Building a Culture

[Tondas]

1 minute ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Culture comes from winning and having guys in the locker room committed to winning and an organization holding players, scouts, coaches and managers accountable.  Jot is doing just that, he just needs to get some wins.  

I think culture comes before winning.  And I certainly agree with the bolded part.

[Thorner]

10 minutes ago, WildCard said:

Well how do you start winning then? Culture has to start before winning

You start winning by accumulating talented NHL players. That's not the same as just talented players (Nylander?). He's talented but hasn't show himself to be an NHL player. Players that have translated their abilities successfully to the NHL have demonstrated the ability to combine their natural talent with the work ethic required to find success. 

Then the winning starts. Then the buzzword "culture" starts becoming a thing. When the expectations are high and the standard of contribution of any individual player is high due to the components already on the team, we have culture. 

[WildCard]

Just now, Thorny said:

You start winning by accumulating talented NHL players. That's not the same as just talented players (Nylander?). He's talented but hasn't show himself to be an NHL player. Players that have translated their abilities successfully to the NHL have demonstrated the ability to combine their natural talent with the work ethic required to find success. 

Then the winning starts. Then the buzzword "culture" starts becoming a thing. When the expectations are high and the standard of contribution of any individual player is high due to the components already on the team, we have culture. 

I disagree. In every sport there have been tons of talented enough teams to win but they don't, or even winning teams have a bad culture (see Lakers)

I think culture helps you supplement and compliment talent; obviously talent is more important and you can win with enough talent and bad culture, but culture allows an organization to replace players much, much more easily, to avoid contract disputes, attract FA, and to squeeze as much as possible out of any given player that you can.

I think it's pretty wild to say that culture is some sort of buzzword. The concept of billions of dollars invested in an extremely high profile company having a good culture isn't unfounded 

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, WildCard said:

I disagree. In every sport there have been tons of talented enough teams to win but they don't, or even winning teams have a bad culture (see Lakers)

I think culture helps you supplement and compliment talent; obviously talent is more important and you can win with enough talent and bad culture, but culture allows an organization to replace players much, much more easily, to avoid contract disputes, attract FA, and to squeeze as much as possible out of any given player that you can.

I think it's pretty wild to say that culture is some sort of buzzword. The concept of billions of dollars invested in an extremely high profile company having a good culture isn't unfounded 

All symptoms of being a winning organization. Winning is the culture. The Patriots are accused of cheating all the time. How's the culture? Strong, maybe the strongest. Because they win football games. 

[WildCard]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

All symptoms of being a winning organization. Winning is the culture. The Patriots are accused of cheating all the time. How's the culture? Strong, maybe the strongest. Because they win football games. 

How is cheating associated with culture? They have a standard there that was put in place before they started winning. Why do the Patriots consistently turn out talent in their organization? 

[Thorner]

3 minutes ago, WildCard said:

How is cheating associated with culture? They have a standard there that was put in place before they started winning. Why do the Patriots consistently turn out talent in their organization? 

Because they have talented professionals making smart decisions. It's the accumulation of acumen. 

Maybe it boils down to semantics, but you don't somehow infuse your organization with "culture". You acquire smart, capable individuals who make intelligent team building decisions and the rest will come. 

That "standard" is only achieved through winning. Winning comes first. 

Edited August 13, 2019 by Thorny

[WildCard]

6 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Because they have talented professionals making smart decisions. It's the accumulation of acumen. 

Maybe it boils down to semantics, but you don't somehow infuse your organization with "culture". You acquire smart, capable individuals who make intelligent team building decisions and the rest will come. 

That "standard" is only achieved through winning. Winning comes first. 

I disagree, I think those smart, capable  individuals who make intelligent decisions create that standard of work. Hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard

[Tondas]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Because they have talented professionals making smart decisions. It's the accumulation of acumen. 

Maybe it boils down to semantics, but you don't somehow infuse your organization with "culture". You acquire smart, capable individuals who make intelligent team building decisions and the rest will come. 

The creation of culture is vital to any successful organization.  It isn't a buzzword and should not be used in quotation marks.   Culture is not a byproduct.  It is the foundation in which sustained success is built. 

[Thorner]

17 minutes ago, WildCard said:

I disagree. In every sport there have been tons of talented enough teams to win but they don't, or even winning teams have a bad culture (see Lakers)

I think culture helps you supplement and compliment talent; obviously talent is more important and you can win with enough talent and bad culture, but culture allows an organization to replace players much, much more easily, to avoid contract disputes, attract FA, and to squeeze as much as possible out of any given player that you can.

I think it's pretty wild to say that culture is some sort of buzzword. The concept of billions of dollars invested in an extremely high profile company having a good culture isn't unfounded 

If talent is more important, why would you attempt to acquire culture first? Take your chances with talent, if it's smart people making the decisions they will be acquiring not only talented individuals but individuals who will be compatible with each other, combining to form a successful team. Then the standards are high, and boom you have culture. 

[Thorner]

5 minutes ago, WildCard said:

I disagree, I think those smart, capable  individuals who make intelligent decisions create that standard of work. Hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard

But hard-working talent trumps all. 

[WildCard]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

If talent is more important, why would you attempt to acquire culture first? Take your chances with talent, if it's smart people making the decisions they will be acquiring not only talented individuals but individuals who will be compatible with each other, combining to form a successful team. Then the standards are high, and boom you have culture. 

