Is Lindy Ruff the new Marv Levy?

[deluca67]

And what have Drury and Briere accomplished since?

They cash very large checks.

[matter2003]

Ok, lets not sit here and act like they got beat 8-0. Lets say it like it is, as I have been.

 

No finisher to beat the Penguins in regulation, in-turn, the Penguins ate Miller alive in the Shootout.

 

No offensive capacity in the lose to the Capitals, who? Goose and a Connolly tip in? Not alot to speak on there.

Nope, 2 - 0 in Wash, and 5 - 2 in Wash. Doesn't sound like Buf has alot of chance in Wash. Remind me again who is going to have home ice advantage?

 

Like I said, you only fool yourself, look beyond the possible defeat and start raising your voice toward what will be needed to compete with these teams. In my opinion, nothing short of Staal or Kovalchuck, but any players you know of that are realistically at the level of Crosby/Malkin or Ovechkin/Semin/Green should be touted as well.

 

Penguins scored once in the shootout against Lalime...Miller was not playing...

[matter2003]

In my opinion, nothing short of Staal or Kovalchuck,

 

Can u explain exactly how it is that Kovalchuk has scored 319 goals by himself, and assisted on another 279, meaning he has been on the ice for AT LEAST 598 goals(probably more like 700 since he has been on the ice for goals he has neither scored nor assisted on), and yet is a combined -86 for his career, including being a negative player every year in the NHL? That really is pretty mind boggling to me---he has been on the ice for about 700 goals, but has allowed almost 800 goals...Doesn't sound like the type of player who helps you win championships. Sounds more like the kind of player who helps you score lots of goals and miss the playoffs every year. Exactly the wrong player for our team...

[nfreeman]

And if Jouron had a roster full of Hall of Famers neither would his teams. A team that was loaded on both sides of the ball and they can't get it done? Barry Switzer was handed a team of Hall of Famers and had no trouble winning a Super Bowl. I get it, Marv is a nice guy with funny and smart quotes. That's where the accolades need to end.

The Bills' SB teams were not loaded on defense. They had playmakers but could not stop the run until Ted Washington arrived, which was well after the SB era. The Dallas SB teams, by contrast, were loaded on both sides. Levy was outcoached by Parcells but lost to superior teams 3 out of 4 times.

 

The 2 games I mentioned were lost by Jauron, not by the players. Levy never threw away wins with idiotic late-game moves.

[static70]

Well matter003,

I have said, the only reason I am touting Kovalchuck is due directly to his current situation contractually in Atlanta. I also asked everyone very early in my posts that if they have any players that can be had lets bounce those names around.

People tend to ignore those statements and zone in on what they appear to hate, having to give up a couple of top 6 forwards for a trade. And Vanek would be a part of that trade if it were to be a top tier talent in the league.

I have nothing against Vanek, in my opinion, the guy has done what he could do with the linemates given him. He is a good hockey player, just not a top tier player.

I am not asking to tear down the roster here, just 2 or 3 players/prospects/picks to help Miller out and gain a little ground offensively. I am under no delusion that if Kovalchuck signed here the team would automatically win games 5 to 1 or 7 to 0 (although that would be nice :rolleyes: ).

I think my point was lost a long ways back, but it is in there. To me anyways, winning the cup is what its all about and if the coach has to go to increase the chance of that happening, then so be it. Is that set in stone? Is it something that is a high priority, fire Lindy and everything will be ok? Well, no, as I have stated, he is a good coach.

 

But I cannot ignore the overall numbers on championships. It starting to look alot like groundhog day to me, great goaltending, but no potency up front to finish the job. Its nothing personal on Lindy, its a job, if I didn't complete a task in 11 years, I wouldn't have that job anymore. Fresh blood in the coaching and general management positions very well may be what is needed to push the team beyond the barrier and bring home a championship or two.

The way I'm looking at it, you can't do any worse than now or the past 11 seasons. A championship for the Buffalo Sabres by any other name is still a championship.

