Weave Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 You know what else is an absolute bore? Paying to see teams with AHL rosters playing your NHL team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I-90 W Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 Hopefully we can sign this Antipin, he can be a top 4 dman, and we make a trade somehow with our #8 pick and prospect or Kane for an additional top 4 dman. I don't want to see Kane go but id really like to know what his intentions are long term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnkirishone Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 when the only useful way to fix a roster is thru the draft you have to accept the worst teams getting first shot at the talent. How about this. if we want teams that just barely missed out on the playoffs winning the draft lottery how about we allow teams to sign free agents in a staggered schedule. the worse the record the sooner free agents can sign with you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 I was hopeful before and it stinks the Sabres moved down 2 spots... still there should be a number of good D available, even Valimaki and Cal Foote aren't bad... probably rules out Makar... Again the lottery, meh check your posts last night as I was eating food a family event and watch the family all cry about the Rangers collapse... er loss... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 I've said before that the problem needs to be fixed, not just by de-incentivizing it, but also by legislating away the tools to do so. For example, players under contract should only be allowed to be traded for other players under contract. Oh, please no. The Sabres have been sellers in non-rebuild context, too (Biron comes to mind). And there are often cap-related reasons for doing so, too. Trading players for picks is an important part of team-building strategy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 (edited) Oh, please no. The Sabres have been sellers in non-rebuild context, too (Biron comes to mind). And there are often cap-related reasons for doing so, too. Trading players for picks is an important part of team-building strategy. Easily worked around too: Buffalo Sabres trade Evander Kane and their 2017 7th round pick to Dallas for Ondrej Vala and their 2017 1st round pick. Edited May 1, 2017 by MattPie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 (edited) Easily worked around too: Buffalo Sabres trade Evander Kane and their 2017 7th round pick to Dallas for Ondrej Vala and their 2017 1st round pick. Good point. So it's both a bad idea and substantively meaningless. Edited May 1, 2017 by Eleven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 I agree with having to do something to discourage t**king. My problem with the way this lottery went was that the system was set up in a way that allowed the expansion franchise to slide so far back in the order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 I'll admit I haven't been involved in this thread so apologies if this has been already covered, but tanking is such a rare event, who cares if it's done anyhow? At most, it's a team per year average. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted May 1, 2017 Report Share Posted May 1, 2017 I'll admit I haven't been involved in this thread so apologies if this has been already covered, but tanking is such a rare event, who cares if it's done anyhow? At most, it's a team per year average. I wouldn't call that rare, and the league cares obviously. They've updated their efforts to discourage it twice recently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 (edited) I wouldn't call that rare, and the league cares obviously. They've updated their efforts to discourage it twice recently.I've thought about it and I still don't see why the league would even care, at least sales wise. Sure it's a detriment to your brand, in some sense I suppose, but I don't think your immediate revenue is hurt that much, if at all, for the team tanking, and in the long run if they team becomes competitive instead of mired in mediocrity, well you're again better off. Edited May 2, 2017 by WildCard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I-90 W Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 I've thought about it and I still don't see why the league would even care, at least sales wise. My guess would be same reason that the hard salary cap exists, parity. The NHL is always trying to lure in new fans and for whatever reason that's the direction the league seems to think is effective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 My guess would be same reason that the hard salary cap exists, parity. The NHL is always trying to lure in new fans and for whatever reason that's the direction the league seems to think is effective. That is part of it. The league loses the opportunity to market a tanking team. It also results in a lesser product overall because it adds to the naturally occurring bottom feeding teams. And, let's face it, if you aren't supporting the team doing the tanking, there is a stigma to it. SSF derided folks who compare it to throwing games, but that is what it is really. The stigma is why few teams actively pursue it as a tactic. That stigma seems to be lessening lately. There was active hate and derision for P-burgh and Ottawa's tank products. Mario was well into his career before