Official Jason Karmanos Hired as Sabres Associate GM

[Sabre fan]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Yes, but it extends beyond that. 

It could go as far as hypothetically needing new owners. My point was merely that, if that was the case, and the tank has infected Pegula and nothing can be better with him here, that *still* doesn’t mean it’s not fixable - the issue then is the owner, incapable of implementing a new strategy. At which point, the statute of limitations on the tank simply expires when we get a new owner. 

I digress 

I live north of Toronto but I fear the Sabres getting new owners as that may lead directly to moving the team and I don't think you want that. Finding another billionaire who will throw money into the team will not be easy in Buffalo so I am thinking that the better solution to new owners is for the Pegulas to step back and hire say Rutherford as President and let him run the team which in effect be the same as new owners. As has been stated the team is not that far from winning and a healthy Jack alone would make a huge difference

[Stoner]

20 minutes ago, Thwomp! said:

So, are we actually getting these guys?  How much of this is rumor vs. fact?

None of it's fact.

Good Lord.

[Radar]

2 hours ago, darksabre said:

Everything is inherently related to the tank. Sorry.

What??

[darksabre]

14 minutes ago, Derrico said:

I don't want to continue rehashing the tank talk and love reading the content you add to this forum.  Having said that, you can not be serious regarding the bolded lol.  I thought the same thing about the Bills until they became good.  We're in a salary cap league.  Management was so incompentent to overpay Skinner and Okposo and Molson and......IMO the real problem with this franchise is giving big, long term money to the wrong guys and we're now also in cap hell.

I'm dead serious. The Bills could just as easily still be bad. Their recovery was never an inevitability. And neither is the Sabres. 

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, darksabre said:

I'm dead serious. The Bills could just as easily still be bad. Their recovery was never an inevitability. And neither is the Sabres. 

I agree with you it’s not inevitable. But i’d say it’s certainly possible. 

If Pegula woke up tomorrow and completely changed his ways, how could it not be? 

And if he is incapable of changing his ways, the true enemy is not the tank, at all 

[darksabre]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I agree with you it’s not inevitable. But i’d say it’s certainly possible. 

If Pegula woke up tomorrow and completely changed his ways, how could it not be? 

And if he is incapable of changing his ways, the true enemy is not the tank, at all 

The entire Pegula family could evaporate into thin air overnight and it might not even matter. 

[Thorner]

At some point the tank can only be the “cause” in terms of the original decision to do so being symptomatic of an incapable hockey mind. 

The physical, literal mechanics of potential success are still in place 

Just now, darksabre said:

The entire Pegula family could evaporate into thin air overnight and it might not even matter. 

Unless we can define what it would be preventing us from winning I’m not sure I can get on board with this 

[Thorner]

I suppose if the decision to tank is considered so bad as to be evidence of Pegula’s inability to be the owner of a successful hockey team forevermore, and there in actuality isn’t an owner out there who would take over and keep the team in Buffalo, in that scenario the tank could be construed as “the” issue until further notice and that it would represent the defining cataclysmic event of their existence once the scenario played to completion with the sale of the team.

I don’t think those parameters are very likely at all met but the possibility exists. 

Edited April 1, 2021 by Thorny

[darksabre]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I suppose if the decision to tank is considered so bad as to be evidence of Pegula’s inability to be the owner of a successful hockey team forevermore, and there in actuality isn’t an owner out there who would take over and keep the team in Buffalo, in that scenario the tank could be construed as “the” issue until further notice and that it would represent the defining cataclysmic event of their existence one the scenario played to completion with the sale of the team.

I don’t think those parameters are very likely at all met but the possibility exists. 

I'm not even trying to argue whether or not the tank was bad, or whether or not the Pegulas are the problem. I'm arguing that it is impossible to totally separate the past from the future.

Think about player trade trees. Do the Sabres make the ECF in 2006 if they don't trade Rick Martin to the Kings in 1981?



People can argue all they want that there should be a statute of limitations on the supposed influence of The Tank, but the problem is that we don't know that.

If the Rick Martin trade could make the Sabres good 25 years later, couldn't The Tank make the Sabres bad 50 years later?

[Thorner]

10 minutes ago, darksabre said:

I'm not even trying to argue whether or not the tank was bad, or whether or not the Pegulas are the problem. I'm arguing that it is impossible to totally separate the past from the future.

Think about player trade trees. Do the Sabres make the ECF in 2006 if they don't trade Rick Martin to the Kings in 1981?



People can argue all they want that there should be a statute of limitations on the supposed influence of The Tank, but the problem is that we don't know that.

If the Rick Martin trade could make the Sabres good 25 years later, couldn't The Tank make the Sabres bad 50 years later?

I love the butterfly affect as much anyone but my argument isn’t predicated on opposing the idea the tank IS why we are where we are right now, and will be going forward, it’s predicted on the idea it doesn’t NEED to be. By the same theory there are infinite actions we might take with unmeasurable potential impacts across the board. 

Your argument is a good one for why the tank made us what we are but it also serves as a strong argument for why it doesn’t have to be, going forward. 

The thought that, out of all potential avenues available to us, that what they’ve done in the past set us on a literally irrevocable course is just so, so unlikely 

Edited April 1, 2021 by Thorny

[Cascade Youth]

Wasn’t the decision it was its execution.

[darksabre]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I love the butterfly affect as much anyone but my argument isn’t predicated on opposing the idea the tank IS why we are where we are right now, and will be going forward, it’s predicted on the idea it doesn’t NEED to be. By the same theory there are infinite actions we might take with unmeasurable potential impacts across the board. 

Your argument is a good one for why the tank made us what we are but it also serves as a strong argument for why it doesn’t have to be, going forward. 

The thought that, out of all potential avenues available to us, that what they’ve done in the past set us on a literally irrevocable course is just so, so unlikely 

Sure. All I'm saying is we're never going to be able to completely leave The Tank behind. It's going to be with us forever, one way or another.

Especially as long as the team is bad.

[LGR4GM]

44 minutes ago, darksabre said:

Sure. All I'm saying is we're never going to be able to completely leave The Tank behind. It's going to be with us forever, one way or another.

Especially as long as the team is bad.

So if we are in game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals in 5 years and Eichel or Reinhart is here, and in OT 1 scores the game winner, I can claim the tank was successful and the reason for our success?

[Randall Flagg]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

So if we are in game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals in 5 years and Eichel or Reinhart is here, and in OT 1 scores the game winner, I can claim the tank was successful and the reason for our success?

No, because we are in last place 6 years after the tank ended, with those guys. If we get from here to that point, it's because of an entirely new full on build from rock bottom, which is like the 3rd time we've tried to do that since the tank. That success story would be the success of this LATEST build, not the tank

[Derrico]

1 hour ago, darksabre said:

I'm dead serious. The Bills could just as easily still be bad. Their recovery was never an inevitability. And neither is the Sabres. 

Eventually they will be just fine.  We live in a salary cap era.  Nobody wanted to play for the Bills until they had a couple of good seasons and now everyone does.  Same will happen with the Sabres.  They need to start drafting much better and stop overpaying mediocre players.  That's been their biggest flaw over the last number of years imo.  Also the ROR trade which was universally hated.  JBott set this franchise back a decent ways after that trade.

Edited April 1, 2021 by Derrico

[Thwomp!]

16 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

No, because we are in last place 6 years after the tank ended, with those guys. If we get from here to that point, it's because of an entirely new full on build from rock bottom, which is like the 3rd time we've tried to do that since the tank. That success story would be the success of this LATEST build, not the tank

You make the tank seem pretty blameless at this point.  I think it's established that the Sabres are good at tanking, whether intentional or not, but the rebuild is what keeps failing.

[Thorner]

32 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

No, because we are in last place 6 years after the tank ended, with those guys. If we get from here to that point, it's because of an entirely new full on build from rock bottom, which is like the 3rd time we've tried to do that since the tank. That success story would be the success of this LATEST build, not the tank

I think liger is right tbh. The reason we are where we are, is likewise in combination with other moves since. Wouldn’t we be way better with ROR? It’s just like how additional moves are necessary, like you say, to get good. 

It wouldn’t be fair to say the tank promised a fix all. Some people thought that but people bear their own responsibility on that. If Jack Eichel is the best player on a cup team, it’s fair to say the tank provided. 

Just like the bolded is mentioning moves that would sway our fortunes for the positive, the inverse is also true: we’ve made moves since the tank that have pulled to the negative 

It can’t be classified as a “full on” rebuild imo when you keep one of the league’s best centres. You had such a thorough take down of Botterill too when you listed him as your most disliked executive. Surely without him steering the ship things were much more salvageable earlier on? 

The very fact he’s so disliked implies that it was felt we could have been way better. And if that’s the case it’s an indictment of events since the tank as well. 

This isn’t to say the tank was a good strategy. There’s just too much unknown. It certainly hasn’t been successful so at this point it was an abject failure. But if we win the cup in three years and Jack wins conn smythe, we are lying to ourselves if we say the perspective doesn’t change 

Edited April 1, 2021 by Thorny

[Randall Flagg]

9 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I think liger is right tbh. The reason we are where we are, is likewise in combination with other moves since. Wouldn’t we be way better with ROR? It’s just like how additional moves are necessary, like you say, to get good. 

It wouldn’t be fair to say the tank promised a fix all. Some people thought that but people bear their own responsibility on that. If Jack Eichel is the best player on a cup team, it’s fair to say the tank provided. 

Just like the bolded is mentioning moves that would sway our fortunes for the positive, the inverse is also true: we’ve made moves since the tank that have pulled to the negative 

It can’t be classified as a “full on” rebuild imo when you keep one of the league’s best centres. You had such a thorough take down of Botterill too when you listed him as your most disliked executive. Surely without him steering the ship things were much more salvageable earlier on? 

It's a full-on rebuild because the second attempt to fix things coming out of the tank resulted in a thing that is pacing to be 10 points WORSE than the tank. IF KA, whose first season as a GM came 6 years after the tank ended, managed to somehow build this team into a cup champion, saying "yay the tank succeeded!" is beyond ludicrous, that's all I'm saying

[Thorner]

Right but Jack isn’t even playing. This season is insane. Also I added to my post. As of now it’s absolutely a fail and I’ve argued that before. But I highly suspect my point of view would alter wildly if we won the cup with Jack.

Jack hasn’t just been our best player the last several years, it’s been a statistical chasm to the next guy. People are going to say they are glad we tanked for him if we win the cup and he’s our best player and captain. First cup ever? Be honest - He would be beloved

Let’s just hope we get to see it

Edited April 1, 2021 by Thorny

[Hoss]

Can we unpin this thread so it actually happens?

[Thorner]

It’s funny cause we know if it doesn’t happen, why

Well, if we believe the bit about what Jim wanted 

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, Randall Flagg said:

No, because we are in last place 6 years after the tank ended, with those guys. If we get from here to that point, it's because of an entirely new full on build from rock bottom, which is like the 3rd time we've tried to do that since the tank. That success story would be the success of this LATEST build, not the tank

No I'm pretty sure I can. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

Have they signed on yet?

[Randall Flagg]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

No I'm pretty sure I can. 

If this Sabres team gets turned into a cup contender, considering that they are in last place by a mile, and have been in last place before since the tank ended, it will be because of moves that haven't been made yet, not because of the tank, 3 last place finishes ago lmao 

Also, I'm pretty sure Chad said "next couple weeks" so we will be within his window for another ~8 days before I start to wonder/worry

[Brawndo]

Friedman mentioned that Karmanos is doing His Due Diligence and checking around the league to get more background on the Sabres Organization. 
 

NFW he comes now 

Also Adams is interviewing other candidates as well, he does not have any names