Fan Frustrations: Sabres Edition

[Eleven]

Chz ain’t worried. My only complaint is I can’t make as many games as I want and getting rid of tix is tough. I’ve donated most of them to RMH.

 

I live in that neighborhood and I'm near RMH all the time.  Those families appreciate them, believe me.

 

Bob Woods was a major loss -- at one point last week, Buffalo was the #18 PP, and Minnesota was #1, exact opposite of last year. (Bob Woods is an assistant coach in Minnesota now.) In addition to the PP not firing on all cylinders, it's all the shorties that they've given up that upset me the most.

 

All of this.  I was discussing the Bob Woods point with a friend on Sunday.

 

Oh, and start saving your pennies.  You have a debt coming due in 80 days.

Edited October 31, 2017 by Eleven

[PASabreFan]

[DirtDart]

I'm beginning to think maybe not.

 

The contracts given to Moulson and, to a lesser degree, Okposo are not good.

 

His abilities as a talent evaluator, I'm sure, are good to very good. But I don't think he really knew how to manage assets and cap space.

I am pretty sure the Moulson deal (1st time) was to get to the cap floor. Okposo had a pretty good year last season before the injury. I honestly don't think he is 100% yet.

[Drunkard]

I am pretty sure the Moulson deal (1st time) was to get to the cap floor. Okposo had a pretty good year last season before the injury. I honestly don't think he is 100% yet.

 

We only gave Moulson 1 contract. Murray traded him to Minnesota after Darcy acquired him from the Islanders for Vanek and a first when they were both in the last year of their deals. If Murray was worried about the cap he should have given him a shorter deal for higher money. Something like $24 million over 4 years or even $21 million over 3 years. Giving a 31 year old a 5 year deal was beyond stupid.

 

I think Okposo should go on LTIR until he's fully healthy. If he needs a conditioning stint in Rochester before he comes back to get into game shape so be it.

[That Aud Smell]

I am pretty sure the Moulson deal (1st time) was to get to the cap floor. Okposo had a pretty good year last season before the injury. I honestly don't think he is 100% yet.

 

Re Moulson: I can't agree. There were other ways to get that done.

[Pokey Jones]

As Drunkard said, it's the term that is the issue. Yes, they needed to get to the cap floor (signing a goalie might have been a better idea there) but you give him a 2 year deal for that. Okposo's term was also too long but no doubt Murray thought we would break out like Edmonton did last year and so he was desperate to sign a big name winger and that was the best available, he got out negotiated simple as that.

 

Isn't it interesting that guys who had big years playing with the islanders get over valued and never live up to that after they leave? I don't see him play much, but it makes me think Tavares is a much better player than people think.

[LTS]

Except he didn't do that here. Which late round pick looks like it's going to pan out here? If his talent evaluation skills were so great why did he destroy our pipeline while adding lousy and/or injury prone vets like Bogo, Moulson, Delo, Lehner, Kane, Gorges etc.. Talent evaluation is more then amateur scouting.

 

In fact, his failure at pro scouting and evaluation is the chief reason we are were we are. This lead to the bad trades and signings and destroyed our team.

 

There are a few potential reasons for this.  The first is that he was the GM here and not an AGM so he had other responsibilities to deal with... 

 

Like a head coach who was losing the locker room.

Like an owner who may have had input on what his moves were and how fast he had to turn things around.

And in some cases you lose some... I mean if you look at that lineup those are late round picks on the roster.  There were some early round picks as well that never panned out.  It happens.

 

The fact is though.  He might not have done his best work here but to flat out say he's not a talent evaluator when he accomplished those kinds of things at every stop prior to here is just incorrect.  He was a solid part of what developed Anaheim prior to being in Ottawa.  The information is out there.

[GASabresIUFAN]

I think you are giving him to much credit for what happened in Ottawa.  We don't know if he made the final drafting decisions or if the scouts or GM did.  We also don't know what standards he was using.  He again doesn't have anywhere near that success here.  As the GM he was responsible and failed.  

 

Sadly, again, he also failed a pro talent evaluation, which when managing an NHL roster and the cap that goes with it, is much more important.  He was and is a terrible GM.

 

Frankly, if I had my choice knowing what I know now about DR vs TM, I'd go with DR and that is a pretty low standard.

Edited October 31, 2017 by GASabresIUFAN

[Pokey Jones]

True, no way to know from outside who actually did the work in any organization.  Given the hindsight, if I was a new GM I might want to try to steal a few of the scouts who were/are there at that time with some pay bumps. I mean that would be my first move in general as a GM. Look at other organizations and see what they drafted successfully and try to get those scouts to work for you. What they mostly do though is hire people they know. Not sure what JBot did in that regard. 

