HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Sully Copy & Paste Column about Pegula firing everyone

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-20-2011, 11:27 AM
  #26
moltenlava26
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 209
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight View Post
The first point is a bit off. Any smart buisness man takes time to allow his own guys to do a close evaluation of what he has before attempting to make huge changes. In hockey it takes time to closely evaluate the ups and downs of a team. You can't decide what needs to be done over a 10 game stretch. He will take the season and probably leave the leadership together until the offseason then make the necisary changes. He didn't become a billionaire by making kneejerk decisions like that.
A truely smart business man would have looked at the past production of the business he was buying and looked at the trends in the business model. What has been successful? How can the product be improved?

LR and DR have been part of a losing culture (post Drury and Danny B), but got a free pass due to past ownership. Well DR was allowed to spend, and we got Ville Lenio. LR was allowed to try to run his system more consistently with top end FAs and his "core." LR went as far to name every "core" member captain or assistant minus Miller.

So where are the Sabres 1/3 of the way into the season? They are clinging to the bottom playoff spot in the East with one of the highest payrolls.

I don't think the whole team needs to be blown up, but a change at GM or HC needs to be made, along with a trade of one or two "core" players. The Sabres lack on ice leadership. At this point, I would trade potential production (Roy/Stafford) for consistant blue collar hard working players.

moltenlava26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 11:30 AM
  #27
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by moltenlava26 View Post
A truely smart business man would have looked at the past production of the business he was buying and looked at the trends in the business model. What has been successful? How can the product be improved?

LR and DR have been part of a losing culture (post Drury and Danny B), but got a free pass due to past ownership. Well DR was allowed to spend, and we got Ville Lenio. LR was allowed to try to run his system more consistently with top end FAs and his "core." LR went as far to name every "core" member captain or assistant minus Miller.

So where are the Sabres 1/3 of the way into the season? They are clinging to the bottom playoff spot in the East with one of the highest payrolls.

I don't think the whole team needs to be blown up, but a change at GM or HC needs to be made, along with a trade of one or two "core" players. The Sabres lack on ice leadership. At this point, I would trade potential production (Roy/Stafford) for consistant blue collar hard working players.
Unless he wants his own guys who he trusts to evaluate what is happening here and now, so he can make a more informed decision. Not that he ignores the past, he certainly factors that is. But I'm sure he weighs what is the better option.

HiddenInLight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 11:32 AM
  #28
KevinFG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 311
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to KevinFG
Of all the crap I've seen that COLUMNIST (read: no facts needed) write over the years, that one is actually pretty tame by comparison. It was also unnecessary, as it falls into the "goes without saying" category.

Saturday night was an embarrassment. Pegula certainly agrees. At least when it comes to the players.

You have to look squarely at Miller, Roy, and Stafford.

Like them or hate them, when the Sabres have needed them the most, they have failed. It's as simple as that.

As for Regeir, I'd say the best players on the ice recently have been his most recent acquisitions, through the draft and free agency.

I can go either way on Ruff. Wouldn't upset me to fire him, nor would it upset me if he stayed.

To me, the one certainty is that Stafford and Roy MUST go, and go soon. Miller needs to get to an elite level, or go as well. He is NOT showing signs of it. I'm not convinced that he can.

KevinFG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 11:35 AM
  #29
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 36,815
vCash: 500
at least you guys recognize crappy journalism

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 11:39 AM
  #30
HarryNealesGarden
Big Daddy Ted
 
HarryNealesGarden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: BOS
Country: United States
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chainshot View Post
Basically a piece that appeals to the masses and offers little in terms of solutions. Bouncing Ruff at this point is the only easy solution and when did Regier become the posterboy for "easy"?
Maybe they can hire an AHL coach because they're fielding a team of AHLers anyway

HarryNealesGarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 11:49 AM
  #31
moltenlava26
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 209
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight View Post
Unless he wants his own guys who he trusts to evaluate what is happening here and now, so he can make a more informed decision. Not that he ignores the past, he certainly factors that is. But I'm sure he weighs what is the better option.
I can buy into wanting his own guys to evalute the franchise, but wouldn't it be more prudent to have HIS guys at the two most crucial talent evaluating postitions? (GM and HC). I think both DR and LR have lost the ability to be objective at this point in their tenure with the Sabres. During his time, when has DR ever traded someone at their highest value when he knew that there was no potential or effort to resign that player? Answer: he hasn't unless you want to count the draft picks for Campbell, which I don't.

I know the past ownership handcuffed DR but how many times has he chosen poorly on the players he retained? Grier/Pyatt/Drury/Mckee just to name a few. While his trades have brought in talent, Ruff's system can not be played consistently. We have watched it and heard the excuses for years. So has Ruff's system become outdated, or is DR not bringing in the proper players so Ruff's system can be played consistently?

If I were the owner, that would have been the first factor I would have evaluated when I bought the team.

moltenlava26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 11:56 AM
  #32
vcv
Moderator
Deal with it
 
vcv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Williamsville, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 14,136
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to vcv
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
I love the side of the fan base that is finally starting to realize that big changes are needed... but still feels the need to defend the things that need changing.

still gotta wear that hat
It's just not that simple. Let me try to lay out for you why myself (and I suspect some others) are not jumping all over having Darcy and/or Lindy fired right now or blowing the team up.

- Darcy and Lindy are very good and would find jobs elsewhere in the league no problem. This is not debated by many.
- Darcy was given the cashflow to add free agents for the first time in... well, maybe ever
- The team *has* improved over the last 3 years. While the last 2 were both first-round exits, the series vs Philly was much closer than the Boston one.
- All 3 off-seasons acquisitions were intended to fill holes that all fans agreed were problems (stay at home defensemen, PP QB, center)
- 2 of 3 of those acquisitions have not lived up to their previous play, let alone expectations, yet
- Team is decimated by injuries
- All 3 acquisitions have proven to be valuable in the playoffs

Basically, I view this year as a trial for Darcy and Lindy on whether or not they deserve to even be considered as GM and coach beyond this season. I have thought that from the moment Terry Pegula stated they weren't going anywhere. Nothing is going to change that until the season is over.

I'm not a fan of blowing things up mid-season, at all.

Give the team a god damn chance to get into the playoffs and show what they are capable of.

Quote:
Originally Posted by moltenlava26
Answer: he hasn't unless you want to count the draft picks for Campbell, which I don't.
Er... why not exactly? That's the exact situation you described.

edit: JB, below, hit on what I was getting at a bit. As always, someone else articulates what I was trying to say better than I could.


Last edited by vcv: 12-20-2011 at 12:01 PM.
vcv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 11:59 AM
  #33
WhoIsJimBob
I Believe
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 18,185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by moltenlava26 View Post
I can buy into wanting his own guys to evalute the franchise, but wouldn't it be more prudent to have HIS guys at the two most crucial talent evaluating postitions? (GM and HC). I think both DR and LR have lost the ability to be objective at this point in their tenure with the Sabres. During his time, when has DR ever traded someone at their highest value when he knew that there was no potential or effort to resign that player? Answer: he hasn't unless you want to count the draft picks for Campbell, which I don't.

I know the past ownership handcuffed DR but how many times has he chosen poorly on the players he retained? Grier/Pyatt/Drury/Mckee just to name a few. While his trades have brought in talent, Ruff's system can not be played consistently. We have watched it and heard the excuses for years. So has Ruff's system become outdated, or is DR not bringing in the proper players so Ruff's system can be played consistently?

If I were the owner, that would have been the first factor I would have evaluated when I bought the team.
Pegula has HIS GUY in Ted Black.

Pegula bought the team mid-season. By the end of the season, Regier and Ruff had done well under Pegula's watch given the run the team went on late in the season.

And while they got bounced in the first round (again), I can understand why Pegula gave them another shot.

The question is how long of a leash do they have. For me, I can understand why they would let them finish out the season, especially given all the injuries.

And as far as Leino goes, who knows how much influence Pegula wields. We know he watched Ehrhoff a lot in the playoffs and liked him prior to the Sabres signing him. Perhaps the same goes for Leino and Pegula has shaped the off season moves more than we know.

If not, I would hope that Regier doesn't get another off season to make the team's cap situation worse while not really helping the on ice product.

WhoIsJimBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 12:01 PM
  #34
Buffalo87
thehosers dot com
 
Buffalo87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rochester
Posts: 7,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by moltenlava26 View Post
I can buy into wanting his own guys to evalute the franchise, but wouldn't it be more prudent to have HIS guys at the two most crucial talent evaluating postitions? (GM and HC). I think both DR and LR have lost the ability to be objective at this point in their tenure with the Sabres. During his time, when has DR ever traded someone at their highest value when he knew that there was no potential or effort to resign that player? Answer: he hasn't unless you want to count the draft picks for Campbell, which I don't.
Why wouldn't you? Just to fit your argument?

Blockbusters rarely happen in the NHL these days and when they do, they are most often contract related. So since the lockout we're looking at Briere/Drury/Vanek/Campbell essentially. Briere, Drury, Vanek were all the same year and the team was busy winning the presidents trophy, you're not trading any of those guys at that point. And Campbell was the following season and he did trade him pretty much at his peak value without hurting the team (read: he waited until it was obvious he wouldn't be re-signed and then dealt him). That trade did get us the pick back that netted us Ennis, then got Bernier which I believe ended up in a 2nd and 3rd after his trade.

The failure in signing Briere, Drury, and Campbell is where the problem lies. And enough information has come out that that decision was largely ownership based and had very little to do with Darcy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by moltenlava26 View Post
I know the past ownership handcuffed DR but how many times has he chosen poorly on the players he retained? Grier/Pyatt/Drury/Mckee just to name a few. While his trades have brought in talent, Ruff's system can not be played consistently. We have watched it and heard the excuses for years. So has Ruff's system become outdated, or is DR not bringing in the proper players so Ruff's system can be played consistently?

If I were the owner, that would have been the first factor I would have evaluated when I bought the team.
Because the Drury and McKee signings worked out so well for those teams. Darcy would be absolutely raked over the coals if he made those kind of signings.

Basically, you answered your own question right there. He was handcuffed so he retained the players he could afford.

Buffalo87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 12:05 PM
  #35
Buffalo87
thehosers dot com
 
Buffalo87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rochester
Posts: 7,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by volatile View Post
It's just not that simple. Let me try to lay out for you why myself (and I suspect some others) are not jumping all over having Darcy and/or Lindy fired right now or blowing the team up.

- Darcy and Lindy are very good and would find jobs elsewhere in the league no problem. This is not debated by many.
- Darcy was given the cashflow to add free agents for the first time in... well, maybe ever
- The team *has* improved over the last 3 years. While the last 2 were both first-round exits, the series vs Philly was much closer than the Boston one.
- All 3 off-seasons acquisitions were intended to fill holes that all fans agreed were problems (stay at home defensemen, PP QB, center)
- 2 of 3 of those acquisitions have not lived up to their previous play, let alone expectations, yet
- Team is decimated by injuries
- All 3 acquisitions have proven to be valuable in the playoffs
Well said, not to mention the fact that the first year the chains are off Darcy, happens to be one of the thinnest FA classes in recent memory. He went out and signed the best FA defenseman available, traded for another that filled a gaping hole in the team. The top choice at center apparently didn't really give Buffalo the time of day so they tried to be inventive and thus far, looks like they were not successful. He would of been crucified if he sat on his hands on July 1st as well.

Buffalo87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 01:03 PM
  #36
Sabretip
Registered User
 
Sabretip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Bob View Post
http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/co...icle679473.ece

I love how Jerry updates his take to include new information from this season to back up his idea.

Oh yeah.....

IIRC, this is the first article Sullivan has written about the Sabres since the preseason. Guess he got so tired of rehashing his usual criticisms on the Bills, or the WGR radio crew did, that he felt it time to aim at the other team in town.

The "copy and paste" thread title was right on the money. Other than switching some of the names in the article and the date of its posting, this read like countless other editorials he's spouted off on.

Sabretip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 01:19 PM
  #37
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 36,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by volatile View Post
It's just not that simple. Let me try to lay out for you why myself (and I suspect some others) are not jumping all over having Darcy and/or Lindy fired right now or blowing the team up.

