Sabre Dance Posted April 7, 2009 Report Posted April 7, 2009 Good post but when did you want to hire Tortorella? I didn't necessarily want Tortorella - just trying to make the point that there are other quality NHL coaches out there who are out of a job that could have been an upgrade for the Sabres down the stretch. It is just frustrating to watch all of these doors closing while the status quo drives the team further down towards the league cellar. :(
darksabre Posted April 7, 2009 Report Posted April 7, 2009 I don't think there is a coach out there who could whip some of the girls on this team in to shape. They need to be split up and become other teams' talented headcases.
North Buffalo Posted April 7, 2009 Report Posted April 7, 2009 I don't think there is a coach out there who could whip some of the girls on this team in to shape. They need to be split up and become other teams' talented headcases. I agree, and it should start with Jochen Hect, Stafford and Tallinder... Max too. Stafford is too busy getting his hydrolics serviced and he is not as big as he seems with the shoulder pads. When is the last time he actually hit someone. Also, we need a top line center... Roy is a second line one, a hustler, but he wore down and Pommer needs to learn to hit and shoot from somewhere else other than the wing. The Tin Man drives me up the wall, one game on, one game in the closet. I would take three clones of Kaleta. Question do they trade some of these guys. The D seems to be coming on with the young talent, my concern is the offense and toughness.
kingcongkorab Posted April 7, 2009 Report Posted April 7, 2009 I reluctantly voted both. If we are going to play the blame game, I put much of the blame for the debacle of the past 2 years right on Darcys shoulders where it belongs. He did nothing to replace Drury and Briere and here we are 2 years later treading water at the bottom of the division. It is apparent to eveybody but the front office that the team is stale, lacks leadership and is need of a major shake up. I don't forsee a scenario where the GM gets fired and keeps the lame duck coach so if Darcy goes, so must Ruff. I really like and respect Lindy. I think he is an excellent coach, but his shelf life in Buffalo has expired. Most great coaches eventually move on and I think its time for Lindy to take his bows and make way for some new blood. As much as I hate to admit it, these players simply no longer respond to his leadership. The play of this team down the stretch the past 2 seasons (losing hockey) has me convinced that it is time for change at the top.
X. Benedict Posted April 7, 2009 Report Posted April 7, 2009 I reluctantly voted both. If we are going to play the blame game, I put much of the blame for the debacle of the past 2 years right on Darcys shoulders where it belongs. He did nothing to replace Drury and Briere and here we are 2 years later treading water at the bottom of the division. It is apparent to eveybody but the front office that the team is stale, lacks leadership and is need of a major shake up. Drury and Briere are perhaps emblematic of where the league has gone in the last two years. It isn't so much that they needed to be replaced, because (regrettably) you are not going to see the wide-open hockey we saw here two years ago in the league any time soon. Those days are done.
FogBat Posted April 7, 2009 Report Posted April 7, 2009 Drury and Briere are perhaps emblematic of where the league has gone in the last two years.It isn't so much that they needed to be replaced, because (regrettably) you are not going to see the wide-open hockey we saw here two years ago in the league any time soon. Those days are done. That had the shelf life of New Coke.
That Aud Smell Posted April 7, 2009 Report Posted April 7, 2009 I would tell Darcy that if he doesn't make magic happen by the trade deadline that he is gone. This team is under-performing with players that clearly have talent but no maturity. Ship out some big names with bad attitudes that will get a good return in the form of players with good hockey sense and a passion for giving it all they've got. I don't care if this team loses next season, as long as they play as hard as possible night in and night out. If you do that, you are guaranteed to walk away in a better position than they are now. This team has taken some very small steps, but some bigger moves need to be made to really make a difference. nothing i could add to this take, other than to say that gleason's profile of brad may from sunday's paper made me think back to the mid-90s when we had some teams that didn't make the playoffs, but were beloved, or at least perceived differently (more favorably), by the fans. this team is like a bizarro version of those teams. didn't we just have this same season? well-played.
calti Posted April 7, 2009 Report Posted April 7, 2009 The Sabres just do not have the talent. If any heads are to roll it should be in mgmt--although they should be given some more time. Sabres + Briere,Campbell,Biron,Drury,Grier etc. =Cup contender. Who have we replaced these guys with? Its not the coaching,the strategy ,the effort. The talent there is not enough. Simple.
