Dreger: Expects Sabres Head Coach will be hired next week

[Zamboni]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I did and the interesting thing is that Bruce became an NHL head coach at 52. Granato is 53. 

Just say you want Boudreau because he's previously been an NHL head coach. But stop acting like Granato isn't qualified. 

But but but like tired giraffes gifs. Does meatballs think they’re funny? I bet Bruce does! 

[sabremike]

29 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I did and the interesting thing is that Bruce became an NHL head coach at 52. Granato is 53. 

Just say you want Boudreau because he's previously been an NHL head coach. But stop acting like Granato isn't qualified. 

If we were talking about an organization that had any shred of credibility like say the Flyers or Bruins that's in a position where they can afford to take a chance on a guy? Yeah. An organization that has zero credibility of any kind dying a horrible that cannot afford to get another hire wrong? Nope. 

34 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

But but but like tired giraffes gifs. Does meatballs think they’re funny? I bet Bruce does! 

[LGR4GM]

10 minutes ago, sabremike said:

If we were talking about an organization that had any shred of credibility like say the Flyers or Bruins that's in a position where they can afford to take a chance on a guy? Yeah. An organization that has zero credibility of any kind dying a horrible that cannot afford to get another hire wrong? Nope. 

Here's the problem. You are taking a chance regardless of who you hire. We hired cup winner Dan Bylsma with his 6 years of NHL head coaching experience and he sucked. You don't want Granato, just say it. No one will be upset but stop this fake argument stuff. Granato is just as capable as Beaudreau and the org's credibility has nothing to do with any of it other than maybe a high end vet coach like Gallant would prefer other places.

ALSO LOLLLLOOLOLOLOLLOOLOL at the Flyers having credibility. What a dumpster fire their team is turning into. 

[LGR4GM]

For the record, I don't really care who the coach is because that isn't going to magically fix all that is wrong with this team. 

[WildCard]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

For the record, I don't really care who the coach is because that isn't going to magically fix all that is wrong with this team. 

It won't, but after watching the last iterations of Sabres coaching cycles we can certainly say it's not a trivial aspect of building a team, especially a young one.

[LGR4GM]

2 minutes ago, WildCard said:

It won't, but after watching the last iterations of Sabres coaching cycles we can certainly say it's not a trivial aspect of building a team, especially a young one.

The good news is Granato or Beaudreuoea are both far more qualified than Krueger or Housley. 

[sabremike]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Here's the problem. You are taking a chance regardless of who you hire. We hired cup winner Dan Bylsma with his 6 years of NHL head coaching experience and he sucked. You don't want Granato, just say it. No one will be upset but stop this fake argument stuff. Granato is just as capable as Beaudreau and the org's credibility has nothing to do with any of it other than maybe a high end vet coach like Gallant would prefer other places.

ALSO LOLLLLOOLOLOLOLLOOLOL at the Flyers having credibility. What a dumpster fire their team is turning into. 

I must've missed the Flyers missing the playoffs for a decade straight. They are having a rough patch but they have credibility built up from decades of almost never being uncompetitive.

And Bylsma won a cup with one of the 5 greatest players ever, a guy in Malkin who is probably one of the 10 or so greatest players of his era and a goalie in MAF who has a good shot at the HOF (And lots of other good players). Conehead the beer vendor probably could've won a cup coaching that Pens team.

[LGR4GM]

Just now, sabremike said:

I must've missed the Flyers missing the playoffs for a decade straight. They are having a rough patch but they have credibility built up from decades of almost never being uncompetitive.

And Bylsma won a cup with one of the 5 greatest players ever, a guy in Malkin who is probably one of the 10 or so greatest players of his era and a goalie in MAF who has a good shot at the HOF (And lots of other good players). Conehead the beer vendor probably could've won a cup coaching that Pens team.

But your only qualification thus far is "already been NHL head coach". 

[LGR4GM]

@sabremike how about this, why is Don Granato not qualified to be an NHL head coach? Why would he potentially fail at that job?

[sabremike]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

@sabremike how about this, why is Don Granato not qualified to be an NHL head coach? Why would he potentially fail at that job?

OK here goes:

I called him an entry level NHL coaching hire. I pointed out that there are other teams and situations where hiring Granato would be reasonable. In my opinion the Sabres are NOT that team or situation. This organization is the biggest failure in modern hockey history and need someone with a track record that says "I can get the job done". 

[Thorner]

15 hours ago, Flashsabre said:

I love that the Captain of this team said “Jack Eichel has to look out for Jack Eichel” and some people can’t figure out why the team has been a disaster and why he has to go.  When your best player isn’t a leader then you aren’t going to win.  When NHL vets that has won Cups came in here and said that Eichel blew them off told me all I needed to know about Jack years ago.  
 

Did I enjoy his talent, sure. Am I going to cry when he goes, absolutely not.

 

I think Adams has it right about building an actual team with an identity that is united.  Whether he can execute it is a different story.

As @dudacekhas mentioned before - with this being KA motivated in conception, it's more likely Jack's "me first" attitude in that particular presser (which he's never conveyed before (ridiculous weak sauce to claim that comment is a reflection of why this team has been a disaster)) is reflection of his feeling of the team having moved on from him, than the other way around. 

Where I disagree with dudacek is his statement that that player couldn't be captain of the Buffalo Sabres - of course he could - just not KA's Sabres, apparently. 

I think KA and the Sabres overall have to be pretty happy with the way their media spin has taken hold in the fanbase

Edited June 28, 2021 by Thorny

[Thorner]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

I did and the interesting thing is that Bruce became an NHL head coach at 52. Granato is 53. 

Just say you want Boudreau because he's previously been an NHL head coach. But stop acting like Granato isn't qualified. 

Granato could be qualified and it still a pretty big stretch to draw a comparison to the Islanders and the Tavares situation, though, which is how this started. The chances of him being Trotz are exceptionally low. The chances of us faring like the Islanders did when trading their C is very low. Last I checked they could use him still, too. 

He could end up a really good coach but that doesn't mean that just like the Islanders we need not worry about losing our far and away best player. 

[DarthEbriate]

If it's Granato, great. Let's play some run-and-gun high-event hockey. But! Then we'd also need to be able to lock it down and go full non-event and counterattack once the playoffs start. (Yes, I assume playoffs at some point when hiring a coach.) Likewise, if we hired a Tortorella full-defense style coach, then I also want him to be able to get a team to go full-tilt offense when it's required during a comeback. But no matter the coach, if the team plays like it did for Kreuger it is doomed (and apparently how Kreuger wanted them to play), and if we have no goaltending beyond 20 games from Ullmark, then the coach won't last very long regardless.

[Stoner]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

@sabremike how about this, why is Don Granato not qualified to be an NHL head coach? Why would he potentially fail at that job?

Why would you potentially fail as GM of the Buffalo Sabres?

[Mustache of God]

18 hours ago, JohnC said:

He probably doesn't get paid for his regular weekly segment. What he is doing by going on the show is increasing his exposure in order to  build up his twitter and other platform following. It's what you have to do in this new world of communication and continue to thrive, if not survive, in this connected world. It's got to be exhausting. 

Dreger is 100% paid for his radio appearances. He doesn't show up at the same time every week out of the kindness of his heart. He shows up because they've contracted him for his time for the segment. 

 

[LTS]

10 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Oh I know. Why I was advocating for Dudley and Gallant and so on. It's possible our guy is a good hire but it's definitely no sure thing.

Gallant was once left looking for a cab by the Florida Panthers when they fired him and he didn't get it done in Vegas.

Is there any indication Dudley even wants to coach?  He's made his career as being and adviser, not as a coach.

See below for one more point.

1 hour ago, sabremike said:

OK here goes:

I called him an entry level NHL coaching hire. I pointed out that there are other teams and situations where hiring Granato would be reasonable. In my opinion the Sabres are NOT that team or situation. This organization is the biggest failure in modern hockey history and need someone with a track record that says "I can get the job done". 

The only coach I can think of in recent history who had the track record of getting the job done and then left his current team to move to a new team (on his terms) and continued to get the job done is Barry Trotz.

Mike Babcock never got the job done in Toronto.

Peter Laviolette still isn't getting the job done.

Boudreau never got it done.

Perhaps there are some others, but the odds are greater that a coach will fail than he will succeed.  At one point in 2014 538 had some research that showed NHL coaches survived on average 2.4 years with a team.  That indicates to me that more often than not, a team does not get the coaching hire right.