- Darcy and Lindy are very good and would find jobs elsewhere in the league no problem. This is not debated by many. one man's trash is another man's treasure
- Darcy was given the cashflow to add free agents for the first time in... well, maybe ever Free Agency is not the solution
- The team *has* improved over the last 3 years. While the last 2 were both first-round exits, the series vs Philly was much closer than the Boston one. debatable... regular season took a step back last year...
- All 3 off-seasons acquisitions were intended to fill holes that all fans agreed were problems (stay at home defensemen, PP QB, center) doesn't have anything to do with coaching issues, and issues with core players
- 2 of 3 of those acquisitions have not lived up to their previous play, let alone expectations, yet problems run much deeper
- Team is decimated by injuries not to the core
- All 3 acquisitions have proven to be valuable in the playoffs

Basically, I view this year as a trial for Darcy and Lindy on whether or not they deserve to even be considered as GM and coach beyond this season. I have thought that from the moment Terry Pegula stated they weren't going anywhere. Nothing is going to change that until the season is over.

I'm not a fan of blowing things up mid-season, at all.

Give the team a god damn chance to get into the playoffs and show what they are capable of. I have a good idea of what they are capable of


my opinion is simple :
This team will get healthy at some point, and make a push for and probably make the playoffs. That will buy the current management, coaching staff, and core players another year.

They will suffer another 1st round exit.

Next year will be round 6... more of the same

If you recognize the flaws.... why do we need to give more time?

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 01:20 PM
  #38
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffalo87 View Post
Why wouldn't you? Just to fit your argument?

Blockbusters rarely happen in the NHL these days and when they do, they are most often contract related. So since the lockout we're looking at Briere/Drury/Vanek/Campbell essentially. Briere, Drury, Vanek were all the same year and the team was busy winning the presidents trophy, you're not trading any of those guys at that point. And Campbell was the following season and he did trade him pretty much at his peak value without hurting the team (read: he waited until it was obvious he wouldn't be re-signed and then dealt him). That trade did get us the pick back that netted us Ennis, then got Bernier which I believe ended up in a 2nd and 3rd after his trade.

The failure in signing Briere, Drury, and Campbell is where the problem lies. And enough information has come out that that decision was largely ownership based and had very little to do with Darcy.



Because the Drury and McKee signings worked out so well for those teams. Darcy would be absolutely raked over the coals if he made those kind of signings.

Basically, you answered your own question right there. He was handcuffed so he retained the players he could afford.
The whole Drury Briere situation wasn't ENTIRELY his fault. A lot of people seem to forget that he TRIED to retain Drury but was screwed over on that whole situation when submitting the contract for approval to the ownership. Please note that I'm not saying the situation couldn't have been handled better. I just think that the blame does not lie entirely with Darcy.

HiddenInLight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 01:29 PM
  #39
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 36,815
vCash: 500
Either the Core is the right group to lead this team to a cup, or it's not
Either Ruff is the right coach to lead this franchise to a cup, or he's not
Either Regier is the right GM to build another contender, or he's not

More time to evaluate isn't necessary IMO.
More time to evaluate means a lesser likelihood of change

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 01:38 PM
  #40
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
Either the Core is the right group to lead this team to a cup, or it's not
Either Ruff is the right coach to lead this franchise to a cup, or he's not
Either Regier is the right GM to build another contender, or he's not

More time to evaluate isn't necessary IMO.
More time to evaluate means a lesser likelihood of change
It could be that it is difficult to sort out the problem immediatly, so Pegula is making sure he makes the right call. Any one of those three factors can make the other two seem like an issue. It could be the core making the coach and gm look bad, it could be the GM making bad decisions that make it difficult for the coaches and players to succeed. It could be the coach that doesn't get the players to live up to their abilities which makes the players and GM look bad. It could be two of the three even. Id rather the extra time be taken so the wrong piece isn't removed.

HiddenInLight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 01:42 PM
  #41
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 36,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight View Post
It could be that it is difficult to sort out the problem immediatly, so Pegula is making sure he makes the right call. Any one of those three factors can make the other two seem like an issue. It could be the core making the coach and gm look bad, it could be the GM making bad decisions that make it difficult for the coaches and players to succeed. It could be the coach that doesn't get the players to live up to their abilities which makes the players and GM look bad. It could be two of the three even. Id rather the extra time be taken so the wrong piece isn't removed.
From Pegula's perspective... sure, that makes sense.