VansTheMans Posted April 7, 2009 Author Report Posted April 7, 2009 So what do you think needs to change? Should management trade away some younger talent(Stafford, MacArthur), and go out and sign some mid-level (skill and salary wise) veteran players (forwards such as Mike Knuble and Peter Sykora are UFA's this year)? Or should the Sabres sacrifice some of our more hefty contract players (Roy, Hecht, Pommers, Connolly), dumping one or two of them and go out and trade/sign an expensive high skilled player (Ex. Hossa)?
LabattBlue Posted April 7, 2009 Report Posted April 7, 2009 I'm surprised at how much support Lindy is getting. Sometimes a coaches message is no longer being heard. It doesn't mean he won't be successful elsewhere, just that maybe a change would do the team good.
VansTheMans Posted April 8, 2009 Author Report Posted April 8, 2009 I'm surprised at how much support Lindy is getting. Sometimes a coaches message is no longer being heard. It doesn't mean he won't be successful elsewhere, just that maybe a change would do the team good. Yea. I think that if Darcy fails to go (which will most likely be the case), then the Sabres should bring in a new coaching staff.
X. Benedict Posted April 8, 2009 Report Posted April 8, 2009 Yea. I think that if Darcy fails to go (which will most likely be the case), then the Sabres should bring in a new coaching staff. Where are you getting likely from?
darksabre Posted April 8, 2009 Report Posted April 8, 2009 Where are you getting likely from? cmon, what are the honest chances they'll actually get rid of Darcy?
sabresnutinphoenix Posted April 8, 2009 Report Posted April 8, 2009 Obviously we don't have the talent but we do have some players.....First thing that must be done is get a scouting staff....Next, give Quinn is walking papers....Then, you can start fresh....
sabresnutinphoenix Posted April 8, 2009 Report Posted April 8, 2009 I reluctantly voted both. If we are going to play the blame game, I put much of the blame for the debacle of the past 2 years right on Darcys shoulders where it belongs. He did nothing to replace Drury and Briere and here we are 2 years later treading water at the bottom of the division. It is apparent to eveybody but the front office that the team is stale, lacks leadership and is need of a major shake up. I don't forsee a scenario where the GM gets fired and keeps the lame duck coach so if Darcy goes, so must Ruff. I really like and respect Lindy. I think he is an excellent coach, but his shelf life in Buffalo has expired. Most great coaches eventually move on and I think its time for Lindy to take his bows and make way for some new blood. As much as I hate to admit it, these players simply no longer respond to his leadership. The play of this team down the stretch the past 2 seasons (losing hockey) has me convinced that it is time for change at the top. My sentiments exactly but we need to fire Quinn first...
Stoner Posted April 8, 2009 Report Posted April 8, 2009 My sentiments exactly but we need to fire Quinn first... Wrong! Neale must go first. I don't know that I can listen to that again next season.
DFITZ1 Posted April 8, 2009 Report Posted April 8, 2009 My sentiments exactly but we need to fire Quinn first... The problem is Quinn can't be fired as he has retains some ownership. Perhaps TG can buy him out with his extra millions (who says golden parachutes have gone away). It doesn't take much thought to realize that a management that belligerently refused to negotiate during the season (2 years ago) and in doing so lost 3 all-stars, all of whom are going to the playoffs this year. The losses of Campbell, Briere and Drury were felt immediately after they were gone (notice last year how quickly the Sabres faded with Campbell gone). What bother sme is the number of players we let go who are steady contributors on there new teams (I won't count Biron, because we needed to unload his salary as a back-up goalie) Campbell - Chicago (missied playoffs last year) Briere - (immediate impact bringing Philly back. A team leader who elevates the play of others) Drury - Rangers in playoffs 2 years with him JP Dumont - Predators Ty Conklin - Pittsburgh/Detroit We actually traded him for last years back-up who was a bust. Played crucial back-up roll for same price as we could have kept him for. Zubrus - rental player in last playoff run. Went to Devils where he still plays Who do we keep? Connelly - great puck handler, but made of porcelain, and has too many giveaways. Max - great skater, needs ritalin. Has more giveaways than the stimulus package. Vanek - Needed to keep after losing Briere/Drury. If Briere was signed, Vanek would've given us 2 1st rounders. Vanek is not Briere, definitely not the leader. Miller - only smart move. But we don't have his back-up Rivet - solid, but did not replace Campbell I see no problem with Ruff. He has the team moving the puck well, but they can't score (how many open nets missed?) and run out of gas by the 3rd period. Great coaches still need great players. Blame falls on Quinn, but like Wall Street, he can stick it too the fans and not be held accountible.
