What Do the Sabres Look Like in 2 years?

[SwampD]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

According to some reports Ullmark through his agent was asking for a 6 year term for $36 m from Buffalo. He ended up signing a 4 yr contract with Boston for $20 M. The amount of money he wanted certainly was a factor but the the 6 yr term he was asking for was more problematic. The organization made the right decision in not signing him. Ullmark did what was right for himself and the GM made the right decision for the organization. 

https://buffalonews.com/sports/sabres/linus-ullmarks-exit-opens-door-for-ukko-pekka-luukkonen-to-be-sabres-starter/article_7af9bba6-f0af-11eb-935d-07125018f070.html

 

This only seems right because they are not interested in winning now.

[Andrew Amerk]

9 hours ago, Thorny said:

It's mostly semantics. They are going to be bad and know it

I get that, but there’s a difference between intentionally being bad, and just being bad. This is not a tank. 

[Pimlach]

I read this thread and I get convinced most die hard Sabre fans, like the ones posting  here, are conditioned to faithfully “wait” before we get good.  All this debate on trying to win, resets, tanks…. 
 

What are the Sabres braintrust waiting for?   How can they take a last place team and make them worse?   

Comments like the ones below are what I’m talking about. 
 

-  we are accumulating draft capital and prospects to join our “new” core for this time in the future when they peak 

(answer:   Our new core has no veteran leadership and may not even be that good.  They might leave like our old core did.  They might leave for the same reasons.  The time to start improving is ALWAYS now)   

 

-  don’t hire an experienced and tough NHL coach (like Gallant), our young players need development and not unreasonable expectations from an experienced NHL coach.  
 

(answer:  hogwash.  An experienced coach won’t play a guy who isn’t ready and a good GM will incrementally create a better roster.)
 

-  why sign a good goalie now when he won’t even be here when we get good? 

(Answer:  because we want to compete and win right now and we have young goalies  in our pipeline for the future) 

 

-  at the end of another losing season we can trade our few decent vet players at the deadline for more draft picks?   We can rationalize that it’s better than losing them for nothing.  
 

(Answer:  that’s how we ended up with a team were no one knows winning; that is how we lost any sense of identity; that is how we became a place good players will not go to)   

-  this team can be exciting  and still get a top 5 draft pick. 
 

(answer:  bottom feeders are not exciting and they do not build or maintain a fan base.  Top draft picks often fail in losing environments). 

I will watch a ***** team because I’m an old diehard.  I feel for the young fans who only know losing and who believe this is the way it has to be.  
 

The time to get better is now.  The organization needs a leader that expects more and sets high expectations and knows how to make it happen.  The waiting is over.   That means you Terry and Kim.  Get it done and step away. 

Edited August 26, 2021 by Pimlach

[Andrew Amerk]

9 hours ago, Thorny said:

It's just the difference between "bad" being the priority, or a willing side-effect. The ultimate goal isn't to finish last but the priority is certainly not "winning" right now. That we'll finish near the bottom is an accepted, and I'd argue, based on the dearth of on ice addition we've seen so far, desired result. 

I’d assume that the priority is “winning,” but understanding the youth movement will only garner a certain amount of wins. 

[Andrew Amerk]

12 hours ago, Buffalonill said:

They have done nothing to improve at all ..but we're not tanking? 

We just lost 85% of our Offense and they did nothing but trade for future assets

If you really can’t see the difference between what they did to tank for McDavid, and what they are doing now, may God have mercy on your soul. 

Of course a rebuilding team traded their best players for future assets. That’s the entire idea of rebuilding. 

Edited August 26, 2021 by Andrew Amerk

[JohnC]

55 minutes ago, SwampD said:

This only seems right because they are not interested in winning now.

Ullmark is a good goaltender. He is not worth a 6 yr contract at $6 M per year. The organization put itself in a bind with the extended and overvalued Skinner contract. And because of that they  lost some roster flexibility that can't get out of it. The organization placed a value on Ullmark and wouldn't go outside their value of him. That's the right way to run the operation. There are  things that one can validly criticize the GM for. This is not one of them. 

Edited August 26, 2021 by JohnC

[SabresVet]

30 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

I read this thread and I get convinced most die hard Sabre fans, like the ones posting  here, are conditioned to faithfully “wait” before we get good.  All this debate on trying to win, resets, tanks…. 

What are the Sabres braintrust waiting for?   How can they take a last place team and make them worse?  

I will watch a ***** team because I’m and old diehard.  I feel for the young fans who only know losing and who believe this is the way it has to be.  

The time to get better is now.  The organization needs a leader that expects more and sets high expectations and knows how to make it happen.  The waiting is over.   That means you Terry it Kim.  Get it done and step away. 

Pushing expectations into the future is always a safe bet because fans are notoriously hesitant to demand accountability of their teams.  

