The Tank Responsibility Thread

[WildCard]

A lot of people like Guhle, Mittelstadt, Davidsson, Asplund, Borgen, and Pu, even though it's far too early to tell on any of those guys. 

 

I highly doubt that it's provable that a significant number of teams did better than that batch in the time since the Eichel draft, since most people drafted in that time who are going to make the NHL still haven't made the NHL yet, or done anything of note in it. 

Then if we drafted better prior to the Tank, we'd be fine

[Randall Flagg]

Then if we drafted better prior to the Tank, we'd be fine

I doubt we would have decided to gut our organization to the level we did if we had drafted better before the tank. That doesn't change the fact that this action is still haunting us every time we step on the ice. 

[WildCard]

I doubt we would have decided to gut our organization to the level we did if we had drafted better before the tank. That doesn't change the fact that this action is still haunting us every time we step on the ice. 

Mean it's an opinion, not a fact. And it's definitely not haunting us for the 20m that Eichel will be on the ice; if you want to contend we're here because of the Tank, then you can throw Dahlin's 25m in that conversation too

[Randall Flagg]

Of players drafted after Guhle, who was taken 51st in a draft of 211 players, only Vince Dunn, Denis Malgin, Dominik Simon, and Markus Nutivaara have played more NHL games, and the only two players I'd take over Guhle at this point are Nutivaara and Dunn, which IMO makes that a good pick at this point, with much left to play out. 

 

Similarly, Victor Mete and Sam Girard are the only 2016 picks taken after Asplund that at this point I'd consider him worth moving for. Maybe Kyrou and Mascherin and guys like that add to this list, undoubtedly some will be better. But before the tank, we were bad at a level which would be considered a non-negligible improvement on our team last year, and that could have been fixed quicker with a higher chance of success by not doing exactly what we did. 

Mean it's an opinion, not a fact. And it's definitely not haunting us for the 20m that Eichel will be on the ice; if you want to contend we're here because of the Tank, then you can throw Dahlin's 25m in that conversation too

I simply will not count a last place finish 5 years after the decision to tank was made, and the resulting lottery luck, as any sort of nod towards the tank, which itself was isolated to two seasons three and four years ago, and was intended to be the "suffering" part. 

[WildCard]

I simply will not count a last place finish 5 years after the decision to tank was made, and the resulting lottery luck, as any sort of nod towards the tank, which itself was isolated to two seasons three and four years ago, and was intended to be the "suffering" part. 

Perfect, then we're in agreement 

[Randall Flagg]

Perfect, then we're in agreement 

I don't think so, I should have been more careful - the beautiful thing that sprang from a lottery ball that happened because we were dreadful for years after the tank finished should not be chalked up as a success to the tank, rather, it should highlight the tank's failure to produce a winning hockey team, because of the gutting process that took place with the roster and perhaps in the competitive spirit of players who are still here and who have only known losing. 

[IKnowPhysics]

No one wants to stink after tanking.  But going into the tank, you had to know that there are several different previously demonstrated models for tanking and rebuilding.  Some aren't as pretty as others, but that doesn't mean that they failed.  A lot of folks wanted this to be the Pittsburgh model: draft a Crosby, then win a cup.  But you have to actually look at what happened to those teams to understand how long tanking -> drafting -> winning takes in reality.

 

For example, Pittsburgh wasn't as easy as get Crosby, get Cup.  Pittsburgh drafted:

1. 2002 (5th overall Whitney)
2. 2003 1st overall Fluery
3. 2004 2nd overall Malkin
4. 2005 1st overall Crosby
5. 2006 2nd overall Jordan Staal

And didn't get to the Cup finals until Spring of 2008.

 

Blackhawks weren't eactly fast, after being so bad for so long:

1. 2003 14th Overall Seabrook
2. 2004 (3rd overall Cam Barker)
3. 2005 (7th overall Jack Skille)
4. 2006 3rd overall Toews
5. 2007 1st overall Kane
6. 2008 (11th overall Kyle Beach)

They won the first new Cup in 2010.

