Tanking or trying? Sabres answer

[Skooby]

We suck really bad talent wise, by design.

[swiper]

Vanek rejected the league max from buffalo. He wanted to go to minny

And with only 10 goals in 49 games with a (-10) we should all be glad Minnesota took him away from us. Can we call them on Hodgson too?

[JATMtheJATM]

And with only 10 goals in 49 games with a (-10) we should all be glad Minnesota took him away from us. Can we call them on Hodgson too?

well, technically the isles took him. even if the pick is a later first, at this rate, the sabres won that trade by a mile. its nice to see moulson (also having a bad year) really liking buffalo and coming back.

[gebobs]

Is that really the point?

Sabre fans had very little respect (as opposed to sympathy) previously from other NHL fans but their excitement over losing for 2 seasons will bring them to new lows.

The NHL has and will again change the draft lottery rules to prevent this. It will be known as The Buffalo Loser Rule.

Oh please...The Sabres have had one top 5 pick and one other top 10 pick in the past 11 drafts and all of sudden it's a Buffalo problem?

'04-'07: Chicago #3,7,3,1
'09-'14: NYI #1,5,5,4,15,5
'08-'13: Colorado #3,17,2,11*,1 (*traded)
'10-'14: Florida #3,3,23,2,1
'03-'06: Pittsburgh #1,2,1,2

And in case none of that seems so much worse than the Sabres, here's the big kahune:
'10-'14: Edmonton picks #3,7,1,1,1

Let's see which of our teams have had the most top 10 picks of the last 30 first rounders, shall we?

Sabres: 4
Bruins: 10
Rangers: 8

[JATMtheJATM]

Oh please...The Sabres have had one top 5 pick and one other top 10 pick in the past 11 drafts and all of sudden it's a Buffalo problem?

'04-'07: Chicago #3,7,3,1
'09-'14: NYI #1,5,5,4,15,5
'08-'13: Colorado #3,17,2,11*,1 (*traded)
'10-'14: Florida #3,3,23,2,1
'03-'06: Pittsburgh #1,2,1,2

And in case none of that seems so much worse than the Sabres, here's the big kahune:
'10-'14: Edmonton picks #3,7,1,1,1

Let's see which of our teams have had the most top 10 picks of the last 30 first rounders, shall we?

Sabres: 4
Bruins: 10
Rangers: 8

but. but. but.....

ITS THE SABRES!

[gebobs]

And the effing Oilers with three #1's and a #3 in the past four drafts have trailed the Sabres most of the season and are still a good bet to finish dead last. And it's the Sabres that are the problem? It's ridiculous.

And the NHL has stacked the deck against tanking anyway so why do these idiots care? The Sabres finished 20 points behind the entire field last year and still picked second. Odds are if they finish last again they will pick second again.

[gebobs]

I understand that tanking undermines competition. Really I do. But what exactly were the Sabres to do differently? Pommers, Vanek and Miller were gone. Fait accompli. Who else should we have kept from the playoff team back in '11? Connolly? Roy? Gerbe? They're all chumps.

The Sabres aren't tanking. They tanked years ago. And it wasn't done purposefully. It was gross incompetence.

[OpIv37]

"They're built to finish 30th and they will finish 30th as the worst team in the last decade. If you want to call it tanking or not, it's obvious what they are doing.

They are built to finish 30th because they have assembled a team so devoid of actual NHL experience/skill that any other outcome is highly unlikely.

Adding Meszaros, Gorges and Gionta for $12M+ a year means you ensure you'll get very little hockey bang for your bucks. Keeping Stafford/Stewart for a whole season while everyone knows they'll be traded means they'll just go through the motions. Having zero center depth means they'll get killed night in and night out. Having two backup goalies means that over a whole season, you won't get good enough goaltending to ruin the plan.

I realize you guys will never admit to this because tanking is frowned upon but you guys know as well as everyone else that this team is built to lose and they are doing it in a more spectacular fashion than any team in the cap era."

Stafford is under contract and worthless in a trade. It's not like Stewart didn't know what was going on when he signed here. If he didn't want to be part of it, he could have gone elsewhere.

And the contracts for Gionta, Mezaros and gorges are at the going rates. I don't know what planet you live on, but $12 million doesn't buy a top D pairing and a first line center in 2014-15.

[JATMtheJATM]

Stafford is under contract and worthless in a trade. It's not like Stewart didn't know what was going on when he signed here. If he didn't want to be part of it, he could have gone elsewhere.

