HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Enough with the Pittsburgh "model" nonsense

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-19-2013, 09:55 PM
  #26
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karate Johnson View Post
An honestly... We have a pretty tight cap situation....

Could be that we end up with the top pick this year.... Do nothing, end up with the top pick next year because we aren't good, then Vanek, Poms, Miller walk for nothing next summer, and we end up with a top pick the next couple years too...


I think you're underestimating our ability to be awful.


Pegula wanting it doesn't matter.
didn't you know... if your owner is wealthy then your franchise will be incapable of being awful for "several" seasons...

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 09:55 PM
  #27
WNY to NoVA
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
it's not really an "argument" he's making...

he doesn't want to endure the losing, so he's come up with a theory as to why having "several" bad seasons in a row is simply not possible with a wealthy and stable ownership

almost as if player talent and coaching has nothing to do with it
yeah, ask the yankees, marlins, dodgers, nyrangers, cowboys, redskins, how a expensive team could never be bad

WNY to NoVA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 09:55 PM
  #28
McTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,888
vCash: 500
Theres a model to get crosby an malkin? Sign me up

McTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 09:56 PM
  #29
Paxon
⚔Z E M G U S⚔
 
Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 22,968
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to Paxon
Pittsburgh definitely didn't have a model, they simply lucked out into being in the position to draft two generational players. Being terrible was only part of it. Look at Edmonton, they drafted even more high picks and nobody knows where that's going to end up in large part because the guys there when they drafted 1st overall 3 years in a row are not (and are not likely to be) anywhere near the Crosby/Malkin level.

If you draft a true high-end #1 overall pick your team simply won't be bad enough to finish last overall for more than another season or two unless you have absolutely nothing on the roster.

Paxon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 09:57 PM
  #30
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,074
vCash: 500
Joshjull,

are you familiar with Shahid Khan's (billionair Jags owner) recent comments?

kind of contradicts your working theory here...

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 09:58 PM
  #31
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 36,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
it's a boatload of assumption... (and also completely ignores the financial impact these super star draft picks have in turning the franchise around)

it makes sense to you because you dont like the idea of losing, to win in the future... like youve said, you pay, and you dont want a ****** product... this massive defense mechanism you've built is just in support of that.

"see.... SEE.... we can't lose... because only bad franchises with ownership issues can lose enough to get better via said losing"

Again grasping at air but not shocking. I never want to tank and I'm not going to deny feeling that way ever. But I can live with it for a single season when we are a mess like we are now.

But you live a fantasy world where you actually think teams TRY to lose for several years as a plan to win the Cup.

You are beyond lost in your fantasy world if you think Pegula will allow this team to suck for several years in a row.

And as I said before, your boy Regier (the guy you praise because of his post Hasek rebuild) didn't even need to crap out for several years during the bankruptcy gutting and rebuilding phase of this team. We bottomed out ONCE in the 3 years before the lockout and we picked in the top 5 that year (2003/Vanek). He had the team back on track and going in the right direction the year after drafting 5th overall because at the 02-03 season deadline he traded for Briere then trade for Drury in the summer. Do you really think with more resources at his disposal he isn't going to try to do it again? And if he can't do you really think Pegula is going to keep him? If we are at the bottom of the standings next season around Xmas, Regier will be gone.

We have the financial resources of the Flyers now. Do they ever suck for several years in order to build a winner? No, they sucked once post lockout and aggressively rebuilt their team by trading for players' rights and signing them before free agency. They aggressively target free agents. They make aggressive trades. It doesn't always work but they never sit back and wait for their team to suck for several years to draft all or most of their top players.

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 09:58 PM
  #32
sabrefan27
Registered User
 
sabrefan27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,957
vCash: 500
Actually it is an actual model. Regier even referenced it on WGR a couple weeks ago with Edmonton. Intentionally go to the bottom for several years for top picks.

sabrefan27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 09:59 PM
  #33
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Paxon View Post
Pittsburgh definitely didn't have a model, they simply lucked out into being in the position to draft two generational players. Being terrible was only part of it. Look at Edmonton, they drafted even more high picks and nobody knows where that's going to end up in large part because the guys there when they drafted 1st overall 3 years in a row are not (and are not likely to be) anywhere near the Crosby/Malkin level.

