LGR4GM Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 Can this all be done in one ###### ######## ####### ######## ####### thread? Jumping between 3 of them now is just annoying.
frissonic Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 are anyone else's palms sweaty? anyone else not able to eat breakfast? or work? or ... whatever?
bunomatic Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 are anyone else's palms sweaty? anyone else not able to eat breakfast? or work? or ... whatever? No. :P
SwampD Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 are anyone else's palms sweaty? anyone else not able to eat breakfast? or work? or ... whatever? I'm the complete opposite. The more talk there is over Babcock, the more indifferent I become. Wake me up when all this BS turns into wins on the ice.
That Aud Smell Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 Can this all be done in one ###### ######## ####### ######## ####### thread? Jumping between 3 of them now is just annoying. Agree
frissonic Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 No. :P liar. :) I'm the complete opposite. The more talk there is over Babcock, the more indifferent I become. Wake me up when all this BS turns into wins on the ice. oh i get it. but seriously ... babcock coming to buffalo would be one of the greatest signings of all time for us. all i can to is refresh twitter and listen to GR. work?? pffft. there will be none of that today.
ddaryl Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 Agree disagree. I like multiple threads.. trying to sort through one is a pain in the arse. especially when one of them is being hijacked by angry people
TrueBlueGED Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 Here's something to chew on while we wait. Why does GMTM get such a huge pass for his poor relationship with Nolan? Not a big red flag? Is it just that Ted was not Tim's man? I made a big deal about Battista getting sent down to tell Nolan that Miller had been traded and was roundly criticized for it. That's how it works, Murray was busy and Battista had nothing to do after getting Terry his Whatchamacallit bars from that diabolical vending machine by Darcy's old office. Sometimes you want a Twix and it gives you those awful peanut butter crackers. But, in hindsight, it was something to be concerned about, no? And it all plays into an image of Murray that apparently concerns Babcock enough that we have to have this waiting game while he figures out if he can work with Murray. Imagine if we lose Babcock over this. Will GMTM still get a pass? That is, if he's still employed by the Sabres de Buffalo? I don't care about Murray's relationship with Nolan because I thought from moment one he was just a coach to get tossed into the tanking volcano, and when the tank was over, a new coach would be brought in for the long haul. Murray isn't going to be planning Babcock's replacement from the start. Totally different dynamic.
K-9 Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 What narrative? Their relationship was crappy and Murray owned up to his part of the responsibility in the Nolan firing presser. He admitted his hands weren't clean. Hamilton has said many times Nolan had ZERO input on player personnel. That's pretty extraordinary. I have no doubt it's on Babcock's mind. And, no, I don't have a link for that statement. Muckler got fired. Your narrative, PA. I just don't think things need to rise to the same level of doubt as you do. I don't believe for a second that Nolan had ZERO input on player personnel. I don't think he always got his way, though, either. And I believe Nolan was resentful because of that. Indeed, I think Nolan was downright obstinate. I also think Murray had every reason to question Nolan's ability as a coach which caused him to lose confidence in Nolan's ability, including his ability to evaluate personnel. Lastly, I think you're over thinking Babcock's and Murray's discussion about levels of control over player personnel. I don't see Babcock's request for more control as something to question Murray about at this point. It's one thing for Murray to limit Nolan's involvement and quite another to give Babcock more leeway. Babcock has earned that given his success. Nolan, not so much. GO SABRES!!!
TrueBlueGED Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 @TSNBobMcKenzie: Example No. 3: while it was all DET or BUF talk yesterday, it was suggested this morning TOR not entirely out of picture. Is that the Toronto Media talking I'd imagine so. Just like the Philly media was trumpeting Babcock as the Flyers #1 target.
Sabres Fan in NS Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 I hope this doesn't turn into another Bowman situation, although he was GM too. Too soon?
Stoner Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 Your narrative, PA. I just don't think things need to rise to the same level of doubt as you do. I don't believe for a second that Nolan had ZERO input on player personnel. I don't think he always got his way, though, either. And I believe Nolan was resentful because of that. Indeed, I think Nolan was downright obstinate. I also think Murray had every reason to question Nolan's ability as a coach which caused him to lose confidence in Nolan's ability, including his ability to evaluate personnel. Lastly, I think you're over thinking Babcock's and Murray's discussion about levels of control over player personnel. I don't see Babcock's request for more control as something to question Murray about at this point. It's one thing for Murray to limit Nolan's involvement and quite another to give Babcock more leeway. Babcock has earned that given his success. Nolan, not so much. GO SABRES!!! It's not a narrative, but if it is, it's Murray's narrative if anyone's. He detailed how poor the communication was. It's not a figment of my imagination. I'm not sure I buy the idea that Murray got into the job, figured Nolan was gone soon anyway, so I might as well not even try to have a good working relationship with my coach in my first GM job. Doesn't make sense. It's more a reflection of Murray's personality, IMHO.
