[Picks, Prospects, or Players???]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

I am on board with your Couterier idea. I would give up a 1st for him. We have Bealuie sitting around, wonder if they have any interest in him as well. Probably not but couldn't hurt to ask. 

Unless you're putting 2-3 top end assets on the board, we aren't sniffing Couturier.

Start with two 1sts and Mittelstadt... and be ready to add.

[Jbot Do Something Already - 4 Saving the Playoffs Edition]

7 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I 100% disagree with number 2. You wanted him to change course when we got Dahlin but not when he showed up with Moulson on the roster? He couldn't make all the moves in 1 offseason. I think he doubted that team, gave them a chance, saw he was right, and started executing his plan. 

I didn't like and still am not a big fan of the ROR trade. That said, Botterill doesn't strike me as an idiot. Methodical is a better word. 

Who needed 20+ games to see that Moulson was no longer an NHL player?

Who brought in Pouliot, Tennyson and Griffith for NHL jobs? He started a season with 33% of a roster that is not in the NHL 18 months later. There were better moves available, and cap space to make them. And then, when marginal upgrades were available on waivers... he passed. 

How can you say he gave them a chance? 

Methodical? Choosing a rebuild plan that will buy him the longest leash possible is not methodical. Not re-evaluatiing the plan after lucking in to Dahlin is not methodical.

[Jbot Do Something Already - 4 Saving the Playoffs Edition]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I think tenacity is a good word. I would love more of that on the team. 

But you have to ask yourself, did Botterill think this would work, or did he know it wouldn't and needed the year to clear the deck? He basically did the same thing McBeane did with the Bills. Cleared the deck and then started building, the only difference is Buffalo lucked into the playoffs in McBeanes first season. 

Either answer to that question IMO, is a failure.

1. He thought it would work = He's an idiot

2. He knew it wouldn't work, and thus tanked in Eichel's 3rd season = He's an idiot

The Bills didn't have Andrew Luck.

[Jbot Do Something Already - 4 Saving the Playoffs Edition]

20 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

yes. He has certainly produced more at the NCAA level than Malone did. Malone was only really good his senior year. Foley was good his sophomore and junior year. Sadly he is injured this year but yes, I think he would have been thought of higher at the time of that trade. 

I don't think Botterill wasted the last 2 years. He restructured the team and in year 2 they have a shot at the playoffs. Pretty good to go from last to there. 

A mistake implies that he should not have done it. I am unsure if that is the case. I think Botterill wanted to do it and did. I think he knew that this year would be up and down because Casey was going to be up and down and Berglund needed to help. Berglund flamed out and Jbott can partially be blamed for that. He still has time to help the team but burning picks on a short term fix is not the way. 

Let's not forget that he took them from ~80 point team... to last place. Now, thank GOD we won the Dahlin lottery...  because otherwise, Botts tanked a season WITH Eichel on the roster. Which is crazy. He actually went in to the season with a straight face putting guys like Tennyson and Griffith and Moulson on the roster. He did that... by choice.

The biggest mistake Botts made was not realizing how much Dahlin changed the equation. By winning the lottery, he should've changed course slightly to recognize that he'd just landed a generational player who would make a difference immediately. The availability of Skinner and some depth moves.

Whoever had the desire to move ROR (Whether it was largely influenced by Pegula, or a decision Botts made on his own), it should've been changed the day the lottery was won.

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Parise and Stamkos both signed with their current team. Not sure how they are even in this convo. And before Tavares comes up, he basically said he wanted to go home to Toronto. 

They were both UFAs who Buffalo made massive offers to, and neither even came to meet with the team.

Parise did not sign with his "current team", he went from NJ to Minny. Stamkos, although he re-signed, went to market.

Yes, we offered Tavares too.

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Your argument is valid. It’s not necessary to phrase your questions along the lines of “when did you stop beating your wife.”

I think the Sabres can make the playoffs without Staal, I think chances improve with Staal.

Pulling numbers out of my ass, if we have a 50/50 chance now we might have a 52 per cent chance with him. I think there are better ways to use that asset, including, but not limited to, using it to pick a prospect.

I think most sportsbooks have our playoff odds around 40% right now.

I am surprised you think the change from incapable 2nd line center to high quality 2nd line NHL center has so little impact.

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

And yet he will sign elsewhere because he has heard good things? You are implying we are at a disadvantage because Buffalo and it's just never been proven to be true. 

Yes. We are at a disadvantage because Buffalo has been a losing franchise for most of his career. Because he has very few relationships on the team. Because he will have contender level offers, and without experiencing Buffalo's ability to win first hand, he has no reason to believe they will.

