Updated Seth Appert Hired as Amerks HC/Adam Mair and Mike Weber Named Asst Coaches

[Brawndo]

 

[kas23]

I was waiting for that to fall. It’s obvious (or maybe not, because Sabres) that Ralph should’ve had significant input into Taylor’s fate and he was fired. Conversely, he probably signed off on the Appert signing. Who knows, maybe Ralph saw Taylor as someone who was gunning for his job. Nevertheless, the quick playoff exits were good enough for a change. 

[Two or less]

That's interesting. Taylor was on the bench with the Sabres until the end of the road trip in late November. November 25th at Tampa was his last game as assistant coach before returning to Rochester. So from the time he left Buffalo that was the last time Krueger talked to Taylor.

[dudacek]

I wouldn’t really expect The NHL head coach to talk to the AHL head coach during the regular season.

I suspect Ralph’s input was asked for on just about every member of the hockey staff before they were let go. I also imagine he had more to say about Taylor than virtually anyone.

[Curt]

19 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I wouldn’t really expect The NHL head coach to talk to the AHL head coach during the regular season.

I would.  I would think they should regularly have discussions about players who are called up/sent down.

[SwampD]

35 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I wouldn’t really expect The NHL head coach to talk to the AHL head coach during the regular season.

I suspect Ralph’s input was asked for on just about every member of the hockey staff before they were let go. I also imagine he had more to say about Taylor than virtually anyone.

I find this curious. Why would he have more to say than others? Wouldn’t he be too busy trying to coach an NHL team to bother with what the AHL coach was doing. Seems like that would fall on the GM.

This is a rudderless f***ing s**tshow.

[In The Buff]

1 hour ago, msw2112 said:

I'm one of the people who have been saying "give the new regime a chance" because we really have no idea how well they will do.  No sense bashing them until/unless they botch it.  I also agree with you that we don't have a whole lot of control over the situation either, so we have no choice but to let it play out.  My family was a season ticket holder for many years, but we are all living out of the Buffalo area now, so we really have no control.  Current season ticket holders have some power - the power to walk away until they are satisfied with the course of the organization.  As a glutton for punishment, I'd probably stick it out and see if this was one of the times the broken clock was right.  Great metaphor.

As much as its hard to be optimistic when times are tough for as long as they've been, I'll always love this team & support them no matter what. I've never been a season ticket holder but i go to tons of games, but these past few years in the 2nd half of the season when I've thought about going to a game, I've chosen to stay home instead.

With the financial cost of attending, coupled with the prospect of watching another losing effort where the arena also feels like I'm in a mausoleum, its hard to justify going.

I've heard that bolded comment before many times, that people should speak with their dollars & stop attending games because then ownership will hear us & feel more pressure to right the ship. That we're mad as hell & not gonna take it anymore! And that makes sense to me for sure & who knows, maybe that'd make a difference. But given the covid situation this year where fans most likely won't even be allowed to go anyways or at the very least be limited in number, even if we wanted to do something like that this year to send a message we couldn't. And quite honestly i believe the owners already are 100% aware of how we feel & that they need to do something. They can't be happy or satisfied themselves. The question is how much responsibility do they place on themselves & do they have the ability to make the correct decisions to turn this thing around now?

GI Joe taught me when I was a kid that: Knowing is half the battle. Well they know what they've done so far hasn't worked, so that's half the battle. Do they know enough now where they can right the ship?

Been waiting on that other half for awhile!

[nfreeman]

23 minutes ago, SwampD said:

I find this curious. Why would he have more to say than others? Wouldn’t he be too busy trying to coach an NHL team to bother with what the AHL coach was doing. Seems like that would fall on the GM.

This is a rudderless f***ing s**tshow.

@dudacek can of course speak for himself but I thought he meant that RK would’ve had more comments about Taylor’s performance than about anyone else’s.

As for the Lysowski item, I would think that normally the NHL HC would chat with his AHL counterpart a few times over the course of the season, but perhaps not.  But either way I think RK must’ve formed a fairly negative impression of Taylor during that November stretch.  

[SwampD]

10 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

@dudacek can of course speak for himself but I thought he meant that RK would’ve had more comments about Taylor’s performance than about anyone else’s.

As for the Lysowski item, I would think that normally the NHL HC would chat with his AHL counterpart a few times over the course of the season, but perhaps not.  But either way I think RK must’ve formed a fairly negative impression of Taylor during that November stretch.  

Yeah, I don’t really know either. All I know is that someone who actually knows stuff better grab the reins of this thing soon.

****ing ***tshow.

[PerreaultForever]

On 8/16/2020 at 6:41 AM, LGR4GM said:

He has tons of experience, is it just because he wasn't an AHL coach or assistant before? I don't understand this line of thinking, you make it sound like they hired some nobody off the street who's never coached at a high level before. 

