Do you know Ruff's System

[nobody]

Actually, I think it was Harold Camping.

 

“Although there is a limit beyond which belief will not withstand disconfirmation, it is clear that the introduction of contrary evidence can serve to increase the conviction and enthusiasm of a believer.” -- Leon Festinger

[K-9]

I believe it was divined by the Mayans.

 

LoL! I guess 2012 is our year, then.

 

GO SABRES!!!

[IKnowPhysics]

This board houses opinions. ... I'm not passing it off as fact.

 

Then don't preface and buttress your opinions with ###### fact-like statements (that you know are opinions but present them as fact). And don't back-peddle when someone calls you on it. Example: "least experienced coaching staff in the league." Experience is at least somewhat quantifiable.

 

According to their bios, Patrick's been assistant coach for six years. Jim Corsi for 10. Ruff, obviously, not the least experienced coach in the league. You could point at Kevyn Adams as the new guy, but he was a player development coach for two years and was promoted when the Sabres parted ways with McCutcheon. Assistant coaches usually don't have long tenures, because if they're good enough to stay in the NHL, they're good enough to head coach in the AHL. Brian McCutcheon is an exception, as he was an associate coach for the Sabres for 11 years. He wasn't hired away to the A and the Sabres moved on.

 

If you want, everyone can start demanding that everyone sources all of their facts like we're writing a wikipedia page. Or we can just keep it honest with the ######.

 

I don't care that you want to believe that Ruff hires young coaches because he has insecurities, whatever, but spinning yarn about any coaching staff being the least experienced in the league without even looking into it is destroying your own credibility.

[nfreeman]

Then don't preface and buttress your opinions with ###### fact-like statements (that you know are opinions but present them as fact). And don't back-peddle when someone calls you on it. Example: "least experienced coaching staff in the league." Experience is at least somewhat quantifiable.

 

According to their bios, Patrick's been assistant coach for six years. Jim Corsi for 10. Ruff, obviously, not the least experienced coach in the league. You could point at Kevyn Adams as the new guy, but he was a player development coach for two years and was promoted when the Sabres parted ways with McCutcheon. Assistant coaches usually don't have long tenures, because if they're good enough to stay in the NHL, they're good enough to head coach in the AHL. Brian McCutcheon is an exception, as he was an associate coach for the Sabres for 11 years. He wasn't hired away to the A and the Sabres moved on.

 

If you want, everyone can start demanding that everyone sources all of their facts like we're writing a wikipedia page. Or we can just keep it honest with the ######.

 

I don't care that you want to believe that Ruff hires young coaches because he has insecurities, whatever, but spinning yarn about any coaching staff being the least experienced in the league without even looking into it is destroying your own credibility.

 

We've seen 2 of the most important board rules come into play today:

 

1. Tone and manner of communication are important (not implicated by PAFan)

 

2. Don't post BS if you don't want to get called on it.

[Stoner]

Then don't preface and buttress your opinions with ###### fact-like statements (that you know are opinions but present them as fact). And don't back-peddle when someone calls you on it.

I didn't back-pedal, or peddle. The opinion was that Ruff is insecure. The fact is that his staff is the least experienced (or, I will concede, one of the least experienced) in the league, as I choose to define experience. (Note: the last time I looked at all of the coaching staffs, it was last Sept. I doubt much has changed since then.)

 

I define coaching experience as head coaching experience at a major level, be it NHL, AHL, major college, the junior ranks etc. Yes, NHL. There are a number of former NHL head coaches serving as assistants. Nice experience to draw on when the wheels are coming off, eh?

 

I've done my homework, pal. Now, let your fingers do the walking and do yours. Let's hear about all the teams with less experienced coaching staffs than Lindy's.

[RazielSabre]

We've seen 2 of the most important board rules come into play today:

 

1. Tone and manner of communication are important (not implicated by PAFan)

 

2. Don't post BS if you don't want to get called on it.

 

This I take issue with, some posters get away with being condecending and rude while others get called on it. If you don't like someones 'tone' on an internet forum then I believe it is firmly your problem to deal with, if they are being outwardly rude (direct insult/put down, overly condecensing) then yes, that is beyond the line and should be dealt with in the appropriate manor.

 

IMHO, not exactly related by I believe important.

 

Back on subject I'd say this is proof no-one has a clue what is in Ruff's head or his system.

[MattPie]

I believe it was divined by the Mayans.

 

You the Sabres are going to go 30-0 into late December and have the world end. The Bills will be 13-1 too. Such is the life of the Buffalo Sports fan.

 

I define coaching experience as head coaching experience at a major level, be it NHL, AHL, major college, the junior ranks etc. Yes, NHL. There are a number of former NHL head coaches serving as assistants. Nice experience to draw on when the wheels are coming off, eh?

 

Are we really looking for former NHL coaches that couldn't cut it to be our assistants?

