Weave Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Don't know where this fits but Paul Hamilton is reporting that Kaleta will be out 4-6 weeks for an undisclosed surgery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Don't know where this fits but Paul Hamilton is reporting that Kaleta will be out 4-6 weeks for an undisclosed surgery. Ted Nolan said it. I didn't want to start a thread but I did anyways since there wasn't a place to discuss it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 I agree with the bold, which is why I want him gone at the end of the year. This is also why I don't buy that he has "lost it"--my memory is that he hasn't necessarily had a skill bias, but a preference for hard-working vets over young players. It's certainly possible my memory on this is incorrect (after all, I was only 11 during his previous stint with the team); but at the very least I think most would agree this is his current preference, which makes him about the worst coach on the planet for this team when they actually start trying to win some games next year with a few key rookies. I said it awhile back but the rift between Nolan and Muckler started when he refused to use Satan after Muckler had acquired him, preferring instead to play Ed Ronan and the like in the playoffs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patty16 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 So the question is, is CoHo sucking because of the coaching or does he suck because he is bad. I mean I noticed him positively for the first time in weeks yesterday when he played with Larson so I honestly don't know. He's pretty bad. The game is just too fast for him. He played just over 6mins last night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 None of it makes sense to me. And it doesn't match what I recall of Nolan's forward use in the 90's. Thinking on GCoE's post, I suppose Nolan may be thinking that he is putting a more responsible player on each line to minimize goaltender exposure. I don't know. I'm not convinced that a guy like Mitchell's game is responsible enough to make up for his lack of ability to create offense, especially when offense is what this team needs more than anything else. Not sure why this didn't occur to me before reading this, but a light bulb just went off in my head. I think it's entirely possible Nolan is doing the right analysis but coming up with the wrong answer--he knows his team can't score so he's trying to win by limiting goals against through focusing on the quality of opponent chances, hence the heavy use of defensively responsible but offensively inept players like Mitchell. Not only does this explain his player selection and usage, but it also helps to explain how our possession numbers are so much worse with a pretty similar roster to last year. Your last sentence provides sound and concise reasoning as to why this is the decidedly incorrect approach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biodork Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 My apologies for making you uncomfortable. Rest assured I am just having some fun, but do not intend to take this route again going forward. No worries, NS! No harm intended and no offense taken. :) ...and ruining the players. Nolan gets you the losses without sucking the soul out of the team. You're SO Canadian.... Hehe true. We were shocked at how easily we could cross the road without fear of death by vehicular manslaughter in Victoria, BC. Ted Nolan said it. I didn't want to start a thread but I did anyways since there wasn't a place to discuss it. Aren't you the one who started a thread specifically about player injuries, etc? :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 My apologies for making you uncomfortable. Rest assured I am just having some fun, but do not intend to take this route again going forward. I know people from Halifax are nice and all but I thought you were being sarcastic and it made me laugh. But you are and where being...nice. Wow, I feel bad now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 No worries, NS! No harm intended and no offense taken. :) Hehe true. We were shocked at how easily we could cross the road without fear of death by vehicular manslaughter in Victoria, BC. Aren't you the one who started a thread specifically about player injuries, etc? :P The thread was for minor injuries. Bumps and bruises and injuries we don't have info on yet. And callups. And demotions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 I know people from Halifax are nice and all but I thought you were being sarcastic and it made me laugh. But you are and where being...nice. Wow, I feel bad now. Don't feel bad. There is a long standing tradition on this board that we poke some fun at our few female posters. What we lack in quantity of female posters we make up for in quality, IMO. Anyway, I have been known to post some things in a good nature and Bio will tend to use the blush emoticon. The problem is that, while my intentions are all in fun, it is not possible to judge how Bio really feels. Therefore, I am turning over a new leaf, as it were, in this matter. Although, our cuttie moderator (no not nFreeman, although he is a cuttie too, in a Jim Kelly kind of way) is still fair game .......... :flirt: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Don't feel bad. There is a long standing tradition on this board that we poke some fun at our few female posters. What we lack in quantity of female posters we make up for in quality, IMO. Anyway, I have been known to post some things in a good nature and Bio will tend to use the blush emoticon. The problem is that, while my intentions are all in fun, it is not possible to judge how Bio really feels. Therefore, I am turning over a new leaf, as it were, in this matter. Although, our cuttie moderator (no not nFreeman, although he is a cuttie too, in a Jim Kelly kind of way) is still fair game .......... :flirt: Cutie has one 't' you mean, hurtful ragebot! I know people from Halifax are nice and all but I thought you were being sarcastic and it made me laugh. But you are and where being...nice. Wow, I feel bad now. I find it so hilarious that you thought NS was a sarcastic stickler. He might literally be the nicest guy that uses the internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biodork Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Don't feel bad. There is a long standing tradition on this board that we poke some fun at our few female posters. What we lack in quantity of female posters we make up for in