Fire Ron

[LGBuffalo]

How do you implement a system when the most important players are not on the team yet.

This, in this moment is the worst period for the rebuild.

I will reserve my opinion about the direction of this franchise when we finish last two years in a row draft McDavid and Reinhart and then the sabres are still terrible. Until then how is this not going as planned?

Finish last and draft Reinhart....if anything fans should be worried that Reinhart causes the team to finish 3rd or 4th last and we lose out on McDavid....that is what everyone should be worrying about because until then the Buffalo Sabres are all but meaningless.

I think that's the point, though. I understand what you're saying, but I don't want them to wait until "the most important" players are on the roster to determine where the organization is heading. I want them to have some idea of a plan on the ice, organizationally speaking so that WHEN those players arrive, there's a structure for them to follow. The veterans that are on the team by the time they arrive can show them what to do. It would be like waiting to draw up the blueprints on a house before the important raw materials arrive. I understand they're going to be bad, and that's fine, but show some direction is all I am saying.

 

[Clock]

There's a graph somewhere out there where one line represents the value of doing poorly now for the future of the team and another line represents the value of having leadership to tailor the new core of this team into a future contender.

I'm all about getting the quality talent, but not to the extent that it ingrains a complete losing culture in the locker room that hurts us more in the long run just so that we can COMPLETELY tank.

I'm hoping that the organization finds the point where those two lines meet so that we can grab that talent while also gelling the core into something that's going to be threatening in a few years.

 

[LGBuffalo]

Maybe they should just concentrate on making clean passes for now and the rest will fall into place.

It would be beautiful to see some clean, consistent passing for sure!

 

[heartsabres*]

These kids are not idiots or pieces of glass. Why people think losing or terrible coaching will destroy their entire future is just ludicrous.

 

[heartsabres*]

There's a graph somewhere out there where one line represents the value of doing poorly now for the future of the team and another line represents the value of having leadership to tailor the new core of this team into a future contender.

I'm all about getting the quality talent, but not to the extent that it ingrains a complete losing culture in the locker room that hurts us more in the long run just so that we can COMPLETELY tank.

I'm hoping that the organization finds the point where those two lines meet so that we can grab that talent while also gelling the core into something that's going to be threatening in a few years.

I completely agree with you but when it comes to rebuilding, losing and trying to keep composure together which includes a high confidence level through losing 60+ games you are looking for a line that probably is not even visible.

I am not sure why fans think losing 60+ games horrible or losing 60+ games respectfully means Grigorenko and Girgonsens minds will be molded differently. They are not zombies or blank slates waiting to be programmed. I am sure by now NHL players have had the experience of both sides of winning and losing and can maintain a high level of compete 4 years from now when the team is suppose to be good.

Call me crazy but I don´t think losing with a terrible coach destroys careers.

Look at the careers of most 1st overall picks(or top 3), the team was still terrible for another year or two. It is part of the growing pains. Even with Sidney Crosby the Penguins had 22 wins.

 

[Gabrielor]

TBH, I think every loss Girgensons sees isn't too bad of a thing

He seems like a guy that would take this personally.

 

[joshjull]

There's a graph somewhere out there where one line represents the value of doing poorly now for the future of the team and another line represents the value of having leadership to tailor the new core of this team into a future contender.

I'm all about getting the quality talent, but not to the extent that it ingrains a complete losing culture in the locker room that hurts us more in the long run just so that we can COMPLETELY tank.

I'm hoping that the organization finds the point where those two lines meet so that we can grab that talent while also gelling the core into something that's going to be threatening in a few years.

Thanks for better explaining my point and more succinctly to boot.

 

[Karate Johnson*]

Higher picks = greater chance at a franchise player.

Not guarantees. But greater chance.

 

[jBuds]

To think that people complaining about a team that has one win in 11 games, with no semblance of a system, no identity, and regression across the board are out of line... Is absurd.

Nothing has gone right. The coach is painfully out of place. He has no idea what he's doing. Yet we are supposed to shut up and let it happen without a cry ?

The team can still have a bad record while attaining results in a different manner. The twisted visions of some of the posts on the last two pages are leading me to madness.

Clock said it well. Happy medium.

 

[heartsabres*]

Also I think Miller and Vanek need to go before the future as planned. I think they are a cancer/distraction to the future of this team. Turn the page already.

 

[slip]

There's a graph somewhere out there where one line represents the value of doing poorly now for the future of the team and another line represents the value of having leadership to tailor the new core of this team into a future contender.

I'm all about getting the quality talent, but not to the extent that it ingrains a complete losing culture in the locker room that hurts us more in the long run just so that we can COMPLETELY tank.

I'm hoping that the organization finds the point where those two lines meet so that we can grab that talent while also gelling the core into something that's going to be threatening in a few years.

On the other hand, our future "core" either hasn't been drafted yet or the majority are still playing in the minors.

 

[heartsabres*]

There's a graph somewhere out there where one line represents the value of doing poorly now for the future of the team and another line represents the value of having leadership to tailor the new core of this team into a future contender.

I'm all about getting the quality talent, but not to the extent that it ingrains a complete losing culture in the locker room that hurts us more in the long run just so that we can COMPLETELY tank.

I'm hoping that the organization finds the point where those two lines meet so that we can grab that talent while also gelling the core into something that's going to be threatening in a few years.

What kind of leader do we have in Girgensons if losing destroys his leadership traits?
Great leaders do not have to be born to great teams if anything losing will help bring this team together when the time is right.

 

[Zman5778]

I'm hoping that the organization finds the point where those two lines meet so that we can grab that talent while also gelling the core into something that's going to be threatening in a few years.

I completely agree. I just don't think that this year is the "gelling" year. I think that there are too many veterans around yet occupying prime spots in the lineup (Ennis/Foligno/CoHo are the only young guys in the top 6...and only Foligno is really "young").

I think this is the year where the kids get experience and learn how to play in the NHL. The kids need to play together more with THEMSELVES to really gel. they need to face the adversity on their own, not with guys like Vanek/Ott/Stafford/etc dragging them along (and playing in important lineup spots).

I think next year is the gelling year. Fewer veterans and more young guys occupying key spots (more innate talent should help too after this upcoming draft).

 

[Zman5778]

On the other hand, our future "core" either hasn't been drafted yet or the majority are still playing in the minors.

I think the real big part of the core isn't drafted yet.

The other "core" pieces aren't playing key roles yet where they learn how to win. When the going gets tough, RonRon turns to the veterans (Vanek/Stafford/Ennis/Porter/Ehrhoff/etc). He doesn't turn to rookies/young guys aside from Pysyk and maybe Foligno.

 

[SabreBlood]

If Ron Rolston deserves to be fired then so does Darcy Regier.

I'm all for an actual rebuild. They're in the middle of one. What I'm not for is a GM that has apparently seleced the wrong head coach to teach these kids about what it takes to succeed from shift to shift. A rookie head coach that continues to trot out players like Stafford in the top 6. A coach that doesn't insist on every player finishing their check, regardless of their role. A coach that sees his veteran defenseman standing around, watching puck carriers, and allowing them to skate unevaded to the net while they simply play go-fish with their stick. A coach that isn't rewarding effort and work with ice time, regardless of age.

I can deal with losing game after game after game. What I can't deal with is watching this team lose game after game after game in the manner in which they're losing them, and the veteran players that apparently have an infinite leash.

 

[LGBuffalo]

There's a graph somewhere out there where one line represents the value of doing poorly now for the future of the team and another line represents the value of having leadership to tailor the new core of this team into a future contender.

I'm all about getting the quality talent, but not to the extent that it ingrains a complete losing culture in the locker room that hurts us more in the long run just so that we can COMPLETELY tank.

I'm hoping that the organization finds the point where those two lines meet so that we can grab that talent while also gelling the core into something that's going to be threatening in a few years.

Beautifully put! For me, there is no shame in losing when you are just not as good as your opponent and not as talented. That's fine, and will happen during a long NHL season. What has really gotten to me is the fact that they're losing and showing nothing on the ice that looks like organized hockey. That falls squarely on coaching. How many times do you have to see a forward have a clear path with the puck out of the defensive zone. Yet, he makes a pass back to the defenseman, who bobbles the puck, has to reverse ice to his partner, and then, with no forechecking from the other team, they've hemmed themselves in the zone for the next shift. It's tough to watch.

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

That^

I'm upset by the fact that some players have the infinite leash while others can't do anything without benchings (Larsson cough). Need to see the guys earning ice time get the ice time.

 

[LGBuffalo]

If Ron Rolston deserves to be fired then so does Darcy Regier.

I'm all for an actual rebuild. They're in the middle of one. What I'm not for is a GM that has apparently seleced the wrong head coach to teach these kids about what it takes to succeed from shift to shift. A rookie head coach that continues to trot out players like Stafford in the top 6. A coach that doesn't insist on every player finishing their check, regardless of their role. A coach that sees his veteran defenseman standing around, watching puck carriers, and allowing them to skate unevaded to the net while they simply play go-fish with their stick. A coach that isn't rewarding effort and work with ice time, regardless of age.

I can deal with losing game after game after game. What I can't deal with is watching this team lose game after game after game in the manner in which they're losing them, and the veteran players that apparently have an infinite leash.

Indeed. I don't usually quote Pierre, but he correctly showed Hodgson yesterday just turn and move away from finishing a check on Chara. No, he's not going to blast Chara or even come close to winning that confrontation, but it's the mindset. That's what has been tough for me to watch.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

I was fine with Rolston until this season started. I didn't get to see Rochester at all, now I see what Rolston is as a coach and it's TERRIBLE! Like others (jbuds, Joshjull) I don't care that they're losing because they need as many top picks as possible, but I also want the rookies/prospects to learn how to play a proper game at the NHL level.

Maybe Rolston can coach in practice, and player development is supposed to be his best quality, but his game management is SO Terribadful, that I'm worried he'll stunt their development. I'm not worried about the young players' attitudes or confidence or other intangibles. I'm worried about them learning how to play NHL hockey. I'm not sure two years of disorganized mess on ice can be corrected by a new coach very quickly, especially when it's the first two years of the young players' careers.

I'm all for the draft picks, but not sure how much damage could be caused in the meantime. On top of that, Regier should be held accountable for the coaching decisions. If he needs to be replaced just to get a coach that can teach these guys how to play a good, competitive brand (besides just teaching fundamentals), then that needs to happen also. I'm generally fine with Regier, but to me the coaching alone is a keep/fire decision.

 

[Jacob582]

On top of that, Regier should be held accountable for the coaching decisions. I'm generally fine with Regier, but to me the coaching alone is a keep/fire decision.

Pegula should be held accountable for the GM decisions. I'm generally fine with Pegula, but to me the GM alone is a keep/fire decision.

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

Can't fire the owner though.

 

[Jacob582]

Indeed. I don't usually quote Pierre, but he correctly showed Hodgson yesterday just turn and move away from finishing a check on Chara. No, he's not going to blast Chara or even come close to winning that confrontation, but it's the mindset. That's what has been tough for me to watch.

Hodgson is a soft player. You will not change him.

I remember when the Sabres were playing the Flyers. 2 Flyers were on top of a Sabre who was down on the ice. Vanek had another Flyer player tied up. Hodgson comes in and grabs the same player that Vanek had a hold of. Weak.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

All I want is a coach that says "I know we're not the most talented team in the league, but X are our strengths, we're going to do Y to maximize those things aggressively."

No more of this "****, we're mediocre defensively, let's hang all the way back and allow five decent-to-good chances instead of one great one."

 

[1point21Gigawatts]

The more games I watch, the more i realize that RonRol has no clue what he is doing. I don't want to pretend to understand the nuances of coaching an NHL team, but even I can see that this guy is floundering. I don't suppose now is the best time to can the guy, but if he is behind the bench again next season....

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

All I want is a coach that says "I know we're not the most talented team in the league, but X are our strengths, we're going to do Y to maximize those things aggressively."

No more of this "****, we're mediocre defensively, let's hang all the way back and allow five decent-to-good chances instead of one great one."

This what turns a team that we know will be bad into a team that we can't stand to watch. I want them to play a game that will (eventually when they have more talent) be able to compete against an NHL team. For now it's the most passive acceptance of defeat I've ever seen, and that's what I'm afraid could be counter-productive (for the young players) about keeping Rolston.