Is Lindy Ruff the new Marv Levy?

[static70]

Yes, those 3 points show they are so much better...

You only fool yourself if you honestly believe we can contain these beasts. I don't know what else to say here except that the proof will be in the pudding. Thats even if this current Buffalo team meets Pitt or Wash in the 1st round. Cause whoever they meet, will beat them with this current roster. This team just doesn't have it I'm afraid.

 

But hey, all is not lost, change the coach, and the GM for that matter and maybe things will get better.

[matter2003]

Basically your argument boils down to this. If the Sabres scored 1 more goal every 5 games(.2 goals per game), they would be tied for 8th in scoring. That is how ridiculous the argument is. So, we are talking about roughly 7 goals this year so far. Your entire argument states the Sabres suck because they haven't scored 7 more goals in the span of 38 games, since that would put them in the top 10 in goals per game. Is it possible the team could have easily scored 7 more goals in the 3rd periods if they really wanted to instead of just playing defensive hockey and dumping the puck out to center? I don't think that is too far fetched.

 

Maybe you should put in your signature:

 

"Sabres suck because they haven't scored 7 more goals in 38 games. Fire Lindy Ruff and Darcy too."

 

Now doesn't that just sound really dumb?

[matter2003]

You only fool yourself if you honestly believe we can contain these beasts. I don't know what else to say here except that the proof will be in the pudding. Thats even if this current Buffalo team meets Pitt or Wash in the 1st round. Cause whoever they meet, will beat them with this current roster. This team just doesn't have it I'm afraid.

 

But hey, all is not lost, change the coach, and the GM for that matter and maybe things will get better.

 

They looked like they contained Pittsburgh pretty well when they lost in the shootout 2-1 with Lalime playing. They also shut out the Caps 3-0 as well. Pretty contained. Yes the Caps beat us also, but lets not sit here and act like they got beat 8-0 now...

[static70]

Basically your argument boils down to this. If the Sabres scored 1 more goal every 5 games(.2 goals per game), they would be tied for 8th in scoring. That is how ridiculous the argument is. So, we are talking about roughly 7 goals this year so far. Your entire argument states the Sabres suck because they haven't scored 7 more goals in the span of 38 games, since that would put them in the top 10 in goals per game. Is it possible the team could have easily scored 7 more goals in the 3rd periods if they really wanted to instead of just playing defensive hockey and dumping the puck out to center? I don't think that is too far fetched.

 

Maybe you should put in your signature:

 

"Sabres suck because they haven't scored 7 more goals in 38 games. Fire Lindy Ruff and Darcy too."

 

Now doesn't that just sound really dumb?

First off, who is arguing? I am stating my points of view, you are stating yours.

 

Second off, 7 goals in 38 games is the difference between 3rd place and 1st place in the conference. But I know my conversational point on this current roster wasn't lost on you. You do realize that clutch performances by clutch players, the ability to play in the offensive zone or TOA (Time on Attack), Solid threat instruments (the ability to force a certain line or lines for the opposition on the ice, thereby reducing the time of the opponents scorers on the ice), sustained chemistry amongst the line 1 and 2 players and of course, a contributing defense that has atleast 1 player that jumps in and makes an offensive threat onto themselves.

These points were not lost on you, you have no further to look than Pitt or Wash or S.J. to see all of this. But then again, if you've been blinded by "loyalty" to an individual player or a system that has not proven itself in the new, post-lockout NHL, there is not much to say.

 

I remember pre 1993 systems that were run and the scoring was a tad more against Buffalo, during the Patty-Alex years the defensive side was missing, but we have a real chance here to put it all together with a couple of trades.

 

The trades required to face a Wash or Pitt are big ones to be sure, but Miller is ready, the defense is sound, now is the time to make the moves to complete the puzzle and compete with these teams.

[static70]

They looked like they contained Pittsburgh pretty well when they lost in the shootout 2-1 with Lalime playing. They also shut out the Caps 3-0 as well. Pretty contained. Yes the Caps beat us also, but lets not sit here and act like they got beat 8-0 now...

Ok, lets not sit here and act like they got beat 8-0. Lets say it like it is, as I have been.

