Iron Crotch Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 The plan was to bottom out. He enacted that plan with his boss's blessing. Then they canned him anyway. Plus, if the Sabres become contenders again even somewhat on the strength of our last two drafts, it'll be hard not to give Regier some credit (not to mention the extra picks we have locked and loaded for the next couple drafts too). I'm glad Darcy's gone and I don't want him back but it's tough to criticize him for having a bad team in a year where they were trying to have a bad team. Criticize him for having bad teams in years where they were trying to have a good team. IMHO, no GM should try to have a bad team. Ever. In any sport. I don't think it is strategic... I think it is lazy. And, if you're trying to tank then why even bother paying a GM a salary? Any one of us on this board could assemble a really bad team for free! Quote
SabresBillsFan Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 Yeah, it is almost inconceivable how an NHL roster could be so devoid of top-level talent. That's what happens when you decide to draft a lot of defenseman. Then throw in a lot of late runs to screw up a better pick and you have a mediocre roster. Plus you think of all the seconds he gave up for rentals how retarded. We are in year 1 of this cleanup I still think we are 3-5 years before making playoffs and that means the tank must keep rolling! Quote
Robviously Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 IMHO, no GM should try to have a bad team. Ever. In any sport. I don't think it is strategic... I think it is lazy. And, if you're trying to tank then why even bother paying a GM a salary? Any one of us on this board could assemble a really bad team for free! Ever? What do you call it when a GM trades a veteran for a draft pick or a prospect that isn't close? They're actively making their team worse. So should that not be allowed? What about trading a pending UFA at the deadline? Again, you're making your team worse. A GM can oversee a rebuilding year. Call it whatever you want, but that's trying to be bad now so that you can be good in the future. Quote
Nitro60 Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 Darcy drafted guys that appealed to him and his vision. That will scare any team at any level from hiring him. Quote
SabresBillsFan Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 (edited) The plan was to bottom out. He enacted that plan with his boss's blessing. Then they canned him anyway. I'm glad Darcy's gone and I don't want him back but it's tough to criticize him for having a bad team in a year where they were trying to have a bad team. Criticize him for having bad teams in years where they were trying to have a good team. I can agree with this but I think the plan was to bottom out and get a top 3 pick in the next 2-3 drafts. Plus I'm not really sold on Grigs I think there was a reason why all those teams were passing him by in the draft. I think JT Compher is going to be a better player than Grigs. Edited February 7, 2014 by SabresBillsFan Quote
Robviously Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 I can agree with this but I think the plan was to bottom out and get a top 3 pick in the next 2-3 drafts. Plus I'm not really sold on Grigs I think there was a reason why all those teams were passing him by in the draft. Is anyone sold on Grigs? Quote
SabresBillsFan Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 Is anyone sold on Grigs? Still a very high pick to reach on a player. His skating and work ethic are brutal. He needs to get with Girgs and work out with him and the skating coach. Quote
Iron Crotch Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 (edited) Ever? What do you call it when a GM trades a veteran for a draft pick or a prospect that isn't close? They're actively making their team worse. So should that not be allowed? What about trading a pending UFA at the deadline? Again, you're making your team worse. A GM can oversee a rebuilding year. Call it whatever you want, but that's trying to be bad now so that you can be good in the future. The presumption of many on this board is the only way to possibly build a winning team is to be really bad and get one or more top-3 picks. My position is that a good GM who drafts well and trades well and is generally good at his job doesn't have to have the first overall pick to build a good team. And for Darcy to suggest that he was incapable of finding good players without landing the top pick, to me, is just plain lazy. The best team in hockey this year (Anaheim) didn't rely on a series of high draft picks to build the team. The Detroit dynasty teams didn't rely on "bottoming out." Edited February 7, 2014 by Potato Quote
dudacek Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 More Murray: he's doing a lot of asking our guys about our acquisitions - what do you like about them and why were they picked up. He said some guys will have to come around to his way of thinking. He talked a lot about leaning on his staff and needed guys he trusts. My reaction: some scouts and player personnel people should be worried about their jobs. Quote
Robviously Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 The presumption of many on this board is the only way to possibly build a winning team is to be really bad and get one or more top-3 picks. Nope. No. Not only is this NOT the presumption of "many" on this board, I don't think anyone on this board has ever said it's the "only" way. And there has never been anything controversial about teams rebuilding. It's an inter temporal trade. You trade good now (and accept bad) to be better later. Almost everyone does this at some point. Quote
