Jump to content

Does Risto want out?


matter2003

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

?

It’s pretty interesting though, isn’t it?

I wonder if it’s true for other franchises.

Oh for sure. It was a great post, very interesting stuff. 

I suppose it varies greatly over the course of the league/it's 31 teams. There's probably times where improvement seems to come out of the blue, other times, after additions. We didn't acquire them in the summer of 05, but our two best players on the best Sabres team I've witnessed were added via trade just a little before that. Botterill will still need to add a 2nd line before we are good, even if it's not in the summer directly preceding our success. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Oh for sure. It was a great post, very interesting stuff. 

I suppose it varies greatly over the course of the league/it's 31 teams. There's probably times where improvement seems to come out of the blue, other times, after additions. We didn't acquire them in the summer of 05, but our two best players on the best Sabres team I've witnessed were added via trade just a little before that. Botterill will still need to add a 2nd line before we are good, even if it's not in the summer directly preceding our success. 

It reminded me of how Winnipeg emerged, which in turn incremental improvements to the roster coupled with steady improvement from young players until critical mass was reached. Chicago and Tampa walked similar paths; the Hawks had the supporting cast building and laid Toews and Kane over top. Tampa grabbed Hedman and Stamkos early and kept adding pieces around them.

I mean, in 15 years ago, Byfuglien and Sharp and Keith may as well have been Samuelsson and Vesey and Jokiharju. Five years ago Nikita Kucherov was an interesting mid-round draft pick who looked like he might be a steal and Yanni Gourde and Brayden Point were nobodies.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

It reminded me of how Winnipeg emerged, which in turn incremental improvements to the roster coupled with steady improvement from young players until critical mass was reached. Chicago and Tampa walked similar paths; the Hawks had the supporting cast building and laid Toews and Kane over top. Tampa grabbed Hedman and Stamkos early and kept adding pieces around them.

I mean, in 15 years ago, Byfuglien and Sharp and Keith may as well have been Samuelsson and Vesey and Jokiharju. Five years ago Nikita Kucherov was an interesting mid-round draft pick who looked like he might be a steal and Yanni Gourde and Brayden Point were nobodies.

 

Winnipeg peaked two seasons ago. Shame. Wheeler and Byfuglien are on the decline now, their window isn't closed but it's only going to get harder for them now. Chevy could have benefited from a few more moves during their build up. Notably, one for a sustainable 2C.

I love the optimism but the bolded is some pretty blind optimism. I don't see Vesey developing into a forward close to any of those mentioned. Steals like Kucherov are 1 in a million, and I don't think Jokiharju has a hall of fame career ahead of him like Keith. Perennial all-star like Byfuglien? Still high hopes. 

I know it's more about the spirit of what you are saying, but the issue is we are always seemingly relying on these rare breakouts from unheralded players to have any sort of chance at success. We are banking on it as a means to get good, not to put us over the top. 

The scenarios also require MVP candidates as the base. Toews and Kane were perennially that for a time, not sure we have even one of those yet. Dahlin should get there. 

Nitpick but Point wasn't a nobody, he was pretty highly regarded as a member of the Canadian WJC teams. 

Edited by Thorny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Winnipeg peaked two seasons ago. Shame. Wheeler and Byfuglien are on the decline now, their window isn't closed but it's only going to get harder for them now. Chevy could have benefited from a few more moves during their build up. Notably, one for a sustainable 2C.

I love the optimism but the bolded is some pretty blind optimism. I don't see Vesey developing into a forward close to any of those mentioned. Steals like Kucherov are 1 in a millioin, and I don't think Jokiharju has a hall of fame career ahead of him like Keith. Perennial all-star like Byfuglien? Still high hopes. 

I know it's more about the spirit of what you are saying, but the issue is we are always seemingly relying on these rare breakouts from unheralded players to have any sort of chance at success. We are banking on it as a means to get good, not to put us over the top. 

The scenarios also require MVP candidates as the base. Toews and Kane were perennially that for a time, not sure we have even one of those yet. Dahlin should get there. 

Nitpick but Point wasn't a nobody, he was pretty highly regarded as a member of the Canadian WJC teams. 

Nitpick 2, but Point was 3rd-round draft pick in one of the shallowest drafts in recent memory. Nobody.

