Jbot Do Something Already Off-season 2019

[GASabresIUFAN]

@Kruppstahl

I don't think JBot is cautious, I think he is very calculating.  I see him as playing "Moneypuck" with the Sabres; looking to max value out of each cap $ and looking to get the right players for the least reasonable asset price.  We can debate the success or lack thereof of the strategy at a later date.

Outside the Kane deal (rookie GM error) and the ROR deal (more to this story), most of his trades and signings have been very calculated.  The Scandella/Pommers for Ennis and Foligno trade, Sheary for a 4th, Skinner for Pu and Pucks, Montour for a 1st, Baloo for a 3rd, protecting Ullmark by giving up Carrier all come to mind.

We needed NHL D and leadership - Therefore he acquired Scandella, Baloo and Pommers and he used others teams issues to get them. Montreal didn't want to lose Baloo to expansion for nothing, Minnesota needed grit and cap space.

We needed a goal scoring winger to player with Jack - He acquired Sheary from Cap strapped Pit for a 4th and then a better deal came along in Skinner who the Canes needed to trade because he wasn't going to re-sign and ended up getting 2 desperately needed LWs for a 4th, a 2nd Pu, Hunwicks contract and a few lower picks.  

He has also made moves just as calculating to add depth to the organization in Rochester and the prospect pipeline.  For example signing Euro FAs Pilut and Ruotsalainen to add more near ready prospects to bridge the gap while the Asplunds, Borgens and Laaksonen's of the world develop properly.  

Overall, I see his vision and am beginning to understand his acquisition philosophy.  As I've said before, I think he is laying excellent ground work for long-term success, but for him and his plan to be here long-term, we actually need to make more headway at the NHL level as soon as next season.

 

Edited June 26, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN

[Crusader1969]

17 hours ago, Kruppstahl said:

Botterill is way too cautious and conservative by nature; I think he's shown that to date.

Not sure he realizes the scope of this off-season project!  

Swapping out secondary and tertiary contributors for different names doing the same type of thing ain't gonna cut it.

I do think we will start to see some moves soon though.

 

 

i think being cautious and conservative is exactly the right thing to do.

Let the GM"s who are willing to pay Tyler Myers $7mill or so do their thing. Add a couple of decent UFA's once the feeding frenzy ends and then see if they can work out another deal like Skinner.

Make sure you have the Cap room to sign your own...Dahlin in particular and then maybe make a big splash when the team shows they are ready to compete.

 

 

[darksabre]

45 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

So now we just sit and wait to see what JBot does.

It could literally be months before anything happens.

[Drunkard]

2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

@Kruppstahl

I don't think JBot is cautious, I think he is very calculating.  I see him as playing "Moneypuck" with the Sabres; looking to max value out of each cap $ and looking to get the right players for the least reasonable asset price.  We can debate the success or lack thereof of the strategy at a later date.

Outside the Kane deal (rookie GM error) and the ROR deal (more to this story), most of his trades and signings have been very calculated.  The Scandella/Pommers for Ennis and Foligno trade, Sheary for a 4th, Skinner for Pu and Pucks, Montour for a 1st, Baloo for a 3rd, protecting Ullmark by giving up Carrier all come to mind.

We needed NHL D and leadership - Therefore he acquired Scandella, Baloo and Pommers and he used others teams issue to get them. Montreal didn't want to lose Baloo to expansion for nothing, Minnesota needed grit and cap space.

We needed a goal scoring winger to player with Jack - He acquired Sheary from Cap strapped Pit for a 4th and then a better deal came along in Skinner who the Canes needed to trade because he wasn't going to re-sign and ended up getting 2 desperately needed LWs for a 4th, a 2nd Pu, Hunwicks contract and a few lower picks.  

He has also made moves just as calculating to add depth to the organization in Rochester and the prospect pipeline.  For example signing Euro FAs Pilut and Ruotsalainen to add more near ready prospects to bridge the gap while the Asplunds, Borgens and Laaksonen's of the world develop properly.  

Overall, I see his vision and am beginning to understand his acquisition philosophy.  As I've said before, I think he is laying excellent ground work for long-term success, but for him and his plan to be here long-term, we actually need to make more headway at the NHL level as soon as next season.

 

Nobody could possibly be playing "moneypuck" then take a look at Berglund and Sobotka and want those guys, can they?

[GASabresIUFAN]

Jbot Off-season trade history

June 14, 2017 - Baloo for a 3rd

June 30, 2017 - Scandella-Pommers for Ennis-Foligno

October 4, 2017 - Redmond for Delo

June 14, 2018 - Hickey for Fasching

June 27, 2018 - Sheary-Hunwick for a 4th

July 1, 2018 - ROR for Berglund, Sobotka, Thompson, a 1st in 2019, & a 2nd in 2021

August 2, 2018 - Skinner for Pu, a 2nd in 2019 & a 3rd & 6th in 2020.

