What would you do if you were in charge?

[nfreeman]

Well, certain of us have made our feelings well known about what we'd like to see. I'd like to get some numbers on it.

 

The question is: if you were making the decisions, what would you do NOW (ie within the next 2 weeks, assuming we get another 2 weeks of up-and-down .500 hockey), with the idea that you would give it a reasonable period of time to gauge its effectiveness before doing anything else? NB that choosing one step to take first doesn't mean you are precluded from doing any of the others later (although once someone is fired, cut or traded, then they are obviously out of the picture for later moves).

 

Also NB that the "Trade Player X" options assume that the Sabres get a modest return -- i.e. prospects, picks or at best a decent 2-way player like Hecht with a good work ethic -- NOT Malkin, Staal, Getzlaf or other elite player.

 

I chose trading Roy.

[dEnnis the Menace]

Well, certain of us have made our feelings well known about what we'd like to see. I'd like to get some numbers on it.

 

The question is: if you were making the decisions, what would you do NOW (ie within the next 2 weeks, assuming we get another 2 weeks of up-and-down .500 hockey), with the idea that you would give it a reasonable period of time to gauge its effectiveness before doing anything else? NB that choosing one step to take first doesn't mean you are precluded from doing any of the others later (although once someone is fired, cut or traded, then they are obviously out of the picture for later moves).

 

Also NB that the "Trade Player X" options assume that the Sabres get a modest return -- i.e. prospects, picks or at best a decent 2-way player like Hecht with a good work ethic -- NOT Malkin, Staal, Getzlaf or other elite player.

 

I chose trading Roy.

 

I too chose trade Roy, as I believe that the Sabres had good results without him last year, and aren't doing anything with him since he's been back. I amde my point clear in another thread, and I stick by that.

[Eleven]

I think you know where I stand. Goodbye, Mr. Stafford. Go find your mouse potatoes elsewhere.

[darksabre]

I want Roy and Stafford gone. I would be lukewarm about sending just one out the door, but both of them would please me greatly.

 

The only reason I don't move Pommers is because I want him back on the top line with Vanek and Adam. That was working well and I want it reunited.

 

I'd expect picks and maybe an overpaid vet in return.

 

If we don't see a change in the mentality of the team after trading some of the brat pack, then I expect us to miss the playoffs or have an early exit. That would result in the firing of Lindy, Darcy, or both. I would also expect a top-to-bottom re-evaluation of the entire team as was done when Pegula came into power.

 

Of course I know my plan is far too apathetic.

[Who Else?]

Fire Lindy. See if players will play for new coach if not off load them.

There is no accountability in the org. That starts at the top.

I believe there is enough talent here if the goaltending improves

Effort and focus are the main problems here.

You can't trade all the players at fault and getting rid of one or two might make little difference to the ones remaining.

Ditching the coach effects everyone.

[carpandean]

I chose fire Darcy. Had I actually been in charge, though, I would have formed a small advisory team of hockey minds back in the Spring (before the trade deadline) to evaluate Darcy and suggest a replacement if needed (knowing that they would suggest it is.) It would not have included any current GM's due to the conflict of interest, and they would not be able to recommend one of themselves as the replacement.

[apuszczalowski]

Get into my Delorean, go back to the day before Darcy was sign as GM of the Sabres and keep them from ever hiring him as GM.

 

But since thats impossible since my Flux capacitor is missing, I would just fire Darcy and get a competent GM in here to run the team. Someone not so attached to "his prospects" and someone able to make trades for players that can make an impact, not reclaimation projects of "guys with potential that will make me look smart if they pan out"

 

The problem starts at the top with the GM. Grossly overpaying for Ehrhoff, making Leino grossly overpaid AND plan B of the Richards/find a Centre plan, not trying to move any of the "core guys" to try and build on what they have. The coach can only do so much with whats been given.

 

Next i would have the GM make a couple moves to unload some of the deadweight and either use this year as a development year for guys in Rochester, or try and get a couple impact players in here to take a chance this season. If some decent moves are made to shake up the team and still no changes, then i make a move to change coaches. The problems so far have been that management is still expecting most of the "core" to continue to develop into superstars, when most have reached their peak, and what appeared in the past to be their potential is more of them overachieving.

