CallawaySabres Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 There is absolutely no way this team is as bad as what we are witnessing right now. Moulson, Ennis, Hodgson, Stafford, Stewart, Girgs, Myers, Gionta and Gorges are not world beaters but there is no way in HELL they are as bad as what we have seen. I honestly think that the mentality they have (and it's impossible to ignore) has beaten them down beyond repair (for this year). Everyone is on the same page in the organization and I'm sure Moulson, Gionta and Gorges were all filled in (truthfully) before signing here. I also believe that Nolan was told not to say certain things because it just conflicts with everything else going on with this team. It is a total shiteshow right now and will continue to be that way for the foreseeable future. The lack of talent combined with the horrendous hand that was dealt to both players and coaches is what it is. I can understand the lack of passion some players might have right now but what I can't understand, is how simple plays look to be so complicated. Is it just lack of concentration, the loss of will, or IS this team really that bad? Not sure, but I am starting to wonder if Nolan is going to even want to put up with this for an entire season as it seems like he MAY be the one who is not comfortable with what is going on right now.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 If Nolan's "pee wee" and "I learned" comments indicate that he's unhappy with the hand he's been dealt, does it at all lend some clarity to the Pat LaFontaine Mystery? Terry hires Pat to be president, Pat thinks he has real power to determine the direction of the franchise, and Ted thinks he's coming on board for a quick-ish turnaround. Terry's enamored of McDavid, the braintrust is set on tanking, and Pat loses the power struggle, leaving Ted in the lurch? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallawaySabres Posted October 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 If Nolan's "pee wee" and "I learned" comments indicate that he's unhappy with the hand he's been dealt, does it at all lend some clarity to the Pat LaFontaine Mystery? Terry hires Pat to be president, Pat thinks he has real power to determine the direction of the franchise, and Ted thinks he's coming on board for a quick-ish turnaround. Terry's enamored of McDavid, the braintrust is set on tanking, and Pat loses the power struggle, leaving Ted in the lurch? i could totally see it, something is not quite right between coach and GM and we all know that TM is going nowhere. Do they fix their differences and ride it out or is, dare I say it, the second coming of Ron Rolston (yes man) coming sooner than later. When does the real coach come in to lead this team....2015, 2016? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 I think TM has a plan and is playing it out right now. I can see why they want to keep Grigo down in Roch for a full year but IMO Pysyk and to a lesser extend McCabe have no business being down there. Having said that, this team is obviously not a playoff contender so lets just stay the course and let Pysyk and McCabe get big minutes on the farm to help develop their game further. If we were really in contention this year I think you would see those guys (especially Pysyk) up here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 If Nolan's "pee wee" and "I learned" comments indicate that he's unhappy with the hand he's been dealt, does it at all lend some clarity to the Pat LaFontaine Mystery? Terry hires Pat to be president, Pat thinks he has real power to determine the direction of the franchise, and Ted thinks he's coming on board for a quick-ish turnaround. Terry's enamored of McDavid, the braintrust is set on tanking, and Pat loses the power struggle, leaving Ted in the lurch? I was suspicious that the real reason for Ted's delay in signing a contract was because he was conflicted about signing on with a team designed to lose for a couple seasons. I think he's out there trying to win in spite of the hand dealt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 If Nolan's "pee wee" and "I learned" comments indicate that he's unhappy with the hand he's been dealt, does it at all lend some clarity to the Pat LaFontaine Mystery? Terry hires Pat to be president, Pat thinks he has real power to determine the direction of the franchise, and Ted thinks he's coming on board for a quick-ish turnaround. Terry's enamored of McDavid, the braintrust is set on tanking, and Pat loses the power struggle, leaving Ted in the lurch? I think I'm just going to ask the same question in every thread: what else could Murray have done on the offseason to make this team appreciably better? In fact, go check the predictions thread, most seemed to think what he did *did* make the team appreciably better. The whole "who is really for tanking, maybe there's a rift" is sort of missing get the boat with where the team was realistically at. Murray may well not explicitly want to tank, but simply realized that it was going to happen because there was no other viable path. Darcy had a choice, but with where the team was following his ouster, Murray did not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 i could totally see it, something is not quite right between coach and GM and we all know that TM is going nowhere. Do they fix their differences and ride it out or is, dare I say it, the second coming of Ron Rolston (yes man) coming sooner than later. When does the real coach come in to lead this team....2015, 2016? How it played out on the Island. Nolan wanted Vets. Garth Snow, practically a kid himself, wanted to start working in rookies. Nolan didn't like the personnel choices. Divorce. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I wonder if the Nolan NYI experience lends more credence to the idea that his hesitation to sign his contract was related to the path that was laid out for the team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 How it played out on the Island. Nolan wanted Vets. Garth Snow, practically a kid himself, wanted to start working in rookies. Nolan didn't like the personnel choices. Divorce. Don't know why this is a surprise. Despite all the more lurid rumors, Muckler and Nolan's big fight was over Nolan's desire for third and fourth line veterans over nurturing the youth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) I think I'm just going to ask the same question in every thread: what else could Murray have done on the offseason to make this team appreciably better? In fact, go check the predictions thread, most seemed to think what he did *did* make the team appreciably better. The whole "who is really for tanking, maybe there's a rift" is sort of missing get the boat with where the team was realistically at. Murray may well not explicitly want to tank, but simply realized that it was going to happen because there was no other viable path. Darcy had a choice, but with where the team was following his ouster, Murray did not. He certainly could have kept Christian Ehrhoff for one thing. And he probably could have overpaid for better defencemen than Meszaros and Benoit. That said, I agree with PA that Terry is all about the tank and that Murray looked at that, at the state of the franchise and at the promise of McEichel and constructed the roster in such a way that he could play both sides. He brought in vets in the three captains who were going to be strong support guys. Succeed or suck, weren't going to be steering the younger guys down the wrong path. Contrary to Darcy, he stacked Pysyk and McCabe and Grigorenko etc in Rochester where they could succeed and learn and hopefully dominate. But for the core of this year's team, he rolled the dice on Stewart, Stafford and Meszaros as UFAs to be. If those three performed, they became chips that could be traded for assets before the team got too close to the playoffs. If they flopped, then the kept us over the floor and close to McEichel. And he thrust Foligno and Myers and Ennis and Hodgson, as well as the two goalies, into prominent roles to see what they were made of. He needed to know if they were guys who could be part of the team moving forward. If that mix succeeded and he had a playoff team, it was probably because the young vets took a significant step forward, and, with the next wave looking so promising, Terry would be OK with things. And from Tim's perspective, the team would be on track. And if half those guys failed, he'd gut the roster of the guys he didn't want moving forward and limp into the lottery. Again Terry happy and the team on track. Nolan seems like a good coach to keep a bad team together or an emerging team overachieve. And that his why he was retained. But I don't think Murray counted on the utter failure of Gionta and Moulson on top of the failure of practically every member of his UFA and young veteran core. He never expected this. Ted is not in on the tank and it never was anyone's intention that he would be. Edited October 30, 2014 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Don't know why this is a surprise. Despite all the more lurid rumors, Muckler and Nolan's big fight was over Nolan's desire for third and fourth line veterans over nurturing the youth. Which begs the question as to why Murray retained him. Was Murray unaware? Did he think Nolan had changed? Did he simply want a sacrificial lamb for when the team would be awful (my personal guess)? Just a curious decision. He certainly could have kept Christian Ehrhoff for one thing. And he probably could have overpaid for better defencemen than Meszaros and Benoit. That said, I agree with PA that Terry is all about the tank and that Murray looked at that, at the state of the franchise and at the promise of McEichel and constructed the roster in such a way that he could play both sides. He brought in vets in the three captains who were going to be strong support guys. Succeed or suck, weren't going to be steering the younger guys down the wrong path. Contrary to Darcy, he stacked Pysyk and McCabe and Grigorenko etc in Rochester where they could succeed and learn and hopefully dominate. But for the core of this year's team, he rolled the dice on Stewart, Stafford and Meszaros as UFAs to be. If those three performed, they became chips that could be traded for assets before the team got too close to the playoffs. If they flopped, then the kept us over the floor and close to McEichel. And he thrust Foligno and Myers and Ennis and Hodgson, as well as the two goalies, into prominent roles to see what they were made of. He needed to know if they were guys who could be part of the team moving forward. If that mix succeeded and he had a playoff team, it was probably because the young vets took a significant step forward, and, with the next wave looking so promising, Terry would be OK with things. And from Tim's perspective, the team would be on track. And if half those guys failed, he'd gut the roster of the guys he didn't want moving forward and limp into the lottery. Again Terry happy and the team on track. Nolan seems like a good coach to keep a bad team together or an emerging team overachieve. And that his why he was retained. But I don't think Murray counted on the utter failure of Gionta and Moulson on top of the failure of practically every member of his UFA and young veteran core. He never expected this. Ted is not in on the tank and it never was anyone's intention that he would be. Thanks for actually answering the question. To this day I think Ehrhoff should have been retained, but even if he's here and we add say Orpik (whom I did not want, and do not want...but he's not worse than Meszaros at this point) I don't think you're really moving the needle much on overall results because of the forwards. Does Ehrhoff+Orpik=20th instead of 30th? That to me is an appreciable difference, and I just don't see a set of moves that makes that happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) Which begs the question as to why Murray retained him. Was Murray unaware? Did he think Nolan had changed? Did he simply want a sacrificial lamb for when the team would be awful (my personal guess)? Just a curious decision. I wonder if some of it was a PR Move. At the time Nolan's Contract was finally signed, PLF left the team and Miller had just been traded, losing him may have put the fan base into a revolt. Edited October 30, 2014 by BRAWNDO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Yes this team really is this bad. Like it or not there are still floaters on this roster and with TN trying to change the culture