 

Just my 2 cents anyways. I know people get worked up no different than I do. I just happen to have a different opinion than some.

[static70]

OK, so it's Kovalchuk or bust, basically.

 

 

Again, I think you are trying make Kovalchuk=All Eastern Europeans because you REALLY want Kovalchuk, but whatever. For the sake of argument, I will even grant you this, OK? You win. Fire Lindy Ruff.

 

 

True, the Sabres are not as good as Washington or Pittsburgh offensively. (Then again. neither is New Jersey. Should they scrap what they have going and go after Kovalchuk? They have scored just one more goal than the Sabres this season when you remove the "goals" for shootout wins.) But if they fired Lindy Ruff today and traded for Kovalchuk tomorrow, would they suddenly be in a class with Pittsburgh and Washington? Depending on who was traded to get him, how fast will they adjust to this new offensive system you favor? Is this just the first step in blowing it all up and starting from scratch? Are they taking a step back to build this offensive team around Kovalchuk that can win it all two years from now? You say the defense "appears solid enough," but they are playing Ruff's system. What if they suck in the new system?

 

Which reminds me ... you advocate some sort of offensive system to lure an offensive player you might not get anyway, but what about the fact that your franchise player - Miller - is THRIVING and you might alienate him with such a move. Again, we have hypothetically agreed to fire Ruff, but putting ANY kind of new system in place just to lure one guy who MIGHT come without considering Miller (and Tyler Myers, for that matter, since he is probably the singular most important guy in the organization right now) is shortsighted.

 

 

You have absolutely zero proof of this. None. If he makes players around him so much better, why hasn't he been able to get them to the playoffs more than once? If he is so clutch, why did he score one goal and add just one assist as they got swept in that one playoff appearance? All we really know about him to this point is that he can put up big numbers on bad teams. And even if I agreed that he was a clutch player, what if they do not get him? What if he insists on testing the market and goes to Dallas or Colorado or something? This is why I asked for a list, because you are putting all your eggs in this basket and you are pretty screwed if he is not on board.

 

 

Except Kovalchuk, of course. Because you have no plan if you can't get him.

 

 

Wait ... huh? ... I thought it had to be "someone talented Eastern Europeans will like playing for." Do you remember Ted Nolan?

You have completely lost me now. I thought it was a bad plan because I do not believe in Kovalchuk like you do, nor do I believe that they could get him even if he was the next Mark Messier when it came to clutch. But at least you were making a case. In the end, we are back to "Anyone is better than Lindy and Darcy."

 

I can't believe I replied to all this without reading the very end. I could have saved myself some time. But I typed it all so ... what the hell, I am posting it. I'll take Ruff and Regier, you take Ted Nolan and Kovalchuk. maybe neither of us will win anything, but I'll take my chances.

LOL, thats what I have been posting for a couple of days now, I only pointed to Kovalchuck because of his current contract situation. He seems to be a real potential, but as I stated in other posts, there are alternatives to him, someone start naming off some players that will fit into Lindy's system and have a potent offensive attack that would not be hindered by Lindy's system.

 

Defending Lindy and Darcy on passion doesn't change the facts. The facts are clear here, no championship banners hanging from the rafters for the Sabres or its fan base after 11 seasons. If that isn't a tell tail sign for some people, well, I don't know what to say then, it is what it is, or as you would say "whatever".

[JJFIVEOH]

The Caps lost to the Canes tonight. Maybe Washington should fire Boudreau?

[Sabre Dance]

Levy was outcoached by Parcells but lost to superior teams 3 out of 4 times.

 

Funny, I thought the Bills lost to the Giants because the kicker missed the field goal....

 

 

Yeah, I know.....Levy didn't have the coaching chops to keep up with the Tuna's game plan, but we almost won it anyway. Almost.

[wjag]

Funny, I thought the Bills lost to the Giants because the kicker missed the field goal....

 

 

Yeah, I know.....Levy didn't have the coaching chops to keep up with the Tuna's game plan, but we almost won it anyway. Almost.

