I-90 W Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 I for 1 am sure as hell glad we don't have to watch Stafford/Pominville/Vanek all watch our goalie get his ass ran over and not do anything, that was a weak group. It's heading in the right direction, the only bad thing about rebuilds is now you have to wait for the kids to grow up a little bit. Precisely. Some people seem to forget what led to the tank to begin with. Still not sure what the difference between tank and rebuild is, if rebuild doesnt mean plugging holes with free agents and keeping the status quo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre fan Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 obviously the fact that somehow the leafs suddenly became like this unstoppable crazy juggarnaut overnight certainly made anything the Sabres did or accomplished to this point unacceptable or not good enough. Kinda think that was a big part of EXGMTM being canned (of course his attitude probably had something to do with it too although he was a good scout and a judge of young talent). The tank and the rebuild is moving along at a good pace and hopefully we will see some big improvements next season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Declaring the tank a failure is premature. For instance, if Eichel, Reinhart, Risto, O'Reilly, Kane, and Nylander are the core of a championship team...those guys are all here because of the tank. Just sayin. I think that of that list, only Eichel and Reino are Sabres because of the tank, with Risto being debatable. ROR and Kane were hockey trades, and Nylander was a post-tank draft pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre fan Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 I think that of that list, only Eichel and Reino are Sabres because of the tank, with Risto being debatable. ROR and Kane were hockey trades, and Nylander was a post-tank draft pick. probably right...really, I think the rebuild is what has been successful to this point, getting rid of aging players like Vanek, Pomminstein and Miller and getting draft picks in exchange. The "tank" was suppose to net McDavid but that didn't work but jack is pretty darn good so that works out in the end. Our rebuild has certainly changed the complete roster (except maybe Ennis) and I do think that is/was good thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 I mean, should they have kept Drew Stanford, and for that matter, Tyler Myers? The studs were showing. Ripping the rest of the drywall out isn't unreasonable... I stand behind DrewmStanford... Ugh, you get it by now :unsure: Stafford was always a bit player ... and Myers was traded as part of a 'hockey trade'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 I think that of that list, only Eichel and Reino are Sabres because of the tank, with Risto being debatable. ROR and Kane were hockey trades, and Nylander was a post-tank draft pick. We don't have the assets to make both the ROR and Kane trades without the tank; the ROR trade, in particular, directly used tank-acquired assets (Zadorov, Compher, pick), and Risto was drafted when we started tanking with the Pominville trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 +++++ Pomminstein sighting ... :flirt: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 I think you have to consider ROR and Kane (and Lehner) spoils of the tank - they were the futures we indirectly acquired for dumping Pominville, Vanek and Miller. Selling off the old core for futures was the tank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 I think you have to consider ROR and Kane (and Lehner) spoils of the tank - they were the futures we indirectly acquired for dumping Pominville, Vanek and Miller. Selling off the old core for futures was the tank. Correct. I don't think anyone would argue year two post-tank was anything other than bitterly disappointing. But declaring the tank a failure really shouldn't be done yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 We don't have the assets to make both the ROR and Kane trades without the tank; the ROR trade, in particular, directly used tank-acquired assets (Zadorov, Compher, pick), and Risto was drafted when we started tanking with the Pominville trade. Exactly. Plus I'm pretty sure ROR was acquired specifically with the intent of bringing him in to do the heavy lifting at center so Eichel and Reinhart could be eased into the league without them having to start off drawing the top competition. Without those blue chippers to protect we may not have even gone after him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 We don't have the assets to make both the ROR and Kane trades without the tank; the ROR trade, in particular, directly used tank-acquired assets (Zadorov, Compher, pick), and Risto was drafted when we started tanking with the Pominville trade. I think you have to consider ROR and Kane (and Lehner) spoils of the tank - they were the futures we indirectly acquired for dumping Pominville, Vanek and Miller. Selling off the old core for futures was the tank. It's true that the Vanek/Pommer/Miller selloff yielded assets that went towards ROR and Kaner -- although other assets were certainly included -- especially in the Kane trade, in which the key piece was Myers. However, I don't really view that selloff as "the tank." Most teams that aren't cup contenders trade their pending UFAs -- and most teams don't intentionally ice terrible teams for the next 2 seasons, including by hiring a coach with essentially no knowledge of current NHL styles of, in order to obtain high draft picks, which is what I regard as the tank. I think Risto is debatable because the Sabres, and Rahn, were still trying to win in 2012-13 -- they went 8-4 in April that year. That wasn't part of the program in the next 2 years, which IMHO were the true tank years. I don't think anyone would argue year two post-tank was anything other than bitterly disappointing. But declaring the tank a failure really shouldn't be done yet. This is fair. The results aren't in yet. If Jackie boy leads them to the playoffs next year and then to a string of, say, 6 conf. finals or better in the following 9 years, it will have been a success. But if they miss again next year, making it 7 years with no playoffs, including 5 in a row starting with the tank (6 under the TB/dudacek definition of the tank era)? I'll feel vindicated, although certainly not happy, in continuing to believe that the right move would've been to have canned DR at the end of the 2012-13 season and brought in a new GM and coach with the mandate of "become a playoff team ASAP while maintaining cap flexibility to add difference-makers as they become available so the team can gradually improve its playoff results over time." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 All good points Freeman. Agree on Risto. I would argue that several teams do exactly what the Sabres did, they just weren't so open about it and the media didn't grab hold of the narrative they way they did over a two-year period leading up to McDavid. This was the first example of it in the internet age. Crosby was interrupted by the strike, so really you have to go back to Lemieux for this type of scenario. I think it changed perception. I would also argue the Sabres hired Nolan because Pat loved him, not because he was unqualified. Myers (and Stafford) sure, but they were old core guys and Myers more or less brought in Bogosian. Pretty sure the only thing we gave up for Kane Lehner ROR that wasn't part of the old core selloff was Armia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pastajoe Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 For some perspective, a reminder that Edmonton ended a 10 year playoff drought this season, and it took them having the 1st pick in the draft for 4 of the last 7 drafts. And they supposedly were trying to win during those years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 For some perspective, a reminder that Edmonton ended a 10 year playoff drought this season, and it took them having the 1st pick in the draft for 4 of the last 7 drafts. And they supposedly were trying to win during those years. Exhibit A for the #NeverTank position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 (edited) Exhibit A for the #NeverTank position.Montreal is the counter argument since without an elite forward of any kind they have never truly been a Cup Contender. And elite players are almost exclusively at the top of the draft. Also Edmonton didn't tank, they were just incompetent and got very lucky. We attempted one of those fly up and stall tricks in the dogfight of hockey, we are just having trouble restarting the propeller. Edmonton got lucky and inadvertently caused their enemy's aircraft to fly into church steeple when Edmonton's plane was sputtering over some French town. Edited May 1, 2017 by thewookie1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Edmonton is not a case of tanking. The only clear cut cases of tanking I recall are Pitt for Mario, Arixona and us, and Toronto. I'm sure there's more, but it's not the same as just sucking, which is what Edmonton did Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Didn't Edmonton tank during the McD year? Either way, they finished DFL or close to it for quite a few years. I think it's fair to hold them up as an example of what happens when you drop to that level, regardless of whether it's intentional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Edmonton did not tank that year. They just sucked. And it's a bad example of it too, because they failed after acquiring elite talent for different reasons. Tanking gets you elite talent, which it did for Edmonton, it's up to you afterwards on how you support and utilize that talent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Edmonton did not tank that year. They just sucked. And it's a bad example of it too, because they failed after acquiring elite talent for different reasons. Tanking gets you elite talent, which it did for Edmonton, it's up to you afterwards on how you support and utilize that talent Maybe until McD the talent they acquired wasn't really elite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Maybe until McD the talent they acquired wasn't really elite.Hall is for sure. And if it wasn't, well that's their fault for drafting like crap. Which, knowing Edmonton, wouldn't surprise me at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Pretty well documented Ottawa tanked for Daigle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Pretty well documented Ottawa tanked for Daigle They admitted it and look how that turned out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Hall is for sure. And if it wasn't, well that's their fault for drafting like crap. Which, knowing Edmonton, wouldn't surprise me at all Y'know, when I watch Hall, he kinda looks like a star, but is he really? In 6 NHL seasons, he's never exceeded 27 goals. Last season, as NJ's top gun, he produced 20-33-53. Those of course are good numbers, but elite? And of course it can't be ignored that he didn't disrupt Edmonton's chronic suckitude one iota -- whereas McD, who is unquestionably elite, immediately muscled them into relevance. The broader point is that there are very few players that can make that kind of difference -- and thus it's almost always not worth tanking for a high draft pick -- especially when the lottery gives you only a very small chance of getting that guy even when there is one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Forgot about Ottawa, good call. They admitted it and look how that turned out.It's not the tanks fault they took a bad player Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Forgot about Ottawa, good call. It's not the tanks fault they took a bad player Karma, man. It will get you every time. 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.