 

One area we have failed in aside from bigger names everyone knows about is in our Euro scouting. It's a softer faster league now and there is more room for European styled players and there has been a lack of those type of players coming through our system (again aside from big names who maybe were not looked at closely enough - Nylander). Hopefully this will change now. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

He didn't start the tank. Our pipeline was destroyed before he even showed up.

 

What do you base this on?  It was DR that drafted two D at the top of 2012 and then 2 centers at the top of 2013.  It was Regier who traded away Roy, Leopold, Pommers, Regehr, and Vanek, for mostly picks and prospects.

 

It was Murray who traded McNabb and the 2 2nd rd picks Regier received for Regehr for Delo and Fasching.  It was Murray who went into the 2015 draft with 7 picks in the top 61 and then only drafted 2 players.  

[LGR4GM]

You have dates reversed. We drafted 2 centers in 2012 and 2 defenders in 2013.

[3putt]

I think you are giving him to much credit for what happened in Ottawa.  We don't know if he made the final drafting decisions or if the scouts or GM did.  We also don't know what standards he was using.  He again doesn't have anywhere near that success here.  As the GM he was responsible and failed.  

 

Sadly, again, he also failed a pro talent evaluation, which when managing an NHL roster and the cap that goes with it, is much more important.  He was and is a terrible GM.

 

Frankly, if I had my choice knowing what I know now about DR vs TM, I'd go with DR and that is a pretty low standard.

Everyone in Ottawa said their drafting success was due to Murray.  It was one one of the reasons LaLa cited for his hire.  His uncle hired him to do what he did with Anaheim which was finding Perry at 28.  He is a very good talent evaluator.  He also is a horse guy.  Horse guys know not every race is worth betting on.

[LTS]

I think you are giving him to much credit for what happened in Ottawa.  We don't know if he made the final drafting decisions or if the scouts or GM did.  We also don't know what standards he was using.  He again doesn't have anywhere near that success here.  As the GM he was responsible and failed.  

 

Sadly, again, he also failed a pro talent evaluation, which when managing an NHL roster and the cap that goes with it, is much more important.  He was and is a terrible GM.

 

Frankly, if I had my choice knowing what I know now about DR vs TM, I'd go with DR and that is a pretty low standard.

 

So if the picks he made as GM of the Sabres are panning out and on the roster in the next 3-4 years do we still call him a failure because he didn't turn the abhorrent team around in a short time frame?  There is more to Murray than Ottawa and that would be....

 

Everyone in Ottawa said their drafting success was due to Murray.  It was one one of the reasons LaLa cited for his hire.  His uncle hired him to do what he did with Anaheim which was finding Perry at 28.  He is a very good talent evaluator.  He also is a horse guy.  Horse guys know not every race is worth betting on.

 

This... he also did the same in Anaheim and it was noted as being largely his ability to sniff out that talent.

 

You can continue to deny his ability or you can give him the credit he deserves while still acknowledging that he might have failed in Buffalo.  Again, a GM's contribution is not usually seen in the immediate results.  Just like a startup moves onto a more conditioned leader once they are out of start up mode.  There are management styles for every level of growth and success.  How many times do you see one GM put together the prospects of a team but can't get over that last hump and they bring in another person who brings it home.  Who did most of the work?  The new guy?  Not quite.

[SabresFanInRochester]

I live in that neighborhood and I'm near RMH all the time.  Those families appreciate them, believe me.

 

 

All of this.  I was discussing the Bob Woods point with a friend on Sunday.

 

Oh, and start saving your pennies.  You have a debt coming due in 80 days.

A LOT can happen in 2+ months.

[GASabresIUFAN]

So if the picks he made as GM of the Sabres are panning out and on the roster in the next 3-4 years do we still call him a failure because he didn't turn the abhorrent team around in a short time frame? There is more to Murray than Ottawa and that would be....

 

Yes because the assets he traded away in his failed attempt to rebuild the team quickly ultimately set the rebuild back years. How much better would our future would look with 6 more top 70 picks developing in our farm system. In fact using the stats in the article referenced below, those picks on average would have produced about 3 more NHL players.

 

Also with the picks he did draft, the numbers point to him being an average drafter during his time in Buffalo. Over his 3 years he made 25 picks. 2 top 2 picks, 8 picks from 8-70 and 15 from 71-210. I placed our picks in a spreadsheet and using the stats from Scott Cullen most recent draft pick article, I calculated how many 100 game NHL players the average GM would produce with our picks. http://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

 

The results were enlightening and depressing. Our 2 top 2 picks should and have played 100 games. As to the rest on picks 8-70 TM should have found 3 players. With luck he MAY produce as many as 4 for the Sabres assuming Asplund, Pu, Guhle and Nylander make the Sabres. So far we have received 7 games from this group. If Lemieux plays 100 games he’ll get credit for drafting him, but that becomes another asset he wasted.

