Neo Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) Something is resonating with me while reading about Kane and ROR. In a different industry, I draft, recruit and build teams. Kane and ROR are both, unquestionably, talents who contribute at a high level. When I evaluate talents, I often see a difference between those you build with, and those you build around. You can afford the latter when you have enough of the former. I see Kane and ROR as talents you build around. I have a feeling the locker room stuff, for lack of a better phrase, indicate JBot is focusing on getting “build with” talent in place in order to entertain the “build around” types as they become available. It takes longer. It gets you to a better place. Edited July 2, 2018 by Neo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 But it bothers me that this is the truth and yet it was seen as a positive by our team-builder that we acquired them. Sorry, who are you referring to here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) Sorry, it wasn't a comment about you.No apology needed. I was just curious what happened. This team certainly feels different now. Edited July 2, 2018 by Skurk Liger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Moulson is still on the books... they didn't dump him on anybody. Bogo still on the books. JBOt had last summer and now this summer to find creative ways to move them.. freeing up cap space to significantly improve the bottom 6 through 2 off-seasons of free agency and trade. JBOT was billed as a cap genius, but nothing he's done strikes me as very impressive. The bottom 6 still suck, bad contracts are still on the books and we're down two of our top point producers. Brilliant. Hey, you know. You could be right. But yesterday was the first day of the NHL open season on roster changes. I have no doubt a lot of general managers wanted to see what UFAs they could get before they worry about certain level of trades. The O'Reilly situation had a timeline associated with it when you consider the bonus. You can throw money to the wind all you want, but it's still impacting the trade timelines. The situation was addressed. Now there are plenty of days before the beginning of next season. The only thing that matters is what this team does NEXT SEASON on the ice. Why not save a little energy for the regular season? The bottom 6 by the way are much better than they were last year. Unless you don't think Sobotka and Berglund are better than Josefson and Nolan. Even if one of those two ends up in the top 6 to start the season, they are intended to be 3rd line players at some point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) Respectfully, you are using stats as a proxy for "good," and while I understand the reasons for doing so, there's more to being a good player than putting up numbers, and there's more to being a bad player than failing to put up numbers. Sometimes there are people at work who appear to be good at their jobs but in reality detract more than they add. Respectfully, no, I'm not. I fully understand the limited capacity of stats and try to qualify almost every post I make using them with that understanding. I'm going off of knowledge I have of those two players, with the limited viewings I've had, with stats underneath. I'm going off of pointed and focused readings of the players from smart Blues fans that I searched for independent of the news of any trade, over the last year. I'm going off of the objective fact that these players are known to have been shopped as cap dumps over the last two years. I pull out the stats because I think they're more useful than appeals to authority and "the locker room." Edited July 2, 2018 by Randall Flagg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Actually, now that I think of it, ROR was the epitome of the Nolan Way. Hard work, persistence, always going. It made him miserable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) How do you not use a face-off specialist when you have one? How do you not use a skilled two-way forward when you have one? Player usage in instances like this aren't black and white matters. ROR wasn't in the same category as Matty Mo, where doing whatever with him made sense. ROR can still play. If he can still play, then for the money he gets you put him out there. The Sabres needed wins - he's one of the best players on the team, you play him. What kind of lashing would Housley have received if he didn't use ROR for ROR's supposed strengths? You can utilize O'Reilly's strengths without giving him literally the most difficult minutes in the entire league. As Flagg has demonstrated, O'Reilly was our second best offensive player, but the extreme usage didn't allow us to maximize that aspect of his game at even strength. My argument isn't abandon his defensive capabilities, it's to find a better balance. Edited July 2, 2018 by TrueBlueGED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthEbriate Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Sometimes being a huge nerd leads to a really cool avatar. It (and this board in general) has made the last few seasons more enjoyable for me to watch/follow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Actually, now that I think of it, ROR was the epitome of the Nolan Way. Hard work, persistence, always going. It made him miserable. Except unlike the Nolan way, he actually had talent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) Actually, now that I think of it, ROR was the epitome of the Nolan Way. Hard work, persistence, always going. It made him miserable. ROR is Orwell’s horse, Boxer. “I must work harder.” Edited July 2, 2018 by Neo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Berglund has fouuuuuuuuuur yearrrrrrrrrs :( ....and ROR has 5 years at twice the cap hit. It's actually a cap dump for us: We had a single player for 5 years at a cap hit of $7.5. Now we have two players for two years at that price, and after that, half that cap hit for another two years. If ROR wasn't helping the attitude in the room, and the feeling is that he wouldn't be much good in two or three years anyway (that can be argued), that this is effectively a cap dump for the Sabres. It frees up the cap hit owed to ROR to help take care of younger players' salaries in as little as two years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Berglund is going to be a nice piece for this team in each of those four seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 ....and ROR has 5 years at twice the cap hit. It's actually a cap dump for us: We had a single player for 5 years at a cap hit of $7.5. Now we have two players for two years at that price, and after that, half that cap hit for another two years. If ROR wasn't helping the attitude in the room, and the feeling is that he wouldn't be much good in two or three years anyway (that can be argued), that this is effectively a cap dump for the Sabres. It frees up the cap hit owed to ROR to help take care of younger