Bullwinkle III Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 Ristolainen can be in the NHL next year too. If you want to argue for Nichushkin (I wanted him too, and am totally bummed about not getting him), NHL-readiness isn't the route you want to take. What are you talking about? Look...you have an NHL-ready Dman and an NHL-ready forward. You have several Dmen in your pipeline and very few forwards (Armia +?). So the obvious choice is to take a forward, especially one that will bring excitement to the team - something the Sabres need desperately. It's that simple. PLUS defensemen take longer to develop. But not only did they do this once, they did it twice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubkev Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 What are you talking about? Look...you have an NHL-ready Dman and an NHL-ready forward. You have several Dmen in your pipeline and very few forwards (Armia +?). So the obvious choice is to take a forward, especially one that will bring excitement to the team - something the Sabres need desperately. It's that simple. PLUS defensemen take longer to develop. But not only did they do this once, they did it twice! They obviously don't feel they need to bring excitement to the team, and they don't care that "defensemen don't sell tickets" because they don't need to sell tickets. They are gonna sell out just like they always do because they know sabres fans will continue to come no matter what. Its Buffalo, the fans always show up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 What are you talking about? Look...you have an NHL-ready Dman and an NHL-ready forward. You have several Dmen in your pipeline and very few forwards (Armia +?). So the obvious choice is to take a forward, especially one that will bring excitement to the team - something the Sabres need desperately. It's that simple. PLUS defensemen take longer to develop. But not only did they do this once, they did it twice! It's funny that DeLuca is the optimist and Bullwinkle is the ever complaining pessimist here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 What are you talking about? Look...you have an NHL-ready Dman and an NHL-ready forward. You have several Dmen in your pipeline and very few forwards (Armia +?). So the obvious choice is to take a forward, especially one that will bring excitement to the team - something the Sabres need desperately. It's that simple. PLUS defensemen take longer to develop. But not only did they do this once, they did it twice! I can't believe I have to sit here defending a pick I didn't like, but you're being unreasonable. The obvious choice wasn't to take the forward because of the risks involved in said forward....besides the whole "NHL or KHL, no AHL" thing and the quitting on the cardio test at the combine, some have questioned his overall hockey sense. I was totally on board with Nichushkin and quite upset we didn't take the chance...but you're acting like taking Ristolainen was an indefensible move, which is absurd. Just because Ristolainen isn't the pick you wanted to make, doesn't inherently make it a bad pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 From ESPN.com: Rasmus Ristolainen Buffalo Sabres TEAM: TPS (Finland) HT: 6-3 WT: 205 POS: D Pick analysis: The Sabres get a hulking D-man with true grit and a big-time shot from the point. He plays the game with a nasty edge and I think he'll grows more into his big body. His skating needs a slight improvement. He is the type of player you can build around and the Sabres are in need of building blocks. -- Sonier Team analysis: The second big, right-shot defenseman off the board. Scouts loved his defensive play, among the highest-ranked of all prospects in the draft. Projected two-way defenseman, but not NHL-ready for next season. I love his playmaking and uses his size and strength, his compete level is off the charts. And like Grant mentioned, he has a bomb of a shot. He'll be a nice building block for the Sabres going forward. -- Starman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 Pick analysis: The Sabres get a hulking D-man with true grit and a big-time shot from the point. He plays the game with a nasty edge and I think he'll grows more into his big body. His skating needs a slight improvement. He is the type of player you can build around and the Sabres are in need of building blocks. -- Sonier I'm starting to worry that is too often a criticism of our top tier prospects now. Hodgson, Grigo, Risto, Armia (if i remember correctly) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 http://www.mynhldraft.com/2013/NHL-Draft-Profiles/Rasmus-Ristolainen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 [/size] I'm starting to worry that is too often a criticism of our top tier prospects now. Hodgson, Grigo, Risto, Armia (if i remember correctly) Young guys can get better at skating. Look at Tavares (the one knock against him was his speed). Not trying to compare Tavares to any of our prospects, just providing some anecdotal evidence. Armia has good speed. I remember the last Sabres game of the year, Grigorenko will have good speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 I've come to the conclusion that if the Sabres had been able to clone Gordie Howe in his prime that people here would still complain. Yes, I know, welcome to the Internet. There was no movement above Buffalo. All reports indicated that there was a possibility of moving to the 5th pick and that Carolina wanted Sekera but it would have taken more than what they gave up to move up 3 spots. Just because change is necessary doesn't mean that the team rid itself of all talent/potential talent. It's not like the pick was bad at all. This crap about we should take a chance on a guy who already has proven he's a quitter and stated either he plays in the NHL or he goes to the KHL is a farce. The NHL doesn't need another Radulov type situation. The Sabres sure don't need it at all. Even if they promised him NHL minutes.. if they were going to be on the bottom next season who thinks this guy is going to stick around? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radiomike Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 Sabres desperately needed a physical D man. Not as much as they desperately need elite forward talent, but it still filled a need, I guess. Exactly. Would have loved a top center but let's remember pur team lacks in both skill and size/toughness. This pick (and second pick) does much to address this. I want a team with skill, but that team also needs to be hard to play against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 Exactly. Would have loved a top center but let's remember pur team lacks in both skill and size/toughness. This pick (and second pick) does much to address this. I want a team with skill, but that team also needs to be hard to play against. Know what makes a team hard to play against? Having too much skill to match up with. Chicago used skill to beat the pants off the toughest team in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 Know what makes a team hard to play against? Having too much skill to match up with. Chicago used skill to beat the pants off the