Ralph Krueger to meet the Media Wednesday June 5th 10am

[Marvin]

3 hours ago, SwampD said:

What if it was a normal chicken chick that got blasted with radiation,... like Godzilla?

 

 

[Eleven]

I think I'm in love with him.

[DarthEbriate]

Based strictly on a single presser... and maybe another radio interview from a few weeks ago...  (small sample size and no games coached yet [as a Sabre])... Kruger can communicate eloquently and interestingly and intuitively. His answers were distinct and insightful, on a variety of topics and without deliberation or wavering. He thinks, he speaks, and he speaks well. Compared to Rolston, Bylsma, Housley, and Nolan... and even Ruff... I'll be happy to listen to postgame radio. We'll see how he sounds after losing 13 out of 15 (if he ever does). But he didn't just fall into coachspeak and cliched drivel. Again -- based on a presser? Darn good presser! Keep acing the tests, Director Kruger!

[...]

Okay, so I watched both the presser and the 14 minute interview with Duff. @pi2000, I think I have a better idea, now, where you're coming from.  In the near half-hour worth of Krueger time today, he spoke about actual, or traditional, coaching for maybe 1 minute.  I can appreciate how folks used to, again, traditional, North American coaching would find that concerning.

RK is not traditional at all.  He is basically Rikard Grönborg with some NHL experience.  Both would come across as alien because they're not Xs and Os type coaches, they're enabler coaches. RK assumes the guys know the fundamentals of the game, or that they can get that kind of coaching from other sources (assistants, etc.). RK is going to focus on personal development, as in, making them "the best person they can be" development.  Right now for players playing in the NHL, being a highly developed person equals being the best possible NHL player that individual can be.

Translated, this means that those of us who want an organization that can recognize true talent, well we ostensibly have it now.  For RK to be successful, the players, despite their psychological make up, must have real talent.

I have to give Jbot and the Pegulas a lot of credit.  Not unlike with Sean McDermott, they have identified an approach to coaching that is essentially radical and they have committed to it.  RK is like the international version of McDermott, which makes sense (to me) because the NFL is a very American game and McDermott has a very American approach as a coach/enabler.  Hockey is an international sport, full of international players, and so the coach/enabler must have a more international approach.  But the fundamental philosophies are very similar.

I don't know if this will work, I'm not wagering either way, but I find it a brave, legitimate attempt at trying something new.

 

Edited June 6, 2019 by ...
The Ghost of Dwight Drane

[North Buffalo]

That make sense, but he did mention using ice time as a reward and-a stick and I like it that he is blunt and pushing players to take responsibility for their game and that he will vary his approach so that he is not predictable... doesnt get stale... more psychological then Xs and Os.   We will see if it works.

[Stoner]

9 hours ago, Eleven said:

I think I'm in love with him.

I think it's very healthy that you're ready to move on from Lindy.

[Stoner]

11 hours ago, Taro T said:

 Everybody's ignoring the elephant in that room.  The thing that stood out was that when the 1st questions from the press pool come from ACTUAL pros like Wawrow and Lysowski (sp?) and hacks like Bucky and the mustachioed one aren't around; you get solid questions and solid answers at one of these.  Very few questions that were groan inducing.  Hoping that remains a thing in the future.

As to the meat of the responses; amazing how much better Krueger's 'don't waste time over analyzing the past; look at where we are & where we needed to go ' sounds compared to 'we won't look at last year's film; everybody gets a clean slate ' sounds.

Not positive Botterill got this right, but remain hopeful that he did.  He definitely SEEMS to know what he needs to do and how to do it.

Yeah, John really went to work getting critical info. on behalf of his readers — "When did you get in town?"

I disagree with you here. First of all it's been a long time since Jerry showed up at any of these (IMMSMC). Harrington would have been a better one to go with. Second, it's the tough, grating questions that produce results. I went to sleep halfway through the "Congratulations, coach..." questions. I'd love to hear how Ralph would handle Mike's probing. And there was some opportunity for tough questions (not a lot). Remember when Mike finally got under OSP's skin to the point that Tom blurted out the truth — his only instruction to Larry and Darcy was to break even financially?

[Stoner]

Anywho, on to the important stuff: 1. Is Kruger going to be a thing? 2. Is his hair mockable? I think he somehow pulls it off. Phil could have done the same thing and probably saved his job here.

