What is a "Lindy Ruff team" known for?

[PASabreFan]

As nfreeman likes to say, let us not be obtuse here. Let's be specific.

 

Specifically, what is a "Lindy Ruff team" known for? After so many seasons, it's not like we can't make some generalizations.

[billsrcursed]

Vajayjay comes to mind...... :blush:

[deluca67]

Undermanned and underfunded.

 

I would love to see Lindy in a situation where the bottom line is winning the Stanley Cup not surviving as a franchise. If Lindy is let go I would love to see him land in Toronto. With Brian Burke as a GM they would have a Cup in three years.

[Guest]

It's hard to put all the blame on Ruff for a lot of things wrong with this team, just because DR hasn't given him dick to work with like undersized spineless players, but this is what I have seen.

 

Sucking in back to back games and taking waaaaayy too many nights off!!!!!

[Kristian]

Missing open nets and hitting posts in clutch situations.

 

Making backup goaltenders look like the second coming of Dominik Hasek.

[Taro T]

As nfreeman likes to say, let us not be obtuse here. Let's be specific.

 

Specifically, what is a "Lindy Ruff team" known for? After so many seasons, it's not like we can't make some generalizations.

A Lindy Ruff team is known for not knowing how to handle the goalies in the regular season.

 

It is also known for slightly underachieving in the regular season but typically getting at least 1 round further than it should when it makes the playoffs.

 

It is known for making other teams despise the Sabres coach beyond a rational level come playoff time, which might be part of the reason that the teams typically exceed playoff expectations. I will never forget Rod Camelface spewing against Lindy when he should have been focusing on having an almost unscrewupable opportunity to win the Stanley Cup.

 

It also tends to be known for being soft, but I would suggest that is a combination of his philosophy of not throwing a monster hit if it leaves you out of position (it is rare for a D-man to go for the Kaleta style hit) and the players that are on the squad.

[spndnchz]

A Lindy Ruff team is known for not knowing how to handle the goalies in the regular season.

 

It is also known for slightly underachieving in the regular season but typically getting at least 1 round further than it should when it makes the playoffs.

 

It is known for making other teams despise the Sabres coach beyond a rational level come playoff time, which might be part of the reason that the teams typically exceed playoff expectations. I will never forget Rod Camelface spewing against Lindy when he should have been focusing on having an almost unscrewupable opportunity to win the Stanley Cup.

 

It also tends to be known for being soft, but I would suggest that is a combination of his philosophy of not throwing a monster hit if it leaves you out of position (it is rare for a D-man to go for the Kaleta style hit) and the players that are on the squad.

+1

[LabattBlue]

A Lindy Ruff team is known for not knowing how to handle the goalies in the regular season.

 

It is also known for slightly underachieving in the regular season but typically getting at least 1 round further than it should when it makes the playoffs.

 

It is known for making other teams despise the Sabres coach beyond a rational level come playoff time, which might be part of the reason that the teams typically exceed playoff expectations. I will never forget Rod Camelface spewing against Lindy when he should have been focusing on having an almost unscrewupable opportunity to win the Stanley Cup.

 

It also tends to be known for being soft, but I would suggest that is a combination of his philosophy of not throwing a monster hit if it leaves you out of position (it is rare for a D-man to go for the Kaleta style hit) and the players that are on the squad.

:thumbsup:

[tom webster]

Apparently he should also be known for riling up certain posters beyond rational explanation as they try different ways to espouse their agenda.

[X. Benedict]

A Lindy Ruff team is known for not knowing how to handle the goalies in the regular season.

 

It is also known for slightly underachieving in the regular season but typically getting at least 1 round further than it should when it makes the playoffs.

 

It is known for making other teams despise the Sabres coach beyond a rational level come playoff time, which might be part of the reason that the teams typically exceed playoff expectations. I will never forget Rod Camelface spewing against Lindy when he should have been focusing on having an almost unscrewupable opportunity to win the Stanley Cup.

