BamBam Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 Anyone catch coaches corner last night? Cherry went on a little tirade about how he is always telling people that Lindy should have more coach of the year awards, but then chin checked him for playing Vanek in the final minutes of the leafs game to allow TV to get his 4th goal. Called it a bad move by the coach who should know better and not try to run up the score. He said..."Was Adam Mair not available...Give him some minutes" Cherry then went on to say that when a coach makes a move like that the Hockey Gods always have a way of coming back at ya, and while he did not wish any ill will towards Vanek he showed the clip from the first period of the Sens game, when Vanek took one in the face and said..."See Lindy....The Hockey Gods Responded Quickly!" :thumbdown:
carpandean Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 Anyone catch coaches corner last night? Cherry went on a little tirade about how he is always telling people that Lindy should have more coach of the year awards, but then chin checked him for playing Vanek in the final minutes of the leafs game to allow TV to get his 4th goal. Called it a bad move by the coach who should know better and not try to run up the score. He said..."Was Adam Mair not available...Give him some minutes" I agree, but for completely different reasons. Vanek had his hat trick and the team was up 5-0, so what was our franchise player doing on the ice? Look what happened to Goose in the final shift of that game. If anything, that was the Hockey God's response.
LabattBlue Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 Anyone catch coaches corner last night? Cherry went on a little tirade about how he is always telling people that Lindy should have more coach of the year awards, but then chin checked him for playing Vanek in the final minutes of the leafs game to allow TV to get his 4th goal. Called it a bad move by the coach who should know better and not try to run up the score. He said..."Was Adam Mair not available...Give him some minutes" Cherry then went on to say that when a coach makes a move like that the Hockey Gods always have a way of coming back at ya, and while he did not wish any ill will towards Vanek he showed the clip from the first period of the Sens game, when Vanek took one in the face and said..."See Lindy....The Hockey Gods Responded Quickly!" :thumbdown: That was a bizzare segment. Of all the things to beat up on Lindy for, having Vanek out there when the score is 5-0 isn't one of them(especailly after praising him).
BamBam Posted February 8, 2009 Author Report Posted February 8, 2009 That was a bizzare segment. Of all the things to beat up on Lindy for, having Vanek out there when the score is 5-0 isn't one of them(especailly after praising him). I totally agree. The way he was praising him I thought it was all going to be good stuff. He didn't even remember if Lindy had won a Jack Adams yet or not, but that turned pretty quick.
Ohiofan Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 I think sometimes Cherry tries too hard to live up to his image, and that leads to him saying some pretty outrageous things. Granted, he is always outspoken, but I see him intentionally going over the top to keep people talking and to keep his name out there and his a$$ employed.
deluca67 Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 Cherry is to hockey broadcasting what Ecklund is to hockey on the web. They both have zero percent credibility. It is the old school Don Cherry types that continue to hold this game back. Cherry is nothing more than an old clown in a bad suit.
SwampD Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 And yet, as superstitious as athletes and coaches are, I wonder how many of them out there completely agree with what he said?
Stoner Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 I agree, but for completely different reasons. Vanek had his hat trick and the team was up 5-0, so what was our franchise player doing on the ice? Look what happened to Goose in the final shift of that game. If anything, that was the Hockey God's response. So you sit your best players in the latter stages of sure wins? Pull Miller then? I've never heard this theory espoused in hockey. There were over 10 minutes left when the Sabres went up 5-0. What was Lindy supposed to do? Weird. Edit! Vanek skated two more shifts after making it 5-0, for a total of 54 seconds.
X. Benedict Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 Anyone catch coaches corner last night? Cherry went on a little tirade about how he is always telling people that Lindy should have more coach of the year awards, but then chin checked him for playing Vanek in the final minutes of the leafs game to allow TV to get his 4th goal. Called it a bad move by the coach who should know better and not try to run up the score. He said..."Was Adam Mair not available...Give him some minutes" Cherry then went on to say that when a coach makes a move like that the Hockey Gods always have a way of coming back at ya, and while he did not wish any ill will towards Vanek he showed the clip from the first period of the Sens game, when Vanek took one in the face and said..."See Lindy....The Hockey Gods Responded Quickly!" :thumbdown: Bad form? Hardly. Lindy was much more a player than Cherry ever was and isn't going to pull a guy out on a special night, especially when he has a chance to score a natural 4 in a single period and his teammates want it to happen. That could be a once in a lifetime.