I'm convinced most people aren't willing to be honest with themselves and hold themselves accountable for their flaws.  So it stands to reason that fans, who draw much of their identity from a sports team, won't do the same there either. 

Unfortunately, ownership is the obstacle and it'll take a herculean effort to overcome their presence.  

[Digger]

My issue with trading established players for "all futures" is that we seem to be valuing the 1st round pick in most cases as the most desirable piece coming back.  Unless the 1st round pick is a top 5 pick we need to wait 2 to 3 years for that player to develop and sometimes 4 to 5 years.  Reinhart's 1st round 2022 pick that we received won't play for the Sabres for 4 to 5 years.  That's tough to accept.

Why can't we make a trade with the focus on former 1st round picks or lower that have developed into good prospects and are ready to play for the Sabres this season?  Players that are still on the ELC?

We will see what package we get if Eichel gets traded but I'd rather have the A+ center prospect ready to play for the Sabres this year as the priority rather than the 1st round picks.  Get young players that are ready to play now.

[SwampD]

15 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Ullmark is a good goaltender. He is not worth a 6 yr contract at $6 M per year. The organization put itself in a bind with the extended and overvalued Skinner contract. And because of that they  lost some roster flexibility that can't get out of it. The organization placed a value on Ullmark and wouldn't go outside their value of him. That's the right way to run the operation. There are  things that one can validly criticize the GM for. This is not one of them. 

He didn’t get a 6x6 contract. He took a 4x5. Did we offer that?

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, SwampD said:

He didn’t get a 6x6 contract. He took a 4x5. Did we offer that?

He wanted a longer term and more to play in Buffalo than Boston. From his perspective I understand why. As I said before he did what was right for him and the organization made a decision that was right for them. 

[SwampD]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

He wanted a longer term and more to play in Buffalo than Boston. From his perspective I understand why. As I said before he did what was right for him and the organization made a decision that was right for them. 

I hadn’t heard that he wanted 6x6 from Buffalo before. That was his ask, but did we counter with 4x5? We don’t know.

[JohnC]

10 minutes ago, SwampD said:

I hadn’t heard that he wanted 6x6 from Buffalo before. That was his ask, but did we counter with 4x5? We don’t know.

The article I cited said that his agent asked for a six year deal. Did we counter it? I can't say for sure. 

[I-90 W]

Compare this current roster (minus Eichel cause we’ll probably never see him wear our jersey again) to any of the tank years. What tangible difference is there? How many more points do you honestly expect us to get than in the tank seasons?

I don’t see this team as currently constructed getting much more than 50 points.

[Zamboni]

Fact is …. Those who wish to call what KA is doing a “tank” will not convince those who think it’s not a true tank, but more of a rebuild. 
And visa versa.

It’s so futile to debate and think you’ll convince anyone to change their opinion on what KA is doing. 
 

No matter how much explaining people do, no one is changing their mind.

Edited August 26, 2021 by Zamboni

[Sabres Fan in NS]

12 hours ago, Buffalonill said:

If they're trying to win they wouldn't trade sam,Ristolainen for a bunch of futures and  Signed perhaps the worst goalie tendom I've ever seen.

And now we're gonna trade our franchise center for futures .

And probably have Girgensons  as our 1st line center .

Thats tanking 101 

 

 

Tanking is all about intent.  The Sabres are not tanking.  It is a full on reset / restart.  There is a big difference.  This is what I wanted the Sabres to do in 2014 / 15.

We are going to have to disagree on this and move on. Okay?

[Kr632]

19 hours ago, nfreeman said:

Well, if Vogl was right in reporting that they only offered Linus a 1-year or 2-year deal, they didn't try very hard.

Either way, pretty much everyone agreed that given Ullmark's injury history, the Sabres needed not only Ullmark but a 2nd credible NHL goalie if they wanted to give a young and developing team the backstopping in net that it will surely need as they try to emerge from the basement.  That didn't happen either.

Bottom line is that about a million goalies moved around this summer, which is what happens every summer, and again the Sabres sat out the game of musical chairs and instead signed a couple of fringe guys whom no one expects to be any good.

They have chosen, at this point anyway, to go into the season with non-credible NHL goaltending.  That is a choice a GM makes when he wants his team to lose.  And a GM that makes that choice is a GM that is tanking.  It may not be as complete a tank as GMTM's tank, but it's still a tank. 

I sincerely hope KA pulls a rabbit out of his hat and brings in a real goalie between now and the start of the season, but I'm not optimistic.

As for your other post about the Reino and other trades -- not sure whether that was directed at me, but I haven't said anything about those trades in the context of whether they are tanking.  FWIW, I don't view those trades as part of a tank.

 

What does this mean?

 

Absolutely.  This is one of the key reasons why tanking is a stupid and shortsighted strategy.

What if the players that were available said no when we offered them a deal? You do understand the players have some say, right? You don't just offer a contract or and that player is yours.