 

It also tends to be known for being soft, but I would suggest that is a combination of his philosophy of not throwing a monster hit if it leaves you out of position (it is rare for a D-man to go for the Kaleta style hit) and the players that are on the squad.

Nice.

 

Yes. Playoffs series....he had Hitchcock near tears in frustration (Fwuck Lindy, Tell Lindy to Fwuck himself), the Laviollete and the Champagne game was a classic case of crawling into your opponents head. He nearly gave Brwyan Murray a nervous breakdown. There is nobody I like better in a 7 game series.

 

Goalies..... check.

Positioning (as you write)...check.

Playoffs .... check.

 

 

Another thing is that he is known for his longevity. There is a lot to be said for the Torrey-Arbour model of management.

Sportswriters have suggested a lot of things, but nobody in the professional media including ex-players have ever suggested that Lindy has lost a room. I don't think he has.

[PASabreFan]

Apparently he should also be known for riling up certain posters beyond rational explanation as they try different ways to espouse their agenda.

 

The absence of a defense of Lindy and making it about me is duly noted.

 

May I borrow a Bucky-ism?

 

Folks, there's no rational defense of this coach. If he's not a popular former Sabre and classic Buffalo guy (via Alberta), he's be toast in this town, instead of toast of it.

 

P.S. Tom, this isn't about my agenda. It's actually about helping you all with your agenda. I'm begging for some of you to give me some good reasons to keep Lindy. His teams are known for... being smart? Working hard? Being prepared to play? Beating teams they should beat? Good power plays? Being disciplined? Excellent defense? Dynamic offenses? Being tough to beat at home? Being physically intimidating? Throw this old dog a bone!

[PASabreFan]

Nice.

 

Yes. Playoffs series....he had Hitchcock near tears in frustration (Fwuck Lindy, Tell Lindy to Fwuck himself), the Laviollete and the Champagne game was a classic case of crawling into your opponents head. He nearly gave Brwyan Murray a nervous breakdown. There is nobody I like better in a 7 game series.

 

Goalies..... check.

Positioning (as you write)...check.

Playoffs .... check.

 

 

Another thing is that he is known for his longevity. There is a lot to be said for the Torrey-Arbour model of management.

Sportswriters have suggested a lot of things, but nobody in the professional media including ex-players have ever suggested that Lindy has lost a room. I don't think he has.

 

OK, he's annoying. And he's been around. Coincidentally, he's getting more annoying with time.

 

Great. That's really something to build on. :)

[spndnchz]

The absence of a defense of Lindy and making it about me is duly noted.

 

May I borrow a Bucky-ism?

 

Folks, there's no rational defense of this coach. If he's not a popular former Sabre and classic Buffalo guy (via Alberta), he's be toast in this town, instead of toast of it.

 

P.S. Tom, this isn't about my agenda. It's actually about helping you all with your agenda. I'm begging for some of you to give me some good reasons to keep Lindy. His teams are known for... being smart? Working hard? Being prepared to play? Beating teams they should beat? Good power plays? Being disciplined? Excellent defense? Dynamic offenses? Being tough to beat at home? Being physically intimidating? Throw this old dog a bone!

Maybe it's time to put the old dog to sleep.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

Playing the System

 

It is as simple as that. Over the years, Ruff has forgotten what it was like to be a player that is able to go off of instincts and to be trustworthy enough to be allowed to make plays and think on his own. Instead he has overvalued his current position of coach, and is more worried about being a teacher and "correct" implementation of his system. This has relegated players with a special skillset to near worthlessness at times, (Max, Kotalik, Gaustad, Bernier, etc.), and has actually hindered the development of certain young players as they become more focused on staying out of the doghouse for not running Lindy's system properly, than just going out and playing hockey.

 

Like Taro said, part of that system is emphasising correct positioning and not looking for physical play. That has led to a total passive mindset in the past, especially on defense. To me, this is why Ruff IS to blame just as much as the rest of management. He has come out in the press admitting this is his philosophy. I used to think like many that Ruff was just saddled with a bunch of pansies given to him by management, but it became obvious he was part of the problem...embracing a pansy style of play.

