2017 NHL Draft -- General NHL Thread

[bunomatic]

And now the rest of the story.  

 

He also traded away high picks from the prior administration including 1st rd picks Armia, Pysyk, Zadorov, Grigorenko, and high 2nd rd picks Lemieux (a Murray pick) and Compher.  We can argue about the merits of these players vs the players acquired in those trades, but that doesn't change the fact that these trades help limit our talent pipeline.  The stats also ignore that the 2 1st and one of the 2nds (31st overall) traded were from the deep 2015 class and cost us an opportunity to draft guys like Carlo, Aho, Jacob Larsson. 

GA I've been reading you beat up on GMTM all year. I get it you don't like him. Thats fine. I happened to like a lot of what he'd done. As NS said at some point you have to start building your team. The fact that some of the players he brought in didn't work out is par for the course. You're not going to score 100% success in trades. He's gone and I'm looking forward to the present and the future. You're beating a dead horse. Move on.

[LGR4GM]

Good read Rakish. I might get back in the twitter game soon after a long absence.

 

I hear rumors that Vancouver will take Liljegren with their pick in the draft. If that does occur, it could alter a lot of things. Typically Vancouver picks over the last couple years have been reasonably well known ahead of time. We shall see.

Defender for the 2nd round I am interested in... Henri Jokiharju. 6' RHD, under weight. He will need a couple years but potentially could be a really solid top 4 guy. Should be easily available at #38 but def gone by #57. 

[Crusader1969]

Latest mock draft from Craig Button - has Sabres selecting Liljegren with Makar and Heiskanen off the board.

 

http://www.tsn.ca/nolan-or-nico-button-says-it-s-still-nico-in-latest-mock-1.750199

[I-90 W]

Latest mock draft from Craig Button - has Sabres selecting Liljegren with Makar and Heiskanen off the board.

 

http://www.tsn.ca/nolan-or-nico-button-says-it-s-still-nico-in-latest-mock-1.750199

Hope so, he's my pick at #8.

[rakish]

Good read Rakish. I might get back in the twitter game soon after a long absence.

 

I hear rumors that Vancouver will take Liljegren with their pick in the draft. If that does occur, it could alter a lot of things. Typically Vancouver picks over the last couple years have been reasonably well known ahead of time. We shall see.

Defender for the 2nd round I am interested in... Henri Jokiharju. 6' RHD, under weight. He will need a couple years but potentially could be a really solid top 4 guy. Should be easily available at #38 but def gone by #57. 

 

I missed this somehow.

 

I like Jokiharju, he's 13th among my 17 year old defensemen, which would be a good pick at #38, if he's still there.

[LGR4GM]

I missed this somehow.

 

I like Jokiharju, he's 13th among my 17 year old defensemen, which would be a good pick at #38, if he's still there.

Then we should take him. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

GA I've been reading you beat up on GMTM all year. I get it you don't like him. Thats fine. I happened to like a lot of what he'd done. As NS said at some point you have to start building your team. The fact that some of the players he brought in didn't work out is par for the course. You're not going to score 100% success in trades. He's gone and I'm looking forward to the present and the future. You're beating a dead horse. Move on.

You can say I'm beating a dead horse all you want, but when you only have NHL ready prospects at one position (RW), your GM has failed the team and this has consequences. Now our new GM has the pick up the pieces and find as many as 4 D for next season. He may have to find centers to replace the inadequate Larsson and Girgensons.

 

This isn't to say we don't have some good prospects in the system. I like Guhle, Asplund, Pu and Nylander but I don't expect any significant contributions from Nylander or Guhle next season and Pu and Asplund, our only 2 good C prospects, look to be at least 2 to 3 years away.

 

These failures also effect the draft strategy for this season and beyond. Now everyone wants to draft a D with our 8th pick in a mediocre draft. Had Murray drafted Sergachev or Chychrun last year, would we even be considering trading Kane or Sam? I doubt it.

 

By the way you build through the draft. Once you have a good core, you supplement it with players from outside. This is what Pit, Chi and LA did and what Murray failed to do. He acquired the complimentary pieces before he had the core in place and it failed.

 

Sure it's time to move on, but if don't learn from the past your doomed to repeat it.

Edited May 15, 2017 by GASabresFan

[GASabresIUFAN]

Rak,

Lets me see if I understand. We are supposed to predict who we'd take with the Sabres picks without any trades and then compare over the next couple of years how they did. What happens if a predicted player goes off the board before we pick? What happens if he trade up or down? Do we put our predictions in as the draft occurs?

 

For example, I really like Valimaki and Vesalainen. I'd like us to trade down and get one of those two and pick up other assets. I think Valimaki will out-perform all the D rated ahead of him long-term.

 

For 38 I'm hoping Hague falls to us there. The ratings on him are all over the place, from 14th by ISS to outside the top 30 by Draftbuzz.

Edited May 15, 2017 by GASabresFan

[LGR4GM]

You can say I'm beating a dead horse all you want, but when you only have NHL ready prospects at one position (RW), your GM has failed the team and this has consequences. Now our new GM has the pick up the pieces and find as many as 4 D for next season. 1) He may have to find centers to replace the inadequate Larsson and Girgensons.

 

This isn't to say we don't have some good prospects in the system. I like Guhle, Asplund, Pu and Nylander but I don't expect any significant contributions from Nylander or Guhle next season and 2) Pu and Asplund, our only 2 good C prospects, look to be at least 2 to 3 years away.

 

These failures also effect the draft strategy for this season and beyond. 3) Now everyone wants to draft a D with our 8th pick in a mediocre draft. 4) Had Murray drafted Sergachev or Chychrun last year, would we even be considering trading Kane or Sam? I doubt it.

 

By the way you build through the draft. 5) Once you have a good core, you supplement it with players from outside. This is what Pit, Chi and LA did and what Murray failed to do. He acquired the complimentary pieces before he had the core in place and it failed.

 

6) Sure it's time to move on, but if don't learn from the past your doomed to repeat it.

1) I think Larsson is actually a good hockey player. He was eating hard minutes and getting minimal defensive support before being injured. I don't think he is an inadequate 3rd line center. 

 

2) As I think that Larsson is fine, this doesn't really bother me. It also leaves out Cornel and Estephan who could also be centers. 

 

3) I want to draft a defender at #8 because I think the defenders will be the best available. Last year Nylander was the best available which leads to #4

 

4) Chychrun went 16th overall, so us and then another 8 teams didn't think he was the best player available but it is Murray's fault... sure. Sergachev I did like at #8 but I didn't think Nylander would be available. The conversation for trading Sam which I started involved us getting Hischier which now is not happening. Trading Kane makes sense because if we can't re-sign him we should trade him to get help on our blueline. Even with Sergachev in the system we would still need blueline help but it might be harder to trade Kane with Nylander in the system I completely disagree with your points 3 and 4. It is revisionist and not at all how things played out.

 

5) What complimentary pieces? ROR, Kane, or Lehner? Bogo was def a bad part of the Kane trade but Kane could be a core piece, he is our best goal scorer so that's kinda of a wash. I hated the Lehner and even though Lehner isn't a dumpster fire and could be a good player, I still want Brock Boeser in or around our system.  ROR trade was for a core piece. So really Murray is about 50/50 in mind. I understand why he was fired and I agree that he failed at things but thus far we have no way of knowing if he failed at drafting. Sam, Jack, and Nylander were all obvious picks or easy for the most part. 2 of the 3 are contributing. The later round guys are what we need to keep an I on. 

 

6) Botterill is not Murray.  They seem like very different people so I am not sure what you mean by this. Do you assume Botterill will trade for complementary pieces? That he will trade away too many draft picks? What? Murray is gone and with him a certain strategy, what Botterills strat will be I can't say.

[Crusader1969]

You can say I'm beating a dead horse all you want, but when you only have NHL ready prospects at one position (RW), your GM has failed the team and this has consequences. Now our new GM has the pick up the pieces and find as many as 4 D for next season. He may have to find centers to replace the inadequate Larsson and Girgensons.

 

This isn't to say we don't have some good prospects in the system. I like Guhle, Asplund, Pu and Nylander but I don't expect any significant contributions from Nylander or Guhle next season and Pu and Nylander look to be at least a year or two away.

 

These failures also effect the draft strategy for this season and beyond. Now everyone wants to draft a D with our 8th pick in a mediocre draft. Had Murray drafted Sergachev or Chychrun last year, would we even be considering trading Kane or Sam? I doubt it.

 

By the way you build through the draft. Once you have a good core, you supplement it with players from outside. This is what Pit, Chi and LA did and what Murray failed to do. He acquired the complimentary pieces before he had the core in place and it failed.

 

Sure it's time to move on, but if don't learn from the past your doomed to repeat it.

