Sabres Management and Coaching Thread

[Jame]

Not saying Bylsma isn't a problem, or even the worst problem, but I don't see what Murrays done with the roster to justify his staying.

I see a different roster, but have zero interest in laying out every move for the millionth time, Layne style

 

[ZZamboni]

This is one of your top 3 man baby rants after a loss. I enjoyed this one a lot.

What GMs in this league "win" their trades? Front offices are more equipped with analytics these days, no one is fleecing anybody.

Love it. It so fits.


Murray has his faults. Bylsma being the biggest.

That said, I'll give him the summer to improve the roster and hopefully the coaching staff.

 

[truthbluth]

I see a different roster, but have zero interest in laying out every move for the millionth time, Layne style

I've seen your arguments. What I don't see is any evaluation of Murray's work to improve the players in the organization that shows successes. Only excuses to this point. I think Bylsma's gone at this point anyway. Will you have the same opinion about the roster if the next coach doesn't get more out of these guys? What would it take to convince you that they just aren't that good?

 

[OkimLom]

I'm not going to touch that man baby rant above, but is anyone going to make a case that GMTM has been good? 4 years into a GM job, you shouldn't have 3 pro teams in the basement, with one of them folding. If we had a top prospect system with all that losing, it'd be one thing, but the Sabres pool is middle of the pack at best. There literally isn't a single argument besides, 'patience,' that supports the idea that Murray has been other than bad. Get ready for Arizona to blow past us in the rebuild next year. I cannot believe that Murray has this franchise in a worse state than Regier/Quinn/Golisano had us in.

This is so depressing.

When two of those years are designed to be dead last in the league, I think he should get a pass. I mean unless fans think that he should've been trying to win during the Reinhart and Eichel years. Then the next one is a year in which you're putting together a ton of new pieces (ROR, Kane, McGinn, Eichel, Reinhart, Bylsma) after two years of playing at the level of dirt. They weren't going to have an overnight fix no matter who was behind the bench.

This year was the first year that they should've been at least competitive. Unfortunately we know injuries played a huge factor in our standings, and the fanbase has become increasingly impatient with the team, regardless of how much of a full blown rebuild we did vs teams like Edmonton, Toronto, and apparently Arizona is now included for some stupid reason. We still have players from those horrible tanking years a long time ago (2 years ago).

Fans are losing their minds because our #1 prospect pool, which at the time was STRICTLY potential. When we had this #1 prospect pool, guys like Grigorenko, Zadorov, Risto, were headlining it, and then Reinhart joined. Grigorenko was handled poorly by previous management in the development process, Zadorov was a guy who didn't become what we thought they could be here. Quite frankly, having the #1 prospect pool is overrated, and having the collection of talent that you think you have only works if they are developed correctly, if they get proper coaching, and a little bit of luck.

The hyperbolic nature of some fans is really getting out of hand. We finally have our prospects playing in leagues that will bring out the best of our players. That alone puts Murray in better shape than the Darcy years. There are issues with Murray's team, from coaching to level of talent in positions, but they are fixable issues, and whether we fans like it or not, Murray is going to be given the time to fix these issues.

 

[OkimLom]

Not saying Bylsma isn't a problem, or even the worst problem, but I don't see what Murrays done with the roster to justify his staying.

I think it would be more apparent if the players were put into positions to be effective. It would be easier for everyone to see what quality of players we actually have.

When you have a coach who puts a guy, who was drafted to be a center, who has played center for the majority of his career, who has shown to be most effective as a pivot man for his line, at wing, and then you put a guy who has for the majority of his career played at wing, at center, and then match them up with teams' #1 or #2 scoring lines AT HOME, you tend to see horrible results, and in turn a roster that is not performing to their potential.

Or, you have a collection of defenseman who are more comfortable, and more effective when they are bringing up the puck and not making stretch passes, who are tasked to making stretch passes while your forwards who are supposed to man the side walls are bolting out of the zone, to stretch teams.

You would think with the amount of questionable decisions that Bylsma has made up to now, that he's trying to sabotage Murray. I'm of course joking, but to see a coach make so many wrong decisions in so many areas of the team, that I'm starting to question that part.

 

[slip]

Breaking: new video shot during team meeting (thought to be fairly recent, as Reinhart is NOWHERE TO BE FOUND) exposes stark contrast in approach to the game between head coach and star player:

 

[Jame]

I've seen your arguments. What I don't see is any evaluation of Murray's work to improve the players in the organization that shows successes. Only excuses to this point. I think Bylsma's gone at this point anyway. Will you have the same opinion about the roster if the next coach doesn't get more out of these guys?

I don't know what you mean. Give me an example of another GM doing what you think Murray has failed to do (outside of the scope of coaching).

What would it take to convince you that they just aren't that good?

A competent head coach and system.

 

[OkimLom]

If before the 2015 draft I told you in Eichel's 2nd season he would be a point per game player, Reinhart a 50 point player, Ryan O'Reilly and Kyle Okposo are Sabres, Kane a 30 goal scorer, Risto a 50 point 27 minute D, Sabres have the #1 power play, and Lehner is our goalie top 10 in Sav %. Wouldn't you think we had a playoff team?

I would think we have talent on this team.

Then I would ask if we're in the playoffs. When you told me no, I would say, maybe it's a coaching thing or we don't have enough complementary scoring. I would follow up with how is Moulson doing, how is Ennis doing, any more defenseman scoring at a good clip?

 

[TehDoak]

I'm not going to touch that man baby rant above, but is anyone going to make a case that GMTM has been good? 4 years into a GM job, you shouldn't have 3 pro teams in the basement, with one of them folding. If we had a top prospect system with all that losing, it'd be one thing, but the Sabres pool is middle of the pack at best. There literally isn't a single argument besides, 'patience,' that supports the idea that Murray has been other than bad. Get ready for Arizona to blow past us in the rebuild next year. I cannot believe that Murray has this franchise in a worse state than Regier/Quinn/Golisano had us in.

This is so depressing.

I'm certainly off the agreement that Rochester's issues really do fall on Murray. And by extension, Murray has failed a bit.

Elmira's issues are completely unrelated. Buffalo signed an agreement to have ECHL people in Elmira, but the Jackels were pretty much folding before they got there (the previous owners "gave the fans" the team for free because it was bleeding so much $)

Murray's failures, in order:

#1. Failing to address the defense in a significant way last summer.
#2. Failing to put a successful team in Rochester even though resources are there
#3. Seemingly disjointed relationship with coaches/assistant coaches, both Nolan and Bylsma
#4. Failing to move any of the pending UFA's at the deadline.

 

[truthbluth]

When two of those years are designed to be dead last in the league, I think he should get a pass. I mean unless fans think that he should've been trying to win during the Reinhart and Eichel years. Then the next one is a year in which you're putting together a ton of new pieces (ROR, Kane, McGinn, Eichel, Reinhart, Bylsma) after two years of playing at the level of dirt. They weren't going to have an overnight fix no matter who was behind the bench.

I don't know why I feel like the only person who seems to put that on Murray. His decision to drive to the bottom is hurting us now, with 2 of 3 cheap years for Jack and Sam gone, and I'm somehow supposed to excuse Murray for that because of **** Murray DECIDED to do? What does it take to hold this guy accountable? Jesus, you'd think he'd actually accomplished something with they way this point gets defended.

This year was the first year that they should've been at least competitive. Unfortunately we know injuries played a huge factor in our standings, and the fanbase has become increasingly impatient with the team, regardless of how much of a full blown rebuild we did vs teams like Edmonton, Toronto, and apparently Arizona is now included for some stupid reason. We still have players from those horrible tanking years a long time ago (2 years ago).

Arizona is included because they were way behind us in the rebuild, and unless something changes, they'll be ahead of us shortly. They'll be adding Keller, Strome, Fischer and probably Kyle Wood as full time players next season. They'll blow right by us.

Fans are losing their minds because our #1 prospect pool, which at the time was STRICTLY potential. When we had this #1 prospect pool, guys like Grigorenko, Zadorov, Risto, were headlining it, and then Reinhart joined. Grigorenko was handled poorly by previous management in the development process, Zadorov was a guy who didn't become what we thought they could be here. Quite frankly, having the #1 prospect pool is overrated, and having the collection of talent that you think you have only works if they are developed correctly, if they get proper coaching, and a little bit of luck.

Hey man, don't lump me in with that crowd that obsessed over that prospect pool, that wasn't my point. My point is, you can't have a basement dwelling team, AND a basement dwelling farm team, AND an average prospect pool, AND THEN call that success. That doesn't seem like a wild notion.

The hyperbolic nature of some fans is really getting out of hand. We finally have our prospects playing in leagues that will bring out the best of our players. That alone puts Murray in better shape than the Darcy years. There are issues with Murray's team, from coaching to level of talent in positions, but they are fixable issues, and whether we fans like it or not, Murray is going to be given the time to fix these issues.

GMing is a complicated job. You have to do so many things for the present and future team that you can't judge individuals moves in a vacuum. However, you do have to measure success. And so far, there hasn't been much.

 

[Jame]

I'm certainly off the agreement that Rochester's issues really do fall on Murray. And by extension, Murray has failed a bit.

Elmira's issues are completely unrelated. Buffalo signed an agreement to have ECHL people in Elmira, but the Jackels were pretty much folding before they got there (the previous owners "gave the fans" the team for free because it was bleeding so much $)

Murray's failures, in order:

#1. Failing to address the defense in a significant way last summer.
#2. Failing to put a successful team in Rochester even though resources are there
#3. Seemingly disjointed relationship with coaches/assistant coaches, both Nolan and Bylsma
#4. Failing to move any of the pending UFA's at the deadline.

#1 I'm sorry, but adding a 25 year old #2 defensemen from a playoff team... is significant. Sure, the injury played a part, but the bottom line is that literally everyone on our blueline looks ****ing terrible. Risto to Bogo to Kulikov to McCabe. They all look like some form of garbage or another. IT'S THE SYSTEM. They didn't all simultaneously become significantly worse.
#2 What system are they running in Rochester? Oh right...
#3 Not sure what this refers to specifically... but I do think there is a disconnect between what Murray wants and what Byslma does... and yes, that is on Murray
#4 I'm ok with it. I think it allows a clearer path to firing Bylsma

 

[truthbluth]

I don't know what you mean. Give me an example of another GM doing what you think Murray has failed to do (outside of the scope of coaching).

Jeez, if only there were a way to measure a GM's success holistically.

 

[1972]

If a company is doing poorly that falls on management...

When your NHL team is one of the worst and your AHL team is the worst then the GM cannot be immune from criticism.

 

[Jame]

I don't know why I feel like the only person who seems to put that on Murray. His decision to drive to the bottom is hurting us now, with 2 of 3 cheap years for Jack and Sam gone, and I'm somehow supposed to excuse Murray for that because of **** Murray DECIDED to do? What does it take to hold this guy accountable? Jesus, you'd think he'd actually accomplished something with they way this point gets defended.

So you'd rather have Ryan Strome, than Jack Eichel?
Yes... tanking hurt the roster (primarily in the form of Ennis/Moulson/Gorges... along with the destroyed development of Girgensons), but we got Jack Eichel for it.

Arizona is included because they were way behind us in the rebuild, and unless something changes, they'll be ahead of us shortly. They'll be adding Keller, Strome, Fischer and probably Kyle Wood as full time players next season. They'll blow right by us.

So Arizona... with 9 fewer points that us this year.... and fewer goals for.... and more goals against.... is going to blow by us with the addition of rookies?

Man... why didn't that work for us?

 

[Moncton man]

So Arizona... with 9 fewer points that us this year.... and fewer goals for.... and more goals against.... is going to blow by us with the addition of rookies?

Man... why didn't that work for us?

Because .... Buffalo?

 

[haseoke39]

The list for us to get into contention for me:

1. New coach.
2. Three NHL defensemen with quality ability to play simple, safe game in their own end. One of these guys anchors the top pairing and frees Risto.
3. Maybe a new goaltender, unproven as yet.
4. To fit the guys under (2), dump a couple bad contracts.
5. Get good development out of your winger prospects, at least two of them pan out into NHL players, at least one of them can play top 6.

It's perhaps an unreasonably large ask altogether. I suspect where we'll fall on our sabres is defense.

 

[Jame]

Jeez, if only there were a way to measure a GM's success holistically.

there are lazy ways to measure anything.

 

[truthbluth]

So you'd rather have Ryan Strome, than Jack Eichel?

Strawman is straw, man.

Yes... tanking hurt the roster (primarily in the form of Ennis/Moulson/Gorges... along with the destroyed development of Girgensons), but we got Jack Eichel for it.

So far, how would you characterize the results of that approach?

So Arizona... with 9 fewer points that us this year.... and fewer goals for.... and more goals against.... is going to blow by us with the addition of rookies?

They've had injuries too. They don't have an Eichel, but OEL is far better than Risto, and with Domi, Keller, Fischer, Dvorak, and Strome, their young forwards are likely to be amongst the best in the league shortly.

Man... why didn't that work for us?

Why didn't it? Could it be the coaches? Yes of course, but it could also be that the players we expected to be good just weren't that good?

 

[Jame]

The list for us to get into contention for me:

1. New coach.
2. Three NHL defensemen with quality ability to play simple, safe game in their own end. One of these guys anchors the top pairing and frees Risto.
3. Maybe a new goaltender, unproven as yet.
4. To fit the guys under (2), dump a couple bad contracts.
5. Get good development out of your winger prospects, at least two of them pan out into NHL players, at least one of them can play top 6.

It's perhaps an unreasonably large ask altogether. I suspect where we'll fall on our sabres is defense.

#1 really should be #1,2, and 3
#2 largely dependent on #1
#3 is silly
#4 yes
#5 largely dependent on #1

 

[truthbluth]

there are lazy ways to measure anything.

Holy ****. Results? Evaluating success via results is lazy? Do you owe GMTM money?

 

[Jame]

Holy ****. Results? Evaluating success via results is lazy? Do you own GMTM money?

So basically a child with basic math skills is equally qualified to evaluate GMTM?

 

[Jame]

Strawman is straw, man.

You can't have your Eichel and eat it too.

You either tank and have Eichel, or you don't. Blame Murray for tanking = you think we'd be better off without Eichel.

So far, how would you characterize the results of that approach?

Ultimately, absolutely worth it (Eichel + depth of assets to trade for ROR), no matter how long it takes.

They've had injuries too. They don't have an Eichel, but OEL is far better than Risto, and with Domi, Keller, Fischer, Dvorak, and Strome, their young forwards are likely to be amongst the best in the league shortly.

Ok

Why didn't it? Could it be the coaches? Yes of course, but it could also be that the players we expected to be good just weren't that good?

I see that the answer alludes you.... that's on you.

 

[OkimLom]

I don't know why I feel like the only person who seems to put that on Murray. His decision to drive to the bottom is hurting us now, with 2 of 3 cheap years for Jack and Sam gone, and I'm somehow supposed to excuse Murray for that because of **** Murray DECIDED to do? What does it take to hold this guy accountable? Jesus, you'd think he'd actually accomplished something with they way this point gets defended.

Of course everyone puts that on Murray, it was his choice, nobody is debating that. His decision to drive to the bottom gave us Jack and Sam. It was the right move, and fits with what Darcy even said, that the only way to get elite talent is to draft early. Tim just took it a few steps further, and it was the right choice for the LONG term. Seeing as we were 2 points away from 2nd last place and 8 points away from 3rd last place, you're looking one of Strome, Marner being in the place of Eichel. There was a purpose to the poor level of this team.

Arizona is included because they were way behind us in the rebuild, and unless something changes, they'll be ahead of us shortly. They'll be adding Keller, Strome, Fischer and probably Kyle Wood as full time players next season. They'll blow right by us.

What were Arizona's rebuilding moves? What makes you think they were doing a rebuild?

Hey man, don't lump me in with that crowd that obsessed over that prospect pool, that wasn't my point. My point is, you can't have a basement dwelling team, AND a basement dwelling farm team, AND an average prospect pool, AND THEN call that success. That doesn't seem like a wild notion.

Considering that a lot of Murray's picks haven't even graduated to the pros yet, I'm not too worry about the state of the farm team right now.

GMing is a complicated job. You have to do so many things for the present and future team that you can't judge individuals moves in a vacuum. However, you do have to measure success. And so far, there hasn't been much.

It is a complicated job, a job that deals with long term much more often than the short term. You can measure the success he has in the short term, but people need to see that there are many forces that impact that success that you value the GM on. I think people like to lump everything together because we as a fanbase want to know WHOSE FAULT IS IT, we need to know who to blame. Murray has his finger prints all over the team, no question about it. He deserves some blame, but the way some fans of the Sabres talk, you would think there is zero positives from this team. That the WHOLE thing is a mess because the Sabres don't have immediate success.

 

[Stephen]

Why do we often hear reports of Jack Eichel putting so much pressure on himself to be a leader, needs to be better, etc.? Put things into perspective, it's still early days in a massive rebuild and he's just getting his feet wet as an impact NHLer. Yet you hear so much anguish over the Sabres lack of success to date you'd think he was Joe Thornton in San Jose after a decade plus of futility. Can't help but think this is an unhealthy level of expectation for the team and the individual player at what amounts to the very beginning of a long and successful journey. Sabres management needs to protect him better.

I mean as a rival fanbase, I have a lot of enmity for your team and Jack Eichel, but you have a ton to look forward to.

 

[OkimLom]

If a company is doing poorly that falls on management...

When your NHL team is one of the worst and your AHL team is the worst then the GM cannot be immune from criticism.

Agree, but there is a difference between criticism and calling for Murray's head because you didn't get the short term results you wanted.