Worst team in Franchise History

[WildCard]

lets change topic to "in NHL history"

Or "NHL Infamy"

[bunomatic]

I prefer best team at losing EVER !

[NNYSABRESMAN]

My wife loves this team! They are so bad to watch that I am absoulutely killing her Honey Do list!

[26CornerBlitz]

THE GLOBE AND MAIL asks, Is Buffalo the worst team in the NHL’s three-point game era?

 

They are in dead last in the NHL by a wide margin, with just 11 points in 26 games.

 

They have won just one of their last 14 games in regulation. Three of their five wins have come in the coin flip that is the shootout.

 

Yes, the Buffalo Sabres, deep into the 2013-14 season, are on pace for just 35 points in a league where it takes more than 90 to usually make the playoffs.

[Derrico]

I keep thinking we're going to go on a little run at some point and reel off like 4 or 5 in a row. I think I'm just use to us screwing our draft pick. Although our start has been so horrendous that if we can keep this pace up into the new year it won't matter if we go on a late run.

[apuszczalowski]

I keep thinking we're going to go on a little run at some point and reel off like 4 or 5 in a row. I think I'm just use to us screwing our draft pick. Although our start has been so horrendous that if we can keep this pace up into the new year it won't matter if we go on a late run.

It doesn't matter though, they can go on to not win another game this season and still not get the coveted Holy #1 pick this year. Its why the league put in the Draft Lottery, so that teams can't "Suck for Luck"

 

There are 29 other teams in the league that will have to rebuild without the #1 pick, and many of them are doing just fine rebuilding other ways without desperately praying for the #1 pick to save them. I would much rather watch and cheer for a team thats trying to rebuild and win every year, then one thats putting all of its hopes and dreams of rebuilding on getting the #1 pick

[TrueBlueGED]

I keep thinking we're going to go on a little run at some point and reel off like 4 or 5 in a row. I think I'm just use to us screwing our draft pick. Although our start has been so horrendous that if we can keep this pace up into the new year it won't matter if we go on a late run.

 

Look on the bright side: we could win the next five and still easily finish last in the league.

[Derrico]

It doesn't matter though, they can go on to not win another game this season and still not get the coveted Holy #1 pick this year. Its why the league put in the Draft Lottery, so that teams can't "Suck for Luck"

 

There are 29 other teams in the league that will have to rebuild without the #1 pick, and many of them are doing just fine rebuilding other ways without desperately praying for the #1 pick to save them. I would much rather watch and cheer for a team thats trying to rebuild and win every year, then one thats putting all of its hopes and dreams of rebuilding on getting the #1 pick

 

I realize the league rules and I'm not just looking at the top pick. However picking second is preferable to picking third, which could easily happen if we get passed by the Oil. This year is a complete right off as far as wins go. I don't want to go on some long run and end up picking 8th or 9th again, especially in a lost year.

[qwksndmonster]

It doesn't matter though, they can go on to not win another game this season and still not get the coveted Holy #1 pick this year. Its why the league put in the Draft Lottery, so that teams can't "Suck for Luck"

 

There are 29 other teams in the league that will have to rebuild without the #1 pick, and many of them are doing just fine rebuilding other ways without desperately praying for the #1 pick to save them. I would much rather watch and cheer for a team thats trying to rebuild and win every year, then one thats putting all of its hopes and dreams of rebuilding on getting the #1 pick

I'm perfectly fine with 1 or 2 this year. If we're dead last in the league again next year, then I'll start freaking out about the lottery.

 

It definitely sucks that our team is where it is, but the draft picks are a nice consolation prize.

[apuszczalowski]

But with the right guys in place in the front Office, it shouldn't and won't matter if we are picking 1st or 10th, they will get someone who can play. The only difference is that almost anyone can make the right pick at the top of the draft, but get down a few spots and thats where the good Front Offices earn their money by finding the right skilled players.

[Derrico]

But with the right guys in place in the front Office, it shouldn't and won't matter if we are picking 1st or 10th, they will get someone who can play. The only difference is that almost anyone can make the right pick at the top of the draft, but get down a few spots and thats where the good Front Offices earn their money by finding the right skilled players.