 

No finisher to beat the Penguins in regulation, in-turn, the Penguins ate Miller alive in the Shootout.

 

No offensive capacity in the lose to the Capitals, who? Goose and a Connolly tip in? Not alot to speak on there.

Nope, 2 - 0 in Wash, and 5 - 2 in Wash. Doesn't sound like Buf has alot of chance in Wash. Remind me again who is going to have home ice advantage?

 

Like I said, you only fool yourself, look beyond the possible defeat and start raising your voice toward what will be needed to compete with these teams. In my opinion, nothing short of Staal or Kovalchuck, but any players you know of that are realistically at the level of Crosby/Malkin or Ovechkin/Semin/Green should be touted as well.

[darksabre]

I'll come back to this thread if the Sabres free fall to 9th. Until then, Lindy is the man in my book.

[BetweenThePipes00]

In my opinion, nothing short of Staal or Kovalchuck, but any players you know of that are realistically at the level of Crosby/Malkin or Ovechkin/Semin/Green should be touted as well.

 

 

Can you give me a list of these players and explain again how firing Lindy Ruff ensures that the Sabres get one? Because there are not that many on the planet, even fewer actually available and even fewer than that availiable to a team without much to trade. You keep telling everyone to deal in reality, but to me it seems it is very UNrealistic to think that these players will end up in Buffalo just because they bring in a new coach. In fact, also remind me who is this new offensive genius of a coach that will have guys like Kovalchuk suddenly asking to be traded to Buffalo? And please make sure he has some Cup rings, because as you keep reminding us, that is all that matters.

 

It's real easy to say that Kovy won't play for Ruff (probably true) without explaining exactly whom he will play for and why that guy is the right coach for the other 22 guys on the team. Also easy to say they should trade for Staal without knowing what Carolina will want for the cornerstone of their team and if the Sabres even have what they want.

 

And what if offer Kovalchuk the maximum contract allowed, and he goes to, say, Dallas for the same money?

 

(By the way, if you can put together some kind of deal that Carolina would take, would the Sabres get the 100-point Eric Staal of 2006, or would they be paying $8 million a year for the guy with 248 points in his last 274 games? Is that a 3+ year slump, or is he maybe not even a point-per-game guy who had one great year? Oh wait, it's probably his coaches' faults for not letting him play in the right system. Never mind a lot of that time was with the same guy with whom he win a Cup. And is it possible that one really big season was because teams were adjusting to the new rules? You know, the same reason the anti-Ruff crew dismisses those teams that scored a lot?)

 

Sorry, but your "plan" to win really does seem to amount to "Ruff hasn't won, anyone would be better, let's score a lot and see what happens." In fact, the whole thing seems to revolve around the idea that because Kovalchuk doesn't like him, it must mean that NO offensively gifted players will EVER play for him, so a new coach means that Kovalchuk will come to Buffalo." Sure, he MIGHT come and it MIGHT be better. We also might end up watching the Atlanta Thrashers North for the next 10 years, because the guy has never led a team anywhere.

 

I am admittedly a Ruff fan, but I was open to a change after last season. Nothing is forever and just because it's not his fault the front office screwed up doesn't mean that he is the right coach for every team. But I am not NEARLY sold on your idea that the way to win a Cup is to get one of these offensive superstars and just let them play a more wide-open style.

 

Pittsburgh scored fewer goals last season than it did in 2006-07 ... they won the Cup because their offensive talent matured and learned to play both ends. Maybe Ruff isn't the right coach, but whomever you bring in better get all this talent you plan on assembling to play some defense, or your arena is still going to be without Cup banners.

[DR HOLLIDAY]

Can you give me a list of these players and explain again how firing Lindy Ruff ensures that the Sabres get one? Because there are not that many on the planet, even fewer actually available and even fewer than that availiable to a team without much to trade. You keep telling everyone to deal in reality, but to me it seems it is very UNrealistic to think that these players will end up in Buffalo just because they bring in a new coach. In fact, also remind me who is this new offensive genius of a coach that will have guys like Kovalchuk suddenly asking to be traded to Buffalo? And please make sure he has some Cup rings, because as you keep reminding us, that is all that matters.

