Question on rebuild.
- Thread starter Beerz
- Start date
cup or bust for me.
The Hawks rebuild was successful because they won a cup
Same with LA
same with Pittsburgh
The Hawks rebuild was successful because they won a cup
Same with LA
same with Pittsburgh
haseoke39
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2011
- 13,938
- 2,491
Depends on what the question is.
Will I be personally satisfied? Of course not. It's not successful if judged solely from the perspective of whether it delivered what I most wanted.
But put it this way: Let's say the result of our rebuild was a perennial contender who went deep in the playoffs regularly but could never seal the deal for a variety of somewhat sympathetic reasons - run into the hottest goalie of the year in the finals, crushed by injuries, etc.
And let's imagine that after that run was over we fell out of the playoffs for a couple years and we had to decide how to rebuild them team. Would I consider what we did "successful" enough to repeat the process, or would I advocate constantly trying to get into the playoffs? Of course I would say our rebuild was a successful enough example. So if the question is did we, overall, have a successful tactic in rebuilding the way we did, the answer might be emphatically yes.
Beerz
Registered User
- Jun 28, 2011
- 35,452
- 11,072
Even if it gave you 6 or 7 years of exciting , high quality hockey... full of drama and suspense?
Zman5778
Moderator
For me, a "successful" rebuild would be this:
A period of time, say, 3-5 years, where we are considered one of the pre-season favorites to win a Cup. In that time period, we win a number of division titles, always have home ice in the first round or two and are generally considered one of the best teams in the NHL.
A Cup would be the icing on the cake, but it's tough. Maybe we run into a brick-wall white-hot goalie. Maybe we get a key injury at a bad time.
If the "peak" of the rebuild is a division title and bounced in Round 2? Unacceptable.
If the "peak" is a period of time where we're considered one of the best? Acceptable.
A period of time, say, 3-5 years, where we are considered one of the pre-season favorites to win a Cup. In that time period, we win a number of division titles, always have home ice in the first round or two and are generally considered one of the best teams in the NHL.
A Cup would be the icing on the cake, but it's tough. Maybe we run into a brick-wall white-hot goalie. Maybe we get a key injury at a bad time.
If the "peak" of the rebuild is a division title and bounced in Round 2? Unacceptable.
If the "peak" is a period of time where we're considered one of the best? Acceptable.
PlamsUnlimited
Big Church Bells
I want cup. But I would be "partially satisfied" with a perennial contender competive team that manages top 5 every year or so. But cup please.
phosphene*
Registered User
I think we'll win it when Zadorov and Risto are in their primes. They're going to be Norris nominees.
I would view that as good, but the definition of success is accomplishing the end goal, which is the Cup. All the other aspects are just window dressings.
Chad Thundercock
Slayer
Cup is obviously the goal, but there's tons of luck involved in winning playoff series.
I would hope to be solidly in the playoffs and feel like a legitimate cup contender for at least a 3 year span.
I would hope to be solidly in the playoffs and feel like a legitimate cup contender for at least a 3 year span.
tsujimoto74
Moderator
- May 28, 2012
- 29,919
- 22,082
I mean, winning the Cup is the whole point. Although I would be pretty content to see a team that is consistently in the playoffs and generally considered a legitimate threat to win it all, the entire point of going through this process is to come out not just with a playoff team but a championship team.
OhreallyOrielly
good 2b a tankster
I want a cup as badly as anyone. But, If the Sabres are at or near the top of the league for a decade and make the finals a couple of times it's hard to call the rebuild a failure. There's some luck involved in every cup run.
Rhett4
Buffalo Selects Jack
Winning the Cup requires a team capable of doing it...and a dozen external factors. If the Sabres can build a team that could win a Cup, then it's been a good rebuild. If that means going to the ECF a bunch of years in a row and getting knocked out by injuries, that's out of their control. That'd still be a success.
I had a ton of fun watching hockey 2005 to 2007, with our without the silver shiny thing.
I had a ton of fun watching hockey 2005 to 2007, with our without the silver shiny thing.
Of course not.
The rebuild is a success when a core structure is in place for long term contention (NHL roster and pipeline)
under those terms, the GM did his job and then it's on the players/coaches to get the job done (of course the GM plays a role in that as well)
The success of "the rebuild" is not dependent on a cup...
If you go from bottom of the league to consistent 90-100 pt team, with a core and a pipeline of talent... Then the rebuild was a success
Last edited:
I better not suffer through this just so Buffalo can be a really good team. The time to be really good was '05-'06 and '06-'07. I'll give the team 2 more full years of mediocrity and dysfunctionality. Come '16-'17 we better be hungry. And I think our draft picks pan out, at least most of them.
