Reality Is...Nobody Has An Answer

[ska-T Palmtown]

GM is the greatest job in the world. You know going in (unless you are an idiot) that you have an expiration date - but if you are fired early you keep drawing your salary!! You hire a good coach, get some good players, keep half an eye on the salary cap. Presto - average GM'ing. This applies to pretty much any sport. If you are smart about it, ONE STINT as a GM sets you up for life.

I know nothing about any workings in the NHL, but I feel like you call up the other GMs and say "Listen, we all know I got a real crap show on my hands here and it is better for the league overall if we don't ALWAYS suck. What kind of problems do you guys have and who on my team could help?" You throw in a few "you're really breakin' my balls here" comments when they ask for Dahlin. You convince them they REALLY want a player from another team, but you'd be happy to take that middle six W/C off their hands cuz you have the cap space, and you toss a 4th rounder their way as a sign of good faith. Presto. 

See?

[SwampD]

21 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

I've had some bad opinions over the years on here. I am usually anti-change. 

I didn't want Ruff and Regeir fired over a decade ago.

I thought Bylsma, Housley, and Granato could have used more time.

I didn't want Botts gone as GM, I haven't been pushing Adams out the door.

I am usually VERY patient with young players. Give them YEARS before you call them busts (Cozens and Krebs are the recent exceptions, but I have kinda come around on Krebs as a bottom-of-the-Roster guy).

With all that said, DO SOMETHING!  Its obvious the current mix isn't working. Its obvious that the Roster, the front office, the development staff, or any combination of multiple things NEEDS to change.

You may make a trade and lose that trade on paper, lose it in the eyes of some fans, lose it in the eyes of media pundits. But even if that happens, you may win the trade in terms of needing to do something.

Please do something meaningful.

I said at the time that getting rid of Bylsma (and Murray) was going to set the rebuild back at least 2 years (never imagined it was going to be this long).

Botts is the only one of this entire crap show that we ever saw actually look like he cared and get mad at losing.

I do think that youth is our issue and I'm afraid that they will think that they have to do something, then get rid of yet another player who will flourish elsewhere.

Thorney has nailed it. It's spending. Get that crusty vet that the young'n's have to answer to.

 

[PerreaultForever]

Okay I'm going to post what all the softies won't like and what a lot of people won't like I think and many will think I'm kidding, but this might just be my last serious post and I am dead serious. As named in the other thread it's toxic. Brutally toxic. They've quit (again). They are lost (again). They are leaderless (again). They've tuned the coach out (again). They have no idea what to do and I suspect many of them are just hoping they will get moved to another team to try to restart their NHL careers or play out their days for the older guys. Management has no fix, nobody wants to come here (why would they?), the franchise is broken and no coach can fix this on his own. 

It is so well and truly f'd that there is only one possible solution and (although they will never do it) it's full on Shorsey and I'm really not kidding. 

You need to find 3 or 4 veteran thugs who absolutely hate to lose, bring them in and make them the team leaders. That's your new "core". You build from that, not from the lazy talent. If you're lucky the guy has a little skill like a Marcus Foligno, but even if he doesn't you still bring him in. You slack in practice? Bam, your own guy runs you through the boards and yells  at you "wake the f up". Zero tolerance for lack of effort and feel the wrath of slacking on every level. In that scenario coach can bag skate anybody who chooses to not buy in and compete at every moment. 

Forget the pretty and fancy it's time to restart in the trenches. It's time to go to war or this damn thing is over forever. 

They of course, will never even consider it. But no, I'm not kidding. It's the only way now. 

[Flashsabre]

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/why-nhl-teams-should-reconsider-teardown-rebuilds-and-prioritize-winning/

[inkman]

1 hour ago, Thorner said:

I’m the guy posting facts (2 of last 160 playoff teams spent as we have)

you must be the other guy 

Yo how did you determine that.  I believe you it just sounds like a mountain of work. 