And the contracts for Gionta, Mezaros and gorges are at the going rates. I don't know what planet you live on, but $12 million doesn't buy a top D pairing and a first line center in 2014-15.

stewart didnt sign in buffalo. he had another year left on his deal.

stafford will garner something in a trade, maybe a low second or third. not much else.

[don137]

Oh please...The Sabres have had one top 5 pick and one other top 10 pick in the past 11 drafts and all of sudden it's a Buffalo problem?

'04-'07: Chicago #3,7,3,1
'09-'14: NYI #1,5,5,4,15,5
'08-'13: Colorado #3,17,2,11*,1 (*traded)
'10-'14: Florida #3,3,23,2,1
'03-'06: Pittsburgh #1,2,1,2

And in case none of that seems so much worse than the Sabres, here's the big kahune:
'10-'14: Edmonton picks #3,7,1,1,1

Let's see which of our teams have had the most top 10 picks of the last 30 first rounders, shall we?

Sabres: 4
Bruins: 10
Rangers: 8

You are confusing him with facts.
For all those people out there saying the Sabres are tanking I'd like them to explain what they could of done differently. The veterans like Vanek, Miller, etc were going elsewhere. Were they suppose to resign middle of the road players like Gaustad and not get a first rounder for him?
Instead of getting stuck in mediocrity for the next several years they got something for players that were leaving and got some youth. They didn't sit and do nothing last off season. They signed Moulson and Gionta plus traded for Georges.

[OpIv37]

You are confusing him with facts.
For all those people out there saying the Sabres are tanking I'd like them to explain what they could of done differently. The veterans like Vanek, Miller, etc were going elsewhere. Were they suppose to resign middle of the road players like Gaustad and not get a first rounder for him?
Instead of getting stuck in mediocrity for the next several years they got something for players that were leaving and got some youth. They didn't sit and do nothing last off season. They signed Moulson and Gionta plus traded for Georges.

Could the Sabres have spent more in FA and been better?

Yes.

But could they have actually fielded a competitive team, due to years of managerial incompetence, the answer is no.

So all this nonsense about tanking comes down to people whining that the Sabres didn't spend tens of millions of dollars to be mediocre while hosing their cap.

Instead, they chose to let the young guys get some playing time so they have the money and cap space to add the missing pieces. It's called "rebuilding" and it's what teams do in North American sports.

Hell, the Bills have done it 4 times this century. But I suppose they were trying to suck so they could draft Donte Whitner and Leodis McKelvin.

[JATMtheJATM]

Could the Sabres have spent more in FA and been better?

Yes.

But could they have actually fielded a competitive team, due to years of managerial incompetence, the answer is no.

So all this nonsense about tanking comes down to people whining that the Sabres didn't spend tens of millions of dollars to be mediocre while hosing their cap.

Instead, they chose to let the young guys get some playing time so they have the money and cap space to add the missing pieces. It's called "rebuilding" and it's what teams do in North American sports.

Hell, the Bills have done it 4 times this century. But I suppose they were trying to suck so they could draft Donte Whitner and Leodis McKelvin.

And how many times have we seen a team spend big in free agency and the player not live up to expectations? Why should the Sabres cripple themselves with potential bad contracts when it won't matter anyways.

Leino?

[sukie]

And how many times have we seen a team spend big in free agency and the player not live up to expectations? Why should the Sabres cripple themselves with potential bad contracts when it won't matter anyways.

Leino?

How amny times have big money FAs NOT been a Leino?

[chernobylwraiths]

Hell, the Sabres probably could be a little better if they played more of their kids now, but if they did, they would be way under the salary floor and be given a penalty for it. So, they actually had to buy some overpriced junk to get to the floor.

I don't like all the idiots running around though thinking this tank is great. I want to see the team playing a little better, but at least they aren't getting blown out on a nightly basis.

[JATMtheJATM]

How amny times have big money FAs NOT been a Leino?

It happens more often then not. Brad Richards? He didn't live up to expectations. Happens a lot. No reason to add too many free agents right now till you know where you want them, their roles, ect.

[JATMtheJATM]

Hell, the Sabres probably could be a little better if they played more of their kids now, but if they did, they would be way under the salary floor and be given a penalty for it. So, they actually had to buy some overpriced junk to get to the floor.

I don't like all the idiots running around though thinking this tank is great. I want to see the team playing a little better, but at least they aren't getting blown out on a nightly basis.

I think that's all anyone hoped for was some kids Improving, which they have. But since the Sabres are here, might as well get mcdavid or eichel.