No, I meant inexperienced at that level (or higher). 

It's also an odd thing to say they will shift focus to youth. As someone else said, don't you have to have a lot of youthful prospects for this idea (which we don't)?  I always thought the usual AHL model was to have rosters of veterans and kids so that the kids can be mentored, coached, taught to win. JBot's idea was to create a culture of winning in the AHL that he hoped to flow into the Sabres from that level was it not? Not saying it worked, but it was a decent idea. 

Obviously we will have to see how this plays out, but what they have done so far really doesn't inspire confidence or optimism. 

[Thorner]

52 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

@dudacek can of course speak for himself but I thought he meant that RK would’ve had more comments about Taylor’s performance than about anyone else’s.

As for the Lysowski item, I would think that normally the NHL HC would chat with his AHL counterpart a few times over the course of the season, but perhaps not.  But either way I think RK must’ve formed a fairly negative impression of Taylor during that November stretch.  

Ya, and I mean, maybe not talking at all would be on the outskirts of normal for a regular coach, but Krueger's thing is supposed to be communication. 

I can't say it's definitely significant but it's odd, at best. 

[dudacek]

3 hours ago, Curt said:

I would.  I would think they should regularly have discussions about players who are called up/sent down.

I’m not saying they shouldn’t, but it’s my impression most NHL coaches deal with the players they’re given. It’s the GM who deals with the team in the AHL, often through his assistant. It’s the typical NHL heirarchy

2 hours ago, SwampD said:

I find this curious. Why would he have more to say than others? Wouldn’t he be too busy trying to coach an NHL team to bother with what the AHL coach was doing. Seems like that would fall on the GM.

This is a rudderless f***ing s**tshow.

More say on Taylor because he worked directly with him while Granato was out and would have a more fully formed opinion.

A say on the organization in general because of the Sabres flat management structure and Adams clear statements that he would be setting direction with Ralph’s input.

[Brawndo]

 

[shrader]

I decided to text my friend that covered ECAC hockey back while Appert was at RPI.  His first response pretty much explains this hire to me:  "very modern, analytical approach".

[Randall Flagg]

14 hours ago, Brawndo said:

 

This is off-putting 

[Thorner]

3 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

This is off-putting 

I agree. As mentioned, it may not even usually bug me but there’s just something about how, on the surface at least, it would appear to contradict the mantra Krueger and the Sabres are so keen on fostering. If Krueger isn’t here to maximize that stuff why is he here?

This is exactly the type of news we were supposed to be getting away from. I just don’t want all that speak to be bullsh*t.

Saying this as someone who doesn’t even buy in to a lot of that culture and communication stuff. But them buying into it is a much more pleasing scenario than the alternative, that they’re just blowing smoke.

Edited August 18, 2020 by Thorny

[Weave]

4 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

This is off-putting 

Yeah, it is.  I have no idea how much an NHL HC communicates with his AHL counterpart, but it has to be greater than “none” over half of a season. 
 

Just sticking with plain old professionalism, this seems like a bad look to me.

[LTS]

On 8/16/2020 at 1:55 PM, inkman said:

I'm referring to going prospect heavy.  The coach won't matter much especially since the prospect pool is as weak as it's been in years.  

I don't think I am fully following you here.  You referred specifically to Rolston and that approach.  As in, the approach of hiring a "development" guy?  I would agree that having a talent gap is not something a development guy (or any coach) is going to fix.

AS for the Krueger/Taylor thing... my guess is that Ralph was brought in to coach, but be an organizational consultant as well.  I am sure we'll see more changes as time passes (not the normal time changes all things, but changes aligned with that aspect).

 

[Curt]

1 hour ago, LTS said:

AS for the Krueger/Taylor thing... my guess is that Ralph was brought in to coach, but be an organizational consultant as well.  I am sure we'll see more changes as time passes (not the normal time changes all things, but changes aligned with that aspect).

How many more changes can there possibly be???  What prominent position in the hockey department hasn’t changed?

[Taro T]

8 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

This is off-putting 

That, and not making any changes to a coaching staff that had horrible special teams.  Granted, Hutton not being able to track a puck was a major factor limiting the PK, but the PP was trash as well all things considered.

Krueger keeps SAYING the right things and Eichel has bought in, but there are things that need to improve this year on both sides of the bench.

Botterill & Krueger never seemed on the same page.  Now we find Taylor was never on the same page either.  Off putting indeed.

[Drag0nDan]

On 8/16/2020 at 11:39 AM, In The Buff said:

I don't understand why Taylor was let go either. Besides from developing & working with a bunch of players that would come thru there, before he coached the Amerks, they had missed the playoffs 3 consecutive years. Botts hires Taylor & coincidentally they make the playoffs 2 years straight & were poised to go a 3rd time. His record was a combined 116-65-20-13 in 214 games. Hard to say he was fired for poor performance imo. What he was fired for, is anyone's guess. 

