The Athletic Putting the ‘tank’ on trial

[Chainshot]

What about the steadfast refusal of the Buffalo Sabres to have even one member of their roster to be French Canadian or Russian? French Canadians are among the best hockey players in the world. They have hockey in their blood. They don't even have to think. They are born with skates on and a hockey stick in their hands. And not one -- Jason Pominville doesn't count, he's on the way out -- serviceable French Canadian on our team? (See Marchand-Bergeron) They have worked great in Buffalo in the past. And what about the Russians? They are some of the most talented players in the league.

Why do the Sabres insist on loading up on US college players and Swedes?? US college players are an earnest attempt to bring the natives home but they are not known for being great at hockey.

The Buffalo Sabres have truly lost their way.

Regarding drafting players from the Q, and Quebecois in particular, when was the last time they had a Quebec based scout? I'm not as plugged in on their new suite of scouts, but it's been a long, long time. Tampa seems to be the new king of the hill for Q-trained talent.

Same thing for scouting Russia, where it seems like they're using part-timers instead of full-timers. I could be wrong, if anyone has info to the contrary, I'd love to hear it. It was the old staff that found Glotov in the MHL, and even he isn't a player so much as he is an irrepressible social media presence.

 

[wunderpanda]

Stop picking the scab. starting to worry about y'all.

 

[Chainshot]

Think of how long it took the Wings to go from perennial joke (hello, 1970's!) to a '90's Cup winner. It apparently didn't fit the parameters of the article, but they had 3 picks in the top 4 between '83 and '90 including a (bad) first overall, as well as 2 other top 10 picks in that 8 year span. But it was 10 years for them to get consistently good and 14 for them to win a Cup from when Yzerman was drafted.

 

[Moncton man]

C'mon, could people get a little perspective please? Could we stop pretending that this one move is the thing that single handedly destroyed the Buffalo Sabres franchise? I've seen it claimed to be worse than losing the co-caps, I've seen it worse than losing Hasek... now it's done more damage than the entirety of the tank?

I think people have just let these thoughts about the trade and STL's success swirl in their heads for way too damn long.

I'm suggesting that the tank was worth doing, it resulted in the team getting one of two centres among the top handful in the league.

The assets Buffalo got back as well as the hole created by the O'Reilly trade set the team back further in my opinion. With him the centre core is stonger, allows Mitts to play third line minutes and the team isn't leaning on garbage that they got in return for the trade.

I believe the damage from that trade hurt more than tanking for the certainty of Eichel.

 

[Dreakon13]

The assets Buffalo got back as well as the hole created by the O'Reilly trade set the team back further in my opinion.

Nothing sent the team on a bigger downward spiral than the initial teardown of the Rochester core and Murray's subsequent trading away the farm. Do you remember the 2012/2013/2014 lineups?

Even if you feel like the return of the tank was ultimately more worth it (which it obviously was)... on face value, I dunno how you can compare the entirety of the tank to one trade in terms of overall impact. It's the mother of all spins.

 

[Buffaloed]

When the Sabres finally do start having success expect them to be labelled as the tank team that cheated.

 

[Sabrefan99]

I enjoyed the tank. In a weird way I felt like we were winning...but my favorite moments were the trades. I can remember where I was when the Sabres traded for O’Rielly, Lerner, and Evander Kane. Looking back, I wish we had those trades back.

 

[Sabre the Win]

I never understood this. Did Murray not understand basic probabilities? The best odds we could possibly have of drafting Mcdavid was 20%, and that's if we finished dead last (obviously we did). We tanked for EICHEL, and the best odds of getting Mcdavid.

How can you be disappointed and angry that something with an 80% chance of happening, happened?

Looking at the 2015 draft, imagine if we drafted 4th to pick Marner in the 1st rd and Aho in the 2nd. That's some pure hindsight fantasy, but it could've happened.

So you would take Eichel over McDavid?

 

[Sabre the Win]

Bull****. Bad coaching selections did the damage. But thats stupid GMing 101, get great players on your roster and let them coached and led by a Baffoon. Both Disco and Phil were terrible.

To illustrate my point: ROR was here and we were dead ****ing last.

Why do you do this everytime? You have been called out 10000x's on this and yet still use it, Eichel was here and we were dead f***ing last.. WHAT IS YOUR POINT?

 

[Rasmus CacOlainen]

Why do you do this everytime? You have been called out 10000x's on this and yet still use it, Eichel was here and we were dead ****ing last.. WHAT IS YOUR POINT?

That we had baffoons behind the bench for 4 years straight.

 

[Moncton man]

Wayne Gretzky couldn't have been the best player of all time. Heck he played for the Blues, Rangers and Kings and didn't win a cup with any of them.

 

[Buff15Sabres]

So you would take Eichel over McDavid?

Not at all, Mcdavid is definitely a better player (no offense to Jack).

I think my post was pretty clear I was talking about the probabilities of the draft lotto.

The logic of tanking that season was that the last place team had the best odds of McDavid (20% at a generational player) and were guaranteed Eichel (an exceptional player that would go #1 in some drafts). If Murray decided to tank that season with the expectation that we would win the lotto and draft McDavid then he doesn't understand probability.

 

[Moncton man]

If Murray decided to tank that season with the expectation that we would win the lotto and draft McDavid then he doesn't understand probability.

