HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Notices

The Same Continual Ruff "System" Problems

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-22-2011, 07:09 PM
  #51
S319R11S16
Expect Suffering
 
S319R11S16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 2,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight View Post
In otherwords you don't have any suggestions. If your going to make a suggestion like that you could at least go to the trouble to figure out who would be a better option. If there's no better option why would they bother firing him?
You dont just fire a guy because you know who else is available. You fire him for allowing a team thats historically spent up near the cap to miss or almost miss tue playoffs year after year. You fire him because his team ***** away leads like Buffalonians **** away Mighty Taco. You fire him for having a horrendous power play, for struggling to get his players in position to close out games, and you fire him because he can't get half his players motivated to play.

S319R11S16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2011, 07:53 PM
  #52
SabresFanNorthPortFL
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Port, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 1,750
vCash: 500
I won't fire Ruff until guys like Gausted and Stafford are off the team.

Ruff has led this team very close to a Cup several times in his 14 years, is always competitive and changes his style depending on the players. We have played high octane in the 14 years, and we have played very dfensive.

My only big gripe with Ruff is that he does not utilize Vanek right. When you have a stallion, you ride him. You game plan around him, you play to his strengths. Ruff doesn't with Vanek, and that bothers me. There should be constant set plays designed to get the puck to Vanek, and there just doesn't seem to be.

Again, a change in the core guys before I get rid of Ruff. He's not the problem in my eyes.

SabresFanNorthPortFL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2011, 09:02 PM
  #53
SoFFacet
Registered User
 
SoFFacet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,414
vCash: 500
I will say that I hate how our forwards rarely take the blue line at speed, our D rarely stands up at our blueline, our breakout is continually messed up, our team rarely offers more than a token forecheck, and constantly struggles against any opposing forecheck, there is little movement on the PP, and we don't pressure the puck enough on D, especially how much room we give opposing pointmen.

But its hard to tell if its because of low effort, poor coaching, the players tuning the coach out, or what.

SoFFacet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2011, 09:17 PM
  #54
BuffaloSabskis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Buffalo NY
Country: United States
Posts: 206
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SabresFanNorthPortFL View Post
I won't fire Ruff until guys like Gausted and Stafford are off the team.

Ruff has led this team very close to a Cup several times in his 14 years, is always competitive and changes his style depending on the players. We have played high octane in the 14 years, and we have played very dfensive.

My only big gripe with Ruff is that he does not utilize Vanek right. When you have a stallion, you ride him. You game plan around him, you play to his strengths. Ruff doesn't with Vanek, and that bothers me. There should be constant set plays designed to get the puck to Vanek, and there just doesn't seem to be.

Again, a change in the core guys before I get rid of Ruff. He's not the problem in my eyes.
They have only been in the finals once.

BuffaloSabskis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2011, 09:30 PM
  #55
S319R11S16
Expect Suffering
 
S319R11S16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 2,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SabresFanNorthPortFL View Post
I won't fire Ruff until guys like Gausted and Stafford are off the team.

Ruff has led this team very close to a Cup several times in his 14 years, is always competitive and changes his style depending on the players. We have played high octane in the 14 years, and we have played very dfensive.

My only big gripe with Ruff is that he does not utilize Vanek right. When you have a stallion, you ride him. You game plan around him, you play to his strengths. Ruff doesn't with Vanek, and that bothers me. There should be constant set plays designed to get the puck to Vanek, and there just doesn't seem to be.

Again, a change in the core guys before I get rid of Ruff. He's not the problem in my eyes.
Why cant it be the other way around? Why cant the core players have a different coach?

What im getting at here is how many cup winning coaches have been let go? How many players have thrived under a new coach?

S319R11S16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2011, 10:05 PM
  #56
kirby11
Registered User
 
kirby11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cleveland, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 1,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoFFacet View Post
I will say that I hate how our forwards rarely take the blue line at speed, our D rarely stands up at our blueline, our breakout is continually messed up, our team rarely offers more than a token forecheck, and constantly struggles against any opposing forecheck, there is little movement on the PP, and we don't pressure the puck enough on D, especially how much room we give opposing pointmen.

But its hard to tell if its because of low effort, poor coaching, the players tuning the coach out, or what.
Hence why we suck in the playoffs. Teams ratchet up pressure. Sabres fail to do so in the offensive zone and our d is bad at handling it because the offense wants to create chances and leaves for the neutral zone early.

kirby11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 08:48 AM
  #57
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruckus007 View Post
ShaPow isn't the GM (probably). It's not incumbent upon him to suggest a replacement if he believes Ruff should go. If I don't like the new Cornwell novel, I don't have to write the next one for her.