I don't get why everyone loves the guy so much tbh.  He was fine - but I don't know that winning at the AHL level has a correlation with young 19-21 year old AHL players becoming good NHL players.  The only player who really graduated in his tenure was olofsson who spent several years in sweden before he came here.  So he didn't exactly help a 19 year old navigate professional hockey.  Nylander, Guhle, Fasching, Baptiste, Bailey - none turned into players and all have been traded. 

There are going to be a fair amount of new faces in the AHL this season.  Perhaps it was the right time for a change for that reason, and maybe they believe this guy can help them become more effective pro's.  

[Drag0nDan]

20 hours ago, Taro T said:

That, and not making any changes to a coaching staff that had horrible special teams.  Granted, Hutton not being able to track a puck was a major factor limiting the PK, but the PP was trash as well all things considered.

Krueger keeps SAYING the right things and Eichel has bought in, but there are things that need to improve this year on both sides of the bench.

Botterill & Krueger never seemed on the same page.  Now we find Taylor was never on the same page either.  Off putting indeed.

Who were even the PK players on this team?  Vesey i guess? Girgs and Larsson? Frolik Lazar and Asplund?  The team gets no scoring out of their line 3 - and they aren't good on defense either.  

As for the power play... when your 2nd unit features Mittelstadt and Sheary... it's going to be tough sledding even gaining the zone.  

[kas23]

On 8/18/2020 at 5:05 PM, LTS said:

AS for the Krueger/Taylor thing... my guess is that Ralph was brought in to coach, but be an organizational consultant as well.

 

But, this is part of the problem. If this is true, the firing of Taylor never properly addressed this problem. It takes 2 people to stop talking to each other. And, if this is allowed to continue to fester, the problem worsens. What I would like Kruger (or even KA, if Kruger doesn’t have the stones) to publicly explain is why this occurred and what did he do to attempt to solve it (he obviously failed to resolved it, outside of fairing the guy after the fact). 

[Curt]

22 minutes ago, kas23 said:

But, this is part of the problem. If this is true, the firing of Taylor never properly addressed this problem. It takes 2 people to stop talking to each other. And, if this is allowed to continue to fester, the problem worsens. What I would like Kruger (or even KA, if Kruger doesn’t have the stones) to publicly explain is why this occurred and what did he do to attempt to solve it (he obviously failed to resolved it, outside of fairing the guy after the fact). 

They will never publicly admit that it’s true, let alone give an explanation for it, and rightfully so.  

[IKnowPhysics]

 

On 8/18/2020 at 9:43 AM, Randall Flagg said:

This is off-putting 

 

On 8/18/2020 at 1:19 PM, Thorny said:

I agree. As mentioned, it may not even usually bug me but there’s just something about how, on the surface at least, it would appear to contradict the mantra Krueger and the Sabres are so keen on fostering. If Krueger isn’t here to maximize that stuff why is he here?

This is exactly the type of news we were supposed to be getting away from. I just don’t want all that speak to be bullsh*t.

Saying this as someone who doesn’t even buy in to a lot of that culture and communication stuff. But them buying into it is a much more pleasing scenario than the alternative, that they’re just blowing smoke.

 

On 8/18/2020 at 2:03 PM, Weave said:

Yeah, it is.  I have no idea how much an NHL HC communicates with his AHL counterpart, but it has to be greater than “none” over half of a season. 
 

Just sticking with plain old professionalism, this seems like a bad look to me.

 

On 8/18/2020 at 6:13 PM, Taro T said:

That, and not making any changes to a coaching staff that had horrible special teams.  Granted, Hutton not being able to track a puck was a major factor limiting the PK, but the PP was trash as well all things considered.

Krueger keeps SAYING the right things and Eichel has bought in, but there are things that need to improve this year on both sides of the bench.

Botterill & Krueger never seemed on the same page.  Now we find Taylor was never on the same page either.  Off putting indeed.

 

41 minutes ago, kas23 said:

But, this is part of the problem. If this is true, the firing of Taylor never properly addressed this problem. It takes 2 people to stop talking to each other. And, if this is allowed to continue to fester, the problem worsens. What I would like Kruger (or even KA, if Kruger doesn’t have the stones) to publicly explain is why this occurred and what did he do to attempt to solve it (he obviously failed to resolved it, outside of fairing the guy after the fact). 

Before this continues to spin feverishly into petty ridiculousness, this was already clarified and resolved on twitter.  Lance Lysowski was interviewed by Gene Battaglia on ESPN Rochester.  Gene tweeted Lysowski's answer to a question without context, and Lysowski immediately clarified and regretted his own poor wording.  Communication about development with Rochester was run through the GMs, as you would expect it would be; he never intended to say that Kruger and Taylor never spoke:

 

 

 

 

Edited August 20, 2020 by IKnowPhysics