dudacek Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 The presumption of many on this board is the only way to possibly build a winning team is to be really bad and get one or more top-3 picks. My position is that a good GM who drafts well and trades well and is generally good at his job doesn't have to have the first overall pick to build a good team. And for Darcy to suggest that he was incapable of finding good players without landing the top pick, to me, is just plain lazy. The best team in hockey this year (Annaheim) didn't rely on a series of high draft picks to build the team. The Detroit dynasty teams didn't rely on "bottoming out." Murray's take seems to be it's about keeping a steady stream of young players coming, then acquiring good players however you can get them. Quote
grinreaper Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 Lol I'm not sure this guy has a hole anywhere Roll him in flour and look for the wet spot. Quote
SabresBillsFan Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 Murray's take seems to be it's about keeping a steady stream of young players coming, then acquiring good players however you can get them. When you have a good team it's easier to add pieces thru free agency or a trade if the team is good. Most players want to be on solid teams. Anaheim built around Getzlaf and Perry and those two are pretty darn good to build around. We have nothing close to that in Buffalo. Detroit has Datsyuk and Zetterberg and we have nothing close to those two. Yes you can build a team without landing a top 3 pick but it's not easy. Quote
Nitro60 Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 We will see soon what Murray has on his mind once the Olympics break is over. Quote
Hoss Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 Just realized that the Sabres are the only team in the NHL that won't play over the next two days. Quote
Nitro60 Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 At least we get to root for a team that has a good chance in winning....go USA! Quote
Iron Crotch Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 When you have a good team it's easier to add pieces thru free agency or a trade if the team is good. Most players want to be on solid teams. Anaheim built around Getzlaf and Perry and those two are pretty darn good to build around. We have nothing close to that in Buffalo. Detroit has Datsyuk and Zetterberg and we have nothing close to those two. Yes you can build a team without landing a top 3 pick but it's not easy. That's my entire point. Those guys weren't just there, they were drafted. Getzlaf was taken 19th and Perry 28th overall. Datsyuk was 171st overall. Zetterberg went 210th overall. Anyone can be bad and take Crosby with the first pick. A good GM can get "above market returns" consistently. Quote
Nitro60 Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 Ding ding ding we have a winner, Potato nails it. Quote
Nitro60 Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 No. It was a punch in the gut late goal that did them in. Quote
... Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 Okay. Thanks! I guess it's not worth watching the rebroadcast. Quote
grinreaper Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 The thing i don't get with TN is he seems to have different standards for different people. Some guys have a bad game they are immediately in the press box. Other guys (Weber/McBain) can seem to do no wrong. Seems very inconsistent in that regard. Every coach has their favorites but his seem pretty obvious. Sorta depends on who is available doesn't it? Quote
dudacek Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 When you have a good team it's easier to add pieces thru free agency or a trade if the team is good. Most players want to be on solid teams. Anaheim built around Getzlaf and Perry and those two are pretty darn good to build around. We have nothing close to that in Buffalo. Detroit has Datsyuk and Zetterberg and we have nothing close to those two. Yes you can build a team without landing a top 3 pick but it's not easy. Absolutely. Our best chance to get those players will be our top pick this year and next. But Anaheim got their pair at picks 19 and 28, and Detroit got theirs in the late rounds. We were lucky on Hasek, and Perreault. We were smart to get Lafontaine, but we were bad to get the player we needed to trade for him. At some point, something like that will happen again. In the meantime, you do everything you can to improve your roster to increase the odds. Quote
SabresBillsFan Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 Absolutely. Our best chance to get those players will be our top pick this year and next. But Anaheim got their pair at picks 19 and 28, and Detroit got theirs in the late rounds. We were lucky on Hasek, and Perreault. We were smart to get Lafontaine, but we were bad to get the player we needed to trade for him. At some point, something like that will happen again. In the meantime, you do everything you can to improve your roster to increase the odds. I still want McDavid badly on this team. A player that is being compared to Sid stat wise and is a student of the game doesn't come along every year. Quote
Hoss Posted February 7, 2014 Report Posted February 7, 2014 That's my entire point. Those guys weren't just there, they were drafted. Getzlaf was taken 19th and Perry 28th overall. Datsyuk was 171st overall. Zetterberg went 210th overall. Anyone can be bad and take Crosby with the first pick. A good GM can get "above market returns" consistently. Getzlaf and Perry: good examples. Zetterberg and Datsyuk: examples of when the game wasn't scouted as well overseas and outside of North America. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.