players' salaries in as little as two years. I can be fine with the logic (not the trade value) if we had more than 2 players with a demonstrated ability of either tilting ice or scoring points (and neither does both) at a high level in the NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Berglund is going to be a nice piece for this team in each of those four seasons. Saving this for future use. I'm actually way too lazy to do that. But I'd definitely bet against this being the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) Berglund is going to be a nice piece for this team in each of those four seasons. An old friend of mine lives in the STL area now - has for about 10 years. He's transferred his allegiances to the local teams. He was born and raised in upstate NY and grew up a fan of the Islanders. He promised me one thing: Berglund will end up making you insane, as a fan. He said it's a combination of the fact that he'll do good things, disappear for stretches of time, and carry that presently 4-year term on his contract. Edited July 2, 2018 by That Aud Smell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Respectfully, no, I'm not. I fully understand the limited capacity of stats and try to qualify almost every post I make using them with that understanding. I'm going off of knowledge I have of those two players, with the limited viewings I've had, with stats underneath. I'm going off of pointed and focused readings of the players from smart Blues fans that I searched for independent of the news of any trade, over the last year. I'm going off of the objective fact that these players are known to have been shopped as cap dumps over the last two years. I pull out the stats because I think they're more useful than appeals to authority and "the locker room." I was actually referring to ROR, not Berglund and Sobotka. In particular, my point was that despite putting up numbers and undeniably doing certain things well, it's quite possible that when everything -- including his effects on his teammates -- is factored in, ROR isn't actually "good." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 I was actually referring to ROR, not Berglund and Sobotka. In particular, my point was that despite putting up numbers and undeniably doing certain things well, it's quite possible that when everything -- including his effects on his teammates -- is factored in, ROR isn't actually "good." That's incredibly vague and far less convincing than any case that can be made for ROR with video, stats, both, neither, and hearing some Canucks fan talk about what he knows of ROR from the occasional WHC game and 2 Sabres games per year, though. It's going to be a confusing first few weeks reading Hamilton's lineup tweets (he uses player jersey numbers) :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 I was actually referring to ROR, not Berglund and Sobotka. In particular, my point was that despite putting up numbers and undeniably doing certain things well, it's quite possible that when everything -- including his effects on his teammates -- is factored in, ROR isn't actually "good." Respectfully, you're trying too hard here. O'Reilly would have to be a serial killer to completely offset what he does on the ice. And again, if he really does have that much of a negative influence on everyone else, we're right and screwed anyway. Talk about soft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKnowPhysics Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Zadorov (#16 overall), Grigorenko (#12 overall), Compher (#35 overall), Pick #31 overall (traded for #39, AJ Greer) -For- (two years of O'Reilly and) Berglund, Sobotka, Thompson (#26 overall), 1st round (top ten protected), 2nd round ===== If Compher (#35) is the 2nd rounder, Zadorov (#16) is the 1st rounder, Thompson (#26) is the #31, this leaves: Grigorenko (#12 overall) for Berglund, Sobotka ===== Are Berglund and Sobotka worth a #12 overall pick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Zadorov (#16 overall), Grigorenko (#12 overall), Compher (#35 overall), Pick #31 overall (traded for #39, AJ Greer) -For- (two years of O'Reilly and) Berglund, Sobotka, Thompson (#26 overall), 1st round (top ten protected), 2nd round ===== If Compher (#35) is the 2nd rounder, Zadorov (#16) is the 1st rounder, Thompson (#26) is the #31, this leaves: Grigorenko (#12 overall) for Berglund, Sobotka ===== Are Berglund and Sobotka worth a #12 overall pick? I'm not convinced we couldn't have added them essentially for free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7+6=13 Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Something is resonating with me while reading about Kane and ROR. In a different industry, I draft, recruit and build teams. Kane and ROR are both, unquestionably, talents who contribute at a high level. When I evaluate talents, I often see a difference between those you build with, and those you build around. You can afford the latter when you have enough of the former. I see Kane and ROR as talents you build around. I have a feeling the locker room stuff, for lack of a better phrase, indicate JBot is focusing on getting “build with” talent in place in order to entertain the “build around” types as they become available. It takes longer. It gets you to a better place. Perfectly said. I the same sentiment last night but didn't say it nearly as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 I'd give my other kidney for X. Benedict to come give his two cents. We talk about "experts" liking this trade. Those twitter guys have never taught me a thing about the game of hockey. They just bring the gossip and sometimes shed light on some rules. X. Benedict teaches people about hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 I'm not convinced we couldn't have added them essentially for free. The more I think about the trade, the more I think they're just warm bodies included to make the money work and be roster placeholders to give some of our kids (Asplud, Olofsson, etc.) time in Rochester. The core of the trade is the futures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 The more I think about the trade, the more I think they're just warm bodies included to make the money work and be roster placeholders to give some of our kids (Asplud, Olofsson, etc.) time in Rochester. The core of the trade is the futures. Right. Which is where most of my anger comes from. There's likely negative value in those bodies, and the first is lotto protected, and the prospect is not in the Blues' top 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Allan in MD Posted July 2, 2018 Report Share Posted July 2, 2018 Thompson is only 20 years old. Yes, he didn't do much last season but who was he playing with: scorers, checkers, penalty killers? We may have something here; we may not. But he's an interesting proposition. It's too early to be judgemental. Hopefully he'll develop and contribute down the road. 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.