quality, IMO. Anyway, I have been known to post some things in a good nature and Bio will tend to use the blush emoticon. The problem is that, while my intentions are all in fun, it is not possible to judge how Bio really feels. Therefore, I am turning over a new leaf, as it were, in this matter. Although, our cuttie moderator (no not nFreeman, although he is a cuttie too, in a Jim Kelly kind of way) is still fair game .......... :flirt: Don't be silly, NS; I don't recall you having ever come close to posting anything offensive. It's all good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Damn, that extra *t*. Always geting in the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 He's pretty bad. The game is just too fast for him. He played just over 6mins last night. So luck got him all those goals and points the last two seasons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Damn, that extra *t*. Always geting in the way. AH HA! You're not a Real Canadian. A Real Canadian would have said "Gosh Darn" instead of "Damn." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 (edited) weave, on 16 Feb 2015 - 12:23 PM, said:weave, on 16 Feb 2015 - 12:23 PM, said: None of it makes sense to me. And it doesn't match what I recall of Nolan's forward use in the 90's. Thinking on GCoE's post, I suppose Nolan may be thinking that he is putting a more responsible player on each line to minimize goaltender exposure. I don't know. I'm not convinced that a guy like Mitchell's game is responsible enough to make up for his lack of ability to create offense, especially when offense is what this team needs more than anything else. TrueBluePhD, on 16 Feb 2015 - 12:45 PM, said:TrueBluePhD, on 16 Feb 2015 - 12:45 PM, said:Not sure why this didn't occur to me before reading this, but a light bulb just went off in my head. I think it's entirely possible Nolan is doing the right analysis but coming up with the wrong answer--he knows his team can't score so he's trying to win by limiting goals against through focusing on the quality of opponent chances, hence the heavy use of defensively responsible but offensively inept players like Mitchell. Not only does this explain his player selection and usage, but it also helps to explain how our possession numbers are so much worse with a pretty similar roster to last year. Your last sentence provides sound and concise reasoning as to why this is the decidedly incorrect approach. WHO IS HE GOING TO PUT OUT THERE TO "SOLVE THE ISSUE" (assuming the TBPhD has it right, and I don't disagree with the analysis)? What the hell, if he goes with scoring skill, which, on this team, is a highly questionable concept, then the goalie gets pummeled. So, he's taking the lower percentage option, right? Limit scoring against chances as much as possible and hope for some offensive luck. Either way, the team is going to lose the game, it's just a matter of how bad. If his mandate is to develop the locker-room, 5-2, 4-1, etc. blow-outs aren't going to help. At least if the scores are low, the games can be called "close". Edited February 16, 2015 by sizzlemeister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 WHO IS HE GOING TO PUT OUT THERE TO "SOLVE THE ISSUE" (assuming the TBPhD has it right, and I don't disagree with the analysis)? What the hell, if he goes with scoring skill, which, on this team, is a highly questionable concept, then the goalie gets pummeled. So, he's taking the lower percentage option, right? Limit scoring against chances as much as possible and hope for some offensive luck. Either way, the team is going to lose the game, it's just a matter of how bad. If his mandate is to develop the locker-room, 5-2, 4-1, etc. blow-outs aren't going to help. At least if the scores are low, the games can be called "close". It's not that I expect Nolan to win, I want to see development. Hodgson and Larsson actually have a chance of contributing to our success next year and beyond. Ellis, Flynn, and Mitchell are plugs with no future on this team. And if Blue and Weave are right about Nolan putting plugs out there to give our goaltender a better chance, that's coaching to not lose, rather than coaching to win. Although, like you said, coaching to win is nigh impossible with this roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 WHO IS HE GOING TO PUT OUT THERE TO "SOLVE THE ISSUE" (assuming the TBPhD has it right, and I don't disagree with the analysis)? What the hell, if he goes with scoring skill, which, on this team, is a highly questionable concept, then the goalie gets pummeled. So, he's taking the lower percentage option, right? Limit scoring against chances as much as possible and hope for some offensive luck. Either way, the team is going to lose the game, it's just a matter of how bad. If his mandate is to develop the locker-room, 5-2, 4-1, etc. blow-outs aren't going to help. At least if the scores are low, the games can be called "close". But the thing is, Nolan's choice of tactics isn't getting the desired effect--we *are* getting blown out. Our goal differential so far this year is -89, while all of last year it was -91; so barring a miraculous turnaround in the remaining 26 games, it's going to be quite a bit worse than last season. If developing the locker room requires games to be close, then he is neither developing the locker room nor developing some young players who may make a long-term contribution to the team, as Qwk said. So if what he's trying blatantly isn't working, why not pivot and try something else? Is he incapable of coaching any other way, or is he simply overly stubborn in his approach? On a micro level, it could certainly be the case that Nolan/Hodgson/Larsson cannot and will not mesh; after all, some coaches and players being unable to get on the same page isn't exactly unusual, and is not itself grounds for firing. I don't expect Nolan to win much, and I don't expect the team to score much...but I think the roster is at least as good as last year, but is producing results a fair bit worse. I see no alternative but to look at the coach in this case and start really pulling apart some of his decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 (edited) If we're talking about Hodgson, then we have to remember that Hodgson has a prior history of not meshing with coaches...and we're talking well over a thousand miles away from Buffalo. I don't see how that fact can be removed or ignored in any conversation about him. Nolan said something to that effect the other day "players have to allow themselves to be coached...". Edited February 16, 2015 by