[gebobs]

I've downloaded all the 1st round picks since 1970 and made a pivot report. Current franchises assume draft picks prior to their move.

Last 10 years...
Top 5: NYI, 5; FLA, 4; EDM, 4; TBL, 3; COL, 3; LAK, 3 (BUF 1)
Top 10: NYI, 7; EDM, 7; CBJ, 6; WPG, 6; FLA, 6; TBL, 5; MIN, 5; TOR, 4; ARI, 4; VAN, 4; BOS, 4; CAR, 4 (BUF, 2)

Last 20 years...
Top 5: NYI, 12; CBJ, 8; TBL, 7; EDM, 7; FLA, 7; WPG, 6; PIT, 5; NSH, 5; LAK, 5; ANA, 5 (BUF 2)
Top 10: NYI, 17; WPG, 12; FLA, 12; CBJ, 11; TBL, 10; BOS, 9; ANA, 9; EDM, 9; VAN, 8; MIN, 8 (BUF, 4)

Last 30 years...
Top 5: NYI, 17; PIT, 10; TBL, 9; COL, 9; EDM, 9; FLA, 9; CBJ, 8; VAN, 7; SJS, 7; CAR, 7; ANA, 7; OTT, 7; LAK, 7 (BUF 4)
Top 10: NYI, 23; VAN, 14; FLA, 14; TBL, 13; TOR, 12; CAR, 12; EDM, 12; WPG, 12; LAK, 12; PIT, 11; CBJ, 11; COL, 11; ANA, 11; ARI, 10; CHI, 10; BOS, 10; NYR, 10; SJS, 10 (BUF, 6)

Of this last, only DET (4), STL (5), and MTL (5) have had fewer. Buffalo's position in this year's draft and last is nothing more than regression to the mean. In other words, what goes around comes around.

[SpikedLemonade]

So now we are counting draft picks the Bruins got from the Leafs?

Why not?

No team has been as intentionally bad for 2 years as the Sabres.

Some new franchise teams were as bad but that wasn't intentional.

To call what the Sabres are doing a normal rebuild is dishonest.

[chernobylwraiths]

So now we are counting draft picks the Bruins got from the Leafs?

Why not?

No team has been as intentionally bad for 2 years as the Sabres.

Some new franchise teams were as bad but that wasn't intentional.

To call what the Sabres are doing a normal rebuild is dishonest.

You are being so intentionally obtuse, it is sad.

[gebobs]

So now we are counting draft picks the Bruins got from the Leafs?

Sure, why not? All team's draft picks are included regardless of where they came from. All teams get picks from trades. Over a period of 10 years or, better yet, 30 years, it will all come out in the wash.

It's intended to give an overview, not a precise metric. The information is quite sufficient to demolish your argument that the Sabres are draft outliers. I only highlighted the Rangers and Bruins to poke your nose, but if you insist on precision, by all means, have at it. Surely, you're smart enough to know how to download the information, research how each draft pick was acquired, group entire franchises through their various moves (as I did), and then churn the data to get a result.

No team has been as intentionally bad for 2 years as the Sabres.

False premise. Crappy logic. Poor conclusion.

Some new franchise teams were as bad but that wasn't intentional. To call what the Sabres are doing a normal rebuild is dishonest.

Who said it was a normal rebuild? Any idiot can see it's extraordinary. It's not every year that a team picks in the top 5 for a second year in row. But it happens. And not rarely. Edmonton picked #1 three years running. Not a big deal unless you happen to troll their boards too, right?

Intentional? Sure, you can read intentions in at any level. Did the Sabres intend to be in this position a few years ago? Of course not, but got there they did doing just what they did. Did they do everything they could to dig themselves out of that hole the past two years. No, not everything. But they did have a strategy and that did not involve a quick fix.

The quick fixes are what got them in that hole in the first place. They lost Briere and Drury, panicked and signed Vanek to a 7-year deal that hamstrung them. Rivet, Regehr, Ehrhoff, etc. were part of a long line of quick fixes going back to Campbell or further. Leino was the most expensive bust in franchise history.

Was their strategy of piling up draft picks, as risky a strategy as any, rather than wade into a free agent market where they had no reasonable chance to compete, intentional? Your damn right it was.

But what would you have them do? Better yet, what the hell do you care? They aren't breaking any rules. In fact, the rules have been rewritten as it happens to their detriment. They are pursuing a completely legitimate long-term strategy. Does it come at the cost of competitiveness? Sure. Too bad. Be thankful your team doesn't suck like ours does.

Now piss off.