[qwksndmonster]

I want Stafford and Roy gone. I voted Stafford because we're very thin at center right now, and it's possible that we could get a natural center back for trading Stafford.

[LabattBlue]

As I said in a post yesterday, I'd be okay with getting rid of both Stafford and Roy ASAP. It is going to take more than walking away from Connolly to rebuild the core of this team.

[HopefulFuture]

Trade a few players, in multiple deals.

One deal for that elusive center

One deal for additional center depth

 

center depth I'd look at Jarrett Stoll

 

As for the elusive center, names like Jason Spezza, Eric Staal or Ryan Getzlaf keep appearing. I'm waiting for some one to surprise us with a decent name that isn't on that list already discussed.

[Iron Crotch]

I want Stafford and Roy gone. I voted Stafford because we're very thin at center right now, and it's possible that we could get a natural center back for trading Stafford.

 

My thoughts as well. We have a glut of scoring wingers (when/if they're healthy) and are short on centers. So it makes more sense to me to trade an overpaid winger than a center right now (Roy's contract isn't horrible). Drew is one of those guys who could "blow up" with a new team and system... but at this point it is about changing team chemistry as much as anything.

 

Edit: Trade Drew and fire Darcy wasn't an option so I was forced to pick one.

[sabre4life]

I chose do nothing and wait... But if I was Terry, I would make an appearance in the dressing before the next home game, apologize to Miller for my comments. Ask Pommers in front of the dressing room what he feels is lacking. He'll give me the company line, so I would reiterate the fact I want to win and I pay all of them to accomplish that goal, and warn them that If I see another half-hearted effort at home for the rest of the season they all should look over their shoulder because none of them are safe. I then pull Darcy and Lindy aside and tell them this is unacceptable and that I want a proposed trade on my desk by the next home game.

[Weave]

I voted wait two weeks. The one and only reason I am willing to wait two weeks is to get injured players back. Once we are back to a full roster I would move both Roy and Stafford. After Stafford and Roy are moved on I would begin my search for Darcy's replacement. If the team rights itself after Roy and Staff are replaced I will give Darcy a short stay of execution. If there is only marginal improvement after those two players are gone Darcy would be gone. Before the trade deadline.

[nfreeman]

Trade a few players, in multiple deals.

One deal for that elusive center

One deal for additional center depth

 

center depth I'd look at Jarrett Stoll

 

As for the elusive center, names like Jason Spezza, Eric Staal or Ryan Getzlaf keep appearing. I'm waiting for some one to surprise us with a decent name that isn't on that list already discussed.

 

No. Not an option, either in reality or in this poll. And these names "keep appearing" only in posts by yobs who don't understand reality.

 

The point of the question is "What would you do if you're in charge?" The options do not include bending reality to meet fantasy.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

I fire Darcy and Lindy.

 

I bring in a GM with a history of valuing a style of play such as Boston or Philly.

 

I accept that this year is not going to be a Cup team and understand that I am at a position of weakness right now in the trade market with my core (Miller,Stafford,Roy), but may be able to move guys like Pominville, Adam, Sekera, and Enroth along with picks and some middle level prospects for a veteran top 6 forward who is a true leader and another stay at home defenseman with a rugged edge. If another center can be found that will help but can be addressed in the offseason.

 

I hire a young, upstart coach who is respected for effort and has had success with young players and understands the natural makeup of chemistry and leadership on a hockey team. Bob Boughner comes to mind. I would look to support him with successful assistants who have NHL experience and are also non-nonsense, but balanced guys. Mike Ramsey and Mike Foligno come to mind. They don't need to be ex-Sabres, but if they are qualified it doesn't hurt.

 

In bringing in a veteran leader up front (Iginla mold) who can teach guys like Stafford, Lieno, Gaustad and Kassian how to do it while opening up room for Vanek on the ice and giving him a level of comfort, and who would IN TANDEM with a no-nonsense coach who could still relate to youth, could hold guys accountable on the ice and in the room....you do not have to deal talented players from a position of weakness. A backend with Regehr/Myers Ehrhoff/New Grit Leopold/Weber would be both balanced and still keep an offensive threat while willing to punish the opposition for 60 full minutes.

 

You still would have a full cupboard of young talent (Kassian, McNabb, Foligno, Ennis, Gerbe) up front who would probably run through a wall for some new juice in here, and by letting Boyes and Hecht walk, you can focus on your new #1 center in the offseason.