sizzlemeister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 If we're talking about Hodgson, then we have to remember that Hodgson has a prior history of not meshing with coaches...and we're talking well over a thousand miles away from Buffalo. I don't see how that fact can be removed or ignored in any conversation about him. Nolan said something to that effect the other day "players have to allow themselves to be coached...". He led the team in scoring last year and the year before was second only to Vanek. Meshing with coaches or not, he was at least producing. This year, he's fallen off a cliff. Why? Well, his average TOI is down 5 minutes per game and he's not getting any powerplay opportunities. Why? I'd imagine this is where we'd diverge in our analysis and you would blame Hodgson for being lazy, and I'd blame Nolan for being inept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 But the thing is, Nolan's choice of tactics isn't getting the desired effect--we *are* getting blown out. Our goal differential so far this year is -89, while all of last year it was -91; so barring a miraculous turnaround in the remaining 26 games, it's going to be quite a bit worse than last season. If developing the locker room requires games to be close, then he is neither developing the locker room nor developing some young players who may make a long-term contribution to the team, as Qwk said. So if what he's trying blatantly isn't working, why not pivot and try something else? Is he incapable of coaching any other way, or is he simply overly stubborn in his approach? On a micro level, it could certainly be the case that Nolan/Hodgson/Larsson cannot and will not mesh; after all, some coaches and players being unable to get on the same page isn't exactly unusual, and is not itself grounds for firing. I don't expect Nolan to win much, and I don't expect the team to score much...but I think the roster is at least as good as last year, but is producing results a fair bit worse. I see no alternative but to look at the coach in this case and start really pulling apart some of his decisions. Goal deferential between seasons is a questionable stat as we are Miller-less this year. No winning 1-0, or the dreaded 1-1 go into shoot outs and get pumped up stats. This years team is not as good as last years team, and the stats bear that out. This team has been put together for one purpose, if you try to dissect it and find a positive you'll be hard pressed. This train of thought has kept me sane, and I have papers from the nice Hospital in North Warren, PA telling me I'm not crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 But the thing is, Nolan's choice of tactics isn't getting the desired effect--we *are* getting blown out. Our goal differential so far this year is -89, while all of last year it was -91; so barring a miraculous turnaround in the remaining 26 games, it's going to be quite a bit worse than last season. If developing the locker room requires games to be close, then he is neither developing the locker room nor developing some young players who may make a long-term contribution to the team, as Qwk said. So if what he's trying blatantly isn't working, why not pivot and try something else? Is he incapable of coaching any other way, or is he simply overly stubborn in his approach? On a micro level, it could certainly be the case that Nolan/Hodgson/Larsson cannot and will not mesh; after all, some coaches and players being unable to get on the same page isn't exactly unusual, and is not itself grounds for firing. I don't expect Nolan to win much, and I don't expect the team to score much...but I think the roster is at least as good as last year, but is producing results a fair bit worse. I see no alternative but to look at the coach in this case and start really pulling apart some of his decisions. The roster is not nearly as good as last year. Miller/Enroth last year was much better than Enroth/Neuvirth this year Ott last year was better than Gionta this year Ehrhoff was heads and shoulders better than Benoit, Meszaros, Strachan, or whomever you consider to be his replacement so far this season. To say this year's roster is at least as good as last year is either completely wrong, foolish, or intellectually dishonest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Anything to make the anti-Nolan argument work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 The roster is not nearly as good as last year. Miller/Enroth last year was much better than Enroth/Neuvirth this year Ott last year was better than Gionta this year Ehrhoff was heads and shoulders better than Benoit, Meszaros, Strachan, or whomever you consider to be his replacement so far this season. To say this year's roster is at least as good as last year is either completely wrong, foolish, or intellectually dishonest. Miller/Enroth is much better than Enroth/Neuvirth, but I don't think that should impact the team's play or possession numbers, only goals against. I think Ott/Gionta is a wash. We've also had Stewart for a full season, and I think he's better than Ott. Ehrhoff's replacement was Gorges, who yes, Ehrhoff is much better than. But those other guys are 3rd pairing players, and our 3rd pairing was just as bad last year. *cough* McBain *cough* I'm not being intellectually dishonest, I happen to think you're discounting the improvement of some players such as Girgensons and Ristolainen while overvaluing last year's roster (John Scott played 56 games, FFS). Heck, I think Risto and Zadorov are a straight upgrade over every defenseman from last year's roster not named Myers or Ehrhoff. Anything to make the anti-Nolan argument work. As opposed to anything to make the anti-Hodgson argument work ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 (edited) Anything to make the anti-Nolan argument work. We can look at just about anyone and start a debate that any given person is a major factor for this teams play. I look at one person GMTM, he put it together to be where it is right now, he will have failed if we finish 29th. So his success is in compiling a team playing off of the combination of individual weaknesses and failing, yet looking as though he is trying to make the team better. He's brilliant, and succeeding because we are actually having this debate. Edited February 16, 2015 by Woods-Racer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Anything to make the anti-Nolan argument work. Or, y'know, we're just calling it as we see it and that's different from the way you see it? 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.