 

It's real easy to say that Kovy won't play for Ruff (probably true) without explaining exactly whom he will play for and why that guy is the right coach for the other 22 guys on the team. Also easy to say they should trade for Staal without knowing what Carolina will want for the cornerstone of their team and if the Sabres even have what they want.

 

And what if offer Kovalchuk the maximum contract allowed, and he goes to, say, Dallas for the same money?

 

(By the way, if you can put together some kind of deal that Carolina would take, would the Sabres get the 100-point Eric Staal of 2006, or would they be paying $8 million a year for the guy with 248 points in his last 274 games? Is that a 3+ year slump, or is he maybe not even a point-per-game guy who had one great year? Oh wait, it's probably his coaches' faults for not letting him play in the right system. Never mind a lot of that time was with the same guy with whom he win a Cup. And is it possible that one really big season was because teams were adjusting to the new rules? You know, the same reason the anti-Ruff crew dismisses those teams that scored a lot?)

 

Sorry, but your "plan" to win really does seem to amount to "Ruff hasn't won, anyone would be better, let's score a lot and see what happens." In fact, the whole thing seems to revolve around the idea that because Kovalchuk doesn't like him, it must mean that NO offensively gifted players will EVER play for him, so a new coach means that Kovalchuk will come to Buffalo." Sure, he MIGHT come and it MIGHT be better. We also might end up watching the Atlanta Thrashers North for the next 10 years, because the guy has never led a team anywhere.

 

I am admittedly a Ruff fan, but I was open to a change after last season. Nothing is forever and just because it's not his fault the front office screwed up doesn't mean that he is the right coach for every team. But I am not NEARLY sold on your idea that the way to win a Cup is to get one of these offensive superstars and just let them play a more wide-open style.

 

Pittsburgh scored fewer goals last season than it did in 2006-07 ... they won the Cup because their offensive talent matured and learned to play both ends. Maybe Ruff isn't the right coach, but whomever you bring in better get all this talent you plan on assembling to play some defense, or your arena is still going to be without Cup banners.

 

 

Good post man....... :beer:

[static70]

Can you give me a list of these players and explain again how firing Lindy Ruff ensures that the Sabres get one? Because there are not that many on the planet, even fewer actually available and even fewer than that availiable to a team without much to trade. You keep telling everyone to deal in reality, but to me it seems it is very UNrealistic to think that these players will end up in Buffalo just because they bring in a new coach. In fact, also remind me who is this new offensive genius of a coach that will have guys like Kovalchuk suddenly asking to be traded to Buffalo? And please make sure he has some Cup rings, because as you keep reminding us, that is all that matters.

 

It's real easy to say that Kovy won't play for Ruff (probably true) without explaining exactly whom he will play for and why that guy is the right coach for the other 22 guys on the team. Also easy to say they should trade for Staal without knowing what Carolina will want for the cornerstone of their team and if the Sabres even have what they want.

 

And what if offer Kovalchuk the maximum contract allowed, and he goes to, say, Dallas for the same money?

 

(By the way, if you can put together some kind of deal that Carolina would take, would the Sabres get the 100-point Eric Staal of 2006, or would they be paying $8 million a year for the guy with 248 points in his last 274 games? Is that a 3+ year slump, or is he maybe not even a point-per-game guy who had one great year? Oh wait, it's probably his coaches' faults for not letting him play in the right system. Never mind a lot of that time was with the same guy with whom he win a Cup. And is it possible that one really big season was because teams were adjusting to the new rules? You know, the same reason the anti-Ruff crew dismisses those teams that scored a lot?)

 

Sorry, but your "plan" to win really does seem to amount to "Ruff hasn't won, anyone would be better, let's score a lot and see what happens." In fact, the whole thing seems to revolve around the idea that because Kovalchuk doesn't like him, it must mean that NO offensively gifted players will EVER play for him, so a new coach means that Kovalchuk will come to Buffalo." Sure, he MIGHT come and it MIGHT be better. We also might end up watching the Atlanta Thrashers North for the next 10 years, because the guy has never led a team anywhere.

