JJFIVEOH Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 Of course the record was better, the roster was better. But the record in the second game of those back to backs was not good. Tack on a worse roster on top of that, and I'm not sure why it's controversial to think the schedule will hurt us. Either way, it doesn't have any bearing on how it will affect this year's team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 Of course the record was better, the roster was better. But the record in the second game of those back to backs was not good. Tack on a worse roster on top of that, and I'm not sure why it's controversial to think the schedule will hurt us. The only player this will affect will be Hodgson, the rest of the slackers are gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 While the cap floor issue isn't a big deal, this isn't very accurate. Ennis and Foligno won't take up anymore than like $5M. Risto's number is already counted against the floor and is a small number. Pysyk and Larsson are also very small numbers. On the performance bonus note: I've scoured all of the internet to figure it out but can't. You can have performance bonuses that have you go over the cap but it doesn't say anything about assisting yourself to the cap floor. Also: when do teams have to be compliant with the cap floor? I'd guess opening night? It's what, 10% over during the summer? I'd guess it's before opening night, otherwise you wouldn't be able to make last-minute roster changes based on those last few practices. I think JJ brings up a great point. It's simple: the Sabres are going to have to spend some money to get to the floor. I don't see people here saying they should overpay John Scott for a season or two. Rather, I see people day-dreaming about the better FAs. I know I said it early on, but I won't claim it was my idea. I do wonder if the league has sent a message to the Sabres (and maybe other teams) that throwing disproportionate money at scrubs for a year or two will be noticed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 I know I said it early on, but I won't claim it was my idea. I do wonder if the league has sent a message to the Sabres (and maybe other teams) that throwing disproportionate money at scrubs for a year or two will be noticed. But they didn't say anything about Leino! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre Dance Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 Spare me the pride argument. Just because you disagree with the approach some of us favor doesn't mean you're somehow morally superior. The Kings also used a #3 overall (Jack Johnson) and #5 overall (Brayden Schenn) to bring in two huge components to their championship teams--Carter and Richards. Your chances of getting NHL players are astronomically higher at the top of the draft. Keep 'em, trade 'em, whatever; but that's where you get the talent. Yes, and just because the team might ask you to watch and support them during this tank/rebuild, you are more than free not to. I think the Sabres have been as clear as they can without outright saying it, that this season will another tank. And for the millionth time, while the #1 pick would of course be ideal next year... IT'S NOT THE BE ALL, END ALL OF THE TANKING PHILOSOPHY. You're going to see trades in an effort to acquire more NHL ready young talent, possibly as soon as next week. When the time comes I think they will once again pursue marquee FA's. But now is still the time for tanking. We have a refreshingly blunt GM now who has told the fans time and again that this is the plan. Well said on all counts. Frankly, I don't plan on following this team very much for this season at least, and maybe more. Moral superiority? No, I just think it's an insult to fans (paid ticketholders or not) to assemble a team which does not represent your best effort to produce a winner every season. I'm very surprised at the number of fans and media who are so willing to write off several seasons for the HOPE of getting better. Nothing in life is guaranteed.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 Frankly, I don't plan on following this team very much for this season at least, and maybe more. Moral superiority? No, I just think it's an insult to fans (paid ticketholders or not) to assemble a team which does not represent your best effort to produce a winner every season. I'm very surprised at the number of fans and media who are so willing to write off several seasons for the HOPE of getting better. Nothing in life is guaranteed.... What would you like us to do? Not like we have any control over the roster. We're just fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 What would you like us to do? Not like we have any control over the roster. We're just fans. Not always. Sometimes we do have direct input. Takeo Spikes Buffalo Bills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 Frankly, I don't plan on following this team very much for this season at least, and maybe more. Moral superiority? No, I just think it's an insult to fans (paid ticketholders or not) to assemble a team which does not represent your best effort to produce a winner every season. I'm very surprised at the number of fans and media who are so willing to write off several seasons for the HOPE of getting better. Nothing in life is guaranteed.... I'm not going to not follow them, but I agree about putting together a winner. Doing what they did last year is acceptable. Purposely tanking from there on out is not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 Tallon picked up Campbell to help the Hawks with cap trouble, Campbell was in decline the Hawks were playing him less and less. Bergenheim up to that point was a mediocre 3rd liner. Theodore was an aging one-hit wonder. You can look withi hindsight all you want, at the time that is the way it was viewed. Jovanovski, I shouldn't need to explain that one. No. Soupy played 23 min per game his last year with Chicago, and 26.5 min per game in the playoffs (2nd on the team). The cap floor in 2011-12 was $48 million. The Panthers' payroll was $52 million. They were over by $4mil partially because they took on Campbell's salary as a favor to the Hawks. (Tallon has done significant business with Chicago since his departure). Am I missing something? You're missing the fact that this kind of thing doesn't happen on the planet Earth. They took on Soupy because it was an opportunity for them to kill 2 birds with one