[SwampD]

I really hope he works out. I can’t think of a single NHL coach I could stand to listen to for this long.

https://www.nbcsports.com/video/southamptons-ralph-krueger-sits-down-roger-bennett

 

[sabills]

11 hours ago, ... said:

RK is not traditional at all.  He is basically Rikard Grönborg with some NHL experience.  Both would come across as alien because they're not Xs and Os type coaches, they're enabler coaches. RK assumes the guys know the fundamentals of the game, or that they can get that kind of coaching from other sources (assistants, etc.). RK is going to focus on personal development, as in, making them "the best person they can be" development.  Right now for players playing in the NHL, being a highly developed person equals being the best possible NHL player that individual can be.

I mentioned this in the other Krueger thread, but its worth repeating. Vanek talked about how Kruger hired smart people as assistants and let them do the real X's and O's style coaching. Krueger mostly managed the coaches, taking a bigger overall view instead of getting into the nitty gritty. This is what I've been hoping for out of my hockey coach, football coach, hell, any political leaders in charge. You can't know everything. Hire smart people, listen to all of them (yes, including, but not limited to, the analytics guys), and make the final call.

[nfreeman]

4 minutes ago, sabills said:

I mentioned this in the other Krueger thread, but its worth repeating. Vanek talked about how Kruger hired smart people as assistants and let them do the real X's and O's style coaching. Krueger mostly managed the coaches, taking a bigger overall view instead of getting into the nitty gritty. This is what I've been hoping for out of my hockey coach, football coach, hell, any political leaders in charge. You can't know everything. Hire smart people, listen to all of them (yes, including, but not limited to, the analytics guys), and make the final call. 

We'll be the judge of that, sir.

[darksabre]

9 minutes ago, sabills said:

I mentioned this in the other Krueger thread, but its worth repeating. Vanek talked about how Kruger hired smart people as assistants and let them do the real X's and O's style coaching. Krueger mostly managed the coaches, taking a bigger overall view instead of getting into the nitty gritty. This is what I've been hoping for out of my hockey coach, football coach, hell, any political leaders in charge. You can't know everything. Hire smart people, listen to all of them (yes, including, but not limited to, the analytics guys), and make the final call.

YoU ONly NEed prAcTiCE aND VIdeO

[Drunkard]

16 hours ago, French Collection said:

His last job was comparable to President of Hockey Operations. Let's hope one of his strengths is assembling a team that fills the gaps of his needs and weaknesses. He should trust these people and delegate accordingly.

I hope he is successful as a coach, hires his eventual successor and moves upstairs once a winning culture is established.

If that means he takes Botterill's job I'm all for it.

[#freejame]

12 minutes ago, darksabre said:

YoU ONly NEed prAcTiCE aND VIdeO

You’re better than this god-awful meme 

[phil_soisson]

21 hours ago, spndnchz said:

Talk the talk but walk the walk he’s got a lot to figure out. 

I think you mean "talk the walk, but walk the talk." It seems like everyone gets that wrong.

[Doohicksie]

2 hours ago, darksabre said:

YoU ONly NEed prAcTiCE aND VIdeO

1 hour ago, #freejame said:

You’re better than this god-awful meme 

[WildCard]

Feel like I'm on 9gag right now

[Doohicksie]

9gag?  Is that still around?

 

[Brawndo]

He was on with the Instigators Today and got more specific about his coaching and expectations for next year 

https://www.nhl.com/sabres/news/sabres-ralph-krueger-the-instigators-interview/c-307729228

[That Aud Smell]

6 hours ago, sabills said:

I mentioned this in the other Krueger thread, but its worth repeating. Vanek talked about how Kruger hired smart people as assistants and let them do the real X's and O's style coaching. Krueger mostly managed the coaches, taking a bigger overall view instead of getting into the nitty gritty. This is what I've been hoping for out of my hockey coach, football coach, hell, any political leaders in charge. You can't know everything. Hire smart people, listen to all of them (yes, including, but not limited to, the analytics guys), and make the final call.

I believe this is a modern trend in hiring into the HC ranks. Heck - Liverpool FC just won the Champions League with a manager (soccer's version of the HC) who was very much in this mold (Klopp).

Honest question: Is the Belichick model essentially the inverse (converse? obverse?) of this? Isn't Belichick like a total savant about the entire playbook, all the Xs and all the Os? Is the Rams HC similar? Maybe things are different in (American) football. Maybe basketball is a better parallel?

