Fire Lindy

[X. Benedict]

Maybe Quinn was hoping that Lindy was fired so he could get the Sabres job?

 

I think he wanted it, and was hoping to not move house either.

[Eleven]

My 2 cents on Babcock

 

At first i thought, okay his job is easy. Takes a system team who prides themselve on scouting and grooming future players and just leads them.

 

The more I hear from him the more I like him. You never hear his players talking junk, he acts as a front man at pressers for a very veteran team (not needing them to get involed), and consistantly makes good decisions on line changes and even goalie situations. Would you name Osgood your playoff starter in '08? I thought he'd stink it up, but has def. proven otherwise.

 

I really really like him now, and respect the job he does. He knows he is there to steady the ship and coaches to the style the team was meant for. I'd be willing to bet a bunch of other ego style coaches might force something they shouldn't be doing.

 

:thumbsup: for Mike Babcock

 

I like him, too. I don't think he could coach the Sabres to the Finals.

[...]

One thing that worries me with Ruff, is his seeming inability to win the "big game".

 

The IIHF final against Russia is still in recent memory, where his Team Canada looked just like Buffalo playing Florida on a Sunday afternoon, and of course ended up losing.

 

Team Canada had the players, yet went out and played the worst three periods of hockey they played throughout the entire competition.

 

"Give him the players and he will win"?

 

It's one game and it's not really fair to base an opinion on one game, but seeing as others are ready to base theirs on NO games, I'll do it anyway : So far his track record says "no".

 

But honestly, who the heck cares anyway these days - Buffalo are so far from ever playing in a big game again, my point is.... Well, pointless :thumbsup:

 

 

Roy was on that team.

[jad1]

Awesome quote by Quinn. It's good to know that some in the hockey community recognize the coaching farce in Buffalo. And, again, it's amazing that Ruff's biggest "fans" continue to damn him with faint praise. "Oh, he would have won if only... Give him great players and he'll win..."

 

Beside Hasek, who the hell has Ruff coached that you would consider "great?"

 

Take a look at the talent in this year's finals. Lindstrom, Zetterberg, Datsuk, Malkin, Crosby, Gonchar. What current or former Sabre has Ruff coached with equivalent talent?

 

The point is, Ruff has become the franchise's most successful coach WITHOUT needing top tier talent.

 

That's why you keep him, because if Regier can aquire a couple of guys like Doan or Cole in the offseason, tough minded guys with middle-tier talent, there's a good chance that Ruff will be able to coach the team to playoff success.

[Spudz]

I like him, too. I don't think he could coach the Sabres to the Finals.

 

Couple questions...

 

Do you think any coach in the league could coach them to the finals?

 

Do you think any change of strategy would take this team to the finals?

 

 

I answer no to both of these, which is why I support Lindy staying here.

 

Unlike football I don't think a coach takes a non playoff team and makes them a stanley cup contender. I believe the true hockey coach puts their players in the best position and let them make plays, but won't fool other teams game planning.

[...]

I'm near convinced that Ruff is as much a victim of Regier's decisions as the fans are. As I posted in another thread, we just signed another teeny tiny forward. What the hell?

[Sabre Dance]

Lindy is right when he talks about puck luck - it's a weird thing about hockey. Perhaps it happens as much to other teams, but I wouldn't know because I don't follow other teams that closely. But the Sabres seem to run into hot goalies VERY often. I'd like to see the stats on it but who has the time... I think we outchanced them again but the puck didn't cooperate and the goalie outperformed Miller.

 

While I agree the Sabres have had more than their share of bad luck over the past few seasons, but I can't go along with the "running into hot goalies VERY often". How many times has a Sabre finally worked into the slot for a decent shot and fires it right into the goalie's chest protector. That's not a "hot" goalie - that's lack of finish. If you have an open shot, you put it where the goalie ain't. Too many instances of the Sabres futzing around trying to find that "perfect" shot and not enough firing it at the net and trying for a deflection/rebound. Scoring goals isn't rocket science - it's just hard work.........

[Eleven]

Couple questions...

 

Do you think any coach in the league could coach them to the finals?

 

Do you think any change of strategy would take this team to the finals?

I answer no to both of these, which is why I support Lindy staying here.

 

Unlike football I don't think a coach takes a non playoff team and makes them a stanley cup contender. I believe the true hockey coach puts their players in the best position and let them make plays, but won't fool other teams game planning.

 

Exactly.