If you draft a true high-end #1 overall pick your team simply won't be bad enough to finish last overall for more than another season or two unless you have absolutely nothing on the roster.
Stamkos, Hedman... and headed towards 3rd top 3 pick in 5 years.

oh... and their ownership is excellent, and has plenty of cash

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:00 PM
  #34
Karate Johnson*
Zemgus is my Copilot
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,841
vCash: 500
If we trade Vanek/Pom/Miller we'll be bad AT LEAST 2 years in a row.

I we don't, and they all leave in a year, we could be bad 3 years in a row.

All the Pegulabucks and Pegula Desire in the world isn't gonna make good players wanna come here.....


We absolutely have to build through the draft. We'll never be able to buy success

Karate Johnson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:00 PM
  #35
slip
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stop Winnin View Post
He's saying that no ownership is going to support bottoming-out for 3-5 years like the way Pittsburgh did and he's right.

I get what you're saying JJ, I still want to suck for at least this year so we can land some potential high impact players.
Even just one top 3 picks is fine with me. With Grigs and Girgs in the pipeline, Armia too, adding an elite 18 year old gives us an excellent core around which to plan the next 5 years. Trade one of Vanek, Pominville, or Miller for a young, impact player to grow with that core.

Heck, we might even suck again next year. So be it. Throw in another top 3 pick. Now you got an amazing pipeline of talent to harvest for the next 5-7 years. The Regier band-aid approach to roster management is bankrupt. The damage is already done. We are fortunate it's a shortened season. The Hockey Gods have show us mercy, and for that I'm grateful.

slip is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:02 PM
  #36
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
But you live a fantasy world where you actually think teams TRY to lose for several years as a plan to win the Cup.
i dont think that...
that's just the way you constantly frame it so that you can make your pet theories in rebuttal

Quote:
You are beyond lost in your fantasy world if you think Pegula will allow this team to suck for several years in a row.
you think rebuilding and "intentionally sucking" are the same thing
I don't

Quote:
And as I said before, your boy Regier (the guy you praise because of his post Hasek rebuild) didn't even need to crap out for several years during the bankruptcy gutting and rebuilding phase of this team. We bottomed out ONCE in the 3 years before the lockout and we picked in the top 5 that year (2003/Vanek). He had the team back on track and going in the right direction the year after drafting 5th overall because at the 02-03 season deadline he traded for Briere then trade for Drury in the summer. Do you really think with more resources at his disposal he isn;t going to try to do it again? And if he can't do you really think Pegula is going to keep him? If we are at the bottom of the standings next season around Xmas, Regier will be gone.
good

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:03 PM
  #37
dma0034
Registered User
 
dma0034's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,443
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post



good
I didn't think you minded Regier.

dma0034 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:06 PM
  #38
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,074
vCash: 500
I dont think trading Ryan Miller for a 1st round pick, is "intentionally sucking"

I don't think starting a young team, to groom and build a contender, is "intentionally sucking"

I dont think swapping out skill (poms, van) for grit, toughness, leadership, guys who do the little things so that our young skill (coho, ennis, grigs, armia, 1st pick, etc) have the right mentors to develop behind.... is "intentionally sucking"

i think doing all those things probably takes a few years to yield the results we all want... but it's NOT intentionally sucking

It's building a contender the hard way... but the way that yields long term results/structure

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:08 PM
  #39
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dma0034 View Post
I didn't think you minded Regier.
i dont really care...

i think if the franchise takes direct actions towards rebuilding, than Pegula has given Regier the free reigns to rebuild.

I disagree with Joshhjull... just didnt care to argue the point.

If the Sabres are sucking again next year... and poms, van, and miller are still here... than Regier will definitely be fired.

but if we embrace rebuild... he wont

depends what pegula wants

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:08 PM
  #40
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 36,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WNY to NoVA View Post
yeah, ask the yankees, marlins, dodgers, nyrangers, cowboys, redskins, how a expensive team could never be bad
Did I actually say that? No I didn't so spare me this nonsense.



There is a difference between what happened to the Sabres this year. A huge payroll that didn't work out and a Pens payroll that was barely enough to ice a NHL roster.

Btw you do realize a plan or a model to build something implies certain things are meant to happen. You're basically arguing we will build a winner with inept management/ownership that will spend a lot of money and have crappy teams. Yet miraculously that same ownership will be able to somehow realize when its time to stop being inept. Then add the complimentary players to the high picks and then surge to a CUp run?