darksabre Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 last i checked playing your players is called line changes. to not play vanek would have meant changing up all the lines in order to play other guys. why bother? grapes is just a grouch and is mad the Sabres won. If it had been the other way around he would have been praising the Leafs for kicking the snot out of us. As much as I try to like don cherry, the dude is a schmuck.
blugold43 Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 last i checked, cherry was a comic book character put in front of the camera to rile people up. the guy's a great entertainer, but i can't imagine anyone worrying too much about what he says. is anyone really worried about his judgment on these matters in comparison to lindy ruff's?
carpandean Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 So you sit your best players in the latter stages of sure wins? Pull Miller then? I've never heard this theory espoused in hockey.There were over 10 minutes left when the Sabres went up 5-0. What was Lindy supposed to do? You definitely cut their ice time (which he clearly did) and especially don't play them in the last minute when losing teams start getting chippy. It's just not worth the risk. You may not of heard of it, but coaches do it. Here's a question: why wouldn't you cut their time? Padding their stats or your goal differential isn't worth having your stars out there when the game is decided. You've seen how many freak injuries that we've had. It's a dangerous sport. Heck, in the NFL, coaches play entire teams of backup players in meaningless games at the end of the season to avoid risking their stars going into the playoffs. Miller was going for a shutout, so it was understandable (though, still risky.) A lot of teams would have played their backup in the third against Edmonton (seen done by other teams in blowouts.) last i checked playing your players is called line changes. to not play vanek would have meant changing up all the lines in order to play other guys. why bother? 5-on-5, you simply put your third and fourth lines out more frequently. On the PP, you run your second unit more or even the mysterious third unit (I can't remember which game it was, but we had a PP unit with guys like Kaleta, Ellis and Mair on it.) It's not just Vanek, either. How about Connolly? If anyone should stay on the bench when the game is decided, it's TC.
Kristian Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 You definitely cut their ice time (which he clearly did) and especially don't play them in the last minute when losing teams start getting chippy. It's just not worth the risk. You may not of heard of it, but coaches do it. Here's a question: why wouldn't you cut their time? Padding their stats or your goal differential isn't worth having your stars out there when the game is decided. You've seen how many freak injuries that we've had. It's a dangerous sport. Heck, in the NFL, coaches play entire teams of backup players in meaningless games at the end of the season to avoid risking their stars going into the playoffs. Miller was going for a shutout, so it was understandable (though, still risky.) A lot of teams would have played their backup in the third against Edmonton (seen done by other teams in blowouts.) 5-on-5, you simply put your third and fourth lines out more frequently. On the PP, you run your second unit more or even the mysterious third unit (I can't remember which game it was, but we had a PP unit with guys like Kaleta, Ellis and Mair on it.) It's not just Vanek, either. How about Connolly? If anyone should stay on the bench when the game is decided, it's TC. Letting players pad their stats is a bad idea period, unless we're talking someone on a 20 game scoreless streak or something like that. You're risking your best players to what you mentioned, last minute infractions and chippiness, and you're sending the signal that you do not respect your opponents. Also, why let your top guys add the extra 5-10 points they might end up getting in situations like these? From the Sabres perspective, all it does is drive their pricetag upwards. So unless you're showcasing someone for a trade, or trying to end someone's slump, letting your top guys pad their stats is just not "good business".
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 Letting players pad their stats is a bad idea period, unless we're talking someone on a 20 game scoreless streak or something like that. You're risking your best players to what you mentioned, last minute infractions and chippiness, and you're sending the signal that you do not respect your opponents. Also, why let your top guys add the extra 5-10 points they might end up getting in situations like these? From the Sabres perspective, all it does is drive their pricetag upwards. So unless you're showcasing someone for a trade, or trying to end someone's slump, letting your top guys pad their stats is just not "good business". Ya... But thnk of the team... Lindy CAN'T give the perception he is letting these kids move into "cruise control." Very bad things (worse than TV injury... Well maybe) happen when this team gets a sniff of that idea! It is a balancing act.
Goodfella25 Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 Hey Don--maybe the Leafs shouldn't suck and actually show up for a game. Then you wouldn't be talking about this.
Kristian Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 Ya... But thnk of the team... Lindy CAN'T give the perception he is letting these kids move into "cruise control." Very bad things (worse than TV injury... Well maybe) happen when this team gets a sniff of that idea! It is a balancing act. Yeah I guess you have a point there, especially with the current team. They do seem to have that nasty habit of getting overconfident real quick, which I attribute to them being young and immature, more than being lazy.
SabresFan526 Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 So, I'm a little confused on how this works with the hockey gods. So, according to Cherry, did Chris Neil finally get what was coming to him after all of the dirty plays he has made throughout his entire career when Teppo sliced him with his skate last night? Or according to Cherry, is that just a dirty play from a European player who has the respect of just about everyone in the entire NHL? Seems to me like it's the hockey gods work in progress as it destroys Neil's trade value, forces Bryan Murray to keep him, and it looks like he won't play for quite a while because of it. I'll take it if that's how the hockey gods work. Or is this just another backhanded comment that Cherry was making due to his racism and general hatred towards any and all players who are from Europe, wear visors, are French Canadians, score pretty goals, do not fight, who don't make assclowns out of themselves on TV, etc.? But, all-in-all, in the last week, we've had two NHL talking heads make comments about the Sabres. Let's kind of look at their track records. We have Don Cherry who has done nothing as an NHL head coach besides taking an idiotic too many men on the ice penalty that cost him a Stanley Cup. And if he were such a great hockey guy, he probably would not be a broadcaster. And, then there's Mike Milbury. See the Islanders, New York for his accomplishments as a man in hockey. There's so much you can say with Milbury, but trading Spezza, Chara, and Muckalt for Yashin and then signing him to a 10 year deal is all you need to know about Milbury. Where does Yashin play now? Is it the KHL or AHL, I forget? Enough said. These are two guys who have zero credibility as far as I'm concerned when it comes to talking about hockey.
Stoner Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 Miller was going for a shutout, so it was understandable (though, still risky.) A lot of teams would have played their backup in the third against Edmonton (seen done by other teams in blowouts.) So if Miller had lost the shutout, you would have pulled him -- because of the "risk"? I don't ever remember seeing a goalie pulled under such circumstances. Or when the game is hopelessly lost. Then again, my hockey window is pretty narrow. I rarely watch games not involving the Sabres.
Kristian Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 And, then there's Mike Milbury. See the Islanders, New York for his accomplishments as a man in hockey. There's so much you can say with Milbury, but trading Spezza, Chara, and Muckalt for Yashin and then signing him to a 10 year deal is all you need to know about Milbury. Where does Yashin play now? Is it the KHL or AHL, I forget? Enough said. These are two guys who have zero credibility as far as I'm concerned when it comes to talking about hockey. You know - And I'm sure this will come a huge shocker to some people so you better sit down for this - I actually feel like I won a million bucks everytime I picture the scenario that Mike Milbury or Garth Snow are in charge of the Sabres :thumbsup:
shrader Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 With such a big lead, Ryan Miller should be ashamed of himself for continuing his effort to stop pucks.
Buffalo Wings Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 So if Miller had lost the shutout, you would have pulled him -- because of the "risk"? Personally, I wouldn't have, but I've seen a coach do this in a college game when his team was up 8-0. As soon as his goalie lost the shutout, he was pulled...about 5-6 minutes left, but I didn't remember any "risk" of leaving him in. I think it was more of giving the guy some rest (it was a Harvard goalie during their Beanpot grind) than anything else.
Lethbridge Broncos Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 they have to have something to talk about. grapes has to have a comment -- this was a good one.
darksabre Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 Personally, I wouldn't have, but I've seen a coach do this in a college game when his team was up 8-0. As soon as his goalie lost the shutout, he was pulled...about 5-6 minutes left, but I didn't remember any "risk" of leaving him in. I think it was more of giving the guy some rest (it was a Harvard goalie during their Beanpot grind) than anything else. A lot of college teams will do that since many dress 3 goalies. If we're up by a lot in a game our coach will usually put in the 3rd stringer rookie to give him some playing time. I guess you could do it in the NHL too if you want your backup to get some ice time if he hasn't been playing a lot lately.
Taro T Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 Bad form? Hardly. Lindy was much more a player than Cherry ever was and isn't going to pull a guy out on a special night,especially when he has a chance to score a natural 4 in a single period and his teammates want it to happen. That could be a once in a lifetime. The fact that Cherry was on the wrong end of Darryl Sittler's big night back exactly 33 years to the day of that particular HNIC CC's MIGHT have something to do w/ his opinion on this issue.
LabattBlue Posted February 8, 2009 Report Posted February 8, 2009 The fact that Cherry was on the wrong end of Darryl Sittler's big night back exactly 33 years to the day of that particular HNIC CC's MIGHT have something to do w/ his opinion on this issue. Take that grapes! :lol:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.