[Thorner]

8 minutes ago, LTS said:

Gallant was once left looking for a cab by the Florida Panthers when they fired him and he didn't get it done in Vegas.

Is there any indication Dudley even wants to coach?  He's made his career as being and adviser, not as a coach.

See below for one more point.

The only coach I can think of in recent history who had the track record of getting the job done and then left his current team to move to a new team (on his terms) and continued to get the job done is Barry Trotz.

Mike Babcock never got the job done in Toronto.

Peter Laviolette still isn't getting the job done.

Boudreau never got it done.

Perhaps there are some others, but the odds are greater that a coach will fail than he will succeed.  At one point in 2014 538 had some research that showed NHL coaches survived on average 2.4 years with a team.  That indicates to me that more often than not, a team does not get the coaching hire right.

Tortorella had success moving to another team. Paul Maurice, to a lesser extent. Just off the top of my head

Tortorella made the playoffs 4/5 years with the Rags then 4/5 with Columbus

[Taro T]

12 minutes ago, LTS said:

Gallant was once left looking for a cab by the Florida Panthers when they fired him and he didn't get it done in Vegas.

Is there any indication Dudley even wants to coach?  He's made his career as being and adviser, not as a coach.

See below for one more point.

The only coach I can think of in recent history who had the track record of getting the job done and then left his current team to move to a new team (on his terms) and continued to get the job done is Barry Trotz.

Mike Babcock never got the job done in Toronto.

Peter Laviolette still isn't getting the job done.

Boudreau never got it done.

Perhaps there are some others, but the odds are greater that a coach will fail than he will succeed.  At one point in 2014 538 had some research that showed NHL coaches survived on average 2.4 years with a team.  That indicates to me that more often than not, a team does not get the coaching hire right.

To say Gallant 'didn't get the job done in Vegas' is setting yourself up to say only 1 coach (out of soon to be 32) gets the job done any given year.  While the GOAL of all coaches is the win the Stanley Cup, the JOB is to get the optimal performance out of the team he has.  Really hard to agree that a coach that took an expansion club to the Finals didn't get the job done.

Gallant has gotten maximal results consistently.

Trotz 'didn't get the job done' either this year, or last, or any other year except 1.  But will take him in a heartbeat over whomever Adams does choose at this point.  

(And Perreault wanted Dudley as GM or Senior Advisor/ PoHO, aka the Lamiorello role, but not to be the coach.)

Edited June 28, 2021 by Taro T

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, sabremike said:

OK here goes:

I called him an entry level NHL coaching hire. I pointed out that there are other teams and situations where hiring Granato would be reasonable. In my opinion the Sabres are NOT that team or situation. This organization is the biggest failure in modern hockey history and need someone with a track record that says "I can get the job done". 

I think Granato is a reasonable hire because of how young the team is. Thank you for laying out your thoughts. 

[Doohicksie]

3 hours ago, sabremike said:

This organization is the biggest failure in modern hockey history and need someone with a track record that says "I can get the job done". 

The Sabres have had coaches that could say they could "get the job done".  Nolan:  won Jack Adams Award, took Sabres to finals previously; Bylsma:  recent Stanley Cup winner; Housley was considered the hottest asst coach available to be promoted when the Sabres hired him.

Rolston and Nolan were nothing more than tank commanders.  Nolan at least had past Coach of the Year cred but I don't think anyone had high expectations for him.

Krueger as a clearly bad hire.

Bylsma and Housley were both legitimate, potentially high-end HC candidates.  And they failed.

I think outside coaches should be considered, but I don't have a problem with Granato.  Given a full training camp and an offseason of player acquisition in accord with GMKA the Sabres should look at least as good as they did at the end of last season.  With some goaltending help and a couple high-end prospects ready to come into their own (or possibly retaining one or both of Jack and Sam), I see no reason why Granato can't pull this team out of the abyss.

[mjd1001]

I want Granato to be named coach.

With that said, a lot of his 'success' at the end of the year....is it really success?

-He got better results than Krueger, that is for sure, and he did it with a depleted and young roster.

-But Reinhart was on a streak where he got something like 13 goals in 13 games at one point. Had he NOT been that hot, just how good would this team have looked?

-Also, its not like they had a winning record with him.  Not even after the winless streak was over till the end of the year did they have a winning record.

