Really?
What makes this roster any better than say the 09-10/10-11 Panthers teams?
It's the fan base that massively overrates this roster.... management knew..."suffering"...
Firing Darcy Right Now Isn't Fixing Anything
- Thread starter Dutchess
- Start date
Really?
What makes this roster any better than say the 09-10/10-11 Panthers teams?
It's the fan base that massively overrates this roster.... management knew..."suffering"...
joshjull
Registered User
Please. Any team that intends to rebuild their roster by hoping they draft franchise players doesn't really have a plan.
again, im not part of the "intentional lose, and cross fingers to win the lottery" crowd...
but you see it as very black/white... as in, it's either the above "myth" or not.
They have spoken openly about suffering, and acquiring as many quality picks as possible in a short period of time. Internally, it's much more likely that they simply accept that which you are unwilling to accept, and that is that their chosen path will lead to suffering (losing) over a period of time.
side bar : a better conspiracy than the "intentionally losing" one.... is the "Ron Rolston is the Patsy" one that I just started
FamilyGuy716
Registered User
Jim Bob
RIP RJ
The toughest part about this whole thing is that fans are being asked to trust a GM that has had a long run at GM and been the face of a team that came close, but never won anything, at it's best and been a team that can't get out of the 1st round lately.
And if Regier isn't the right GM for the rebuild, this team will be mediocre or worse for close to a decade <cough>Bills</cough> before things get better.
That is a tough pill for a ton of fans to swallow.
I don't think that firing Regier tomorrow will instantly make the team better. I don't think that firing Regier will make the fans clamoring for his head that much happier with the team when you fast forward to the end of the season.
But, there are a sizable amount of fans that might have more hope for the future of the franchise if Regier were replaced over the next couple of months when things are pretty much on auto-pilot from a GM POV.
Personally, I have resigned myself to Regier being the GM for at least the next 2 or 3 years, so I am hoping that he's the right guy for the job. At least through the tear down and start to build up phases of the rebuild process.
And if Regier isn't the right GM for the rebuild, this team will be mediocre or worse for close to a decade <cough>Bills</cough> before things get better.
That is a tough pill for a ton of fans to swallow.
I don't think that firing Regier tomorrow will instantly make the team better. I don't think that firing Regier will make the fans clamoring for his head that much happier with the team when you fast forward to the end of the season.
But, there are a sizable amount of fans that might have more hope for the future of the franchise if Regier were replaced over the next couple of months when things are pretty much on auto-pilot from a GM POV.
Personally, I have resigned myself to Regier being the GM for at least the next 2 or 3 years, so I am hoping that he's the right guy for the job. At least through the tear down and start to build up phases of the rebuild process.
Sabre Dance
Make Hockey Fun Again
- Jul 27, 2006
- 12,456
- 2,243
again, im not part of the "intentional lose, and cross fingers to win the lottery" crowd...
but you see it as very black/white... as in, it's either the above "myth" or not.
They have spoken openly about suffering, and acquiring as many quality picks as possible in a short period of time. Internally, it's much more likely that they simply accept that which you are unwilling to accept, and that is that their chosen path will lead to suffering (losing) over a period of time.
side bar : a better conspiracy than the "intentionally losing" one.... is the "Ron Rolston is the Patsy" one that I just started
They said a lot of things. After they talked suffering they started talking about being like Anaheim and convincing Vanek and Miller to stay.
So believe what you want. They basically did the opposite of 2 years ago, this way they have both on record. If they suck with Vanek and Miller then they say its suffering, if they surprised and were good then they say that was the plan.
There is a rebuild happening, but if they truly were serious then you move Vanek and Miller last year when you were in last place in a short season and people were calling 2013 the greatest draft in many years.
Ruckus007
where to?
again, im not part of the "intentional lose, and cross fingers to win the lottery" crowd...
but you see it as very black/white... as in, it's either the above "myth" or not.
They have spoken openly about suffering, and acquiring as many quality picks as possible in a short period of time. Internally, it's much more likely that they simply accept that which you are unwilling to accept, and that is that their chosen path will lead to suffering (losing) over a period of time.
side bar : a better conspiracy than the "intentionally losing" one.... is the "Ron Rolston is the Patsy" one that I just started
So you are concerned that the path they're on may hinder, or squander, the young assets assembled to date, then?
You only hire Ron Rolston, if you know the team is going to be terrible for a few years, and the coach will need to be let go... you're one of the richest owners in sports... you can get ANYONE to come work for you....
Ron Rolston, is simply part of the plan... it's the only explanation. sort of
Ron Rolston, is simply part of the plan... it's the only explanation.
sort ofI think the tough love (losing) will separate the future core from the drivel
I think RonRol brings some things to the table in terms of "teaching" that were probably believed to bring value to the process (while the team performance suffers)
spit balling
sometimes you reveal too much... and not to cover your tracks
there are so many unknown factors in that type of speculation.
- What was/wasn't offered for Vanek
- Who even wants Ryan Miller
- Miller's no trade clause
Sabre Dance
Make Hockey Fun Again
- Jul 27, 2006
- 12,456
- 2,243
You only hire Ron Rolston, if you know the team is going to be terrible for a few years, and the coach will need to be let go... you're one of the richest owners in sports... you can get ANYONE to come work for you....
Ron Rolston, is simply part of the plan... it's the only explanation.
Wow, you give them way too much credit. Pegula wants this to be a family. There is very little chance he hired Rolston thinking he would fire him in 3 years.
Sabre Dance
Make Hockey Fun Again
- Jul 27, 2006
- 12,456
- 2,243
Wait a second, when Vanek was top in scoring last year but the Sabres were fighting for last place you dont think teams wanted him?
Why wouldn't a goalie needy team want Miller? Heck, why not before last season if the plan was rebuild? Anaheim would have been perfect before last season. Things change fast in this league.
There are a lot of questions, IF this was the plan all along.
Last edited:
Gosh don't we all know that the teams with high picks were dying to trade them away for a year of Vanek and Miller at inflated salaries? MacKinnon, Jones, Drouin, Barkov, Lindholm, Monahan--why would you want a future superstar at low cost with control over his future when Darcy dangled such plums? That dumb Darcy-right! Cause we KNOW!
Ruckus007
where to?
Concerned, gotcha.
Or they don't do a good job of getting a consistent message out. Which is fine, they can say whatever they want as I only care about the results. If this rebuild works, kudos and any quotes along the way are meaningless. If if fails, off with there heads (but any quotes along the way will still be meaningless).[/QUOTE]
joshjull
Registered User
Its incredible how out to lunch you are on my opinion yet feel the need to lecture me about it despite your ignorance.
I also feel the goal of the rebuild is to trade away assets for more picks and prospects. I fully expect that we will struggle while this process is going on. Probably near the bottom of the standings this year and struggling for long stretches during the season as well. But to accept the team's current record, putrid organization within games and poor structure as all "part of the plan to rebuild" is absurd.
The team is current playing at a .150 percentage pace. Posters actually think this is what we should see? That along with 1.2 goals per game? These are absurdly low numbers that should not at all be acceptable. The structure and accountability Rolston talked about is not anywhere to be found. You can lose more often than not and still look as if you know how to play the game.
I'm not sure what your getting at. I don't think "intentionally losing" is a conspiracy nor do I think Rolston is a "Patsy".
Sabre Dance
Make Hockey Fun Again
- Jul 27, 2006
- 12,456
- 2,243
By not trading Vanek it hurt our chances to get those players. Plus the time to trade him, if you knew you were trading him was when he was red hot.
Even with that said, Reger still had the chance to trade up and get Lindholm or Monahan. Instead his plan was he wanted more picks. Thats fine thinking in a deep draft, but maybe he gets a superstar at 5.
sure they did... I don't see the relevance of your correlation
I can't think of numerous reasons... lets stay on topic instead
You seem to have gone in a different direction. (your vanek correlation makes sense now...i disagree with your timeframe)
This was NOT the plan "all along" (im not sure what the reference point in time is for "all along")....however, that does not mean the rebuild didn't begin a while ago (another argument).
This was/is the plan, as determined in the offseason... when a new direction was being laid out and a coach being hired.
Sure the first steps in the direction of a rebuild were made before that, with the decision to sell at the deadline.
And yes, the pieces of a rebuild began to be acquired at the previous deadline. (Regier is correct to point to that period of time IN HINDSIGHT as when the rebuild began, because that's when the first pieces of the rebuild were beginning to be acquired.... he was hedging his bets, while trying to contend with a current roster that had shown plenty of question marks....)
But commitment to a plan/direction was formalized in the offseason, with the hiring of Rolston and the draft, and the lack of adding any veteran depth that would assist with winning hockey games.
I doubt there were many if any teams in contention that could take on Vanek's salary last year and for this entire season. The fact that we had to retain salary on the Pominville trade to get it to work speaks volumes to how little salary teams are willing to take on while the salary cap smooths out. If Vanek was a UFA next year it would be a different story because the cap is going to up close to $10 Million in the next few years or something absurd.
What team needed a goalie at Miller's salary last year? When was the last time that a goalie with anything close to Miller's salary was traded? Why would Anaheim have needed him before last season when Hiller was still healthy and doing fine?
Why does this have to be explained to the same 2 or 3 posters over and over? Look around the league. How many significant trades are going down? How many trades happen before the trade deadline each year? How many aging goaltenders are being traded? How many soon to be UFA wingers making $7+ Million are being traded with a full year left on their contract? This isn't making excuses for Darcy these things just don't happen in the cap world. Just because you want something to happen doesn't mean it could or should happen.
Sabre Dance
Make Hockey Fun Again
- Jul 27, 2006
- 12,456
- 2,243
This was a team that went after Parise, Doan, and Suter before last season. I still wonder who they move out if Doan, Parise and Suter decided to come here. But suffering was far from their minds.