stone by geting a really good player who was a bit overpaid and get to the cap floor at the same time. Having said all of that, I don't disagree with your basic premise -- i.e. that it's possible that the Sabres might be not as terrible next season as everyone is assuming. I don't think they'll get up to playoff-bubble status, but I expect a number of teams to tank this year, and I think the Sabres will be better than they were last year -- so it's not automatic that they will be bottom 3 in the NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 I'm not going to not follow them, but I agree about putting together a winner. Doing what they did last year is acceptable. Purposely tanking from there on out is not. Purposely tanking is exactly what they did last year. Frankly, I don't plan on following this team very much for this season at least, and maybe more. Moral superiority? No, I just think it's an insult to fans (paid ticketholders or not) to assemble a team which does not represent your best effort to produce a winner every season. I'm very surprised at the number of fans and media who are so willing to write off several seasons for the HOPE of getting better. Nothing in life is guaranteed.... Some of us view toiling in mediocrity just to ice a "competitive" team as the functional equivalent of writing off several seasons, which is something you and others who argue this point don't seem to understand. Finishing 11th is as much of a waste of time as finishing 15th, except that it lacks the payoff of being truly awful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 No. Soupy played 23 min per game his last year with Chicago, and 26.5 min per game in the playoffs (2nd on the team). You're missing the fact that this kind of thing doesn't happen on the planet Earth. They took on Soupy because it was an opportunity for them to kill 2 birds with one stone by geting a really good player who was a bit overpaid and get to the cap floor at the same time. Having said all of that, I don't disagree with your basic premise -- i.e. that it's possible that the Sabres might be not as terrible next season as everyone is assuming. I don't think they'll get up to playoff-bubble status, but I expect a number of teams to tank this year, and I think the Sabres will be better than they were last year -- so it's not automatic that they will be bottom 3 in the NHL. He was in his 30's. Everybody is in their decline at that age. He wasn't happy with the fact that he was given less power play time. I didn't say otherwise about Campbell and Florida. Or course they brought him in because he was still good. But that deal to Florida never happens if Tallon didn't have connections in Chicago. Purposely tanking is exactly what they did last year. No, they finished last becasue they flat out sucked. At one point they were down to their 7th string goaltender. They traded away all the big name pending UFA's. They went through a GM change, a coaching change, the Lafontaine debacle............. they didn't do all that for the purpose of tanking. Granted they didn't do anything to try and imporve the situation, but at that point finish off the season and move forward. Now going back to my original point, it's going to be more difficult to tank this year. They won't be able to do it on purpose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 They can win 33% more games this year and still finish last. They will be better this year, but not 7 wins better, so they'll still finish last. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 He was in his 30's. Everybody is in their decline at that age. He wasn't happy with the fact that he was given less power play time. I didn't say otherwise about Campbell and Florida. Or course they brought him in because he was still good. But that deal to Florida never happens if Tallon didn't have connections in Chicago. No, they finished last becasue they flat out sucked. At one point they were down to their 7th string goaltender. They traded away all the big name pending UFA's. They went through a GM change, a coaching change, the Lafontaine debacle............. they didn't do all that for the purpose of tanking. Granted they didn't do anything to try and imporve the situation, but at that point finish off the season and move forward. Now going back to my original point, it's going to be more difficult to tank this year. They won't be able to do it on purpose. And why did they flat out suck? Because management made the conscious choice to ice a team that couldn't hope to be competitive. All of the rhetoric all offseason was about the top players being at the top of the draft, and then the team does zilch to improve and replace what they traded away at the deadline the previous season? Sometimes 2+2 really does equal 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 They can win 33% more games this year and still finish last. They will be better this year, but not 7 wins better, so they'll still finish last. Looking at the Charts from last year (and I'm just eyeballing), there's essentially three phases of the season: The Rolston Nose-dive, the Nolan Excitement, and the Post-Trade Free Fall. The Nolan Excitement period wasn't that bad, we're not talking about playoffs, but we're not talking about last place either. Just using a ruler, we'd have finished somewhere just below NYI for the season. The question is with the new players we'll have, is that modest pace going to be the norm. And after the trade deadline will it be a free fall again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 And why did they flat out suck? Because management made the conscious choice to ice a team that couldn't hope to be competitive. All of the rhetoric all offseason was about the top players being at the top of the draft, and then the team does zilch to improve and replace what they traded away at the deadline the previous season? Sometimes 2+2 really does equal 4. I guess we just see it differently. I'll stick to my point of tanking this coming season.......... not last. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 Looking at the Charts from last year (and I'm just eyeballing), there's essentially three phases of the season: The Rolston Nose-dive, the Nolan Excitement, and the Post-Trade Free Fall. The Nolan Excitement period wasn't that bad, we're not talking about playoffs, but we're not talking about last place either. Just using a ruler, we'd have finished somewhere just below NYI for the season. The question is with the new players we'll have, is that modest pace going to be the norm. And after the trade deadline will it be a free fall again? To finish just behind the islanders, we would have to win 13 additional games. Who can we possibly add or improve that will get us an additional 26 points in the standings? Jesus Gretzky Orr? Bottom 3 is almost inevitable unless we trade our top draft picks for current players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 (edited) Looking at the Charts from last year (and I'm just eyeballing), there's essentially three phases of the season: The Rolston Nose-dive, the Nolan Excitement, and the Post-Trade Free Fall. The Nolan Excitement period wasn't that bad, we're not talking about playoffs, but we're not talking about last place either. Just using a ruler, we'd have finished somewhere just below NYI for the season. The question is with the new players we'll have, is that modest pace going to be the norm. And after the trade deadline will it be a free fall again? I think that type of analysis ignores that Nolan got the benefit of a "new coach bump" that almost all new coaches--even Rolston--get. Once the team settled in, they were awful again. E.g., 4-13 in the six weeks preceding the Olympics. I don't think there's evidence for the idea that this team is going to be appreciably better with a full season of Nolan (or anyone else) at the helm. Edited June 24, 2014 by Eleven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 To finish just behind the islanders, we would have to win 13 additional games. Who can we possibly add or improve that will get us an additional 26 points in the standings? Jesus Gretzky Orr? Bottom 3 is almost inevitable unless we trade our top draft picks for current players. Preach on! This team can get better (but will it even get to the pre-deadline talent level?) and still be the worst in the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 To finish just behind the islanders, we would have to win 13 additional games. Who can we possibly add or improve that will get us an additional 26 points in the standings? Jesus Gretzky Orr? Bottom 3 is almost inevitable unless we trade our top draft picks for current players. "Turmoil" was spelled S-A-B-R-E-S last year. Actually, you can wind that back to the end of xx-13 season. I'm no expert, but I would have to think organizational stability and focus would account for, oh, half or more of those 26 points, before you factor in its affects on the players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 I think that type of analysis ignores that Nolan got the benefit of a "new coach bump" that almost all new coaches--even Rolston--get. Once the team settled in, they were awful again. E.g., 4-13 in the six weeks preceding the Olympics. Very good point. "Turmoil" was spelled S-A-B-R-E-S last year. Actually, you can wind that back to the end of xx-13 season. I'm no expert, but I would have to think organizational stability and focus would account for, oh, half or more of those 26 points, before you factor in its affects on the players. I think we should take this to the charity bet thread... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 "Turmoil" was spelled S-A-B-R-E-S last year. Actually, you can wind that back to the end of xx-13 season. I'm no expert, but I would have to think organizational stability and focus would account for, oh, half or more of those 26 points, before you factor in its affects on the players. good point. But that might just balance out the downgrade in goal. One other posibility is Zemgus. That kid has it in him to will a team to 80 points. I don't know if he can do it next year, but he has that thing there isn't a good word for. it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude_Verret Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 I guess we just see it differently. I'll stick to my point of tanking this coming season.......... not last. They may not finish last, but I'd give them a 90% chance of being bottom five in the league and getting an elite talent to add to the one they're about to pick in a few days. I'll take that all day long over the the 5% chance they have of being a bubble team and getting an exponentially worse prospect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 No, they finished last becasue they flat out sucked. At one point they were down to their 7th string goaltender. They traded away all the big name pending UFA's. They went through a GM change, a coaching change, the Lafontaine debacle............. they didn't do all that for the purpose of tanking. Granted they didn't do anything to try and imporve the situation, **raises hand** That's not really fair. They did bring in Dagostini, Konopka and Conacher to right the ship! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stenbaro Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 No. Soupy played 23 min per game his last year with Chicago, and 26.5 min per game in the playoffs (2nd on the team). You're missing the fact that this kind of thing doesn't happen on the planet Earth. They took on Soupy because it was an opportunity for them to kill 2 birds with one stone by geting a really good player who was a bit overpaid and get to the cap floor at the same time. Having said all of that, I don't disagree with your basic premise -- i.e. that it's possible that the Sabres might be not as terrible next season as everyone is assuming. I don't think they'll get up to playoff-bubble status, but I expect a number of teams to tank this year, and I think the Sabres will be better than they were last year -- so it's not automatic that they will be bottom 3 in the NHL. I think the Sabres will show a marked improvement this upcoming season. Girgenson should be better just from being a year older and wiser, our goaltending should be the same, and I believe Myers will kill it this yr..I want another last place finish I just dont see it happening... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted June 24, 2014 Report Share Posted June 24, 2014 I think the Sabres will show a marked improvement this upcoming season. Girgenson should be better just from being a year older and wiser, our goaltending should be the same, and I believe Myers will kill it this yr..I want another last place finish I just dont see it happening... I think it's highly unlikely that our goaltending will be the same. 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.