Serious question now that the offseason dust has settled: would you rather go into the 3rd-last game of next season with ...

[LGR4GM]

You can't rebuild a team in a year without cutting corners. In this case, cutting corners would be using players if they're not ready and bringing in whomever they can get whether they're a good fit or not. I'm willing to wait for this to be done right.

This is exactly what DR did, cut corners, forced players into uncomfortable spots, and brought in guys who didn't fit. His last 2 years was a constant train wreck with the only saving grace being his uncanny ability to trade well.

[nfreeman]

And we didn't win a Cup either.

 

Also, Perreault was the best this team ever had. And we technically got him by tanking.

 

No. He was chosen in the expansion draft.

[Iron Crotch]

No. He was chosen in the expansion draft.

 

Yep. We got him by winning a coin flip (over Vancouver).

 

To the general topic, you don't lose on purpose ever. In any sport. Your job as a professional athlete, as a coach, as a GM is to win games. All draft picks are gambles and there isn't a single draft throughout history where the first pick ended up being a better player than the second pick, the second better than the third, and so forth down the draft. There is a huge amount of noise in the draft. Win as many games as you can. Pick wherever you end up. And, build a team through shrewd transactions and keen talent evaluation. If you need to lose on purpose to build a team then you're a lousy GM.

[LastPommerFan]

No. He was chosen in the expansion draft.

 

He was chosen at the regular amateur draft. We won the draft lottery. There's a different way to do that now, but it's the same mechanism.

 

In the Expansion Draft, we picked Tom Webster.

[Eleven]

Yep. We got him by winning a coin flip (over Vancouver).

 

 

It was a spin of a wheel. The wheel landed on no. 11, which the Sabres had.

[darksabre]

 

 

No. He was chosen in the expansion draft.

 

Which is equivalent to tanking.

[TrueBlueGED]

Yep. We got him by winning a coin flip (over Vancouver).

 

To the general topic, you don't lose on purpose ever. In any sport. Your job as a professional athlete, as a coach, as a GM is to win games. All draft picks are gambles and there isn't a single draft throughout history where the first pick ended up being a better player than the second pick, the second better than the third, and so forth down the draft. There is a huge amount of noise in the draft. Win as many games as you can. Pick wherever you end up. And, build a team through shrewd transactions and keen talent evaluation. If you need to lose on purpose to build a team then you're a lousy GM.

 

A GM's job isn't to win games, it's to compete for, and ultimately win, championships. If a GM deems the best way to do that is a season or two of tanking, he's still doing his job. You don't have to like it or agree with it, but he's not abdicating any responsibility.

[SwampD]

A GM's job isn't to win games, it's to compete for, and ultimately win, championships. If a GM deems the best way to do that is a season or two of tanking, he's still doing his job. You don't have to like it or agree with it, but he's not abdicating any responsibility.

If that's all it was I'd probably fine with it.

[TrueBlueGED]

 

If that's all it was I'd probably fine with it.

 

Well, last year was the only true bottoming out. The year before was a half-assed tank job, and while I feel they have potential to be the worst team in the league this year, they're at least icing NHL players.

[LastPommerFan]

If that's all it was I'd probably fine with it.

 

The tank didn't start until we traded Leopold on March 30th, 2013, we haven't even been tanking for 18 months yet.

[Claude_Verret]

Yep. We got him by winning a coin flip (over Vancouver).

 

To the general topic, you don't lose on purpose ever. In any sport. Your job as a professional athlete, as a coach, as a GM is to win games. All draft picks are gambles and there isn't a single draft throughout history where the first pick ended up being a better player than the second pick, the second better than the third, and so forth down the draft. There is a huge amount of noise in the draft. Win as many games as you can. Pick wherever you end up. And, build a team through shrewd transactions and keen talent evaluation. If you need to lose on purpose to build a team then you're a lousy GM.

 

You can typically hear a pin drop in the top 5. By the time you reach pick 10 and beyond it gets pretty gosh darn noisy. Thus the tank.

[SwampD]

The tank didn't start until we traded Leopold on March 30th, 2013, we haven't even been tanking for 18 months yet.

I would say it started sooner (pre Ruff's firing), and we're being asked to go another year, then wait even longer for it to bear fruit. Add to that the crappy years leading up to it and we're looking at a whole lotta years.

[LastPommerFan]

I would say it started sooner (pre Ruff's firing), and we're being asked to go another year, then wait even longer for it to bear fruit. Add to that the crappy years leading up to it and we're looking at a whole lotta years.

 

it certainly didn't start before the lockout. We spent a fortune on UFAs.

 

We're going to win a playoff series in 2016.

[LGR4GM]

it certainly didn't start before the lockout. We spent a fortune on UFAs.

 

We're going to win a playoff series in 2016.

I actually think that is possible. Maybe not that likely but if we have Samson, Grigorenko (fingers crossed) and Eichel all on the team that is some major talent. Toss in Baptiste, Fasching, Ullmark maybe... there is just too much talent for us to be crappy for to much longer.

[LastPommerFan]

I actually think that is possible. Maybe not that likely but if we have Samson, Grigorenko (fingers crossed) and Eichel all on the team that is some major talent. Toss in Baptiste, Fasching, Ullmark maybe... there is just too much talent for us to be crappy for to much longer.

 

Samson-Ennis/Hodgson/Grigs(I've not given up yet, either)-Zemgus could be the middle of a playoff series winning team given one more year to grow.

 

Samson/Eichel - Eichel/Samson - Zemgus is not significantly better than the above in 2015-16, but is significantly better every year after that.