[TrueBlueGED]

You the Sabres are going to go 30-0 into late December and have the world end. The Bills will be 13-1 too. Such is the life of the Buffalo Sports fan.

 

 

 

Are we really looking for former NHL coaches that couldn't cut it to be our assistants?

 

Pretty sure he'd use a metric of only prior AHL assistants if it had supported his opinion.

[Stoner]

Are we really looking for former NHL coaches that couldn't cut it to be our assistants?

 

Absolutely. Lots of elite teams do. Of course, my point is that the vast majority of NHL staffs are populated by former head coaches from all major levels of hockey.

 

Pretty sure he'd use a metric of only prior AHL assistants if it had supported his opinion.

 

Where's your homework assignment, doc?

[TrueBlueGED]

Absolutely. Lots of elite teams do. Of course, my point is that the vast majority of NHL staffs are populated by former head coaches from all major levels of hockey.

 

 

 

Where's your homework assignment, doc?

 

I never made an assertion about experience, only stating that your metric of experience was clearly chosen to support your view as opposed to actually explain how much experience is on a typical NHL bench. For instance, is 2 years of failed head coaching experience somehow more valuable than 10 years as an assistant on a successful team? Oh, and even if we decide your metric doesn't suck...where's your homework assignment? You say you've done it, yet have shown nothing.

[Stoner]

I never made an assertion about experience, only stating that your metric of experience was clearly chosen to support your view as opposed to actually explain how much experience is on a typical NHL bench. For instance, is 2 years of failed head coaching experience somehow more valuable than 10 years as an assistant on a successful team? Oh, and even if we decide your metric doesn't suck...where's your homework assignment? You say you've done it, yet have shown nothing.

 

You really going to insist on including Corsi's 10 years? Talk about picking and choosing to support your view. (Also, I sure as hell am not including Lindy's years as evidence of his staff's experience.) Why add the word "failed" to describe head coaches on NHL staffs? Do you think the Cup-winning coaches of the Bostons and Pittsburghs and Chicagos and Detroits of the league pick "failed" coaches to join them?

 

I did my homework last fall. Any way you slice it, my way or your way, Lindy's staff, relative to the rest of the league, is pathetic. Nobody on his current staff had one lick of coaching experience before Lindy hired them, Corsi excluded. I don't know what that guy did before he came to Buffalo -- probably appeared at proctologist conventions as Groucho Marx.

 

The time to do the homework again is this September, when staffs are again finalized. Why don't we agree to come up with a mutually agreeable "metric" for measuring experience. Years of coaching experience at a major level, either as head coach or assistant, would work fine for me. Thankfully, it's pretty easy to go on the various team sites and get the skinny on the assistant coaches.

 

Corsi will probably be the sticking point, because when his years are added, it won't look so bad for Lindy. No goalie coaches or consultants, or strength and conditioning guys!

[dEnnis the Menace]

what about equipment managers? ;) :P

[Stoner]

OK, Terry, you want to win a Cup? You emulate Detroit? You came in and essentially gave your coach carte blanche to expand his coaching staff. And you end up with Teppo, Groucho, Jimbo and Kevbo, and out of the playoffs?

 

And Mike Babcock? He just hired three-time NHL head coach Tom Renney to be his associate.

 

"Tom Renney’s appeal to the Red Wings came down to one factor. 'Experience, experience, experience,' head coach Mike Babcock said today after the Wings announced they’d hired Renney to be an associate coach."

 

Experience, experience, experience.

 

Why wouldn't Lindy consider such a move? Why?

 

Oh yeah, Babcock's other assistant was a head coach in the AHL for three years, won a Memorial Cup as head coach in the WHL and was a college head coach before that.

 

Hell, their assistant coach for video has a nice background, too. Director of Hockey Operations at Michigan State.

[TrueBlueGED]

You really going to insist on including Corsi's 10 years? Talk about picking and choosing to support your view. (Also, I sure as hell am not including Lindy's years as evidence of his staff's experience.) Why add the word "failed" to describe head coaches on NHL staffs? Do you think the Cup-winning coaches of the Bostons and Pittsburghs and Chicagos and Detroits of the league pick "failed" coaches to join them?

 

I did my homework last fall. Any way you slice it, my way or your way, Lindy's staff, relative to the rest of the league, is pathetic. Nobody on his current staff had one lick of coaching experience before Lindy hired them, Corsi excluded. I don't know what that guy did before he came to Buffalo -- probably appeared at proctologist conventions as Groucho Marx.

 

The time to do the homework again is this September, when staffs are again finalized. Why don't we agree to come up with a mutually agreeable "metric" for measuring experience. Years of coaching experience at a major level, either as head coach or assistant, would work fine for me. Thankfully, it's pretty easy to go on the various team sites and get the skinny on the assistant coaches.