So 48 games later you say they decided we needed to suffer. honestly i get that. Maybe seeing all these players turn them down made them say the only way we get top players in Buffalo is to draft them. Maybe the plan before last year was flash money and they will come. I do remember Darcy saying we need to find a way to acquire top players. But IMO should have went full rebuild last offseason when players turned them down.
The rebuild and the suffering is not my issue. My issue is trying to forget all the failure that Regier represents.
I know what your opinion is.
You expected them to be near the bottom. Is it then safe to say that smarter hockey people running the organization expected the same thing?
What does that mean? If their expectations were that they would be a bad team?
If you have the opportunity to make changes that would win more games, but you choose not to because the plan isn't to win short term, what do you call that? I don't call it "intentionally losing". I call it rebuilding.
Can you trade talent and acquire futures, accept that it increases the likelihood of a poor season, without that poor season being "part of the plan"? The plan is to acquire talent, the plan is to win in 2016+, what happens record wise in 2013 is not part of the plan... it's a meaningless aspect.
I prefer to separate the two.
1. The Plan : Rebuild. Ship talent for futures. Groom youth. Create a new culture. Rid the past.
2. Short Term Outcomes : likely poor, but unrelated to the "The Plan"
Now because of those expected short term outcomes... you're likely not sticking with a coach long term... you need someone to drive the car around the block for awhile before it's time to get on the high way.
We have a 3rd line winger centering our 2nd line
We have no ability to matchup
Half our forward core are either career 4th liners or Children
Half our blueline are rookies
Our best player (vanek) is the 3rd or 4th best player on a contender
We have exactly 1 player who would crack a good teams top 6 (Vanek)
We have exactly 1 player who would crack a good teams top 4 (Ehrhoff)
The roster is too average on the veteran end and way too young on the other.
Their putrid play should not be surprising
I think Buffalo has gone far too long without seeing a roster like this one... you should've watched the Panthers a few years ago. You wouldve tempered your expectations.
Do you think Ron Rolston was hired with the intention of leading this team when it "comes of age", when breaks out of the rebuilding phase, and into the contending phase?
I certainly don't. I think he was hired to be fired. I think they saw benefits that he would bring to the rebuild in terms of "teaching"... but if he was hired to be fired... then he is the patsy... he's the guy that will take the fall after 3 years of suffering.
Sabre Dance
Make Hockey Fun Again
- Jul 27, 2006
- 12,456
- 2,243
You guys and your excuses for why Vanek and Miller were not traded. You dont even realize that you are criticizing Regier by even making the excuse. Who would want our best players at those prices? um, who's fault is that?
I cant even believe that its the answer I get when i say Vanek should have been traded last year, if the plan was trade him. The only reason that is the excuse used is because we were bad. if we were good the excuse would be why would you trade a top 5 scorer at the time when we are playing well.
Gaborik had a terrible season last year and someone traded for him with a similar contract. You mean to tell e there was a not a team in the NHL that would have given Darcy a great offer for a top 5 scorer on a 2 year deal? That sounds great to me actually. No financial commitment at all. You show you fans you want to win.
As for Miller, Anaheim coming off a losing season. Hiller off of a losing season. Miller coming off 31-21-7. A much better save% than Hiller. Hiller obviously was not their guy. yes, Anaheim would have gladly traded for Miller. Maybe not Bobby Ryan for Miller and Stafford, but only guy that expected that was Regier.
So your position is that by not trading these guys, they couldn't possibly be committed to a full rebuild and the ensuing "suffering"?
Maybe they were simply thinking...
"Hey, we are going to be awful next year... but WITH Vanek and Miller for a large portion of the season, we will be comparatively awful... like other teams that have bottomed out over the years... you know... like maybe we'll only win 25-30 games.... we'll be terrible... but comparatively terrible.... BUT if we trade them now, and pursue the rest of our plan of making moves only for the future, then we will be ALL TIME AWFUL... like potentially record book awful.... like 9 win awful.... so lets keep them around until the deadline"
Given the way the season has gone (Vanek and Miller are pretty much the only reason we are in most games).... that speculative assessment above would be spot on.
I want the Sabres to stay the course. That means keep Regier. The jury is still out on Rolston.. I defer to the hockey people to determine whether he is the man to mold the youngsters. That being said, I would have preferred Roy.
I hope this team has built up enough cachet with the fans to weather these next two years. I have been on the high draft choice bandwagon for several years. Remember, no team since before the last lockout has won the cup without 2 or more top 4 picks. Yes, I am including the Kings' selection of Thomas Hickey at #4 even though he was a bust/non-factor. The goal is the cup. I want one in my lifetime. Go Rinehart/McDavid.
I hope this team has built up enough cachet with the fans to weather these next two years. I have been on the high draft choice bandwagon for several years. Remember, no team since before the last lockout has won the cup without 2 or more top 4 picks. Yes, I am including the Kings' selection of Thomas Hickey at #4 even though he was a bust/non-factor. The goal is the cup. I want one in my lifetime. Go Rinehart/McDavid.