There are plenty of reasonably qualified coaches available. Randy Carlyle, Michel Therrien, Bob Hartley, John Anderson, Craig MacTavish, Dallas Eakins are all out there. More than we can come up with.

I like Ruff, I'm not necessarily advocating replacing him but don't suggest that he's somehow irreplaceable and that it's up to the fans to conduct the search.

If its not up to us to suggest an alternative then its not up to us to say he should be fired. How do you know that the team HASN'T looked to see if there is anybody better able to take the spot? When a team fires a coach they generally have a new coach to hire very quickly. I'm sure that if the Sabres felt that another guy was the best option right now, that other guy would be the coach. Since that other guy ISN'T the coach then I think it is safe to assume that the team feels that at this point in time Ruff gives them the best chance to win, by enough of a margin that they won't fire him for the sake of change.


Saying that its not our place to suggest a replacement is the lazy way out. Saying that the team will not do what's best for a winning team is a lazy argument. Every team is always looking to improove any way possible. The fact is that the best available coaches this season have already been taken, so why would they go for a coach who isn't as good? Not to mention Lindy has Hardly had a chance to work with his actual team, AND they are 3 points ahead of where they were on this day last year.

HiddenInLight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 09:06 AM
  #58
S319R11S16
Expect Suffering
 
S319R11S16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 2,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight View Post
If its not up to us to suggest an alternative then its not up to us to say he should be fired. How do you know that the team HASN'T looked to see if there is anybody better able to take the spot? When a team fires a coach they generally have a new coach to hire very quickly. I'm sure that if the Sabres felt that another guy was the best option right now, that other guy would be the coach. Since that other guy ISN'T the coach then I think it is safe to assume that the team feels that at this point in time Ruff gives them the best chance to win, by enough of a margin that they won't fire him for the sake of change.


Saying that its not our place to suggest a replacement is the lazy way out. Saying that the team will not do what's best for a winning team is a lazy argument. Every team is always looking to improove any way possible. The fact is that the best available coaches this season have already been taken, so why would they go for a coach who isn't as good? Not to mention Lindy has Hardly had a chance to work with his actual team, AND they are 3 points ahead of where they were on this day last year.
That's saying a whole hell of alot considering they had to go on a historical tear last year just to make the playoffs on just about the last day.

You have no idea how a coach will do if given an opportunity. Just as you don't know that guys like Stafford, Roy, Vanek, Pominville, etc will play even better if given a different coach.

Answer me this... what top NHL players has Lindy Ruff coached up from day 1 in his 14 years here?

S319R11S16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 09:56 AM
  #59
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,007
vCash: 500
None of that relates to my point in the slightest. My point is that if you want to complain about ruff and scream and yell, then you better be ready with a better option. Otherwise all you are is an ignorant grass is always greener type. The fact is that right now there may not be any options that the team feels will give them a better shot so why would they risk hurting the team by hiring a new unprooven coach if they don't think he will do any better then ruff. Don't tell me I'm saying ruff is doing a good job. I'm not. I'm saying that there may not be a better option.

HiddenInLight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 11:36 AM
  #60
Ruckus007
Said too much
 
Ruckus007's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Huntington, WV
Posts: 7,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BowieSabresFan View Post
Maybe, but it does weaken the argument if all you can say is.. "Fire Ruff!!!!" Just firing the coach to fire the coach is not an answer.
Eh, the same can be said about "Fire Regier," "Trade Roy," Trade Stafford" etc. I don't need an alternative to be named to listen to an argument about making a move on Ruff (or anybody else). IMO, it's lazy to immediately ignore someone simply because they don't suggest a replacement for whomever they want moved.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight
If its not up to us to suggest an alternative then its not up to us to say he should be fired.
Exactly. We as fans have no say in any personnel moves so it doesn't matter if someone who expresses that Ruff should be fired doesn't suggest an alternative. We all have a right to express our opinions (within reason) on these boards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight
How do you know that the team HASN'T looked to see if there is anybody better able to take the spot? When a team fires a coach they generally have a new coach to hire very quickly. I'm sure that if the Sabres felt that another guy was the best option right now, that other guy would be the coach. Since that other guy ISN'T the coach then I think it is safe to assume that the team feels that at this point in time Ruff gives them the best chance to win, by enough of a margin that they won't fire him for the sake of change.
You can't prove that. It's the same kind of speculative reasoning you're railing against.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight
Saying that its not our place to suggest a replacement is the lazy way out. Saying that the team will not do what's best for a winning team is a lazy argument. Every team is always looking to improove any way possible. The fact is that the best available coaches this season have already been taken, so why would they go for a coach who isn't as good? Not to mention Lindy has Hardly had a chance to work with his actual team, AND they are 3 points ahead of where they were on this day last year
If you want to debate whether Ruff should or shouldn't be fired that's up to you. I haven't expressed an opinion on that topic. My point is simple....

People can make an argument about firing Ruff that doesn't not require advocating a replacement. In the exact same way you can make an argument about keeping Ruff and making other changes. Or no other changes.

Ignoring a dissenting post because it does not include all your personal requirements for disagreement is, IMO, lazy and close-minded.

Ruckus007 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 11:38 AM
  #61
Ruckus007
Said too much
 
Ruckus007's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Huntington, WV
Posts: 7,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MillerFan1 View Post
That's saying a whole hell of alot considering they had to go on a historical tear last year just to make the playoffs on just about the last day.

You have no idea how a coach will do if given an opportunity. Just as you don't know that guys like Stafford, Roy, Vanek, Pominville, etc will play even better if given a different coach.

Answer me this... what top NHL players has Lindy Ruff coached up from day 1 in his 14 years here?
Briere

Ruckus007 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 12:32 PM
  #62
WhoIsJimBob
Circle the Bandwagon
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MillerFan1 View Post
Why cant it be the other way around? Why cant the core players have a different coach?

What im getting at here is how many cup winning coaches have been let go? How many players have thrived under a new coach?
You could. But, plenty of people think that the core of the team is rotten.

So, if you keep the players and change the coach, you could be changing the wrong piece of the puzzle and delaying getting closer to winning until you actually get around to moving players.

WhoIsJimBob is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 12:34 PM
  #63
WhoIsJimBob
Circle the Bandwagon
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MillerFan1 View Post
Answer me this... what top NHL players has Lindy Ruff coached up from day 1 in his 14 years here?
Vanek & Miller have been near the tops at their position at least once in their careers.

But, I would say that low number is a bigger indictment of Regier than Ruff.

I think the talent of the players that Regier has brought in has been a bigger limiting factor than Ruff's coaching.

WhoIsJimBob is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 12:43 PM
  #64
S319R11S16
Expect Suffering
 
S319R11S16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 2,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruckus007 View Post
Briere
Meh.

Briere was good when we traded for him. He had a couple killer years post lockout when a ton of other players had inflated numbers then dies down a bit. No doubt he is a fantastic player, but lets not act like he was **** before he came here.

S319R11S16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 12:46 PM
  #65
S319R11S16
Expect Suffering
 
S319R11S16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 2,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Bob View Post
You could. But, plenty of people think that the core of the team is rotten.

So, if you keep the players and change the coach, you could be changing the wrong piece of the puzzle and delaying getting closer to winning until you actually get around to moving players.
Yea and if Ruff was an issue (which quite a few agree) you could be putting us back in the same situation as we were pre-lockout.

Whats easier to change? Coach or **** can 5-6 players? Look around the league, most teams do both. Its not very often that teams keep the same coach and work on multiple trades to ditch their entire core. Only in Buffalo is a coach rated so high, that fans and media would rather dump a ton of players, than to try and shake the team up by firing a coach who's game plans have been stale for several years.

We're up against the cap, teams might not want the players at their signed numbers. What happens if those who appear to be the problem ones aren't able to be moved? What do you do? Hang on to ho hum mediocrity for another year or two?

S319R11S16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 12:47 PM
  #66
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight View Post
None of that relates to my point in the slightest. My point is that if you want to complain about ruff and scream and yell, then you better be ready with a better option. Otherwise all you are is an ignorant grass is always greener type. The fact is that right now there may not be any options that the team feels will give them a better shot so why would they risk hurting the team by hiring a new unprooven coach if they don't think he will do any better then ruff. Don't tell me I'm saying ruff is doing a good job. I'm not. I'm saying that there may not be a better option.
Sounds like someone who would never trade an established top 6 player, for a top 5 draft pick... because that would make you an ignorant grass is always greener type


Jame is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 12:49 PM
  #67
Myllz
Pavelski Lite
 
Myllz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle
Country: United States
Posts: 12,931
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Bob View Post
Vanek & Miller have been near the tops at their position at least once in their careers.

But, I would say that low number is a bigger indictment of Regier than Ruff.

I think the talent of the players that Regier has brought in has been a bigger limiting factor than Ruff's coaching.
Could be either one. It could be Regier just doesn't draft players with high ceilings, or it could be Ruff doesn't develop players as well as they could be to hit their ceilings. Who knows, maybe Vanek is a 50+ goal scorer playing under someone else. Then again, maybe he's only a 25 goal scorer elsewhere.