And yes, the disadvantage has been proven true with Brad Richards, Parise, Stamkos, and on...

[Jbot Do Something Already - 4 Saving the Playoffs Edition]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

yes. He has certainly produced more at the NCAA level than Malone did. Malone was only really good his senior year. Foley was good his sophomore and junior year. Sadly he is injured this year but yes, I think he would have been thought of higher at the time of that trade. 

I don't know... any difference between the two as prospects is in the negligible to insignificant range... similar to my inclusion of a 3rd vs your inclusion of a 4th.

[Jbot Do Something Already - 4 Saving the Playoffs Edition]

13 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Your right he didn't play much ES with Eichel but he played lots of pp with Eichel. 0.39 of ROR's total points as a Sabre were scored on the PP. 

We still get you don't like the ROR trade, I don't understand why you are continually coming back to it. 

It's the most relevant debate of the season. Fixing the mistake of the ROR trade should be the priority. Otherwise, we are going to flush season after season down the toilet like we've done in Botts 1st two years.

My continued pointing to the ROR trade, is no different than those who disagree and want a slow rebuild continue to point to the Murray trades and the impact they have today.

 

[Jbot Do Something Already - 4 Saving the Playoffs Edition]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Paul Statsny. 1st, 4th, Eric Foley. 

agreed....

you think Eric Foley is significantly better than Sean Malone?

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

So you admit there are reasons players would sign here? Therefore we don't have to bring him in early to convince him. 

No. I don't agree at all that there are reasons a high end veteran in his mid 30s would sign here, outside being convinced via a few months in the lockerroom, with the guys, seeing first hand the potential of the team and city.

The examples you cited are completely irrelevant to an Eric Staal scenario.

[Jbot Do Something Already - 4 Saving the Playoffs Edition]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

I think that is a low offer for Staal. You are talking 1st, Guhle, and something else

What's your comparable? Rarely does a rental go for a 1st AND a very good prospect. Boston had to give up Lindgren along with the first, but also got NY to take cap dumps

But I don't disagree that Staal will be highly sought after and cost a lot.

 

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

8 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I'd say the development impact is about the same, 20% maybe. 

No, my view is that making the playoffs once is not some magical development thing for the guys that are on the team the next year. 

Using Edmonton to make the case when their roster is in significantly worse shape than Buffalo's is not a strong example.

Just now, dudacek said:

Putting aside the leading ambiguity of the bolded, I’m pretty sure that’s what my post said, yes.

The chances of Eric Staal being the difference between the Sabres making the playoffs or not, are not great, never mind all the intangible long term benefits if that actually happens.

So you think the Sabres have close to no chance to make the playoffs as it stands now?

Or you think upgrading the 2C from Sobotka to Staal has a really low impact on the roster's ability to perform overall?

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

6 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't believe that. Players will sign here because it is a hockey market with a great facility and owner. Skinner waived a NTC to come here. Okposo signed here. We can get UFA's if needed. 

Skinner waived his NTC because he was only willing to go to Toronto or Buffalo (proximity to toronto).... we got super lucky.

Okposo signed here because we gave him a ridiculous contract... are you saying we should give Staal a ridiculous contract?

[Jbot Do Something Already - 4 Saving the Playoffs Edition]

7 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

This will be the only year ROR hits 65 points. He's a 55pt player. It certainly will not take years to fix the hole considering were we currently are with Casey. Will Casey be as good as ROR? Idk, hard to tell but he will be a capable 2nd line center. 

ROR doesn't make or break this team but I agree the trade was mediocre at best. Sobotka is an offensive black hole and Berglund is gone, thankfully. We basically got Tage and a 1st for ROR and that's a risky trade. 

I said this in another thread. To be very clear it would cost more than a 1st to bring in Staal or a player of his level. You are talking a 1st, rochester prospect, and another prospect or player. And all you get is Staal for 3 months. Your ROI isn't great there. 

ROR scored 60 points... twice.... in Buffalo.... while basically never playing at ES with Eichel. Over the previous 5 seasons (not counting this year), he averaged 63 points per 82 games.

I agree it would cost more than a 1st for Staal, but the additional pieces would be negligible/filler... i.e. SJ 1st, 3rd, Malone. We could look towards the Rick Nash Boston trade for comparable.

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Sorry 2 years ago for the Oilers. Guess getting into the playoffs that one time really taught them a lot about how to win and stuff... 

So your view is that the Sabres roster has as many holes as the mess in Edmonton?