 

Corsi will probably be the sticking point, because when his years are added, it won't look so bad for Lindy. No goalie coaches or consultants, or strength and conditioning guys!

 

I added the world "failed" because by your measure, a head coach with a terrible record for 2 season who gets fired and hired as an assistant is a more experienced and better option than a 10-year assistant for a team like Detroit. Your entire argument is implying that experience=better, but your measure of experience is crap. Your proposed measure of any pro experience (assistant or head) is infinitely superior.

 

 

OK, Terry, you want to win a Cup? You emulate Detroit? You came in and essentially gave your coach carte blanche to expand his coaching staff. And you end up with Teppo, Groucho, Jimbo and Kevbo, and out of the playoffs?

 

And Mike Babcock? He just hired three-time NHL head coach Tom Renney to be his associate.

 

"Tom Renney’s appeal to the Red Wings came down to one factor. 'Experience, experience, experience,' head coach Mike Babcock said today after the Wings announced they’d hired Renney to be an associate coach."

 

Experience, experience, experience.

 

Why wouldn't Lindy consider such a move? Why?

 

Oh yeah, Babcock's other assistant was a head coach in the AHL for three years, won a Memorial Cup as head coach in the WHL and was a college head coach before that.

 

Hell, their assistant coach for video has a nice background, too. Director of Hockey Operations at Michigan State.

 

How about this: you can have Detroit's wonderful coaching staff with the Sabres' roster last year, and I'll take the Sabres inexperienced and crap coaching staff with last year's Detroit roster, and let's see who has the better record. My money is on the better roster.

[Eleven]

I added the world "failed" because by your measure, a head coach with a terrible record for 2 season who gets fired and hired as an assistant is a more experienced and better option than a 10-year assistant for a team like Detroit. Your entire argument is implying that experience=better, but your measure of experience is crap. Your proposed measure of any pro experience (assistant or head) is infinitely superior.

 

 

 

 

How about this: you can have Detroit's wonderful coaching staff with the Sabres' roster last year, and I'll take the Sabres inexperienced and crap coaching staff with last year's Detroit roster, and let's see who has the better record. My money is on the better roster.

 

Good luck with this...

[RazielSabre]

I added the world "failed" because by your measure, a head coach with a terrible record for 2 season who gets fired and hired as an assistant is a more experienced and better option than a 10-year assistant for a team like Detroit. Your entire argument is implying that experience=better, but your measure of experience is crap. Your proposed measure of any pro experience (assistant or head) is infinitely superior.

 

 

 

 

How about this: you can have Detroit's wonderful coaching staff with the Sabres' roster last year, and I'll take the Sabres inexperienced and crap coaching staff with last year's Detroit roster, and let's see who has the better record. My money is on the better roster.

 

Please remember, both of you, that Detroit was not a very good team last year.

[TrueBlueGED]

Please remember, both of you, that Detroit was not a very good team last year.

 

Not sure if you're serious? :unsure:

 

They had 102 points and a +45 goal differential. They weren't the Detroit machine of past years, but they were still a very good hockey team.

[dEnnis the Menace]

Not sure if you're serious? :unsure:

 

They had 102 points and a +45 goal differential. They weren't the Detroit machine of past years, but they were still a very good hockey team.

 

perspective :P

 

for Detroit fans, last year was a down year :ph34r:

[RazielSabre]

Not sure if you're serious? :unsure:

 

They had 102 points and a +45 goal differential. They weren't the Detroit machine of past years, but they were still a very good hockey team.

 

Hammered by Nashville in the 1st round is a good year?

 

So if they are great but were out 4-1 in the 1st round their a 'very good hockey team' but when we, as the underdog, take Philly to 7 we are crap? Perspective indeed.

[TrueBlueGED]

 

 

Hammered by Nashville in the 1st round is a good year?

 

So if they are great but were out 4-1 in the 1st round their a 'very good hockey team' but when we, as the underdog, take Philly to 7 we are crap? Perspective indeed.

 

No shame in losing to the Preds last year. They were a trendy Cup pick before the playoffs. And I think you're confusing me with somebody else, I've never said the Sabres were crap and if they made it last year I thought an upset of NY was very possible.

[RazielSabre]

No shame in losing to the Preds last year. They were a trendy Cup pick before the playoffs. And I think you're confusing me with somebody else, I've never said the Sabres were crap and if they made it last year I thought an upset of NY was very possible.

Possibly it just seems that that was the general tone, apologies for the slander. :)

 

Shame or not, Detroit are not the template powerhouse anymore, Boston, Nashville, Philly(ish) seem to be the best, most consistant teams at the moment. To put that in perspective I'd say Vancouver, Philly and Pittsburgh are the most talented teams.