 

Maybe Ruff is a very good coach, but it has been so long since I have seen any fire out of him that I forget if he ever knew what he was doing. Granted I didn't pay as much attention this year, but his record speaks for itself. Without Dominik Hasek in net...Ruff is a .500 coach. Without Hasek or an encyclopedia full of rules changes to fit the makeup of his team.....Ruff is 0-5 in trying to make the playoffs.

 

If I had to give out grades:

 

Golisano: C-

Quinn: F

Regier: D

Ruff: C

 

He is the best of the clowns at what he does, but that only means he's qualified to run the drive-thru when the others work the fries and the grill.

[X. Benedict]

OK, he's annoying. And he's been around. Coincidentally, he's getting more annoying with time.

 

Great. That's really something to build on. :)

Thanks for weighing the merits :rolleyes:

 

Seems you would like him replaced for the sake of accountability....

 

Do you need names.....

 

Bob Hartley

Don Lever

Pat Burns

Randy Cunneyworth

Craig Hartsburgh

Ted Nolan

Tom Renney

Denny Savard

Pete laviolette

Barry Melrose

Scott Arniel

Greg Gilbert

James Patrick

Guy Carboneau

[tom webster]

The absence of a defense of Lindy and making it about me is duly noted.

 

May I borrow a Bucky-ism?

 

Folks, there's no rational defense of this coach. If he's not a popular former Sabre and classic Buffalo guy (via Alberta), he's be toast in this town, instead of toast of it.

 

P.S. Tom, this isn't about my agenda. It's actually about helping you all with your agenda. I'm begging for some of you to give me some good reasons to keep Lindy. His teams are known for... being smart? Working hard? Being prepared to play? Beating teams they should beat? Good power plays? Being disciplined? Excellent defense? Dynamic offenses? Being tough to beat at home? Being physically intimidating? Throw this old dog a bone!

 

 

I don't think my opinion would lend any more weight to the argument then the opinion of respected hockey people throughout the NHL. What's the point with you anyway, you argue both points of the argument. When a Buffalo News writer chalks up a miserable 40 minutes against the Devils to work ethic, you rip the writer for being lazy and not exploring the myriad of hockey reasons for their seeming lackluster play and yet you apparently cite their lack of work ethic in condemnation of Lindy.

I have said before that I have great respect for Ruff as a coach but also would have no problem with them dismissing both Ruff and Regier and going in another direction. Even if Ruff and Regier were the epitome of coach/ Gm it doesn't mean that some other duo wouldn't do better in the environment that is TG and LQ. Its all about dynamics and creating that perfect storm. And again, I will stick to my core belief that a little bit of luck plays into the equation. Bill Belichick was Dick Jauron until Scott Pioli drafted a skinny kid from Michigan who couldn't beat out Drew Henson.

[nfreeman]

Well, notwithstanding your mischaracterization of the way I've described several of your posts as "obtuse" (which mischaracterization is itself...obtuse), here's what I'd say about Lindy:

 

1. When he hasn't been kneecapped by ownership/management (losing Peca & Domink, bankruptcy/jail, threat of franchise folding or moving, losing Drury, Briere, Soupy, Dumont, McKee & Grier), his teams have done very well in the playoffs. They've done so playing both a defensive-oriented style and a high-scoring style.

 

2. This year's team absorbed a staggering loss of talent over the last couple of years and has a near-complete absence of veteran leaders, yet still would've made the playoffs this year (and probably gotten to the 6 or 7 slot) had his 2 best players not gotten hurt in the last 2 months of the year. (I know it's an excuse, but it's still true.)

 

3. Lindy was able to get along with and get the most out of Dominik, when quite a few other coaches weren't. Lindy was also able to get more out of guys like Satan and Zhitnik (not to mention Drury and Briere) than other coaches have.

 

4. Those calling for his ouster would do well to remember that this team went something like 13 years without winning a playoff series before he arrived.

 

5. My only complaint is the way Miller got overworked this year before the injury -- there were too many times when the team had 3 games in 4 nights and he played all 3. But this is just nitpicking.