 

So far so very mediocre. Where he has really failed is after pick 70, which is supposed to be his specialty. The math says we should develop a minimum of 3 players from this group. Success here is very important here because 8 of the 9 D TM drafted were in this group. Right now only 1 player, Borgen, is arguably on a NHL track. Some others have a possibility, such as Fitzgerald, Hagel and Olofsson, but none of these guys has emerged as a top prospect for the Sabres.

 

All told, TM is on track to have drafted 8 players from his picks and that is average. Considering the needs of our team and his reputation as a great drafter, being average during a rebuild doesn’t cut it.

Edited November 1, 2017 by GASabresIUFAN

[Crusader1969]

It's the power play for me.  Also I generally agree with you; I'm not ready to jump off a bridge (or to throw Housley off of one).

 

 

totally agree, why you would mess with the top PP in the league? they probably wanted to spread the talent between the 2 units but ended up making both units pathetic. Hopefully, they stick with Samson, Eichel, KO, ROR and Risto.

 

Otherwise, I never saw this team as a Playoff contender so I am indifferent to winning and losing. Though I do hope they win games and not cheering for a Tank.

[LTS]

Maybe I am missing something...

 

The article you link judges the draft position picked to gauge the CAREER value of a player.  Then you turn around and use that to assess players who haven't finished their CAREER?

 

How does that work?  Are you saying because Guhle, Pu, Asplund, and Nylander are barely scratching the start of their careers that Murray is a failure because those players have only played 7 games?

 

Until those players bust from the game and retire you can't judge what they've accomplished...

 

As for Lemieux... you assume wasted.  That trade brought Kane and Bogosian.  So a few things there.  1. Kane has been valuable to the team.  2. If Kane is flipped (albeit by another GM) for assets that benefit the Sabres (say a top 4 D) then that move was essentially moving Lemieux (and others) and ending up with a top 4 D later.  Again, how do you judge the final value? 

 

Finally, judging any single move in isolation if it is indeed a failed move would make everyone a failure.  It's an aggregate body of work that can't be fully judged at this point.

[dudacek]

GA, your argument falls apart when you start using NHLers as your measuring stick. Or do you think it is irrelevant that Murray turned those six picks (plus other assets, the best of which was Tyler Myers) into seven NHLers?

 

O’reilly Kane, Bogosian, McGinn, Lehner, Deslauriers and Legwand

 

Do you think it is likely that any of those six draft picks will be as good as O’Reilly?

Edited November 1, 2017 by dudacek

[GASabresIUFAN]

Actually I gave Tm the benefit of the doubt, assumed Nylander et al were going to make the NHL and play 100+ games and gave him credit for drafting them. Lemieux also.

 

Right now TM picks on track to play 100 NHL games are

Jack, Sam, Nylander, Lemieux, Asplund, Guhle and maybe Pu and Borgen. That’s it. Based on historical data that is average for the amount he picks he had and were he drafted them.

 

The comment about only 7 games is meant to convey, that outside Jack and Sam, the Sabres have yet to really benefit from any other TM draft pick. We can argue whether or not we should be seeing results yet, but your comment says look 3-4 years out. By this time all the guys listed should be in the NHL. My argument is that even if all make the grade, the evaluation of TM the drafted is still average. To give TM a passing grade as a drafter would mean that guys like Olofsson, Hagel, Fitzgerald make the team and produce. If that happens then we all might look back more kindly on the TM era.

 

However that will not change the fact that his zeal to rebuild quickly ultimately failed and set the franchise and the rebuild back years. So no matter how his draft picks ultimately do, his era here will always be viewed as a failure.

[GASabresIUFAN]

GA, your argument falls apart when you start using NHLers as your measuring stick. Or do you think it is irrelevant that Murray turned those six picks (plus other assets, the best of which was Tyler Myers) into seven NHLers?

O’reilly Kane, Bogosian, McGinn, Lehner, Deslauriers and Legwand

Do you think it is likely that any of those six draft picks will be as good as O’Reilly?

In fact, the failure of the rebuild to date stems from the acquisition of these vets with their blotted salaries and ultimately strengthens my argument. It doesn’t matter if any of the drafted guys becomes as good as ROR. The acquisition of the vets was premature based upon what stage of the rebuild we were on and depending on how the kids were developing many of the moves may not have been necessary. We needed to draft in quantity and hopefully quality and let the kids grow up together and then suppliment the roster.

 

Seriously, has any of the young vet acquistions truly helped us? Has Lehner really been better then a combo of Johnson and Neuvirth. Has Bogo outperformed the slow footed Franson. While Kane is having a great start to this contract year, can you really say he has been a dynamic presence on offense during his 2+ seasons here when he doesn’t make anyone around him better? I’d even argue that having ROR has hurt the development of Reinhart by forcing him out of his natural position.