he got the respect he deserved around the league in part because of what Pittsburgh did to get him. There is a level of acceptance now. Not fully though. How much respect is Jack getting among his peers right now. We've all read the articles that have Jack secondary to the other young stars. You don't think that is related to what we did to get him? I think it is at least in part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I-90 W Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 That is part of it. The league loses the opportunity to market a tanking team. It also results in a lesser product overall because it adds to the naturally occurring bottom feeding teams. And, let's face it, if you aren't supporting the team doing the tanking, there is a stigma to it. SSF derided folks who compare it to throwing games, but that is what it is really. The stigma is why few teams actively pursue it as a tactic. That stigma seems to be lessening lately. There was active hate and derision for P-burgh and Ottawa's tank products. Mario was well into his career before he got the respect he deserved around the league in part because of what Pittsburgh did to get him. There is a level of acceptance now. Not fully though. How much respect is Jack getting among his peers right now. We've all read the articles that have Jack secondary to the other young stars. You don't think that is related to what we did to get him? I think it is at least in part. Thanks for the insight; I didn't know that Mario didn't get respect til well into his career because of the tank (I was born in 81) but that is fascinating. I don't know if Jack doesn't get the respect he deserves because of the tank. Matthews and Laine play a part in it also. Jack was hyped up a lot in his rookie season and it fell off a bit this season. Media coverage at least. Next season he's going to sky rocket I think into a full season ppg player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 That is part of it. The league loses the opportunity to market a tanking team. It also results in a lesser product overall because it adds to the naturally occurring bottom feeding teams. And, let's face it, if you aren't supporting the team doing the tanking, there is a stigma to it. SSF derided folks who compare it to throwing games, but that is what it is really. The stigma is why few teams actively pursue it as a tactic. That stigma seems to be lessening lately. There was active hate and derision for P-burgh and Ottawa's tank products. Mario was well into his career before he got the respect he deserved around the league in part because of what Pittsburgh did to get him. There is a level of acceptance now. Not fully though. How much respect is Jack getting among his peers right now. We've all read the articles that have Jack secondary to the other young stars. You don't think that is related to what we did to get him? I think it is at least in part. Maybe, maybe not. I bet there's significant overlap between teams that have decided to tank and teams that have been naturally bad in the years leading up to the tank. Given that, I doubt too much marketing opportunity is lost, as the league tries to avoid marketing bad teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 I'll admit I haven't been involved in this thread so apologies if this has been already covered, but tanking is such a rare event, who cares if it's done anyhow? At most, it's a team per year average. Agreed. Tanking too often gets confused with rebuilding. To rebuild you first need to tear down the team and start building from scratch. It's a legitimate strategy in pro sports, shed bad contracts, put yourself in position to build around a new core of talent. Tanking is not rebuilding... tanking involves intentionally throwing games... benching your best players on purpose so you lose. Did BUF bench their best players in 14-15? I don't think so. They put out the best roster they could... as did COL this year. Sometimes you just suck, doesn't mean you're intentionally throwing games. Does fielding a team devoid of any real talent increase your chances of losing? Of course. But at no point did BUF (or COL) tell their players to go out there and lose on purpose. Why the NHL feels the need to punish those teams, I don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted May 2, 2017 Report Share Posted May 2, 2017 Agreed. Tanking too often gets confused with rebuilding. To rebuild you first need to tear down the team and start building from scratch. It's a legitimate strategy in pro sports, shed bad contracts, put yourself in position to build around a new core of talent. Tanking is not rebuilding... tanking involves intentionally throwing games... benching your best players on purpose so you lose. Did BUF bench their best players in 14-15? I don't think so. They put out the best roster they could... as did COL this year. Sometimes you just suck, doesn't mean you're intentionally throwing games. Does fielding a team devoid of any real talent increase your chances of losing? Of course. But at no point did BUF (or COL) tell their players to go out there and lose on purpose. Why the NHL feels the need to punish those teams, I don't know. As outlined somewhere, the Sabres are being punished by DR proudly heralding the dawning of the tank when he publicly told Sabre fans to prepare for suffering. 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.