The Bills lost the superbowl because they couldn't stop and old running back named Otis Anderson. Plain and simple.

[static70]

Can u explain exactly how it is that Kovalchuk has scored 319 goals by himself, and assisted on another 279, meaning he has been on the ice for AT LEAST 598 goals(probably more like 700 since he has been on the ice for goals he has neither scored nor assisted on), and yet is a combined -86 for his career, including being a negative player every year in the NHL? That really is pretty mind boggling to me---he has been on the ice for about 700 goals, but has allowed almost 800 goals...Doesn't sound like the type of player who helps you win championships. Sounds more like the kind of player who helps you score lots of goals and miss the playoffs every year. Exactly the wrong player for our team...

Ok, I could say something like this in response:

 

Can you explain exactly how it is that Ruff has been behind the Buffalo Sabres bench for 11 going on 12 seasons and still hasn't brought a championship to Buffalo?

Exactly the wrong system to play for our team..........

[Stoner]

What's all the ruckus? Ruff got the Sabres into the playoffs four times this decade! The Sabres changed owners... and he lost some good players! Cut him some slack already.

[cdexchange]

I mentioned those stats along with a list of others that this team is in the bottom third of the league in. Being bottom third in shots against and other categories that Miller does not effect is the point. The Sabres are not better defensively. They are not grittier which is pointed out by their hit totals, dead last. They're 20th in blocked shots and 21st in takeaways.

 

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree then. I watch all the games, and I see a team that is definitely better defensively than last year: the emergence of Tyler Myers, the resurrection of Tallinder, the forwards are backchecking better, the PK is improved, and by far most importantly of all - they are playing much calmer and not blowing leads left and right with bone-headed giveaways in the third period like last year.

 

If you want to tell me that none of that is true because they are allowing 0.9 more shots per game than last year, then fine. It won't change my opinion though.

 

Also, it's affect, not effect. Just pickin' up the slack for Ink.

 

 

 

I ask the question again and maybe you will address it. Where is the Lindy Ruff influence? Where is this team better with Lindy behind the bench? Is it not safe to say that any coach can come and write Miller's name on the lineup sheet?

 

 

Is it not safe to say that any coach in the NHL can write his team's best player's name on the lineup sheet?

 

Look, I'm not arguing that Ruff is bulletproof. He may very well have to go at some point this season, or more likely after the season, and it really wouldn't bother me at all. As a fan, I would not mind a shakeup at the top, I agree that things are getting a bit stale. All along I've just been pointing out the absolute absurdity of doing it right now when the team is in first and we've racked up 50+ points before the season is even half over. As an organization, you don't have two losing seasons and then (rightly or wrongly) decide to bring your coach back for (probably) one more shot, only to fire him halfway through because the team is succeeding beyond anyone's expectations (with a roster that most of us would argue is sorely lacking). It's utterly ridiculous, and a complete waste of time even arguing about it.

[nfreeman]

We'll just have to agree to disagree then. I watch all the games, and I see a team that is definitely better defensively than last year: the emergence of Tyler Myers, the resurrection of Tallinder, the forwards are backchecking better, the PK is improved, and by far most importantly of all - they are playing much calmer and not blowing leads left and right with bone-headed giveaways in the third period like last year.

 

If you want to tell me that none of that is true because they are allowing 0.9 more shots per game than last year, then fine. It won't change my opinion though.

 

Also, it's affect, not effect. Just pickin' up the slack for Ink.

 

Look, I'm not arguing that Ruff is bulletproof. He may very well have to go at some point this season, or more likely after the season, and it really wouldn't bother me at all. As a fan, I would not mind of shakeup at the top, I agree that things are getting a bit stale. All along I've just been pointing out the absolute absurdity of doing it right now when the team is in first and we've racked up 50+ points before the season is even half over. As an organization, you don't have two losing seasons and then (rightly or wrongly) decide to bring your coach back for (probably) one more shot, only to fire him halfway through because the team is succeeding beyond anyone's expectations (with a roster that most of us would argue is sorely lacking). It's utterly ridiculous, and a complete waste of time even arguing about it.

good post.

