Who Will Have a Better Season - Bills or Sabres?

[erickompositör72]

1 minute ago, TrueBlueGED said:

I don't think the floor was lower. Again, more than a few teams have been terrible for extended periods without trying to be. Hell, that was one argument about why the tank was a uniquely Buffalo thing. Now, the likelihood of hitting that floor may have been higher; I'd agree with that. But I would rebut that building around top picks is more likely to reach the ceiling (which, in my mind, is extended Cup contention, not just a single win). 

I just don't understand the propensity for so many fans to think this way. '99 was uniquely Buffalo. 2005-2007 was uniquely Buffalo. Why is tanking now a Buffalo thing? (maybe I misunderstood what you meant by "the tank was a uniquely Buffalo thing")

[WildCard]

Just now, erickompositör72 said:

I just don't understand the propensity for so many fans to think this way. '99 was uniquely Buffalo. 2005-2007 was uniquely Buffalo. Why is tanking now a Buffalo thing? (maybe I misunderstood what you meant by "the tank was a uniquely Buffalo thing")

We were the latest to do it, and probably the most blatant 

[erickompositör72]

Just now, WildCard said:

We were the latest to do it, and probably the most blatant 

And honestly, I think the blatancy was the most damaging, vis-a-vis "the culture"

the fact that we were cheering for losses. You keep comparing to Toronto- they were throwing jerseys on the ice when we were cheering!

[Hoss]

1 hour ago, SwampD said:

The Leafs didn't tank. They were sellers at the deadline. Huge difference.

The Leafs 100% tanked. It was blatant.

[Weave]

10 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

I don't think the floor was lower. Again, more than a few teams have been terrible for extended periods without trying to be. Hell, that was one argument about why the tank was a uniquely Buffalo thing. Now, the likelihood of hitting that floor may have been higher; I'd agree with that. But I would rebut that building around top picks is more likely to reach the ceiling (which, in my mind, is extended Cup contention, not just a single win). 

That likelihood is not bore out by the list of 1st overall picks though, so while it sounds like it makes sense it hasn't been seen in actual results with any consistency.  Chicago and Pittsburgh both had extended Stanley Cup success on the backs of top picks, but after those two specific teams you can't really point to a top pick directly leading to extended success.

Hey freeman, how's this for not continuing to litigate the tank?

[erickompositör72]

2 minutes ago, Weave said:

That likelihood is not bore out by the list of 1st overall picks though, so while it sounds like it makes sense it hasn't been seen in actual results with any consistency.  Chicago and Pittsburgh both had extended Stanley Cup success on the backs of top picks, but after those two specific teams you can't really point to a top pick directly leading to extended success.

Right. Which of the current-generation of tankers (us, oilers, leafs) is poised to win the first cup?

[WildCard]

3 minutes ago, erickompositör72 said:

Right. Which of the current-generation of tankers (us, oilers, leafs) is poised to win the first cup?

Oilers didn't tank, they just sucked. The Coyotes tanked

7 minutes ago, Weave said:

That likelihood is not bore out by the list of 1st overall picks though, so while it sounds like it makes sense it hasn't been seen in actual results with any consistency.  Chicago and Pittsburgh both had extended Stanley Cup success on the backs of top picks, but after those two specific teams you can't really point to a top pick directly leading to extended success.

Hey freeman, how's this for not continuing to litigate the tank?

Doughty was instrumental in two Cups for the Kings. Ovechkin has been pretty big at keeping the Capitals a contender

[Weave]

1 minute ago, WildCard said:

Oilers didn't tank, they just sucked. The Coyotes tanked

Doughty was instrumental in two Cups for the Kings. Ovechkin has been pretty big at keeping the Capitals a contender

Until the slide post 2007 Ovie was mocked as a loser and noone here would've traded our team for his.  This is like calling a Sabres cup in 2022 the result of a successful tank.  So much water under the bridge since Ovie was drafted.

[WildCard]

Just now, Weave said:

Until the slide post 2007 Ovie was mocked as a loser and noone here would've traded our team for his.  This is like calling a Sabres cup in 2022 the result of a successful tank.  So much water under the bridge since Ovie was drafted.

Ovechkin was drafted in 2005...

[GASabresIUFAN]

Interesting results so far especially considering that the Bills made the playoff last year and the Sabres finished last.  

I'm going to make the case for the Bills making the playoffs, but it hinges on Shady playing and not ending up in a jail cell here in the ATL.  Last season the Bills won by running the ball, playing solid D and getting some luck.  This despite having a terrible QB.  I don't we the recipe being any different this year except our QB play should be better.   We had a solid draft and I thought did well in free agency.  The defense should be even better this season then last. My prediction is 9-7 which may be enough to make the playoffs.

What I don't understand is how the Pats have an easier schedule then the Bills.  

As to the Sabres, I think they will be improved.  However we have going eliminate a -81 goal differential to become competitive.  That means an increase of about 40 goals scored and a decrease of about 40 goals.  I don't see this happening.  If we can cut it to a -25, I'll be thrilled.  The structure of this team leads me to believe we'll see a 30 goal increase in scoring, but with only a 20 goal decrease in goals against.  I'm thinking about 33-38-11, with a 500 record at home.  

[Derrico]

1 hour ago, SwampD said:

They certainly didn't hit the ice in two consecutive season openers with the sole purpose of coming in dead f###### last!