 

better, just not significantly better in Eichel's rookie year.

Edited August 8, 2014 by Glass Case Of Emotion

[Taro T]

 

 

Yes. You are correct.

 

Sorry Taro. Your position has great emotional resonance, but facts is facts.

 

 

 

I think there is a compelling argument to be made that the '75 team was closer than the '99 team.

 

 

 

Ahem!

:huh: How do you figure the '75 team was closer than '99?

 

The '99 team was a goal & a game away. And both Modano & Hull were playing injured in game 6. Neither were a definite go for a game 7.

 

The '75 team needed at least 3 goals and a win in a frozen over hell in late May. Wasn't gonna happen.

 

 

Had the Isles managed to take game 7 from Filly, that '75 team would have won and there wouldn't even be a discussion about '75 vs '06; but the Sabres had nearly as little chance of winning that last series as the '68-'70 Blues had. The '06 Sabres were less than 20 minutes away from the Eulers and w/ any returning D matched up very well against them.

 

 

 

1975 was closer. The Sabres needed a minimum of 4 goals to win that cup that year (3 to win Game 6, 1 minimum to win game 7). The Sabres needed a minimum of 6 goals to win: 2 vs. the Canes and then four 1-0 games. I get the "they can't win in that building" concept, but realistically a couple bounces would have tossed that.

That Sabres team was not realistically going to get a "couple of bounces" against Parent in the Spectrum.

 

And finding 4 more goals against Parent wasn't some easy feat to pull off for anyone. He was better than 0.2 ga/g than anyone in the regular season w/ a 2.02 and dropped that to 1.89 in the playoffs. (And that 1.89 INCLUDED the 9 goals scored in the fog in games 3&4.) Heck, the Sabres had a grand total of 3 goals in 3 games in Filly and were shutout when their backs were against the wall at home. Counting regular season, they had 4 goals in 5 games in Filly. They never held the Phlyers to less than 2 goals in any of the 11 games they played and gave up 4 or more 8 times. And, if not for the fog, the Sabres likely don't come close to 4 goals in reguation in either game 3 or 4. Parent was a friggin' wall during their SC days. No one played angles like he did and his D didn't let you get to the few rebounds.

 

That Sabres team realistically pushed the Phlyers as far as they were going to. They weren't winning that year, unfortunately. The Spectrum was literally the Sabres' personal house of horrors.

[nfreeman]

Which is equivalent to tanking.

 

How on earth is it equivalent to tanking? The Sabres had not yet played an NHL game when they drafted #11.

 

The tank didn't start until we traded Leopold on March 30th, 2013, we haven't even been tanking for 18 months yet.

 

Using a career mediocrity as a tanking touchstone again, eh? I'm sensing a pattern.

[LastPommerFan]

How on earth is it equivalent to tanking? The Sabres had not yet played an NHL game when they drafted #11.

 

 

 

Using a career mediocrity as a tanking touchstone again, eh? I'm sensing a pattern.

 

Well the next day they traded Robyn Regehr and 2 days after that they traded the best player ever to wear blue and gold. I was just trying to avoid crying. Thinking about how the tank actually started on 4/3/13 (the only day in Sabres History darker than Black Sunday) is a little tough for some people, ok?

 

Why you gotta be a bully?

 

:cry:

[nfreeman]

Well the next day they traded Robyn Regehr and 2 days after that they traded the best player ever to wear blue and gold. I was just trying to avoid crying. Thinking about how the tank actually started on 4/3/13 (the only day in Sabres History darker than Black Sunday) is a little tough for some people, ok?

 

Why you gotta be a bully?

 

:cry:

 

I'm sorry.

 

This is a safe place, I promise.

[Weave]

Well the next day they traded Robyn Regehr and 2 days after that they traded the best player ever to wear blue and gold. I was just trying to avoid crying. Thinking about how the tank actually started on 4/3/13 (the only day in Sabres History darker than Black Sunday) is a little tough for some people, ok?

 

Why you gotta be a bully?

 

:cry:

 

[Claude_Verret]

#enjoythetank

[Kristian]

The thing is, there were none of these. There were no "They traded who!?" trades of one of the core to shake up the roster or make a real difference. The idea that Darcy did everything he could and that a tank was the only thing left is complete BS. He brought in the same players the same coaches year after year and expecte a different result.

 

I find it hilarious that the same GM that used "not mortgaging the future" to bring in real elite talent was the same guy that initiated "the Tank" and suffering.

 

This f#####g sucks!!!!

 

Couldn't agree more.

 

This is exactly why I keep saying Darcy was clueless when it came to building a hockey team.

 

He was good at identifying talent, and good at getting value for his assets (at least early in his tenure), but he was utterly and completely LOST when it came to team-chemistry.

 

Add to this, that he never understood *why* his teams didn't work out, and kept insisting the "core" needed to "mature" and things would be much better, tells you that he wasn't only clueless - He was also stubborn, and pig-headed.

[Eleven]

Here's some images for all you tankers: http://www.diebytheblade.com/2014/8/1/5961387/sabres-wartime-propaganda

[mjd1001]

For me, its either finish last (guaranteeing at least the 2nd pick in the draft) or go all out for wins. I'd PREFER finishing last, but I just don't think they are going do that this year. I see this team as worse case scenario a 25th to 26th place team, and BEST case about 20th overall. The problem is, I don't think they will finish last.

[IKnowPhysics]

Here's some images for all you tankers: http://www.diebytheb...time-propaganda

 

Enjoyable.

Edited August 12, 2014 by IKnowPhysics