My view is that we have one massive hole.... Edmonton has 4-5

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

17 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Although I am on board for the need of a Staal-type player and agree there are developmental pluses to making the playoffs, I wouldn’t sacrifice a first-rounder to acquire Staal - partly because I think the chances of Staal delivering the best case scenario aren’t great and partly because of opportunity cost.

Staal is a rental. The chances of him having a greater long-term positive impact on the franchise than a late first arent great. I would trade a lesser pick/prospect for Staal, and I would rather sacrifice that first-rounder in a package to acquire a better asset at the draft.

You dont think the "Developmental Pluses" have a better chance of impacting the franchise long term than the less than 20% chance that the late 1st rounder ever makes an impact?

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

13 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Making it to the playoffs and losing in round 1 doesn't make you a winning franchise. Look at Edmonton, they made the playoffs last year and have what to show this year? So yes I will take hypothetical 2. 

They already have begun to win. They now have a frame of reference with the 10 game win streak and you hear them talk about what they did right then and are not now. Adding Staal doesn't suddenly give them that knowledge or belief. I like Staal and would add him, but not for a 1st round pick and things which is what it would cost. 

Hypothetical:

1. Add Staal this offseason for nothing but cap space
2. Get proper development all next year
3. Make the playoffs in 2020
4. in 2021 have that 1st round player looking good
5. in 2022 have that player on the team as you make not a playoff run, but a cup run. 

 

FYI Edmonton missed the playoffs last year.

And in all likelihood #4 and 5 never happen.

I also think the only way to attract a player like Staal is to add them now, and let them experience Buffalo, the community, the lockerroom and feel that the team is close to contending. Staal will not sign here as a blind UFA. Nor will any other solution to the crater.

[Jbot Do Something Already - 4 Saving the Playoffs Edition]

8 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:

What I want most for the rest of the season is lineup stability, especially with the forwards. I think it really hurts development if lines 2, 3 and 4 all have different players/combinations each game. The team should focus on finding a combination they feel comfortable with and letting them develop chemistry with each other so that a) we go into the playoffs knowing roles and linemates or b) the team has built some structure so that we can start next season strong and each player knows where they stand.

I think it would be beneficial to find a short term 2C to provide the structure I mentioned, but I don't think it is critical enough to pay a 1st round pick for it. 

 

So you agree that the current state is hurting development, chemistry and structure.... but fixing that is not worth the cost of a late 1st?

This is the part I just don't get.... How is that late 1st, which has about a 50% chance of even making the NHL, and a less than 20% chance of being a top 6/top 4 player more critical than developing and building the players who have already beaten those odds?

It doesn't make any sense

[Jbot Do Something Already - 4 Saving the Playoffs Edition]

9 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

so you actually think that Olofsson-Mitts-Nylander could replace Skinner-Eichel-Reinhart on the 1st line? Heaven help us all. And when would this happen ....before or after the trade deadline? If you eventually bring up all these players how do you keep the pipeline in Roch stocked with this kind of talent without 1st rd and 2nd rd picks?

Like I've said, I'm not opposed to maybe giving up a late 1st to add certain players that will help going forward.

Get over the ROR trade.....I google the ROR trade and read many articles AND the links within them. The in general the feelings at the time of the trade and leading into the season were that we fleeced the Blues on that trade. Word on Bots that came up often was "impressive" that he got that done and didn't have to pay ROR bonus. Most articles and I believe most fans too, thought that Berglund /Sobotka would help this team at least short term more than they have(myself included). Based on previous career numbers they should've combined in production to the point of ROR's numbers (about 55-60pts). They were also to take over the face-off circle where ROR was 60%. Whether you believe it or not, they performed there respectfully (Berg was at 58% and Sobotka above 51%). There was no way Bots is at fault for Bergy leaving or knowing it would happen prior to the deal and yes it has had an impact on the team, we were winning before he left and still near the top of the league. Tage was supposed to be the prize piece and has been improving and might still become that. The 1st rd pick could still end up being the real prize providing that it's used correctly (which ever way Bots deems best, not a message board poster).

All -in-all it will take some more time to build this roster to the point where we compete every year for a good amount of time instead of jumping around the standings forever.

@LGR4GM....I only half agree with your assessment of Olofsson. He has 14g and only two of them on the PP, He may turn out to be a Skinner lite, good 5v5. He does have alot of assists on the PP though so that's where I agree with you. I would like to see him called up sometime soon to see if he can help our PP get a little action.

I honestly have no idea where you get the bolded... that's not remotely what I said or implied.

We have 4 first rounders in two drafts.... we would be able to keep our pipeline stocked the same way most teams in the league do it... with 1 1st a year....

Anyone who thought Berglund/Sobotka would help this team going forward, wasn't fit to judge the trade in the first place. They were brutal cap dumps to take on in the deal. The fact that the Buffalo Media carried the water on this trade, along with the impetus to get it done before the bonus... is all the confirmation that's needed to know that Pegula ordered the trade. A good, experienced GM would've been able to talk a dumb owner out of it. We didn't have one in place to do that. So we got fleeced and created a massive hole that we will likely spend years trying to fix. On the scale of bad organizational moves the ROR trade is on the same scale as Golisano penny pinching Briere, and losing both co caps because of it.

And of course Botts deserves some blame for bringing a quitter in to the lockerroom from which he was supposedly trying to purge sadness from.... it was on Botts to ensure Berglund had waived his NTC. Had he done his due diligence, he should've known STL was trying to pull a fast one on Berglund, and that bringing in a guy against his wishes isn't a great idea.

Yes, it will take more time... but it didn't have to. Botts very easily could've added the following to the 2017-18 roster:

• Dahlin and Skinner (two additional star level talents)
• Bogo, McCabe, Sheary, Hunwick (real NHL depth)
• Mittelstadt, Erod, Pilut (young NHL talent)
• Ullmark, Hutton

And he could've done it without cratering the roster by subtracting a 65 point Selke caliber NHL center in his prime. But instead, it WILL take more time now... significantly more time. All because of bad ownership/front office decisions.

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

100% disagree. I cannot say how much I disagree. 

I understand the disagreement in the generic terms of "Draft picks/Rebuild/Pipeline".... I don't understand it when you break down the hypothetical impact of Staal vs the hypothetical impact of the draft pick.

 

Hypothetical Impact of Staal:

1. Playoffs - Eichel Core experience, winning, no longer a losing franchise.
2. Proper Development/Usage - Mittelstadt, Thompson, etc

Hypothetical impact of late 2019 1st rounder

1. 2019-20: None
2. 2020-21: None
3. 2021-22: Maybe Depth
4. 2022-23: Depth/Impact
5. 2023-24: MAYBE BIG IMPACT - Eichel in year 6 of 8 year contract

It's sooo much more important for the Eichel core to begin winning, tasting the playoffs.... and to be developing the top talent behind them properly... than it is to have a 4th 1st rounder in the next 2 drafts....

 

 

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Don't forget Aho at #35 overall. 

Yes we agree the SJS pick will be late. I guess it will be 24-28. If we are trading that pick though, it can't be for Staal, it has to be for a younger player who will be with the team for a few years. 

No, it can be for Staal who positively impacts everyone who is critical to our long term success.

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

19 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I actually think the 2016 draft was mediocre and just a step up from 2014. Definitely not as good as 2017 and I am still on the fence with the 2018 draft. 

Sure take the 2015 draft then... consider that I am advocating trading the SJ 1st, I hope we can agree it’s going to be a late 1st.

picks 19-30 in the 2015 draft... in 3.5 years has only produced 2 impact players (Boeser, Konecny)

8 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

The metric I can use for casey is this. In games 1-19 Casey had 6pts, in games 20-39 he had 4pts, and in games 40-48 he has 4pts. 

0.32ppg

0.21ppg

0.44ppg

I think we are seeing an improvement as of late. I think out of everyone on the team, Mittelstadt getting the time off now will be the biggest benefactor. 

So in the two equal sample ranges he regressed, and you are now leaning on a significantly smaller sample (8 games) to make your case?

regardless... I don’t think 4 points vs 6 points is illustrative of anything (other than not belonging In The NHL)

[Trade Speculation and Rumors 2018-19]

15 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Your sensitivity comment is not very sensitive at all.

Anyway, carry on ...

See... I told you ?

[Oilers vs Sabres - who has the brighter future?]

29 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Run? No. It may at the most have cost us the playoffs this year but that's about it. 

To the bolded, this is factually wrong. 

Define many years? Because I would guess they should be NHL ready in 2 years, which for some will not be good but I am fine with that as I think Casey will be fine. 

2nd bolded, having ROR would have allowed proper development, yes. Trading for Staal at this point is closing the door after the cat got out. You can harp on the ROR trade all you want, I do the same with the Lehner trade, but the fact is ROR is gone and we've seen signs that this team can function without him. 

 Yes, run. This roster minus the ROR trade would give Toronto a run IMO. 

I’m am eagerly awaiting your presentation of the facts regarding Mittelstadt’s development.

I think 2 years would be incredibly optimistic. The players taken 17-30 in the 2016 draft (2.5 years), 8 of them have 0 NHL games, only 3 have more than 22 games, and of the 3 with more, Tage “i don’t belong in the NHL” Thompson leads the way with 82