dudacek

The bolded entirely supports my point. Some scouts had Makar as high as 3. Some had him as low as 17. Your board (the consensus) whiffed by having him at 7 because it gave as much weight to the bad scouts as it gave the good ones.

I think you missed my point. The Internet would have melted down if Makar had gone #1 that year. That’s because the internet had put its trust in “the consensus” instead of any smart scouts advocating for Makar.

Started listening to the pod a few weeks ago. Enjoy it. I like Joe. He’s a step up from most of the familiar faces. I’d rather they bring in a new voice than move an old one.

I never perceived that. Considered them a terrible expansion team with terrible management.

I'm interested in all of the lists, but that's really the only one that I invest much care into, because it represents a consensus of what the pros are thinking. Whether you like or hate Button or Scouch or Pronman, or whoever, most of the other lists are the products of one hard-working individual, or a small staff that cant touch the resources of an actual NHL team. And even with McKenzie, his list is an amalgamation of resources that likely have a wide range of credibility. Consensus is a faulty standard when consensus indicates Nolan Patrick is a better prospect than Cale Makar.

Depends on how you define tanking I guess. At its essence, I think it's about that point where a switch flips and an organization is not actively trying to win. If it's defined as being deliberately bad today in order to get better in the future it happens every year, although GMs usually wait until the deadline. Montreal and Philly tanked out the season after their seasons fell apart. Arizona entered the season tanking. If you define it as finishing last at all costs, it's only ever happened twice IMO: Lemieux and McDavid.

Personally, I'd get rid of it; It doesn't seem very effective in preventing tanking (the reason it allegedly exists) or encouraging parity (the reason the draft allegedly exists) But drilling down to the essence of what @SDS said up thread: the NHL sells hope. Does the lottery generally provide more hope or less/ I'd say more, so it will continue.

Is the Vegas pick actually optional? I've never seen it reported that way. It was always "if it's in the top 10 it moves to 2023"

Curious to see how the standards at central scouting compare to those around the league. Has it changed and adapted, or is it just an under-resourced small handful of old boys using methods and systems straight out of 1984. Are they on a level playing field with an NHL scouting staff? How do their results compare? So much fascinating insight in to the field remains out of our hands.

All of this. Was thinking the same thoughts, along with the idea that he could be in line to be one of next year's top Rochester prospects on a roster that is going to be lacking them.

Maybe you go Zemgus and Tage at home and Ras and Alex away? Then when KO moves on, the new captain is chosen out of the other three, with other two getting the As full time.

Listening to Donnie and Kevyn at the end of the year, I think they are going to make his captaincy official. The issue is how does Z fit in? Because I think they'd prefer the As to go to younger leaders, probably Tuch and Dahlin.

John has generally been a pro, and I wish him well. Hope the new guy brings something fresh to the general coverage we get of the Sabres: humour, a storytelling voice, passion, connections, an eye for angles no one else is taking...maybe all of the above. By and large, Sabres media tends to consist too much of familiar takes and echoes of games and post-game pressers — which I now watch first-hand instead. I'd like to see someone leading some fresh conversations.

Krebs was fantastic. Two things stood out for me: You could see the game he tries to play in the NHL work in the AHL because the game is a tad slower. The curls and cutbacks free up open ice and the high risk passes are on the money. He was so much better than he was in December in Rochester; the skill was there then, but tonight he was so much more in sync with the game. Development is real. Belleville was playing dead puck era hockey. They had hands and sticks on everybody all the time and the refs let them. Quinn was a constant target. He didn’t quit or look intimidated, but he didn’t fight through it either. Fitz was clutch. Dell was more lucky than good, but I’ll take it. What the hell happened to Weissbach? He looked more wobbly than I can remember someone looking in a long time. That one might climb into Belleville’s heads. They played the way they had to for 45 minutes but couldn’t hold on. And you’d think the refs aren’t going to be giving them that many favours 2 games in a row.

Well that sucks. At least that gives me a warning

I understand it’s at the Crossroads.

The premise of the piece was outstanding: the number of games Vegas lost to injury is entirely misleading because it includes players who never would have been able to actually dress under the cap. It was impossible for them to ice a healthy roster and they planned it that way.

The idea that making money any way related to your chosen field should render you ineligible to explore that field at a university is patently ridiculous. Cant believe it continues.

Cozens playing for Team Canada, according to Granato on WGR.

I think SDS has the truth of it. UPL is getting his shot. Anderson has a job if he wants it.

I think it is interesting that a season that was the result of a teardown and from the outside could have easily turned into a step backward actually resulted in an improvement that flirted with the top 5 in Sabres history. He has a plan that he believes in and this year his belief was validated. Therefore it is highly likely he will stick with it. I am largely on board with that. *** Separate, but connected, I really hope Craig Anderson packs it in. Because if he doesn't I am pretty positive we will enter next year with an Anderson/UPL tandem. And i just don't think that's going to be good enough. Neither was as good this year as Kevyn seems to think they were. And neither has given much reason for us to think they will be better next year.

Johnson put up similar points in his 2nd year to both of those guys. Your point was that a guy who’s going to be top 4 should get more than .5 points per game in college. So now it’s “unless he’s big?” Nik Hjalmarsson wasn’t big and tough, and also never scored more than 26 points in a season. But he played on the 1st pair of a Stanley Cup winner. Hank Tallinder never hurt a fly, but was the best defenceman on the last great Sabres team. They are examples of poised, reliable top 4 defencemen who didn’t score, or punish, but helped their teams win by defending with their feet and their brain. Those who like Johnson think he can play that type of role. The amount of points he’s putting up in college aren’t really relevant. He’s not going to succeed or fail in the NHL as a point producer.

Matthias Samuelsson was picked 32 and put up 14 points in 30 games. K’Andre Miller had 18 in 36. I really think you have the wrong impression of the role Johnson plays.

Never saw any reporting, or even internet gossip, to that effect. He interviewed a bunch of guys - which he said he was going to do from the outset - then picked Don. I remember thinking that the search was a bit of a sham - it was mostly about Adams making connections, and picking people’s brains about his team.

9 would match the highest price paid for a goalie in the cap era. Helle is worth it but the 2 years thing might scare me off. I'd do 16 and Portillo though.