X. Benedict Posted May 8, 2013 Report Posted May 8, 2013 I made a chart for each coach displaying player usage. The x-axis shows the strength of defensemen played against, as defined by the amount of PK time the opponent defensemen get. The y-axis show the strength of forwards played against, as defined by the amount of PP time the forward gets. The size and color of the bubble are plus/minus I'm surprised by the difference in the two coaches. Rolston matched players far more than Ruff, as shown by the vertical spread in Rolston's chart. That's a sound observation. Ruff wouldn't match the lines with opposing players as much as he would match zone starts. The ideal Lindy Ruff team would be 4 lines that are equally balanced as to roll. Ruff would create mismatches by moving individual players up and down lines during a game. When Ruff did match it was often individual players and not necessarily pairings. . For example he loved to use Sekera to match against Ovechkin. Rolston thus far has been a much more traditional coach. Ruff (for lack of a better comparison) would manage his bench much more like Roger Neilson - mixing rather than matching. Ruff rarely finished games with the lines he started with. By the end of many games he would have 3 new lines, and 3 forwards sitting that could have come from any line. That was one reason I was never bored with Lindy Ruff. Of course when you don't have centers, or when your team is poorly conditioned, or you lack depth, it really doesn't work. Rolston, I think will be much more like Randy Carlyle in matching. Carlyle will match, match, match, match relentlessly. Claud Julien does much less of it. He matches up Chara and Kessel as much as he can. He's not worried about the rest of the Toronto roster as far as I can tell.
Iron Crotch Posted May 8, 2013 Report Posted May 8, 2013 I'm thinking of starting a metal band called Doomed to Eternal Mediocrity. (Was there really any doubt that prevention-oriented Darcy would hire Muscles Glasses as permanent head coach?)
Ross Rhea Posted May 8, 2013 Report Posted May 8, 2013 When the playoffs were on the line (tongue and cheek, I know), they done got blowed up in the game. The Rangers owned them early and often. That and that game alone is what I base my decision on. If they had lost 3-2, I would have been annoyed but gotten over it, but to get blown out of your barn when there was everything to play for is what sticks in my RR craw. If he didn't have the team ready for that game, then why should I have faith that a few more games or a season will make a difference with this coach? Why can't Buffalo teams look past their nose for coaches and GMs? The Bills announce a 'world-wide' search for a GM. In fact, the search turned into a 'walker-search'. Ralph went the distance his walker would take him, that is down the hall, and hired Nix from within. Nix then gives a utterly ridiculous contract to a QB that has no business being an NFL starter. Nix went as far as his local sports network to hire his next coach having watched all the local Syracuse games. The Sabres announce a new contract for Regier and then go crap the bed. Regier went as far as Rochester to get his interim coach and then completed his search by strolling down the hall and hiring the first coach he saw. Surely a little investigation could have brought us better than Nix, Marrone, Regier and Rolston. I have to be okay with the decision for RR because it is what it is. But someone tell me why being a Buffalo fan means having to just be okay with stuff. Disagree, I think the goaltender is at fault not the coach in that game.
Trettioåtta Posted May 8, 2013 Report Posted May 8, 2013 Disagree, I think the goaltender is at fault not the coach in that game. Do you mean goaltenders? Both got lit up. Although 5/8 goals were the defence's fault
Jsixspd Posted May 8, 2013 Report Posted May 8, 2013 Maybe because you are the one stating that no legit coach would want to come here? Buffalo's situation with an entrenched mediocre GM who apparently took the job for the retirement benefits, does inhibit the team's ability to attract a quality coach. However, an effort should still be made. And I feel that "due diligence" was not performed by Pegula, Regier, et al. Here the Sabres season has been over about a week and a half, and they picked the guy that just happened to be sitting behind the desk right now for the job. I'm sure no stone was left unturned in their exhaustive search..... lmao!!!! They probably looked every bit as hard as old OJ did, searching the golf-courses of America for Nicole's killer. Face it - a Regier "boy" was selected - Regier will hear nothing but happy words every time he calls Ruffton on the phone or intercom.
rakish Posted May 8, 2013 Report Posted May 8, 2013 Claud Julien does much less of it. He matches up Chara and Kessel as much as he can. He's not worried about the rest of the Toronto roster as far as I can tell. This is Toronto v Boston, regular season 2013. Kessel's D number of 4.91 is the highest I've seen, but this is the first time I've separated out one team vs another. When looking at individual teams, it's important to remember that Boston will have a different PP time than other teams, and if they use 4 forwards on the PP, the opponent will have a much higher forward average. This will all average out over a season, but not between leagues or especially single opponents. This chart also depends upon what Toronto is trying to do, and they normally get their checking line out against the top forwards. This leads to Lupul and Kadri seeing easier opponents than say Vanek and Hodgson, which I think partially explains the plus/minus difference.