 

Lindy is solid as an effing rock. Give him some horses and he'll get the wagon to the promised land.

[R_Dudley]

Good at;

 

1.)Coming up with a plan and style to adapt his teams approach to what he's been given. Many comments here support that(e.g defensive style vs. post lockout new NHL style and most recent this year when Vanek and Miller went down)

 

2.)Knowing how to change things up for the players during and over the multiple seasons so not to lose the room or ears of his players. i.e. Have a hard practice, call a player out in media or not, etc. This has been confimed/repeated now by allot of the team

 

3.)Generally, most of the time keeping an even keel and not getting too high or too low over the course of the season in front of his team and/or fans.

 

4.)Knowing when to step up and take the blame vs. calling certain players out.

 

5.)Solid penalty killing teams.

 

6.)Game /series planning and adjustements in playoff's (unfortuantely we have not been able to see this last 2 yrs) .

 

Not so good at.

 

-Getting the players to always execute number 1 above

 

-As many have said, handling his goalie rotation

 

-Assistant coach choices and performance (However I must consider if he is getting to chose or are his options being given him

 

-Encouraging Physical style of play

 

-Power play effectiveness/consistancy.

 

-Consistent application of his public stances(e.g. want more ice time play like you want it) and evenly applying handling that across all his players.

[SabresFan526]

Thanks for weighing the merits :rolleyes:

 

Seems you would like him replaced for the sake of accountability....

 

Do you need names.....

 

Bob Hartley

Don Lever

Pat Burns

Randy Cunneyworth

Craig Hartsburgh

Ted Nolan

Tom Renney

Denny Savard

Pete laviolette

Barry Melrose

Scott Arniel

Greg Gilbert

James Patrick

Guy Carboneau

Don't know if many people have heard, but apparently, Burns has had yet another cancer relapse (third time, this time lung cancer) and has now become a terminal patient. It's so sad. I've always thought that he was a great coach, and of all the guys to deserve a Stanley Cup, he finally got it in New Jersey, ironically enough with the only team he never won a Jack Adams with. Coaching three different teams and winning the Jack Adams is a testament to how great of a coach he was and it's too bad we will likely never see him behind the bench ever again.

[PASabreFan]

I don't think my opinion would lend any more weight to the argument then the opinion of respected hockey people throughout the NHL. What's the point with you anyway, you argue both points of the argument. When a Buffalo News writer chalks up a miserable 40 minutes against the Devils to work ethic, you rip the writer for being lazy and not exploring the myriad of hockey reasons for their seeming lackluster play and yet you apparently cite their lack of work ethic in condemnation of Lindy.

I have said before that I have great respect for Ruff as a coach but also would have no problem with them dismissing both Ruff and Regier and going in another direction. Even if Ruff and Regier were the epitome of coach/ Gm it doesn't mean that some other duo wouldn't do better in the environment that is TG and LQ. Its all about dynamics and creating that perfect storm. And again, I will stick to my core belief that a little bit of luck plays into the equation. Bill Belichick was Dick Jauron until Scott Pioli drafted a skinny kid from Michigan who couldn't beat out Drew Henson.

 

No, "working hard" was just a suggested choice. That list is not a list of my points against Ruff. Wow, you do hang on every word. I am honored. Also slightly disconcerted.

[val james]

Going after Billy Smith

[X. Benedict]

Going after Billy Smith

 

Ah.....that was a thing of beauty.

[PASabreFan]

Ah.....that was a thing of beauty.

 

For the youngens:

 

Wow, Schoeny's helmet doesn't come close to matching his jersey. Sacre Bleu! I love the clean boards, no graphics on the screen. Ah, those were the days. My 50s were a wonderful time.

[PASabreFan]

Anyone remember how that incident shook out, penalty wise? It was 3-2 Sabres (edit: Islanders!), and the final was 5-2. I wonder if Ruff got the only penalty and the Islanders scored on the power play?

[deluca67]

Ah.....that was a thing of beauty.

Ruff never threw a punch. :wallbash: