Georgia Blizzard
-
Posts
315 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Georgia Blizzard
-
-
The punishment is established. You do the crime you do the time. We're not arguing whether it should be changed. At the time of the infraction the rule was... miss the game. Thus.. you miss the game. Regardless of winning or the coach being a good coach the issue remains the same. A player was late to a meeting and was disciplined. Successful teams don't have that problem. Details matter.
Fine.. late, point is irrelevant insofar as the disciplinary action was "you miss a game". You may have deferred punishment, but I doubt any coach would do such a thing and yes, while he's not my dog it really does make a difference.
Regardless of what your opinion of the level of punishment is the player knew at the time of his infraction what the TEAM's STANDARD was and the resultant action.
Not sure where the point I bolded is coming from. It was listed as a small infraction.. and I said I agreed with that. Who said repeated violations?
Boom. It sounds like the team has had some disciplinary issues all season and Murray has grown tired of it and wanted to make it abundantly clear to the players. I would imagine that this wouldn't be needed to be clarified if it was 1 player, 1 time. So it sounds like "more to come here".
It doesn't mean, to me, that Bylsma isn't going anywhere. If Murray had to step in and clarify then I would wonder if Murray already sees issues with the coach not being respected by players. Murray may have stepped in to clarify to the players that regardless of who the coach is you still have to be a professional.
I wasn't implying you said repeated violations, I was only pointing out that if their were repeated violations by Sam, it might justify a more severe punishment -- i.e. if he is perpetually late by 5 minutes for every meeting and every practice, it would be easier to understand a more severe punishment
Otherwise, on it's own, being 5-minutes late doesn't rise to the level of the punishment that was assessed
-
Tim Murray told Mike Harrington this afternoon that he wanted the rule of being late changed to a black and white policy. He approached the coaches on Sunday and the rule was changed. The players were told on Monday that if they're late, they'd miss a full game.
Per Paul Hamilton.
###### DD isn't going anywhere
Life isn't black and white, when you try to make it that way you'll make an ass out of yourself sooner than later.
-
The option for suit in the press box is only available as an option if you choose to delay implementing the disciplinary action. I do not believe it should have been delayed and therefore the suit in the press box option was not available. Reinhart had to dress per NHL rules. How long he sat there is still up for debate. If the Sabres could have put him in the press box and then chose to put him on the bench anyway I would be firmly in the camp of fire the entire front office. However, he had to dress and had to sit on the bench. There is no scenario, that we are aware of, that allowed the Sabres to NOT put him on the bench dressed as a player. Again, why was he there so long? That's a different conversation for me... I don't know, but I want to.
Missing a meeting is something small. He didn't get busted for drugs, driving drunk, assault, sexual harassment. It's small. You do the crime, you serve the time, you move on.
I am not acting like there is more to it. He missed a meeting. That's what is being said and no one is refuting it. You miss a meeting, you miss a game. That's how it works. The players all know it and it happened and so he missed a game.
In addressing hypothesized scenarios about him being on the bench the whole game?
If he CHOSE to be there to be support his team then I think he earns major points from his teammates. Everyone knows its out there for display the entire game. If that's the case then I think it shows some serious character from him. Everyone makes mistakes, how they chose to own them is what I care about.
If Bylsma chose to put him on the bench against his wishes then that's the equivalent of dressing him if they had the option not to. It's out of line and unwarranted.
If it's another reason... then I'll respond when it's posted.
He was LATE to meeting, didn't miss it (at least as reported).
If you had to dress him and have him on bench per CBA, like I said, I'd have deferred punishment until Sunday (it's not like he's a dog your training that needs to have punishment at time of infraction) --- worst case, you dress him and sit him for a few shifts or for 1/2 a period
Again, LATE for meeting doesn't rise to level of punishment
If the infraction was worse than that, why didn't Gionta infer as much ? -- if this was a repeated offense, why didn't DD or Gio say, repeated violations ?
Like I said earlier, can anyone point to another situation like this in the league over the past 10 years ? Gio says it happens, I can't recall any
-
What method though? Benching? I think we can accept that it happens to players all the time. Ovechkin was benched for the alarm clock incident.
Who put Reinhart in the situation? It wasn't his coach. Reinhart missed the meeting and thus created the entire reality of possibilities that could have occurred from that point on.
You don't delay punishment or do it when it's convenient. It's not punishment then.
What lesson does Reinhart learn more from?
Oh, I missed a meeting but they'll suspend me when it's convenient for the team to not be impacted as much.
or
I missed a meeting and I earned the right to be suspended and because we have a player out suspended, and two injured, and then one got sick I am now forced to dress and sit on the bench. My team is significantly impacted by my lack of discipline.
I am 100% fine with Bylsma benching Reinhart. I don't know why he was on the bench the whole game and since I don't I'm not judging anything in that regard until I do.
Overall, I blame Reinhart 100% for this situation. If he doesn't miss the meeting none of the other issues would have occurred.
So, in your opinion is there a difference between dressing and sitting on bench vs. in a suit in the press box in terms of degree of punishment ?
If you think there isn't, any further discussion is pointless
If you think there is, which I do, then DD was as much in the wrong as Reinhart
I never said not to punish him, I've only said, based on what we know (a reported lateness to meeting, and Gio saying it was "something small"), said punishment is too severe.
You seem to be comfortable taking the position that there must be more to it --- why not the position based on what you know and react
-
Who do optics matter to? You? Because right now you and I know the same amount about the situation and I certainly don't feel the same way. Whose reality are we in?
Look at the quotes in those articles. Trotz called Ovechkin not playing for "personal reasons" and Ovechkin owned the alarm clock.
Finally, you are not accepting the fact that Reinhart had to dress and be on the bench. You can't not accept that. The Okposo sickness happened late enough that Reinhart had to dress. No one is debating that. Even IF you want to debate why the Sabres didn't have another player ready you can't put that on this situation.
What GM or Coach sits around and says, "Hey, I should have this player scratched most nights just in case I have a player who misses a meeting and another who gets ill right at the last minute?" Doesn't happen.
That's not my point.
My point is simple, once it was clear that Reinhart had to dress, DD should have pivoted to a different punishment, instead of a full game dressed on the bench he could have:
1- one period on bench (he could say, guys, normally Sam would get a full game, but, since he has to dress it's going to be one period, because, as we all know, that's going to very public and very shaming)
2- scratch on Sunday vs. NYI
3- some other behind the scenes punishment
DD chose to literally humiliate a 20-year, 2nd overall pick, who is suppose to be a cornerstone for this franchise.
The guy has no subtly, no deftness, no nothing
Said another way, dressing and benching is MUCH WORSE than sitting in press box and being scratched. The punishment didn't fit the crime. And, if the crime is that much worse than being late to a meeting, why is Gio out there saying is was something minor ????
-
I'm not even going to try and quote anything said up to this point.
Discipline policies are well known. No organization doesn't have them.
Reinhart had to dress. Accept that. You don't know WHY he was on the bench for the FULL game and it's dangerous to speculate. You can hypothesize a million different things but since none of it is provable at this point it doesn't support any of your points regardless of your point.
I firmly believe that Bylsma would have benched him if they were in a playoff race. Failure to do so would only weaken his position as a coach. He might gain favor with 1 player but anger others. Rules are written and rules are followed.
All of these players bust their ###### to play at this level and want to succeed, every one of them. They are a team and during a season they hold each other accountable. You will likely not hear it but I am sure more than 1 player has said something to Reinhart for his screw up. There may be some who want to make excuses for him and if they then that concerns me. There is no one to blame but Reinhart for this situation happening.
Think about what you are upset about and then distill it down to a good argument. If you are mad because you hate Bylsma as a coach then accept other coaches who you might like have done the same thing to players that mean more to their team than Reinhart.
If you are mad because he sat on the bench the whole game then accept you don't know WHY it happened so stop jumping to conclusions.
If you are mad because his punishment should have been delayed a game because it hurt the team you should ask yourself, who missed the meeting? Who is responsible for being at the meeting? Who controls Sam Reinhart? This is all one Sam Reinhart.
http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/ilya-kovalchuk-stripped-of-ska-captaincy-benched-for-two-more-games (not just in the NHL, and during the playoffs, and the captain no less)
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/gaudreau-flames-players-benched-discipline-1.3442455 (this year, and during the Father's trip with the team)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/three-benched-calgary-flames-apologize-hartley-says-hes-moved-on/article28704283/ (references a benching of Seguin in the last game of the regular season when he could set a goal record)
Point is... players screw up, they get benched and they hold themselves accountable.
You want to find a fact? Try and find out why Reinhart was on the bench the whole game. That's all I would want to know at this point.
In the end, the optics matter. They matter A LOT.
If everything you say is true, i.e. there is more to this then we know, then it's incumbent on DD to tell more of the story. His failure to do that creates the very narrative that this punishment was excessive.
In this case, like most, perception equals reality.
If DD really wanted to punish Sam to show the team, he could have just as easily handled it in private in the sanctity of the locker room with only the players. DD chose a public shaming, he chose it for a reason, and in the end, that choice is what's most troubling to me !!
-
I agree, who knows what really happened here, as there could be things behind the scenes that were building up and led to this because he was late to a meeting. And how late was he? Details are needed to give this proper perspective
Gionta, "by no means was it something huge"
Punishment should fit crime. I'd ask entire board to identify the last time they know of any player sitting dressed and on bench entire game for disciplinary reasons ?? I'd then ask, to list all the infractions other players on this team and other teams have committed that were as bad or worse than being late to a team meeting.
Again, you are dealing with a 20-year old. Sit him for a period, then let him play and prove to his teammates and coaches that he learned his lesson
I hate this coach
-
Given the Okposo and CBA situation, the punishment should have been to sit for 1st period. The public shaming of that would more than send message.
The media SUCKS, just listened to the DD interview, for all their access, why aren't they pressing DD on the punishment ?? -- why aren't they asking for specifics, what did he do ? is it clear to players that they'll sit ? is the punishment consistent with all players ? why did Eichel only get PP punishment ? was this as bad as Kane missing practice ?
Push this nitwit and expose him for what he was a second rate player and what he currently is a third rate coach
Maybe Sam doesn't want to be here.
He shouldn't want to be here.
Natural center. Natural playmaker. Forced to wing, then to off wing. Front of net on PP. They've misused him and it shows.
-
Punishment should fit the crime.
If it was truly being late to meeting, dressing and sitting ONE PERIOD would be substantial --- but entire game ??? --- it looked like a 9 year old told to sit in the corner, while the rest of the class had a pizza party --- again, punish, but, this is the most severe punishment I've seen over the past several years
DD had to know that dressing and sitting would be viewed as more severe than a scratch and Sam in press box, or is he that tone deaf ???
EDIT: So, Harrington tweeted that DD had no choice but to dress Reinhart due to Okposo illness, CBA and no backups in town. OK. I get that, BUT, and this is huge BUT. DD must still have the presence of mind to know that a dressed player sitting on bench and not playing is worse than in a suit and in press box. As such, he should have said, look, normally you'd be a scratch and in press box, but given our very unique situation you need to dress and sit on bench. Since that is MORE humiliating, you only have to sit for a period.
-
DD needs to explain why he was dressed and on bench and not in press box --- public shaming seems severe
-- or -- someone needs to leak that it was significantly more egregious than being late to meeting
Without more explanation this is crap
He could have sat him for a couple shifts
-
-
So, Samson was going to be scratched but KO got sick and you can't use "Samson is healthy but needs to be punished" as an excuse to have an emergency call up, and if KO was sick late anyway they wouldn't have had time, so Sam spent the suspension on the bench?
The only thing I don't get is what Vogl means by the punishment being increased.
Does he mean Samson did something that was going to get him punished for a shift, but then was late and so the punishment extended to the full game? Or does he mean that when Jack missed a meeting he only was benched for a power play, but now the punishment for that infraction is worse, the whole game?
Gionta said it "wasn't a big mistake" --- seems to contradict what Vogl said "increased"
-
This kid (he's only 20) has been jerked around the past 2 years by this nitwit coach
Plays him out of position, takes a natural playmaker and sticks him in front of the net, move him to wing, then to C, then to his off wing
This is total ######. He's suppose to be one of the cornerstones of this rebuild
Punish him. Yes.
Sit a few shifts or scratch him from game, but why make him sit an entire ###### game dressed and on the bench
I've never seen that before, has anyone ??
-
Late for a team meeting
So, humiliate him ??
-
I'm sorry but everyone trying to use the Reinhart benching as an excuse to fire Dan are damned fools.
If it was Kane who was benched for violating a team policy everybody would be begging for Murray to trade him.
Young Samson ###### up and suddenly it's Dan's fault .. yeah OK.
The issue isn't that he was disciplined, it was HOW he disciplined him.
He showed him up. He made him sit dressed on bench and watch, give me a break, does DD think he's dealing with 9 year olds ??
-
Why do we have to keep watching Deslauriers play hockey
Ugh
He'll be in Rochester next year
-
Sentimentality says YES.
Rational thought says NO.
Go with rational thought, he doesn't crack the lineup on skill and team needs to find newer, younger captain (ROR or Eichel)
-
Is it me or does Bogo seem to play better when he plays more minutes ?
-
F&Ck Buck(y)
I'm eternally grateful to Pegulas
They have only a few things to do:
1- Find the RIGHT person to run the on-the-field operations for each franchise; whether that's a fully empowered GM or a VP of Football/Hockey Operations, I don't care. I think GMTM still might be the right guy, I know Whaley is NOT.
2- Empower them
3-write the checks
4-Enjoy watching the games
-
I thought Manning's late hit was worse than Risto's..... Manning got two games for interference with primary contact to the head. Guentzel was the victim both plays, at some point he needs to protect himself. While it's true that Risto's hit was interference, primary contact was not to the head.... so I don't understand why he got more games than Manning.
https://www.nhl.com/video/manning-suspended-two-games/t-277440360/c-49795603
The Manning hit is 2X worse, if he got two, Risto should have gotten 1.
This would be a major deal if Sabres were in playoff race, I think fact that we aren't is part of reason it was excessive -- easy to make an example out of someone
-
decision
In end, with no playoffs it doesn't matter
-
Halak and a third for Neuvirth and Klesla is the only deal they've ever made, unless he's referring to something he did as an assistant GM. Klesla had been acquired just a day earlier by the Caps and never played a game for them. He quit hockey rather than report to Buffalo, so I guess you could certainly call Klesla a favour.
I found the quotevery interesting and agree, the Halak trade was the logical situation GMTM was referring to. Not sure if it was taking Klesla or finding a way to get the Caps Halak via St Louis, either way, there is a favor owed and acknowledgment to that end.
I think the expansion draft and the behind the scenes negotiating will be fascinating.
Do all the GM's see the unprotected lists, I know they are not made public, but, I assume all GM's will have access to those.
-
Paul Hamilton.
Too vanilla and milk toast for my taste.
I know there are many worthy candidates, but, I'll take a flame thrower over someone that rarely says anything I don't already know and when he expresses an opinion, I usually don't agree with it. For all his access, I expect more.
-
I'm not belittling religion, at least not in this thread, I have a religion thread for that. I just want the hockey coach to be hired based on his hockey resume and the football coach to be hired based on his football resume. If Terry Pegula is taking people's religious beliefs into account for the hiring process that's just plain stupid, just like it's stupid that he seems to have allowed the Bills coach's wrestling background and religious beliefs to factor into the hiring metrics. I have no real feelings on wrestling whatsoever but I still think it's dumb to factor in McDermott's past wrestling background into his decision making process or the fact that Russ Brandon stacked the deck in favor of Rex Ryan by telling him to bring a bottle of red wine to his interview just so it would make his job of marketing the team easier. The actual religious part isn't where my problem lies. It's in using irrelevant factors into his hiring metrics.
It's not dumb to factor in a person's values and how they deal with people as part of the hiring process, it would be dumb not to. Sometimes values are reflected by a person's religious beliefs, sometimes in their non-professional associations, sometimes in the way they interact with their family and friends, in any case, it's a part of every hire any intelligent manager makes, sports is no different.
Too often people confuse values with religion because for a lot of people they are one in the same.
I don't think the Pegulas are searching for a Christian, they are searching for someone who lives Christian values, it's not a religious test, it's a values test. Big difference
Reinhart Dressed and Benched; Late to Meeting
in The Aud Club
Posted
The problem with black & white rules is they work in theory, rarely in practice
DD should have made him healthy scratch for Sunday, plain and simple --- told the team, under normal circumstances, Sam would be suspended tonight, but, with KO out, he'll be scratched on Sunday --- easy application of the rule, all parties understand situation being unique and life goes on
Instead, we get a black & white application of a rule that shames Reinhart and makes this organization look second rate -- I don't get it
Disappointing, but not the end of the world