 

That's true but historically speaking the best of the best come from the top of the draft. I don't care who you have in your front office, the player taken #1 overall is better than the guy taken 10th overall 99 out of 100 times.

[TrueBlueGED]

But with the right guys in place in the front Office, it shouldn't and won't matter if we are picking 1st or 10th, they will get someone who can play. The only difference is that almost anyone can make the right pick at the top of the draft, but get down a few spots and thats where the good Front Offices earn their money by finding the right skilled players.

 

If this is true, then why is the hit rate for draft picks so much lower later in the 1st round where the best teams, and presumably, best front offices are?

[apuszczalowski]

That's true but historically speaking the best of the best come from the top of the draft. I don't care who you have in your front office, the player taken #1 overall is better than the guy taken 10th overall 99 out of 100 times.

Tell that to the Oilers, or the Islanders, or the Sens who have all picked guys #1 overall who have had players picked later that ended up with much better careers.

The Red Wings are a perfect example of what I am talking about, they have not picked below the #20 spot since 1991 and that was in 2005 when they picked 19th. In most years they havent even had a 1st round pick. Thats 22 drafts and they have taken some Hall of Fame guys in those drafts. They have been a playoff team for the majority of that time and have won multiple cups.

[TrueBlueGED]

Tell that to the Oilers, or the Islanders, or the Sens who have all picked guys #1 overall who have had players picked later that ended up with much better careers.

The Red Wings are a perfect example of what I am talking about, they have not picked below the #20 spot since 1991 and that was in 2005 when they picked 19th. In most years they havent even had a 1st round pick. Thats 22 drafts and they have taken some Hall of Fame guys in those drafts. They have been a playoff team for the majority of that time and have won multiple cups.

 

Are you really prepared to argue that Datsyuk and Zetterberg are examples of quality scouting? If a front office thinks two guys are going to be that good, they don't let them sit until the 6th and 7th rounds, respectively.

[darksabre]

 

 

Are you really prepared to argue that Datsyuk and Zetterberg are examples of quality scouting? If a front office thinks two guys are going to be that good, they don't let them sit until the 6th and 7th rounds, respectively.

 

Wouldn't scouting have to play a role in finding players who might otherwise go overlooked? Someone had to establish that these guys were worth taking over everyone else in those rounds, right?

[Derrico]

Tell that to the Oilers, or the Islanders, or the Sens who have all picked guys #1 overall who have had players picked later that ended up with much better careers.

The Red Wings are a perfect example of what I am talking about, they have not picked below the #20 spot since 1991 and that was in 2005 when they picked 19th. In most years they havent even had a 1st round pick. Thats 22 drafts and they have taken some Hall of Fame guys in those drafts. They have been a playoff team for the majority of that time and have won multiple cups.

 

It's been proven a million times the stars overwhelmingly come from the top of the draft. There are so many examples, if you can't see that by now I'm not going on a long post to prove it. Do a little research yourself, including work that's been done by members of this message board.

[TrueBlueGED]

Wouldn't scouting have to play a role in finding players who might otherwise go overlooked? Someone had to establish that these guys were worth taking over everyone else in those rounds, right?

 

Sure, but that doesn't mean they deserve a lot of credit. Take it from the other perspective. The same front office that recognized Datsyuk and Zetterberg should be taken over their peers in the late rounds also made the judgment that 5-6 other guys in the draft, who probably amounted to nothing, were better draft picks. Presumably, they also had a good chunk of the 150ish players drafted by other teams raked higher than those two.

 

If they had taken them in round 1 when they were totally off anybody else's radar, sure, they'd get a ton of credit for that. But as is I think it was about 98% luck.

[Neo]

 

 

Are you really prepared to argue that Datsyuk and Zetterberg are examples of quality scouting? If a front office thinks two guys are going to be that good, they don't let them sit until the 6th and 7th rounds, respectively.

 

 

I'd argue that's exactly what it is.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

 

 

 

I'd argue that's exactly what it is.