TheFunPolice Posted May 8, 2013 Report Posted May 8, 2013 is there really such a thing as a "permanent coach?"
26CornerBlitz Posted May 8, 2013 Report Posted May 8, 2013 is there really such a thing as a "permanent coach?" Permanent Coach?...maybe....Permanent GM....definitely! :sick:
deluca67 Posted May 8, 2013 Report Posted May 8, 2013 That's crazy. 30 NHL Head Coaching jobs in the world. And success in Buffalo is the closest thing to job security in a transient profession. I agree. Any NHL coaching gig is a good gig. People are downplaying that aspect way too much on here. Playing for an owner with deep pockets would also be appealing. Terry has upgraded every aspect of Sabres operations. Facilities, scouting, etc. He swung for the fences with free agents. Seems like a destination worth seeking rather than avoiding. Not all 30 NHL coaching jobs are created equal. Just like the Bills are one of 32 coaching jobs in the NFL. This isn't "hockey heaven." There is no more likelihood that Buffalo is a designation for a prime coaching candidatse than it is for prime free agents. The most the Sabres could hope for in the coaching market is the Leino of coaches. I'm sure the bells and whistles would impress some of the lessor candidates.
wjag Posted May 8, 2013 Report Posted May 8, 2013 Not all 30 NHL coaching jobs are created equal. Just like the Bills are one of 32 coaching jobs in the NFL. This isn't "hockey heaven." There is no more likelihood that Buffalo is a designation for a prime coaching candidatse than it is for prime free agents. The most the Sabres could hope for in the coaching market is the Leino of coaches. I'm sure the bells and whistles would impress some of the lessor candidates. No one is arguing that all coaching positions are equal. Clearly they are not. But only a handful open up each year making anyone of them desirable. If you can afford to stay on the sideline and cherry pick the job you want, all the power to you. Doesn't change the fact that there are only 30 and to have one puts you in an elite club. There are plenty of good prospects out there that would take the Buffalo job. We will never know though because the search was over before it started.
Trettioåtta Posted May 8, 2013 Report Posted May 8, 2013 Not all 30 NHL coaching jobs are created equal. Just like the Bills are one of 32 coaching jobs in the NFL. This isn't "hockey heaven." There is no more likelihood that Buffalo is a designation for a prime coaching candidatse than it is for prime free agents. The most the Sabres could hope for in the coaching market is the Leino of coaches. I'm sure the bells and whistles would impress some of the lessor candidates. I imagine the money for coaches is similar to players in terms of the step up. Would i rather earn $50,000 coaching a CHL team or $500,000 coaching a team in the best league on earth? Not to mention, coaches doing good jobs aren't fired. And then there is the whole ego thing - if Rolston turns this team around and makes them a 4-6 seed he will get all the praise I seriously doubt a professional coach turns down any NHL job unless a) They have multiple offers b) They have no desire to coach in the NHL at the time (e.g. the OHL Knights coach - hunter?)
X. Benedict Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 Not all 30 NHL coaching jobs are created equal. Just like the Bills are one of 32 coaching jobs in the NFL. This isn't "hockey heaven." There is no more likelihood that Buffalo is a designation for a prime coaching candidatse than it is for prime free agents. The most the Sabres could hope for in the coaching market is the Leino of coaches. I'm sure the bells and whistles would impress some of the lessor candidates. You really underestimate the draw of the game itself. I've met my handful of NHL coaches. They don't turn down work when it is available. The game is hardwired into these guys.
Ross Rhea Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 Do you mean goaltenders? Both got lit up. Although 5/8 goals were the defence's fault No, just the starter. After the first 4 did it really matter? That was when the game was lost, a small couple minute window with fine goalie play is all it took, but yeah that was so on the coach, please!
deluca67 Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 No one is arguing that all coaching positions are equal. Clearly they are not. But only a handful open up each year making anyone of them desirable. If you can afford to stay on the sideline and cherry pick the job you want, all the power to you. Doesn't change the fact that there are only 30 and to have one puts you in an elite club. There are plenty of good prospects out there that would take the Buffalo job. We will never know though because the search was over before it started. As you said, each year a handful of coaching positions open up. Top end candidates are likely to wait for a better situation to open up. There are going to be jobs opening up where the team is underachieving which is a far position to be in than Buffalo which openly states they are in full rebuild mode. The Sabres are going to have to bring more to the table than just being one of 30 teams. I think they know that which is why they settled for Rolston.
X. Benedict Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 As you said, each year a handful of coaching positions open up. Top end candidates are likely to wait for a better situation to open up. There are going to be jobs opening up where the team is underachieving which is a far position to be in than Buffalo which openly states they are in full rebuild mode. The Sabres are going to have to bring more to the table than just being one of 30 teams. I think they know that which is why they settled for Rolston. Just a hunch, but I think they didn't just settle on Rolston. I really think that Darcy thought he was the best candidate to nurture everyone under 25 on that roster and develop a younger roster. That's just my opinion, and I'm a little non-plussed by it. But the lack of high end candidates is not the reason.