 

This is a very doable scenario that would change the culture of the organization overnight, and allow the rest of the year to gel and maybe even get lucky. You would be loaded for bear with a new attitude and plenty of talent going into next year.

[Samson's Flow]

I voted healthy scratch a regular (being Stafford) for a few games. I don't think anything drastic can be done until we start gaining back some players from injury. Making a trade right now is panicky mainly because when the new player comes in you want them to have a consistent line to play on and not be juggling around due to injury. that being said, the injuries do not prevent the coach from sending a message that the effort and level of play is not acceptable, therefore the healthy scratch.

 

I'm looking at January 15ish as my decision-making deadline. If the team does not a) come together and play better, b) get healthy or c) both by then, than I would make a big move of trading away Stafford and Roy and ideally getting a package of a young physical centerman, high picks in the draft and expiring veteran contracts (to improve the package by balancing out the salaries).

 

I give LR and DR until the rest of the year before making a decision on their fate, as I believe TP is not the type of business man to make brash decisions midway through the year. I do believe you start considering who could be the replacement in the offseason so if you do go that path, you are educated and prepared.

 

I fire Darcy and Lindy.

 

I bring in a GM with a history of valuing a style of play such as Boston or Philly.

 

I accept that this year is not going to be a Cup team and understand that I am at a position of weakness right now in the trade market with my core (Miller,Stafford,Roy), but may be able to move guys like Pominville, Adam, Sekera, and Enroth along with picks and some middle level prospects for a veteran top 6 forward who is a true leader and another stay at home defenseman with a rugged edge. If another center can be found that will help but can be addressed in the offseason.

 

I hire a young, upstart coach who is respected for effort and has had success with young players and understands the natural makeup of chemistry and leadership on a hockey team. Bob Boughner comes to mind. I would look to support him with successful assistants who have NHL experience and are also non-nonsense, but balanced guys. Mike Ramsey and Mike Foligno come to mind. They don't need to be ex-Sabres, but if they are qualified it doesn't hurt.

 

In bringing in a veteran leader up front (Iginla mold) who can teach guys like Stafford, Lieno, Gaustad and Kassian how to do it while opening up room for Vanek on the ice and giving him a level of comfort, and who would IN TANDEM with a no-nonsense coach who could still relate to youth, could hold guys accountable on the ice and in the room....you do not have to deal talented players from a position of weakness. A backend with Regehr/Myers Ehrhoff/New Grit Leopold/Weber would be both balanced and still keep an offensive threat while willing to punish the opposition for 60 full minutes.

 

You still would have a full cupboard of young talent (Kassian, McNabb, Foligno, Ennis, Gerbe) up front who would probably run through a wall for some new juice in here, and by letting Boyes and Hecht walk, you can focus on your new #1 center in the offseason.

 

This is a very doable scenario that would change the culture of the organization overnight, and allow the rest of the year to gel and maybe even get lucky. You would be loaded for bear with a new attitude and plenty of talent going into next year.

Wow, I change my idea to this one. That was argued well GoDD. I especially like (even though I argued the contrary in my post right after) not trading good players from a position of weakness. As a pretty successful fantasy owner (not that they are anything at all alike), I am well aware of sending out offers to struggling teams to pluck their talent while they are weak. If the Sabres were to go the trade route, I wouldn't want them to do it from a position of weakness. An offseason more like the Flyers of this year would be a better time to trade core pieces.

[Who Else?]

Get rid of Lindy, I was just listening to him on the WGR audio from earlier today. He was comparing Miller's problem in net with Pomminstein, Gaustad, and McCormick coming back from concussions a little slow and not bein g fully right.

If this is his story then why the heck did he start him back to back over the weekend and proclaim Miller will be in net tonight.

 

He also said he benched McNabb to get Weber more playing time.

With MAG in the stands tonight I think Weber will get plenty of ice time.

If its that hard for him to figure it out maybe he should just retire.

[nfreeman]

I fire Darcy and Lindy.

 

I bring in a GM with a history of valuing a style of play such as Boston or Philly.

 

I accept that this year is not going to be a Cup team and understand that I am at a position of weakness right now in the trade market with my core (Miller,Stafford,Roy), but may be able to move guys like Pominville, Adam, Sekera, and Enroth along with picks and some middle level prospects for a veteran top 6 forward who is a true leader and another stay at home defenseman with a rugged edge. If another center can be found that will help but can be addressed in the offseason.

 

I hire a young, upstart coach who is respected for effort and has had success with young players and understands the natural makeup of chemistry and leadership on a hockey team. Bob Boughner comes to mind. I would look to support him with successful assistants who have NHL experience and are also non-nonsense, but balanced guys. Mike Ramsey and Mike Foligno come to mind. They don't need to be ex-Sabres, but if they are qualified it doesn't hurt.

 

In bringing in a veteran leader up front (Iginla mold) who can teach guys like Stafford, Lieno, Gaustad and Kassian how to do it while opening up room for Vanek on the ice and giving him a level of comfort, and who would IN TANDEM with a no-nonsense coach who could still relate to youth, could hold guys accountable on the ice and in the room....you do not have to deal talented players from a position of weakness. A backend with Regehr/Myers Ehrhoff/New Grit Leopold/Weber would be both balanced and still keep an offensive threat while willing to punish the opposition for 60 full minutes.

 

You still would have a full cupboard of young talent (Kassian, McNabb, Foligno, Ennis, Gerbe) up front who would probably run through a wall for some new juice in here, and by letting Boyes and Hecht walk, you can focus on your new #1 center in the offseason.

 

This is a very doable scenario that would change the culture of the organization overnight, and allow the rest of the year to gel and maybe even get lucky. You would be loaded for bear with a new attitude and plenty of talent going into next year.

Wow, I change my idea to this one. That was argued well GoDD. I especially like (even though I argued the contrary in my post right after) not trading good players from a position of weakness. As a pretty successful fantasy owner (not that they are anything at all alike), I am well aware of sending out offers to struggling teams to pluck their talent while they are weak. If the Sabres were to go the trade route, I wouldn't want them to do it from a position of weakness. An offseason more like the Flyers of this year would be a better time to trade core pieces.

 

It really was persuasive, innit? Almost enough for me to turn in my Team Sunshine and Kittens tote bag! But not just yet.

[mphs mike]

I chose do nothing and wait... But if I was Terry, I would make an appearance in the dressing before the next home game, apologize to Miller for my comments. Ask Pommers in front of the dressing room what he feels is lacking. He'll give me the company line, so I would reiterate the fact I want to win and I pay all of them to accomplish that goal, and warn them that If I see another half-hearted effort at home for the rest of the season they all should look over their shoulder because none of them are safe. I then pull Darcy and Lindy aside and tell them this is unacceptable and that I want a proposed trade on my desk by the next home game.

 

This would be my choice simply because, unlike Pegula, I don't have access to the locker room inner circle where I can make an informed judgment about what's wrong.

[dEnnis the Menace]

I fire Darcy and Lindy.

 

I bring in a GM with a history of valuing a style of play such as Boston or Philly.

 

I accept that this year is not going to be a Cup team and understand that I am at a position of weakness right now in the trade market with my core (Miller,Stafford,Roy), but may be able to move guys like Pominville, Adam, Sekera, and Enroth along with picks and some middle level prospects for a veteran top 6 forward who is a true leader and another stay at home defenseman with a rugged edge. If another center can be found that will help but can be addressed in the offseason.

 

I hire a young, upstart coach who is respected for effort and has had success with young players and understands the natural makeup of chemistry and leadership on a hockey team. Bob Boughner comes to mind. I would look to support him with successful assistants who have NHL experience and are also non-nonsense, but balanced guys. Mike Ramsey and Mike Foligno come to mind. They don't need to be ex-Sabres, but if they are qualified it doesn't hurt.

 

In bringing in a veteran leader up front (Iginla mold) who can teach guys like Stafford, Lieno, Gaustad and Kassian how to do it while opening up room for Vanek on the ice and giving him a level of comfort, and who would IN TANDEM with a no-nonsense coach who could still relate to youth, could hold guys accountable on the ice and in the room....you do not have to deal talented players from a position of weakness. A backend with Regehr/Myers Ehrhoff/New Grit Leopold/Weber would be both balanced and still keep an offensive threat while willing to punish the opposition for 60 full minutes.

