people would still blame the refs. lets point the blame where it belongs. or dont blame anyone, and just say the bruins are the better team right now.

_________________

You think I'm "blaming". I'll complain about some non-calls from last night, but I'm hardly blaming the refs. I'm saying that if "A" happens (loosely called series) then "B" (Sabres are at a disadvantage).

This was frustratingly obvious from the Recchi assist, but either way Buffalo couldn't manage a quality scoring chance for the vast majority of the game. This was in part due to the style of play and more so from the injuries.

Add - yes the playoffs are more physical, but the officiating at one time was supposed to be comparable to the regular season. It was for a few seasons and now we're probably swaying back to muck and grind. I have a big problem with that, but that's another more general issue to discuss another time.

None of this matters.

During a time of year that you live or die by your ability to seize opportunities, your power play just can't go 0-11.

You can't blame that on injuries, either, because it's been miserable all year.

For the love of god, I wish they'd bring back Scott Arniel as a special teams coach.

_________________
Wheelhouse

Yeah, I felt that could have been an interference call on Recchi for that hit on Kennedy. Of course, it was made worse when Bergeron scored off of his feed. Fucker.

_________________
"...they came down into the stands and asked if I knew how to do play by play. I said...No. But. I'll take a shot at it if you want".- Rick Jeanneret

Calling the same number of penalties on each team doesn't mean the officials are calling games 'evenly'. If a penalty happens, call it. If it's a penalty in January, it should be a penalty in April. That has not been the case in this series, nor any of the other games I've watched league wide. Players are getting away with things that they didn't 6 weeks ago.

Allowing clutching / grabbing / interference, which is being done, obviously benefits the Bruins. I don't think anyone can dispute that. The onus is on the Sabres to work around that, although they shouldn't use that as an excuse why they've dropped two in a row.

It adds to the frustration

_________________
"...they came down into the stands and asked if I knew how to do play by play. I said...No. But. I'll take a shot at it if you want".- Rick Jeanneret

It's safe to say you don't really know what you're talking about:

Vanek
05-06 48 pts (81 games)
06-07 84 pts (82 games)
07-08 64 pts (82 games)
08-09 64 pts (73 games)
09-10 53 pts (71 games)

Savrad
05-06 97 pts (82 games)
06-07 96 pts (82 games)
07-08 78 pts (74 games)
08-09 88 pts (82 games)
09-10 33 pts (41 games)

Year in, year out, Savard outperforms Vanek. I like how you simply doubled Savards half year total to dictate his season total, when in reality the guy usually picks up his play in the latter part of the season (which he has completely missed). Convenient. Meanwhile, Vanek has played 30 more games this year and only has 20 more points.

If I had to pick which player to have on my team, HANDS DOWN it would be Savard.

For someone who constantly debases other users for conjecture and assumptions, you make a pretty big one in saying that Savard usually picks up his play towards the end of the season.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual

Geeez man, enough of this ridiculous argument. The numbers don't lie. AT THE VERY LEAST, Savard is as good as Vanek. The numbers say he's better than Vanek.

See this?

ENOUGH. MAKE YOUR POINT WITHOUT INSULTS.

To the point at hand, yes, Savard has consistently produced more points than Vanek. He's a center; that's his job.

Vanek has consistently produced more goals than Savard.

It's also worth pointing out that the 5 year timeframe you compared consists of Vanek's first 5 seasons in the NHL. Savard had 421 games under his belt before Vanek even started, and you would expect a more experienced player to have those better numbers.

Vanek's job is to score, actually. He is noted as a goal scorer, while Savard is more of a set up man. That's why Boston was so good when they had Kessel, it was Bergeron, Kessel, and Savard.

_________________
"Counting all the assholes in the room, I'm definitely not alone!" ~ Michael Poulsen, Volbeat, Still Standing.

I agree with Irony. When it comes right down to it, the refs were fair. Sure, they missed some calls, but being a ref is hard. You can't see EVERY penalty or dirty play. Just most.

_________________
"Counting all the assholes in the room, I'm definitely not alone!" ~ Michael Poulsen, Volbeat, Still Standing.

Why are you getting like that powerplayer? It's safe to say that I do know the fuck what I'm talking about, and that you misunderstood that post. So before you get to being an ass with me, let me clear up what you misunderstood...

I never compared Savard to Vanek and I don't know how you thought so. I'm saying that Savard is not a savior. He's good but this season he's not on a great pace for production. I'm sure that has as much to do with the rest of the team as Savard, but 33 pts in 41 games is not gamebreaking production. I will correct myself since I typed 62 pts when I should have estimated 66 pts. Supposing that Savard would "pick up his pace" and pretending that I ignored this "fact" is being borderline retarded.

66 pts is comparable to Roy or Connolly. Since Connolly is well below 100% I made the slightly sarcastic remark about it being a wash. Both players are comparable in production, one is out while the other is ineffective due to his injury. After that Boston is missing a d-man while Buffalo is missing two top forwards, including their best/hottest forward, and has another (Stafford) that wouldn't be playing right now if it weren't the playoffs.

Split hairs over any of this and debate it to the hilt, but the bottom line is that Buffalo is worse off injury wise than Boston right now, during this series, when it matters the most.

First of all, "you don't know what you're talking about" is pretty innocuous---on a HOCKEY board of all places!. Squnato, you're getting really petty with me and I don't appreciate it. These boards are FILLED with comments much stronger than that. You don't need to look very far to find one.

Secondly, you made my point. Yes, Savard has more experience than Vanek. He is, maybe because of that, a better player. And don't discount his role. Points are points are points. Is Malkin less a player because he had 5 less goals than Vanek? He finished last season with 113 points. Vanek had 64.

If we had a power play that made Boston quiver, they'd think twice before committing penalties and slowing us down on the rush.

But since we don't, what's to stop them?

_________________
Wheelhouse

The NHL.
Oh wait...

_________________
"Counting all the assholes in the room, I'm definitely not alone!" ~ Michael Poulsen, Volbeat, Still Standing.

I don't care if you don't appreciate it or not; that's the job that the moderators have to do. All these little snippy comments you (and others) have been making are adding fuel to the fire in an atmosphere that's already tense enough because of the playoffs being underway. You're not the only person that has been asked to tone it down, so don't feel singled out.

It's quite annoying, because you do make some compelling points that get lost because of the extra crap that does nothing to further the discussion.

The thing with Savard is simple. He's a very good setup man, but his effectiveness will be lessened without finishers. That was a problem even before he got hurt. His career numbers support this. He can create, and get people the puck who can finish. However, he won't be as effective a player if he's surrounded by people who CAN'T finish, and that's been the situation in Boston for most of the year.