Again, I want Granato to be named head coach.  But I also know that if he is....this team is likely to still struggle for wins under him (as they would under anyone) for at least the first quarter or third of next season. Without Reinhart or a healthy Jack, that is for sure in my mind.

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

You don't win games without points. 

Just like you don't win without goaltending. 

But not necessarily many points. 1-0 is fine by me if it's our 1. 

If you're suggesting we would have won with this team and good goaltending we disagree. It's not enough. Our D would have exposed many goalies. 

If you're suggesting it's a team sport and you need solid play everywhere I agree. 

[LGR4GM]

2 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

But not necessarily many points. 1-0 is fine by me if it's our 1. 

If you're suggesting we would have won with this team and good goaltending we disagree. It's not enough. Our D would have exposed many goalies. 

If you're suggesting it's a team sport and you need solid play everywhere I agree. 

And if you're suggesting we can somehow lose 130 points of offense totally roughly 50ish goals and still win games, we can't. 

[LTS]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

Tortorella had success moving to another team. Paul Maurice, to a lesser extent. Just off the top of my head

Tortorella made the playoffs 4/5 years with the Rags then 4/5 with Columbus

Not sure I agree and here's why:

The Rangers season point totals before and when Torts joined:

• 05-06: 100 pts
• 06-07: 94 pts
• 07-08: 97 pts
• 08-09: 95 pts (Torts coached 21 games that season)
• 09-10: 87 pts
• 10-11: 93 pts
• 11-12: 109 pts (this was the most successful year - 3 seasons after he took over)
• 12-13: 56 pts (Torts was fired after this season)
• 13-14: 96 pts (The team reverted back to its routine point totals)

Similar results with Columbus.

• 13-14: 93 pts
• 14-15: 87 pts
• 15-16: 76 pts (Torts coached 75 games)
• 16-17: 108 pts (sounds impressive, but was only 3rd in the Metro that year)
• 17-18: 97 pts
• 18-19: 98 pts
• 19-20: 81 pts

With Columbus he never made it past the 2nd round.

As I see it with Torts, the good team was already there.  He managed a season boost for each of them but then faded out.  I'm not doing Paul Maurice, but he's maintained a team but not put them over the top yet.

2 hours ago, Taro T said:

To say Gallant 'didn't get the job done in Vegas' is setting yourself up to say only 1 coach (out of soon to be 32) gets the job done any given year.  While the GOAL of all coaches is the win the Stanley Cup, the JOB is to get the optimal performance out of the team he has.  Really hard to agree that a coach that took an expansion club to the Finals didn't get the job done.

Gallant has gotten maximal results consistently.

Trotz 'didn't get the job done' either this year, or last, or any other year except 1.  But will take him in a heartbeat over whomever Adams does choose at this point.  

(And Perreault wanted Dudley as GM or Senior Advisor/ PoHO, aka the Lamiorello role, but not to be the coach.)

Gallant took the Vegas job with a team that was well stocked and had absolutely nothing to lose in a city that was going crazy for its first year of hockey.

The next year didn't go as well and the year after that he was fired.

I'm just not buying into it.  He's now inheriting a Ranger team that is set to move to the top.  I am sure he'll be looked on as going something miraculous but he's getting a very good roster.

Trotz turned the Islanders completely around in 1 season with pretty much the same lineup and has kept them there.

Fine on Dudley, I'd take him too, but the Sabres have already told him once they were not interested right?

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, LTS said:

Gallant was once left looking for a cab by the Florida Panthers when they fired him and he didn't get it done in Vegas.

Is there any indication Dudley even wants to coach?  He's made his career as being and adviser, not as a coach.

But Gallant has gotten it done. Vegas, despite their expansion draft trades etc. was still not supposed to be anything right away. remember all the consternation and complaints around here when Vegas had more points and was winning more than us early in the season? We were worse than an expansion team and it wasn't sitting well. Gallant seems to rub owners the wrong way, but he does get it done, and you watch, he will get it done in New York too. 

For Dudley, I was comparing him to the Lamorello part. A top dog of some kind. A big boss to shape the franchise in his image. he has Sabres history, which places him above other similar czar types for this franchise imo. 

The point is hire experienced hockey men rather then rookies learning on the job (and making mistakes in growing pains).