I'm actually kind of conflicted here. Do we compliment Bucky on his shamelessness here? Apparently he's not bothered at all about how he may be perceived. But this is so unbelievably bad, I don't understand how it squeezes through the editing process. I'm beginning to think that Warren Buffett's golden retriever actually is the News' sports editor.
Tim Kennedy hasn't taken a full lap around the NHL, but he already knows how it works.
A full lap is playing a full season, or playing each team? One way or another, he seems like a pretty smart guy to figure it out so quickly.
You want to score goals? Get your fanny to the net. You want to help your team and make a good living in the best travel hockey league in the world? Get your fanny to both ends of the rink.
Dangerously close to plaschke-nanigans on the "best travel hockey league in the world." Also, fanny? Really? Are you my 68 year old second grade teacher?
Kennedy was hardly fretting about a seven-game scoring drought that ended Saturday when he set up fellow rookie Tyler Ennis for his first NHL goal in the Buffalo Sabres' 3-2 victory over the Philadelphia Flyers.
Whoa! Kennedy didn't register a point for seven games? That's a pretty significant scoring drought. They've only played 17 so far, meaning he was without for almost half the season up to this point. But you know what I'm wondering right now? How did this guy deal with it? I'm sure a true professional from Ontario or Alberta or Europe, where I'm sure he's from because no local guy could ever make it to the pros much less make it to the pros for the local team, handled it with aplomb.
Instead, the South Buffalo native
Holy crap!! He's from Buffalo???? Amazing!! Somebody should've mentioned this sooner!!
looked at a bigger picture that showed he was playing well for a Sabres team leading its division.
He was playing well? You just said he hadn't scored a point in seven straight games, which is a long time. It'd be like Terrell Owens not scoring a touchdown in three straight... nevermind.
"I don't really stress about [scoring] as long as our line is playing well," Kennedy said.
This is presented as a valid sentiment. I'm filing this away for when Jochen Hecht "sucks" again.
"We're creating opportunities and playing well in our own zone. That's all I care about right now. I've been playing hockey long enough to know that you go on streaks sometimes, and those points will come in bunches."
What a true professional! What a veteran concept! He's obviously a lunchpail kind of guy who will be a blue collar fan favorite, since he's playing both ends of the rink and always has his A game.
For what it's worth, Kennedy has one goal and five points.
Wait, I thought he was awesome? Those numbers kind of suck.
This is the only point total that mattered: 25.
That's how many the Sabres have earned through 17 games with a 12-4-1 record. Their strong start continued with three straight victories in four nights, including back-to-back wins over Calgary and Philadelphia.
Are we still talking about Tim Kennedy? The Sabres are playing well, though, which is cool. But after three games in four nights, what did they do on the fifth day?
They were off Sunday.
Oh, cool.
Forget the individual stats.
He left out "until Tallinder, Lydman, Connolly, Hecht, or Lalime go through a rough patch, when individual stats will not only not be forgotten, they'll be made up!"
Kennedy has been solid for the Sabres while centering the third line and playing against the opposing team's top two lines virtually every game, giving Buffalo its first true checking line in years, while he adjusts to playing in the NHL.
This is a little trickier, but upon closer inspection "playing against the opposing team's top two lines virtually every game" means: 1) he does not, in fact, play against the opponent's top two lines every game, and 2) when you're skating 10-15 shifts a game you're bound to see each line at least once (thereby making this statement accurate, but still misleading). This does not take into account that maybe, perhaps the opposing coach is trying to match his top two lines against these guys because they're not exactly generating a wealth of offense (judging by Kennedy's plus-minus anyways).
"They're the one line you really feel good about putting on the ice," Sabres coach Lindy Ruff said. "They're a puck-possession line. They've had good opportunities. They don't make that real low-percentage play. Every play that line usually makes against the top lines is a high-percentage play. Just get it to the net."
This kind of says nothing. Actually, I take that back. This says nothing.
Kennedy has had veteran Jochen Hecht on his flank almost all season. Mike Grier was playing the right side before injuring his groin.
Relevance? Anyone? Anyone?
What follows qualifies as pornography in the Gleason household. Reader discretion is advised.
