Sabres Management and Coaching Thread

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
well the Vanek, Pominville and Miller trades were part of the tank. How else would we have been bad enough to draft 2nd overall twice? I guess you're saying make those trades but for players who could have helped us immediately. Add them and maybe you end up drafting a Sam Bennett and Marner.

No, I'm saying we still rebuild (like Toronto), just not a full tank. See the last three pages for an overly detailed explanation on the difference between the two.
 
I agree that Murray tanked.

The funny thing is that, by your definition, he did not. Your definition says it would have been better for him to build a 44 point team, or a 24 point team, or a 0 point team.

My definition says he tanked nearly perfectly, just enough to get to the top of the draft.

And yet you come into this insisting I have a faulty definition of tanking which logically invalidates my opinions on Regier. You're twisting yourself into some incoherency trying to make what is fundamentally a matter of opinion into something objectively favoring you.

I grant you your opinion that Regier would not have tanked, and there's no way we'll ever know.

Regier didn't tank
Murray did

Pretzels
 
Bob McKenzie just talked about all the coaches on the hot seat. Dan Bylsma was not mentioned.
 
The coach is definitely making a negative impact. Just not as much as many are implying. If Buffalo played like Toronto with our defense, we'd have the most goals against in NHL history and we'd still be losing. I'd say that AT MOST Byisma is responsible for 10 points. At most. Almost definitely less. I don't think any coach can be responsible for 17 POINT difference, that's placing way too much importance on the coach..

Disregard poor line decisions, disregard poor game plans, disregard poor in game adjustments, disregard passive attacking systems, disregard poor player position placement, disregard the fact the system forces the team to play to their weaknesses, disregard the inability to capitalize on matchups at home, disregard overusing players to the point they are burnt out by game 60...You then have a point.

He makes our players worse...simple as that.
 
Bob McKenzie just talked about all the coaches on the hot seat. Dan Bylsma was not mentioned.

Because Bob has already said he'd be surprised if they were thinking of firing him. The only people on the planet that place all the blame on the coach in on this board. I agree that he's one of the biggest problems, and hurting us more every day, but like Sam said, teams don't just become great overnight. This team has a long, long way to go, no matter who the coach is.

Our only solace -- and it's a HUGE one -- is that we have one of the best 5 players on the league, which most teams can't say. So there's always hope.
 
Worse than if they went out there and played shinny every night with no coaching staff or system.

I guess Murray is still tanking because he's supported a coach who's costing the team a point every 5 or more games for two full years now. You don't keep a guy who's costing your team 17 points unless your tanking or bad at your job.

My argument is solely comparing rebuild vs tank strategies. I supported the tank and most data are now telling me I likely chose incorrectly.
 
We are screwed if he survives this summer because we can't help but improve, so we'll be like 15-12-4 in December and Murray will be 'this is fine', there won't be any heat on him or Bylsma at all. We'll be stuck with him for years if we creep into a playoff spot.
 
I guess Murray is still tanking because he's supported a coach who's costing the team a point every 5 or more games for two full years now. You don't keep a guy who's costing your team 17 points unless your tanking or bad at your job.

My argument is solely comparing rebuild vs tank strategies. I supported the tank and most data are now telling me I likely chose incorrectly.

The answer to your question could be that pegula wanted bylsma thru his Pittsburgh connections. And pegula isn't green lighting the change.
 
Speaking of Sekera, caught the Avs game the other night. Compher was absolutely flying. Never thought much of him and didn't like trading Sekera for him, but as it usually turns out, Regier knew what he was doing. Compher looks legit.
 
That's fair, but that still leaves the hiring of Lafontaine and his direction.

Nothing about Regier's actions were "tank" oriented. They were rebuild oriented. "There's going to be some pain", isn't the same thing as "we're going to actively create one of the worst teams of the modern era"

A tank move doesn't bring Moulson in return for Vanek.

Regier definitely was tanking. His "suffering" comments and comments about how it is extremely hard to get elite players outside of drafting with high picks, indicate it.

During and after the 12/13 season he made several moves that made the team worse, and he did pretty much _nothing_ to compensate those moves in order to make the team better.

He traded all of our pending UFAs and he traded our captain _with_ term. During the draft he traded a player _with term_ (Sekera) for futures and tank commander esque McBain. Multiple teams were making lunatic and silly moves to improve the team even at the slightest. Regier did _nothing_.

During the off-season of 12/13 he also talked about trading Miller and Vanek (indirectly, of course), but that the market was not good enough. He ended up trading Vanek for futures and a pending UFA who was easily flipped into more futures.

On the other hand, Murray has _never_ traded a player with term for futures (like Regier did with several players). Murray also made actual moves to improve the team during his first off-season (he signed Moulson, Gionta and McCormick who at the moment were not tank commanders). Meszaros was probably just for cap hit and warm body reasons - he was a tank commander.

The failure of Regier wasn't that he wasn't willing to tank. His failure was that he was making the same mistake that Edmonton did (throwing youngsters to the wolves; Risto, Grigo, Girgs and Zadorov). He also screwed with Grigorenko by burning one of his RFA season by having him on the roster for more than 25 games during the lockout season for no clear reason.
 
Missed alot.

I'm not saying I don't appreciate having Eichel.

My point about the tank is this:
It was a move, whose success should not be measured in number of Eichels acquired, but in overall improvement of the franchise. Are we in a better state because of it? Hard to say because you are comparing to an alternate reality. But we aren't in good shape. To argue otherwise requires to make one of two arguments:

100% of the blame for the success of both Buffalo and Rochester is on Bylsma and his system.
OR
'patience'

So if your argument is it's ALL Bylsma's fault, I won't argue, because then the premise is, it's impossible to judge Murray's ability to build a roster.
If your argument is, 'patience,' I want to know what it would take for patience to run out. For me, it has.

I do think this is mostly Bylsma's fault, but I also see severe flaws in the roster (D, bottom 6 F) that exist because of the moves GMTM has made, not strictly as a side effect of the tank.
 
Missed alot.

I'm not saying I don't appreciate having Eichel.

My point about the tank is this:
It was a move, whose success should not be measured in number of Eichels acquired, but in overall improvement of the franchise. Are we in a better state because of it? Hard to say because you are comparing to an alternate reality. But we aren't in good shape. To argue otherwise requires to make one of two arguments:

100% of the blame for the success of both Buffalo and Rochester is on Bylsma and his system.
OR
'patience'

So if your argument is it's ALL Bylsma's fault, I won't argue, because then the premise is, it's impossible to judge Murray's ability to build a roster.
If your argument is, 'patience,' I want to know what it would take for patience to run out. For me, it has.

I do think this is mostly Bylsma's fault, but I also see severe flaws in the roster (D, bottom 6 F) that exist because of the moves GMTM has made, not strictly as a side effect of the tank.

Actually, that's exactly what the Tank should be measured on.
The Rebuild, on the other hand, can be measured by "where we are at today".

The Tank was a one purpose thing (McEichel).
 
Missed alot.

I'm not saying I don't appreciate having Eichel.

My point about the tank is this:
It was a move, whose success should not be measured in number of Eichels acquired, but in overall improvement of the franchise. Are we in a better state because of it? Hard to say because you are comparing to an alternate reality. But we aren't in good shape. To argue otherwise requires to make one of two arguments:

100% of the blame for the success of both Buffalo and Rochester is on Bylsma and his system.
OR
'patience'

So if your argument is it's ALL Bylsma's fault, I won't argue, because then the premise is, it's impossible to judge Murray's ability to build a roster.
If your argument is, 'patience,' I want to know what it would take for patience to run out. For me, it has.

I do think this is mostly Bylsma's fault, but I also see severe flaws in the roster (D, bottom 6 F) that exist because of the moves GMTM has made, not strictly as a side effect of the tank.

This is weird compartmentalism. You don't need these absolutes of the problem is this or that...

It's this and that.

Bylsma is a huge problem. The team with an above average coach could easily be 5 points better in the standings.

Murray and Pegula deserve blame for the hire.

That defense needs another good top 4 guy. It was a weakness compounded by bad coaching that highlighted the weaknesses of the defensemen and blunted their talents.

How about this as a reality check for the world is crumbling crowd, the rebuild has failed etc.

If Eichel and Kulikov don't get fluke injuries on the eve of the season, this team most likely has a slight improvement on last year.

In all seriousness look at a roster like the leafs or oilers and realize that the talent difference is nonexistent.

I have big problems with the foreseeable disaster that was hiring bylsma, but the talent is there to have a huge jump if they change coaches and don't find the worst one in the shed to hire.
 
I have big problems with the foreseeable disaster that was hiring bylsma, but the talent is there to have a huge jump if they change coaches and don't find the worst one in the shed to hire.

You cant always blame coaching. I'm pretty sure that is what most people will do. Good coaches get fired all the time and their fans complain about many of the same things Sabres fans complain about Bylsma.

So what we will have is a never ending argument if the team does not improve. Coach is bad, players are good argument.

I still compare our rebuild to Florida, in fact I heard many doing the same comparison. That was when Florida was looking like the next great team. The trio of Ekblad, Huberdeau, and Barkov will be on their 3rd coach next season.
 
You cant always blame coaching. I'm pretty sure that is what most people will do. Good coaches get fired all the time and their fans complain about many of the same things Sabres fans complain about Bylsma.

So what we will have is a never ending argument if the team does not improve. Coach is bad, players are good argument.

I still compare our rebuild to Florida, in fact I heard many doing the same comparison. That was when Florida was looking like the next great team. The trio of Ekblad, Huberdeau, and Barkov will be on their 3rd coach next season.

or some of us can actually tell the difference between bad coaching and bad players.
 
You cant always blame coaching. I'm pretty sure that is what most people will do. Good coaches get fired all the time and their fans complain about many of the same things Sabres fans complain about Bylsma.

So what we will have is a never ending argument if the team does not improve. Coach is bad, players are good argument.

I still compare our rebuild to Florida, in fact I heard many doing the same comparison. That was when Florida was looking like the next great team. The trio of Ekblad, Huberdeau, and Barkov will be on their 3rd coach next season.

Team has the best PP in the league but is toothless at even strength. Usually great even strength scorers become bad when they come to the team.

But sure, it's the players.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad