GDT: 11/19/19 Minnesota @ Buffalo, 7 p.m. EST

[darksabre]

7 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

The bolded is ridiculous on its face.

As I have said multiple times:  the point of the tank was to get Eichel, and thereby to become a good team.  If becoming a good team weren't the entire point of the tank, then no one would ever pursue a tanking strategy.

The reason I and many others opposed the tank is simple:  as a strategy for a bubble team to become a cup contender, it usually fails -- and it usually results in semi-permanent residence in the basement.  This is exactly what has happened to the Sabres. 

The reason tanking usually brings these disastrous consequences is that it is too difficult and unlikely to climb from the basement to cup contender.  There are too many moving pieces and too many things have to go right.  In the meantime, losing has been internalized as the expected result.

So saying "they screwed up the rebuild" isn't an accurate description of the post-tank era.  It would be more correct to say "their plan relied on a 50-1 longshot paying off, and it didn't pay off."

It gives me no pleasure to say it.  But when I see/hear utter nonsense like the bolded, or other defenses of the tank (and you are far from the only one), I feel like there is a real risk that the team will just repeat the same idiotic tactic, and a decade in the desert will turn into 20 years, which will in turn lead to the team leaving.

The tank would have worked if the team had been situated to recover from it sooner. If they had a bunch of good pieces in the AHL and had kept some quality vets around.

Instead Darcy just decided to do it without anything in place to plug their tank-fruit in to when it was done. So now we have to do the necessary team building post-tank.

There's a right way to execute a tank. This wasn't it. And now we're here, waiting.

[Zamboni]

 

• This is the first of two meetings between the Sabres and Wild this season.
• Last meeting: Buffalo defeated Minnesota 5-4 (SO) in Buffalo on Feb. 5
• Next meeting: Saturday, March 28 in Minnesota
• The Sabres are 4-5-1 in their last 10 games vs. the Wild; 2-7-1 at home.

 

• Buffalo won both matchups with Minnesota last season. With a win tonight, the Sabres would have three straight wins against the Wild for the first time since Minnesota joined the league in 2000-01.
• Sam Reinhart has nine points (4+5) in his last nine games, including four multi-point outings.
• Jack Eichel has seven multi-point games this season, tying for 12th-most in the league entering play Monday. His three multi-goal games leave him one shy of the league lead.

 

• The Sabres enter tonight's game with a 10-7-3 record through their first 20 games this season, tying the 1983-84 season as the team's 16th-best start through 20 games.

Edited November 19, 2019 by Zamboni

[Brawndo]

 

[...]

I've been waiting to see what a 7 D lineup would look like.

[SwampD]

4 minutes ago, ... said:

I've been waiting to see what a 7 D lineup would look like.

I didn’t even know that it was something I have been waiting to see.

[...]

1 minute ago, SwampD said:

I didn’t even know that it was something I have been waiting to see.

But you realize you are, or...?

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

40 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Is it bad that I don't think this team has hit bottom yet? 

What is bad is that you used the word "yet" as if you expect it to happen. Hopefully we pull out of this turmoil before we get to that stage.

 

 

 

19 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

As I have said multiple times:  the point of the tank was to get Eichel, and thereby to become a good team

 

36 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Let's do this. Because your sniping and attempted gloating is terrible.

The tank succeeded because the tank was to get 1 specific player. The rebuild failed.

Either the tank and rebuild are linked in which case we can agree that the rebuild portion of the tank failed. Or they are separate in which case the Tank succeeded. So as I have asked you repeatedly and you have repeatedly ignored, is the Tank and Rebuild linked as 1 or is the tank and rebuild separate entities? If so why or why not? 

Basically defend your point or stop saying it. 

The priceless look on Murray's face when he lost the lottery says that the tank did not in fact succeed and McDavid was the prize intended for. You could argue that Eichel was a guaranteed "consolation" prize and therefore was some what a success.

 

Go Sabres!!!

[SwampD]

Just now, ... said:

But you realize you are, or...?

Now I can’t wait for tonight!?

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

30 minutes ago, darksabre said:

The tank would have worked if the team had been situated to recover from it sooner. If they had a bunch of good pieces in the AHL and had kept some quality vets around.

Instead Darcy just decided to do it without anything in place to plug their tank-fruit in to when it was done. So now we have to do the necessary team building post-tank.

There's a right way to execute a tank. This wasn't it. And now we're here, waiting.

What is the right way? Tell the players on the team not to perform so we can get a franchise player? 

There is no clear proven way to do a tank, ask Edmonton, they've probably tried them all.

[freester]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

The late and sparse GDT is a symptom of a broader malaise IMHO.

