OkimLom
Registered User
- May 3, 2010
- 15,582
- 7,021
"Do you Validate Parking?""Do you want a new picture?
Can you give me a one from 79?"
"How much are we putting in the card? Do you have change for a $5?"
"Do you Validate Parking?""Do you want a new picture?
Can you give me a one from 79?"
I hate it even more if this hire is just a vehicle to get Appert behind the bench.
Which player benefits the most from a Lindy Ruff hire? My vote is Dylan Cozens.
You'd be against Ruff mentoring Appert and furthering his coach development? I think anyone they would bring in as an apprentice would be thrilled to learn from Ruff.I hate it even more if this hire is just a vehicle to get Appert behind the bench.
Doesn’t Lindy’s system make it hard on goaltenders though? I bet Boston could make those same goaltenders look solid. Los Angeles too.Nah, it's all because Andrew Brunette went to Nashville.
Has nothing to do with the goaltending position at all.
Of course it is. The fact that he’s willing to take a small contract had to play a decent-sized role in his selection. Not that it’s a bad thing.Lindy's deal is 2 years per Lance.
Or Myers?Power. Think back to the years Ruff worked on getting something out of Campbell.
I see 2 possible scenarios:
1. This whole thing works out, Lindy Ruff retires/ gets promoted into a senior advisor or POHO role and will be at the head of the table to select the next HC of the Buffalo Sabres. It may or may not be Appert, but we will have been successful and this will be viewed as good coaching development if it does turn out to be Appert.
2. This experiment fails and Lindy Ruff will be at the head of the table as some POHO/Senior Advisor, Adams will be sent packing and Lindy will select both the next HC and GM of the Buffalo Sabres. Likely not Appert in this version of the simulation.
Two scenarios popped into my head when I saw this:
1) Lindy had 2 years left on his NJ deal and he wants to renegotiate a new deal after that deal expires.
2) They have a plan to have a coach in waiting on the staff to take over in 2 years and Lindy gets that bump up into a management role.
I don't get this line.[ . . . ]
I'm not mad about the hiring of Lindy. But I'm a little ticked off that they did such little work in trying to find a new head coach. Hiring Lindy so quickly points me to the direction that they already have an idea on the longer term head coach for the Sabres, but they need a transitional coach in the meantime.
Yeah, if the sole purpose of the hire is to prep Appert then i am definitely against it. I also don't see how we expect Appert to make the leap from development/AHL coach to NHL HC when Granato wasn't capable of flipping that switch despite a healthy amount of assistant coach experience.You'd be against Ruff mentoring Appert and furthering his coach development? I think anyone they would bring in as an apprentice would be thrilled to learn from Ruff.
Two scenarios popped into my head when I saw this:
1) Lindy had 2 years left on his NJ deal and he wants to renegotiate a new deal after that deal expires.
2) They have a plan to have a coach in waiting on the staff to take over in 2 years and Lindy gets that bump up into a management role.
Appert is his own coach and I think painting him as the same thing as Granato isn't fair to him. Plus, what the team will need in two years might not be the same thing that they need today.Yeah, if the sole purpose of the hire is to prep Appert then i am definitely against it. I also don't see how we expect Appert to make the leap from development/AHL coach to NHL HC when Granato wasn't capable of flipping that switch despite a healthy amount of assistant coach experience.
Appert is his own coach and I think painting him as the same thing as Granato isn't fair to him. Plus, what the team will need in two years might not be the same thing that they need today.
So, in thinking about this, a few thoughts:
1. If still think firing Granato and hiring Ruff was an Adams choice, i don't know what to say. The one good thing we've learned about Adams is he typically goes by committee and he moves slow. He's very deliberate with his moves and doesn't do things rashly. Firing Granato is fine....firing Granato before getting feedback from the players is definitely not an Adams move. And hiring a new coach without an interview process or waiting to see if any coaches get canned after the 1st round is another fast move. This firing/hiring stinks of Terry taking over the process and getting what he wants versus the front office going through a discussion and deciding what is best for the team.
2. The dynamic between Ruff/Adams/Pegula has the potential to be problematic. The gravitas that Ruff holds with the Pegulas and the personal relationship there is going to be a problem if Adams and Ruff have a disagreement. The Regier/Ruff era had a decade plus of established dynamic between GM and coach. Ruff is coming back a conquering hero tasked with fixing the problems of the organization since he was fired. I'm not saying it WILL be a problem, these are all adults and professionals, but there is certainly POTENTIAL to be a problem here.
3. Not doing a formal interview process also I think is also bad. Worse case scenario, you could have gotten 3-4 professional coaches give you a deep dive on the construction of your roster and what needs to be changed. There also could have been the absolute perfect fit for this team that you didn't get to see because you rushed for the good press fan service hire.
Overall, I still like the hire, because I believe Ruff is a good coach and like what he did with NJ. There is a fit here even if you remove the name Ruff and his history with the org. However, I think the underlying issues with the owner and GM still exist. I like having fresh eyes on the org though. I'd really like to see a senior advisors or extra AGM brought in outside the org to really just take a fresh look at the organization as a whole at how the team can improve their processes and management.