Players not listening to Dan?

[nfreeman]

Good stuff here boys.

[Weave]

All this stuff about whether we ignored D in the draft.  GMTM has been consistently adamant about this.  Best.  Player.  Available.  in every round.  He's not looking for position, and he shouldn't be.  Luck of the draw determines whether that player is a forward or D.  And then you make trades if there is an imbalance.

 

right now I don't think we have an imbalance.  Other than center, we do not have much positional depth.  The kids in Rochester aren't exactly setting the world on fire.  I wouldn't assume any of them blossom higher than bottom 6.

[LTS]

Yes, I think their terrible play and inability to stay healthy was a major issue in the first 1/2 of the season.  The failure of our second pair has been the root cause of our D problems this year.  

 

The drafting issue is huge.  For example in 2014 GMTM drafted Reinhart (2), Lemieux (31), Cornel (44) and then Karabacek (49).  Montour went 55th, McKeown 50th and Dougherty 51st.  Van's Tryamkin when 66th.

 

I know where you are going, but applying today's knowledge back to the draft at the time it happened you have to accept that Montour was looked over 54 times before drafted right?  So, a lot of GM's didn't think he'd be where he is today. Simple litmus test for your thinking... where does Tom Brady get drafted if every GM knew then what they know now?

 

That's not correct. He swapped Myers for Bogo. He did swap Pysyk for Kulikov, but that hasn't exactly helped. However, he moved out McNabb and Zadarov, and didn't replace them. It would have been wise to do so.

 

Here's the thing.  While Kulikov has not worked out it's not because he's not good. Who foresees a player breaking his tailbone because of a gate flying open when he hits it?  How often does that ever happen?  Do you think that if Kulikov never injured himself in that way that he would have improved the D?  I believe it.

 

I didn't quote one other post but you mentioned how Edmonton had to trade a top forward to get a D to shore up their woes.  Well, this is exactly what we are talking about here.  Trading a top forward to get a D to shore up our woes.  It happens.  It's not like Edmonton has taken a massive setback because they traded away Hall.  We assume the Sabres will have that set back.  However, if the D is improved and it allows the Sabres to begin getting out of the zone more and change their breakouts then do we expect our talented forwards to score?  I would.

[GASabresIUFAN]

All this stuff about whether we ignored D in the draft.  GMTM has been consistently adamant about this.  Best.  Player.  Available.  in every round.  He's not looking for position, and he shouldn't be.  Luck of the draw determines whether that player is a forward or D.  And then you make trades if there is an imbalance.

 

right now I don't think we have an imbalance.  Other than center, we do not have much positional depth.  The kids in Rochester aren't exactly setting the world on fire.  I wouldn't assume any of them blossom higher than bottom 6.

 

Fair enough.

 

But what exactly are you trying to prove here? 

And it seems like we got the better of the deal there, Bogosian has been the healthier of the two. 

The point here is that the best rebuilds are built out from the blueline after getting a few elite forwards at the top of the draft. Once we secured Reinhart and Eichel, getting D depth should have been a priority, not an after thought.  GMTM thought swapping Myers for Bogo and Pysyk for Kulikov would solidify his second pair.  Each has been a step back.  He then filled the gap he created by trading away the other near NHL ready prospects with AHL journeymen like Falk and Fedun.  He also never acquired decent D for Rochester.  Thus once the injuries hit, we didn't have enough adequate depth in the organization to field a solid D group, which has lead to the Sabres being the worst team in the NHL in shots allowed and gutted the Amerks.  This is not dissimilar to the failure of the 2005-6 club that again had nothing in the system to help out in the NHL once the injuries hit on the D in the playoffs, and more specifically the Conference Finals.  

 

Trading good prospect forwards for good prospect D as We've suggest is very difficult because it so hard to develop good D.  Also while drafting the "best available" player is a great theory, but it doesn't work in practice.  Regier followed the same mantra and failed to draft and develop any centers during his tenure except Derek Roy and 4th liner Paul Gaustad.  Sometimes you have to side with a position of need if it's close between two players.  If you look at the draft ratings of players, once you get out of the top 5 the difference in ratings is negligible.   For example, how different were the ratings between Karabacek drafted 49th and McKeown drafted 50th or Doughterty drafted 51st?  Well according to CSS's final rankings, McKeown was 27th, Doughterty 30th and Karabacek 41st.   So after taking 3 straight forwards did GMTM really take the best player available with a 4th forward in Karabacek when he could have taken 2 higher rated players at a position of need? 

I know where you are going, but applying today's knowledge back to the draft at the time it happened you have to accept that Montour was looked over 54 times before drafted right?  So, a lot of GM's didn't think he'd be where he is today. Simple litmus test for your thinking... where does Tom Brady get drafted if every GM knew then what they know now?

 

 

Here's the thing.  While Kulikov has not worked out it's not because he's not good. Who foresees a player breaking his tailbone because of a gate flying open when he hits it?  How often does that ever happen?  Do you think that if Kulikov never injured himself in that way that he would have improved the D?  I believe it.

 

I didn't quote one other post but you mentioned how Edmonton had to trade a top forward to get a D to shore up their woes.  Well, this is exactly what we are talking about here.  Trading a top forward to get a D to shore up our woes.  It happens.  It's not like Edmonton has taken a massive setback because they traded away Hall.  We assume the Sabres will have that set back.  However, if the D is improved and it allows the Sabres to begin getting out of the zone more and change their breakouts then do we expect our talented forwards to score?  I would.