Samson's Flow Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 Your narrative, PA. I just don't think things need to rise to the same level of doubt as you do. I don't believe for a second that Nolan had ZERO input on player personnel. I don't think he always got his way, though, either. And I believe Nolan was resentful because of that. Indeed, I think Nolan was downright obstinate. I also think Murray had every reason to question Nolan's ability as a coach which caused him to lose confidence in Nolan's ability, including his ability to evaluate personnel. Lastly, I think you're over thinking Babcock's and Murray's discussion about levels of control over player personnel. I don't see Babcock's request for more control as something to question Murray about at this point. It's one thing for Murray to limit Nolan's involvement and quite another to give Babcock more leeway. Babcock has earned that given his success. Nolan, not so much. GO SABRES!!! I was under the impression that Nolan did in fact have little to no input on who he was getting on his roster on a nightly basis. If he did have input, Pysyk would have been up all season. This was Nolan's frustration, but if Nolan got his way we may be looking at a Strome/Marner/Hanifin draft this year. GMTM took charge and dictated who was on the Sabres. I don't think it's an issue going forward because the objective is much different.
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 I'm the complete opposite. The more talk there is over Babcock, the more indifferent I become. Wake me up when all this BS turns into wins on the ice. Too bad you have to wait to change your name to Rip Van Swample........
Claude_Verret Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 It's not a narrative, but if it is, it's Murray's narrative if anyone's. He detailed how poor the communication was. It's not a figment of my imagination. I'm not sure I buy the idea that Murray got into the job, figured Nolan was gone soon anyway, so I might as well not even try to have a good working relationship with my coach in my first GM job. Doesn't make sense. It's more a reflection of Murray's personality, IMHO. I think it's pretty simple.. Murray was going to engineer that roster to finish DFL come hell or high water. Whether Ted Nolan was or was not on board...GMTM ZFG.
qwksndmonster Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 It's not a narrative, but if it is, it's Murray's narrative if anyone's. He detailed how poor the communication was. It's not a figment of my imagination. I'm not sure I buy the idea that Murray got into the job, figured Nolan was gone soon anyway, so I might as well not even try to have a good working relationship with my coach in my first GM job. Doesn't make sense. It's more a reflection of Murray's personality, IMHO. I think that's the fundamental difference between the way you look at it and the way most folks here (including myself) look at it. Most of us believe that Nolan doesn't work well with GM's because there's a history. Obviously that's what we all want to think because we have nothing to do with Nolan anymore and Murray's our GM. That said, when I read that Babdick likes Tim Murray's style of being out scouting instead of a lot of day to day micromanagement, it seems like the Nolan situation may have helped in some way.
K-9 Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 It's not a narrative, but if it is, it's Murray's narrative if anyone's. He detailed how poor the communication was. It's not a figment of my imagination. I'm not sure I buy the idea that Murray got into the job, figured Nolan was gone soon anyway, so I might as well not even try to have a good working relationship with my coach in my first GM job. Doesn't make sense. It's more a reflection of Murray's personality, IMHO. I'm pretty sure it's your narrative. Murray indeed detailed how poor the communication was. But communication is always at least a two-way street and, given Nolan's temperament, I can't even suspect Murray was the cause for all of that dysfunction. I'm curious though, does Murray have a previous history of not getting along with others like Nolan? I agree that firing Nolan wasn't a foregone conclusion when Murray came aboard. Quite the opposite, in fact. I think Nolan had every opportunity to solidify his position but he doesn't have the chops for it at the NHL level. No shame in that, but Murray had a season and a half to evaluate Nolan as a coach and co-worker before making the decision to let him go. I don't think it's any more complicated than that and I don't think Murray's "personality" got in the way then nor do I see it being a limiting factor in the pursuit of Babcock. If Babcock comes aboard, it will be in part because of what he perceives Murray's acumen as a hockey man to be, not because he has a great personality, anyway. GO SABRES!!! I was under the impression that Nolan did in fact have little to no input on who he was getting on his roster on a nightly basis. If he did have input, Pysyk would have been up all season. This was Nolan's frustration, but if Nolan got his way we may be looking at a Strome/Marner/Hanifin draft this year. GMTM took charge and dictated who was on the Sabres. I don't think it's an issue going forward because the objective is much different. Little to none is not the same as ZERO, as PA represents it. And I believe Nolan absolutely got chafed over it. Easy to understand, given that Murray and Nolan had entirely different team goals last season. GO SABRES!!!
papazoid Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 my inside sources say babcock to sabres is a done deal. 10 yr/$50 mil GUARANTEED. all this delay is just posturing.
