Official 2015 tank thread II

[haseoke39]

In any given year, the bills could assemble the right group of supporting players that all stood up for each other and won a Superbowl. It's still kind of interesting to keep tabs on them from year to year, but I haven't been emotionally invested in them for a long time because they haven't solved the most important position in the game, and honestly I won't probably get worked up over them unless our until they get a quarterback you believe in.

Sabres spent a decade trying to build around a non-elite core and that's how that went. The point of the rebuild for me at least wasn't about depth or building the best second defense pairing or checking center in the league, it was about having the elite guys to build around. One player doesn't make you a contender, you have to build a whole team around them, but if you build a whole team around no elite players, that's no good either.

I'm coming to terms with the fact that were not going to be getting the obvious fix, and we could still win, but it's hard to get emotionally invested. The bills could still win the Superbowl this year.

I'll say this: I think there's a lot of what I'm gonna call "sum of all weaknesses" analysis going on here. It goes like this: Our defense core could definitely be as good as one of the weakest defense cores to win the cup in the last decade, so we should be able to win the cup even without chara, pronger, doughty, etc. Of course those teams had Crosby, toews, etc.

Our forward core could definitely be as good as the weakest forward cores to won the cup over the last decade, so we could definitely win without a superstar up front. Of course, that team had chara and Thomas.

Our goaltending could definitely be as good as Chicago's, etc.

If you compared us to the weakest link on each cup winner, you'd eventually argue no one weakness is fatal. But the weakest links on every cup winner, taken all together, might not even make the playoffs.

I want to know in what aspect were going to outclass the league. I really don't know the answer.

You buckle up and hope, I guess.

 

[Zip15]

Alright, time to regroup the tank. Three of our next five games are in Winnipeg (where we haven't won since the Jets returned), Boston, and Detroit. We should lose all three in regulation--especially when you consider the Jets game is at 8pm ET one night after we have a 7pm game in Buffalo against Ottawa (this was caused by the canceled game during the snowstorm).

The home games are against Ottawa and Colorado. If we can manage only 1 pt in those two games, the teams behind us should be able to make up some ground.

 

[Havok89]

Alright, time to regroup the tank. Three of our next five games are in Winnipeg (where we haven't won since the Jets returned), Boston, and Detroit. We should lose all three in regulation--especially when you consider the Jets game is at 8pm ET one night after we have a 7pm game in Buffalo against Ottawa (this was caused by the canceled game during the snowstorm).

The home games are against Ottawa and Colorado. If we can manage only 1 pt in those two games, the teams behind us should be able to make up some ground.

Edmonton has no plans in making up ground.

 

[joshjull]

Edmonton has no plans in making up ground.

You could have stopped right there

 

[Zip15]

Edmonton has no plans in making up ground.

If we only get 1 pt in the next give games, they'll make up some ground. As I've said 100 times, Arizona concerns me far more than Edmonton.

 

[MayDay]

Here, thats a lot closer to the truth.

No it's not. What has Nolan done? His team is still getting dominated every night, in SOG, possession, Corsi, faceoffs - basically every single metric where you might see an effect of coaching putting in a system.

If Enroth hadn't been playing All-World, all these wins would be losses. Nolan or no Nolan.

Most overrated coach in Buffalo history. Always gets credit for the heroics of his goaltenders.

 

[joshjull]

No it's not. What has Nolan done? His team is still getting dominated every night, in SOG, possession, Corsi, faceoffs - basically every single metric where you might see an effect of coaching putting in a system.

If Enroth hadn't been playing All-World, all these wins would be losses. Nolan or no Nolan.

Most overrated coach in Buffalo history. Always gets credit for the heroics of his goaltenders.

Such an incredibly confident assertion thats completely wrong.

When are posters going to grasp that having as strong possession team is about having strong possession players. No coach can turn a collection of players that are predominately poor possession players into a possession team. No system can do it either. Its the GM's job to transition this team from one with predominantly non possession players into one thats predominately possession players. When that happens we should be a much better possession team no matter who the coach is.

Bashing Nolan over something he can't really change is pretty lame. EDIT: And you basically expressed the same thing, that we are a bad possession team, in a few different ways to make it seem a more dramatic assertion. A bad possession team will be bad in all of those categories. Its not like they are really different things.

 

[MayDay]

Such an incredibly confident assertion thats completely wrong.

When are posters going to grasp that having as strong possession team is about having strong possession players. No coach can turn a collection of players that are predominately poor possession players into a possession team. No system can do it either. Its the GM's job to transition this team from one with predominantly non possession players into one thats predominately possession players. When that happens we should be a much better possession team no matter who the coach is.

Bashing Nolan over something he can't really change is pretty lame.

Ok then, what has Nolan done?

Why should he get credit for wins in a stretch in which in his team is getting dominated, but his goaltender is pulling a .960 sv%?

 

[ZeroPT*]

No it's not. What has Nolan done? His team is still getting dominated every night, in SOG, possession, Corsi, faceoffs - basically every single metric where you might see an effect of coaching putting in a system.

If Enroth hadn't been playing All-World, all these wins would be losses. Nolan or no Nolan.

Most overrated coach in Buffalo history. Always gets credit for the heroics of his goaltenders.

Ok, but when myself and others posted that earlier in the year, you just debunked them and now that it suits your narrative, they're useful?

Got it.

 

[MayDay]

Ok, but when myself and others posted that earlier in the year, you just debunked them and now that it suits your narrative, they're useful?

Got it.

Two different things.

I accept that those stats can tell you whether the team is good or not. And I accept that the stats say that this is a bad team.

What I was disputing much earlier in the thread was that there had to be a tight correlation between those stats and W-L record and where a team finished in the standings. I argued that a team can get results better than its stats would suggest they should - as the Sabres have clearly been doing lately. If anything, the hot streak is proving correct what I was arguing earlier.

 

[Jamie Walker]

Ok then, what has Nolan done?

Why should he get credit for wins in a stretch in which in his team is getting dominated, but his goaltender is pulling a .960 sv%?

maybe he should be the goalie coach

 

[1972]

I don't know why some of you feel so entitled to tell others how they are allowed to route for there team. If you hope we lose for McEichel, or want to win every game who cares.

We are a bad hockey team who was built to be in the McEichel sweepstakes, I don't see how wanting to lose for them is a problem. It's no different than Carolina fans, Oilers fans, and Coyotes fans. I've always had the mindset, if you are going to be bad then you better be really bad.

 

[1972]

This is going to be a long 6 months if posters fight like this every day. We are all fans who want the same end goal, we have different views on how to reach that end goal. It's quite clear that management has built a team to lose games and pick at the top of the draft, whether that happens or not remains to be seen.

I want them to win a Cup, I think McDavid or Eichel gives them the best chance at that, so that's what I want. Will I be devastated if they don't get one? Of course not. But I think they are the type of players that will make good teams great.

 

[Old Navy Goat]

I want them to win a Cup, I think McDavid or Eichel gives them the best chance at that, so that's what I want. Will I be devastated if they don't get one? Of course not. But I think they are the type of players that will make good teams great.

Personally, I want Hanifin and then Merkley and Bracco with our other firsts but I'm kind of greedy that way.

 

[Woodhouse]

Ignore the thread if tanking bothers you. It's not up for debate within the confines of this thread. I really didn't think any of this would need repeating, but here it goes:

Mod Edit: Bump. Remember, like the three parts from 2013-14, this is the safe zone (within the forum rules of course) for Sabres tank talk. Please try and keep that discussion here rather than across multiple threads with repeated snark, worries, or tangents. This also keeps from riling up the GDT with users cheering against the team. Conversely, if tank talk still irks or baffles you in 2014-15, resist your urge to tell these fans how backwards you think that is and simply ignore the thread. The needless bickering is avoided that way.

Hope that helps,
Woodhouse.

 

[Tapu Coco]

What the hell happened to this thread?

This is my take: I don't understand how some people see no meaning at all in these wins. We're witnessing a player we thought would make an elite third liner blossom into an all-situations top 6 forward, a player some may have counted out of the long-term plans giving the front office every reason to stay for the long haul, and an NHL caliber top 4 defense develop this season anchored by 3 very young defensemen, one of which just turned 20 and another not even 20. These aren't insignificant players that can just be overlooked because of an obsession with the next Crosby. That said, I know that contention with a star is preferable to contention without one, and we would be best off in the long run with McEichel. Is a #1 pick everything, though? I want this team to be deep, not a star with a bunch of meh behind him. Would McEichel make the team better? Absolutely. Would it sink us if we don't get him? I don't think so, we have a deep enough pool.

We're all fans here, so why is seeing our team win, especially when we least expect it, such a bad thing? The ideal road, at least in my view, is a middle ground: "losing with honor" or whatever that mantra was. If we can stay on that path, there would obviously be nothing to worry about, but this recent stretch has had things unfold differently. It's a hard balance to keep, but what's so bad about seeing the team develop with a few wins along the way?

What you anti-tankers largely fail to understand is that these young guys can continue playing this well while the team comes up short because it gets so badly outplayed on a near-nightly basis.

That's how you become Edmonton. I'm sure Taylor Hall and the like play well in the losses, but they aren't part of a winning culture

 

[MayDay]

I don't even know what "winning culture" and "losing culture" are supposed to even mean.

People seem to just slap those labels on teams that have been winning or losing, respectively.

 

[haseoke39]

"What's so bad" is missing a player you build around. Every champion has some guy or other who can be the storyline of a series by overwhelming or shutting down the best players in the game. We could've built depth without a tank at all - in fact, that's the far preferable way to build depth. The point of a tank was to get one or two elite guys, and I'm not sure we got any. That was the primary sin of the last core. We kept trying to get the right depth around a group of guys who were borderline all stars in a good year but never elite enough to carry a championship squad.