from ' country club ' to ' Tough to play against ' or 'hard working ' there will be casualties among this group. I believe Teds trying to weed them out right now. Who's willing to go through a wall for his team mates ? Who half ###### it ? Seeing that someone like Hodgson has been demoted to the 4th line sends a message to the rest that you could be next if you don't work. Personally Hodgson just doesn't fit into that kind of team. His defensive side of the game has always been questionable and maybe thats why he's been singled out. His offensive side has been there but where is it lately? Without the offence he's not of much use. Some guys can't carry others and need a surrounding cast to elevate their games. Cody falls into this catagory. There are others. Jack London once said ' life isn't about being dealt a good hand its about playing a bad hand well. ' Nolan has his work cut out for him. This is one crappy team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Don't know why this is a surprise. Despite all the more lurid rumors, Muckler and Nolan's big fight was over Nolan's desire for third and fourth line veterans over nurturing the youth. It doesn't really point to a long union when the job description here will pretty much start with nurture the youth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Wings Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I think I'm just going to ask the same question in every thread: what else could Murray have done on the offseason to make this team appreciably better? In fact, go check the predictions thread, most seemed to think what he did *did* make the team appreciably better. The whole "who is really for tanking, maybe there's a rift" is sort of missing get the boat with where the team was realistically at. Murray may well not explicitly want to tank, but simply realized that it was going to happen because there was no other viable path. Darcy had a choice, but with where the team was following his ouster, Murray did not. This. Personally, while I wasn't jumping for joy as if they'd won the cup, I was quite happy with the off-season moves. I do think we're better off seeing McCabe, Pysyk, & Grigs on the big league club sooner than later, but if Nolan wanted vets, he got them. I honestly don't understand what's wrong with the group he got...if he's truly a great coach, then he'll make something work with the hand he's been dealt. He's not the GM (which begs the question how much power does he have?), so if he's gonna complain about the groceries, then go find another place to shop for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I didn't expect a great team. I only expected to see a more competitive team. (Even without Vanek, Miller, and Erhoff) But thank heavens we are through the 10 game grace period. Whatever that means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Just passing through, but I think we have the answer to the meddling owner question ... all 4 of the "splashy" signings / trades in the early days of TP's ownership are all gone. Just sayin'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Just passing through, but I think we have the answer to the meddling owner question ... all 4 of the "splashy" signings / trades in the early days of TP's ownership are all gone. Just sayin'. Regehr, Ehrhoff, Leino, and who was #4? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Regehr, Ehrhoff, Leino, and who was #4? Boyes, but I suppose he was not that big a deal. Still had TP playing with his new toy written all over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) Just passing through, but I think we have the answer to the meddling owner question ... all 4 of the "splashy" signings / trades in the early days of TP's ownership are all gone. Just sayin'. I don't even remotely see the connection here. All of them are gone, and the real big ones were jettisoned by the new GM. If anything, the new GM being able to undo these moves points to a lack of ownership meddling. Edit: particularly with Ehrhoff, wouldn't the meddling owner want to keep his prize acquisition? Edited October 30, 2014 by TrueBluePhD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I don't even remotely see the connection here. All of them are gone, and the real big ones were jettisoned by the new GM. If anything, the new GM being able to undo these moves points to a lack of ownership meddling. Edit: particularly with Ehrhoff, wouldn't the meddling owner want to keep his prize acquisition? They dangled the carrot of McDachiel in front of him and he bit. He's bought in. He's on board. Hook line and sinker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 They dangled the carrot of McDachiel in front of him and he bit. He's bought in. He's on board. Hook line and sinker. So he's following the advice of his expert advisors? That's not meddling, not even by PA's standards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I don't even remotely see the connection here. All of them are gone, and the real big ones were jettisoned by the new GM. If anything, the new GM being able to undo these moves points to a lack of ownership meddling. Edit: particularly with Ehrhoff, wouldn't the meddling owner want to keep his prize acquisition? What bunomatic wrote, or he has learned his lesson. As long as hockey people dangled the carrot, I guess I'm fine with either scenario. So he's following the advice of his expert advisors? That's not meddling, not even by PA's standards. I don't think of Terry as the president and his hockey people as his cabinet. The buck shouldn't stop with Terry. I see Terry as more of the rubber-stamper. (I tried to work in a pocket veto reference, but couldn't. But... I got your pocket veto right here!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted November 1, 2014 Report Share Posted November 1, 2014 (edited) The Sabres just completed the worse possession month since 2007. https://twitter.com/...5380096/photo/1 Travis Yost @TravisHeHateMe · 29m29 minutes ago So just to be clear: the worst month we have ever seen previously was that of a 38.7% team. Buffalo was FIVE POINTS WORSE.0 replies0 retweets1 favorite https://twitter.com/TravisHeHateMe/status/528631137061859329 Edited November 1, 2014 by BRAWNDO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.