MattPie Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 youre hitching your horse to 2 seasons over the last 14 since Hasek left them? Again it seems non-tankers are stuck in 2005. I want better than that - Im looking for them to be perennial cup contenders for the next 10-12 years once the "tank" is over. Plus lets not forget the President Trophy winning Sabres got beat easily by Senators and would have been lambs to the slaughter vs the Ducks. But yes they, messed up letting the FA's walk for nothing. Glad we didn't do the same with Pommer, Gaustad, Vanek and Miller. It certainly would have been different, but I'm not sure I'd have hitched my wagon to the 2006-7 team in 2007-8 and beyond with the way the league regressed in terms of calling penalties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 I'm hitchin my horse to Crusader1969's post. It's not 2005 anymore (prior actually), no wealing and dealing for top line players. No lure of big money to get a player on your team to take you deep on playoff run. The only way to get the Malkins and Crosbys and Kanes is by draft. No amount of money will buy them, so you can't buy a pair of cornerstone players, you have to draft and nurture. Success is most probable picking earliest in the draft, hence the need to tank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 It certainly would have been different, but I'm not sure I'd have hitched my wagon to the 2006-7 team in 2007-8 and beyond with the way the league regressed in terms of calling penalties. Regardless of the way the league called penalties post-lockout, those teams had loads of talent that allowed Vanek Roy Afinigenov (?) to be he third line. Even if that team structure wasn't going to work going forward, the players on that team were considered top offensive players. A prudent GM could have shuffled out some of the finesse players for heavier players. It would have been a reload like Detroit rather than the apocalyptic rebuild that we see now. I'm hitchin my horse to Crusader1969's post. It's not 2005 anymore (prior actually), no wealing and dealing for top line players. No lure of big money to get a player on your team to take you deep on playoff run. The only way to get the Malkins and Crosbys and Kanes is by draft. No amount of money will buy them, so you can't buy a pair of cornerstone players, you have to draft and nurture. Success is most probable picking earliest in the draft, hence the need to tank. I understand that based on the position the team is in right now thats the way to go. But back then, we had the quality to continue to build and make adjustments rather than blowing the whole thing up. Yes we wouldn't ever have a Crosby, Stamkos, Taveres etc., but we could still be competitive like the LA and Boston teams that won with talent depth. The Sabres mismanaged that talent by losing Drury/Briere on Black Sunday, and continuing to focus on retaining the winger talent and failing to realize it was the center depth that made that team click. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 the Regardless of the way the league called penalties post-lockout, those teams had loads of talent that allowed Vanek Roy Afinigenov (?) to be he third line. Even if that team structure wasn't going to work going forward, the players on that team were considered top offensive players. A prudent GM could have shuffled out some of the finesse players for heavier players. It would have been a reload like Detroit rather than the apocalyptic rebuild that we see now. I understand that based on the position the team is in right now thats the way to go. But back then, we had the quality to continue to build and make adjustments rather than blowing the whole thing up. Yes we wouldn't ever have a Crosby, Stamkos, Taveres etc., but we could still be competitive like the LA and Boston teams that won with talent depth. The Sabres mismanaged that talent by losing Drury/Briere on Black Sunday, and continuing to focus on retaining the winger talent and failing to realize it was the center depth that made that team click. at the end of the day we will never know what would have happened if Briere and Drury didn't walk - a huge blow to the team and definitely not worth debating any more. Luckily we are 35 more games away from all being on the same page and cheering for the Sabres to win games once again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 the at the end of the day we will never know what would have happened if Briere and Drury didn't walk - a huge blow to the team and definitely not worth debating any more. Luckily we are 35 more games away from all being on the same page and cheering for the Sabres to win games once again. I certainly don't want to open up that can of worms again. That discussion would bleed into every topic around here for years. I think we came up with a dead horse emoticon to use anytime the Drury/Briere thing was discussed. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 the at the end of the day we will never know what would have happened if Briere and Drury didn't walk - a huge blow to the team and definitely not worth debating any more. Luckily we are 35 more games away from all being on the same page and cheering for the Sabres to win games once again. The only thing that will bleach out this underwear skidmark of a season for me is a Stanley Cup. Anything less, even going to 10 consecutive ECFs, and it wasn't worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted January 27, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 The only thing that will bleach out this underwear skidmark of a season for me is a Stanley Cup. Anything less, even going to 10 consecutive ECFs, and it wasn't worth it. Bingo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Regardless of the way the league called penalties post-lockout, those teams had loads of talent that allowed Vanek Roy Afinigenov (?) to be he third line. Even if that team structure wasn't going to work going forward, the players on that team were considered top offensive players. A prudent GM could have shuffled out some of the finesse players for heavier players. It would have been a reload like Detroit rather than the apocalyptic rebuild that we see now. I understand that based on the position the team is in right now thats the way to go. But back then, we had the quality to continue to build and make adjustments rather than blowing the whole thing up. Yes we wouldn't ever have a Crosby, Stamkos, Taveres etc., but we could still be competitive like the LA and Boston teams that won with talent depth. The Sabres mismanaged that