 

I am admittedly a Ruff fan, but I was open to a change after last season. Nothing is forever and just because it's not his fault the front office screwed up doesn't mean that he is the right coach for every team. But I am not NEARLY sold on your idea that the way to win a Cup is to get one of these offensive superstars and just let them play a more wide-open style.

 

Pittsburgh scored fewer goals last season than it did in 2006-07 ... they won the Cup because their offensive talent matured and learned to play both ends. Maybe Ruff isn't the right coach, but whomever you bring in better get all this talent you plan on assembling to play some defense, or your arena is still going to be without Cup banners.

I respect those that tout the "defensive first" strategy.

 

You wanted my short list, you already have it. As I stated I look at the reality of who can be had.

 

Lindy Ruff in Buffalo = no Eastern European talent signs with Buffalo due to his reputation to stifle a style of play. How do we know this is true? Because a few of these players have spoken up about it, well now, thats not a good sign.

 

Who are these players from Eastern Europe you ask? Only the current best talent in the league, including Kovalchuck.

From my point of view, as a fan, it is down right disconcerting that this is this case.

 

I think the most important thing you tend to loose sight of when you attempt to corner my posting as half-hearted, or in a non-academic setting for hockey is the facts before us, low output in the goals department half way into the season isn't a funk or a bad run. Quite frankly, this team is horrible offensively, Miller appears primed, the defense appears solid enough. The reality of the situation is this Buffalo squad will not take down Wash. or Pitt in the playoffs. They will be fortunate to maintain their divisional 1st place standing. If you make the changes needed in personell sure you run a risk of getting a product that may be a dud. But I highly doubt Kovalchuck is a dud. And why do I tout him? Because he is on his way to free agency, he can be had and longterm with a high paid, longterm contract. He instantly elevates the play of those around him by his own skills. He is a clutch player in clutch situations.

 

Sounds to me like someone the Buffalo Sabres should seriously be looking at to help cure the scoring woes. Buy hey, ya know, alot of people tend to have player loyalty. I have none of that nonsense left in me. My loyalty is to the team itself, not any individual player.

 

As for what coach needs to be here, well, the hard, cold facts of the situation is a reality that apperantly hasn't hit you as of yet. The reason they play the game is to win "Lord Stanley's Cup". I don't know what you think this game is about, but to every single one of the fans I know personally, they are all in agreeance on this.

 

Both Lindy Ruff and Darcy Reiger have had 11 going on 12 seasons to complete this task, in that time other teams have won it by building their rosters not only from within the organization, but have also brought in talent through trades and Free Agency to win a Championship.

 

In other words, standing pat on this current roster is not an option, and that is what Lindy and Darcy are touting. They will not win a championship in the forseeable future with this philosophy, its time for them to go, its been time for them to go. Hell, bring back Ted Nolan if you want, but these 2 guys have had their chance I say.

[cdexchange]

Well, ok, if you believe this Sabres team has a snowballs chance in hell of runnin and gunnin with Pitt and Wash, I want what your smokin.

 

 

Of course I never said that, another straw man argument. They don't have much of a chance of "runnin and gunnin" with those teams, as those teams clearly have much better offensive talent. Duh. The Sabres do however, have a chance of playing solid D, getting lights-out goal tending, and getting just enough scoring to win a tight series against either of those teams. The reason I know they can do all these things is that they've been doing it all year so far.

 

That doesn't mean I would bet money on it, but to say that there is ZERO chance of that happening is just simply wrong.

[deluca67]

Haha, I love how you just threw those two in there now and allege that I called them "minor" when of course I never once mentioned either of them. Holy straw man Batman! :lol:

 

Weren't you the guy trying to run Miller out of town a few years ago because his eyes were asymetrical or something? Perhaps you jumped the gun there too. Just let the season play out is all I'm sayin'. It's not like this is Miller's last year and we only have a one-year window with him. If we miss the playoffs or get spanked in the first round then by all means. But to fire the coach now while we're in first place is just dumb, IMHO.

For the bold part, No.

 

I mentioned those stats along with a list of others that this team is in the bottom third of the league in. Being bottom third in shots against and other categories that Miller does not effect is the point. The Sabres are not better defensively. They are not grittier which is pointed out by their hit totals, dead last. They're 20th in blocked shots and 21st in takeaways.