 

I have no problem with trading a Kane to get a top 4 D.  I don't think it will setback the Sabres at all.  It will give Bailey a better opportunity and that is fine with me.  I just hate the GMTM put himself in the that position.

[Weave]

Regier didn't fail because he drafted best player available.  He failed because his evaluation of who was best player was so far off. 

 

Drafting is a craps shoot as it is.  You don't lower the odds even a small amount by favoring position over player strength.

[dudacek]

For the record, McKeown and Dougherty have sucked almost as badly as Karabacek.

 

Yse, I think I've shown pretty clearly that:

* Today's NHL blueline in Buffalo is probably better and certainly not worse than the one Murray inherited.

* Our collection of young defenceman is pretty typical for the NHL, maybe a bit better because Risto

* At most, Murray missed two opportunities to draft a promising young defenceman, neither of which would be helping us now

 

Maybe this is semantics, but "hasn't done enough to fix the blueline" is a far cry from "creating a mess"

 

I think you are glomming on to two legitimate organizational weaknesses and not only assuming excellent opportunities to address those weaknesses were ignored, but also assuming your preferred moves come with no opportunity cost in other areas.

And you ignore how bereft of talent this team was when Murray arrived.

 

Remove all the noise and Murray's net turnover in the pipeline on defence is: Zadorov and McNabb for Guhle.

If that's the price we paid for significant talent upgrades elsewhere, I'm glad he paid it.

Maybe he will use some of those other assets to upgrade the defence. We know he tried last summer and I am sure he is still trying.

 

Much ado about very little.

Edited February 18, 2017 by dudacek

[JJFIVEOH]

I know where you are going, but applying today's knowledge back to the draft at the time it happened you have to accept that Montour was looked over 54 times before drafted right? So, a lot of GM's didn't think he'd be where he is today. Simple litmus test for your thinking... where does Tom Brady get drafted if every GM knew then what they know now?

 

 

Here's the thing. While Kulikov has not worked out it's not because he's not good. Who foresees a player breaking his tailbone because of a gate flying open when he hits it? How often does that ever happen? Do you think that if Kulikov never injured himself in that way that he would have improved the D? I believe it.

 

I didn't quote one other post but you mentioned how Edmonton had to trade a top forward to get a D to shore up their woes. Well, this is exactly what we are talking about here. Trading a top forward to get a D to shore up our woes. It happens. It's not like Edmonton has taken a massive setback because they traded away Hall. We assume the Sabres will have that set back. However, if the D is improved and it allows the Sabres to begin getting out of the zone more and change their breakouts then do we expect our talented forwards to score? I would.

And that's just it, everybody keeps throwing Kulikov out with yesterday's trash because of what he has (or hasn't) done all year. I've watched him since his rookie year and he brings much more than he has shown. He won't put up points like Risto, but he can move the puck. He's physical, fairly fast and can eat a ton of minutes. There's a reason why he is a 2/3 D-man. The Sabres have two players who can fill the holes that need to be addressed and people want to trade one and let the other walk. I don't get it.

[dudacek]

Yes, on paper Bogosian and Kulikov should be exactly what this team needs.

Kulikov at least has an excuse. I think he's been better in his most recent stint.

I'd be OK with re-signing him.

[PromoTheRobot]

Also why did the Edm and now Col rebuilds fail? Anyone... Bueller?... Anyone?

 

Lack of D!

Edm drafted "great" forward after "great" forward. Hall, RNH, Gagner, Yakupov etc In fact from 2007-2016, they have used their 1st pick on a forward every time but 1 and that was Darnell Nurse in 2013, Their D got so bad, they finally got rid of a star forward for a D last year in the Hall for Larsson trade. They are still an O juggernaut (having McJesus will do that), but with the signing of Sekera & Russell, development of Klefbom, the trade for Larsson and getting good play from college FA Matt Benning, the Oilers now have a competent D group and are in a playoff spot.

 

Colorado has 3 hugely talented forward in Duchene, MacKinnon and Landeskog and their team is 2013-14 Sabres awful. Why? No D. Other then the injured Eric Johnson, and the defensively challenged Barrie, I'm not sure anyone of the team is worth a darn.

 

I don't care how great your O is, if you aren't at least decent on D, you aren't winning a thing in the NHL.

 

I do agree that the Cap helps move talent around the NHL and helps parity. However, that makes drafting and developing cheap young talent so important. It's why Regier ulimately failed, (for some reason he hated drafting centers) and ultimately if GMTM doesn't fix the D in the NHL and in our pipeline, he'll fail as well.

If there is such a dearth of good defense, why would anyone trade away that magical, can't-miss young defenseman everyone seems to think Kane could get us?

[Scottysabres]

If there is such a dearth of good defense, why would anyone trade away that magical, can't-miss young defenseman everyone seems to think Kane could get us?

Some teams are top 4 D heavy but lack in scoring

Some teams are heavy scoring but lack top 4 D

Some teams lack both

A select few have just the right balance

 

 

Where do you believe the Sabres fall in these categories?

[Doohickie]

Maybe the players aren't listening to Dan, but they listen to Robin.

[Scottysabres]

Maybe the players aren't listening to Dan, but they listen to Robin.

Don't puss off the giant swede...lol

 

We need a video snippet of the swede from heartbreak ridge :)