 

 

I'm not considering trading either of Kane or Reinhart (unless you know that Kane is not going to sign an extension).

 

 

 

How many Dmen are we really missing? you just need 6. Yes, the prospect pool is currently weaker at D than forward but the cupboard isn't exactly bare. Guhle, Stephens, Borgen and FitzGerald isn't a bad place to start.

 

McCabe, Risto, Guhle, Antipin, Bogo and Gorges are here currently. I'll bet that at least 1 dman is added via trade or UFA.

Plus, not sure if anyone has noticed but 4 out of the 6 draft picks in 2015 were Dmen.

[LGR4GM]

I'm not considering trading either of Kane or Reinhart (unless you know that Kane is not going to sign an extension).

 

 

 

How many Dmen are we really missing? you just need 6. Yes, the prospect pool is currently weaker at D than forward but the cupboard isn't exactly bare. Guhle, Stephens, Borgen and FitzGerald isn't a bad place to start.

 

McCabe, Risto, Guhle, Antipin, Bogo and Gorges are here currently. I'll bet that at least 1 dman is added via trade or UFA.

Plus, not sure if anyone has noticed but 4 out of the 6 draft picks in 2015 were Dmen.

I agree. If Kane can't be signed to a reasonable extension then trade him.

 

Yup. Guhle #51, Borgen #92, Stephens #122, and Chukarov #182. In 2016 we took Fitzgerald #86, Nyberg #129, Budik #130, and Osmanski #189 overall. 

[Thorny]

I'm not considering trading either of Kane or Reinhart (unless you know that Kane is not going to sign an extension).

 

 

 

How many Dmen are we really missing? you just need 6. Yes, the prospect pool is currently weaker at D than forward but the cupboard isn't exactly bare. Guhle, Stephens, Borgen and FitzGerald isn't a bad place to start.

 

McCabe, Risto, Guhle, Antipin, Bogo and Gorges are here currently. I'll bet that at least 1 dman is added via trade or UFA.

 

Plus, not sure if anyone has noticed but 4 out of the 6 draft picks in 2015 were Dmen.

If we can replace Gorges with a legit top 4 d man, I think with good coaching we can at least run a balanced approach on the back end. That one addition is key, though.

[rakish]

Rak,

Lets me see if I understand. We are supposed to predict who we'd take with the Sabres picks without any trades and then compare over the next couple of years how they did. What happens if a predicted player goes off the board before we pick? What happens if he trade up or down? Do we put our predictions in as the draft occurs?

 

For example, I really like Valimaki and Vesalainen. I'd like us to trade down and get one of those two and pick up other assets. I think Valimaki will out-perform all the D rated ahead of him long-term.

 

For 38 I'm hoping Hague falls to us there. The ratings on him are all over the place, from 14th by ISS to outside the top 30 by Draftbuzz.

 

 

Yeah, you will be using the picks that Botterill uses.  One of the advantage, that Botterill has over us is that he gets to move, and we have to pick where he picks.  Your list will look a lot like Craig Button's, or Bob McKenzie's. My list is much shorter because, for instance, I won't be taking Hischier, so I don't bother putting him on my board.

 

If someone goes off the board (if a team picks Valimaki at #5, you don't get to choose him at #8). The player you get at #8 (if Buffalo does use that pick) is your highest ranked player, that is still available. 

 

Sometimes I play that if you get Hague at #38, I can't get Hague at #57, regardless if he is still undrafted. But I'm not going to play that way this year.

 

One thing to be careful of is that Botterill could trade up or trade down, so your list needs to be ordered so you could draft, say #15 and #32 instead of #8.

 

I like both Valimaki an Vesalainen, but I think you're right, they both go in the middle of the first round.

[rakish]

... 8th pick in a mediocre draft. ...

 

My current belief is that it isn't. It sucks to picks first, because  picking 8th will get you almost the same player as first.

 

I've jiggled the numbers a little bit from the other day

In 2016, over the past 12 years, for forwards, I have Matthews 6th, Keller 10th, Tkachuk 17th, Laine 32nd (I weigh age 16 really high, which kills Laine), Alex Nylander at 93.

in 2017 I have Nolan Patrick at 42nd,  Suzuki at 60, Pattersson at 64, Hischier at 66, Valardi at 73, Andersson at 86.

 

So Buffalo, picking in the same spot, will likely get a better player in 2017 than they did in 2016.

[Crusader1969]

My current belief is that it isn't. It sucks to picks first, because  picking 8th will get you almost the same player as first.