You can bring all the talent you want together but if they aren't a cohesive unit they will be beaten by a less talented team/organization that is marginally less talented. It's easier to create a culture than it is to bring in enough talent to overcome a bad one

[Thorner]

6 minutes ago, WildCard said:

You can bring all the talent you want together but if they aren't a cohesive unit they will be beaten by a less talented team/organization that is marginally less talented. It's easier to create a culture than it is to bring in enough talent to overcome a bad one

Of course roster cohesion factors in. That's just successful team building. 

If by "culture" you mean a good GM capable of assembling not only talented individuals both those that will complement each other's strengths and weaknesses allowing a cohesive unit to be formed, then yes, go culture. 

Edited August 13, 2019 by Thorny

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, WildCard said:

Well how do you start winning then? Culture has to start before winning

How do you having a winning culture before the winning.  Jbot has done everything he can (ok except get a new 2c) he has revamped the roster, fired and replaced coaches, replaced and upgraded scouting, and turned the Amerks into winners.  Now it’s up to the players to play to their potential.  

The phrase learning to win has been around forever.  Our guys started on that road in the first half last season but couldn’t maintain it.  Now they need to take the next step.  HCRK and the vets need to lead the kids.

Edited August 13, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

All symptoms of being a winning organization. Winning is the culture. The Patriots are accused of cheating all the time. How's the culture? Strong, maybe the strongest. Because they win football games. 

The Cheatriots are accused of cheating, because they cheat.

But they win because they are the best prepared of any of the 32 teams.  They're beatable in September IMHO because they don't yet know what their opponents will do and because their new pieces haven't fully learned their responsibilities.  But as they learn themselves and their opponents, they out plan their opponents to the point their opponents beat themselves when the Cheats don't beat them outright (e.g., Seattle &  Atlanta SBs).

The Cheats know the Rulebook inside & out and find angles that the rules committee that actually writes the rules never thought of.  Sometimes it's accidental (like how playing the Bills their WR fumbled the ball while getting knocked cold but then had the ball brush against him while he was partially over the sideline before the Bills could recover it finding out that the sideline extends out into the field of play when someone is in contact with it; they then started having their KR step out of bounds before touching the ball automatically making the kickoff out of bounds & getting it up at the 40 for free) & sometimes it's purposeful (like in the Ravens playoff game when they kept having TE's report ineligible confusing the #### out of Khaki 's brother); but they always find those loopholes.  They're also willing to push beyond the gray of the rules when they believe they can get away with it - which earns them the Cheatriot moniker.

Edited August 13, 2019 by Taro T

[Thorner]

Gotta admire them Patriots. 

[Tondas]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Gotta admire them Patriots. 

Admire - NO.  Begrudging respect - YE (I can go through with it).

[North Buffalo]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

How do you having a winning culture before the winning.  Jbot has done everything he can (ok except get a new 2c) he has revamped the roster, fired and replaced coaches, replaced and upgraded scouting, and turned the Amerks into winners.  Now it’s up to the players to play to their potential.  

The phrase learning to win has been around forever.  Our guys started on that road in the first half last season but couldn’t maintain it.  Now they need to take the next step.  HCRK and the vets need to lead the kids.

But learning to win... putting your head down even when going gets tough to quote John Belushi with Germans and  Pearl Harbor... staying with it till you figure it out... what the Blues did this year... it may be something small or big that flips the switch, but you dont hang your head... you keep searching for that switch... cohesive teams do that... sulking teams dont... or they stay too long in their own frustration instead of figuring out how to support each other... we have seen too much of that with the Sabres... part of that is maturity and young leadership imo.  Sabres need to find a guy with both talent and maturity to lift guys up and help them buckle down when they need too.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

I love Culture.  Big fan, especially when the 2 7s clash.

 

[Weave]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

 

But they win because they are the best prepared of any of the 32 teams. 

This right here is an excellent example of culture.  They have built an expectation of do whatever it takes to gain advantage.  Culture.  Right.  There.

[Tondas]

2 minutes ago, Weave said:

This right here is an excellent example of culture.  They have built an expectation of do whatever it takes to gain advantage.  Culture.  Right.  There.

Agree.  And that mindset Comes. Before. Winning.  Let's hope RFK gets this instilled ASAP.

[Weave]

3 minutes ago, Tondas said:

Agree.  And that mindset Comes. Before. Winning.  Let's hope RFK gets this instilled ASAP.

I think that it all develops together, culture and winning.  So I have no dog in this race.

[Doohicksie]

2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

How do you having a winning culture before the winning.

Before the winning, before the culture, one must have structure.  Then one must populate the structure with the players available in ways that set the players up for success.  If the structure is good and the right players are playing in the right places, the culture and the winning will grow.  The part I bolded is something RFK said he seeks to do.  I hope he can provide the right structure and be able to evaluate the talent on the team to adequately place them in those positions to succeed.  If he can (HUGE IF), then the culture will emerge and the winning will come.

[Curt]

Discipline, Structure, Communication, and Character:  The pillars upon which winning cultures are built

[SwampD]

Meh.

Culture is a crock. Winners win. They can be *****, or choirboys.

[nfreeman]

36 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Meh.

Culture is a crock. Winners win. They can be *****, or choirboys.

The Cowboys team that spanked the Bills in back—to-back SBs had a decidedly non-choir-boy character, but I think that most of them were very serious about winning and busted their butts to do so.