 

Our best bet, and actually the closest model I think that we're following is the Tamp Bay.  They had a historic meltdown because of an awful ownership change after winning the Cup in 04, and suffered for a few years of bad management, bad trades, and bad drafting, before being in position to turn it around with two no-brainer picks:

1. 2008 1st overall Steven Stamkos
2. 2009 2nd overall Victor Hedman
3. 2010 (6th overall Brett Connolly)
4. 2011 27th overall Namestnikov
5. 2012 (10th overall Steven Koekkoek)
6. 2013 3rd overall Jonathan Drouin

Tampa Bay went to the conference finals in 2011, dropped out, and then showed up in three of four conference finals from 2015-2018, including the SCF in 2015.

 

 

Buffalo is currently here:

1. 2012 (12th overall Mikhail Grigorenko, traded in a package for O'Reilly)
2. 2012 14th overall Zemgus Girgensens
3. 2013 8th overall Rasmus Ristolainen
4. 2013 (16th overall Nikita Zadorov, traded in a package for O'Reilly)
5. 2014 2nd overall Sam Reinhart
6. 2015 2nd overall Jack Eichel
7. 2016 8th overall Alex Nylander
8. 2017 8th overall Casey Mittelstadt
9. 2018 1st overall Rasmus Dahlin

Tanking was successful: the Sabres acquired a stupid number of high draft picks, including three elite 1st or 2nd overall picks, and we are now so ridiculously loaded up with draft talent.  We even converted to potential busts in Grigorenko and Zadorov into a statistical and team leader Lady Byng candidate.  Any failure of the Buffalo Sabres to win again has nothing to do with the tank to acquire high draft picks.  It has everything to do with how the rest of the team is put together around those top players and how the team is coached.  That is a failure to build a team around its core players, not a failure to tank.

 

Darcy and GMTM did a masterful job tanking to acquire picks.  GMTM failed to get the team back on its feet, despite evidence from other models that doing so in the short post-tank time he had would have been a Herculean accomplishment.  It's now JBot's turn to try to lift the team, and despite completely rinsing out the defense from last year, he hasn't had the opportunity or willpower to do it.

Edited May 30, 2018 by IKnowPhysics

[dudacek]

Pittsburgh and Chicago were bad for a long time before they were great.

The assets that they developed and acquired certainly didn’t happen in two three years.

 

Toews Eichel

Kane Mittelstadt

Hossa ROR

Sharp Reinhart

Seabrook Ristolainen

Keith Dahlin

Hjalmarsson Guhle

 

The parallels in the core they acquired over five or six years can be made to ours, if a few of the kids step up this year and next. And that would make the plan launched six years ago a success.

Edited May 30, 2018 by dudacek

[LGR4GM]

Well, whoever is so inclined can dance around with terminology all he/she wants, but I'll venture that no one here wanted the Sabres to tank, get Eichel and still stink, which is undeniably what has happened so far -- and what the brave, clear-headed and handsome anti-tankers were concerned about.

 

If what we've seen so far is a successful tank, I'd hate to see a failed one.

Backed you right into a corner and arguing semantics won't help.

[WildCard]

I don't think so, I should have been more careful - the beautiful thing that sprang from a lottery ball that happened because we were dreadful for years after the tank finished should not be chalked up as a success to the tank, rather, it should highlight the tank's failure to produce a winning hockey team, because of the gutting process that took place with the roster and perhaps in the competitive spirit of players who are still here and who have only known losing. 

5 years though. How is it something's fault 5 years later. No other tank that's ever happened in any sport ended like this

[LGR4GM]

 

Either the tank and rebuild are seperate or Dahlin is part of the tank via the connection to the rebuild

[nfreeman]

Backed you right into a corner and arguing semantics won't help.

 

That's an interesting interpretation of this conversation.

[LGR4GM]

That's an interesting interpretation of this conversation.

You brought up semantics. Either the tank failed because the rebuild failed and they are linked or the tank succeeded and the rebuild failed.

[nfreeman]

You brought up semantics. Either the tank failed because the rebuild failed and they are linked or the tank succeeded and the rebuild failed.

 

No.

 

The tank failed because it didn't achieve its goal, which was to produce a good hockey team.