It's not the fans' fault, but I'm sensing a growing fatalism and "whatever" attitude in the fan base.  The arena is pretty quiet and there are thousands of empty seats.  Stubhub has tickets in the lower level at center ice for $34 (face value is presumably 3x to 4x that amount).  The hardcore fans here are pretty close to writing off yet another season (in freaking mid-November!).  And it's hard to feel any optimism about a turnaround anytime soon.

Behold what the tank hath wrought.  A great franchise has become a joke and a great hockey city doesn't give a crap.  It's an abomination.

And don't kid yourself and think that we've made it to the other side and annual improvement is assured.

Stop blaming the tank. It’s the incompetent GMs that we’ve had and the terrible personnel moves they have made. 

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

Shout out to @SwampD for getting us started and to say that sometimes the simple way of doing things are appreciated just as much as the more complicated ways. This old fart doesn't always need allot of info to get him jump started.....this is in no way meant to trash the hard work that some do in GDT's. All are appreciated.

[miles]

Minnesota is terrible on the road

Sabres 4 -2

[darksabre]

10 minutes ago, freester said:

Stop blaming the tank. It’s the incompetent GMs that we’ve had and the terrible personnel moves they have made. 

Separating incompetent GMs from the tank is some next level gymnastics. 

[French Collection]

7D dressing for tonight’s game, I wonder if they will share ice time or move one to play wing?

We really need a win. 
 

Let’s go Buffalo!

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

The bolded is ridiculous on its face.

As I have said multiple times:  the point of the tank was to get Eichel, and thereby to become a good team.  If becoming a good team weren't the entire point of the tank, then no one would ever pursue a tanking strategy.

The reason I and many others opposed the tank is simple:  as a strategy for a bubble team to become a cup contender, it usually fails -- and it usually results in semi-permanent residence in the basement.  This is exactly what has happened to the Sabres. 

The reason tanking usually brings these disastrous consequences is that it is too difficult and unlikely to climb from the basement to cup contender.  There are too many moving pieces and too many things have to go right.  In the meantime, losing has been internalized as the expected result.

So saying "they screwed up the rebuild" isn't an accurate description of the post-tank era.  It would be more correct to say "their plan relied on a 50-1 longshot paying off, and it didn't pay off."

It gives me no pleasure to say it.  But when I see/hear utter nonsense like the bolded, or other defenses of the tank (and you are far from the only one), I feel like there is a real risk that the team will just repeat the same idiotic tactic, and a decade in the desert will turn into 20 years, which will in turn lead to the team leaving.

It gives you great pleasure to say it which is why you do it constantly just like I love saying Brock Boeser. 

it is utter nonsense to not understand the purpose of the tank and the subsequent failure of the rebuild. The purpose of the tank was to get a high end player to increase the likelihood of being a Stanley cup contender. So again the rebuild failed because we did not reach that designation even though no one can tell me how we would be better off today without tanking except that we wouldn't have Eichel, Reinhart, Dahlin. Yes I will include Dahlin now because you blame the tank for everything to this point, even though I disagree with that. 

[DarthEbriate]

I need Mitts to do something tonight on the scoresheet. His line was producing (when Sheary was in the lineup) at the start of the season, and they've disappeared all of November. Just like the power play.

One thing I learned about Tanks courtesy of Quake II. They're really slow. Sure, they can hurt you if they catch in a corner or unaware. But if you plan for them... they're sooo slow. How long have we been doing this rebuild madness? We've seen Disney buy Lucasfilm, create a new trilogy, two standalones, a full animated series, another in progress, and a live show already in action. Even Ewan McGregor is getting close to original Alec Guinness age. All since we last made the playoffs.

[LGR4GM]

55 minutes ago, darksabre said:

The tank would have worked if the team had been situated to recover from it sooner. If they had a bunch of good pieces in the AHL and had kept some quality vets around.

Instead Darcy just decided to do it without anything in place to plug their tank-fruit in to when it was done. So now we have to do the necessary team building post-tank.

There's a right way to execute a tank. This wasn't it. And now we're here, waiting.

This I could agree with. It is why I remain furious at the Lehner trade. It was an asset we needed to help the rebuild coming out of the tank and was pissed away on a goalie with mental health issues that we simply didn't need at the time. 

[inkman]

1 hour ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

The silver lining. 

Seats were super cheap on stubhub, so it's a cost friendly date night. 

So, tank, rebuild, what.... Everrrrr, I want to see some heart tonight 

Word. Tickets are 10-20 bucks. Even 100 & 200 section.  

[Randall Flagg]

The tank was indeed a horrible move, and is ultimately what our problems today stem from. 

In order to finish below a 56 point finish for the Coyotes in the McEichel year, we had to obliterate our organizational depth to a degree that nobody has seen outside of an expansion team. 