 

You still would have a full cupboard of young talent (Kassian, McNabb, Foligno, Ennis, Gerbe) up front who would probably run through a wall for some new juice in here, and by letting Boyes and Hecht walk, you can focus on your new #1 center in the offseason.

 

This is a very doable scenario that would change the culture of the organization overnight, and allow the rest of the year to gel and maybe even get lucky. You would be loaded for bear with a new attitude and plenty of talent going into next year.

 

I disagree with you a lot, but this is a very well thought out argument, that I see no wrong in honestly. maybe changing Stafford with Boyes (obviously Stafford can't walk, but he can be traded for something) because I feel if left on a wing, Boyes is going to be more consistent, but that's a MINOR detail.

 

again, good post.

[TheMadCap]

Most realistic option: Trade either/or Roy or Stafford for picks and/or a vet player

 

Most attractive option/best case scenario: Move Darcy to head of scouting and hire a big time GM. Let the new GM chose what to do about Ruff for now, but if they miss the playoffs or get bounced in the 1st round, Ruff should be shown the door anyway. Then he can hire the coach of his choice. Also, the new GM could move a few pieces (like option above) to shake this team up a bit more...

[IKnowPhysics]

Being a passionate fan and someone who played recreational hockey for years, I make the assumption that I know everything there is to know about running a professional hockey organization competing at the highest level. Invariably, I draw on my experience from winning multiple Stanley Cups in EA Sports games, resulting in rash, uninformed decisions concerning front office, coaching, and player personnel. Poor management results in the loss of key hockey people and my lack of credentials and now-established bad track record fails to attract suitable replacements. The results would be the complete corrosion of the team from the front office to the on-ice product. I garner instant and continuous media scrutiny, which, combined with the likely poor on-ice product, results in reduced fan attendance and television ratings. The financial value of the franchise plummets due to the lack of revenue and increased overpayment of free agent players, which would be required to attract them to my train wreck. In the future, low confidence in my management of the team by local businessmen and government leaders fails to land me their financial and political investment in a new arena, required to maintain status quo with the rest of the league. By this time, even players I claim off of waivers refuse to play for me. Attendance becomes so abysmal that I exercise the low attendance clause of the arena lease, and move the team to Seattle, the largest US television market without a hockey team outside of Houston. Having previously been in massive debt and losing tens of millions of dollars per year, the NHL will hail the move as a success, demonstrating the feasibility of hockey in nontraditional US markets.

 

Seattle Sabres.

 

 

 

 

Or I exercise some patience, listen to the experts in the organization, and CTFO. Don't Wang it up.

[bills_fan_in_raleigh]

i fire lindy his system sucks

[korab rules]

Being a passionate fan and someone who played recreational hockey for years, I make the assumption that I know everything there is to know about running a professional hockey organization competing at the highest level. Invariably, I draw on my experience from winning multiple Stanley Cups in EA Sports games, resulting in rash, uninformed decisions concerning front office, coaching, and player personnel. Poor management results in the loss of key hockey people and my lack of credentials and now-established bad track record fails to attract suitable replacements. The results would be the complete corrosion of the team from the front office to the on-ice product. I garner instant and continuous media scrutiny, which, combined with the likely poor on-ice product, results in reduced fan attendance and television ratings. The financial value of the franchise plummets due to the lack of revenue and increased overpayment of free agent players, which would be required to attract them to my train wreck. In the future, low confidence in my management of the team by local businessmen and government leaders fails to land me their financial and political investment in a new arena, required to maintain status quo with the rest of the league. By this time, even players I claim off of waivers refuse to play for me. Attendance becomes so abysmal that I exercise the low attendance clause of the arena lease, and move the team to Seattle, the largest US television market without a hockey team outside of Houston. Having previously been in massive debt and losing tens of millions of dollars per year, the NHL will hail the move as a success, demonstrating the feasibility of hockey in nontraditional US markets.

 

Seattle Sabres.

 

 

 

 

Or I exercise some patience, listen to the experts in the organization, and CTFO. Don't Wang it up.

 

 

i fire lindy his system sucks

I have never seen two more diametrically opposed posts in such close proximity in my life.

[IKnowPhysics]

I have never seen two more diametrically opposed posts in such close proximity in my life.

 

Bonus points for similar avatars. If you look carefully, my avatar knows what it's doing.