Thorny
-
Posts
35,352 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Thorny
-
-
20 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
Catton is the most likely to slide down.
Very prepared for him being labelled can’t miss in the vein of Benson
-
4 hours ago, dudacek said:
Step away the value chart for a minute, and look at the big picture:
Jokiharju is not someone the team is likely to be able to afford to keep long-term. Given the cap, the Sabres probably will not be able to give him term. There is a very good chance he goes to arbitration this summer and is a UFA next summer. If he’s not traded this summer, this will probably be his last year as a Sabre.
Larsson is a better player and a better fit for next year’s team.
The future of Krebs is uncertain, but it is increasingly unlikely he will become more than a bottom 6 player. There’s a better chance he is merely a replaceable part than a core piece. There is a very good chance he will be passed on the depth chart and made redundant in the near future by one of the many prospects up front.
Gourde is a better player and a better fit for next year’s team.
Pick 11 has a ton of asset value. It is also 3 to 5 years before the NHL team will see a return if we invest that value in an 18-year-old, and another 2 before that value is fully realized.
Tanev is a better player and a better fit for next year’s team.
Johnson, Novikov, Komarov and Strbak - does it really matter if they are replacing Larsson in a year instead of Jokiharju? Savoie, Kulich, Rosen and Östlund - does it really matter if they are replacing Gourde and Tanev in a year instead of Krebs and Girgensons?
These are the pieces around the edges, not the core pieces. Good teams are constantly juggling them on a year-to-year basis in order to win now. You accumulate a rich cache of young players like the Sabres have in order to allow you to do that.
Would you rather trade Jokiharju and Krebs for draft picks next summer, or a better team right now? I don’t think there’s a debate there for most of us.
What this trade idea forces you to weigh is the possibility of #11 becoming a core piece in the future against the possibility of filling in the 3 biggest holes on next year’s roster in order to win now. In principle, it’s really no different than the Canucks trading a hefty bag of futures for pending FAs Hronek, Zadorov and Lindholm. In practice, the Sabres have a much larger cupboard of assets in place to bankroll such trades than the Canucks did. It’s time to spend some of those assets.
I agree with @Archie Lee that you might be able to accomplish the same thing at a cheaper cost. I also agree with @PerreaultForever that there are intangible gains to being good next year that should not be ignored.
SOMEONE probably accomplishes that same thing at a cheaper cost. But we aren’t the field: that’s always the issue with said logic. If we want the one team that consummates the deal to be us, the offer you proposed is the one that actually results in completion rather than a “we stayed true to our value evaluation” scenario
-
1
-
-
Ya I mean if Edmonton wins the cup we’ll have to grudgingly agree they are the 6th best team in the nhl. We can’t forget to square the data the league uses to determine who the best team is for the season with our own personally chosen, biased markers for success, like Expected playoff wins inferred based on how tired we are randomly guessing the teams to be and also prospect pool strength.
-
50 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:
And if we still fail; then what?
-
32 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:
See you're trying to win the trade, and I agree with @dudacek I think it would get us in the playoffs and imo finally breaking that 13 year non playoff run would be worth it, even if all 3 left the year after (although obviously you'd try to keep some of them). Gives all those Rochester kids one more year to mature as well.
A real coach, finally in the playoffs, regardless of what happens after, the entire conversation changes and maybe then the NTCs for Buffalo start to stop and more players will also consider coming. We simply HAVE to break the loser label before we lose another round of young talent and rebuild yet again in a perpetual spiral.
Exactly. I’d imagine the winning has value in and of itself, probably great value. It’ll help the entire environment and it’s attractiveness to outside players
-
1
-
-
On 5/22/2024 at 3:33 PM, Thorny said:
Ya, of the 4 remaining teams there’s no one to root for
Uninspiring final 4 for sure, not even sure the hockey will be exciting
Good teams definitely though, maybe the 4 best
On 5/22/2024 at 9:35 PM, stinky finger said:With all due respect, Edmonton is in no way one of the 4 best teams.