 

I ask the question again and maybe you will address it. Where is the Lindy Ruff influence? Where is this team better with Lindy behind the bench? Is it not safe to say that any coach can come and write Miller's name on the lineup sheet?

[deluca67]

Of course I never said that, another straw man argument. They don't have much of a chance of "runnin and gunnin" with those teams, as those teams clearly have much better offensive talent. Duh. The Sabres do however, have a chance of playing solid D, getting lights-out goal tending, and getting just enough scoring to win a tight series against either of those teams. The reason I know they can do all these things is that they've been doing it all year so far.

 

That doesn't mean I would bet money on it, but to say that there is ZERO chance of that happening is just simply wrong.

The myth continues to manifest it's self. The only truth in your post is "getting lights-out goal tending." The rest is wishful thinking.

[nfreeman]

They looked like they contained Pittsburgh pretty well when they lost in the shootout 2-1 with Lalime playing. They also shut out the Caps 3-0 as well. Pretty contained. Yes the Caps beat us also, but lets not sit here and act like they got beat 8-0 now...

I'll come back to this thread if the Sabres free fall to 9th. Until then, Lindy is the man in my book.

Can you give me a list of these players and explain again how firing Lindy Ruff ensures that the Sabres get one? Because there are not that many on the planet, even fewer actually available and even fewer than that availiable to a team without much to trade. You keep telling everyone to deal in reality, but to me it seems it is very UNrealistic to think that these players will end up in Buffalo just because they bring in a new coach. In fact, also remind me who is this new offensive genius of a coach that will have guys like Kovalchuk suddenly asking to be traded to Buffalo? And please make sure he has some Cup rings, because as you keep reminding us, that is all that matters.

 

...

 

Pittsburgh scored fewer goals last season than it did in 2006-07 ... they won the Cup because their offensive talent matured and learned to play both ends. Maybe Ruff isn't the right coach, but whomever you bring in better get all this talent you plan on assembling to play some defense, or your arena is still going to be without Cup banners.

Thank heavens for the thin blue line that protects us all from the lunatics out there.

 

A few points:

 

1. The Sabres probably aren't good enough to beat Pittsburgh in the playoffs.

 

2. The Sabres are good enough to beat Washington in the playoffs (although it would be an upset). The Rangers would've beaten them in the first round last year if Tortorella hadn't outsmarted himself and Lundy hadn't fallen off the table. Guys like Backstrom, Semin and Green haven't proven themselves in the playoffs yet.

 

3. Carolina isn't going to trade Staal.

 

4. The Sabres aren't going to trade for Kovalchuk without a signed extension in place.

 

5. The theory that the only reason the Sabres are winning this year is that Miller is standing on his head in every game, and that Lindy therefore has nothing to do with the Sabres' strong points this year, is nonsense. Frankly, it's a terrible theory, and materially worse than "the Sabres haven't won the Cup, so Lindy should go" (which is also a bad theory, but at least has a modicum of rational thought attached to it).

 

Leaving aside the fact that Lalime is 2-0-1 in his last 3, there is the simple fact that first-place teams on pace to score 108 points don't win games with hot goalies and nothing else. The odd game here or there? Yes, a goalie can take over and win it. But not half a season.

 

6. Defense wins championships. Pittsburgh, who is as loaded as anyone, won the Cup last year with Fleury playing extremely well and by scoring a bunch of down-and-dirty goals -- not with Malkin and Crosby "running and gunning."

 

7. I'll ask this again to anyone in the "fire Lindy" crowd: is there a top 10 NHL team with a 1-2 center combination as weak as TC-Roy? Is there a top 10 NHL team with a top-4 group of forwards as weak as TC-Roy-Pommer-Vanek?

 

8. Finally, DeLuca, I've read a lot of your posts on this board over the years. Your equating of Jauron and Levy is probably the all-time worst one. There's much that can be said about this, but suffice it to say that Levy's teams never, EVER, lost games like the 1st Patriots game this year or the Dallas night game last year.