[Stoner]

good post.

 

-1

[nfreeman]

-1

feeling a bit frisky today with the witticisms, eh?

[cdexchange]

-1

 

 

-2 :ph34r:

[Taro T]

...

It is not good that players will not come to Buffalo due to his hard nosed attitude towards his system. There is no Stanley Cup under his tenure, and that is a big to do when you've had a dozen years to establish a plan of action and apply it. This in no way implies he is an awful coach, it does however imply that if he can't be diplomatic with certain types of players it is naturally going to hurt the team. His system is unproven, whether its due to the current talent pool available or the system itself is something only the players know. I can only make my deductions based on the rate of success, which to date has not impressed me to say the least.

Which system would that be? The one he used when he had Hasek, the one he used post-Hasek prior to Briere arriving, the one he used post-Briere arrival and pre-lockout, the one he used immediately post-lockout, the one used the next 2 years, or this current one?

 

As you have watched the Sabres play for 39 years, I am assuming you realize that the styles were different in each of those periods.

[deluca67]

We'll just have to agree to disagree then. I watch all the games, and I see a team that is definitely better defensively than last year: the emergence of Tyler Myers, the resurrection of Tallinder, the forwards are backchecking better, the PK is improved, and by far most importantly of all - they are playing much calmer and not blowing leads left and right with bone-headed giveaways in the third period like last year.

 

If you want to tell me that none of that is true because they are allowing 0.9 more shots per game than last year, then fine. It won't change my opinion though.

 

Also, it's affect, not effect. Just pickin' up the slack for Ink.

 

 

Is it not safe to say that any coach in the NHL can write his team's best player's name on the lineup sheet?

 

Look, I'm not arguing that Ruff is bulletproof. He may very well have to go at some point this season, or more likely after the season, and it really wouldn't bother me at all. As a fan, I would not mind a shakeup at the top, I agree that things are getting a bit stale. All along I've just been pointing out the absolute absurdity of doing it right now when the team is in first and we've racked up 50+ points before the season is even half over. As an organization, you don't have two losing seasons and then (rightly or wrongly) decide to bring your coach back for (probably) one more shot, only to fire him halfway through because the team is succeeding beyond anyone's expectations (with a roster that most of us would argue is sorely lacking). It's utterly ridiculous, and a complete waste of time even arguing about it.

Forwards back checking better? Shots allowed and total hits say otherwise.

PK is improved? Miller

Not giving up late leads? Miller again, this team has the third most giveaways in the NHL.

 

Miller is succeeding. The franchise is merely racking in the benefits despite a lack luster roster. You consider the argument "ridiculous" and a "waste of time" because all you have to hold to is are the standings. Which is the direct result of Miller's with next to zero contributions from the head coach and roster. Which fits right into point.

 

I guess this is a pointless debate if all you can bring is that you can't fire a coach in the middle of the season if they have a winning record. Even if this team is lack luster in every aspect the head coach has a influence on. After all Dick Jouron was 5-1 last season. Look how that turned out.

[matter2003]

We'll just have to agree to disagree then. I watch all the games, and I see a team that is definitely better defensively than last year: the emergence of Tyler Myers, the resurrection of Tallinder, the forwards are backchecking better, the PK is improved, and by far most importantly of all - they are playing much calmer and not blowing leads left and right with bone-headed giveaways in the third period like last year.

 

If you want to tell me that none of that is true because they are allowing 0.9 more shots per game than last year, then fine. It won't change my opinion though.

 

Also, it's affect, not effect. Just pickin' up the slack for Ink.

 

I agree....the defensive play is much better than last year. Teams are basically taking lots of bad shots from distance and Miller is making the saves without rebounds in many cases.

[matter2003]

Ok, I could say something like this in response:

 

Can you explain exactly how it is that Ruff has been behind the Buffalo Sabres bench for 11 going on 12 seasons and still hasn't brought a championship to Buffalo?