My money is on a combination of the two.

Myllz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 12:50 PM
  #68
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight View Post
If its not up to us to suggest an alternative then its not up to us to say he should be fired. How do you know that the team HASN'T looked to see if there is anybody better able to take the spot? When a team fires a coach they generally have a new coach to hire very quickly. I'm sure that if the Sabres felt that another guy was the best option right now, that other guy would be the coach. Since that other guy ISN'T the coach then I think it is safe to assume that the team feels that at this point in time Ruff gives them the best chance to win, by enough of a margin that they won't fire him for the sake of change.
I would say the complete opposite is true.
They usually name an interim coach, and spend the rest of the year evaluating that coach, as well as other candidates.

If the fire someone at the end of the year, they usually take a large part of the offseason to name a new coach.

Even in season, LA this year spent 2-3 weeks before naming Sutter the next coach after firing murray.

"this guys is making a **** sandwich"
"well we've got no one else in mind for the job"
"ok, let him continue making **** sandwiches then"


Quote:
Saying that its not our place to suggest a replacement is the lazy way out. Saying that the team will not do what's best for a winning team is a lazy argument. Every team is always looking to improove any way possible. The fact is that the best available coaches this season have already been taken, so why would they go for a coach who isn't as good? Not to mention Lindy has Hardly had a chance to work with his actual team, AND they are 3 points ahead of where they were on this day last year
this argument makes no sense to me at all...

Jame is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 12:52 PM
  #69
S319R11S16
Expect Suffering
 
S319R11S16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 2,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Bob View Post
Vanek & Miller have been near the tops at their position at least once in their careers.

But, I would say that low number is a bigger indictment of Regier than Ruff.

I think the talent of the players that Regier has brought in has been a bigger limiting factor than Ruff's coaching.
From day 1 it was pretty obvious that Vanek and Miller were going to have good NHL careers.

Why? A coach's job is to coach up players and make them better. A GMs job is to find good players. No doubt Darcy has brought some good players in here... its Lindys job to make better and to make marginal players good.

S319R11S16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 01:00 PM
  #70
S319R11S16
Expect Suffering
 
S319R11S16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 2,996
vCash: 500
This has been stinging me for an awful long time and I really see this as being the case:

Pegula is a fan. Pegula wants Buffalonians to win a cup. Pegula is willing to spend whatever it takes in terms of scouting etc to ensure that we are able to bring in the best players possible. Pegula bought the Amerks so that he could control everything about them including the development of future Sabres. There is no doubt in my mind he is doing this for Lindy and Darcy because he feels like they deserve a cup. As a fan of the team he wants Lindy and Darcy to finish what they started. He is willing to spend whatever it takes to make a winner out of those 2. That's why he said they aren't going anywhere. He wants to use his money to make champions out of them.

S319R11S16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 01:03 PM
  #71
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MillerFan1 View Post
This has been stinging me for an awful long time and I really see this as being the case:

Pegula is a fan. Pegula wants Buffalonians to win a cup. Pegula is willing to spend whatever it takes in terms of scouting etc to ensure that we are able to bring in the best players possible. Pegula bought the Amerks so that he could control everything about them including the development of future Sabres. There is no doubt in my mind he is doing this for Lindy and Darcy because he feels like they deserve a cup. As a fan of the team he wants Lindy and Darcy to finish what they started. He is willing to spend whatever it takes to make a winner out of those 2. That's why he said they aren't going anywhere. He wants to use his money to make champions out of them.
I posted a thread about that same topic in the offseason...

Jame is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 01:04 PM
  #72
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruckus007 View Post
Eh, the same can be said about "Fire Regier," "Trade Roy," Trade Stafford" etc. I don't need an alternative to be named to listen to an argument about making a move on Ruff (or anybody else). IMO, it's lazy to immediately ignore someone simply because they don't suggest a replacement for whomever they want moved.




Exactly. We as fans have no say in any personnel moves so it doesn't matter if someone who expresses that Ruff should be fired doesn't suggest an alternative. We all have a right to express our opinions (within reason) on these boards.


You can't prove that. It's the same kind of speculative reasoning you're railing against.




If you want to debate whether Ruff should or shouldn't be fired that's up to you. I haven't expressed an opinion on that topic. My point is simple....

People can make an argument about firing Ruff that doesn't not require advocating a replacement. In the exact same way you can make an argument about keeping Ruff and making other changes. Or no other changes.

Ignoring a dissenting post because it does not include all your personal requirements for disagreement is, IMO, lazy and close-minded.

As to the speculative reasoning, every team always looks at any method that they could feasibly use in order to improve the team. Therefor if a team feels like there is a higher chance to win by changing one piece in the office they will do it. If the team doesn't feel like moving that one person will help the team they don't. That is purely common sense.