[SwampD]

 

7. I'll ask this again to anyone in the "fire Lindy" crowd: is there a top 10 NHL team with a 1-2 center combination as weak as TC-Roy? Is there a top 10 NHL team with a top-4 group of forwards as weak as TC-Roy-Pommer-Vanek?

 

 

Why is that? These players were hand picked by DR and LR. They came up in their system designed to get the absolute most out of their players. Whatever wall they've all hit, I believe, was built by Lindy.

[nfreeman]

Why is that? These players were hand picked by DR and LR. They came up in their system designed to get the absolute most out of their players. Whatever wall they've all hit, I believe, was built by Lindy.

Well, there are those who believe that Lindy was not on board with the TC extension, and that the Sabres were forced, through front office incompetence, to give Vanek $50MM at far too early an age (instead of, say, a 3- or 4-year deal at a much lower number that would be winding down this year or next year and presumably inspiring him to play harder so he could strike gold in his next contract).

 

As for Pommer and Roy, I think Lindy probably likes them well enough, but that doesn't mean he thought they were capable of being his horses or that he wanted to commit $5.3MM per year and a top-line slot to Pommer.

 

When you look at Pommer and Roy, do you see elite NHL talents that could be blossoming under a different coach? I'm not being sarcastic. I look at them and see undersized guys with good hockey sense and skills who are good complementary players, but who don't have the ability to be real top-line studs.

[static70]

As far as what Lindy wants, that statement in itself is a paradox. You cannot say Lindy is not responsible for the roster on one hand, then turn around and say he is the "Coach" of an NHL Franchise. This makes absolutely no sense what so ever.

 

Lindy Ruff and his staff give a situation report to the GM (Darcy Reiger) on the status of the team. The coaching staff reports to Lindy, in turn, Lindy reports to Darcy. Then, Darcy goes out and acquires (as close as he can in any case) the needs that the coaching staff have pointed to.

 

I have alot of respect for Lindy Ruff, liked him as a player and think he is a good coach. I am in no way implying otherwise. I am merely pointing out the obvious pitfalls and otherwise failures that have occured under his watch on the bench.

 

1. Although Kovalchuck will want an extension, it would by pure folly not to go after this guy. I never stated the defense or goaltending were an issue. On the contrary, if you look at my posts, I repeatedly state they are primed to go now. Offensive ability is where the team lacks, holding the top 6 forwards accountable has not achieved the expected results.

Kovy is an impact player, and as such would be well worth the 9 to 10 million he is going to ask for. The details of the signing are up to Darcy. If (a big if) the trade was made, you can say goodbye to Vanek and another top 6 forward as well as a defenseman (Lydman, Paetsch UFA's this is problematic for them as a choice, but not unheard of). Which d-man, well, it could be Sekera or a prospect. Myers, Rivet and Montador aren't going anywhere, they probably resign Tallinder. Butler, Sekera, Gragnani and Weber would be the likely tools here, but ya never know.

 

2. Carolina and the Staal situation.

I don't disagree with you on Staal. He was just another potential candidate that could be brought in. As for a team never trading a player, I don't buy that for one bit. Every commodity has a price. Same thing with Sharp from Chicago, although he is less of an impact player.

 

3. I cannot disagree with you more on what wins championships. I never thought for one second it was the defensive play itself, the more likely (and accurate) style of play that wins championships is to shutdown the opponents big guns, this does not have to be defensive play per say. A good case in point on this would be to look at the offensive zone ice time for the season and playoffs for the Stanley Cup finalists. Last year, Detroit had it right, they spent more time in the offensive zone, but lack of execution to finish plays cost them the Cup. Thats an offensive breakdown. Pittsburg capatilized on their offensive zone attacks. They roled 4 lines that were obviously more talented than Detroits. Yes, the play gets a whole lot tighter along the boards, down low and by the paint, but the transition game was just as quick as it was in the regular season.

 

4. The Lindy Ruff situation. I can only base my opinions on the standard in the league by which other teams or past Buffalo teams have handled the coaching position.