Maybe not two but they absolutely did in the Matthews draft.  Maybe it's someone else I'm thinking of but I thought you were from the gta no?  The media from day one that season was talking about the draft.  Fans on message board had tanks as their avatar pics just like us beginning in October.  Just like us they gave any and every warm body away at the deadline.  Difference is twofold.  They won the lottery and they had sucked for so long prior to that year they already had high picks (kadri, reilly) and guys like jvr who they traded another high pick (schenn) for.

Debate whether we should of tanked or not but let's not pretend we're the only one.  We weren't the first and certainly not the last.

[Weave]

1 minute ago, WildCard said:

Ovechkin was drafted in 2005...

 

I know.  and he was considered a loser and a greedy LW until last season.  Washington was the east coast SJ Sharks with Ovie until they caught lightning in a bottle.

[Hoss]

For those that think four cups wouldn’t be “success” for the Sabres tank is it purely because you believe nothing will ever cover for the moral questions you have of the tank? If so, do you no longer root for the Sabres?

[WildCard]

Just now, Weave said:

I know.  and he was considered a loser and a greedy LW until last season.  Washington was the east coast SJ Sharks with Ovie until they caught lightning in a bottle.

You said post 2007

Would you rather be Washington or us for the last decade? How about a more fluctuating team, between contention and misery, but without that star player to keep them in consistent contention year in and year out. Say, Columbus

[TrueBlueGED]

10 minutes ago, Weave said:

Until the slide post 2007 Ovie was mocked as a loser and noone here would've traded our team for his.  This is like calling a Sabres cup in 2022 the result of a successful tank.  So much water under the bridge since Ovie was drafted.

That's because popular hockey analysis is dumb.

[Sabel79]

1 minute ago, TrueBlueGED said:

That's because popular hockey analysis is dumb.

The Cherrys, Milburys, Fischlers and Roenicks of this world must someday give way... 

[Weave]

1 minute ago, WildCard said:

You said post 2007

Would you rather be Washington or us for the last decade? How about a more fluctuating team, between contention and misery, but without that star player to keep them in consistent contention year in and year out. Say, Columbus

I was referring to the the Sabres post 2007, as in, prior to that season, none of us would have traded our team for Washington's and that was with a prime 1st overall pick on their squad.

as for what team would I rather have, I'd have actually watched the last 4-5 seasons if we were Columbus.  That pretty much says it all.

 

[WildCard]

Just now, Weave said:

I was referring to the the Sabres post 2007, as in, prior to that season, none of us would have traded our team for Washington's and that was with a prime 1st overall pick on their squad.

as for what team would I rather have, I'd have actually watched the last 4-5 seasons if we were Columbus.  That pretty much says it all.

Alright, but even pre-2007 Sabres, that only overlaps with Washington for 2 seasons, and those 2 seasons happened to be our best in a decade. Kinda cherrypicking there

I was referring to Washington or Columbus

[Weave]

5 minutes ago, Hoss said:

For those that think four cups wouldn’t be “success” for the Sabres tank is it purely because you believe nothing will ever cover for the moral questions you have of the tank? If so, do you no longer root for the Sabres?

I hated the moral implications of the tank.  But I won't turn my back on them because they made that decision.  I turned my back on them because they sucked.  When that changes I'll actively watch and root.  and still hate the decision they made.

1 minute ago, WildCard said:

Alright, but even pre-2007 Sabres, that only overlaps with Washington for 2 seasons, and those 2 seasons happened to be our best in a decade. Kinda cherrypicking there

I was referring to Washington or Columbus

What I was cherry picking was a Sabres team that was slowly being sold off (probably closer to 09-10 maybe?).  Noone picks that team over 1/2 the teams in the league.

[WildCard]

2 minutes ago, Weave said:

What I was cherry picking was a Sabres team that was slowly being sold off (probably closer to 09-10 maybe?).  Noone picks that team over 1/2 the teams in the league.

I've lost what your comparison was at this point. 

[Weave]

Just now, WildCard said:

I've lost what your comparison was at this point. 

 

And we're better for it.  This has gone way astray and I'm getting near wind down time.

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Weave said:

I don't think the bolded is quite correct.  At least not in my mind it isn't.  The main tank concern in my mind always was that both methods had the same ceiling but the floor for the tank was expected to be lower, and IMO longer.

 

34 minutes ago, Weave said:

That likelihood is not bore out by the list of 1st overall picks though, so while it sounds like it makes sense it hasn't been seen in actual results with any consistency.  Chicago and Pittsburgh both had extended Stanley Cup success on the backs of top picks, but after those two specific teams you can't really point to a top pick directly leading to extended success.

This misses the point entirely.

The last Stanley Cup champion without a top-two pick on it was Detroit in 2007, which was largely still a product of the pre-cap era.

The 2011 Bruins are the only other team in this century not to have a top three pick in a key role. Seguin was on the team, but not a key piece.

Having a top-two pick and usually multiple high-end picks has been a requirement of cup-winners in the salary cap era.

Picking high may not guarantee anything, but without that elite talent you haven’t had a chance.

Edited August 14, 2018 by dudacek

[SwampD]

18 minutes ago, Hoss said:

For those that think four cups wouldn’t be “success” for the Sabres tank is it purely because you believe nothing will ever cover for the moral questions you have of the tank? If so, do you no longer root for the Sabres?

That would be a success. Four Cups would be the only way I would deem it a success.

 

Okay, maybe just two. Two Cups I would call a success.

 

Not only one cup, though.

[SwampD]

 

 

 

Okay,… maybe even just one.

 

It still sucked, though

 

…Kaleta at center,… Jeebus.

[Formerly Allan in MD]

The Sabres will win more games than the Bills, guaranteed.