20 mai 2020
Sabres de Buffalo
Deuxième équipe préférée
Panthers de la Floride
Messages dans les forums
Messages par jour
Sujets de discussion
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MG1986</b></div><div>The Sabres fan base is getting restless. There are going to be external pressures to rebuild not only this club, but the entire hockey ops department. If I was a Sabres fan, which I am not, I would be truly pissed off that the owners decided to let go of Botterill, a guy who learned management skills from some of the best and has business savvy for a GM with basically nothing to his managerial resume. The Pegulas like Adams, they have his ear, they know they can micromanage him. That was not the case with Botterill, which is a lot of the reason why he was let go. I expect this organize to continue displeasing fans until ownership is willing to bring in the proper management people and let them do their thing. As an added point, Ray Shero and Ron Hextall, as well as a list of other more qualified candidates, are available, yet, they go with Adams. It says a lot about ownership right there.</div></div>
Almost no one is pissed Botterill was fired. Nor should they be. He was brutal. You can argue he was pressured into doing what the owners wanted but that just makes him an idiot and a coward. The O'Reilly trade was the hill to die on in regard to that. You cannot make that trade even if it means you get fired. His history of moves and decisions were a baffling nightmare of asset mismanagment and naive idiocy.
A stupid person can study at the feet of greatness and ever remains stupid so your appeal to authority falalcy is nonsense. Pittsburgh's success has more to do with Crosby and Malkin than anyone in managment. Success with the big team brings money which brings scouting talent and other organizational talent which brings better drafting and development and on we go. Winning in the AHL doesn't bring any of that which was what Botterill's plan was. He had a dundamental misunderstanding of causation.
Sabres fans do not want a rebuild. They want extreme and aggressive action to get into the playoffs NOW and I suspect the Pegulas might too. I don't think that's the best idea but then I'm patient enough to want to see it done right. From a hockey perspective they shouldn't be concerned with competing until after the expansion draft. But from a commercial perspective, that would be a disaster. The Eichel stuff is wildly overblown as he's under contract so no real need to worry about that.
Either way, it does look like a recipe for complete and total disaster at this point unless they successfully get a 2C and enough Krueger-style guys to be competitive next year (not saying it will happen but it could).
The Pegulas are clearly in over their heads and Adams was a total panic/controlling move unless they plan on moving Krueger into a President role in the near future. He's likely going to be the de facto culture/management guy (and he has the pedigree) and Adams will play a role in that too.
Still, you're most likely right on that: the culture is toxic. But defending Botterill is insane and you're ignoring the possibility that no established hockey guy wants the job so a rookie might be their only option. So this year could go very badly but I don't see Adams getting fired even if it does.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>gretzkyghosts</b></div><div>
If I were Botterill, I would NOT play Sam with Jack as that only inflates Sam's value in a contract year.
While Pilut looked really good in Rochester, he was given chances under Housley as well as Krueger but he just was not NHL material. 6 pts, minus 12 in 46 games.
Why would a GM not bring in Hammond who he signed just in case?
Playing Sam with Jack only added $2,000,000 to Sam's long tern contract, I find it hard to believe a GM would want to do that.
When the Sabres played Tampa in Europe, not only did no one come to Skinner's defense, but no one jumped in after Ristolainen delivered a huge hit and was challanged.
Who would want to play for a coach who essentially discourages players sticking up for each other.
I know all of the players say they like Krueger, if that were the case the results would have been much better, as we all put out for someone we like.
Let me say, it was not until end of the season review with many people who know more about hockey than I convinced me that Krueger WAS the problem.
I have not read anything here to convince me to that i was right originally and wrong for changing.</div></div>
Wow. Talk about dumpster fires. To deal with these in a row:
That is precisely what I insinuated above. I also explained why he did.
Who were you watching? And you're going to quote plus/minus as a legitimate stat in 2020 (on a bad team no less)? Damn. Ballsy.
Botterill prioritized winning in Rochester (even over player development at times). That was the most likely cause for this insane move. It fueled a number of his insane moves and got him and the Rochester coaching staff rightfully fired.
Botterill did the exact same thing with Skinner. So can't believe he'd do it with Reinhart? Really? When a person shows you who they are, believe them. He was trying to use Jack as a selling point to keep the guys at any cost. Yeah...capologist was what they called that clown. He just had Crosby so guys took discounts to win.
Well this is straight out of dead puck era hockey. Should we still be pissed at Milan Lucic for running down Miller? This is hockey in the third man in, instigator era. Tell me we should get rid of those rules and I'm all in on changing that. Until then, criticize guys for not wanting to put the team in a bad spot? Please. Skinner also dives like crazy.
This is just apparent bias. You base this on what? One incident in Sweden from a team that hasn't been "standing up for each other" for a decade plus? Your mind is already made up if you can genuinely believe that load of crap.
Liking the coach helps a talented team elevate. Where was the talent? Where was anything resembling a competent center after Eichel? Oh yeah, a solid 4C in Larsson.
The phrasing is "more than me" not "more than I". Stop trying to sound smarter than you are. And whether or not these supposed hockey gurus are worth listening to is questionable as you only compare them to your own dubious standard. Quod erat demonstrandum.
Finally, there have been plenty of solid points on here from various people. You haven't presented a cogent argument (let alone, heaven forfend, an actual counterargument) against Krueger other than some whining about "toughness" (please don't use the phrase "blue collar", please don't do it...) and not getting results with a poorly constructed, under-talented roster.
You clearly still have Miller-induced Post-Lucic Stress Disorder. Get over it.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>gretzkyghosts</b></div><div>Botterill's first season he brought in Wilson and Nolan who each had two cups.
Pominville, Scandella, Pouliot and Beaulieu all had playoff experience.
Other than they, only O'Reilly had any playoff experience.
After making those moves the Hockey Writers predicted the Sabres would end their playoff drought.
We all know how that ended, Dahlin!
Listen to this entire interview then talk to me:
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_ZpOdjLiSo" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_ZpOdjLiSo</a>
:22 second, "I was not mentally tough enough" your captain should be the toughest of the team.
1:20 "we are stuck in this mind set of being OK" the captain is responsible for making the team a winning team.
1:55 "through the year I lost my love of the game" Kids play this for fun! how can you lose the love of having fun?
3:04 Asked "when did the team as a whole start feeling sorry for itself" he answered 3:14 "It happened right away!"
3:26 paraphrasing here I am getting ready to play overseas it has been a long time since I have had that kind of excitement, have a chance to win something.
4:57 again paraphrasing I was lost my love as soon as the season started, "right from the get go".
5:05 He asked again paraphrasing kids love this game why did you lose it he replied "at times through the year I felt I lost it."
6:02 "Kind of how I felt out of love for it"
After that what would you have done with O'Reilly?
I was excited with Krueger initially, I thought he was just what the team needed a motivator.
Unfortunately Hutton went blind, Skinner, Rodrigues and Vesey have career bad years.
But I do not think Krueger knew how to put together a line up.
Sam is suppose to be a playmaker why is he on the same line with Jack?
We will see what the future brings.
After listening the Pegula press conference, they reminded me of the Rigases.</div></div>
You've clearly already made up your mind and are stuck in the past. How does any of that have to do with Krueger?
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>gretzkyghosts</b></div><div>
<a href="/users/Taxtime" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Taxtime</a>
So a new “better” coach gets 3 new forwards and 3 new NHL quality defensemen and he barely improves over the “a wildly unstructed system”?
You are correct, there is a losing attitude. Maybe you remember Botterill’s first year he brought in 6 players who all had playoff experience and a total of 4 Stanley cups, yet that team was “led” to last place over all. I am sure you remember Nolan saying that there was no accountability.
On your second post, I agree both Miller and Montour are better than what they displayed playing for Buffalo, but is that not the purpose of my post to say the coach did not bring out the best in the players.
Krueger's system requires a lot of endurance and cohesion. It takes a certain type of player to sustain the intensity and commitment needed. Sheary, Vesey, and even Johansson aren't those type of players just to name a few.
Add in a goalie who couldn't see.
Then there was the bizarre roster decisions... They weren't merit based which is not Krueger's style.
Miller benched for Bogosian despite clearly being the stronger player. Vesey playing top line instead of Skinner when Olofsson went down. Pilut in the minors when he shows all the signs of a solid 2nd line defenseman. Trying Johansson at center. Continuing to play Risto too much even when Krueger said he shouldn't (to keep intact the excuse that he's overused). Keeping Reinhart stapled to Eichel's line in a contract year (exactly as they did with Skinner to try to convince him to stay). It all reeks of a GM desperate to save his job interfering. Trying to showcase players, make his acquisitions look better than they were, retain players at all costs...
It's possible that Krueger made these decisions based on attitude and buy in rather than merit but it really didn't look like it from the outside and nothing the Sabres said in the post mortem backs this up. I can't say for sure but this offseason will tell us a TON based on the type of players they target.
They really did get some low key good results. Replace a blind Hutton with a routine backup, take away Skinner's insanely bad luck, replace Vesey with a guy who could occasionally hit an empty net, take out Bogosian and insert Miller or anyone else... Play Pilut... It's a very different year. Could be the coach. Aggregate evidence makes it seem unlikely as he just showed up and has made progress with the players (something Botts never did).