[Eleven]

Here's a very laudatory article concerning Mike Babcock: http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/playoffs/200...&id=4242044 It's natural for those types of articles to come out when a team is in the finals, but I don't doubt that Babcock is a decent head coach.

 

Notice who is fourth on the list in playoff percentage since Babcock became a head coach in the NHL. (It's in the sidebar.) Ruff. With the Buffalo roster, too.

 

Would you rather Babcock, in Buffalo, coach the current Sabres roster? Or Ruff coach the Red Wings roster in Buffalo? To put it another way, would Babcock get more out of Connolly, Hecht, and Tallinder; or would Ruff and the Sabres be better with Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and Lidstrom?

 

No real argument, is there? And I still don't think any coach has done more with less than Ruff has.

[Stoner]

Here's a very laudatory article concerning Mike Babcock: http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/playoffs/200...&id=4242044 It's natural for those types of articles to come out when a team is in the finals, but I don't doubt that Babcock is a decent head coach.

 

Notice who is fourth on the list in playoff percentage since Babcock became a head coach in the NHL. (It's in the sidebar.) Ruff. With the Buffalo roster, too.

 

Would you rather Babcock, in Buffalo, coach the current Sabres roster? Or Ruff coach the Red Wings roster in Buffalo? To put it another way, would Babcock get more out of Connolly, Hecht, and Tallinder; or would Ruff and the Sabres be better with Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and Lidstrom?

 

No real argument, is there? And I still don't think any coach has done more with less than Ruff has.

 

Or done less with less! Five in seven!

[Eleven]

Or done less with less! Five in seven!

 

With players that shouldn't be in the NHL. When the roster is even barely legit, Ruff seems to make the final four pretty often.

[SwampD]

Here's a very laudatory article concerning Mike Babcock: http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/playoffs/200...&id=4242044 It's natural for those types of articles to come out when a team is in the finals, but I don't doubt that Babcock is a decent head coach.

 

Notice who is fourth on the list in playoff percentage since Babcock became a head coach in the NHL. (It's in the sidebar.) Ruff. With the Buffalo roster, too.

 

Would you rather Babcock, in Buffalo, coach the current Sabres roster? Or Ruff coach the Red Wings roster in Buffalo? To put it another way, would Babcock get more out of Connolly, Hecht, and Tallinder; or would Ruff and the Sabres be better with Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and Lidstrom?

 

No real argument, is there? And I still don't think any coach has done more with less than Ruff has.

It's a good argument. Now I want Lindy gone even more. If he wasn't so good then we would have fallen to last place a couple of years in a row, gotten some #1 draft picks, Darcy's incompetence would have come to light sooner so he'd be gone,.. then with with a new GM and a fistful of #1s he'd hire a new coach and we'd be in the position that the Pens are in now.

 

Thanks a lot Lindy. Thanks for keeping us mediocre.

[Eleven]

It's a good argument. Now I want Lindy gone even more. If he wasn't so good then we would have fallen to last place a couple of years in a row, gotten some #1 draft picks, Darcy's incompetence would have come to light sooner so he'd be gone,.. then with with a new GM and a fistful of #1s he'd hire a new coach and we'd be in the position that the Pens are in now.

 

Thanks a lot Lindy. Thanks for keeping us mediocre.

 

Alright, Swamp, we know you want Lindy gone, but we also know that Detroit didn't do it with No. 1 overall picks.

 

Pittsburgh, maybe (and wait until that cap kicks in!). But they haven't done anything in the last 18 years that the Sabres haven't done, and the Sabres at least brought home some hardware in 2007.

 

Too tired. You and PA write up something & I'll see what I can do w/ it tomorrow night. Always fun debating you two, though, seriously.

 

 

 

(Aside: Wouldn't the NBA be more fun with fights? What the hell is on my TV? Bunch of tall guys who are afraid to hit each other.)

[Kristian]

Alright, Swamp, we know you want Lindy gone, but we also know that Detroit didn't do it with No. 1 overall picks.

 

Pittsburgh, maybe (and wait until that cap kicks in!). But they haven't done anything in the last 18 years that the Sabres haven't done, and the Sabres at least brought home some hardware in 2007.

 

Too tired. You and PA write up something & I'll see what I can do w/ it tomorrow night. Always fun debating you two, though, seriously.

(Aside: Wouldn't the NBA be more fun with fights? What the hell is on my TV? Bunch of tall guys who are afraid to hit each other.)

 

He does have a point though, although it's hardly Lindy's fault.

