Doohickie Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 (edited) I see two scenarios: 1. After consulting with ownership, GMTM relieves DD of his position over the next few days. 2. DD is retained, but he is put on what is called in my workplace a "growth plan." In other words, he's put on notice with specific goals that he needs to attain in order to keep his job, and if he doesn't get there, he will be let go on a specific date in the future. I see his growth plan including: Demonstrable cultural changes/team building A change in his system that takes the strengths of the players into account Keeping the team in a playoff position If he fails to do these things, GMTM will relieve him of duties, probably by Thanksgiving or so, to give the team a reasonable shot at salvaging the season. The advantage of the first approach is that it gives the team a clean slate and a fresh perspective, almost like pressing the New Game button in a video. The downside is that changing horses doesn't guarantee the Sabres will win the race. A new coach may not do any better. In the second scenario you've got a coach with existing relationships to team management and players. He's more of a known quantity. Of course the elephant in the room is that what is known about him so far as the Sabres is concerned is marginal at best. But he's already on contract, is getting paid whether or not he gets fired, and if the proper expectations and consequences are laid out, it may be worth it to give him one more chance before giving up on him. Even in trying to build a case for keeping him, it makes me want him gone. Edited April 13, 2017 by Doohickie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 I see two scenarios: 1. After consulting with ownership, GMTM relieves DD of his position over the next few days. 2. DD is retained, but he is put on what is called in my workplace a "growth plan." In other words, he's put on notice with specific goals that he needs to attain in order to keep his job, and if he doesn't get there, he will be let go on a specific date in the future. I see his growth plan including: Demonstrable cultural changes/team building A change in his system that takes the strengths of the players into account Keeping the team in a playoff position If he fails to do these things, GMTM will relieve him of duties, probably by Thanksgiving or so, to give the team a reasonable shot at salvaging the season. The advantage of the first approach is that it gives the team a clean slate and a fresh perspective, almost like pressing the New Game button in a video. The downside is that changing horses doesn't guarantee the Sabres will win the race. A new coach may not do any better. In the second scenario you've got a coach with existing relationships to team management and players. He's more of a known quantity. Of course the elephant in the room is that what is known about him so far as the Sabres is concerned is marginal at best. But he's already on contract, is getting paid whether or not he gets fired, and if the proper expectations and consequences are laid out, it may be worth it to give him one more chance before giving up on him. Even in trying to build a case for keeping him, it makes me want him gone. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 It makes me sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 I don't buy that Murray's going to turn it around and be more involved with building a culture. What was he doing during the past two years? What was he doing the last two years? Seriously? Trying to fix one of the historically worst teams in NHL history. You think 2 years was a enough time to fix everything that was broken with that team and we're looking at his finished product that will contend for Cups? Gimme a break.... probably one of the most misguided comments I've seen here... no offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 I see two scenarios: 1. After consulting with ownership, GMTM relieves DD of his position over the next few days. 2. DD is retained, but he is put on what is called in my workplace a "growth plan." In other words, he's put on notice with specific goals that he needs to attain in order to keep his job, and if he doesn't get there, he will be let go on a specific date in the future. I see his growth plan including: Demonstrable cultural changes/team building A change in his system that takes the strengths of the players into account Keeping the team in a playoff position If he fails to do these things, GMTM will relieve him of duties, probably by Thanksgiving or so, to give the team a reasonable shot at salvaging the season. The advantage of the first approach is that it gives the team a clean slate and a fresh perspective, almost like pressing the New Game button in a video. The downside is that changing horses doesn't guarantee the Sabres will win the race. A new coach may not do any better. In the second scenario you've got a coach with existing relationships to team management and players. He's more of a known quantity. Of course the elephant in the room is that what is known about him so far as the Sabres is concerned is marginal at best. But he's already on contract, is getting paid whether or not he gets fired, and if the proper expectations and consequences