[inkman]

18 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Okay I'm going to post what all the softies won't like and what a lot of people won't like I think and many will think I'm kidding, but this might just be my last serious post and I am dead serious. As named in the other thread it's toxic. Brutally toxic. They've quit (again). They are lost (again). They are leaderless (again). They've tuned the coach out (again). They have no idea what to do and I suspect many of them are just hoping they will get moved to another team to try to restart their NHL careers or play out their days for the older guys. Management has no fix, nobody wants to come here (why would they?), the franchise is broken and no coach can fix this on his own. 

It is so well and truly f'd that there is only one possible solution and (although they will never do it) it's full on Shorsey and I'm really not kidding. 

You need to find 3 or 4 veteran thugs who absolutely hate to lose, bring them in and make them the team leaders. That's your new "core". You build from that, not from the lazy talent. If you're lucky the guy has a little skill like a Marcus Foligno, but even if he doesn't you still bring him in. You slack in practice? Bam, your own guy runs you through the boards and yells  at you "wake the f up". Zero tolerance for lack of effort and feel the wrath of slacking on every level. In that scenario coach can bag skate anybody who chooses to not buy in and compete at every moment. 

Forget the pretty and fancy it's time to restart in the trenches. It's time to go to war or this damn thing is over forever. 

They of course, will never even consider it. But no, I'm not kidding. It's the only way now. 

I don’t hate it but I’d rather bring in guys who can play a little rather than the Dalton Smiths of the world. Gimme a Tkachuk, Trouba and Kreider.  They would demand effort.  I know none of them are coming but that is what the Sabres need.  

[SwampD]

32 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Okay I'm going to post what all the softies won't like and what a lot of people won't like I think and many will think I'm kidding, but this might just be my last serious post and I am dead serious. As named in the other thread it's toxic. Brutally toxic. They've quit (again). They are lost (again). They are leaderless (again). They've tuned the coach out (again). They have no idea what to do and I suspect many of them are just hoping they will get moved to another team to try to restart their NHL careers or play out their days for the older guys. Management has no fix, nobody wants to come here (why would they?), the franchise is broken and no coach can fix this on his own. 

It is so well and truly f'd that there is only one possible solution and (although they will never do it) it's full on Shorsey and I'm really not kidding. 

You need to find 3 or 4 veteran thugs who absolutely hate to lose, bring them in and make them the team leaders. That's your new "core". You build from that, not from the lazy talent. If you're lucky the guy has a little skill like a Marcus Foligno, but even if he doesn't you still bring him in. You slack in practice? Bam, your own guy runs you through the boards and yells  at you "wake the f up". Zero tolerance for lack of effort and feel the wrath of slacking on every level. In that scenario coach can bag skate anybody who chooses to not buy in and compete at every moment. 

Forget the pretty and fancy it's time to restart in the trenches. It's time to go to war or this damn thing is over forever. 

They of course, will never even consider it. But no, I'm not kidding. It's the only way now. 

I've been saying this exact thing for a while now (maybe with slightly different language). I totally agree. I think you could even do it with only 1 or 2. It would make everyone else play better.

[7+6=13]

2 hours ago, Thorner said:

I guess the distinction for me where “nonsense” is concerned is that: my ability to cope with it is inversely tied to how much the particular hockey opinion is infused and backed by a professional salary

maybe it’s absurd, but I have a higher tolerance for Joe message board being seemingly off base than I do the guy being paid more money than I’ll probably make in my lifetime 

On this we agree.  

[Thorner]

59 minutes ago, inkman said:

Yo how did you determine that.  I believe you it just sounds like a mountain of work. 

Well I didn’t calculate the varying caps, it’s a well documented discussion point that only 2 teams spending bottom 10 have made the playoffs the last decade. I just took that decade and x 16 teams each year.

there’s a knowing error there - there’d actually be more than 160 cause that year, what, 24 teams made it?

So 2 of the last 168

 

 

[Flashsabre]

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/video/the-talking-point-have-the-sabres-hit-rock-bottom~3049491

[ska-T Palmtown]

13 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/video/the-talking-point-have-the-sabres-hit-rock-bottom~3049491

ha. specific point in time? no. the bottom could certainly fall out further.  Like, in the grand scheme of things ... perhaps.