Thorny
-
Posts
35,352 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Thorny
-
-
All fair. I just think there's going to be a very vocal group who will never accept a 55-60 point player making $7.5m. And no, I have no idea how large that group will be, but I'm positive we'll know about them :lol:
My original post on the matter was probably too optimistic, that vocal group you are predicting is a pretty much guaranteed eventuality. ????
-
I fully expect Pysyk to be handling the tough assignments sooner than later (assuming he's effective on the left side) which slots Gorges into the 2nd pair. If he fails miserably there, he'll deserve the criticism.
It's probably a case of familiarity breeds contempt, but this logic could have easily been applied to Stafford...and he remained a whipping boy to the very end.
Good point, although the streakiness of Stafford combined with his lack of physical play likely contributed to the disillusionment there as well, not to mention he was asked to play above his ideal role of a second line winger, whereas O'Reilly is none of those things, and is perfectly capable of fulfilling the first line centre role.
Winning also contributes to it as well, to a large degree. If O'Reilly is playing on a winning team the season after this coming one, and he's contributing 50/60 points and stellar defensive play, he's Drury, not Stafford.
-
I tend to agree. We've forgotten what average goaltending looks like. You can argue the last year+, but that's a bad example given how bad the team was. This will go two ways, most likely: Lehner will be good enough and in a few years Buffalo looks like Chicago. Or Lehner will be not good enough and Buffalo looks like several Philly teams over the past decade (good skaters being let down in net).
Two definite possibilities. But there are other possible outcomes as well. I would argue that had Philly had the depth of talent Chicago had, it would have been sufficient enough to mask any issues in net. I think this is actually what is going on in Chicago to some degree, I'm still not sold on Crawford being a true difference maker. If our talent develops as we hope, "good enough" for Lehner could be a substantially lower baseline than the goaltending required by other teams to achieve contention.
If Lehner completely bottoms out, I also trust that GMTM would attempt to upgrade in net.
-
Without question O'Reilly, for the exact reasons you mention. If you were to create a scapegoat in a lab, it'd look something like O'Reilly with the type of player he is, the contract, the trade, and the drunk driving. Runner up is probably Kane, especially if Armia and/or Myers really take off in the Peg.
I'd like to think we are self-aware enough as a fan base of our "scapegoat choosing ways" to the degree that, if O'Reilly continues to perform in the consistent way he has been, fans will appreciate the job he's doing. He was such a highly publicized and analysed addition, there's really no excuse for fans to not be aware of what we are getting. If he under performs in relation to his usual standards, or if one was unimpressed by his talents in the first place, it would be more understandable, but failing that, he is a known commodity.
I'll go with Gorges, for the reason dudacek mentioned.
-
I voted for excellent middle-six forward. As Girgensons develops I can see him fitting in nicely as the 2nd line RW (and even put in some spot-duty on the first line). If Girgensons ends up as our 3rd line center, I'm thinking we are going to have a perennial contender of a roster. He would undoubtedly fit in well in a role like that as well. His skill set lends itself to either.
-
Martin Jones (the available goalie most similar to Lehner) also went for a 1st-rounder, but that is mostly irrelevant.
The philosophy behind the Lehner deal is simple: identify what you want and pay the price to get it.
Murray identified Lehner — not Niemi, not Jones, not Lack, not Talbot — as the goalie he wanted.He paid the price.If Lehner fails as the team's starter, Murray made a mistake in judging his talent.It's about building a team, not winning a trade.This. Also, you can't really compare Lehner to the guy drafted at 21, whoever that is. Who knows who Murray would have picked. If Lehner plays well for us, it was a good trade. If he doesn't, it wasn't a good trade. But the repercussions of such a mistake are well over-stated. I'll say it again, draft picks are way over-valued. This isn't the NFL where a first round pick at 21 overall is going to most likely play in the league, let alone step in immediately.