October 1, 2018 - Dougherty for Baptiste

[GASabresIUFAN]

8 minutes ago, Drunkard said:

Nobody could possibly be playing "moneypuck" then take a look at Berglund and Sobotka and want those guys, can they?

Sure, He thought he was getting two decent but overpaid depth players and then both went AWOL on the Sabres.

[nfreeman]

Vogl had IMHO an excellent piece in the Athletic today regarding FA RWs:  https://theathletic.com/1048146/2019/06/26/the-sabres-desperately-lack-right-wing-depth-these-seven-free-agents-could-fill-that-need/

His bottom line:  Pavelski is by far the best option, but unrealistic.  After him, Zuccarello and Nyqvist.  Donskoi and Connolly have good analytics cases but each would be taking a major step into a top-6 role, and it's unclear whether either is suited for it (making those 2, btw, interesting test cases for analytics).

 

 

[Randall Flagg]

The thing about Donskoi and Connolly on Jack's RW is that they won't need those guys to be able to put up large offensive numbers - Jack and Jeff already have that covered. Those two would both bring an element to the game most Sabres fans think we lack, and are capable of using it in a way to create space for Jack/Jeff. 

If this were last offseason, before Skinner, then I'd feel a lot worse about signing one of them to be Jack's winger.

[Taro T]

3 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Jbot Off-season trade history

June 14, 2017 - Baloo for a 3rd

June 30, 2017 - Scandella-Pommers for Ennis-Foligno

October 4, 2017 - Redmond for Delo

June 14, 2018 - Hickey for Fasching

June 27, 2018 - Sheary-Hunwick for a 4th

July 1, 2018 - ROR for Berglund, Sobotka, Thompson, a 1st in 2019, & a 2nd in 2021

August 2, 2018 - Skinner for Pu, a 2nd in 2019 & a 3rd & 6th in 2020.

October 1, 2018 - Dougherty for Baptiste

So, you're saying should we see CJ Smith not make the final 23 then we should expect to see Botterill use him to trade for a huge piece of this season's Amerks? 

Cool.

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

So, you're saying should we see CJ Smith not make the final 23 then we should expect to see Botterill use him to trade for a huge piece of this season's Amerks? 

Cool.

I’m confused, do you have a problem with minor league players being traded other minor players?

[Taro T]

2 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I’m confused, do you have a problem with minor league players being traded other minor players?

Not at all.

Found it interesting to be reminded that after Botterill had gotten his Sabres set he was still looking to improve the Amerks both times out.  Expecting Botterill to make a similar move right before the season opens again this year.

[Witty remark that would've been misinterpreted as snark removed here.] ?

And in both cases, Botterill took a guy he wasn't going to use in the NHL & sent him to a team that did use the guy in the NHL for a better fit on the Amerks.

[GASabresIUFAN]

7 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Not at all.

Found it interesting to be reminded that after Botterill had gotten his Sabres set he was still looking to improve the Amerks both times out.  Expecting Botterill to make a similar move right before the season opens again this year.

[Witty remark that would've been misinterpreted as snark removed here.] ?

And in both cases, Botterill took a guy he wasn't going to use in the NHL & sent him to a team that did use the guy in the NHL for a better fit on the Amerks.

Gotcha

By the way Bailey and Baloo were not tendered qualifying offers from the teams we traded them to and are now UFAs. 

Edited June 26, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN

[Taro T]

3 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Gotcha

By the way Bailey and Baloo were not tendered qualifying offers from the teams we traded them to and are now UFAs. 

Saw that.  Really hoping Bailey lands somewhere and gets it figured out.  Not expecting it though.

Beaulieu will likely get signed, just not at a raise on last year.

[nfreeman]

45 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

The thing about Donskoi and Connolly on Jack's RW is that they won't need those guys to be able to put up large offensive numbers - Jack and Jeff already have that covered. Those two would both bring an element to the game most Sabres fans think we lack, and are capable of using it in a way to create space for Jack/Jeff. 

If this were last offseason, before Skinner, then I'd feel a lot worse about signing one of them to be Jack's winger.

And this element is?  Analytics ice-tilting, perhaps? 

[Randall Flagg]

7 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

And this element is?  Analytics ice-tilting, perhaps? 

Physical engagement, grit, sandpaper etc. "hard to play against"

Edited June 26, 2019 by Randall Flagg

[Drunkard]

54 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Sure, He thought he was getting two decent but overpaid depth players and then both went AWOL on the Sabres.