are laid out, it may be worth it to give him one more chance before giving up on him. Even in trying to build a case for keeping him, it makes me want him gone. Right. If he has to work on all of that...why bother? And why would anyone feel confident that even if he fixes it, that it'll be a permanent fix? Maybe I'm too cynical, but I generally don't believe people fundamentally change who they are. Can chip around the edges, sure, but we're talking foundational changes here. I just don't see it a) happening, and b) being long lasting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 What was he doing the last two years? Seriously? Trying to fix one of the historically worst teams in NHL history. You think 2 years was a enough time to fix everything that was broken with that team and we're looking at his finished product that will contend for Cups? Gimme a break.... probably one of the most misguided comments I've seen here... no offense. Took Toronto one year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 Took Toronto one year I the even more pertinent point is they're doing it on the back of rookies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 I the even more pertinent point is they're doing it on the back of rookies. Yup. Wonder who's responsible for getting them to play well, huh? This whole garbage about the tank still affecting us is just that, garbage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radar Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 (edited) Took Toronto one year Can't say this enough, but I think up and down the roster Toronto was better to start with. We have over estimated our roster and underestimated Toronto, in my opinion. If you think Babcock is the sole difference I don't agree. I would just as soon see Bylsma out but that won't be THE answer. This team needs more than that. Edited April 13, 2017 by Radar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 (edited) Can't say this enough, but I think up and down the roster Toronto was better to start with. We have over estimated our roster and underestimated Toronto, in my opinion. I think there's some truth here, but not to the tune of 17 points in the standings. We (Sabres fans) have long underrating Kadri and Gardiner, in particular. But when Connor freaking Brown gets 20 goals, and Marincin, Carrick, and Hunwick masquerade as passable defensemen, there's more going on than talent base. Edited April 13, 2017 by TrueBlueGED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 Can't say this enough, but I think up and down the roster Toronto was better to start with. We have over estimated our roster and underestimated Toronto, in my opinion. If you think Babcock is the sole difference I don't agree. I would just as soon see Bylsma out but that won't be THE answer. This team needs more than that. I think there's some truth here, but not to the tune of 17 points in the standings. We (Sabres fans) have long underrated Kadri and Gardiner, in particular. But when Connor freaking Brown gets 20 goals, and Marincin, Carrick, and Hunwick masquerade as passable defensemen, there's more going on than talent base. Agreed. Plus, it's players who've had success elsewhere then come here and are terrible that has me concerned as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 (edited) Took Toronto one yearIt didn't take Tor one year. It took decades. They haven't won crap since 1967. I was 1 when they won their last Cup. Since that time they have one division championship and they haven't even been to a Cup final. They have truly stunk since 2008. They draft Schenn 8th in 2008, Kadri 7th in 2009, Reilly 5th in 2012, Nylander 8th in 2014, Marner 4th in 2015 and Matthews 1st in 2016. That's 6 top 10 picks in the last 9 seasons and they turned Schenn into JVR. They also got their best D, Gardiner 17th overall in 2008 for Beauchemin in 2011. We have had had 4 top 10 picks that same period. Bottomline is Tor is not some overnight success. They hired a Cup winning GM to clean out their dead weight, allow their quality young vets, like JVR Gardiner and Kadri, to blend with their young studs in Nylander, Marner and Matthews. We have GMTM who keeps adding dead weight in a foolish attempt to try to acclerate the rebuild. Edited April 13, 2017 by GASabresFan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 Right. If he has to work on all of that...why bother? And why would anyone feel confident that even if he fixes it, that it'll be a permanent fix? Maybe I'm too cynical, but I generally don't believe people fundamentally change who they are. Can chip around the edges, sure, but we're talking foundational changes here. I just don't see it a) happening, and b) being long lasting. I agree completely. I think we saw in the presser than GMTM acknowledges the warts the team has. Now he's got to get the team to a better place: He needs to figure out the future state, and the steps required to get there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 It didn't take Tor one year. It took decades. They haven't won crap since 1967. I was 1 when they won their last Cup. Since that time they have one division championship and they haven't even been to a Cup final. They have truly stunk since 2008. They draft Schenn 8th in 