Proof meets pudding
Least so far
-
McPowerplay strikes again. Have a feeling it’s the Oilers year
i still cannot remember a final 4 with 4 more unlikeable teams. Worst rooting playoffs in memory. Thank God for baseball
-
10 hours ago, Alaska John said:
Can someone please remind me what happened with Brandon Hagel? I have read the Sabres were unable to sign him at the time they needed to, and he went his separate way, bouncing around for a bit until really coming into his own the past couple of years. Did he just not show enough for the Sabres to make him a good offer, or was he just mis-handled by the Sabres talent evaluators? Thanks for the info.
Jason Botterill didn’t sign him because he was a CHL player and wouldn’t have drafted him at all had he been the GM when he was selected
-
8 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:
Nobody's perfect ...?
Dude was "Captain Clutch" during the 05-07 window.
Always felt Briere brought it even more so. Left every bit of his soul out there
3 hours ago, French Collection said:The shot blocking ratchets up too, taking a toll on them.
Biggest thing is that powerplays go down and the importance of even strength play goes up. At least it used to be that way
not as in touch with current playoff product
- - -
As for “clutch” I do think it mostly comes down to being by able to play your usual game when the game gets tighter
“do your job”
You see the grittier guys shine more because the rules aren’t adhered to as stringently by the officials
-
1
-
-
Just now, stinky finger said:
Love it
Do you just hate the rangers or have you co-opted Florida as a second team?
-
That was a really nice pass by Bennett on the goal
-
1 hour ago, dudacek said:
And what I'm saying is I don't buy in to the popular theory that Adams made this trade because of Casey's looming contract.
I believe it was purely a roster trade: we had 3 top 6 centres and 3 top 4 defencemen; Adams traded from a position of strength to fill a position of weakness.
Whether Casey signs for $5M or $8M won't really affect my position on the trade much. I will judge it on whether Byram improves the D-corps more than Casey's loss hurts the middle 6 up front. And how Adams backfills the Casey hole (or doesn't) will definitely factor into my judgement.
Very much agree, feeding into..
1 hour ago, dudacek said:To be clear, I don't think Byram is dominant either, just very talented.
Something I'm not sure people are aware of is how productive Byram is at even-strength and how PP time colours point totals for defencemen.
His 28 ES points ranked 34th among defencemen in the NHL last year. His peers included John Carlson, Drew Doughty, Vince Dunn, Shea Theodore, Owen Power, Brock Faber and Torrey Krug. He was 8th in ES goals.
He was ahead of age peers like Seider, Sanderson, Luke Hughes and Kaiden Guhle, not to mention veterans like Chychrun, Chabot, Pietrangelo, Seth Jones and Brent Burns.
The swap as you point out made a ton of sense in theory: evaluation is in limbo because of the execution - issue with Byram was *specifically* the type of dman he seems to be - which you’ve pointed to before, as a stance others have: “I wanted a D man just not THAT one.” His offensive production is definitely reasonable but at least some portion of those still skeptical of the trade already knew this to be the case: issue is how poor his actual defence was. He produced offensively at ES but also gave it right back at ES.
Whether or not Byram improves us more than losing Mittelstadt hurts us is indeed as you point out the only way to evaluate the deal and imo the answer to that will be determined by how well Byram finds balance
-
1
-
-
Just now, GASabresIUFAN said:
What does it hurt? He is an excellent skater and may just need more time (like Hagel) to develop. Give him an AHL deal, let him go back to juniors and see what happens.
Hagel was a special case because it was a brow-furrowing decision from the word go. Not only did Hagel look like the more promising prospect, considering a system depth comparison signing Hagel was always a no-brainer and it was a clear, focused instance of Botterill declining to sign him because he got much too literal/Sith with his “absolutely no Canadian Junior players” bias. Precisely when his bias became a farce
-
“Winning” trades is the province of teams less concerned with winning games
-
7
-
-
Matteo Costantini - 4 years since being drafted. Do his rights expire this June 1 or does he have another college season ahead of him?
-
1 minute ago, Doohickie said:
It would be fine if the rest of the Spring 2023 "All Stars" returned to form.
And doing nothing all summer except trading Tage for a 4th would be fine if Levi ends up playing like Hellebuyck next season and Cozens pots 100 points.