It is not good that players will not come to Buffalo due to his hard nosed attitude towards his system. There is no Stanley Cup under his tenure, and that is a big to do when you've had a dozen years to establish a plan of action and apply it. This in no way implies he is an awful coach, it does however imply that if he can't be diplomatic with certain types of players it is naturally going to hurt the team. His system is unproven, whether its due to the current talent pool available or the system itself is something only the players know. I can only make my deductions based on the rate of success, which to date has not impressed me to say the least.

[carpandean]

As far as what Lindy wants, that statement in itself is a paradox. You cannot say Lindy is not responsible for the roster on one hand, then turn around and say he is the "Coach" of an NHL Franchise. This makes absolutely no sense what so ever.

 

Lindy Ruff and his staff give a situation report to the GM (Darcy Reiger) on the status of the team. The coaching staff reports to Lindy, in turn, Lindy reports to Darcy. Then, Darcy goes out and acquires (as close as he can in any case) the needs that the coaching staff have pointed to.

You are making a lot of assumptions about how things actually work between Lindy's reports and Darcy's moves. I'm not talking about how it should work, but instead how it actually does work on this team. Maybe Darcy sees it as his job to shape the team and Lindy's job to coach whoever he is given. Sure, he'll factor in Lindy's assessment, but he still acquires the players that he feels the team needs or, at least, his interpretation of what Lindy says they need. Does Lindy seem like a guy who would want a half dozen forwards under 5'9"? I don't know that it works this way, either, but is it any less likely than your assumption?

[static70]

Well, that is true, and if that is the case Darcy should be gone.

Wait a second, I think I have stated time and again both of these guys should be removed from their current positions. :lol:

 

Would the teams offensive woes change if Darcy were removed? A good question to be sure, I don't blame Lindy for the Drury/Briere fiasco. Whether to pay them or not wasn't my concern, letting them walk and getting nothing in return for them, I put the full blame of that on Darcy. Someone once said (it may have been you) that when Lindy has the horses the team wins. This could very well be the truth as well.

 

If that is the case, DARCY REIGER, OFF WITH YOUR HEAD :D

[PASabreFan]

You are making a lot of assumptions about how things actually work between Lindy's reports and Darcy's moves. I'm not talking about how it should work, but instead how it actually does work on this team. Maybe Darcy sees it as his job to shape the team and Lindy's job to coach whoever he is given. Sure, he'll factor in Lindy's assessment, but he still acquires the players that he feels the team needs or, at least, his interpretation of what Lindy says they need. Does Lindy seem like a guy who would want a half dozen forwards under 5'9"? I don't know that it works this way, either, but is it any less likely than your assumption?

 

Lindy's been there 12 years, went to the final, went to three other conference finals, won Coach of the Year -- and has no leverage or real power? For 12 years, he's been given crap to work with, and he's fine with it? Why doesn't he want to leave? Is he afraid that with better talent, he'll still fail to win? Or that he won't be adored by the fan base in New York or Philly -- and cut the same slack by the media?

[PASabreFan]

Not to mention that this theory suggests Lindy is below the professional scouts on the totem pole. I mean, Darcy would ask Jon Christiano, the director of pro scouting, what he thinks of a player, but not the head coach?!

[nfreeman]

Well, that is true, and if that is the case Darcy should be gone.

Wait a second, I think I have stated time and again both of these guys should be removed from their current positions. :lol:

 

Would the teams offensive woes change if Darcy were removed? A good question to be sure, I don't blame Lindy for the Drury/Briere fiasco. Whether to pay them or not wasn't my concern, letting them walk and getting nothing in return for them, I put the full blame of that on Darcy. Someone once said (it may have been you) that when Lindy has the horses the team wins. This could very well be the truth as well.

 

If that is the case, DARCY REIGER, OFF WITH YOUR HEAD :D

Why does either of them need to be gone? Almost halfway through the season, they are in 1st place in their division and on track for 108 points. Isn't it possible that Darcy has, without the benefit of a top-3 draft pick or an $8MM free agent, rebuilt the team that his bosses gutted and that Lindy has, again, developed a system that gets the most mileage out of the talent on the roster (i.e. Miller and Myers)?