 

Going 9-12 in seasons where you miss the playoffs is just plain pointless - You don't make the post-season, yet you don't get to draft high enough to profit from it either.

 

You're talking about Pittsburgh and the Caps, but I think the Nordiques is probably the textbook example of how to do it - Their two cup wins were a direct result of them sucking so bad for years, and once they became they Avs they were a powerhouse for 10 years.

 

Granted, they had the budget for it as well, but there are many teams out there with a sick budget that haven't come close to winning a cup in 10 years. Flyers and Rangers for example. It takes something special to go all the way, and clearly the Avs had that.

 

That said though, you need to turn those draft picks into hockey players, and pre-lockout our player development was mediocre to put it nicely. The best player developing years we've had in recent memeory around here, curiously enough, were the "no-touch" years.

 

Personally, I'm growing more and more inclined to believe our two ECF years were the result of the "no-touch" league, more than it was us being a good team. Not surprisingly, the deeper we got each year, the more the refs swallowed their whistles, and you could tell it bothered our guys a heckuva lot more than it did Carolina or Ottawa. Sad, but the evidence supports it, IMHO.

[SwampD]

It's not that I want Lindy gone because he's not a good coach, because he is. Do I think he has his shortcomings?... Absolutely, but the positives outweigh the negatives. But in his 12 years, whether we were winning or losing, I see the same mistakes over and over; backup goalies...well, you know, Max is still Max(same players in the doghouse over and over), we can't clear our zone, getting peppered until a blast from the point gets by Miller(or others). We were lucky enough for 2 years to actually score more on the opportunities that we did get when we did finally cleared our zone, but that's now gone.

 

And good players keep leaving. Logic tells me that the players don't think he is as important to the team as the fans do. Why do we never get the hometown discount? We apparently have this great coach that "any player would love to play for", yet after just missing the SCFs twice, our two best players chose money over that chance to win. And as it turns out, Darcy was correct about their value.

 

I was being tongue-in-cheek with my post earlier, but everyone talks about changing the make-up of this team(deluca). As long as Ruff keeps us somewhat competitive(as is the claim), then Darcy will keep bringing in the same type of players. Without Ruff maybe we hit bottom sooner and Darcy(or his replacement)sees that this is not the way to build a team.

 

There's more, but I'm rambling so I'll just stop. I just know that I'm ready for a change, because right now I'm just bored. I know exactly what a Lindy Ruff coached team is going to give me. And I want to see something different.

[Eleven]

It's not that I want Lindy gone because he's not a good coach, because he is. Do I think he has his shortcomings?... Absolutely, but the positives outweigh the negatives. But in his 12 years, whether we were winning or losing, I see the same mistakes over and over; backup goalies...well, you know, Max is still Max(same players in the doghouse over and over), we can't clear our zone, getting peppered until a blast from the point gets by Miller(or others). We were lucky enough for 2 years to actually score more on the opportunities that we did get when we did finally cleared our zone, but that's now gone.

 

And good players keep leaving. Logic tells me that the players don't think he is as important to the team as the fans do. Why do we never get the hometown discount? We apparently have this great coach that "any player would love to play for", yet after just missing the SCFs twice, our two best players chose money over that chance to win. And as it turns out, Darcy was correct about their value.

 

I was being tongue-in-cheek with my post earlier, but everyone talks about changing the make-up of this team(deluca). As long as Ruff keeps us somewhat competitive(as is the claim), then Darcy will keep bringing in the same type of players. Without Ruff maybe we hit bottom sooner and Darcy(or his replacement)sees that this is not the way to build a team.

 

There's more, but I'm rambling so I'll just stop. I just know that I'm ready for a change, because right now I'm just bored. I know exactly what a Lindy Ruff coached team is going to give me. And I want to see something different.

 

Change for the sake of change would not normally be an unreasonable position after 12 years. But I don't think the chances are good that the Sabres will pick up a better coach. They'll "pull a Ralph," pick up a coach on the cheap, and the long downward spiral will begin. That's why I want to keep Ruff here.

[SwampD]

Change for the sake of change would not normally be an unreasonable position after 12 years. But I don't think the chances are good that the Sabres will pick up a better coach. They'll "pull a Ralph," pick up a coach on the cheap, and the long downward spiral will begin. That's why I want to keep Ruff here.

The long downward spiral to where? Missing the playoffs 5 out of 7 years? ;)

 

And I'm starting to think that the only reason we went so deep into the playoffs when Ruff first got here was Hasek(an upward trend that had already begun with Ted Nolan).

 

EDIT: Also, it doesn't always take a better coach for a team to improve, just a different one.

[Stoner]

Alright, Swamp, we know you want Lindy gone, but we also know that Detroit didn't do it with No. 1 overall picks.

 

Pittsburgh, maybe (and wait until that cap kicks in!). But they haven't done anything in the last 18 years that the Sabres haven't done, and the Sabres at least brought home some hardware in 2007.

 

Too tired. You and PA write up something & I'll see what I can do w/ it tomorrow night. Always fun debating you two, though, seriously.

 

Another way of looking at it, of course, is whether Babcock wins a Cup with Buffalo in either 06 or 07 and whether Ruff takes Detroit there last year. You all know where I stand, I think, so I won't rub your noses in my certitude.

 

I just like the cut of Babcock's jib. His mind seems so sharp during his in-game interviews. He's coaching even then. Pointing to the defensive end, "We play better down there, we'll play better up here," pointing to the offensive zone. "Keep the puck," emphasizing his team's possession game. Real simple, real sound and real crisp. Listen to Ruff. His mind is mush.

[Stoner]

Personally, I'm growing more and more inclined to believe our two ECF years were the result of the "no-touch" league, more than it was us being a good team. Not surprisingly, the deeper we got each year, the more the refs swallowed their whistles, and you could tell it bothered our guys a heckuva lot more than it did Carolina or Ottawa. Sad, but the evidence supports it, IMHO.

 

FWIW, some raw numbers...

 

The Sabres averaged 5.8 power plays per game during the regular season in 05-06. This was 18th in the league. In the playoffs, they averaged 5.5 PPs. As the playoffs went along, the Sabres averaged 6.8 against Philly (but had 12 PPs in Game 2), 4.8 against Ottawa and 4.86 against Carolina.

 

The next season, they averaged 4.96 PPs per game during the regular season, 12th in the league. In the playoffs they averaged 5.5 power plays per game. 4.8 against the Fishsticks, 5.8 against the Rump Rangers and 5.8 against the Stall Toe-Tappers from Kanata.

 

Crunch away.

[wonderbread]

FWIW, some raw numbers...

 

The Sabres averaged 5.8 power plays per game during the regular season in 05-06. This was 18th in the league. In the playoffs, they averaged 5.5 PPs. As the playoffs went along, the Sabres averaged 6.8 against Philly (but had 12 PPs in Game 2), 4.8 against Ottawa and 4.86 against Carolina.

 

The next season, they averaged 4.96 PPs per game during the regular season, 12th in the league. In the playoffs they averaged 5.5 power plays per game. 4.8 against the Fishsticks, 5.8 against the Rump Rangers and 5.8 against the Stall Toe-Tappers from Kanata.

 

Crunch away.

 

 

My head hurts. What does this tell us.

[Stoner]

My head hurts. What does this tell us.

 

You don't want to have sex tonight?

[...]

I smell bacon.

[Kristian]

FWIW, some raw numbers...

 

The Sabres averaged 5.8 power plays per game during the regular season in 05-06. This was 18th in the league. In the playoffs, they averaged 5.5 PPs. As the playoffs went along, the Sabres averaged 6.8 against Philly (but had 12 PPs in Game 2), 4.8 against Ottawa and 4.86 against Carolina.

 

The next season, they averaged 4.96 PPs per game during the regular season, 12th in the league. In the playoffs they averaged 5.5 power plays per game. 4.8 against the Fishsticks, 5.8 against the Rump Rangers and 5.8 against the Stall Toe-Tappers from Kanata.

 

Crunch away.

 

But all that shows is that the refs were consistent in the number of penalties they called, not that they were consistent in the infractions they called.

 

How many of those powerplays are stick calls, and how many are interference and holdings? And how many infractions would've been called in the regular season, but weren't in the playoffs, and what kind of infractions were these?

 

I used the wrong term though, I said the refs "swallowed their whistles", and to a certain extent I'm sure they did as the playoffs are so much more intense and would probably generate more penalties than the average regular season game.

 

However, I should have written something more along the line of "the refs changed they way they called the game", as that's just how the NHL does things.

 

Still, the 05/06-06/07 were the "you can't touch me" years, and of course a team like the Sabres would flourish under something like that.

 

The fact that we now suck again just shows that the current roster don't like to scrum along the boards, or get touched in general. This is especially true for our so-called "defense".