Two or less Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 my inside sources say babcock to sabres is a done deal. 10 yr/$50 mil GUARANTEED. all this delay is just posturing. seems legit
LGR4GM Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 Darren Dreger @DarrenDreger 32s32 seconds ago Toronto and Buffalo in bidding war for Babcock. No decision yet. Hearing Red Wings final offer was 5 years at $4 million per.
dudacek Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) Here's something to chew on while we wait. Why does GMTM get such a huge pass for his poor relationship with Nolan? Not a big red flag? Is it just that Ted was not Tim's man? I made a big deal about Battista getting sent down to tell Nolan that Miller had been traded and was roundly criticized for it. That's how it works, Murray was busy and Battista had nothing to do after getting Terry his Whatchamacallit bars from that diabolical vending machine by Darcy's old office. Sometimes you want a Twix and it gives you those awful peanut butter crackers. But, in hindsight, it was something to be concerned about, no? And it all plays into an image of Murray that apparently concerns Babcock enough that we have to have this waiting game while he figures out if he can work with Murray. Imagine if we lose Babcock over this. Will GMTM still get a pass? That is, if he's still employed by the Sabres de Buffalo? What narrative? Their relationship was crappy and Murray owned up to his part of the responsibility in the Nolan firing presser. He admitted his hands weren't clean. Hamilton has said many times Nolan had ZERO input on player personnel. That's pretty extraordinary. I have no doubt it's on Babcock's mind. And, no, I don't have a link for that statement. Muckler got fired. It's not a narrative, but if it is, it's Murray's narrative if anyone's. He detailed how poor the communication was. It's not a figment of my imagination. I'm not sure I buy the idea that Murray got into the job, figured Nolan was gone soon anyway, so I might as well not even try to have a good working relationship with my coach in my first GM job. Doesn't make sense. It's more a reflection of Murray's personality, IMHO. I think PA is raising a good point that shouldn't be dismissed, despite Nolan's history. It certainly seems like Murray made little to no effort to make things work with Ted. He essentially gave Ted free rein to coach and hire as he saw fit. Then he quickly lost whatever respect he had for Nolan because of the decisions he made with that free rein. It could also be that even though Murray takes personal pains to not interfere, part of him wants his coach to take some initiative and cultivate a beers after work relationship. Murray's not the most socially gifted dude. The difference with Babcock is that Murray already respects him and has a certain level of comfort with him; he made it clear this time he was going to hire someone he had a comfort level with. So it could be that Murray liked the type of set-up he had with Nolan, just not the way Nolan fit the set-up. I think our GM is much more connected in the hockey world than Nolan, who has cultivated a reputation as an outsider. I think the fact that Murray is still in the room with Babcock probably answers your concern more than anything. If Murray fails to close the deal with Babcock, I think it will have more to do with the comforts of the Detroit organization and Buffalo's place in the standings than any personality flaws in Murray. But I agree the situation bears watching. (Of course this all goes out the window if Babcock signs with Toronto. Then it will have been about money and power and prestige) Edited May 20, 2015 by dudacek
Samson's Flow Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 Little to none is not the same as ZERO, as PA represents it. And I believe Nolan absolutely got chafed over it. Easy to understand, given that Murray and Nolan had entirely different team goals last season. GO SABRES!!! I try not to speak in absolutes for this exact reason. Nolan having little control over the daily roster would certainly be a cause for conflict. But saying the Nolan had zero input is painting GMTM as insensitive and all-powerful, which I don't think is a fair characterization. IMO it was more due to competing objectives than anything else.
Brawndo Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 Darren Dreger @DarrenDreger 32s32 seconds ago Toronto and Buffalo in bidding war for Babcock. No decision yet. Hearing Red Wings final offer was 5 years at $4 million per. Bozak and Strome or Eichel and Reinhart. Easy decision.
nfreeman Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 Regarding the multiple-thread issue: when the Wawrow thread appeared, I considered merging it into this one, but decided against it because this one considers all coaching possibilities while that one is Babcock-only. Once we have a resolution on Babcock, the prediction thread will be closed, and if we get the right answer on Babcock, this thread will be closed as well. Until then, I think there are valid reasons to keep them all going. Please PM PAFan with all thoughts on this issue.
K-9 Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 Darren Dreger @DarrenDreger 32s32 seconds ago Toronto and Buffalo in bidding war for Babcock. No decision yet. Hearing Red Wings final offer was 5 years at $4 million per. If there's any truth to that, if I'm Pegula, I walk away with my head high and honor intact. No way I'd be used as a wedge after giving an unprecedented offer to Babcock. And if that's what Babcock is doing here, good riddance. GO SABRES!!! I try not to speak in absolutes for this exact reason. Nolan having little control over the daily roster would certainly be a cause for conflict. But saying the Nolan had zero input is painting GMTM as insensitive and all-powerful, which I don't think is a fair characterization. IMO it was more due to competing objectives than anything else. Agree entirely. Just not that complicated. But I understand the need for some that were against Murray's strategy last season, to make an issue out of it. If you think that finishing last was not a good strategy, then Murray can't be given any quarter. The concept of tanking and disrespect of Nolan will always be conflated by that segment of the fan base. GO SABRES!!!
Recommended Posts