Jump to content

Ralph Krueger: Bad Coach or Bad Person


Was Ralph Krueger a bad coach, bad person or both?  

71 members have voted

  1. 1. Was Ralph Krueger a bad coach, bad person or both?

    • Bad coach
      64
    • Bad person
      0
    • Both
      4
    • Neither
      3


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Thorny said:

He's not "bullying" them unless there's actual intent to harm. I think he thought he was doing it the right way. 

You think he got rid of Taylor for “good” reasons.  What about Skinner?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Passive Aggressive personality.  They charm you and then grind your gears until you lock up.  

That's why I like The Don, the Leader of the Sabres Mafia.  

He's giving us an offer we can't refuse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

You think he got rid of Taylor for “good” reasons.  What about Skinner?  

He did have a good reason to get rid of Taylor. Chris Taylor and he had different hockey philosophies. There is nothing irrational or even personal in trying to put together a staff who are all on board with the philosophy he is trying to engender on the team and throughout the organization. Krueger had strong beliefs on how the game should be played. From his perspective it wouldn't be productive/wise for one of the primary coaches in the system who prepares the prospects for the NHL to prepare players for a system that he (Taylor) didn't believe in. 

From a philosophical standpoint Taylor and others (Granato) was right about the better philosophy and system to play in the NHL. That is not an issue worth debating because it is abundantly clear that what Krueger was espousing was out of touch with the NHL of today. But it is wrong to depict Krueger as a vindictive person who jettisoned staff because there wasn't an understandable reason for it. (I'm not suggesting that you are taking that stance but others are.) 

There are coaches whose philosophical inclinations lean toward a free wheeling offensive style of play. That is not a coach who would fit well in an Islander organization run by Lou Lamoriello who stresses a tight defensive brand of hockey. The bottom line is the organization hired Krueger and gave him a lot of authority to reshape the team and organization. It was grave mistake that set the franchise back. Now it has to untie the knot of backwardness and retie it and make it a more modern knot.   

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Doohickie said:

I don't care if he believed his own ***** or not.  He is a terrible person because of his arrogance.

Man you really should just cool it. Maybe even a little self reflection.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JohnC said:

He did have a good reason to get rid of Taylor. Chris Taylor and he had different hockey philosophies. There is nothing irrational or even personal in trying to put together a staff who are all on board with the philosophy he is trying to engender on the team and throughout the organization. Krueger had strong beliefs on how the game should be played. From his perspective it wouldn't be productive/wise for one of the primary coaches in the system who prepares the prospects for the NHL to prepare players for a system that he (Taylor) didn't believe in. 

From a philosophical standpoint Taylor and others (Granato) was right about the better philosophy and system to play in the NHL. That is not an issue worth debating because it is abundantly clear that what Krueger was espousing was out of touch with the NHL of today. But it is wrong to depict Krueger as a vindictive person who jettisoned staff because there wasn't an understandable reason for it. (I'm not suggesting that you are taking that stance but others are.) 

There are coaches whose philosophical inclinations lean toward a free wheeling offensive style of play. That is not a coach who would fit well in an Islander organization run by Lou Lamoriello who stresses a tight defensive brand of hockey. The bottom line is the organization hired Krueger and gave him a lot of authority to reshape the team and organization. It was grave mistake that set the franchise back. Now it has to untie the knot of backwardness and retie it and make it a more modern knot.   

 

The difference in philosophies was that Taylor knew how to coach and RK didn’t. Taylor probably spoke up and said the system sucked.  RK wanted him gone because he didn’t want a competent coach as an easily available replacement. 

Sorry Rasputin your plan didn’t work in the end.  Granato was on your staff and had RK been a good coach and administrator he probably would have listened to Granato and Taylor and we would have had a good team.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

The difference in philosophies was that Taylor knew how to coach and RK didn’t. Taylor probably spoke up and said the system sucked.  RK wanted him gone because he didn’t want a competent coach as an easily available replacement. 

Sorry Rasputin your plan didn’t work in the end.  Granato was on your staff and had RK been a good coach and administrator he probably would have listened to Granato and Taylor and we would have had a good team.

We all agree that Krueger adhered to his philosophy as if was a religious tenet. He was a rigid believer in his philosophy without tolerating a contrarian view even when it clearly wasn't working.  Anyone espousing an alternative approach was not only not going to be listened to but was going to be excised from the staff. He stuck to his guns and essentially shot himself in the foot. 

What is ironic is that Granato was part of the staff that he assembled. And when the coach was dispatched the interim HC who came from his staff undid a lot of what he was espousing. 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Flashsabre said:

I would like to hear what really happened with Chris Taylor.  That is the only thing I see as pointing to “bad person” but we don’t know the details there.

I believe it came out somewhere that essentially Tails was viewed as a threat by RK, due to things that happened while Tails was temporarily up on the bench with the Sabres. 

Thusly, Tails was axed when Kyvon was named 1A and RK named 1B. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Andrew Amerk said:

I believe it came out somewhere that essentially Tails was viewed as a threat by RK, due to things that happened while Tails was temporarily up on the bench with the Sabres. 

Thusly, Tails was axed when Kyvon was named 1A and RK named 1B. 

If by came out you mean someone on the internet hypothesized.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

If by came out you mean someone on the internet hypothesized.

I wasn’t completely sure if I had read an actual article about it or not, but it sounds likely fairly accurate even if it was only hypothesized somewhere else. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, Chris Taylor seems like good dude, but the deification of him around here is kinda absurd.

He has three years head coaching experience where he led a couple loaded Amerks teams to first-round knockouts, yet I bet half this board would be happy if he was named the new head coach.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

idk why, but for some reason the team quit on Kreuger, and I think that's obvious. We'd lose a game and he'd come out and say we have to do x y and z and next game team didn't do any of the three. If you're the coach, what do you do then?

For some reason they're doing what Granato tells them to do. Some of those things are the same things Kreuger said they had to do better. So honestly, I don't get the extreme difference other than the obvious, and that is they simply quit on him and Adams fails in not recognizing the need for a change sooner. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

We'd lose a game and he'd come out and say we have to do x y and z and next game team didn't do any of the three. If you're the coach, what do you do then?

He never said specifics.  He's say, "We need more compete" or "more urgency"  There were no Xs and Os, no real hockey words.  Just concepts.  Values.  Ideas.  Adjectives.  Nouns.  Things that in the end meant not a damned thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading that the team was interested in bringing Miller back for this season before his likely retirement and Ralph nixed it made me want to waffle him right over his head with a Balls Mahoney level chairshot. 

Edited by sabremike
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Doohickie said:

He never said specifics.  He's say, "We need more compete" or "more urgency"  There were no Xs and Os, no real hockey words.  Just concepts.  Values.  Ideas.  Adjectives.  Nouns.  Things that in the end meant not a damned thing.

I don't think that's entirely true. I remember him saying we needed to get to the front of the net for example. They're not great at it, but some of them are doing it for Granato. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Doohickie said:

He never said specifics.  He's say, "We need more compete" or "more urgency"  There were no Xs and Os, no real hockey words.  Just concepts.  Values.  Ideas.  Adjectives.  Nouns.  Things that in the end meant not a damned thing.

Honest question.  Has Granato given specifics in post game PCs?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sabremike said:

After reading that the team was interested in bringing Miller back for this season before his likely retirement and Ralph nixed it made me want to waffle him right over his head with a Balls Mahoney level chairshot. 

Welp I changed my mind; perhaps he is a terrible person! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

idk why, but for some reason the team quit on Kreuger, and I think that's obvious. We'd lose a game and he'd come out and say we have to do x y and z and next game team didn't do any of the three. If you're the coach, what do you do then?

For some reason they're doing what Granato tells them to do. Some of those things are the same things Kreuger said they had to do better. So honestly, I don't get the extreme difference other than the obvious, and that is they simply quit on him and Adams fails in not recognizing the need for a change sooner. 

I think its because he had no credibility as much an anything. When things go bad for Scotty Bowman, they don't keep dropping and dropping. He makes changes and they get out of the rut. Krueger had a track record that showed he had no such ability and the players didn't see anything but the same old crap and they didn't believe.

3 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

I actually read this in Marty Biron’s voice. 

Ralph Cougar bad coach or da worse coach?

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Weave said:

Honest question.  Has Granato given specifics in post game PCs?

Have you watched any? He sorta does. His answers aren't overly technical, but they aren't cliche either. He sounds like a hockey coach (Ralph didn't) but a pretty articulate and thoughtful one.

Edited by dudacek
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I try to put myself in Ralph's position. The Pegulas offer me all that dough to coach the sabres. I definitely say "yes!" After I do that I just try to hang on for as long as I can. I'd have probably changed my system a couple of times, but my results would have been pretty much the same. 

Bad coach.

Oh, and for the record: I know plenty of con-artists who are fine people. 

  • Meh 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, SwampD said:

This thread.

 

Such a great movie.  
 

12 hours ago, sabremike said:

After reading that the team was interested in bringing Miller back for this season before his likely retirement and Ralph nixed it made me want to waffle him right over his head with a Balls Mahoney level chairshot. 

Ryan Miller?  this seems impossible, not least because Miller wouldn’t leave his family in SC to play here   

 

3 hours ago, ubkev said:

 

Oh, and for the record: I know plenty of con-artists who are fine people. 

I suppose it depends on your definition of con artist, but I don’t see how this is possible.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

 

I suppose it depends on your definition of con artist, but I don’t see how this is possible.  

I watch hookers work grifts on embezzlers. I like an underdog, what can I say?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...