2008, Kadri 7th in 2009, Reilly 5th in 2012, Nylander 8th in 2014, Marner 4th in 2015 and Matthews 1st in 2016. That's 6 top 10 picks in the last 9 seasons and they turned Schenn into JVR. They also got their best D, Gardiner 17th overall in 2008 for Beauchemin in 2011. We have had had 4 top 10 picks that same period. Bottomline is Tor is not some overnight success. They hired a Cup winning GM to clean out their dead weight, allow their quality young vets, like JVR Gardiner and Kadri, to blend with their young studs in Nylander, Marner and Matthews. We have GMTM who keeps adding dead weight in a foolish attempt to try to acclerate the rebuild. Bogosian is the only dead weight he added in his attempts to accelerate things. Neither O'Reilly nor Kane fall into that category. If we compare: O'Reilly - Kadri Kane - JVR Risto - Rielly Eichel - Matthews Nylander - Nylander Reinhart - Marner Bogo - Gardiner McCabe - Zaitsev Sure, Gardiner obliterates Bogo, and their Nylander is currently more useful in the NHL than ours, but I don't see some massive talent gap on the whole for the key pieces. Certainly not to the point where the rebuilds cannot be compared to one another. If Murray doesn't whiff on Bogo/Kulikov, we're talking marginal talent differences at best between the squads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 Took Toronto one year One year?? They've only made the playoffs once (not counting this season) over the past 12 years. They've been stockpiling prospects, etc.. far long than Buffalo has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clintwestwood Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 Goes where exactly? He's under contract this coming season and then he's an RFA. He has no leverage, he can't go anywhere until he's 26. That was the hypothetical part. My question still stands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 One year?? They've only made the playoffs once (not counting this season) over the past 12 years. They've been stockpiling prospects, etc.. far long than Buffalo has. They tanked for a year, got their guy, and are in the playoffs. Everything they stockpiled, we went out and got in trade and FA. They haven't been rebuilding for 12 years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 They tanked for a year, got their guy, and are in the playoffs. Everything they stockpiled, we went out and got in trade and FA. They haven't been rebuilding for 12 years This just isn't true man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 This just isn't true man. I think the point he's trying to make is that the notion that the Leafs talent base was do much more mature than ours really isn't true, because we went out and added O'Reilly, Kane, and Okposo (whom I forgot to list in my post). Yea, they technically started compiling high draft picks sooner than us, but that got balanced out by subsequent moves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 What was he doing the last two years? Seriously? Trying to fix one of the historically worst teams in NHL history. You think 2 years was a enough time to fix everything that was broken with that team and we're looking at his finished product that will contend for Cups? Gimme a break.... probably one of the most misguided comments I've seen here... no offense. I didn't mean what was he doing the past two years as far as team building. I'm fine with the roster moves. I mean what was he doing as far as watching our system/monitoring the culture of our locker room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 I didn't mean what was he doing the past two years as far as team building. I'm fine with the roster moves. I mean what was he doing as far as watching our system/monitoring the culture of our locker room. Evidently taking a very hands off approach. Which I will definitely count as a huge fail Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 He still might. He just needs Pope Terry to sign the Writ of Divorce. Annulment. The Church is quirky when it comes to divorce. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted April 14, 2017 Report Share Posted April 14, 2017 Annulment. The Church is quirky when it comes to divorce. Yes. You're correct, of course. Thank you. :doh: Evidently taking a very hands off approach. Which I will definitely count as a huge fail So which GM in the NHL takes a hands-on approach in the locker room? And what coach would put up with it? That is decidedly not the GM's job unless the coach is screwing the pooch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted April 14, 2017 Report Share Posted April 14, 2017 Yes. You're correct, of course. Thank you. :doh: So which GM in the NHL takes a hands-on approach in the locker room? And what coach would put up with it? That is decidedly not the GM's job unless the coach is screwing the pooch. Well, that's kinda the point right? Dan shouldn't have been left to his own devices because he's garbage and we all know he's garbage. But GMTM tried to treat him like any other coach and got burned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted April 14, 2017 Report Share Posted April 14, 2017 Um. Did we know he was that kind of garbage going into it? I didn't. 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.