Stoner Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 I can only hope Golisano grew a set of balls and advised Darcy and Lindy what the stakes are here -- their jobs. After Golisano said before the season he would bite a microphone in half if they missed the playoffs, who could blame him? The quote is from Darce on sabres.com and is strikingly un-Darce-like. I have no problem with a housecleaning should the Sabres miss the playoffs for the fifth time in seven seasons. I almost find myself thinking that such a housecleaning would be better for the organeyezation in the long run than making the playoffs and going out in one round. Not that I'm rooting for them to miss the playoffs...
LabattBlue Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 I have no problem with a housecleaning should the Sabres miss the playoffs for the fifth time in seven seasons. The two runs to the conference finals will tend to make people forgot how disappointing this 7 year run will be as a whole if they miss the playoffs this year.
deluca67 Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 The two runs to the conference finals will tend to make people forgot how disappointing this 7 year run will be as a whole if they miss the playoffs this year. My concern would be is Golisano or Quinn the persons you want hiring a new GM?
LabattBlue Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 My concern would be is Golisano or Quinn the persons you want hiring a new GM? no and no.
tom webster Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 I can only hope Golisano grew a set of balls and advised Darcy and Lindy what the stakes are here -- their jobs. After Golisano said before the season he would bite a microphone in half if they missed the playoffs, who could blame him? The quote is from Darce on sabres.com and is strikingly un-Darce-like. I have no problem with a housecleaning should the Sabres miss the playoffs for the fifth time in seven seasons. I almost find myself thinking that such a housecleaning would be better for the organeyezation in the long run than making the playoffs and going out in one round. Not that I'm rooting for them to miss the playoffs... This would imply that Golisano even cares about winning. His refusal to agree to contracts is what tore this team apart two years ago.
SabresFan526 Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 I don't think it's likely to happen. First, I think the Sabres will make the playoffs. Second, it costs too much to fire Darcy and Lindy as Darcy just signed an extension earlier this year and Lindy still has two years left on his existing deal. They would have to pay both of these guys and their replacements if they fired them. If they weren't willing to pay Chris Drury or Daniel Briere or Brian Campbell, there is no way they are going to pay Darcy and Lindy to do nothing and also pay their replacements. Third, Quinn originally hired Darcy, so he does have some loyalty there.
billsrcursed Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 I can only hope Golisano grew a set of balls and advised Darcy and Lindy what the stakes are here -- their jobs. After Golisano said before the season he would bite a microphone in half if they missed the playoffs, who could blame him? The quote is from Darce on sabres.com and is strikingly un-Darce-like. I have no problem with a housecleaning should the Sabres miss the playoffs for the fifth time in seven seasons. I almost find myself thinking that such a housecleaning would be better for the organeyezation in the long run than making the playoffs and going out in one round. Not that I'm rooting for them to miss the playoffs... Hmmm.... interesting. The lack of fire under this team's arse starts at the top and works it's way down. Perhaps this will trickle down a little and remind people of their expendability.....
LabattBlue Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 To add to my post... I would not have a problem if either Darcy or Lindy were let go if they miss the playoffs, but like was mentioned earlier, the choosing of the replacements would scare the heck out of me.
carpandean Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 This would imply that Golisano even cares about winning. His refusal to agree to contracts is what tore this team apart two years ago. Oh come on now, TW ... of course he cares about winning. Winning = money. He had legitimate reasons why he felt players should be under shorter contracts (provides checks, incentive and outs; anyone wish Hecht were under a shorter contract?), has since realized that in the NHL that's not how it works and changed his ways. If you want to make an argument, it would be that he has decided that a lower salary gives the highest expected profits (i.e., an increase in salary would cost more than the profits of later rounds * increase in probability of making them.) If he felt that spending $5 million more would give an expected increase in revenue of more than $5 million, he would do it. But, regardless of where he feels the profit-maximizing salary is, you can assume with 100% certainty that he wants them to win every single game that they play. He cares, if for no other reason (which I'm sure there are) than it affects his pocketbook.
Stoner Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Posted February 27, 2009 I just hope Tom (TG not TW) remembers how much fun the spring of 2006 was. I know he was enjoying it. Almost three years have passed! Damn. You can't take it with you. Then again this is the guy who hasn't bought bread crumbs in years. He just keeps shaking out his toaster.
Eleven Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 This would imply that Golisano even cares about winning. His refusal to agree to contracts is what tore this team apart two years ago. Yep. Briere and The Intangible have been kicking ass in Philly and New York this year.
apuszczalowski Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 Ruff should not be fired, he is one of the topcoaches in the league, who will you find thats going to be an improvement? He can only make do with what he has, its not his fault that the biggest upgrades made to his team by the GM is bringing inexperienced rookies up from the AHL and throwing them into the lineup.
nfreeman Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 This would imply that Golisano even cares about winning. His refusal to agree to contracts is what tore this team apart two years ago. Yep. Briere and The Intangible have been kicking ass in Philly and New York this year. Well, I don't agree that he doesn't care about winning, but the bolded part really can't be disputed.
billsrcursed Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 Ruff should not be fired, he is one of the topcoaches in the league, who will you find thats going to be an improvement? He can only make do with what he has, its not his fault that the biggest upgrades made to his team by the GM is bringing inexperienced rookies up from the AHL and throwing them into the lineup. As much as I've defended Ruff, he HAS been careless with his line-juggling this year. Also, his decision tonight to go with Timmy and Pommers was very, very questionable. I'm not sure I totally agree that his time hasn't come..... as much as I hate to say that.