 

One way to liven up the draft is to go to an auction system instead of a draft slot. Give teams a set amount of dollars slotted by finish. Say each team gets $4 million to allocate on the rookie pool. Then you get an extra $20,000 for each slot in the standings....so the worst team in the league gets a bankroll of $4.6 million. You can use your money in any fashion, but you would pretty much let the worst team get the #1 pick if they went all-in.

 

This could really test the scouting powers of teams and would be the only way to answer a question like Detroit. It would make for great drama considering just about any team can get any player. You could also turn your franchise around overnight. You may end up with 15 players or 1....but either way it could be huge.

[darksabre]

 

 

Sure, but that doesn't mean they deserve a lot of credit. Take it from the other perspective. The same front office that recognized Datsyuk and Zetterberg should be taken over their peers in the late rounds also made the judgment that 5-6 other guys in the draft, who probably amounted to nothing, were better draft picks. Presumably, they also had a good chunk of the 150ish players drafted by other teams raked higher than those two.

 

If they had taken them in round 1 when they were totally off anybody else's radar, sure, they'd get a ton of credit for that. But as is I think it was about 98% luck.

 

But why take them in those early rounds? That's silly. You're picking them based on the fact that they are late draft picks. If Detroit takes them early then we're not even having this conversation.

[TrueBlueGED]

But why take them in those early rounds? That's silly. You're picking them based on the fact that they are late draft picks. If Detroit takes them early then we're not even having this conversation.

 

If you think someone is going to be a great player, you take them at the first opportunity regardless of what anyone else thinks. Why would you risk otherwise when you can never be certain where other teams have someone ranked? Passing on players you love for players you love less simply because you expect them to slide is insanity. Remember, we're not talking about a 4 pick difference, we're talking 5+ rounds. The only reasonable explanation for taking 5-6 players over Datsyuk and Zetterberg is because you think they were better picks.

[Robviously]

If you think someone is going to be a great player, you take them at the first opportunity regardless of what anyone else thinks. Why would you risk otherwise when you can never be certain where other teams have someone ranked? Passing on players you love for players you love less simply because you expect them to slide is insanity. Remember, we're not talking about a 4 pick difference, we're talking 5+ rounds. The only reasonable explanation for taking 5-6 players over Datsyuk and Zetterberg is because you think they were better picks.

And if the argument was that they were SO SMART that they knew (1) that Datsyuk/Zetterberg was going to be a star and (2) that no one else would take him prior to the 6th/7th rounds, then wouldn't they also have been smart enough to use their picks before those two on other NHL players?

 

In 1998, they had SEVEN picks before they finally took Datsyuk in the 6th round. Of those 7 picks, only Jiri Fischer (1st round) had a real NHL career (300 games). Only one other player of the other 6 played in the NHL and that lasted 2 games.

 

Same with Zetterberg in 1999. They had 3 picks before him and none of them had real NHL careers.

 

They hit back to back grand slams but even they didn't know what they were doing at the time.

[Weave]

And if the argument was that they were SO SMART that they knew (1) that Datsyuk/Zetterberg was going to be a star and (2) that no one else would take him prior to the 6th/7th rounds, then wouldn't they also have been smart enough to use their picks before those two on other NHL players?

 

In 1998, they had SEVEN picks before they finally took Datsyuk in the 6th round. Of those 7 picks, only Jiri Fischer (1st round) had a real NHL career (300 games). Only one other player of the other 6 played in the NHL and that lasted 2 games.

 

Same with Zetterberg in 1999. They had 3 picks before him and none of them had real NHL careers.

 

They hit back to back grand slams but even they didn't know what they were doing at the time.

 

Yep. It isn't really rational to try and argue that Detroit knew at draft time these guys were going to be anywhere near as good as they became.

[Robviously]

Yep. It isn't really rational to try and argue that Detroit knew at draft time these guys were going to be anywhere near as good as they became.

They deserve credit but it's not exactly a strategy you can adopt.

[Weave]

They deserve credit but it's not exactly a strategy you can adopt.

 

Yeah, obviously they deserve credit for drafting those two. But picked as late as they were, there is no way Detroit thought they had anything other than a punchers chance of making the NHL.