 

The tank and the rebuild are two stages of the same project.  To date the project has failed.  It is impossible to know whether you, Robvy and others are correct that the project would've been successful had GMTM been better at stage 2 of the project -- but what is known is that to date the project has been a crashing failure.

 

Now, it's possible that Dahlin will become a superstar and lift the Sabres to perennial contender status.  If that happens, the question of whether the tank was successful will be impossible to answer, because it will be impossible to know what would've happened without Dahlin.  Of course, that will be a good problem to have.

[WildCard]

The tank failed because it didn't achieve its goal, which was to produce a good hockey team.

No, that wasn't it's goal.

Edited May 30, 2018 by WildCard

[LGR4GM]

No.

 

The tank failed because it didn't achieve its goal, which was to produce a good hockey team.

 

The tank and the rebuild are two stages of the same project. To date the project has failed. It is impossible to know whether you, Robvy and others are correct that the project would've been successful had GMTM been better at stage 2 of the project -- but what is known is that to date the project has been a crashing failure.

 

Now, it's possible that Dahlin will become a superstar and lift the Sabres to perennial contender status. If that happens, the question of whether the tank was successful will be impossible to answer, because it will be impossible to know what would've happened without Dahlin. Of course, that will be a good problem to have.

Ok, you're using they are linked. Therefore Dahlin is part of stage 2 which means you can't call stage 1 a failure yet.

No, that wasn't it's goal.

Nope. That's the rebuilds job.

[woods-racer]

It's hard for me to see how anyone can argue a rebuild or tank (the 2 or mutually exclusive to me) have failed after just 5 years. GMTM tried to rush the rebuild, that failed. It's now back on schedule. The tank was successful in acquiring McEichel.

 

The Sabres are delayed one year from the dealings of exGMTM. That does not mean failure.

[LGR4GM]

We're 3 seasons post tank. We should have been good last year. If we are this year, everything is on track.

 

I feel like there will never be agreement on this.

[Randall Flagg]

5 years though. How is it something's fault 5 years later. No other tank that's ever happened in any sport ended like this

Because despite relying on numerous prospects and depth signing attempts, roughly 1.5 lines, often 2, and as many as 3 when a couple forwards go down, are STILL tank-level bad in terms of getting their faces caved in offensively and defensively.This has been a problem since 2013-14 and 2014-15, when Gionta, Stewart, Foligno, Moulson, Girgensons, Larsson etc. were top 6 fixtures. It has literally never been fixed or gotten better since then, and that is not for lack of trying.

 

An influx of as many legitimately good players as you could reasonably hope to add in one offseason, in 15-16, gave us Eichel, Reinhart, ROR, Kane to fit in on top and push guys down, and we still got tanked at even strength and had to ice 4th lines entirely for 10 minutes per game of guaranteed verifiable trash, despite McGinn and Legwand being added as attempts at depth as well to go along with the topload. This is an incredible offseason addition that can never be relied on regularly, and it pulled us to being a bad hockey team instead of the worst non-basically-expansion team the league has seen, perhaps, ever. 

 

Teams simply don't get turned over more than that, with THAT MUCH raw talent addition, on any sort of regular basis, and the tank team was so bad at even strength possession hockey, and scoring, and defense, and anything you can imagine, that the addition of about 90 goals worth of top 6 forwards only got us back to being within 10 standings positions of league average. Within 10 spots of being able to fight for a playoff spot. Then, after adding another top 6 forward that was another 20 goal guy, and getting ready for the rush of NHL-ready prospects in Carrier, Rodrigues, Baptiste, Bailey, and Fasching, each of whom were introduced at one point and were supposed to be depth, I mean, you'd think ONE of those guys would work out (to be fair to Carrier, his 60% possession over a pretty large sample size with KO and ROR was successful) but we still got caved in at even strength.

 

And THEN the depth problem rears its head when TWO INJURIES puts this lineup out against the Penguins roughly one month into the season:

 

Kane-Larsson-Okposo

Foligno-Reinhart-Gionta

Moulson-Cal O'Reilly-Girgensons

Carrier-Grant-Schneider 

 

They won in a shootout after allowing 47 shots on goal and giving up 1 goal. Sure, no team looks great when you take out their top two centers, but ROR was back soon after and doesn't make that lineup any less disgraceful to paying fans. Oh, but Ennis was hurt too! Too bad Ennis was arguably the worst regularly dressed skater on the team by that season. 

 

Then, to fix the depth problem that offseason, we made the following additions to the roster the following year, all either 'meh'd' or approved of - Griffith, Pouliot, Wilson, Pominville, Nolan. Nolan, utter trash, was an upgrade on Deslauriers. Griffith, Pouliot, Wilson were all freebees, Wilson was the only one that really worked out. Pominville was dreadful, a wash with Ennis. What other realistic depth moves were out there, and how were we supposed to make them? That is five players. Should we have added Radulov (fat chance, he was highly prized and we've already learned our old winger FA lesson), Hanzal, Vrbata, Williams? Would Marleau really have come here? he's the only one I could have seen making any real impact on the ice or our dressing room. No chance he leaves SJ for here.

 

We even got verifiable hockey out of some prospects this season - E-Rod played like a legitimate 35-40 point player, and Baptiste wasn't terrible. Furthermore, the even strength play of every single top 6 player we had, EVEN OKPOSO, improved to their Sabre-career-best. But the lack of depth that was attempted to be addressed by these almost 20 names in three seasons I mentioned was never fixed, and really could never have been fixed with the assets available. It wasn't happening via free agency, with all of the widespread busts and lack of interest in coming to a team like Buffalo. It wasn't happening via trade, because we needed to address other holes with trades, like bringing in Scandella, and in general weren't interested in trading our only pieces of value (RORRistoEichelReinhartKaneOkposoNylanderGuhleETC). The only possible way to have rebuilt our depth to good NHL level at this point would have been to get every actually good depth player to hit the market the past few years to come here, which is foolish and unreasonable to expect. 

 

And this ISN'T solely because Murray gave up a grand total of two 2015 first rounders and a second used to get our second best player, while still making 25 picks in his 3 drafts, which is 4 more than an average team who keeps all their picks. Nor was it Murray trading Grigorenko and Zadorov for said player. It's because we decided that spending two years playing a second line, a fourth line, and 2 AHL lines, and intentionally stocking our franchise to do so, has never been fixed. 

 

And it's easy to laugh at all of the names and "feeble attempts" those seem to be now, but they were legitimate at the time and excited the crap out of this board, me included. We did as well as you can expect a team to do in terms of introduction of prospects and grabbing guys in trade and UFA. No team retools consistently better than we did in the years during and since the tank. They just do their retooling on the base of an actual NHL organization, instead of one that was intentionally by far the ugliest thing this league has seen for a two year stretch out of a non-immediate expansion franchise. 

 

The most direct affect of our place in the standings this particular season lies with both goaltending and our forward depth outside of about 4-5 players. The former is directly because of the tank. The latter has only been a problem this particular season. It's still going to be hard as hell to fix the former, which will still be aching in 2020, 5 years after the conclusion of the tank. 

Edited May 30, 2018 by Randall Flagg

[Doohickie]

I doubt we would have decided to gut our organization to the level we did if we had drafted better before the tank. That doesn't change the fact that this action is still haunting us every time we step on the ice. 

 

There were lots of threads around here about the Rotten Core and that they needed to go.  Pominville, Vanek, Roy, Stafford, Ennis, they were all pretty good players but none of them stepped up into the same type of leadership role that Drury/Briere provided, and most fans around here were ready to move on to try something new.  If you recall, the Sabres were a perennial playoff bubble team and seemed to be slowly sliding with each year after they made the conference finals in '06 and '07.

 

Maybe if we'd have kept some of that talent and then picked up a Ryan O'Reilly type player who wanted to lead and when he got here had plenty of veterans to support him, things would have been different.  But that's all water under the bridge.  I think with being a constant bubble team, without strong leadership, and the whole Rotten Core thing, a total tear-down was inevitable.

We're 2 months post tank.

 

fify

[Randall Flagg]

There were lots of threads around here about the Rotten Core and that they needed to go.  Pominville, Vanek, Roy, Stafford, Ennis, they were all pretty good players but none of them stepped up into the same type of leadership role that Drury/Briere provided, and most fans around here were ready to move on to try something new.  If you recall, the Sabres were a perennial playoff bubble team and seemed to be slowly sliding with each year after they made the conference finals in '06 and '07.