[carpandean]

Lindy's been there 12 years, went to the final, went to three other conference finals, won Coach of the Year -- and has no leverage or real power? For 12 years, he's been given crap to work with, and he's fine with it? Why doesn't he want to leave? Is he afraid that with better talent, he'll still fail to win? Or that he won't be adored by the fan base in New York or Philly -- and cut the same slack by the media?

Not to mention that this theory suggests Lindy is below the professional scouts on the totem pole. I mean, Darcy would ask Jon Christiano, the director of pro scouting, what he thinks of a player, but not the head coach?!

No, I'm quite certain that Darcy does get Lindy's input. My point is that what he does with it, how he spins it, how he executes are all up to him, not Lindy. Maybe Lindy is frustrated, but he really just wants to stay head coach for his former team, in the community that he lives in and where the fans revere him. Could it be better for him elsewhere? Maybe, but maybe he likes it where he is even with a GM that he isn't totally happy with.

[nfreeman]

Lindy's been there 12 years, went to the final, went to three other conference finals, won Coach of the Year -- and has no leverage or real power? For 12 years, he's been given crap to work with, and he's fine with it? Why doesn't he want to leave? Is he afraid that with better talent, he'll still fail to win? Or that he won't be adored by the fan base in New York or Philly -- and cut the same slack by the media?

Obtuse. No one is suggesting that Lindy doesn't have input, or that he's "fine" with everything that's happened. What is being stated is that the GM, after consulting with the coach, gets the final call on personnel matters (unless of course he's undercut by the owners). This is what generally happens on the planet Earth.

 

As for why Lindy doesn't want to leave -- maybe he likes being an NHL coach and not having to move his family (I think he has 4 kids) around every few years? Maybe he likes working with Darcy and trusts him? Maybe he's aware that no situation is perfect? More specifically, maybe he's aware that in just about any situation there will be a GM who has the final call on things and so to the extent he's not happy with some of Darcy's decisions, that aspect of life as a coach won't be any different anywhere else?

[static70]

Why does either of them need to be gone? Almost halfway through the season, they are in 1st place in their division and on track for 108 points. Isn't it possible that Darcy has, without the benefit of a top-3 draft pick or an $8MM free agent, rebuilt the team that his bosses gutted and that Lindy has, again, developed a system that gets the most mileage out of the talent on the roster (i.e. Miller and Myers)?

 

Oh, I don't know nfreeman, I guess when I take a job my clients expect the best results. As I have stated before, a job has a title and that title has a definition of duties, responsibilities, etc.....etc.....

I would be remiss of myself if I didn't "assume" that some where in the contracts for Darcy and Lindy there is a defining line about building a product that wins a championship.

 

After 11 seasons, into the 12th, is more than enough time to call them on the carpet. The current season not withstanding mind you, I fully realize it won't happen now. But, I guess I'm prone to looking to the off-season already. The Sabres will be knocked out of the playoffs, probably round 1, most definitely round 2 IMHO.

Then we can discuss the options available on the GM and Coaching positions.

[nfreeman]

Oh, I don't know nfreeman, I guess when I take a job my clients expect the best results. As I have stated before, a job has a title and that title has a definition of duties, responsibilities, etc.....etc.....

I would be remiss of myself if I didn't "assume" that some where in the contracts for Darcy and Lindy there is a defining line about building a product that wins a championship.

 

After 11 seasons, into the 12th, is more than enough time to call them on the carpet. The current season not withstanding mind you, I fully realize it won't happen now. But, I guess I'm prone to looking to the off-season already. The Sabres will be knocked out of the playoffs, probably round 1, most definitely round 2 IMHO.

Then we can discuss the options available on the GM and Coaching positions.

So if, say, they get to the 2nd round of the playoffs and lose to Pittsburgh in 6 games, you think Darcy and Lindy should be fired? Only 4 teams get to the 3rd round -- should 26 teams fire their coach and GM?

 

As for the 12 years -- as I've said before, isn't it appropriate to consider the various crapstorms that Darcy and Lindy have had to deal with through no fault of their own (owners jailed, team going bankrupt, NHL taking over team, team sold, loss of Dominik, loss of Peca, loss of Drury and Briere, etc.)? I'd like to see an unbroken series of deep playoff runs too -- but NJ and Detroit haven't had to deal with any of those seismic events.