Exactly the wrong system to play for our team..........

 

The same way 95% of all coaches to have ever coached in the NHL haven't?

[matter2003]

The Bills lost the superbowl because they couldn't stop and old running back named Otis Anderson. Plain and simple.

 

Or make tackles on third and long...really Mark Baker was the player to elude 7 Bills and get a first down on 3rd and 16?

[matter2003]

I guess this is a pointless debate if all you can bring is that you can't fire a coach in the middle of the season if they have a winning record. Even if this team is lack luster in every aspect the head coach has a influence on. After all Dick Jouron was 5-1 last season. Look how that turned out.

 

Again, prime example of someone just trying too hard to look smarter than everyone else...

 

You don't get bonus points for having great "stats". You brought up in another thread how the Sabres are dead last in hits. Who cares. Carolina leads the NHL in hits---guess its easy to run around hitting people when you get frustrated cause you suck so bad...besides, nothing else to do when you are losing by 3 or 4 goals every night. Pittsburgh is 2nd in the NHL in hits...how'd they do tonite? As soon as Buffalo started roughing them up and being aggressive, they looked like they would have rather gotten on the bus to go back to Pittsburgh and gave up 4 straight goals. Bottom line is this team finds ways to win. One night it might be scoring 5 goals. Another it might be Miller saving their bacon in a 1-0 win. Next night it might be laying the lumber on teams(yeah, the Sabres actually have enough guys who can play that way when needed...). They are extremely flexible, and that will help them immensely.

 

Bottom line is their 52 points are 3 off the best in the NHL. Go follow the Thrashers if you want "stats"...Kovalchuk can score 100 goals and allow 125 when he's on the ice and they can miss the playoffs again, but they will score lots of goals and look great...he can even make Max look good again...too bad he can't help them make the playoffs...

 

There is a saying in business:

 

"The bottom line is the bottom line." Right now, the bottom line is they are winning games in lots of different ways. If you are still waiting for the "fluke" to end halfway thru the season, you are gonna be waiting a while..

[static70]

Which system would that be? The one he used when he had Hasek, the one he used post-Hasek prior to Briere arriving, the one he used post-Briere arrival and pre-lockout, the one he used immediately post-lockout, the one used the next 2 years, or this current one?

 

As you have watched the Sabres play for 39 years, I am assuming you realize that the styles were different in each of those periods.

Quite frankly, you cannot call it a style for individual player effort.

You can say during the Hasek years it was still defensive, but the individual talent led to success with Drury and Briere here, the system never changed, the talent did. And since I've watched the Sabres all 39 years, I have never seen a coach go so long with 1 team without success. If you consider success anything but winning a championship then that is your opinion. A Stanley Cup Banner in the rafters at HSBC is my opinion.

[DR HOLLIDAY]

Quite frankly, you cannot call it a style for individual player effort.

You can say during the Hasek years it was still defensive, but the individual talent led to success with Drury and Briere here, the system never changed, the talent did. And since I've watched the Sabres all 39 years, I have never seen a coach go so long with 1 team without success. If you consider success anything but winning a championship then that is your opinion. A Stanley Cup Banner in the rafters at HSBC is my opinion.

 

Dealing in absolutes always leads to tunnel vision. But it is your opinion...... :beer:

[static70]

The same way 95% of all coaches to have ever coached in the NHL haven't?

Sure, if 95% of all coaches have never accomplished it, then I would not call them successful.

As I posted earlier, you don't consider a successful coach by not winning championships, and this is merely semantics you speak of on how great a coach can be without winning one.

At the end of the day, an Owner of a sports franchise brings in staff (including a GM and Coach) to win championships, there are, I will admit, rebuilding processess and time parameters to achieve this, but the very reason to play the game is to win it all in a season. 11 going on 12 seasons is more than ample time to do so, even with the obstacles that had to be overcome with bankruptcy and the change of ownership.