 

Maybe if we'd have kept some of that talent and then picked up a Ryan O'Reilly type player who wanted to lead and when he got here had plenty of veterans to support him, things would have been different.  But that's all water under the bridge.  I think with being a constant bubble team, without strong leadership, and the whole Rotten Core thing, a total tear-down was inevitable.

 

fify

We surely still could have rebuilt the team, I highly doubt we would have explicitly done what we did to successfully finish with 106 points and only 40something wins over the span of two full seasons on purpose though.

[Doohickie]

Eh, I'm okay with the tank.  This franchise was stale and needed to be torn down.  I'm even okay with this past season to be honest.  You could see pieces start to come together, but the team isn't there yet.  I really think Housley and JBot decided early on that the team wasn't ready yet and instead decided on an 82-game training camp.  Maybe with Dahlin arriving and all the other young players being another year more experienced, we will finally see some improvement. We have some cornerstone pieces and will be getting another with the draft.

[dudacek]

Here’s another issue with the tank.

The young kids (read Eichel, Reinhart, Risto) looked at the vets they were playing with, saw how most of them were, and basically tuned them out.

“Not playing the right way? What the do you know Gorges, I’m ten times the player you are,” became their attitude.

And, even as they continued to play the wrong way, THEY WERE RIGHT!

 

With Ryan O’Reilly moping in the corner and blaming himself for everything, they turned to me-first entitled high-pick, no-playoff party boys Kane and Bogo to show them the way, BECAUSE THERE WAS LITERALLY NO ONE ELSE TO FILL THE VOID!

Dan the droning bumbling doofus Bylsma certainly wasnt going to do it.

 

That remains the biggest issue with this team, can Botterill and Housley create an environment where our immature core can be saved, or are Sam and Jack going to swallow up Casey and Rasmus the same way they were led astray by Evander?

 

We can’t continue to have a room where the stars don’t respect the foot soldiers and the leaders can’t or don’t lead.

[Doohickie]

Here’s another issue with the tank.

The young kids (read Eichel, Reinhart, Risto) looked at the vets they were playing with, saw how ###### most of them were, and basically tuned them out.

“Not playing the right way? What the ###### do you know Gorges, I’m ten times the player you are,” became their attitude.

And, even as they continued to play the wrong way, THEY WERE RIGHT!

 

With Ryan O’Reilly moping in the corner and blaming himself for everything, they turned to me-first entitled high-pick, no-playoff party boys Kane and Bogo to show them the way, BECAUSE THERE WAS LITERALLY NO ONE ELSE TO FILL THE VOID!

Dan the droning bumbling doofus Bylsma certainly wasnt going to do it.

 

That remains the biggest issue with this team, can Botterill and Housley create an environment where our immature core can be saved, or are Sam and Jack going to swallow up Casey and Rasmus the same way they were led astray by Evander?

 

We can’t continue to have a room where the stars don’t respect the foot soldiers and the leaders can’t or don’t lead.

 

The answer is that, yes, the locker room will be fine.

[ubkev]

Here’s another issue with the tank.

The young kids (read Eichel, Reinhart, Risto) looked at the vets they were playing with, saw how ###### most of them were, and basically tuned them out.

“Not playing the right way? What the ###### do you know Gorges, I’m ten times the player you are,” became their attitude.

And, even as they continued to play the wrong way, THEY WERE RIGHT!

 

With Ryan O’Reilly moping in the corner and blaming himself for everything, they turned to me-first entitled high-pick, no-playoff party boys Kane and Bogo to show them the way, BECAUSE THERE WAS LITERALLY NO ONE ELSE TO FILL THE VOID!

Dan the droning bumbling doofus Bylsma certainly wasnt going to do it.

 

That remains the biggest issue with this team, can Botterill and Housley create an environment where our immature core can be saved, or are Sam and Jack going to swallow up Casey and Rasmus the same way they were led astray by Evander?

 

We can’t continue to have a room where the stars don’t respect the foot soldiers and the leaders can’t or don’t lead.

I love this narrative.