 

I've jiggled the numbers a little bit from the other day

In 2016, over the past 12 years, for forwards, I have Matthews 6th, Keller 10th, Tkachuk 17th, Laine 32nd (I weigh age 16 really high, which kills Laine), Alex Nylander at 93.

in 2017 I have Nolan Patrick at 42nd,  Suzuki at 60, Pattersson at 64, Hischier at 66, Valardi at 73, Andersson at 86.

 

So Buffalo, picking in the same spot, will likely get a better player in 2017 than they did in 2016.

 

 

Helps the argument for those that say keep the pick! Thanks!!

 

Im not trading the 8th pick for a guy who could be my 4th dman. makes no sense.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Yeah, you will be using the picks that Botterill uses.  One of the advantage, that Botterill has over us is that he gets to move, and we have to pick where he picks.  Your list will look a lot like Craig Button's, or Bob McKenzie's. My list is much shorter because, for instance, I won't be taking Hischier, so I don't bother putting him on my board.

 

If someone goes off the board (if a team picks Valimaki at #5, you don't get to choose him at #8). The player you get at #8 (if Buffalo does use that pick) is your highest ranked player, that is still available. 

 

Sometimes I play that if you get Hague at #38, I can't get Hague at #57, regardless if he is still undrafted. But I'm not going to play that way this year.

 

One thing to be careful of is that Botterill could trade up or trade down, so your list needs to be ordered so you could draft, say #15 and #32 instead of #8.

 

I like both Valimaki an Vesalainen, but I think you're right, they both go in the middle of the first round.

I'm not a big believer in BPA, because each team's list is predicated on the criteria they use which may or may not over weighted certain positions based on need. No two teams lists are the same. Therefore, can I state highest rated D for the 8th pick, or highest rated goalie for pick 89?

[rakish]

I'm not a big believer in BPA, because each team's list is predicated on the criteria they use which may or may not over weighted certain positions based on need. No two teams lists are the same. Therefore, can I state highest rated D for the 8th pick, or highest rated goalie for pick 89?

 

Sure, again, be careful that '89' might not get used. I think I'm fairly soft on interpretation since the draft doesn't change that much but it would be nice to be fair to those playing (like Pronman, McKenzie, and Button) who don't interpret their board.

 

One thing I do is use 'OR'. I'll take this 150 pound forward or that 150 pound forward, but I don't want them both.

[GASabresIUFAN]

1) I think Larsson is actually a good hockey player. He was eating hard minutes and getting minimal defensive support before being injured. I don't think he is an inadequate 3rd line center. 

 

2) As I think that Larsson is fine, this doesn't really bother me. It also leaves out Cornel and Estephan who could also be centers. 

 

3) I want to draft a defender at #8 because I think the defenders will be the best available. Last year Nylander was the best available which leads to #4

 

4) Chychrun went 16th overall, so us and then another 8 teams didn't think he was the best player available but it is Murray's fault... sure. Sergachev I did like at #8 but I didn't think Nylander would be available. The conversation for trading Sam which I started involved us getting Hischier which now is not happening. Trading Kane makes sense because if we can't re-sign him we should trade him to get help on our blueline. Even with Sergachev in the system we would still need blueline help but it might be harder to trade Kane with Nylander in the system I completely disagree with your points 3 and 4. It is revisionist and not at all how things played out.

 

5) What complimentary pieces? ROR, Kane, or Lehner? Bogo was def a bad part of the Kane trade but Kane could be a core piece, he is our best goal scorer so that's kinda of a wash. I hated the Lehner and even though Lehner isn't a dumpster fire and could be a good player, I still want Brock Boeser in or around our system.  ROR trade was for a core piece. So really Murray is about 50/50 in mind. I understand why he was fired and I agree that he failed at things but thus far we have no way of knowing if he failed at drafting. Sam, Jack, and Nylander were all obvious picks or easy for the most part. 2 of the 3 are contributing. The later round guys are what we need to keep an I on. 

 

6) Botterill is not Murray.  They seem like very different people so I am not sure what you mean by this. Do you assume Botterill will trade for complementary pieces? That he will trade away too many draft picks? What? Murray is gone and with him a certain strategy, what Botterills strat will be I can't say.

1) Do you really think Larsson is a capable 3rd center in the system JBot wants to run?  He doesn't skate that well. He's smallish, isn't great in the FO circle, and isn't a great sniper or passer.  He is an average NHL player and if we are going to run an uptempo team that rolls at least 3 lines to create offense, I don't think his skills matchup.