What if the team said no in a trade? What if the player said he would refuse to report if traded? There's plenty of things that could have happened but everyone jumps to the player isn't here so we must have sat on our hands and not made an offer. 

Edited August 26, 2021 by Kr632

[That Aud Smell]

4 minutes ago, Kr632 said:

You do understand the players have some say, right?

😬

[Pimlach]

8 hours ago, Zamboni said:

Fact is …. Those who wish to call what KA is doing a “tank” will not convince those who think it’s not a true tank, but more of a rebuild. 
And visa versa.

It’s so futile to debate and think you’ll convince anyone to change their opinion on what KA is doing. 
 

No matter how much explaining people do, no one is changing their mind.

Ok, so rather than trying to define how we are going to go about losing, let’s define how we go about winning?  
 

That is the frustrating part. To come in last place with Eichel, Reinhart, Ullmark, Risto and McCabe; and then lose them all and add only futures and league minimum players.  Doing yet another rebuild/reset/tank in a year with another alleged savior in the draft has a smell to it.  
 

Edited August 26, 2021 by Pimlach

[Weave]

1 hour ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Tanking is all about intent.  The Sabres are not tanking.  It is a full on reset / restart.  There is a big difference.  This is what I wanted the Sabres to do in 2014 / 15.

We are going to have to disagree on this and move on. Okay?

Let’s see what transpires during the season and at the deadline before declaring a tank/non-tank.  If they jettison players performing well during the season we’ll have a pretty good idea of intent.

[thewookie1]

5 minutes ago, Weave said:

Let’s see what transpires during the season and at the deadline before declaring a tank/non-tank.  If they jettison players performing well during the season we’ll have a pretty good idea of intent.

I can live with that litmus test as to what level of intentional tanking this may be. If we make a trade at the deadline while outside the playoff picture however that doesn’t really count. For instance if we are 15 pts out of the playoffs and Butcher has 35 pts already; trading him for a 1st+ shouldn’t be seen as tanking. That would just be solid asset management.

[Archie Lee]

7 minutes ago, Weave said:

Let’s see what transpires during the season and at the deadline before declaring a tank/non-tank.  If they jettison players performing well during the season we’ll have a pretty good idea of intent.

I think this summarizes the "tank" v. "not a tank" debate pretty well.  If in mid-November Aaron Dell is giving us a .920 save % and Vinnie Hinostroza is playing at a point per game pace and we trade them both for a 6th round pick, then we will know it is a tank.

 

 

 

 

[SabresVet]

15 minutes ago, Weave said:

Let’s see what transpires during the season and at the deadline before declaring a tank/non-tank.  If they jettison players performing well during the season we’ll have a pretty good idea of intent.

There's no need to wait and see with the roster and how it'll fare against a tough division.  We know the goaltending is suspect and the forwards group is not much better given previous performance.  The defense I'm not extremely concerned about, though this won't carry them if they aren't scoring.  

It seems all people have to hang their hat on is that Granato's scheme will deliver huge dividends.  It reminds me of when people celebrated Chan Gailey's offenses who featured nobody and managed to (for a time) score some points.  Without top talent over a long season it's inevitably they'll struggle.

As someone noted above, you had a last place team in the league and then removed Eichel, Reinhart, Ullmark, McCabe, and Ristolainen.  Who replaces those guys and how are they an improvement?   

[Sabres Fan in NS]

22 minutes ago, Weave said:

Let’s see what transpires during the season and at the deadline before declaring a tank/non-tank.  If they jettison players performing well during the season we’ll have a pretty good idea of intent.

That's fair and reasonable.  As of now I say non-tank, but I agree that we should pass final judgement as the season goes on.  I will say that I would be surprised if this turns into a tank.  I think the Sabres have learned their lesson and there is no McDavid at the end of this season's tunnel.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

5 minutes ago, SabresVet said:

There's no need to wait and see with the roster and how it'll fare against a tough division.  We know the goaltending is suspect and the forwards group is not much better given previous performance.  The defense I'm not extremely concerned about, though this won't carry them if they aren't scoring.  

It seems all people have to hang their hat on is that Granato's scheme will deliver huge dividends.  It reminds me of when people celebrated Chan Gailey's offenses who featured nobody and managed to (for a time) score some points.  Without top talent over a long season it's inevitably they'll struggle.

As someone noted above, you had a last place team in the league and then removed Eichel, Reinhart, Ullmark, McCabe, and Ristolainen.  Who replaces those guys and how are they an improvement?   

We know that the Sabres will be bad.  All you points are right on and correct.

They don't make this season a tank season.  Tanking is all about intent.  

[SabresVet]

1 minute ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

We know that the Sabres will be bad.  All you points are right on and correct.

They don't make this season a tank season.  Tanking is all about intent.  

By no means is this a deliberate attempt to run the team into the ground to obtain a top draft pick.  

It's a classic rebuild, not a Tim Murray special circa 2014-15.