I would think the math was exactly the reason to tank the season. 100% chance of getting top tier talent if you finish last. Murray knew that, but was still discouraged the 20% chance didn't work out for a player who will likely finish his career among the top all time players.

 

[Sabre the Win]

Not at all, Mcdavid is definitely a better player (no offense to Jack).

I think my post was pretty clear I was talking about the probabilities of the draft lotto.

The logic of tanking that season was that the last place team had the best odds of McDavid (20% at a generational player) and were guaranteed Eichel (an exceptional player that would go #1 in some drafts). If Murray decided to tank that season with the expectation that we would win the lotto and draft McDavid then he doesn't understand probability.

Ok but we tanked for McDavid, no if and or buts, Eichel was the consolation prize so when you say we tanked for Eichel that's incorrect unless you would take Eichel over McDavid.

That's what I am getting at.

 

[Buff15Sabres]

Ok but we tanked for McDavid, no if and or buts, Eichel was the consolation prize so when you say we tanked for Eichel that's incorrect unless you would take Eichel over McDavid.

That's what I am getting at.

What I'm getting at is that anyone that thinks we tanked for McDavid doesn't understand statistics.

Finishing dead last, with the best possible odds at #1 overall we had the following odds:
20% McDavid
80% Eichel

As I said in my original post, we tanked for Eichel; and the best possible odds at McDavid.*

*Unless our GM was a complete and utter buffoon that thought it was worthwhile to tear this team down to the studs for slightly better odds at getting a generational player.

 

[GOALOFSSON]

When the Sabres finally do start having success expect them to be labelled as the tank team that cheated.

I'll be loving every moment of it.

 

[Thorton02]

If we hit on any of our draft picks outside of the 1st/2nd overalls, this wouldnt be an issue.

 

[Dreakon13]

Why do you do this everytime? You have been called out 10000x's on this and yet still use it, Eichel was here and we were dead ****ing last.. WHAT IS YOUR POINT?

The point isn't that ROR or Eichel or anyone individually was the problem, or that ROR isn't a great piece to have... it's that having or not having ROR didn't move the needle for us. We were bad before ROR, we were bad during ROR, we were bad after ROR. We weren't a great team that fell from grace as soon as we lost him. We weren't even a good team. We weren't even an average team. We couldn't even luck our way out of DFL. We went from worst, to worst, to worst.

The trade was awful as far as individual value goes and whoever was behind it deserves whatever criticism they get. As far as the overall goes though... it's a blip on the radar. No matter how much people want to spin that it's worse than losing the co-caps, Hasek and the entirety of the tank combined.

 

[Chainshot]

The issue now is identifying good core pieces and making sure they stay locked in. Clearly the easy one is Dahlin. Skinner is now part of that and Eichel too. Do they regard Sam well enough for him to part of the core? Or is this going to be the part they use to attempt more roster changes? Part of the idea around getting up into the draft stratosphere is having the ability to use the players selected, while they are still of high value, to move for areas of need. Whether those deals work, well... that's why they play the games.

Hopefully they see that Reinhart is part of the core moving forward. Similarly, they need to continue to build their base and add important pieces yearly. The whole point was to get the sort of high-end centers that are so often a feature of Cup contending and Cup winning teams. They did that, but they came out with so little else.

 

[Member 308457]

Here's the hockey guy analyzing how tanking teams win cups. It's all about achieving and maintaining excellence drafting the lower rounds the right way and getting the right free agents at the right time. Unlike the Sabres. You can have 3-4 fantastic guys on your team but if the rest of the team is middling/mediocre, you're still going to finish outside the playoffs. You have to have everything else around them.

 

[Crazy Tasty]

Darcy purged all the talent and loaded up on picks, the picks and prospects that Murray traded depleted a pretty thin prospect pool. Then not giving two shits about developing the ones we did have has led little to no depth or competition from within. When this team was good, prospects moving up made the team better, that’s just not the case the last few years. It looks like that could change in the next year or two, with some pretty good looking draft picks the last two year, but patience and developing is key. I still think Murray’s biggest mistake was ignoring Rochester.

 

[pigpen65]

I still think Murray’s biggest mistake was ignoring Rochester.

Murray was terrible at drafting, terrible at trading, terrible at signings, terrible at developing, terrible at highering, terrible at managing the cap, and every time he was interviewed he came off as a complete idiot who reflected terribly on the organization. It's not like ignoring Rochester was a conscious decision he made any more than ignoring competence for any single responsibility of the position was. Murray was an idiot.

 

[brian_griffin]

Murray was terrible at drafting, terrible at trading, terrible at signings, terrible at developing, terrible at highering, terrible at managing the cap, and every time he was interviewed he came off as a complete idiot who reflected terribly on the organization. It's not like ignoring Rochester was a conscious decision he made any more than ignoring competence for any single responsibility of the position was. Murray was an idiot.

So... I'm checking for understanding... you think Murray could have done a better job?

 

[OldSchool RinkRat]

So you would take Eichel over McDavid?

Anyone who would take Eichel over McDavid needs to have their head examined, but I would probably take Eichel & Dahlin together over McDavid. If we end up drafting McDavid, I don't think we would have Dahlin right now. I would rather have a Franchise #1 Center and Franchise #1 (Bordering on Generational) Defenseman, than only a Generational, Franchise #1 Center.

 

[Onry]

Ugh. These never-ending narratives. Around and around the bowl, we go. Sigh.