I am in the perennial contender column...
mildly successful would mean consistently finishing first or second in our division for a 5 - 10 year period.
Very Successful would mean making it to the Conference Finals on a consistent basis with a Finals visit or even a Cup victory.
Completely successful means winning a Cup and being able to compete for another Cup (Hawks/LA) shortly afterwards.
mildly successful would mean consistently finishing first or second in our division for a 5 - 10 year period.
Very Successful would mean making it to the Conference Finals on a consistent basis with a Finals visit or even a Cup victory.
Completely successful means winning a Cup and being able to compete for another Cup (Hawks/LA) shortly afterwards.
There is only 1 measure of true success.
A perennial contender might save jobs but it doesn't mean we've accomplished the goal.... There would still be work to be done.
I contend a rebuild isn't complete until you win a championship
A perennial contender might save jobs but it doesn't mean we've accomplished the goal.... There would still be work to be done.
I contend a rebuild isn't complete until you win a championship
dotcommunism
Moderator
- Aug 16, 2007
- 5,182
- 3,348
The only thing that can actually be controlled is the process. Doing everything right isn't going to necessarily lead you to a cup, there are too many variables beyond anyone's control. A good process could end up not leading to a cup. A bad process, with bad decision making, can result in one.
I don't think I can fairly judge the rebuild based on winning a cup or not.
I don't think I can fairly judge the rebuild based on winning a cup or not.
I'd rather win a cup and miss the playoffs for the next 5 years than make it to round 2/3 every year for 5 years
The goal in Pro Hockey is to win the Championship.
If you have a solid plan, and you build a playoff team and they fall short of a goal it's clear that you need to continue building.
The variable can be planned for. If injury is the reason you failed you have to address depth. If overall talent is the issue you need to tweak your top end.
If you fail to win there is always a modification to be made.
And if 15 years Murray leaves buffalo with 11 playoff seasons, 4-5 deep runs, a presidents trophy, and no championships he will leave having failed.
Because there is only one goal that anyone cares about.
If you have a solid plan, and you build a playoff team and they fall short of a goal it's clear that you need to continue building.
The variable can be planned for. If injury is the reason you failed you have to address depth. If overall talent is the issue you need to tweak your top end.
If you fail to win there is always a modification to be made.
And if 15 years Murray leaves buffalo with 11 playoff seasons, 4-5 deep runs, a presidents trophy, and no championships he will leave having failed.
Because there is only one goal that anyone cares about.
Paxon
202* Stanley Cup Champions
Winning a Cup isn't the measure for me. If they're a contender for 10 straight years and never win the Cup, for example, I don't see how you can say it wasn't a successful rebuild. To make an extreme hypothetical, imagine if Detroit was the same in every way over these past couple decades, only whenever they reached the finals they lost. I'd give my left nut to be rooting for that, in the playoffs every year longer than some here have been alive. I want a team that gives us hope they will be playing for something, making the 82 games + playoffs we watched actually feel like they mean something. That's entertainment value.
Of course, in that Detroit example, it's basically impossible to be that good for that long and not win a Cup, but I'm just stressing that sustained high level success makes rooting for the team worth it for me.
Of course, in that Detroit example, it's basically impossible to be that good for that long and not win a Cup, but I'm just stressing that sustained high level success makes rooting for the team worth it for me.
ZZamboni
Puttin' on the Foil
I don't want to be the SJ Sharks of the east. 
Would it be exciting? Sure. Would it be filled with suspense? Sure.
Would it be satisfying? Hell no.
Would it be exciting? Sure. Would it be filled with suspense? Sure.
Would it be satisfying? Hell no.
Sabre the Win
Joke of a Franchise
- Jun 27, 2013
- 12,297
- 4,972
joshjull
Registered User
Thats simply not true. An injury to a core player in the playoffs in this cap era pretty much seals a teams fate. The top teams are so close in talent that if a Toews, Kane, Koiptar, Doughty etc goes down there is no way they can ice enough depth to overcome that.
To pretend that all aspects of winning a Cup are within the control of the GM is being a tad naive. Posters hate to read it but a certain degree of luck is involved in winning Cup, particularly with injuries to your team or an opponent. Its why Crosby's Pens have a Cup and the Wings didn't win 2 in a row.
Last edited:
Push Dr Tracksuit
Gerstmann 3:16
- Jun 9, 2012
- 13,239
- 3,316
Im not in the buisness of just being in the playoffs. We could have done that without being the worst team in the league. Being a 100 pnt team may be a successful rebuild, but not what Im hoping for.
