Crusader1969 Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 no, its nothing against the player or signing any FA. Im arguing that finishing 20th this season will do more harm than good long term because they will miss out on another player who will more than likely end up in top 6 or top 2 D pair. Play well during the home stretch - just don`t move out of the bottom 7. Where would Boedker rank on the current Sabres? right now he would be the 5th or 6th forward depending on how you feel about Ennis. Add 1 of the Big 3 in the 2016 draft and now he is definitely out of the top 6 (again assuming you rank Ennis higher) next season. Add Tkchuck, Dubois or Nylander and he is out of the top 6 in 2 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 (edited) I guess I just don't understand what Boedker has to do with our finish this season then. Also, what forwards do you put ahead of Boedker? I can think of four: Kane, O'Reilly, Eichel and Reinhart. Edited February 21, 2016 by Hoss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 (edited) really nothing, I originally said that you are better off not finishing 20th overall but rather 5th or 6th last cause you can`t add to your top 6 through FA. Then someone else said Boedker to which I replied ``if your goal is Boedker and mine is Laine, Tkachuk or Dubois then we have different aspirations on what we want the Sabres to become`. It spiraled from there... Maybe I`m under-estimating Boedker? again under the big assumption that the Sabres can even sign him. Edited February 21, 2016 by Crusader1969 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 Boedker has hit a big slump which may coincide with the activity on an extension/trade talk for him. He has one goal in 23 games. But I still contest that he'd be a great addition to our top six or just to the team in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 Boedker has hit a big slump which may coincide with the activity on an extension/trade talk for him. He has one goal in 23 games. But I still contest that he'd be a great addition to our top six or just to the team in general. I think Crusader's point on the top 6 was that the 4 you mentioned, plus Ennis, are better than Boedker, putting Boedker at #6 (subject to adjustment depending on how you feel about Ennis; I prefer Ennis to Boedker, but YMMV). I agree with you generally that Boedker is a nice player, with good speed and good hockey IQ, and I certainly wouldn't mind adding him on the wing. My issue is cost. I think he will command a much higher price as a UFA than his "value" will justify in light of the Sabres' other cap space priorities. How high would you go to sign him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 As I have stated many times before the whole notion of a top six is obsolete. In today's salary cap era its a top 4 with 5 to 7 guys that need to be somewhat interchangeable and filled out by a bottom 2 for the fourth line an d1 guy comfortable with being the 13th forward. The trick is being able to leave some fexibility for deadline acquisitions and injury concerns. With two of the top 4 on entry level contracts the team has a lot more flexibilty to overspend for a couple of years but ultimately it depends on finding a surprise player and drafting well enough to have a prospect or two join the roster yearly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 really nothing, I originally said that you are better off not finishing 20th overall but rather 5th or 6th last cause you can`t add to your top 6 through FA. Then someone else said Boedker to which I replied ``if your goal is Boedker and mine is Laine, Tkachuk or Dubois then we have different aspirations on what we want the Sabres to become`. It spiraled from there... Maybe I`m under-estimating Boedker? again under the big assumption that the Sabres can even sign him. Had you included the bolded, I wouldn't have asked for clarification. the re-telling makes your intent much more clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 Had you included the bolded, I wouldn't have asked for clarification. the re-telling makes your intent much more clear. Only thing that guarantees a top 5 spot is finishing 29th or 30th and that is not happening, even without O'Reilly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 Only thing that guarantees a top 5 spot is finishing 29th or 30th and that is not happening, even without O'Reilly Without ROR, McGinn Legwand and Gorges I definitely see that Asa possibility. We will see in a week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 (edited) I think Crusader's point on the top 6 was that the 4 you mentioned, plus Ennis, are better than Boedker, putting Boedker at #6 (subject to adjustment depending on how you feel about Ennis; I prefer Ennis to Boedker, but YMMV). I agree with you generally that Boedker is a nice player, with good speed and good hockey IQ, and I certainly wouldn't mind adding him on the wing. My issue is cost. I think he will command a much higher price as a UFA than his "value" will justify in light of the Sabres' other cap space priorities. How high would you go to sign him? It's tough because of Moulson's bad contract but I think 5x5 would be where I'd go on him. I would be willing to add term if he sacrifices salary or lower term and increase salary some. Edited February 21, 2016 by Hoss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 I will add that if we get extended looks at Fasching, Baptiste Carrier, just to see where they are in their development, I wouldn't mind. Much is made of the current chemistry, but we are still too thin on talent to think that a few moral victories will have any meaning after the season is over. Once the season concludes, there will be new faces and some of the ones currently here will be gone. My preference would be the get better everyday approach, which also means shedding bodies and giving some prospects a taste. A step back this year to leap ahead next year. It's tough because of Moulson's bad contract but I think 5x5 would be where I'd go on him. I would be willing to add term if he sacrifices salary or lower term and increase salary some. Isn't he asking for 6x6.5 with the Yotes? I doubt he gives another team a discount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 Only thing that guarantees a top 5 spot is finishing 29th or 30th and that is not happening, even without O'Reilly I'm pretty sure Crusader is gunning for another run to 29/30. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 I'm pretty sure Crusader is gunning for another run to 29/30. I also think he has consistently advocated that to get the impact winger we covet, the best place to do so is at the top of the draft. A top lhd is also available. I see nothing wrong with asset management at this point, and I would like to see if there is any help on the way in the system. Bailey looks promising, are there others? Good time for auditions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 I'm pretty sure Crusader is gunning for another run to 29/30. No, im good with anywhere in the bottom 7. I`d like to see the Sabres get 75-80 points which should land them in bottom 5-7. Here you should have a decent shot at a top 3 pick but if not, you will still be able to land a top prospect. Of course, losing O`Reilly I may have to adjust my total point aspirations to 72 -75 points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 No, im good with anywhere in the bottom 7. I`d like to see the Sabres get 75-80 points which should land them in bottom 5-7. Here you should have a decent shot at a top 3 pick but if not, you will still be able to land a top prospect. Of course, losing O`Reilly I may have to adjust my total point aspirations to 72 -75 points. Ok, so 24 is good but 20 isn't? You realize that if they finish 24 there is a chance, albeit small, that they wouldn't draft till 10th? I think it would be great to get one of the top 3 or 4 picks but I don't think its vital to the rebuild and would therefore prefer they show signs of continued development and let the chips fall where they may. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 Ok, so 24 is good but 20 isn't? You realize that if they finish 24 there is a chance, albeit small, that they wouldn't draft till 10th? I think it would be great to get one of the top 3 or 4 picks but I don't think its vital to the rebuild and would therefore prefer they show signs of continued development and let the chips fall where they may. yes, I believe the high end forward pool for this years draft goes 6 deep. Its not all about the ping pong balls. Matthews, Laine, Puljujarvi, Tkachuk, Dubois and Nylander. At this point I think there is a decent chance that they all go before Chychrun gets picked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted February 21, 2016 Report Share Posted February 21, 2016 (edited) Just saying I want better than Boedker in the top 6 when this team is ready to become a real contender for the cup. I think the there are 6 forwards in the draft who project to be much better players that Boedker and I want one of them on the Sabres. A high draft pick (Top 7) will be much more beneficial to the Sabres long term than an extra 4 or 5 wins in a season when the team isn't going to make the play-offs. If we had a guy in Rochester that was ready to step into a top 6 spot next year that would be different. There just isn't a guy right now who we can bank on anywhere in the current prospect pool and believe me- I really like Bailey, Fasching and Baptiste. Again, I don't think this is necessarily true. That would only be a certainty if you were looking at things as if in a vaccum. The extra wins we could accumulate could be very important as they would show continued growth from our young players. The wins themselves aren't what's beneficial, and I think that's how you are classifying them. It is what those wins could be a product of. really nothing, I originally said that you are better off not finishing 20th overall but rather 5th or 6th last cause you can`t add to your top 6 through FA. Then someone else said Boedker to which I replied ``if your goal is Boedker and mine is Laine, Tkachuk or Dubois then we have different aspirations on what we want the Sabres to become`. It spiraled from there... Maybe I`m under-estimating Boedker? again under the big assumption that the Sabres can even sign him. I never said my goal was Boedker. I was simply responding to your point about there being no top 6 players available in free agency, to which I replied that I think Boedker is one. You later clarified that you were comparing available players specifically to those prospects you mentioned. Just wondering, and I'm not trying to be snarky here at all I swear, for how long will you view where we are drafting to be of the utmost importance? Will you be looking towards the draft next year again? There is so much more that goes into building a team besides drafting high. At this point, we have so much of our future here, I really do think that wins should be the priority. Of course this is only my opinion. I will add that if we get extended looks at Fasching, Baptiste Carrier, just to see where they are in their development, I wouldn't mind. Much is made of the current chemistry, but we are still too thin on talent to think that a few moral victories will have any meaning after the season is over. Once the season concludes, there will be new faces and some of the ones currently here will be gone. My preference would be the get better everyday approach, which also means shedding bodies and giving some prospects a taste. A step back this year to leap ahead next year. Isn't he asking for 6x6.5 with the Yotes? I doubt he gives another team a discount. Again, they wouldn't be moral victories. They would be the product of our young talent performing. Maybe I am in the minority with wanting to win as many games as possible, but I feel sometimes like some want to go from the basement to the playoffs, and that anything in between would be a waste, and that we might as well just lose games if we are somewhere in the middle. The failure of the old core created this idea where it is bad to be mediocre. But that is only the case if your core doesn't have the potential for great improvement through growth. Small improvement is necessary before big improvement. There should be no more intentional steps back. We can't just keep picking top 3 until we are then rewarded our due playoff spot, as if enough bottom finishes mathematically equates to a playoff spot. Ok, so 24 is good but 20 isn't? You realize that if they finish 24 there is a chance, albeit small, that they wouldn't draft till 10th? I think it would be great to get one of the top 3 or 4 picks but I don't think its vital to the rebuild and would therefore prefer they show signs of continued development and let the chips fall where they may. Agreed. This is where I am at. Edit: Having said all this, I believe losing ROR is a huge hit to our development and progress for the rest of this season. So anyone hoping for a top pick is likely to have the chips fall their way. Edited February 22, 2016 by Thorny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted February 22, 2016 Report Share Posted February 22, 2016 Again, I don't think this is necessarily true. That would only be a certainty if you were looking at things as if in a vaccum. The extra wins we could accumulate could be very important as they would show continued growth from our young players. The wins themselves aren't what's beneficial, and I think that's how you are classifying them. It is what those wins could be a product of. I never said my goal was Boedker. I was simply responding to your point about there being no top 6 players available in free agency, to which I replied that I think Boedker is one. You later clarified that you were comparing available players specifically to those prospects you mentioned. Just wondering, and I'm not trying to be snarky here at all I swear, for how long will you view where we are drafting to be of the utmost importance? Will you be looking towards the draft next year again? There is so much more that goes into building a team besides drafting high. At this point, we have so much of our future here, I really do think that wins should be the priority. Of course this is only my opinion. Again, they wouldn't be moral victories. They would be the product of our young talent performing. Maybe I am in the minority with wanting to win as many games as possible, but I feel sometimes like some want to go from the basement to the playoffs, and that anything in between would be a waste, and that we might as well just lose games if we are somewhere in the middle. The failure of the old core created this idea where it is bad to be mediocre. But that is only the case if your core doesn't have the potential for great improvement through growth. Small improvement is necessary before big improvement. There should be no more intentional steps back. We can't just keep picking top 3 until we are then rewarded our due playoff spot, as if enough bottom finishes mathematically equates to a playoff spot. Agreed. This is where I am at. Edit: Having said all this, I believe losing ROR is a huge hit to our development and progress for the rest of this season. So anyone hoping for a top pick is likely to have the chips fall their way. In response to your assertion that wins are a result of growth of the young core, you ignore the possibility of contributions from those not in the immediate or long term future of the team. Those to me are moral, or rather Pyrrhic victories. I am for progression but I also believe this is not a year we are looking to move significantly forward. I believe some more talent added, some contracts subtracted and some seasoning talent developing ahead of schedule is all required. I would look to next year when we can truly hold all accountable and expect a legitimate push upward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted February 22, 2016 Report Share Posted February 22, 2016 In response to your assertion that wins are a result of growth of the young core, you ignore the possibility of contributions from those not in the immediate or long term future of the team. Those to me are moral, or rather Pyrrhic victories. I am for progression but I also believe this is not a year we are looking to move significantly forward. I believe some more talent added, some contracts subtracted and some seasoning talent developing ahead of schedule is all required. I would look to next year when we can truly hold all accountable and expect a legitimate push upward. Fair, and well taken, but I don't think the players on the current team not part of the future are in a position to substantially affect where we finish this year. Most of the key roles are already filled by youth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted February 22, 2016 Report Share Posted February 22, 2016 There are some reports out of Rochester that Cal O'Reilly has been called up. Is Bailey being down or do they have space with ROR going on IR? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 22, 2016 Report Share Posted February 22, 2016 There are some reports out of Rochester that Cal O'Reilly has been called up. Is Bailey being down or do they have space with ROR going on IR? They're going to put him in Ryan's jersey and hope nobody notices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted February 22, 2016 Report Share Posted February 22, 2016 They're going to put him in Ryan's jersey and hope nobody notices.Outstanding :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted February 22, 2016 Report Share Posted February 22, 2016 There are some reports out of Rochester that Cal O'Reilly has been called up. Is Bailey being down or do they have space with ROR going on IR? They'll have space with ROR on IR. ROR, Ennis, McCormick on IR. Cal O'Reilly, Colaiacovo, Franson the 3 "extras" aside from the 20 man roster we saw in today's game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasmus_ Posted February 22, 2016 Report Share Posted February 22, 2016 They're going to put him in Ryan's jersey and hope nobody notices. QFT! That was a great response! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted February 22, 2016 Report Share Posted February 22, 2016 Maybe I am in the minority with wanting to win as many games as possible, but I feel sometimes like some want to go from the basement to the playoffs, and that anything in between would be a waste, and that we might as well just lose games if we are somewhere in the middle. The failure of the old core created this idea where it is bad to be mediocre. But that is only the case if your core doesn't have the potential for great improvement through growth. Small improvement is necessary before big improvement. There should be no more intentional steps back. We can't just keep picking top 3 until we are then rewarded our due playoff spot, as if enough bottom finishes mathematically equates to a playoff spot. I can definitely see your point. The biggest difference between us is you are looking at standings and i am looking at points. I wanted to see a big improvement from last year and they are on pace to do so. I just see getting to 75ish points and finishing bottom 5-7 as a win-win. Next year, I would like to see the team make a similar improvement in points - maybe go from 75 to 90. That should get them into play-off contention and well out of the bottom 10. If they get to 90 next season - the following year i would then be looking at 100+ for the following year, eventually being one of the top teams in the league year in year out. Just takes time and I'm enjoying watching the process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.