From the perspective of the moment an offseason yielding a 30 point player at best as the crown jewel would be negligent
-
1
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Doohickie said:
I was dismayed when Zach Benson made the team. I was wrong.
I'm just saying that while it makes sense to look outside for 3/4C help, we might be sitting on someone that is ready to pop into the league with the same success Benson had last year.
No matter what Kevyn does, I will withhold judgment until I see how it plays out. There may be a different dynamic with Lindy as HC. If he does have an influence on the roster I will tend to trust Kevyn's moves going forward. Kevyn has his own way of doing things and as much as he says he seeks inputs from those around him, I think having a senior hockey guy like Lindy to vet Kevyn's moves can only help.
You weren’t really wrong about Benson. Benson being the best option can be true and also a really sad commentary on the state of the roster
Adding a Benson level player as our biggest F addition this summer wouldn’t be positive
2 hours ago, xzy89c1 said:LOL, ask 32 gms and they will all pick Byrum. Ask any scout. This made my day. too funny. A 3rdish line center or a very good right now and potentially dominant dman?
He has great potential but he’s not “very good” right now. He also doesn’t have a U in his name. So, 0/2
your pro analysis seems swapped, here, Mittelstadt is the guy who’s currently “very good”, bonafide top 6, Byram is the one performing at a depth level
-
32 minutes ago, Mango said:
Solid and fair take and seems probable.
That said, I think it’s best for the org long term that Lindy be the man at the top and not Adams.
I am just not sold on the guy. I have a lot more questions about the vision for this team now than I did 18 months ago. I don’t get it.
I am rooting for the Sabres success sooner rather than later. I think a 96 point season, first round loss, and moving Adams to POHO has the potential to be terrible long term.
Making the playoffs and Adams moved out of the GM role seems reasonable to me..
-
2 hours ago, Taro T said:
Have said it before, but believe that if the team is unsuccessful the next 2 years then Adams is gone, but if they are then he bumps up to PoHO with probably Karmanos becoming the GM (maybe Ventura gets it) and Ruff sliding into an advisory role to Kevyn as soon as he's ready to be done coaching.
If things go kerplewy once again this year (or even if they don't this year but do spectacularly next year) then Adams is gone and Ruff becomes PoHO with probably Karmanos or Ventura becoming the GM but if Lindy has somebody from outside in mind then he brings in a GM.
Should things go well, Appert has the inside track to be Lindy's successor. If they don't, would guess the HC becomes Peca because, well, because.
Should only be 1 year
Realize you mention that possibility in the next paragraph
-
1
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, Buffalonill said:
I remember people use to say McDavid made Draisaitl lol
He does
To a significant extent. He’d be an all star regardless but he’s completely elevated to a different stratosphere due to McDavid. Bouchard is the far and away third leading scoring in these playoffs. McDavid effect
hasn’t stopped Leon from refusing to where his mouth guard at any point. Pure chew toy accessory
- - -
when I see the oilers ahead it bugs me, when I see the stars ahead it bugs me. Can’t believe I’m rooting for the Rangers lol
-
On 5/28/2024 at 1:23 PM, PerreaultForever said:
I agree with all this except the term. I think we do need a veteran 3C but I think long term is fine. I want stability on this team, not a puppy mill. There's no reason, should any of these kids step up that they can't be moved to a wing (or Cozens, or even Tage). You can never have too many centers. The main thing for me is to add a solid 2 way dependable guy like the vets you mention.
I would manage the 3C position as if the prospects are a non-entity. If they break down the door, good problem
-
3
-
2
-
-
10 minutes ago, Taro T said:
Didn't we see THAT Reinhart in the game in Winnipeg way back when?
Best game I’ve seen live. First time I ever saw the Sabres win live. Sammy hat-trick, finished off with an EN goal off an unselfish play from Kane
-
1
-
-
9 shots so far total. Hope I didn’t go Nostradamus on this one
-
5 hours ago, Thorny said:
Agree. Our best hope could legitimately be Levi
Canada is also on the Levi timeline apparently
All the rage
2 hours ago, Sabres73 said:Devon. Levi.
This is how you find out who’s blocked you
2024 Conference Finals
in The Aud Club
Posted
Exactly what I’m poking fun at