darksabre Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 There's a lot of chatter here after yesterday's press conference that Tim Murray has outright admitted that next season's plan is to tank again. Tanking, as defined, being the idea of fielding a bad team to fail on purpose in order to draft high. There are a few reasons why this is a broken theory. It starts with Tim's arrival here when the season was already lost. Coming in from outside the organization it is clear that there is nothing here that Tim is attached to. None of the players on the team (outside of the ones he added) are "his guys". Neither are any staff members. And neither is the rebuild "plan" that Darcy set into motion. Regardless of the course the team was on, Tim clearly has his own plan: Draft well, develop well, and don't rush anything. The last part is where the illusion of a tank comes into play. As a GM you've traded away most of the valuable assets you don't think you need right away. You've maximized value and probably lowered the overall talent level of your team right into the basement. This is tantamount to inheriting a house only to find the previous owner has left some valuable things behind, so you sell them on craigslist and now you're sleeping on the living room floor. You'll buy new shiny things, just not yet. Now Tim gets to move forward with HIS plan. There's still a few things left, like Leino's stupid contract, but for the most part the stage has been set. He's got kids where he wants them, and will be adding more this offseason. He'll put them where he wants them as well. In the meantime, we've got some young talent that is going to stick with the Sabres. Girgensons, Pysyk, Ristolainen, Foligno, Hodgson, Ennis, Flynn. Maybe McCabe and Zadorov, maybe. Guys like Stafford, Weber and Ehrhoff will be back. Myers, Neuvirth, Enroth and probably Stewart too. But then you have a lot of holes to fill. We've probably already got some of those filler players. Conacher, Deslauriers, McBain, Ruwhedel. Maybe John Scott. Basically anyone who can take the place of a younger player who Tim doesn't want to put in the NHL yet. Remember, don't rush anything. Unfortunately for us, this is going to look like a tank. But it wont be. It's simply a succession plan. Eventually kids will start replacing filler players and veterans and they will be better suited to those roles. This is what #blueprint really is. This is methodical. Just don't call it a tank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Just start with your first sentence. Murray nearly outright stated the opposite. It's clear that he is not planning on finishing last. (It's clear that he's not planning on finishing first, either.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted April 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Just start with your first sentence. Murray nearly outright stated the opposite. It's clear that he is not planning on finishing last. (It's clear that he's not planning on finishing first, either.) Talk to everyone in the other threads bracing themselves for another tank. It's a popular interpretation of Murray's comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 I would make the argument that this season was not a tank either, by any reasonable definition of the word. The season was terrible solely because the roster was devoid of enough talent to win on a consistent basis. That is not a tank job ... losing on purpose. I do not believe the players, management and ownership planned to "tank". And they won't next season either, but I do not believe the results will be very different from this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 (edited) Talk to everyone in the other threads bracing themselves for another tank. It's a popular interpretation of Murray's comments. They're going to be bad again next year..... really bad. There could very well be improvement and they'll still be "competing" for last place. They won't outright call it a "tank", but the strategy of drafting very high in 2015 remains firmly in place. Edited April 16, 2014 by 26CornerBlitz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted April 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 They're going to be bad again next year..... really bad. There could very well be improvement and they'll still be "competing" for last place. They won't outright call it a "tank", but the strategy remains firmly in place. It's not a tank then. It simply cannot be defined that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Talk to everyone in the other threads bracing themselves for another tank. It's a popular interpretation of Murray's comments. It is popular. It is also strained. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 It's not a tank then. It simply cannot be defined that way. Semantics aside, there's a strategy that has been articulated that they are committed to seeing through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 "Tanking" is a fan fabrication to cope with the losing resulting from sale of current assets in favor of futures. We sold Vanek, Miller, Ott, etc and it resulting in 6+ additional top 60 picks over the next 2 drafts. This is twice as many top 60 picks as we had from 2009-2011. That is why we suck. That is why we wait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 It's not a tank then. It simply cannot be defined that way. So what should we call it? Semantics aside, there's a strategy that has been articulated that they are committed to seeing through. "Tanking" is a fan fabrication to cope with the losing resulting from sale of current assets in favor of futures. We sold Vanek, Miller, Ott, etc and it resulting in 6+ additional top 60 picks over the next 2 drafts. This is twice as many top 60 picks as we had from 2009-2011. That is why we suck. That is why we wait. Exactly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted April 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Semantics aside, there's a strategy that has been articulated that they are committed to seeing through. Now there is. There wasn't before. This season started as a tank and was forced to continue as one. The only difference being we're coming out of it with a real plan. No one can convince me that Darcy would have gone this far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 I wouldn't call tanking a fan fabrication at all. It's setting your team up to fail with the goal of landing a draft pick. Tanking may have been DR's plan, and it would look like GMTM continued it, but I don't think he did. I think GMTM looked at what was going on and sold off as many assets as he could with the intention of tearing it down to rebuild it. In late June, I expect he'll trade some of those picks for quality guys that can improve the team in '14-'15. As he said, he's not doing some long rebuild. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKnowPhysics Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 What looks like a tank, moves like a tank, and sounds like a tank? VS. The players won't play to lose, the coaches won't coach to lose, and the general manager won't call it a tank on the record. The roster has been stripped of the veteran, talented players required to win games in the NHL. A team that was already last place in the NHL traded its leading scorer (twice if you count Moulson), its captain,and its starting goalie among others. So, roughly speaking, in order to become competitive again, you need to either see an unprecedented growth/influx of talent from our prospects OR the GM needs to bring in enough veteran talent by trades and free agency to make up for those lost players. I'm not sure that the the pressure should or would be placed on the kids, so that might leave it to the GM. But Tim's said he's only looking at two veteran free agents. Which means even if he's successful in free agency, he would have to bring in a some amount of talent via trades... ...and that seems like a reversal of what he just accomplished. The management is still touting the number of 1st and 2nds in these three years. Murray may trade some of those into more NHL-ready prospects, but probably not ones that will make an immediate game-changing impact. My point is that Tim Murray can claim that there's no intentional tank, and you can choose to believe or not believe him, but you'd better believe the residual tank ability of this team is extremely high. We're gonna lose. And with two extremely talented selections available next year, the prospect of finishing last to guarantee selecting one of them is not just something we should be cognizant of, it's something we should be striving for. Even if we can't or shouldn't admit it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 I wouldn't call tanking a fan fabrication at all. It's setting your team up to fail with the goal of landing a draft pick. Tanking may have been DR's plan, and it would look like GMTM continued it, but I don't think he did. I think GMTM looked at what was going on and sold off as many assets as he could with the intention of tearing it down to rebuild it. In late June, I expect he'll trade some of those picks for quality guys that can improve the team in '14-'15. As he said, he's not doing some long rebuild. It won't be if they execute the plan properly by drafting the right players, proper development of the current prospect pool, and key acquisitions via trade/free agency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 If they buy out the best tank commander in the NHL , Leino , then the tank has ended http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on-hockey/24527885/ville-leino-buyout-a-very-good-possibility-sabres-gm-says Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 (edited) It won't be a tank, per se, but that isn't going to change anything. The team will be bad. They won't compete for anything. They'll try, and they'll likely fail. For as much as I get insulted for stating absolutes, this entire thread is an absolute that nobody can really know for sure. Edited April 16, 2014 by Tankalicious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Can we change the name of this thread to "The official thread of semantics"? They're going to suck but they're not going to try to suck. What exactly is the point? Does the "but hey, these guys are trying" point of view really make a bad season that much more palatable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted April 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Can we change the name of this thread to "The official thread of semantics"? They're going to suck but they're not going to try to suck. What exactly is the point? Does the "but hey, these guys are trying" point of view really make a bad season that much more palatable? I suppose I should have titled it "The setup is done, now we execute the plan", because apparently the concept of this season being both a tank and a setup that leads to a season where there is no tank, is way too complex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 I suppose I should have titled it "The setup is done, now we execute the plan", because apparently the concept of this season being both a tank and a setup that leads to a season where there is no tank, is way too complex. Most people can't think that many steps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 I suppose I should have titled it "The setup is done, now we execute the plan", because apparently the concept of this season being both a tank and a setup that leads to a season where there is no tank, is way too complex. The two are in definitely not mutually exclusive. But at the same time, weren't we already at that point this year, giving a guy like Girgensons significant playing time, and to a lesser extent Ristolainen? There was never a point where they were throwing away the season and also ignoring the development of their younger guys. No team would ever do that. They may go about it in a poorly planned way, but they're not trying to screw over their young guys. At this point, I'd say the word tank has been used far too often, just like a teenage girl and the word "like". What does it even mean anymore? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted April 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 The two are in definitely not mutually exclusive. But at the same time, weren't we already at that point this year, giving a guy like Girgensons significant playing time, and to a lesser extent Ristolainen? There was never a point where they were throwing away the season and also ignoring the development of their younger guys. No team would ever do that. They may go about it in a poorly planned way, but they're not trying to screw over their young guys. At this point, I'd say the word tank has been used far too often, just like a teenage girl and the word "like". What does it even mean anymore? A lot of people here are using tanking as a process. It's not. It's a hard reset. It's what you do when you've completely messed up building a team. Darcy started the tank and Murray had no choice but to finish it. Point of no return. It's the abandonment of one plan and the setup to another. But it alone is not a plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Tank(ing) - The selling off of all valuable assets over a short period of time with the intention of receiving new talent via the draft. Rebuild - The selling off of many valuable assets over a short period of time with the intention of receiving new talent via the draft and trades and free agency. Retool - The selling off of certain assets for immediate NHL ready players in order to quickly change the identity of a team. Draft picks may be included. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 04/16 – Murray wants higher expectations for Sabres, quick rebuild (Bill Hoppe – Olean Times Herald) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Does this mean I have to change my name/avatar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 04/16 – Murray wants higher expectations for Sabres, quick rebuild (Bill Hoppe – Olean Times Herald) 04/16 – Murray wants higher expectations for Sabres, quick rebuild (Bill Hoppe – Olean Times Herald) I like when you post this stuff because I miss things sometimes but please not the same link in multiple threads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.