I said he was giving Boston fits during the first 70 minutes of the series. If you don't realize that you weren't watching. Stop being a pain in the ass over it.

Better is subjective, and a matter of opinion, as your original response correctly stated.

My feeling is that from a strictly talent perspective, Buffalo is better than Boston. The regular season final standings bear that out. However, head to head, Boston's style of play counters Buffalo's style of play quite effectively.

The same could be said for New Jersey and Philadelphia. The 'better' team doesn't always win in the playoffs.

You've poo poo'd anyone who said that Vanek MIGHT have altered the outcome of the series had he not been hurt, yet you make the assumption that Savard would have done so many great things against Buffalo.

Can't have it both ways.

Boston was a better team than the inexperienced, injured, unprepared Sabres this year.

Next season won't be the case.

Every team has a rite of passage before greatness.

_________________
Wheelhouse

Squanto, no problem. Too bad there isn't a rule against twisting, exaggerating, confusing, and outright totally missing the points of other posters to the point of appearing intentional.

I wasn't insinuating that at all, merely stating it as a counter to the presumptive hypothesis already being floated.

Too bad there isn't a rule against letting one's bias affect their reasoning, especially when it's so glaring at times.

Everyone here is entitled to their own opinion, reasoned or unreasoned, biased or unbiased.

I motion to close the thread. This is going no where, and it seems as though you'll have to agree to disagree.

_________________
Wheelhouse

Vanek was on a current streak, had he not went down, the refs were a bit better, hecht was back, the Sabres could have won. I know people are going to be like, "Refs, B&Y? We are past that!", but the McCormick and Kaleta penalties won Boston that game, and the Vanek injury game loosened the Sabres spirits. We could have won those two games if those events didn't happen. COULD HAVE. It's not me saying we WOULD have, we would have a good chance.

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

You'll be the only one in here to call me a biased homer...that's for sure. This is simple...injuries hurt your chances of winning, they don't help. There is no bias in saying that. While you argue that, you can also argue why the sky is red, it brighter at night, and how the sun is cold.

LOL! Of course!

I was just mimmicking the person to whom I responded.

You guys are too much.

Vanek was on a current streak (worlds shortest streak),
had he not went down,
the refs were a bit better,
hecht was back,

the Sabres could have won.

Have you disclaimed enough?

You can do that for each and every team in the league.

If Savard was back
if Seidenberg was back
if Stuart was back
if beer at TD garden was cheaper

Boston could've won. Oh wait, they did anyway!

You'll find Boston was on one of the shortest ends of the stick this season, yet managed to pull it together when it mattered most.

Seriously, can we stop the whining?

For the love of god, close this thread.

_________________
Wheelhouse

For the love of God and honesty, have the courage to admit Boston was the better team and move on. Some people have gotten so good at making excuses that they should be working in the front office.

Geeeeez.

And yes, PLEASE close this thread, because every time I see a lame excuse, I am compelled to respond---even though I realize it's pointless trying to get through to some people who are convinced that an established outcome is unjust and not a reflection of (their version of) reality.

P.S. If it makes you feel any better, Boston's EXTREMELY poor luck with injury this season continues as now Krejci is out for the season with a broken wrist. They get Savard back and now have Seidenberg, Stuart, Sturm and Krejci out. It never ends for this team.

Will you stop pounding out the "excuses" response and at least try to pretend that you're having a conversation?

I already said before the series that Boston was going to be tough. I had no misconceptions about it, but I did think Buffalo would win due to 1) being healthy (which quickly changed) and 2) Boston's inept offense (which they turned around). If both teams were healthy I would call it a toss-up or near toss-up. Boston may very well be the better team...I don't care and I have no desire to argue the point. That doesn't mean Buffalo wasn't good enough to beat them.

They very well could have beat Boston without a few things going against them. The injuries and officiating are simple observations...nothing more. Continuing that "biased homer" type of response is pretty damn insulting to me, so just drop it unless you just feel like being an ass. I fully acknowledge that Boston still could've or probably won the series regardless of any adversity Buffalo faced.

My point that you refuse to acknowledge, is that Boston is a better team than their record indicated (due to injuries), and they are playing well now. Because of that, there shouldn't be this "trade/fire everybody" type of response for Buffalo. They are only a few players short of being a legit Cup contender, with cap room to use this summer.

If you can't reasonably respond to that without the "biased, homer excuses" slant, then just don't respond at all.

I am having a conversation, you are just incensed at what I am saying, that's all.

This notion that the Sabres were good enough to beat the Bruins is really something to think about. Generally in sports, if a team is good enough to beat another team, THEY BEAT THEM. Especially when given TWELVE opportunities between the regualr and post seasons.

Of that 12

Boston 8, Buffalo 4.

Who's the better team?

You can consume yourself with all the variables, but there are ALWAYS variables to spin if the outcome doesn't go your way. That's why fans don't decide outcomes, SCORES do.

You have an opinion that others don't share.

A couple posts above, you AGREED with me that people are entitled to their opinions, yet you continue to put forth that your opinion is the right one and people should agree with you.

This thread has derailed enough off of the discussion about Ennis. It's done.