The statements about the trade still being poor value even if Lehner plays well, don't make any sense. Too much emphasis is put on "winning" a trade at the time it takes place, measuring perceived value against perceived value, prematurely determining who "won" and who got "fleeced". It's not about winning trades, it's about improving your team. If Lehner improves our team, it was a good trade. Darcy seemed to skew towards winning trades, GMTM has showed repeatedly he will pay the price in order to acquire what he wants in order to improve the team.
It is becoming abundantly clear that Tim Murray's work here will be best viewed at the macro level, and not in the micro. He is building the team he wants to build, and each trade is working in cohesion with the others. Let's wait and see the finished product.
-
I loved this movie, one of my favorites as well actually.
-
But again, except for the top 5-10 guys, there is a LOT more to it than just scoring. What Sharp gives you in addition to scoring is significantly more (or has been, he's starting to get up there in years) than what Stafford gives you. Stafford is a reasonable 2nd line guy and could even be one on a top team.
There is however, IMHO, NO f'n way he can be a 1st liner on a top team. And unfortunately, he was expected to be a top liner on this team which is completely out of his wheelhouse.
This is what I was trying to say, and you said it in more succinct fashion. Reasonable second liner, not a 1st liner on a really good team. If he is your top line right wing, there is a good chance you may be fielding a middle of the pack to nearing the bottom of the pack team.
-
I get what you're saying, but I bet that if you watched some team's #2 RW for an entire season you might be frustrated that player too. I'd say Stafford is a borderline #1 RW, but I don't think he'd be out a place on most teams top-6 as long as he's not expected to be the top-2 or 3 players on the team as he was in Buffalo.
EDIT: and we're just talking goals here, obviously there are other factors that go into a player's performance.
A lot of the discrepancy comes down to the terminology used and how different people interpret it. When someone says "first line RW", they generally aren't thinking 43 points. But that is what Stafford had last year, and it was good for 29th in the league for RW scoring. So yes, Stafford could be termed a "borderline" first line RW. But "first line" is such a broad ranging term that it can mean different things to different people. 17 RWs had more than 10 points more than Drew last year. The separation between top RWs and lower level "first line" RWs is huge.
When someone thinks of a first line RW, they aren't thinking about Drew Stafford. And I would argue that if Drew Stafford is your first line RW, you aren't going to be a good team. But if you are defining first line RW by the top 30 RWs, then yes Drew fits that strict definition.
Bottom line is that I would say Stafford would not be out of place in a top 6 at this stage of his career on a mediocre/fair team, but you aren't going to be a top 10 team with with Drew Stafford on your top line. To say he's not out of place as long as he's not one of your top 2 or 3 players on your team is stretching it way too far. Drew Stafford is drastically out of place if he's your 4th best player.
-
So, the trade ended up being Kane, Bogo and Kasdorf for Myers, Stafford, Armia, Lemieux and Roslovic.
It will take a few years to see how the youngsters develop. Staf re-signed so it is up to Armia, Lemieux and Roslovic to shine and show what they can do. Armia got rave reviews in the development camp. Morroissey, Petan and Armia were the 3 best layers on the ice.
The two year contract current-Stafford was not a part of the trade. He was an upcoming UFA when we traded him, no guarantee we would have signed him for next season. What we traded was a Drew Stafford rental. New contract is separate from the trade, Jets could have signed him during the UFA period if they decided to pursue him.
The Winnipeg play-by-play guy was on Hockey Hotline the other day and said it was likely that Stafford would start the season on the top line, replacing Frolik.
I'll say it again: Stafford has all the physical tools but not the mental focus and edge needed to be a consistently effective player. If Winnipeg needs him to hold down a top-line slot, they are in trouble.
This.
Drew Stafford has officially become that guy your company hires who management really likes but who actually doesn't do any real work and no one can figure out why he hasn't been fired yet.
:lol:
-
Right now the Sabres have nothing in goal but hope and potential. As of today, the Stars have a level of goal-tending the Sabres can only hope for. It's like comparing the Bills QB'
s to that of Miami and Cincinnati. They may not have elite QB's, compared to the Bills they might as well be.
Great avatar and signature quote!