Weave Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 As you said, each year a handful of coaching positions open up. Top end candidates are likely to wait for a better situation to open up. There are going to be jobs opening up where the team is underachieving which is a far position to be in than Buffalo which openly states they are in full rebuild mode. The Sabres are going to have to bring more to the table than just being one of 30 teams. I think they know that which is why they settled for Rolston. Serious question, who is out there that is a top end candidate? Seems to me that most of the options are recycled coaches without sterling pedigree and up-and-comers. Both of those categories seem to be the type not willing to turn one of only a couple opportunities per year down.
dudacek Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 Not all 30 NHL coaching jobs are created equal. Just like the Bills are one of 32 coaching jobs in the NFL. This isn't "hockey heaven." There is no more likelihood that Buffalo is a designation for a prime coaching candidatse than it is for prime free agents. The most the Sabres could hope for in the coaching market is the Leino of coaches. I'm sure the bells and whistles would impress some of the lessor candidates. Benefits to coaching in Buffalo relative to the rest of the league: 1) central location, favourable for travel 2) nice place to raise a family 3) cheap housing 4) deep pockets owner, a) not afraid to spend money on acquiring talent b) " on hiring assistant coaches c) " on facilities and coaching tools 5) GM who is intensely loyal to his hires (one coach in 17 years?) 6) GM shown to be hands-off and collaborative 7) hockey market where people care about the team 8) small market where the media are relatively easy to ignore We have a lack of talent, but it is not the wasteland some would have you believe And our "dysfunctionality" is more the creation of tired fan base than many here would care to admit. And where exactly are the "prime coaching candidates," the ones clearly superior to Rolston — not in your eyes, but in the eyes of the hockey world? As far as I know, the only available one there is the one we just fired.
Grumpy Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 Benefits to coaching in Buffalo relative to the rest of the league: 1) central location, favourable for travel 2) nice place to raise a family 3) cheap housing 4) deep pockets owner, a) not afraid to spend money on acquiring talent b) " on hiring assistant coaches c) " on facilities and coaching tools 5) GM who is intensely loyal to his hires (one coach in 17 years?) 6) GM shown to be hands-off and collaborative 7) hockey market where people care about the team 8) small market where the media are relatively easy to ignore We have a lack of talent, but it is not the wasteland some would have you believe And our "dysfunctionality" is more the creation of tired fan base than many here would care to admit. And where exactly are the "prime coaching candidates," the ones clearly superior to Rolston — not in your eyes, but in the eyes of the hockey world? As far as I know, the only available one there is the one we just fired. Keep howling at the moon.
deluca67 Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 Serious question, who is out there that is a top end candidate? Seems to me that most of the options are recycled coaches without sterling pedigree and up-and-comers. Both of those categories seem to be the type not willing to turn one of only a couple opportunities per year down. Patrick Roy? Guy Carbanneau? Ron Wilson? These are three solid head coaching candidates I doubt would give the Sabres the time of day.
Weave Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 Patrick Roy? Guy Carbanneau? Ron Wilson? These are three solid head coaching candidates I doubt would give the Sabres the time of day. Roy is a top end candidate? Really? That's a stretch. Wilson I'll grant you is a top end candidate who might be inclined to cherry pick his re-entry. I'd call Cabanneau a retread with less than stirling pedigree that I mentioned above that can't really afford to cherry pick his re-entry into the NHL.
drnkirishone Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 Rolston is no good cause his coaching experience is with kids. Roy is a top end canidate why? cause his coaching experience is with kids? lmao
deluca67 Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 Roy is a top end candidate? Really? That's a stretch. Wilson I'll grant you is a top end candidate who might be inclined to cherry pick his re-entry. I'd call Cabanneau a retread with less than stirling pedigree that I mentioned above that can't really afford to cherry pick his re-entry into the NHL. I wouldn't consider Carbonneau a "retread." He was 126-106 in one of the toughest hockey markets in the world.
dudacek Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 Keep howling at the moon. I dont like Rolston, Darcy hired Rolston instead of looking at other options, therefore no coach wants to come to Buffalo. Show me one speck of evidence coaches don't want come to Buffalo. You can't because you don't have any.
deluca67 Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 Rolston is no good cause his coaching experience is with kids. Roy is a top end canidate why? cause his coaching experience is with kids? lmao Along with Roy's coaching experience you get the 19 years of NHL experience of one of the greatest goaltenders, make that greatest players, that ever played the game. A Stanley Cup champion that has played the game at the highest level. Has Rolston ever played in a NHL game?
X. Benedict Posted May 9, 2013 Report Posted May 9, 2013 Patrick Roy? Guy Carbanneau? Ron Wilson? These are three solid head coaching candidates I doubt would give the Sabres the time of day. If asked to interview, any of them would have been on the next plane in. I'd bank on it.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.