woods-racer Posted January 6, 2017 Report Share Posted January 6, 2017 Doohickie posted this in another thread... The problem with the way the tank worked out is that in each case we lost the lottery. I'm not sure losing the first one killed us, and I think Jack can, in fact, lead us to the Cup, but I think things would be further along with McJesus in the blue & gold. In the *old* days, when the Pens and Blackhawks finished last in the league, they drafted first overall and success on the ice came quicker than what we are seeing here given the same time line. So the question has been raised, are we not as far along this year because we didn't get the first overall pick for either of the two tanks years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assquatch Posted January 6, 2017 Report Share Posted January 6, 2017 Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted January 6, 2017 Report Share Posted January 6, 2017 Doohickie posted this in another thread... The problem with the way the tank worked out is that in each case we lost the lottery. I'm not sure losing the first one killed us, and I think Jack can, in fact, lead us to the Cup, but I think things would be further along with McJesus in the blue & gold. In the *old* days, when the Pens and Blackhawks finished last in the league, they drafted first overall and success on the ice came quicker than what we are seeing here given the same time line. So the question has been raised, are we not as far along this year because we didn't get the first overall pick for either of the two tanks years? Yes, and no. Murray was going to pick Reinhart either way, the fact that the Panthers picked Ekblad over Sam is incidental. Murray was never going to pick Ekblad, so in a sense, we picked first in that draft. Next year however, I have no doubt Murray would've picked McDavid over Eichel, even though he doesn't come right out and say it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 Yes for one reason only. If the Sabres win the lottery in 2015, Mike Babcock signs as the Head Coach of Your Buffalo Sabres. That puts them either in one or in much better contention for a playoff this season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 Yes for one reason only. If the Sabres win the lottery in 2015, Mike Babcock signs as the Head Coach of Your Buffalo Sabres. That puts them either in one or in much better contention for a playoff this season True and yet if Sabres finish top 2 this year and maybe next year does this in fact make them a better team in the long run Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted January 7, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 What if we finally won the lottery in 2016 and got our first overall pick then? Would Babcock be here because of that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 This strikes me as a pretty obvious "yes" -- ie it's pretty obvious that the Sabres would be better if they had better players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 What if we finally won the lottery in 2016 and got our first overall pick then? Would Babcock be here because of that? No, because he signed a long term deal to Coach the Leafs in May 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 In December 2014, when it became apparent that Babcock would not be staying in Detroit. Matthew Coller reported that Babs would be interested in coaching Buffalo particularly in McDavid was going to be there. Alas neither happened. I as do many members of the board feel that Bylsma is not the coach to lead this team to the promise land and will not be the Coach when we do reach the Cup Final. Which means the team will be learning and adapting to a new system soon. If Babcock is the coach the team would have two years under the system that will make them a Cup Contender for a decade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 Rotflmao Woe is us.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 Dur. Yay! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matter2003 Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 Doohickie posted this in another thread... The problem with the way the tank worked out is that in each case we lost the lottery. I'm not sure losing the first one killed us, and I think Jack can, in fact, lead us to the Cup, but I think things would be further along with McJesus in the blue & gold. In the *old* days, when the Pens and Blackhawks finished last in the league, they drafted first overall and success on the ice came quicker than what we are seeing here given the same time line. So the question has been raised, are we not as far along this year because we didn't get the first overall pick for either of the two tanks years? Even look at Matthews in Toronto...he just scored his 21st goal in 38 games as a ROOKIE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) The style of play here vs. Toronto, Bylsma vs. Babcock, two lousy teams, is interesting. Trace it back. Why are we playing a conservative, defense-first style? Murray can't be surprised, so who hired Murray and why? LaFontaine and Battista went on the interviews in Ottawa. Why did they think a Murray style team was the right way to go? Who hired LaFontaine? The guy who likes hard-working, gritty players? The losing culture is intriguing. It's more of a small-market mentality. We can't afford to score goals, so build from the goal out. But why should that be the case with Pegula as owner? Are we still stuck on this lunchpail, hard-working mentality that probably hasn't been true about the city of Buffalo since steel went south (and even then the early Sabre hockey teams were wide open and fun to watch)? Why can't we score goals and have fun? Poor Jack and Sam and Evander and Risto. Edited January 7, 2017 by PASabreFan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matter2003 Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 The style of play here vs. Toronto, Bylsma vs. Babcock, two lousy teams, is interesting. Trace it back. Why are we playing a conservative, defense-first style? Murray can't be surprised, so who hired Murray and why? LaFontaine and Battista went on the interviews in Ottawa. Why did they think a Murray style team was the right way to go? Who hired LaFontaine? The guy who likes hard-working, gritty players? The losing culture is intriguing. It's more of a small-market mentality. We can't afford to score goals, so build from the goal out. But why should that be the case with Pegula as owner? Are we still stuck on this lunchpail, hard-working mentality that probably hasn't been true about the city of Buffalo since steel went south (and even then the early Sabre hockey teams were wide open and fun to watch)? Why can't we score goals and have fun? Poor Jack and Sam and Evander and Risto. Toronto is becoming a not so lousy team right in front of our eyes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted January 7, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 This strikes me as a pretty obvious "yes" -- ie it's pretty obvious that the Sabres would be better if they had better players. Isn't that part of the debate though? Would we have chosen Ekblad over Reinhart? McDavid would have been taken over Jack. But, is it because of McDavid we would be better in the standings or because we would have Babcock that we would be better? So it's not the player talent as much as it is the coaching? If we didn't get McDavid or Jack but picked third and had Marner or Strome, but again we have Babcock, would you expect this team to be better in the standings? No, because he signed a long term deal to Coach the Leafs in May 2015 Whoopsie. :ph34r: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 What is delaying our improvement is a terrible D group. After McCabe and Risto we have nothing on the backend. This keeps us in our zone longer and limits our offense when Risto isn't on the ice. This is a problem of only drafting forwards. Nylander is a nice player and could develop into a star, but we needed another top flight D. We should have drafted Sergachev or Chychrun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 Isn't that part of the debate though? Would we have chosen Ekblad over Reinhart? McDavid would have been taken over Jack. But, is it because of McDavid we would be better in the standings or because we would have Babcock that we would be better? So it's not the player talent as much as it is the coaching? If we didn't get McDavid or Jack but picked third and had Marner or Strome, but again we have Babcock, would you expect this team to be better in the standings? Whoopsie. :ph34r: I think the Sabres would've chosen Ekblad over Reino, and McD over Eichel, and would've been justified in doing so, and would've been better off now, because both of the guys they didn't get are better than the guys they got. And if McD had resulted in Babcock -- a huge if, btw -- that would've resulted in additional improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radar Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 While Ekblad and McDavid would have been the picks Risto and Eichel aren't bad compensation. We were very fortunate to get both of them. I was thinking earlier we have a pretty darn good core of players now. Yeah there are areas we need improvements but I think we're going in a good direction even with the record not being as good as I'd like. O'Rielly move was huge in my mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 I am not so sure that Murray would have picked Ekblad instead of Samson, even if he had the #1 pick. He always seemed to be the anti-Darcy and wanted to build the team from the centre position out / back. I think he may have even said that at one point, but I'm not sure on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjd1001 Posted January 7, 2017 Report Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) I'm not sure the lack of #1 overall picks is the problem. I think they need(ed) another 1 or 2 additional top 5 picks in the last 2-3 years. Edited January 7, 2017 by mjd1001 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.