But ME, personally, I'm not new to the situation. I've seen the same problems for 4+ years. A little more money to spend, a few new faces, and a string of bad luck on the injury front... changes nothing. It's the same problems year after year.

I don't think the changes I am advocating would happen in season. I just REALLY want them to.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 01:51 PM
  #42
moltenlava26
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 209
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffalo87 View Post
Why wouldn't you? Just to fit your argument?

Blockbusters rarely happen in the NHL these days and when they do, they are most often contract related. So since the lockout we're looking at Briere/Drury/Vanek/Campbell essentially. Briere, Drury, Vanek were all the same year and the team was busy winning the presidents trophy, you're not trading any of those guys at that point. And Campbell was the following season and he did trade him pretty much at his peak value without hurting the team (read: he waited until it was obvious he wouldn't be re-signed and then dealt him). That trade did get us the pick back that netted us Ennis, then got Bernier which I believe ended up in a 2nd and 3rd after his trade.

The failure in signing Briere, Drury, and Campbell is where the problem lies. And enough information has come out that that decision was largely ownership based and had very little to do with Darcy.



Because the Drury and McKee signings worked out so well for those teams. Darcy would be absolutely raked over the coals if he made those kind of signings.

Basically, you answered your own question right there. He was handcuffed so he retained the players he could afford.
Here is where we disagree. I would have traded Campbell when his value was the highest, prior to the season. Teams knew buffalo had to unload him so all they got was a pick. At that time BC was a top 3 offensive defenseman. If you view a pick as equal compensation, well that's your opinion and it's wrong.

There were multiple reports drury, McKee, and breiere would have stayed for less than market value but DR, as usual waited too long.

So back to my original question, in your opinion, has DR not provided the correct players or is Ruffs system outdated?

If you feel there is no problem, enjoy the rest of this season and the early round exit...if they even make it that far

moltenlava26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 01:58 PM
  #43
BowieSabresFan
Registered User
 
BowieSabresFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by volatile View Post
It's just not that simple. Let me try to lay out for you why myself (and I suspect some others) are not jumping all over having Darcy and/or Lindy fired right now or blowing the team up.

- Darcy and Lindy are very good and would find jobs elsewhere in the league no problem. This is not debated by many.
- Darcy was given the cashflow to add free agents for the first time in... well, maybe ever
- The team *has* improved over the last 3 years. While the last 2 were both first-round exits, the series vs Philly was much closer than the Boston one.
- All 3 off-seasons acquisitions were intended to fill holes that all fans agreed were problems (stay at home defensemen, PP QB, center)
- 2 of 3 of those acquisitions have not lived up to their previous play, let alone expectations, yet
- Team is decimated by injuries
- All 3 acquisitions have proven to be valuable in the playoffs

Basically, I view this year as a trial for Darcy and Lindy on whether or not they deserve to even be considered as GM and coach beyond this season. I have thought that from the moment Terry Pegula stated they weren't going anywhere. Nothing is going to change that until the season is over.

I'm not a fan of blowing things up mid-season, at all.

Give the team a god damn chance to get into the playoffs and show what they are capable of.


Er... why not exactly? That's the exact situation you described.

edit: JB, below, hit on what I was getting at a bit. As always, someone else articulates what I was trying to say better than I could.
Yea, I pretty much agree with all of this. However, certain posters' minds are closed on the issue.

BowieSabresFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 02:02 PM
  #44
Buffalo87
thehosers dot com
 
Buffalo87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rochester
Posts: 7,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by moltenlava26 View Post
Here is where we disagree. I would have traded Campbell when his value was the highest, prior to the season. Teams knew buffalo had to unload him so all they got was a pick. At that time BC was a top 3 offensive defenseman. If you view a pick as equal compensation, well that's your opinion and it's wrong.
Again, you can twist it however you like but in the end you're twisting it to fit your argument. Regier handled the Campbell situation well. Why would you trade a top 3 offensive defenseman the season before he becomes an FA, thus forfeiting any chance of re-signing the guy?