I didn't ignore a dissenting post because it didn't fill requirements. I ignored the point because it didn't make sense. Why would you remove a coach if you knew that the only other options were worse then you currently have? It makes no sense. In that case you would be making your team WORSE. It's change for the sake of change which is never a good idea. So unless there is a better option out there, then there is no point in removing the coach. Unless you are advocating removing ruff just so we can hire somebody who does an even worse job. AGAIN I am NOT saying we shouldn't fire ruff. I'm not defending Ruff in any way. I'm just saying that we can't fire him unless we KNOW that there is a better option available. Generally when a coach is fired they announce his replacement during the same day. SO if we fire Ruff, who replaces him. Just because my logic doesn't suit your logic doesn't mean that that isn't a valid question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
Sounds like someone who would never trade an established top 6 player, for a top 5 draft pick... because that would make you an ignorant grass is always greener type

I wouldn't trade a top six player for a top 5 pick when the team is in a WIN NOW mode like it is now. The team is currently NOT rebuilding, so why do you throw away players to get future guys that don't help you WIN NOW? In addition to that thought I didn't say I would NEVER make a trade for that. Don't put words in my mouth in order to pick an argument. If you want to argue against my posts you can do it in a nonfalacious way. Otherwise I hope you like my ignore button.

HiddenInLight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 01:19 PM
  #73
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight View Post
As to the speculative reasoning, every team always looks at any method that they could feasibly use in order to improve the team. Therefor if a team feels like there is a higher chance to win by changing one piece in the office they will do it. If the team doesn't feel like moving that one person will help the team they don't. That is purely common sense.
... but not if they are in "win now mode" as described below

you're a mess of contradictions

Quote:
I didn't ignore a dissenting post because it didn't fill requirements. I ignored the point because it didn't make sense. Why would you remove a coach if you knew that the only other options were worse then you currently have? It makes no sense. In that case you would be making your team WORSE. It's change for the sake of change which is never a good idea. So unless there is a better option out there, then there is no point in removing the coach. Unless you are advocating removing ruff just so we can hire somebody who does an even worse job. AGAIN I am NOT saying we shouldn't fire ruff. I'm not defending Ruff in any way. I'm just saying that we can't fire him unless we KNOW that there is a better option available. Generally when a coach is fired they announce his replacement during the same day. SO if we fire Ruff, who replaces him. Just because my logic doesn't suit your logic doesn't mean that that isn't a valid question.
yea, because KNOWING that the hundreds of potential coaching candidates are NOT improvements, is a logical statement

and for the record, GENERALLY, that's not happens at all.


Quote:
I wouldn't trade a top six player for a top 5 pick when the team is in a WIN NOW mode like it is now. The team is currently NOT rebuilding, so why do you throw away players to get future guys that don't help you WIN NOW? In addition to that thought I didn't say I would NEVER make a trade for that. Don't put words in my mouth in order to pick an argument. If you want to argue against my posts you can do it in a nonfalacious way. Otherwise I hope you like my ignore button.
Philly was in win now mode when they traded Versteeg for a 1st

stop falaciousizing with me

Jame is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 01:28 PM
  #74
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
... but not if they are in "win now mode" as described below

you're a mess of contradictions



yea, because KNOWING that the hundreds of potential coaching candidates are NOT improvements, is a logical statement

and for the record, GENERALLY, that's not happens at all.




Philly was in win now mode when they traded Versteeg for a 1st

stop falaciousizing with me


Lol you don't know what a fallacy is. Go look it up you'll look less stupid.


If you read my post you would know that I was not saying that they should or shouldn't fire the coach. All I said, was that if the team felt that they had a better chance of winning with a different coach, they would have fired Ruff and Hired said coach immediately. But you know, you'd have to actually read my posts in order to understand my actual point. But you won't do that will you, because you prefer to attempt a fallacious argument by making my arguments into something that better suits yours. The sabres are currently in a WIN NOW mentality. That means that they are trying to WIN NOW. THAT'S why they will not trade a player just for picks right now. But again, you'd have to actually read the posts that you quote in order to do that. How about you (for the third time) actually read my posts before responding to arguments that I supposedly made, so that way you actually know what I'm talking about. But you don't have to make an intelligent informed argument if you don't want to. I'll just keep laughing at you.

HiddenInLight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2011, 01:29 PM
  #75
McTankel
HFBoards Sponsor
 
McTankel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Hamburg, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,735
vCash: 500
Ruff needs to get fired. Team needs a shake-up.

McTankel 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 11:25 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.