[#freejame]

3 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

I believe this is a modern trend in hiring into the HC ranks. Heck - Liverpool FC just won the Champions League with a manager (soccer's version of the HC) who was very much in this mold (Klopp).

Honest question: Is the Belichick model essentially the inverse (converse? obverse?) of this? Isn't Belichick like a total savant about the entire playbook, all the Xs and all the Os? Is the Rams HC similar? Maybe things are different in (American) football. Maybe basketball is a better parallel?

I would think a head coach in football has the ability to dictate the game much more than any other sport. Basketball might be a better example but I would be talking out of my ass if it said so one way or the other. 

[sabills]

8 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

I believe this is a modern trend in hiring into the HC ranks. Heck - Liverpool FC just won the Champions League with a manager (soccer's version of the HC) who was very much in this mold (Klopp).

Honest question: Is the Belichick model essentially the inverse (converse? obverse?) of this? Isn't Belichick like a total savant about the entire playbook, all the Xs and all the Os? Is the Rams HC similar? Maybe things are different in (American) football. Maybe basketball is a better parallel?

I think Belichick is the exception to this. That man, as much as I hate the Patriots, is one of the best coaches in North American sports history. A genius like that, if you happen upon him? Yeah, he can have his hands in every honey pot (though I do think he does more delegation than we assume).

Most guys can't and won't be that guy. I'd argue that there isn't really a guy like that in the NHL today, someone who is head and shoulders above his counterparts. People thought Babcock was that, and maybe he is, but he just looks like another good to really good coach to me.

The point is, if you have a coach who hires a bunch of really, really smart people at every position and can figure out how to take all those pieces and put them together he doesn't HAVE to be a savant. And I think most guys could do that, certainly some better than others but most to some extent, if they really put their head into it.

Instead we have every football coach, and hockey coach, thinking that THEY know best, that the way THEY were taught is the only way, that they have to control every in and out to have value. I think that's somewhat born out of the fear of failure. I HAVE to know everything, because I only have 3 years to win or else I'm fired, and if I give over these little decisions to other people, I could end up losing my job because I trusted someone else.

[...]

59 minutes ago, #freejame said:

I would think a head coach in football has the ability to dictate the game much more than any other sport. Basketball might be a better example but I would be talking out of my ass if it said so one way or the other. 

Agreed on both.  I don't know basketball, but I do know soccer and tennis.  In both latter sports you know the fundamentals, you know where you're supposed to be and when (positioning), you know universal (to the sport) strategies (not unlike chess).  The challenge is executing all of those well and using your knowledge of those elements to synthesize them in the moment into something that works. 

It's very simple: the better players execute and process the game better than the majority (who, at the pro level, execute and process better than amateurs).  So the goal is: how to get these guys to elevate their execution and processing?  To do that you must figure out what it is that prevents them from executing and processing better once you remove talent as a parameter.

In most, if not all, cases, the thing preventing players from being better is themselves - whatever junk is in their minds and their emotional...capacities.  

This all is predicated on the assumption that these players are competent students of the game, already having learned (most of) the fundamentals.  Xs and Os can get weighed down by the fundamentals.  A game like football is always about either well-executed or cleverly re-worked fundamentals. 

A game like hockey (or soccer, or tennis) relies on this being muscle memory for the player and they execute and process at a higher level.  

The Xs and Os for a head coach ought to be player match-ups, player usage, and the occasional clever alterations to the fundamentals in-game, relying on the talent, ability to execute and process, and chemistry of the players.

 

Edited June 6, 2019 by ...
Ddsfknasdf

[SDS]

7 hours ago, darksabre said:

YoU ONly NEed prAcTiCE aND VIdeO

You don't even need video. Just watch them live and make a mental note of things.

[SDS]

1 hour ago, That Aud Smell said:

I believe this is a modern trend in hiring into the HC ranks. Heck - Liverpool FC just won the Champions League with a manager (soccer's version of the HC) who was very much in this mold (Klopp).

Honest question: Is the Belichick model essentially the inverse (converse? obverse?) of this? Isn't Belichick like a total savant about the entire playbook, all the Xs and all the Os? Is the Rams HC similar? Maybe things are different in (American) football. Maybe basketball is a better parallel?

I think the point is that you have to have the knowledge somewhere. An individual or a group...