-
At 21.we.could have gotten a left d. Will he make it who knows. Will Lehner make it? Who knows? But I think gt is still moee overrated than selecting a prospect in a deep draft. To each his own.
It seems like Brendan Guhle is a LHD that Murray and Co. are very high on, perhaps he was the target all along, and they knew they could get him in round 2.
-
The flip to this is that a good goalie is often times had in late round pick ups. Using a 1st is a waste of the 50/50 chance on every other position, so your argument has more merit for every other position except goalie and especially a goalie with a head injury.
The *certain commodity* is the not entirely truth full in this case with a total of 86 NHL games played, he ranks as certain of a commodity as Zadorov and Grigorenko .
Nobody missed it.
No angst, just not as assured of a reasonable outcome as GMTM other moves.
Your point about Lehner only playing 86 games is well taken. Although he has played more games than Zadorov and Grigorenko, and 80+ games for a netminder is more than 80+ for a skater, as often times with young skaters they are only playing a few minutes a game, while the goalie is usually in for all 60.
Lehner still is a much more proven commodity than a pick which will more likely not have a lasting impact in the NHL, and for that I am happy with the trade. It's all well and good to say you can get a goalie with a later pick, but the odds of that pick turning into a starter are much, much lower than Lehner lasting as the starter.
-
Well this never caught fire like I hoped it would, but here is thehockeywriters' "Core Rankings". Go ahead and guess where you think the Sabres are on this list before you look, I'm interesting to see if anyone gets it.
The odd thing about that article, is that although it seems the writer based it more on established talent (which as DeLuca states, would make sense in light of the rankings), it says in the write up before he starts ranking the teams that:
"We will analyse where teams stand in regards to what they’re building and how each teams future looks. Keep in mind I don`t have a crystal ball, but I do value prospects highly."
It seems like that statement contradicts the rankings. There is no way that if you are valuing prospects highly that I can see the Sabres coming in at 19. Even the write up on the Sabres in the article is quite positive.
-
All true, but you forgot the cost.
Was the goaltender worth a first and taking on an overpriced aging player?
We have only to trust in GMTM's judgment, because from the outside looking in this trade looks the most costly for the return.
I don't have the data on hand, but I believe the chances that a 21st overall pick plays as many games as Lehner has/will is something like 50/50. So it's a coin flip NHLer, probably 3 years away, for a goalie who while not exactly a proven commodity, has played games in the NHL as a starter and is regarded to have a good amount of potential. It's a risk worth taking.
I feel that draft picks are sometimes overvalued. The allure of the "surprise box" over the certain commodity.
As for the cap dump, it doesn't diminish the value of the trade. It's only a one year deal that is easily affordable for where we are in regards to the cap right now, and Legwand may even prove to be a serviceable 4th liner.
-
In the OP's defense there was considerable talk of shipping prospects or trading the 2016 1st pick for a left handed D. And that was trade the pick now talk. I think X (Eggs?) summed up my thoughts, when he stated that his expectation for next year was that they would be better than last year. That's it. We are still rebuilding and I was firmly against the Lehner trade for what it cost. Not because he is not a potential starter, but rather that is the least of our issues while we rebuild.
I respectfully disagree. Not so much as a commentary on Lehner (although I do think he has very good potential) but because if he is what Murray thinks he is/can be, I don't think he is addressing a need that could be considered the least of our issues at all. A quality goaltender can provide much confidence to young players on the roster, whether by masking the mistake of a young defenseman by making a timely save, or allowing the forwards to play their natural offensive game because they are confident in their man between the pipes.
Aside from all that, Lehner himself is a young goalie. He has an opportunity to grow with our young core and be a part of it. Better to get that guy in the crease now, when he was made available. If GMTM truly believes in him, which I'm sure he does, why wait and risk not being able to get your guy in the future.
To me, the premise of adding a young, potential starter for the crease at the current time, is a solid one. It comes down to whether or not you like the guy Tim chose.
-
You didn't really just type that, did you? :lol:
GMTM didn't really trade away too much imho. He traded some young unknowns for some less young (but still young enough) less unknowns. I know that others got their panties in a bunch and think we gave away too much, but I don't really have a problem with what he's done so far in terms of trades.