And the kids aren't really developing any faster or higher than I expected really. They were always supposed to be bright spots on this team. They just needed to be surrounded by enough liabilities if we were going to have them improve and still tank. Instead we placed the onus on building a competent supporting cast. It helps us win now but I don't know if it helps us win in two years.

And overall the team still looks real bad to be fair. Most of these wins have been extremely reliant on goaltending.

 

[Tapu Coco]

I don't even know what "winning culture" and "losing culture" are supposed to even mean.

People seem to just slap those labels on teams that have been winning or losing, respectively.

I wasn't implying that we have a winning culture because of this recent streak. We have the ideology, but we're in transtion and it's not something you can just flip-flop. It starts from the top, Edmonton for example has gongshow management, and it trickles down, not to mention the fact that they haven't made the playoffs since '06 and jerseys are thrown on the ice, they haven't insulated their core with proper veterans, etc

 

[Zip15]

That's how you become Edmonton. I'm sure Taylor Hall and the like play well in the losses, but they aren't part of a winning culture

I think you have a pretty low estimation of our prospects if you think their development hinges on a month's worth of game outcomes in 2014. I think Girgensons, Ristolainen, and Zadorov are going to be the players they're going to be because they're excellent hockey players, and not because their team got lucky in a bunch of games in December 2014.

On a related note, the incessant invocation of Edmonton by those with the opposing view has become incredibly tiresome. It's lazy, too. The Sabres will not suffer years of woe simply because they lost a few more games in December 2014 with league-average goaltending instead of Vezina-caliber goaltending.

 

[Beerz]

I don't even know what "winning culture" and "losing culture" are supposed to even mean.

People seem to just slap those labels on teams that have been winning or losing, respectively.

Easy.

Winning Culture ='s A well built team who is flush with talent thruout the line-up.

Losing Culture ='s A poorly built team who lacks talent to win.

It's absolutely just a cliche passed around in sports that has no meaningful impact at all. It's a myth.

We could've gone 0-82 this year and it would have zero impact on how anything transpires a year from now.

 

[Sabre the Win]

"What's so bad" is missing a player you build around. Every champion has some guy or other who can be the storyline of a series by overwhelming or shutting down the best players in the game. We could've built depth without a tank at all - in fact, that's the far preferable way to build depth. The point of a tank was to get one or two elite guys, and I'm not sure we got any. That was the primary sin of the last core. We kept trying to get the right depth around a group of guys who were borderline all stars in a good year but never elite enough to carry a championship squad.

And the kids aren't really developing any faster or higher than I expected really. They were always supposed to be bright spots on this team. They just needed to be surrounded by enough liabilities if we were going to have them improve and still tank. Instead we placed the onus on building a competent supporting cast. It helps us win now but I don't know if it helps us win in two years.

And overall the team still looks real bad to be fair. Most of these wins have been extremely reliant on goaltending.

Drury and Briere we're the stars in Buffalo and Darcy messed that up. The sin was on Darcy and I say that because Drury nor Briere were ever considered McDavid or Eichel and if we had properly built around them with Vanek, Miller and Pomminville we would be Stanley Cup champions without that generational talent that is apparently so needed.

 

[Tapu Coco]

I think you have a pretty low estimation of our prospects if you think their development hinges on a month's worth of game outcomes in 2014. I think Girgensons, Ristolainen, and Zadorov are going to be the players they're going to be because they're excellent hockey players, and not because their team got lucky in a bunch of games in December 2014.

On a related note, the incessant invocation of Edmonton by those with the opposing view has become incredibly tiresome. It's lazy, too. The Sabres will not suffer years of woe simply because they lost a few more games in December 2014 with league-average goaltending instead of Vezina-caliber goaltending.

When did i say that?

I wasn't using the EDM example as a comparison to us...I used it to make a point of winning/losing culture being more than a hasty label

 

[dire wolf]

Easy.

Winning Culture ='s A well built team who is flush with talent thruout the line-up.

Losing Culture ='s A poorly built team who lacks talent to win.

It's absolutely just a cliche passed around in sports that has no meaningful impact at all. It's a myth.

We could've gone 0-82 this year and it would have zero impact on how anything transpires a year from now.

I don't believe that for a minute. Confidence and psychology plays a HUGE role in performance. As does players feeding off of each other's hard work and success.

 

[Zip15]

Drury and Briere we're the stars in Buffalo and Darcy messed that up. The sin was on Darcy and I say that because Drury nor Briere were or are considered McDavid or Eichel and if we had properly built around them with Vanek, Miller and Pomminville we would be Stanley Cup champions without that generational talent that is apparently so needed.

Oh boy. You apparently missed the Briere quote about how the guys responsible for him not being in Buffalo aren't there anymore--while Regier was still the GM. The obvious inference being that it was Quinn and Golisano who were responsible.

But let's not argue that in this thread.