VansTheMans Posted April 8, 2009 Author Report Posted April 8, 2009 I keep debating how much better off the Sabres would be if we were able to keep one of the co-captains. Another question I have: do you think if the Sabres would have sat Briere and Drury in a room together, they would have signed on for a few more years at a discounted price? I still feel that both Briere and Drury felt slighted, felt that management was trying to play them against each other in terms of contract discussions. Neither liked that very much, so both jumped ship at the end of the season.
DFITZ1 Posted April 8, 2009 Report Posted April 8, 2009 I keep debating how much better off the Sabres would be if we were able to keep one of the co-captains. Another question I have: do you think if the Sabres would have sat Briere and Drury in a room together, they would have signed on for a few more years at a discounted price? I still feel that both Briere and Drury felt slighted, felt that management was trying to play them against each other in terms of contract discussions. Neither liked that very much, so both jumped ship at the end of the season. Briere would've signed for $5M/year IF the Sabres negotiated early in 2006. They stubbornly refused because of "policy". I think Drury still would have gone, but that money could;ve been used to re-sign Campbell. We have NO defenseman that can match Campbells talents, even if he wasn't always super (but still good) on D. His puck handling made it look like we had 6 skaters out there and the opposition had to respect him. Keeping 2 out of 3 would've worked out OK.
PromoTheRobot Posted April 8, 2009 Report Posted April 8, 2009 Why don't you include Larry Quinn in the poll? We all blame Regier but he can't go to the bathroom without Quinn's approval. Nothing will change as long as Larry Quinn runs the Sabres. PTR
SarasotaSabre Posted April 8, 2009 Report Posted April 8, 2009 The problem is Quinn can't be fired as he has retains some ownership. Perhaps TG can buy him out with his extra millions (who says golden parachutes have gone away). It doesn't take much thought to realize that a management that belligerently refused to negotiate during the season (2 years ago) and in doing so lost 3 all-stars, all of whom are going to the playoffs this year. The losses of Campbell, Briere and Drury were felt immediately after they were gone (notice last year how quickly the Sabres faded with Campbell gone). What bother sme is the number of players we let go who are steady contributors on there new teams (I won't count Biron, because we needed to unload his salary as a back-up goalie) Campbell - Chicago (missied playoffs last year) Briere - (immediate impact bringing Philly back. A team leader who elevates the play of others) Drury - Rangers in playoffs 2 years with him JP Dumont - Predators Ty Conklin - Pittsburgh/Detroit We actually traded him for last years back-up who was a bust. Played crucial back-up roll for same price as we could have kept him for. Zubrus - rental player in last playoff run. Went to Devils where he still plays Who do we keep? Connelly - great puck handler, but made of porcelain, and has too many giveaways. Max - great skater, needs ritalin. Has more giveaways than the stimulus package. Vanek - Needed to keep after losing Briere/Drury. If Briere was signed, Vanek would've given us 2 1st rounders. Vanek is not Briere, definitely not the leader. Miller - only smart move. But we don't have his back-up Rivet - solid, but did not replace Campbell I see no problem with Ruff. He has the team moving the puck well, but they can't score (how many open nets missed?) and run out of gas by the 3rd period. Great coaches still need great players. Blame falls on Quinn, but like Wall Street, he can stick it too the fans and not be held accountible. did you mean "role" ?......... :wallbash:
VansTheMans Posted April 8, 2009 Author Report Posted April 8, 2009 Why don't you include Larry Quinn in the poll? We all blame Regier but he can't go to the bathroom without Quinn's approval. Nothing will change as long as Larry Quinn runs the Sabres. PTR I considered Quinn in the option of "ownership", since he does own part of the team.
LabattBlue Posted April 8, 2009 Report Posted April 8, 2009 I considered Quinn in the option of "ownership", since he does own part of the team. In a recent Buffalo News blog by one of the hockey guys, my jaw drop when it was estimated that Quinn has a 7-10% ownership stake in the Sabres. I would have guessed 1 or 2%.
VansTheMans Posted April 8, 2009 Author Report Posted April 8, 2009 Yea. I would assume 7-10% would be accurate. If he was only at 1 or 2%, I would fail to understand why he wields such influence in the organization.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.