I feel like I could see this posted and read it a million times, and I would be happy to do so every time. GMTM generally traded away unknowns for known commodities. I hesitate to even call the trades "calculated gambles" as a lot of what we acquired is proven talent. Far from being upset about futures we gave up, I found the deals to not only be good value, but can't miss. If you can acquire proven talent in the age early 20s range, you do it (Kane, O'Reilly).
We still have a TON of drafted prospects in the fold, as well as lots of draft picks going forward. We didn't undergo an incredible tear-down of massive proportions so that we could use and develop every single pick and prospect required as a result of said tear-down.
-
I doubt he gets surpassed by younger players this year already, Baptiste and Bailey are still a season away in doing so.
Bottom 6 forward only though, #2 RW is to optimistic for me.
That's a good point. Gionta is the only natural RW we have on the roster at the moment, the guys that are on their way here at that position aren't here yet. I think Gionta slots in well behind Ennis and Girgensons on the right side. I think with some quality line-mates he can perform closer to the level he was playing at near the end of last season.
-
I think it's a pretty good list outside of ranking McDavid there already, before he has played an NHL shift. Crosby is the best player in the NHL right now, him being #1 makes sense, even if the writer has shown a trend towards Pittsburgh bias in the past.
-
How long without a Stamkos/Kopitar signing do we go before their respective fanbases begin freaking out?
When talking about Stamkos, it's probably already started.
-
How much would fans despise Danny Briere if Darcy resigned him? I think he'd be another member of the failed core, and people would only talk about his defensive deficiencies since we wouldn't have been able to put him in a position to succeed. Kind of like how we kept hearing about how much of a creampuff Pommers was.
It depends. I think if we had been able to re-sign him, we would have had a reasonable amount of continued success. His huge playoff year was what, in 2010? We won the division that year. Then lost in the first round. With Briere on the team, things may have ended much more positive.
If we had kept Drury too? No way do I think we would be talking about a "failed core".
A big reason that core "failed" was because the players were asked to play above their positions. When we had Briere and Drury, Roy and Vanek were on the 3rd line, and Pominville was part of the supporting cast.
-
Yes. Eichel will eventually replace Gionta.
I'm not so sure he gets an A, either, unless they do home and away As. And the DUI is part of the reason. There are other guys--Girgensons, Kane, Bogosian, Moulson, maybe even Ennis or Ristolainen--who are going to be deserving of letters, too.
I see Reinhart as someone who will definitely be getting a letter in time.
-
It's interesting that everyone considers Jack Eichel to be better than Reinhart *today*. I think long term that'll prove to be true, but today there's no reason Reinhart with the extra year of experience shouldn't be #2 (O'Reilly #1) and Eichel starting at #3 or wing to ease into the NHL.
Great point. I've thought a lot about that too and it is possible that at least at the beginning of the season, Reinhart performs in a more NHL-ready way than Jack. It certainly looks like this is possible after seeing how much Reinhart had progressed at the Sabres development camp.
One extra year of development is a long time for kids that age.
-
I think the whole point of Gionta is to teach him good habits.
Foligno, meanwhile is there to work the corners and make sure no one takes liberties.
This is what I was thinking. He's only going to pick up good habits from Gionta, and as for McGinn I have heard good things about his work ethic and drive. Foligno is as you state.
As for the third line being a waste of Sam's talent, I'm not so sure that is the case. If he is playing in his natural position, and his line-mates can find their way to the right areas, I think he could put up respectable numbers as a rookie, as he is adjusting to the NHL. McGinn and Gionta when on their games are capable of being that type of line-mate. Maybe Foligno too. If Reinhart has an exceptional training camp and looks like he is ready to contribute in a big way immediately, then that's when I think you would consider putting him on RW on the top line to start. There is no doubt that Kane and O'Reilly would provide him with a fair amount of protection.
Around the NHL: 2015-2016
in The Aud Club
Posted
Turd Rock from the Sun.