Angola native Patrick Kaleta was bumped up from the fourth line, giving the Sabres two Buffalo-born forwards on the same line for the first time in history.
"The B-lo line," Kaleta said with a smile.
I'm speechless. Seriously, I can't believe this is actually happening.
If the Buffalo boys continue playing their style, they will remain in good standing with Ruff. Kennedy made the roster because he played so well defensively that Ruff had to keep him. Kaleta has a spot because he was willing to skate through a wall when he wasn't throwing someone through one.
All I can say right now is please, if there is any kind of merciful deity watching over us, please do not let Patrick Kane ever sign with the Sabres. Or Brooks Orpik. Please.
Kennedy, 23, is a terrific skater and puck-handler who also plays with plenty of bite.
Gotta be careful there. Jarkko Ruutu also plays with plenty of bite, which is a great way to get fined.
Ruff knows his point totals would certainly be higher if he played on the power play,
Saying this is like saying "
but that's not where he needs Kennedy.
Most likely because, as noted above, Tim Kennedy doesn't really generate a lot of points.
Ruff would rather have the rookie available for the first shift after the Sabres' PP, when the opposition typically sends out its top scoring line.
Unfortunately I am in no position to verify or dispute this. Perhaps we could get a quote from Lindy saying that this is the case?
"I'm pleased with the way he's played," Ruff said. "I would love to see him cash in on a few opportunities, and I think that will come. As a line, they scored some important goals for us early on. No points [for seven games]? That part will come."
Or how about a completely banal assessment of Kennedy's play thus far, with no articulation as to what happens after a power play goal whatsoever.
It explains why Ruff, for all the conversations he had with Kennedy about his play, hasn't mentioned a word to the rookie about producing more points. After all, when did scoring goals become more important than preventing them?
Whenever you write about Tim Connolly, who, FYI, also happens to be great at puck possession. Some of the things Connolly does with the puck on his stick would've gotten him burned at the stake in 17th century Salem.
Kennedy has a plus-1 rating, an accomplishment given his role.
A +1 rating isn't an accomplishment. It's barely breaking even. You're distorting his role. Just a few lines ago you're saying the points are going to come, so obviously Kennedy (and his line) are still charged with the task of scoring goals. Seriously, who sends a line on to the ice with instructions to not score? But now, since Kennedy apparently gets zero power play time, his five points and plus one means his line's also been on the ice for four opposing goals. I'm not saying it's terrible, but I will say it doesn't deserve an entire column pointing this fact out.
Kennedy's defense has created offensive opportunities, which is what Ruff has been preaching for years.
That apparently no one converts, judging by the numbers.
The Sabres spent much of the game against Philly playing — shhhh! — the neutral zone trap, which enabled them to control the tempo. Kennedy had one good scoring chance, but Ray Emery stopped it with his blocker.
This is almost identical to the comment that got John Wawrow blasted in August, when T.O. would've scored but for a "perfect" tackle. This sentence basically says "Kennedy had a good scoring chance, but the opposing goalie did what he's paid to do."
He has had more scoring opportunities than he could count but failed to convert on all but one for a variety of reasons. It includes unlucky bounces that get smothered in the crease (Edmonton last week) to great saves (Boston the previous weekend) to simply failing to get his shot off quickly enough against the best goalies in the world.
Excuse, excuse, poor execution out of Tim Kennedy. Does your editor pay any attention to what you write at all ever?
At some point, that will change.
Unless, of course, it doesn't, but Bucky will still love you because you're from South Buffalo. Or so I hear, at least.
"If I keep getting them and don't start scoring, that's on me," Kennedy said.
Timmy Kennedy, accountable.
"Right now, they're not going in, but who knows? Last year [in Portland], it was the same thing. I wasn't scoring for a little bit and ended up going on a good streak.
Timmy Kennedy, potential.
That's how it comes right now with the pros. You go through droughts for some games, and then you go on a hot streak. Hopefully, a hot streak is coming around."
Timmy Kennedy, veteran beyond his years.
I'm assuming the drafting of this column used up the entire kleenex supply in the Gleason household. I think a few tags are warranted here.
No comments:
Post a Comment