Realistically... A coach can't last beyond 20 games if his team only wins 3 games...

dire wolf

immaculate vibes
May 9, 2006
6,151
1,638
Out in LA
You are still out to lunch on my stance but thanks for trying.


I'm well aware that this team will suck for the foreseeable future. I'm also happy with the stockpiling of assets as we've moved out established players. I expect another infusion the next two drafts of more young talent due to the amount of 1st and 2nd rounders we have now and will likely accumulate with future moves. I have a ton of faith in Regier to acquire as many assets as possible in future trades and I also have a ton of faith in Devine to get the most out of those picks regardless of where they are.

My issue is with how the young players/prospects are currently being developed (or not) at the moment. Many on here are too giddy about how high we will draft to care about that. Its due in large part to the feeling that we will draft a franchise players, blue-chipper, etc. in each of the next two drafts so its all good. Basically nothing matters with the current youngsters because our saviors will be drafted the next two years. Well thats possible but not likely. What is highly likely is we add a lot of talented kids. This will be a great thing and help the rebuild but I don't get the sense many are looking at things this way. Its the next two top picks will save the franchise for many.


Nor do they realize that to realistically get all the pieces needed will require moving many of the recently acquired and future assets in trades, occasionally with overpayments. Part of finding out what we will need is developing the current crop of young players/prospects to see what we have in the first place. I don't see Rolston doing that. So I'm not happy about him being here nor am I happy with how some of the youngsters are being handled period (like a few should be sent elsewhere) The fact that he will lead us to a top 2 pick in a draft year with no discernible franchise players in it does not trump my concerns.


EDIT: and who the hell is in that pic shaking his head? :laugh:

Well said. This is my position too. I don't mind losing. I expect to lose a ton of games this year and next because our players are so young and inexperienced. We don't have the talent and experience to succeed. But if you watch the games, we aren't just losing because of those factors. We're getting creamed on facets of the game that we should be doing a lot better at. The coaching staff should be teaching the players fundamental systems and strategies, and putting the players we have in the best possible position to succeed. See my rant in the Ducks GBU for more specifics. But when Rolston is putting out the Moulson-Hodgson-Ennis line along with the Risto-McBain pairing for a defensive zone start right after we gave up a bunch of goals, the problems are obvious. When you watch our young players struggle for some way to break the puck out of our own zone and there is no one to pass it to, there is an obvious coaching problem.

I don't know if bad coaching can truly ruin talented players, but I know that our young players certainly aren't learning NHL-level strategies from him, so they are not developing properly.

I may be in the minority, but I'd rather pick in the 5-10 slot with good coaching to teach the young'uns than tank just for the sake of picking number 1 or 2.
 

Sabresfansince1980

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2011
10,835
5,194
from Wheatfield, NY
I don't know if bad coaching can truly ruin talented players, but I know that our young players certainly aren't learning NHL-level strategies from him, so they are not developing properly.

I may be in the minority, but I'd rather pick in the 5-10 slot with good coaching to teach the young'uns than tank just for the sake of picking number 1 or 2.

I'm concerned about this as well, but I just don't know what the answer is. I've been saying the first couple weeks of the season that they shouldn't look as bad as they do while losing. I'm just not yet sure how much long-term effect that might have on the young players' development. Maybe time will tell, or they'll just keep being bad and the answers could range from bad scouting/drafting to coaching to management.
 

dire wolf

immaculate vibes
May 9, 2006
6,151
1,638
Out in LA
The point is, nobody should be supporting a terrible coach for the sole purpose of trying to get a better draft pick. Player development is more important.
 

buffalowing88

Registered User
Aug 11, 2008
4,276
1,716
Charlotte, NC
The point is, nobody should be supporting a terrible coach for the sole purpose of trying to get a better draft pick. Player development is more important.

I have swung from both sides of the argument lately when it comes to this issue and at the moment, I'm really starting to become concerned that, like you imply, Rolston is going to screw up the young guys on this squad beyond repair. Prospects have got to be handled with care and if you are going to throw a bunch of these players into this situation, they need guidance and a structured system. I have seen none of that from Rolston. He is great to have around because he is utterly terrible and single handedly has contributed to our tank more than anyone else but the long term effects are going to be an issue. At this point a top 5 pick should be all but ensured so I support canning him now and getting our future coach a head start on this rebuild.
 

Splintered Sherwood

Registered User
Oct 25, 2013
281
0
I don't know if Rolston is the second coming of Lou Angotti or if he simply is a coach who is in over his head or simply doesn't have the tools to succeed. Or simply, all of the above.

I think at the NHL the role of the coach is to motivate players, place them in the proper roles so the players can succeed, and to advise his team on what to expect from the opposition and what they need to do if they want any chance of beating them.

I don't know if Rolston is any good at any of the alleged areas - the record and performance mostly indicates that is in doubt - but, I think the idea of him damaging prospects is kind of overblown. Not the best of examples, but Marty McSorley was a rookie on that awful Penguins team of 83/84 and he had a decent/good career. A better example, Joe Sakic's Nordiques were 5th in the Adams in his rookie year and continued to be fifth until they traded Lindros to Philadelphia and began their ascent up the standings. Marcel Dionne's first 4 years playing for a terrible Red Wings squad didn't hinder his development.

Yes, I know that nobody on the current roster is unlikely to be the next Marcel Dionne or Joe Sakic, but I think it is ultimately up to the player to decide how much he can maximize his talent. Rolston may not be giving the most chances to the rookies, but I think he is trying to hammer home that you have to make the most of what you are given with in terms of ice time and linemates/defence partners.
 

brian_griffin

"Eric Cartman?"
May 10, 2007
16,624
7,851
In the Panderverse
"It's the most embarrassed I've been in my career," Moulson said. (RE: Benching)

Start to worry about him destroying the culture. No one will ever want to play here.

To sba or anyone else:
Was the above quote / benching related to the Ducks game? I watched until about midnight at the local sports bar, then went home, which was still partway through the 3rd pd. Haven't read the GDT or the GBU.

I recall an abyssmally long "MEH" shift with about 14:00 to go in the 2nd where the Ducks bascially held the puck the whole time in the Sabre zone and the Sabre forwards were particularly ineffective in helping the Sabre D and/or clearing the zone. I understand MEH was benched for better part of 3rd pd.

IMO, deserved if based on that 2nd pd shift.
 

brian_griffin

"Eric Cartman?"
May 10, 2007
16,624
7,851
In the Panderverse
You are still out to lunch on my stance but thanks for trying.


I'm well aware that this team will suck for the foreseeable future. I'm also happy with the stockpiling of assets as we've moved out established players. I expect another infusion the next two drafts of more young talent due to the amount of 1st and 2nd rounders we have now and will likely accumulate with future moves. I have a ton of faith in Regier to acquire as many assets as possible in future trades and I also have a ton of faith in Devine to get the most out of those picks regardless of where they are.

My issue is with how the young players/prospects are currently being developed (or not) at the moment. Many on here are too giddy about how high we will draft to care about that. Its due in large part to the feeling that we will draft a franchise players, blue-chipper, etc. in each of the next two drafts so its all good. Basically nothing matters with the current youngsters because our saviors will be drafted the next two years. Well thats possible but not likely. What is highly likely is we add a lot of talented kids. This will be a great thing and help the rebuild but I don't get the sense many are looking at things this way. Its the next two top picks will save the franchise for many.


Nor do they realize that to realistically get all the pieces needed will require moving many of the recently acquired and future assets in trades, occasionally with overpayments. Part of finding out what we will need is developing the current crop of young players/prospects to see what we have in the first place. I don't see Rolston doing that. So I'm not happy about him being here nor am I happy with how some of the youngsters are being handled period (like a few should be sent elsewhere) The fact that he will lead us to a top 2 pick in a draft year with no discernible franchise players in it does not trump my concerns.


EDIT: and who the hell is in that pic shaking his head? :laugh:

1. Well-articulated, as others noted. I will add to your points in your last paragraph.

Part of the hope / belief in acquiring additional talent, (high end or not), then exiting the rebuild and contending again, assumes the current talent develops adequately enough that it all comes together in 2-3 seasons. Waste this season and you add a year to that timetable. Add too many years and then you age the players out of their peak talent window.

2. gif is Doogie Howser / Neil Patrick Harris.

Rolston is now at Fredo stage.
He was banging the cocktail waitresses two at a time.
 

Corto

Faceless Man
Sep 28, 2005
15,991
942
Braavos
I just don't want this thread to die out and be forgotten after a win.

Rolston is still awful. He's terribad.
 

sr edler

gold is not reality
Mar 20, 2010
11,846
6,290
Love the "over the top" dispair displayed in the OP. Thanks for the laugh.
 

joshjull

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
78,467
39,918
Hamburg,NY
@Real_ESPNLeBrun: One of Regier's worst decisions was keeping Rolston as his head coach. Few people around the league believe he was head coach material
 

Djp

Registered User
Jul 28, 2012
23,825
5,639
Alexandria, VA
@Real_ESPNLeBrun: One of Regier's worst decisions was keeping Rolston as his head coach. Few people around the league believe he was head coach material

struggle with this logic....

his success/failure this season is irrelevent to his hiring.

i agree they should have looked at other candidates this offseason and hired a coach looking at all candidadates out there and if he was the best one then fine.

How much of his coaching work was by following Darcy's tanking orders?

But to say he wasnt a coaching candidate is crazy.....

He coached team US U18 club, then he coaches for Rochester.

At the same time they are saying an assistant who has never coached a team is somehow a better candidate...
 

Karate Johnson*

Guest
struggle with this logic....

his success/failure this season is irrelevent to his hiring.

i agree they should have looked at other candidates this offseason and hired a coach looking at all candidadates out there and if he was the best one then fine.

How much of his coaching work was by following Darcy's tanking orders?

But to say he wasnt a coaching candidate is crazy.....

He coached team US U18 club, then he coaches for Rochester.

At the same time they are saying an assistant who has never coached a team is somehow a better candidate...

They hired a guy who was a bad coach during games, and in between games.

That's a death sentence if you're tasked with developing kids.

If he was following Darcy's instructions, guess what? Darcy paid for it too.


What's not to undertand?
 

Chainshot

Give 'em Enough Rope
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
148,173
96,825
Tarnation
Paul Hamilton on GR right now said Myers, under Rolston, wasn't "allowed" to carry the puck. W.T.F. Probably the best part of his game is swooping up the ice and distributing or shooting once he gains the blueline with speed. Hoe. Lee. Crap.
 

LaFontaineToMogilny

Registered User
Jul 16, 2013
407
0
Paul Hamilton on GR right now said Myers, under Rolston, wasn't "allowed" to carry the puck. W.T.F. Probably the best part of his game is swooping up the ice and distributing or shooting once he gains the blueline with speed. Hoe. Lee. Crap.

This simply can not be true!
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->