 

The sad part of these acquisitions is that they made us good enough to finish outside the bottom five, leaving us drafting 8th the last two years, but not good enough to be a playoff contender. In fact they landed us in no mans land, which is exactly what the tank was done to try to avoid. I’d have much rather finished in bottom 5 the last two seasons and pick up the high draft picks then watch an $80 million team finish with 78 pts.

 

This is the real tragedy of the TM era. The guy was supposed to be a development and draft expert. Why did he stray from his skill set and do the exact opposite of how he knew a team should be rebuilt?

Edited November 1, 2017 by GASabresIUFAN

[Radar]

In fact, the failure of the rebuild to date stems from the acquisition of these vets with their blotted salaries and ultimately strengthens my argument. It doesn’t matter if any of the drafted guys becomes as good as ROR. The acquisition of the vets was premature based upon what stage of the rebuild we were on and depending on how the kids were developing many of the moves may not have been necessary. We needed to draft in quantity and hopefully quality and let the kids grow up together and then suppliment the roster.

Seriously, has any of the young vet acquistions truly helped us? Has Lehner really been better then a combo of Johnson and Neuvirth. Has Bogo outperformed the slow footed Franson. While Kane is having a great start to this contract year, can you really say he has been a dynamic presence on offense during his 2+ seasons here when he doesn’t make anyone around him better? I’d even argue that having ROR has hurt the development of Reinhart by forcing him out of his natural position.

I don't disagree with some of what you say only because of timing. We weren't that far along that a few veteran acquisitions would immediately jump us into being a playoff contender. Disagree on your comment on ROR who is still young and added to that I'm not sold yet that Reinhart is going to ever be the player we want or projected him to be at center or wing. Certainly would not not make the deal for ROR with your argument being the reasoning.

[dudacek]

Sure, but a team without O,Reilly and Kane and Chad Johnson starting in goal right now wouldn’t give me any more hope, even if we had Nikita Zadorov and Brock Boeser and Brendan Lemieux and Erik Cernak coming and two more like them coming.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Sure, but a team without O,Reilly and Kane and Chad Johnson starting in goal right now wouldn’t give me any more hope, even if we had Nikita Zadorov and Brock Boeser and Brendan Lemieux and Erik Cernak coming and two more like them coming.

You are assuming we would have drafted who the team we traded the pick to drafted. You can’t therefore assume an Erik Cernak. I also disagree on hope. Had you seen incremental progress from 52 and 54 pts in the tank years to say 68 pts in 2015/16 to 78 last season, I think everyone would happy with the direction of the club. In fact, had we finished with 68 pts in 2015-16, Matthews, Laine or Tkachuk might be a Sabre right now. That would give us more hope.

 

This might have been the off-season to begin making the moves to supplement the team to try to get the team over the hump. Instead we are now saddled with bad contracts up and down the lineup. We also wasted Jack’s ELC and despite a 10 player turnover we have take another step back.

Edited November 1, 2017 by GASabresIUFAN

[LGR4GM]

You are assuming we would have drafted who the team we traded the pick to drafted. You can’t therefore assume an Erik Cernak. I also disagree on hope. Had you seen incremental progress from 52 and 54 pts in the tank years to say 68 pts in 2015/16 to 78 last season, I think everyone would happy with the direction of the club. In fact, had we finished with 68 pts in 2015-16, Matthews, Laine or Tkachuk might be a Sabre right now. That would give us more hope.

 

This might have been the off-season to begin making the moves to supplement the team to try to get the team over the hump. Instead we are now saddled with bad contracts up and down the lineup. We also wasted Jack’s ELC and despite a 10 player turnover we have take another step back.

I do not agree. This team actually appears to be playing real hockey at times. I saw that once last year, and it was the game Eichel came back in. 

[dudacek]

You are assuming we would have drafted who the team we traded the pick to drafted. You can’t therefore assume an Erik Cernak. I also disagree on hope. Had you seen incremental progress from 52 and 54 pts in the tank years to say 68 pts in 2015/16 to 78 last season, I think everyone would happy with the direction of the club. In fact, had we finished with 68 pts in 2015-16, Matthews, Laine or Tkachuk might be a Sabre right now. That would give us more hope.

This might have been the off-season to begin making the moves to supplement the team to try to get the team over the hump. Instead we are now saddled with bad contracts up and down the lineup. We also wasted Jack’s ELC and despite a 10 player turnover we have take another step back.

I don’t assume Erik Cernak at all, just like I didn’t assume Brock Boeser.

I threw out four names that I thought would be a realistic representation of what the Sabres might have had instead of the veterans acquired by Murray, probably a better than average haul for those types of picks.

 

Corey Perry, David Pastrnak are the exceptions.

Cernaks and Lintuniemis are more likely than Brandon Montours

 

As to the Matthews Laine Tkachuk point, we could also have DuBois or Juolevi with our 68 point season.