talent by losing Drury/Briere on Black Sunday, and continuing to focus on retaining the winger talent and failing to realize it was the center depth that made that team click. Yeah but it wasn't jus that. We had a tiny scouting department that only looked at video footage. We traded away a lot of our 2nd round picks for a useless player. Our draft record from that era is horrific. If the mid-naughties drafting turned up anything good we might have done a lot better. We also traded away the wrong players. Paille became a great 4th liner/PK, MacArthur is a great second line forward now, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 Little early to say we've been in the desert for a generation, no? Well, if you're saying that I'm part of the devaluing of the word "generation," I suppose you're right. But we've been in the desert for 4 freaking years and I'm not seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. wow, what hunt were the Sabres ever in? the hunt for 8th place?? being stuck in the middle is what sucks. I would say that there is a higher risk of being stuck in mediorcrity for a lenghier period than there is of coming in last picking up prospects like Reinhart and McDavid / Eichel and not become a contender. you can have your 40 years of mediocrity if thats what you want. I'll take my 4 or 5 years of losing to build a true contender. Again, this is obnoxiously stated, and ridiculous on its face. Of course no one wants 40 years of mediocrity. The point is that it wasn't that long ago that they were substantially better than mediocre, and that rising to true contender status didn't require the abomination we're currently living with (not to mention that it is fairly likely that this abomination won't result in rising to that status). As 11 ably pointed out, in 2010 they won their division and in 2011 they were winning 3-2 in the playoffs, and 3-1 in the 2nd period of the closeout game, at home, against the defending Eastern Conference champs. That is not mediocrity. That was a good team that needed some improvements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) in 45 years of trying it the Non-tank way - how many cups did it bring the Sabres? again your happy with good teams that go out in the first round but put up a fight. Sure maybe once and a while you may even win a round but at the end of the day its all false positives. You are never really a true cup contender. Being stuck in the middle is a fate worse than death - just listen to Leaf Radio if you want for their perspetive of a team exactly that. For me, I have no issue for the Sabres to sucking for 4 years if it means they add high end talent that will allow them in time to become cup contenders -year in year out As I said before - I would trade every single guy on your "good" Sabres team of 2010 for McDavid or Eichel and now you are possibly adding that player to Reinhart, Girgensons, Risto, Zadarov - plus all the other prospects filling the pipeline. If you can't see the light at the end of the tunnel I have think you either aren't looking very hard or don't want to admit that the Tank crowd is starting to look pretty smart. Edited January 28, 2015 by Crusader1969 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) in 45 years of trying it the Non-tank way - how many cups did it bring the Sabres? again your happy with good teams that go out in the first round but put up a fight. Sure maybe once and a while you may even win a round but at the end of the day its all false positives. You are never really a true cup contender. Being stuck in the middle is a fate worse than death - just listen to Leaf Radio if you want for their perspetive of a team exactly that. For me, I have no issue for the Sabres to sucking for 4 years if it means they add high end talent that will allow them in time to become cup contenders -year in year out As I said before - I would trade every single guy on your "good" Sabres team of 2010 for McDavid or Eichel and now you are possibly adding that player to Reinhart, Girgensons, Risto, Zadarov - plus all the other prospects filling the pipeline. If you can't see the light at the end of the tunnel I have think you either aren't looking very hard or don't want to admit that the Tank crowd is starting to look pretty smart. I stopped reading after that because I distinctly remember you limiting us to the post 2005 lockout years. You can't go back prior to lock-out because the landscape completely changed once the salary cap came into play. Since, there is very few quality players make it to free-agency. No longer can teams out-spend. I won't include the Devils but the Wings/ Rangers were known as big spenders back in the day. The point being the 2011 team had many flaws, however DR lacked the vision and ability to take what we had and improve upon it. We needed centers and we needed to overpay to get them. The market dictated that but DR had to win every trade. It's great to see that on individual deals but sometimes you toss in the extra 2nd that team wants because it's an accpetable loss to you. Edited January 28, 2015 by LGR4GM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 in 45 years of trying it the Non-tank way - how many cups did it bring the Sabres? again your happy with good teams that go out in the first round but put up a fight. Sure maybe once and a while you may even win a round but at the end of the day its all false positives. You are never really a true cup contender. Being stuck in the middle is a fate worse than death - just listen to Leaf Radio if you want for their perspetive of a team exactly that. For me, I have no issue for the Sabres to sucking for 4 years if it means they add high end talent that will allow them in time to become cup contenders -year in year out As I said before - I would trade every single guy on your "good" Sabres team of 2010 for McDavid or Eichel and now you are possibly adding that player to Reinhart, Girgensons, Risto, Zadarov - plus all the other prospects filling the pipeline. If you can't see the light at the end of the tunnel I have think you either aren't looking very hard or don't want to admit that the Tank crowd is starting to look pretty smart. Why on Earth is the tank crowd looking smart? Has the tank delivered any results? Watching the games is unbearable. What exactly is there to indicate that this will improve? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Why on Earth is the tank crowd looking smart? Has the tank delivered any results? Watching the games is unbearable. What exactly is there to indicate that this will improve? Well if you take a look at all the teams post 2005 that drafted 1st overall (minus EDM) then there is good history to indicate we should improve or at least our talent level will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Well, if you're saying that I'm part of the devaluing of the word "generation," I suppose you're right. But we've been in the desert for 4 freaking years and I'm not seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. I just think you're being a bit hyperbolic with the whole thing. Heck, we haven't even actually been tanking for 2 full season yet. If you want to argue that we've been in the desert longer, that's fine, but deliberate tanking has only been involved since the Pominville trade. It may seem like longer, but it really hasn't been that long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 You can't go back prior to lock-out because the landscape completely changed once the salary cap came into play. Since, there is very few quality players make it to free-agency. No longer can teams out-spend. I won't include the Devils but the Wings/ Rangers were known as big spenders back in the day. Not sure what it means, but just thought I would point out that the last SC that the Devils won, they had the fourth highest payroll in the NHL at the time. I think they were at 54MM and while the Sabres were at 32MM, I think. That an enormous difference. Maybe it was 52 and 34. Either way, it's a big difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 in 45 years of trying it the Non-tank way - how many cups did it bring the Sabres? again your happy with good teams that go out in the first round but put up a fight. Sure maybe once and a while you may even win a round but at the end of the day its all false positives. You are never really a true cup contender. Being stuck in the middle is a fate worse than death - just listen to Leaf Radio if you want for their perspetive of a team exactly that. For me, I have no issue for the Sabres to sucking for 4 years if it means they add high end talent that will allow them in time to become cup contenders -year in year out As I said before - I would trade every single guy on your "good" Sabres team of 2010 for McDavid or Eichel and now you are possibly adding that player to Reinhart, Girgensons, Risto, Zadarov - plus all the other prospects filling the pipeline. If you can't see the light at the end of the tunnel I have think you either aren't looking very hard or don't want to admit that the Tank crowd is starting to look pretty smart. My problem with this is that it states a definite cycle to winning cups. You are bad for a few seasons, realize such and tank for 2 more seasons, develop them for 1-2 seasons, and then win a cup and are cup contenders for the next decade or so. What's interesting is, and since we're limited to 2005 and forward, we've never seen a team follow this model and reach the top of the arc again. You can't really say tanking is the only way to win cups post-2005 because we've never seen how the end of a tank ends; can that team continue to pump in talent and sustain a cup contending status after a Kane, Toews, Crosby retire? Or are they to repeat the cycle all over again? If the NHL is so cyclic, it's going to get really dull very fast. Side note, did the Bruins tank? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted January 28, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 On the Bruins: somebody else tanked for them. They got the second pick from Toronto. Seguin played a relevant role in the playoffs (not a lead role). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 On the Bruins: somebody else tanked for them. They got the second pick from Toronto. Seguin played a relevant role in the playoffs (not a lead role). The Sabres could have kept the good team together and pulled off savvy trades, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Are there really people who think tanking is the only way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) Are there really people who think tanking is the only way?Is this your first day here? :lol: Edited January 28, 2015 by SwampD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 The Sabres could have kept the good team together and pulled off savvy trades, too. This is exactly what I argued in my post upthread. The 06-07 years the team had enought talent that was perceived as higher end/elite that hockey trades could have been made to "reload" and adapt the team talent to reflect the changing rules structure. At that point the players we all ended up hating a few years later still were highly regarded. Losing centers and relying on wing play and next man up mentality resulted in a methodical talent drain that led u to the postiion we are in now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Are there really people who think tanking is the only way? I've yet to see any pro-tanker argue that tanking is the only way. To win the cup you need several elite players and most teams get them from the top of the draft but there are definitely other ways to get them such as free agency, trades, or through great fortune in the draft by drafting multiple hall of famers in the late rounds like Detroit, multiple studs later in the first round like Anaheim, or studs in the second and 3rd rounds like Boston (although they still had 2 top 5 picks). People look to the draft because that's the element most under control of the team because you can try to get these players in Free Agency but it's hard because: A) They don't become available very often and B) Those players have the ability to sign anywhere and will usually take a big payday from a team like the Rangers rather than sign with Buffalo You can try to get these players through trade but you're either gambling on unknown potential and some luck just like with the draft or you're paying through the ears for an established stud in the league so it's pricey. The rest of the teams who have won the cup had multiple top 5 draft picks to acquire the elite talent needed to win including Chicago, LA, Pittsburgh, and Carolina. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Are there really people who think tanking is the only way? In the new NHL - it may not be the only way but its best way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Forget about everything that has happened up to this point. All that matters is where the team is today. At this point, is there anyone who would rather have Marner over McDavid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 What happens when Nashville wins the cup... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.