deluca67 Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 As much as I've defended Ruff, he HAS been careless with his line-juggling this year. Also, his decision tonight to go with Timmy and Pommers was very, very questionable. I'm not sure I totally agree that his time hasn't come..... as much as I hate to say that. Can you explain the bolded point some more?
billsrcursed Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 Can you explain the bolded point some more? I was referring to his "in-game" switches. I know what he's trying to accomplish. He realizes that some guys aren't playing well with others, so he tries to mix it up. On top of this, he puts guys in his "dog house" during games and has others fill the void by double shifting. To me, and it's obviously just my humble opinion, these things shouldn't take place during the game as frequently as they do. I watch a lot of other games throughout the season, and while injuries can cause these types of things on the fly, it's clearly more evident with our team than it is with others, and even moreso this year. For example, Hecht isn't going to come out of his "funk" by moving from line to line. Vanek isn't going to suddenly want to play better after sitting half of the second period. I just think there are better ways of managing our lines DURING the game. If you want to move guys around prior to the start of a game because you have a hunch about a couple of guys who may produce better together, great! I just don't think it's very productive to handle these things midway through a game....
BamBam Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 My concern would be is Golisano or Quinn the persons you want hiring a new GM? Agreed!
Two or less Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 Darcy and Lindy ain't going anywhere. Keep dreaming guys.
buftex Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 I was referring to his "in-game" switches. I know what he's trying to accomplish. He realizes that some guys aren't playing well with others, so he tries to mix it up. On top of this, he puts guys in his "dog house" during games and has others fill the void by double shifting. To me, and it's obviously just my humble opinion, these things shouldn't take place during the game as frequently as they do. I watch a lot of other games throughout the season, and while injuries can cause these types of things on the fly, it's clearly more evident with our team than it is with others, and even moreso this year. For example, Hecht isn't going to come out of his "funk" by moving from line to line. Vanek isn't going to suddenly want to play better after sitting half of the second period. I just think there are better ways of managing our lines DURING the game. If you want to move guys around prior to the start of a game because you have a hunch about a couple of guys who may produce better together, great! I just don't think it's very productive to handle these things midway through a game.... Months before Drury left Buffalo, I remember Paul Hamilton, on a GR segment mentioning that Drury was frustrated by Lindy's constant line shuffling. At the time (it was around January) it didn't seem like a big deal. But when Drury left, I always wondered if that didn't play into Drury wanting to leave. It is rare, particularly with the Sabres, that you hear anything about players being unhappy with things behind the scenes. All that said though, I wouldn't be too anxious to chase Lindy Ruff out of town just yet.
Kristian Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 This would imply that Golisano even cares about winning. His refusal to agree to contracts is what tore this team apart two years ago. True, but neither Drury or Briere are exactly enjoying huge successes with their new teams, so in hindsight perhaps more of our success could be attributed to the way the game was called out of the lockout than the players who were on the team? Just sayin.... Doesn't mean TG is off the hook though.
tom webster Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 True, but neither Drury or Briere are exactly enjoying huge successes with their new teams, so in hindsight perhaps more of our success could be attributed to the way the game was called out of the lockout than the players who were on the team? Just sayin.... Doesn't mean TG is off the hook though. Or maybe the chemistry was just right here and the Sabres as a team were really better then the sum of their parts. The lack of success they are having now says nothing about what would have happened if they stayed together. Its no different then if Max gets traded and goes off and scores 30 goals next year for somebody in the NHL or KHL. It isn't happening here.
2ForTripping Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 I said this two day ago in the Darcy discusses the trade deadline
tom webster Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 Oh come on now, TW ... of course he cares about winning. Winning = money. He had legitimate reasons why he felt players should be under shorter contracts (provides checks, incentive and outs; anyone wish Hecht were under a shorter contract?), has since realized that in the NHL that's not how it works and changed his ways. If you want to make an argument, it would be that he has decided that a lower salary gives the highest expected profits (i.e., an increase in salary would cost more than the profits of later rounds * increase in probability of making them.) If he felt that spending $5 million more would give an expected increase in revenue of more than $5 million, he would do it. But, regardless of where he feels the profit-maximizing salary is, you can assume with 100% certainty that he wants them to win every single game that they play. He cares, if for no other reason (which I'm sure there are) than it affects his pocketbook. I don't believe there is enough difference in his bottom line to make him care. I don't want to get into the whole argument of how valuable owning the franchise really is. If you don't have the passion to win, however, a whole argument can be made about risk and reward in a purely financial gain sense that would lean towards doing nothing. It is kind of like doing nothing when your backup goaltender on your farm team goes out for the year.
Kristian Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 Or maybe the chemistry was just right here and the Sabres as a team were really better then the sum of their parts. The lack of success they are having now says nothing about what would have happened if they stayed together. Its no different then if Max gets traded and goes off and scores 30 goals next year for somebody in the NHL or KHL. It isn't happening here. Guess we'll never know for sure. Shame either way.
LabattBlue Posted February 27, 2009 Report Posted February 27, 2009 Don't let the key point of PA's original post get lost in this thread. IF the Sabres miss the playoffs, that will be 5 misses in 7 years. I like Lindy a lot, DR not as much, but somebody's head has to go on the chopping block if they go 5 for 7.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.