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:20 PM
  #41
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 36,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stop Winnin View Post
He's saying that no ownership is going to support bottoming-out for 3-5 years like the way Pittsburgh did and he's right.
Thank you for making a much better and succinct explanation of what I'm saying. Also done in a far nicer tone

Quote:
I get what you're saying JJ, I still want to suck for at least this year so we can land some potential high impact players

So do I.

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:20 PM
  #42
slip
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
Did I actually say that? No I didn't so spare me this nonsense.



There is a difference between what happened to the Sabres this year. A huge payroll that didn't work out and a Pens payroll that was barely enough to ice a NHL roster.

Btw you do realize a plan or a model to build something implies certain things are meant to happen. You're basically arguing we will build a winner with inept management/ownership that will spend a lot of money and have crappy teams. Yet miraculously that same ownership will be able to somehow realize when its time to stop being inept. Then add the complimentary players to the high picks and then surge to a CUp run?
What's your alternate plan? Where would you go from here?

slip is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:32 PM
  #43
rsg87
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 158
vCash: 500
Aren't the Oilers still in the process of the Penguins model and still failing miserably? You can't simply just tank...you need to tank at the right time when generational players are available. Some drafts have them and some drafts don't.

The Hawks were bad but they didn't do it the same way as Pittsburgh. Yes, they drafted Toews and Kane high but they also struck gold in Keith (2nd rounder), Seabrook (14th overall), Buff (245th overall), and signed Marian Hossa. They really only had two really high draft picks (Toews and Kane) that were top contributors.

rsg87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:34 PM
  #44
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
Thank you for making a much better and succinct explanation of what I'm saying. Also done in a far nicer tone
is it possible for ownership to support a COMPLETE rebuild... but not support COMPLETE failure after 3 seasons

(since you seem to be using this 3-5 year barometer)

They didn't "try" to bottom out THIS year

Can you run this by your Pegula Crystal Ball for me?

Year 1 : Unintended Bottoming Out (right now)
Result : They determine that they need to start over... move on from the old core... rebuild through draft... position themselves for building around the young core in a few years. They trade Miller, Vanek, Pommer over the next 12 months for future assets. They achieve a top 3 pick

Year 2 : Expected Bottoming Out
Result : development of new core... another top tier pick

Year 3 : Influx of the youth (mackinnon, grigs, girgs, armia, etc)
Result : Still a bad year, but we begin to see the maturation process... Pegula Bucks beging to inject more talent into the lineup... moves are made. Not a bottom out pick... but no playoffs either

Year 4 : The push for the playoffs... maybe they make it... maybe not... but it's obvious they are on the right path

Year 5 : Back to the playoffs

Years 6-10 : Contend

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:35 PM
  #45
sba
....
 
sba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,648
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to sba
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post


The point is how the Pens were built (actions leading to those picks) CANNOT be replicated by the Sabres. Its so incredibly simple yet is lost on so many.
Even if it could, there's plenty of teams it hasn't worked for as well. It's a crapshoot.

sba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:40 PM
  #46
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 36,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
i dont think that...
that's just the way you constantly frame it so that you can make your pet theories in rebuttal



you think rebuilding and "intentionally sucking" are the same thing
I don't



good
No I think certain posters definition of rebuilding, as in icing weak teams for several years to get high picks, is intentionally sucking.

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:41 PM
  #47
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 36,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by slip View Post
What's your alternate plan? Where would you go from here?

Rebuilding like Regeir did the last time in the post Hasek bankruptcy years is what makes the most sense to me.

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:41 PM
  #48
Karate Johnson*
Zemgus is my Copilot
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
There is a difference between what happened to the Sabres this year. A huge payroll that didn't work out and a Pens payroll that was barely enough to ice a NHL roster.

:
If they both end up with top picks a few years in a row, who cares how we got there?

Karate Johnson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:43 PM
  #49
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 36,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
Joshjull,

are you familiar with Shahid Khan's (billionair Jags owner) recent comments?

kind of contradicts your working theory here...
I'm not and frankly need more info to weigh the relevance. I'm not going to look for it.

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:45 PM
  #50
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 37,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
Rebuilding like Regeir did the last time in the post Hasek, bankruptcy years is what makes the most sense to me.
"rebuilding through the draft" puts you in control
"rebuilding through trades" is dependant on other GMs being morons

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:19 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.