In the two short years after the tank ended, the Sabres added:
a 56 -> 75 point center in Eichel (the latter was his pace in the second year)
a 40+ point winger in Sam
a 25+G, 40+ point winger in Kane
a ~60 point center in ROR
a 45 point winger in Kyle Okposo

Which is a talent swing in two years that you can more or less never guarantee happening again. It is incredibly rare for a team to see that much top six capable talent added in such a short span.

And that team's forward depth was still among the worst in the league. This is with getting solid depth performances during that time from additions like Gionta, Foligno's development (remember, in 16-17, the FLG line was our best possession line at times). Girgensons shifting out of a 1C role. 

Since 2015, the sheer number of depth forwards we've brought in is ludicrous, but the crater we started from was so far below average and acceptable that we haven't been able to catch up to league average in this regard yet, nearly 5 years after the tank ended. 

Take a team that didn't tank but was mired in an extended stretch of mediocrity. It could be the Hurricanes, it could be the Flames. These teams, for a long time, didn't have great management, but they eventually got to a point where their middling forward additions coupled with nice development of prospects like Aho, Pesce, Slavin (no different from Jack/Sam's development) turned them into effective forward corps, but it took each team probably 5 years of having bad forward depth to do it. This is starting from far, far above where we did, when we had a 3rd line, a 4th line, and 2 AHL lines at our healthiest. It was never going to be an easy fix unless literally every single move over a 5 year span was the correct one, which isn't something you can realistically come close to guaranteeing for any NHL team no matter how good the management. They haven't been perfect, and have NEVER fixed the forward chasm, even with plenty of GOOD moves for GOOD players at all levels of the forward group (ROR and Skinner and Kane were good-to-great top 6 additions, Mojo is a good middle 6 addition, KO was good for a year before his injury, and was fine as a 4th liner, Sheary an annoying but reasonable depth addition, Gionta had two nice years etc.) No, Coin White, Jack Roslovic, and JT Compher all together would not have made the difference. Not even Brock Boeser, and using hindsight on these draft picks we "could have kept" (in reality, having kept them, we would have entered post tank seasons with depleted TOP SIX as well as depth, which was untenable for a fan base asked to sit through 164 purposeful tanking games) is a joke considering you'd be trying to shoot down tank hindsight with the same logic. Most teams miss most picks as far as impact players go, and we're no different.

We intentionally made the starting line 5 years back of what usually takes years to develop from in the first place by choosing to tank, and in doing so acquired a center that more and more people turn on by the day anyway. In addition to his partner in crime, who half the fanbase has already been lukewarm towards for years. I love Jack and Sam and never want to trade them, but not even McDrai is enough to pull a team out of the abyss, and we gave up so much ground organizationally to get them and they're nowhere close to McDrai. Even if you take every single one of the big mistakes out of the last 5 years, this team isn't close to cup contention, despite the fact that the timelines of every single tank intellectual are documented here for all to see (me included) and had cup contention as starting, like, last year, after a nice playoff run the year before (when we finished in last again). 

The average tank supporter had cup contention within 5 years, liked/justified most of the team's moves along the way, got angry when some of us didn't, and then pretend now like they've had their finger on the pulse of this thing all along despite being incorrect about virtually everything

Edited November 19, 2019 by Randall Flagg

[Doohicksie]

That was a long post.  I never read your long posts.  But I read that one.  And I think you're spot on, Randall.

[Wyldnwoody44]

Seriously, this is a GDT, move the damn tank talk to somewhere else, these conversations have grown tiresome. It's bad enough the team is bad right now, I don't need constant reminders of the past 5+ years over and over. 

[darksabre]

1 minute ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

Seriously, this is a GDT, move the damn tank talk to somewhere else, these conversations have grown tiresome. It's bad enough the team is bad right now, I don't need constant reminders of the past 5+ years over and over. 

wah

[Wyldnwoody44]

Just now, darksabre said:

wah

Wah is right, there are literally 10 other threads for this crap to continue in, pick one 

[DarthEbriate]

3 minutes ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

Seriously, this is a GDT,

Good point. Who do we need to nullify on the Wild? I have no knowledge of them this season --- do they have a go-to line? An up-and-comer to keep watch on?

[Weave]

2012-13. The season with Ron Rolston as HC.  Lets call that the beginning of the end.

 

We’re weeks away from calendar year 2020. Call it season 8 since the obvious end of trying to win.  8 years is a hockey player generation.  A full career for most players.  We’ve wandered the desert for the equivalent of an entire player career.

 

This team hasn't made a correct decision since Chris Drury left for NYR, losing on purpose included.  Debate all you want if the tank wad successful.  Its success is immaterial as it was a flawed decision to choose to do it, for all the reasons previously mentioned.

 

You want proof it was the wrong decision?  The proof is that it is still debated an entire generation of talent after the decision was made.