Ok. That certainly doesn't sound like moneypuck though. I thought moneyball was supposed to be all about finding players who produce at higher levels than they get paid, not taking on overpaid depth players who end up getting even worse after you acquire them.  

[Zamboni]

18 minutes ago, Drunkard said:

Ok. That certainly doesn't sound like moneypuck though. I thought moneyball was supposed to be all about finding players who produce at higher levels than they get paid, not taking on overpaid depth players who end up getting even worse after you acquire them.  

It is. But as with everything, most like to alter things to fit their definition. Analytics driven player acquisitions at a fair to low cost, to better a team. The basis of Moneyball/puck.

[Drunkard]

1 minute ago, Zamboni said:

It is. But as with everything, most like to alter things to fit their definition. Analytics driven player acquisitions at a fair to low cost, to better a team. The basis of Moneyball/puck.

And that's probably a good way to try to build a team, but acquiring Berglund and Sobotka are not good examples of following that methodology. 

[nfreeman]

18 minutes ago, Drunkard said:

And that's probably a good way to try to build a team, but acquiring Berglund and Sobotka are not good examples of following that methodology. 

Is anyone disagreeing with you on this?  Or on the assertion that the return for ROR was lousy?

[Drunkard]

1 minute ago, nfreeman said:

Is anyone disagreeing with you on this?  Or on the assertion that the return for ROR was lousy?

Somewhat. I've been doing my best to avoid bringing up he who will not be named, but it's hard not to think of it when GA described Botterill as cautious, calculating, and playing moneyball when he brought those guys in.

I know, I know. Let it go, right? Like the decision to tank?

[nfreeman]

2 minutes ago, Drunkard said:

Somewhat. I've been doing my best to avoid bringing up he who will not be named, but it's hard not to think of it when GA described Botterill as cautious, calculating, and playing moneyball when he brought those guys in.

I know, I know. Let it go, right? Like the decision to tank?

The decision to tank was, by orders of magnitude, much more consequential than the ROR trade.

And your description of @GASabresIUFAN's post omits his critical point regarding what JB thought he was getting before Bergy and Vlad fell off the table.

[...]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

His bottom line:  Pavelski is by far the best option, but unrealistic.  After him, Zuccarello and Nyqvist.  Donskoi and Connolly have good analytics cases but each would be taking a major step into a top-6 role, and it's unclear whether either is suited for it (making those 2, btw, interesting test cases for analytics).

I think it's time for "the analytics" to put up or shut up.  If the numbers are good, why hesitate?

[Thorny]

Just now, nfreeman said:

The decision to tank was, by orders of magnitude, much more consequential than the ROR trade.

And your description of @GASabresIUFAN's post omits his critical point regarding what JB thought he was getting before Bergy and Vlad fell off the table.

This is kind of funny. "How can you fault me for that trade? I thought those two guys would be good when I made it!"

[Drunkard]

2 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

The decision to tank was, by orders of magnitude, much more consequential than the ROR trade.

And your description of @GASabresIUFAN's post omits his critical point regarding what JB thought he was getting before Bergy and Vlad fell off the table.

At least tanking helped us acquire good players. The other decision, not so much.

I read his whole post and he basically tried to push the Kane trade and other trade aside and then use the rest of his tenure as the justification for his assessment. I guess he can do that, but you can make almost anybody look competent if you ignore or explain away the bad stuff and only focus on the positives.

[nfreeman]

16 minutes ago, Thorny said:

This is kind of funny. "How can you fault me for that trade? I thought those two guys would be good when I made it!"

I don't think @GASabresIUFANwas claiming that JB shouldn't be held accountable for the ROR trade -- only that JB thought he was getting players consistent with the "moneypuck" approach.
 

11 minutes ago, Drunkard said:

At least tanking helped us acquire good players. The other decision, not so much.

I read his whole post and he basically tried to push the Kane trade and other trade aside and then use the rest of his tenure as the justification for his assessment. I guess he can do that, but you can make almost anybody look competent if you ignore or explain away the bad stuff and only focus on the positives.

The first bolded is ridiculous on its face. 

"At least the Chicago fire helped clear some real estate plots."

"At least Black Sunday helped the Sabres stay under the cap."

"At least my hand doesn't itch any longer since that car accident in which I lost my arm."

As to the 2nd bolded -- here is how @GASabresIUFANconcluded his post: 

Quote

Overall, I see his vision and am beginning to understand his acquisition philosophy.  As I've said before, I think he is laying excellent ground work for long-term success, but for him and his plan to be here long-term, we actually need to make more headway at the NHL level as soon as next season.

 

So it seems pretty clear that GA was describing what he sees as JB's overall philosophy/plan, but also stating that the plan needs to start delivering results -- not just apologizing for him and ignoring bad moves.