toughest team in the league. Led by the 1st and 3rd overall picks of the draft. Boston has their cup and came within a gnats ass of a 2nd without such high picks. At best, these teams are a draw and they were built very differently. Their recent individual team results hardly point to a superior methodology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 Led by the 1st and 3rd overall picks of the draft. Boston has their cup and came within a gnats ass of a 2nd without such high picks. At best, these teams are a draw and they were built very differently. Their recent individual team results hardly point to a superior methodology. I don't disagree at all, but there seems to be a forum norm where "harder to play against" is a synonym for "physically tougher", which it is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 I don't disagree at all, but there seems to be a forum norm where "harder to play against" is a synonym for "physically tougher", which it is not. Amen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 I don't disagree at all, but there seems to be a forum norm where "harder to play against" is a synonym for "physically tougher", which it is not. Agreed... Horvat, Lazar and Compher are guys I think of as hard to play against and it has nothing to do with them being physical monsters, it has to do with a burning desire to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 I don't disagree at all, but there seems to be a forum norm where "harder to play against" is a synonym for "physically tougher", which it is not. NHL Exhibit A is Brad Marchand. Also Andrew Shaw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 I don't disagree at all, but there seems to be a forum norm where "harder to play against" is a synonym for "physically tougher", which it is not. Agreed. Frankly I watched numerous times where the Blackhawks seemed to be able to throw the puck around the ice surface (offensive zone, neutral zone, defensive zone) and make it look like the Bruins were chasing them the entire time. They didn't have to beat them up, they just played some extremely sound positioning based upon what strategy the Bruins were using and kept players moving into open areas. This didn't happen perpetually but it happened a lot. The other thing of note was that it seemed to me that Chicago could take the puck along the boards at will. In a space where you'd expect the sizable Bruins to have dominance it seemed like repeatedly the Blackhawks emerged with the puck. Dogged tenacity can prove more difficult than bruising physicality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patty16 Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 Led by the 1st and 3rd overall picks of the draft. Boston has their cup and came within a gnats ass of a 2nd without such high picks. At best, these teams are a draw and they were built very differently. Their recent individual team results hardly point to a superior methodology. Um what??? Seguin was 2nd overall and Horton was 5th overall. Rask was 21st overall and the team has many more 2nd rounders. Not to mention Jagr who was top 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 Um what??? Seguin was 2nd overall and Horton was 5th overall. Rask was 21st overall and the team has many more 2nd rounders. Not to mention Jagr who was top 5 But they were lead by Bergeron, Chara and Krejci - all second round picks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 Um what??? Seguin was 2nd overall and Horton was 5th overall. Rask was 21st overall and the team has many more 2nd rounders. Not to mention Jagr who was top 5 They also acquired Rask (and others) by trading a former 5th overall pick (Kessel). High draft picks help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 Um what??? Seguin was 2nd overall and Horton was 5th overall. Rask was 21st overall and the team has many more 2nd rounders. Not to mention Jagr who was top 5 Only one of which was drafted by Boston. The Bruins built their team via free agency and trades (and even that one high draft pick was also acquired via trade). They had a handful of successful picks in Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic, and Marchand, but the bulk of their roster came from outside. edit: And as SDS said, Chicago's core came from picks 1 and 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patty16 Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 Only one of which was drafted by Boston. The Bruins built their team via free agency and trades (and even that one high draft pick was also acquired via trade). They had a handful of successful picks in Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic, and Marchand, but the bulk of their roster came from outside. edit: And as SDS said, Chicago's core came from picks 1 and 3. and LA won it with one contributor in the top 10 picks. Detroit was tops in the league for years with very few top picks. Top end talent generally comes in the first few picks so of course it helps. But it's not necessary to have top 5 picks to be competitive or win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 and LA won it with one contributor in the top 10 picks. Detroit was tops in the league for years with very few top picks. Top end talent generally comes in the first few picks so of course it helps. But it's not necessary to have top 5 picks to be competitive or win. LA is a bad example. They traded Schenn (#5 overall) and Johnson (#3 overall) in packages to acquire Richards and Carter, thus completing their Cup team. I think Boston and Detroit are the only post-lockout Cup winners where top-5 picks weren't either the foundation of the team or used in deals to acquire key pieces for the team. And with Detroit, seriously, if the Sabres fall ass backwards into 2-3 hall of fame players in the mid rounds I'll stop clamoring for high picks ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Crotch Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 Exactly. Would have loved a top center but let's remember pur team lacks in both skill and size/toughness. This pick (and second pick) does much to address this. I want a team with skill, but that team also needs to be hard to play against. I agree. Most people didn't notice with flashy scorers like Kane and Toews in the lineup, but Chicago was the best defensive team (fewest goals allowed) in the NHL this year. Keith and Seabrook were a big reason for the Hawks' success. Only offense (e.g. Pittsburgh, Tampa) or only defense (e.g. Ottawa) won't win it. The Sabres were lousy in both ends last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 I agree. Most people didn't notice with flashy scorers like Kane and Toews in the lineup, but Chicago was the best defensive team (fewest goals allowed) in the NHL this year. Keith and Seabrook were a big reason for the Hawks' success. Only offense (e.g. Pittsburgh, Tampa) or only defense (e.g. Ottawa) won't win it. The Sabres were lousy in both ends last year. I tend to think that their puck possession prowess is a major factor in the fewest goals allowed achievement in addition to having three really good D in Keith, Seabrook, and Hjamarlsson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.