At the time, Bernier (considered a burgeoning power-forward at the time) and a 1st round pick was a pretty good return. Bernier didn't turn out well, and again, Regier traded him before his value dropped too far and got a pretty decent return on him. And they got Ennis out of the 1st rounder.

You're saying Campbell should have been traded in the summer of 2007. The same summer the team lost it's two captains, and you're saying they should of traded their best defenseman as well? I am very glad you are not running the team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by moltenlava26 View Post
So back to my original question, in your opinion, has DR not provided the correct players or is Ruffs system outdated?

If you feel there is no problem, enjoy the rest of this season and the early round exit...if they even make it that far
This is not a black and white issue as you're trying to portray it. I don't necessarily think ruff's system is outdated, and I don't necessarily believe it's on Regier either. I think this team needs a change, I absolutely will not disagree with you on that, but does that mean Lindy is a bad coach or his system is outdated? Not at all. Nor does that mean Regier hasn't done his part as GM either.

I am a firm believer of every coach having a shelf life, when certain players have heard the same message for long enough, they're going to stop responding. I'm afraid that may be what we've seen with this team.

Buffalo87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 02:05 PM
  #45
vcv
Moderator
Deal with it
 
vcv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Williamsville, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 14,136
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to vcv
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
my opinion is simple :
This team will get healthy at some point, and make a push for and probably make the playoffs. That will buy the current management, coaching staff, and core players another year.

They will suffer another 1st round exit.

Next year will be round 6... more of the same

If you recognize the flaws.... why do we need to give more time?
define more time?

If they suffer another 1st round exit, I agree they should get rid of DR and LR.

vcv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 02:12 PM
  #46
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
my opinion is simple :
This team will get healthy at some point, and make a push for and probably make the playoffs. That will buy the current management, coaching staff, and core players another year.

They will suffer another 1st round exit.

Next year will be round 6... more of the same

If you recognize the flaws.... why do we need to give more time?
Why do you just assume that? How do you know that Pegula wouldn't accept that result, and fire Regier or Ruff at that point?

You don't.

SackTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 02:15 PM
  #47
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 36,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by volatile View Post
define more time?

If they suffer another 1st round exit, I agree they should get rid of DR and LR.
So the season rolls on...
Ruff keeps making a mess of the goaltending situation
the consistent night in/night out effort is still questionable at best
they continue to blow multi goal leads
the team continues to lack an identity
(etc any other issues you've had over the years that still exist)

But they get hot in the last month, make a run, make the playoffs, and upset a team in the first round...

More of the same next year? Just because they won a round?

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 02:16 PM
  #48
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 36,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post
Why do you just assume that? How do you know that Pegula wouldn't accept that result, and fire Regier or Ruff at that point?

You don't.
correct. i dont know that. but it's my fear.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 02:19 PM
  #49
start winnin
NO MORE TANK BOYS
 
start winnin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Buffalo
Posts: 9,094
vCash: 50
I don't like Sully, he's a pompous buffoon, but he's hit some things right on the head in this article.

He mentions how the franchise is full of people who are content with what they have, and I have to agree. I don't see the hunger in our players eyes. I was watching Boston last night and it's amazing how much effort they put into their game, I don't see that with our Sabres. We have a lot of passengers, not enough battlers. We have a lot of talent, but no work ethic.

start winnin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2011, 02:28 PM
  #50
jfb392
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffalo87 View Post
Why wouldn't you? Just to fit your argument?

Blockbusters rarely happen in the NHL these days and when they do, they are most often contract related. So since the lockout we're looking at Briere/Drury/Vanek/Campbell essentially. Briere, Drury, Vanek were all the same year and the team was busy winning the presidents trophy, you're not trading any of those guys at that point. And Campbell was the following season and he did trade him pretty much at his peak value without hurting the team (read: he waited until it was obvious he wouldn't be re-signed and then dealt him). That trade did get us the pick back that netted us Ennis, then got Bernier which I believe ended up in a 2nd and 3rd after his trade.
Yes, it was LA's 3rd in 2009 (#66, Brayden McNabb) and Vancouver's 2nd in 2010 (#55, traded to Columbus for Raffi Torres, Petr Straka).

I'd say it ended up working out well for us.

jfb392 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:57 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.