[IKnowPhysics]

So I went and did all of the "homework." It took too ###### long and it only revealed what I was afraid of: it was a waste of my ###### time. There's no correlation between points precentage with an assistant coach's tenure with their current team, total nhl coaching experience, nhl head coaching experience, total AHL coaching experience, total juniors/college coaching experience, or even the tenure of the head coach they work for in any sense, totalling team-wide or averaging per assistant coach. I'd capture and post the plots, but that's a waste of time too, because they're all flat lines with R-squared values of (often much) less than 0.3. Goalie and video coaches were ignored. All of the data was gathered painstakingly from NHL.com and hockeydb.

 

And while it does turn out that Buffalo is currently ranked 22nd in total years and 25th in average years of NHL experience among its assistant coaches, it's ultimately meaningless because that doesn't correlate to winning.

 

There's also no correlation between an assistant coach's experience (at any level) and a head coach's tenure, showing that a coach with many years or fewer years of experience doesn't favor or disfavor assistant coaches with more or less experience. So older coaches aren't keeping their tenures by hiring guys with no experience.

 

If I were to guess at any of this worthless information, I'd say coaches just look for good guys they know they can work with.

 

There were one or two meagerly interesing stats: the current tenure of assitant coaches with their teams at the moment is about 1.57 years. The average tenure for a head coach right now is 2.83 years. Only two teams have an assistant coach with more than three years of NHL head coach experience: Detroit (Renney) and San Jose (Robinson).

 

In summation, it's not that PA doesn't exactly know what he's talking about, but what he's talking about is pointless.

[TrueBlueGED]

So I went and did all of the "homework." It took too ###### long and it only revealed what I was afraid of: it was a waste of my ###### time. There's no correlation between points precentage with an assistant coach's tenure with their current team, total nhl coaching experience, nhl head coaching experience, total AHL coaching experience, total juniors/college coaching experience, or even the tenure of the head coach they work for in any sense, totalling team-wide or averaging per assistant coach. I'd capture and post the plots, but that's a waste of time too, because they're all flat lines with R-squared values of (often much) less than 0.3. Goalie and video coaches were ignored. All of the data was gathered painstakingly from NHL.com and hockeydb.

 

And while it does turn out that Buffalo is currently ranked 22nd in total years and 25th in average years of NHL experience among its assistant coaches, it's ultimately meaningless because that doesn't correlate to winning.

 

There's also no correlation between an assistant coach's experience (at any level) and a head coach's tenure, showing that a coach with many years or fewer years of experience doesn't favor or disfavor assistant coaches with more or less experience. So older coaches aren't keeping their tenures by hiring guys with no experience.

 

If I were to guess at any of this worthless information, I'd say coaches just look for good guys they know they can work with.

 

There were one or two meagerly interesing stats: the current tenure of assitant coaches with their teams at the moment is about 1.57 years. The average tenure for a head coach right now is 2.83 years. Only two teams have an assistant coach with more than three years of NHL head coach experience: Detroit (Renney) and San Jose (Robinson).

 

In summation, it's not that PA doesn't exactly know what he's talking about, but what he's talking about is pointless.

 

:worthy:

[drnkirishone]

So I went and did all of the "homework." It took too ###### long and it only revealed what I was afraid of: it was a waste of my ###### time. There's no correlation between points precentage with an assistant coach's tenure with their current team, total nhl coaching experience, nhl head coaching experience, total AHL coaching experience, total juniors/college coaching experience, or even the tenure of the head coach they work for in any sense, totalling team-wide or averaging per assistant coach. I'd capture and post the plots, but that's a waste of time too, because they're all flat lines with R-squared values of (often much) less than 0.3. Goalie and video coaches were ignored. All of the data was gathered painstakingly from NHL.com and hockeydb.

 

And while it does turn out that Buffalo is currently ranked 22nd in total years and 25th in average years of NHL experience among its assistant coaches, it's ultimately meaningless because that doesn't correlate to winning.

 

There's also no correlation between an assistant coach's experience (at any level) and a head coach's tenure, showing that a coach with many years or fewer years of experience doesn't favor or disfavor assistant coaches with more or less experience. So older coaches aren't keeping their tenures by hiring guys with no experience.

 

If I were to guess at any of this worthless information, I'd say coaches just look for good guys they know they can work with.

 

There were one or two meagerly interesing stats: the current tenure of assitant coaches with their teams at the moment is about 1.57 years. The average tenure for a head coach right now is 2.83 years. Only two teams have an assistant coach with more than three years of NHL head coach experience: Detroit (Renney) and San Jose (Robinson).

 

In summation, it's not that PA doesn't exactly know what he's talking about, but what he's talking about is pointless.

Why Am I not surprised at this?

[Stoner]

All of the data was gathered painstakingly from NHL.com and hockeydb.

But those are current assistants. Some of them weren't with those teams last season.

 

Also, I can't believe you set your r-squared value at less than .3. We all know that's too low. Come on. Please. :P