Sabres' Locker Room Culture

[Taro T]

24 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:

Interesting. Thanks!

How much impact the "locker room culture" has on actually winning is still to be determined. I still think getting better players is far more important to winning than any of this tangential stuff.

Really hard to say.  The Bills punting Smerlas, Devlin, & Still prior to the '90 season set the stage to end the "Bickering Bills" & turned the reins fully to Kelly, Smith, Thomas, Bennett, Talley, Hull, & Reed.  Got them to 4 Superbowls.  Of course, had Smerlas still been there & they'd've made the game in the '90 season, having him rather than Wright in the middle probably gets them the W in Tampa.  (No guarantee they'd've gotten there, though.)

That's clearly best case - & a comparable climb would be to 3rd in the division & a 1st round win over Bah-stan or the Loafs.  Still too much has to go best case for that to be more than a pipe dream at present.

[pi2000]

Only one thing will fix the lockerroom issues... winning.

We didn't hear anything about a toxic lockeroom in early October.    In my experiences, once losing sets in, the lockeroom becomes a very uncomfortable place for all involved.   Everybody has their own way of dealing with losing, some are vocal, some internalize it.. others look for somebody to blame.    

 

[LGR4GM]

38 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

I think so.  Even if he continues to play top defender type minutes, but fewer minutes, there should be a benefit.  He won't be perpetually worn out.

I don't think he's perpetually worn out. I think he's perpetually comfortable and making money so he's not worried. 

[Weave]

1 hour ago, pi2000 said:

Only one thing will fix the lockerroom issues... winning.

We didn't hear anything about a toxic lockeroom in early October.    In my experiences, once losing sets in, the lockeroom becomes a very uncomfortable place for all involved.   Everybody has their own way of dealing with losing, some are vocal, some internalize it.. others look for somebody to blame.    

 

 

Sure we did.  It started the season before that.  It's why we got rid of Gio.

Not gonna lie.  I am concerned about this team turning the reigns over to the kids that basically snubbed their noses at every successful vet that was brought in.  I hope it's the right play.

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't think he's perpetually worn out. I think he's perpetually comfortable and making money so he's not worried. 

I agree with this 100%.  And I think it is why Risto will be the next big name moved.

 

[WildCard]

13 minutes ago, Weave said:

 

Sure we did.  It started the season before that.  It's why we got rid of Gio.

Bingo. Beat me to it

[Iron Crotch]

The locker room is a nice topic for talk radio and the newspapers... but I'd argue that we're not winning because our players aren't good enough. Occam's razor. I agree with pi2000. Win and all these one-off theories about the underlying problem (e.g., locker room) go away.

 

Edited July 9, 2018 by Iron Crotch

[WildCard]

1 minute ago, Iron Crotch said:

The locker room is a nice topic for talk radio and the newspapers... but I'd argue that we're not winning because our players aren't good enough. Occam's razor. I agree with pi2000. Win and all these one-off theories about the underlying problem (e.g., locker room) go away.

I don't think locker room issues go away when you're winning, I think people just don't talk about them as much. Perfect example is the A-Rod / Jeter Yankees and Shaq/Kobe Lakers. The locker room issues are 100% still there, but if you're talented enough you can overcome it. I think it takes an absolute ton of talent to do this though, especially in more of a team sport such as hockey.

Athletes are people at the end of the day, and with the extent of time and sacrifice that goes into a season, with all the travel/games/outings etc., being comfortable with who you're doing it with definitely makes going to work easier, more fun, and you're more excited to go

[Randall Flagg]

19 minutes ago, Weave said:

 

Sure we did.  It started the season before that.  It's why we got rid of Gio.

Not gonna lie.  I am concerned about this team turning the reigns over to the kids that basically snubbed their noses at every successful vet that was brought in.  I hope it's the right play.

I agree with this 100%.  And I think it is why Risto will be the next big name moved.

 

3 years later and I'm still waiting on more than conjecture that this happened to any meaningful degree, and the musings of Paul Hamilton "ROR will not return a 1st round pick because he's such cancer" don't count as that

 

[WildCard]

Just now, Randall Flagg said:

3 years later and I'm still waiting on more than conjecture that this happened to any meaningful degree, and the musings of Paul Hamilton "ROR will not return a 1st round pick because he's such cancer" don't count as that

And if was the kids, don't you think Botterill would have gotten rid of them? At least Reinhart and Risto?

[LTS]

1 hour ago, WildCard said:

I don't think locker room issues go away when you're winning, I think people just don't talk about them as much. Perfect example is the A-Rod / Jeter Yankees and Shaq/Kobe Lakers. The locker room issues are 100% still there, but if you're talented enough you can overcome it. I think it takes an absolute ton of talent to do this though, especially in more of a team sport such as hockey.

Athletes are people at the end of the day, and with the extent of time and sacrifice that goes into a season, with all the travel/games/outings etc., being comfortable with who you're doing it with definitely makes going to work easier, more fun, and you're more excited to go

The locker room issues don't go away.  The only thing winning does is reduce the chance that someone wants to speak out and potentially upset the winning ways.  When you are losing there's nothing to worry about.  Speak out, be miserable, yell at each other.  You are already losing.  

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Randall Flagg said:

3 years later and I'm still waiting on more than conjecture that this happened to any meaningful degree, and the musings of Paul Hamilton "ROR will not return a 1st round pick because he's such cancer" don't count as that

 

Has anyone heard a Paul reaction to the O’Reilly trade? How about John Shannon’s?

Whatever your disappointment level on the return, it’s a far cry from “I doubt they will be lucky enough to get a first.”

Edited July 10, 2018 by dudacek

[pi2000]

34 minutes ago, LTS said:

The locker room issues don't go away.  The only thing winning does is reduce the chance that someone wants to speak out and potentially upset the winning ways.  When you are losing there's nothing to worry about.  Speak out, be miserable, yell at each other.  You are already losing.  

You're suggesting that the Sabres locker room issues are unrelated to losing.    I would disagree.

[pi2000]

1 hour ago, WildCard said:

I don't think locker room issues go away when you're winning, I think people just don't talk about them as much. Perfect example is the A-Rod / Jeter Yankees and Shaq/Kobe Lakers. The locker room issues are 100% still there, but if you're talented enough you can overcome it. I think it takes an absolute ton of talent to do this though, especially in more of a team sport such as hockey.

Athletes are people at the end of the day, and with the extent of time and sacrifice that goes into a season, with all the travel/games/outings etc., being comfortable with who you're doing it with definitely makes going to work easier, more fun, and you're more excited to go

Depends on your definition of "issues".   If the issues are because of terrible performance after terrible performance and some guys are pointing fingers, other guys are burying their heads, etc... then that's one type of issue that goes away with winning.   You heard it in ROR's quote about losing love of the game.because the losses kept piling up.... that doesn't happen if they're winning and he's probably still here.

[R_Dudley]

7 hours ago, SDS said:

 What has frustrated me about this topic is that all of the locker room reporters were adamant how toxic the locker room was. It seems to me ferreting out the bad apples would have been easy. And maybe it was. It says a great deal that certain players have been moved quickly. Actions speak louder than words. 

Yep that's what I read into here as well. 

7 hours ago, dudacek said:

I think we have a tendency to overthink this and read all kinds of nefarious possibilities into this when the reality is simple.

Constant losing is demoralizing. It leads to finger pointing, loss of self-confidence and a desire to be elsewhere. And it becomes a self-perpetuating Catch 22. It has always been this way, therefore, it will always be this way. The room was sour because we suck.

Sheary, Hutton, Berglund, Sobotka, Pominville, Scandella, Wilson, hell even Nolan - Botterill has consciously been adding players who are used to winning. It’s not nearly as important as talent, but hopefully it can help counteract the “here we go again” mindset that clearly affected guys like O’Reilly and Lehner and continues to affect guys like Larsson And Girgensons. Couple that with competitive and talented kids like Mittlestadt and Dahlin and what they are trying to create in Rochester and hopefully we’ve reached some sort of critical mass where the weight of the tank won’t really matter.

Yeah i am in this camp as well.

When you have a team of Generation Y's(Millennials) and Generation Z's and you don't have something in common like winning you better have something else you can hang your hats on with your team mates or that you can rally around. You don't want partying (see Kane trade) as core team bonding exercise.

Also there certainly was/is a leadership issue. Your captain can't be your 3rd or 4th line players(loved you Gio as a player but your prime minute days and contributions were done) and Eeyore O'Reilly wasn't an act many would follow. So Jack wasn't ready, Risto still isn't, Scandella was too new and we had no one else playing top minutes that we could tag.  

Last coaching did appear to be in over their heads last year at least for a good part of the season.

Back to SDS's post above I have to believe the changes they made reflect the actions they felt needed to right the ship.  

[PerreaultForever]

6 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

3 years later and I'm still waiting on more than conjecture that this happened to any meaningful degree, and the musings of Paul Hamilton "ROR will not return a 1st round pick because he's such cancer" don't count as that

 

I think JBot pretty much confirmed the issue around the time of his door slamming. He talked about the culture having to change then, he just didn't name names (which was smart). We have to trust/hope he has fixed it. 

There is no question Eichel has to be a new leader, he's signed for a decade at a price nobody will pay if he isn't. Dahlin is supposed to have a dedicated personality, Samuellson is supposed to be a leader type. It all hinges now on how good JBot's draft picks will be and possibly if there are any hidden gems or late bloomers etc. from Murray's. I truly believe we are FINALLY headed in the right direction. 

[LTS]

13 hours ago, pi2000 said:

You're suggesting that the Sabres locker room issues are unrelated to losing.    I would disagree.

It's not what I meant to suggest.

I think winning/losing plays into whether or not players are willing to bite their tongue about a situation.  It doesn't make the situation go away.  If players have a problem with each other they will continue to have a problem with each other.  However, when the team is winning they are less likely to say anything because they might upset the locker room and cause the team to start losing.  If they are already losing then there's no need to hold their tongue because the team is already losing.

The concept that winning cures anything is incorrect is what I am getting at.  A turd is a turd, even if you put Eau d' Winning on it.  It's just less likely to be considered something that should be flushed because it doesn't smell as bad at the moment.  But when the perfume wears off...