 

2) Estephan has yet to sign and Cornel is a winger miss cast as a center because we lack centers.  In his first AHL year at 20, and he put up exact 14 pts in 67 games.  (Catenacci put up 20).  These guys are both prospects and may get a shot at the NHL someday, but they aren't exactly top prospects and don't project as top 2 line material.  We'll likely be seeing Pu and Asplund in the NHL before of these guys.  One other note on Estephan.  He was drafted 152nd.  The odds of him making the NHL for 100 games are about 15.9%, with a 4.4% chance of him being a top 6 forward.  http://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-expected-value-of-nhl-draft-picks-1.317819

 

3) Odds are that the "BPA" at 8 this year will be a forward.  Middlestat, Necas, Tippett and Glass all have higher general ratings then Liljigren and two will likely be available to us at 8.  Are you taking another forward then?  The rating difference between Chychrun, Segachev and Nylander were tiny.  GMTM should have taken one of the D because that was where the gaping hole in our pipeline was. 

 

4) This leads to 4.  If he had drafted Sergachev or Chychrun. this season we likely wouldn't be search for another expensive top 4 D.  Instead we could be relying on our development system, and this would have freed up millions with which we could afford to keep Kane long-term.  Instead we have a talented but raw forward who is unlikely to contribute this season and maybe even the year after.  

 

5 & 6) Chi and Pit went out to get complimentary pieces after they had their core.  Murray tried to rush the process and went after "core" and complimentary pieces instead of patiently wait to build a core properly with internal talent.  This failed strategy put us in cap hell 1-2 years too early and when these players failed to deliver full value on their large contracts the team sucked.  Remember he acquired not only core type players like Lehner ROR, KO and Kane, but Kulikov, Bogo, Moulson, Gorges, Gionta and Franson costing $47 million. (for 10 players). With exception of Lehner, that's a lot of unproductive money spent.  

 

That's the thing I really like about JBot.  I doubt he makes the Kulikov, and Kane/Bogo trades and I don't think he would have shelled out the money for Moulson or Franson.  I also don't think JBot would have shipped out all the picks and players TM did.  Some else brought up the contract limit.  Draftees don't count against that limit until signed and playing pro hockey (Guhle doesn't count until this year for example). They do count against the 83 player limit.  Adding our unsigned draftees to our contracts list, we currently stand at 69 players.  We had and have plenty of room for a few additional prospects. Ultimately, this off-season and early next season JBot is going to move out players that don't fit his system/style of play by making hockey type trades for players that do.  I also think he is going to hold onto our 2 tops picks at a minimum, but I wouldn't be surprised if he actually trades down to get more picks.  I expect we'll see some inexpensive depth vets signed, especially for D, guys like DeLo and Gorges moved off the roster. 

Edited May 15, 2017 by GASabresFan

[LGR4GM]

We aren't gonna agree on this.

[GASabresIUFAN]

We aren't gonna agree on this.

Lol.

[dudacek]

The Sabres have two second overall draft picks that have scored at top six levels as 20-year-olds and a 26-year-old first line centre on a long-term contract.

Skilled centres are always a need, but they certainly aren't a pressing need.

[LGR4GM]

Lol.

Haha, just being honest. It's a great convo though. Definitely making me more critical of Murray's moves.

[Derrico]

So, I'm catching up on draft analysis.  Are we looking at 3 D that are all worthy of going 8th overall?  If so, and they are all gone, I want the next best forward or trade down.  Seems obvious but I could see many crying that we took yet another forward at 8.

[Thorny]

So, I'm catching up on draft analysis.  Are we looking at 3 D that are all worthy of going 8th overall?  If so, and they are all gone, I want the next best forward or trade down.  Seems obvious but I could see many crying that we took yet another forward at 8.

BPA works in theory, but at some point a conscious decision has to be made to add quality defenceman to the team and/or pipeline, as we are in such dire need of them. We don't have to select a defenceman at 8, but if we don't, Botterill needs to find a way to add either a young prospect D man or young roster D man to the roster, this offseason.

[North Buffalo]

The Sabres have two second overall draft picks that have scored at top six levels as 20-year-olds and a 26-year-old first line centre on a long-term contract.

Skilled centres are always a need, but they certainly aren't a pressing need.

yes they are and were before Sam and Eichel and OReilly... Centers can play wing... wingers cant play center. That being said they arent right now but another scorer and lots of high end D D are prospects are.