 

I’m not sure you’re getting my point, because I’m certainly not posting this stuff as evidence as to why we should be optimistic about the Sabres. I’m not optimistic or pessimistic because 40 years of watching way too closely has taught me that hockey is chaos and the role of luck is huge.

I’m not trying to say Samuelsson Vesey and Jokiharju could be Byfuglien, Sharp and Keith, I’m trying to point out how bloody unlikely it was that Byfuglien, Sharp and Keith could be Byfuglien, Sharp and Keith. They were a fat 8th-rounder, a minor leaguer who couldn’t make the Flyers three years running and was acquired for another minor leaguer, and a random 2nd-round pick.

 

Teams and players come out of the blue all the time, especially when you’ve got key guys in place.

In 06 the Sabres did nothing except acquire Lydman for a 3rd rounder. No one expected them to make the playoffs in August.

In ‘72 that Sabres team looked like Gilbert and Rico and bunch of nobodies. They finished with 51 points, worst in franchise history.

They had a 2nd-rounder pop a modest 6 goals and 16 points as a rookie. They traded popular Eddie Shack to Pittsburgh for an unsung young minor leaguer who had 7 total NHL goals in 54 games. They had a 22-year-old Centre who put up 18 points that year as a throw-in to the joe Daley for Mike Robitaille deal.

The next year, they became the Craig Ramsay, Rene Robert and Don Luce everyone remembers and the team made the playoffs. In hindsight you say, “wow, shrewd moves,” but then? Nobody saw that coming, not even Punch.

 

I’m not saying that means this year’s Sabres will be good. Common sense tells me they shouldn’t be. 

But it’s hockey and sometimes hockey just doesn’t make sense.

Edited by dudacek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, dudacek said:

It’s interesting that only once (2015) was a huge jump in the standings preceded by a flashy off-season of major additions.

Especially if you consider 1972.  It makes me question whether the current "emerging young core," as you aptly described it, is good enough.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Nitpick 2, but Point was 3rd-round draft pick in one of the shallowest drafts in recent memory. Nobody.

 

I’m not sure you’re getting my point, because I’m certainly not posting this stuff as evidence as to why we should be optimistic about the Sabres. I’m not optimistic or pessimistic because 40 years of watching way too closely has taught me that hockey is chaos and the role of luck is huge.

I’m not trying to say Samuelsson Vesey and Jokiharju could be Byfuglien, Sharp and Keith, I’m trying to point out how bloody unlikely it was that Byfuglien, Sharp and Keith could be Byfuglien, Sharp and Keith. They were a fat 8th-rounder, a minor leaguer who couldn’t make the Flyers three years running and was acquired for another minor leaguer, and a random 2nd-round pick.

 

Teams and players come out of the blue all the time, especially when you’ve got key guys in place.

In 06 the Sabres did nothing except acquire Lydman for a 3rd rounder. No one expected them to make the playoffs in August.

In ‘72 that Sabres team looked like Gilbert and Rico and bunch of nobodies. They finished with 51 points, worst in franchise history.

They had a 2nd-rounder pop a modest 6 goals and 16 points as a rookie. They traded popular Eddie Shack to Pittsburgh for an unsung young minor leaguer who had 7 total NHL goals in 54 games. They had a 22-year-old Centre who put up 18 points that year as a throw-in to the joe Daley for Mike Robitaille deal.

The next year, they became the Craig Ramsay, Rene Robert and Don Luce everyone remembers and the team made the playoffs. In hindsight you say, “wow, shrewd moves,” but then? Nobody saw that coming, not even Punch.

 

I’m not saying that means this year’s Sabres will be good. Common sense tells me they shouldn’t be. 

But it’s hockey and sometimes hockey just doesn’t make sense.

Ok I think I'm understanding your point better now. Thanks for clarifying. 

I hesitate to put too much emphasis on expecting that out-of-the-blue wave to be the method of transportation to where we need to get to next. I think the shrewd player still has the ability to manipulate the overall situation to the point where success becomes likely, should the majority of the moves be good ones. It's about time-frame. Build a winner or get off the pot. 

In the abstract, ya, you are probably right, the jump may come when we aren't expecting it. It's true. But to me the interesting debate lies in the mechanics of what's making that happen behind the scenes and how long the person in charge should have to orchestrate their strategy. 

Edited by Thorny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

It reminded me of how Winnipeg emerged, which in turn incremental improvements to the roster coupled with steady improvement from young players until critical mass was reached. Chicago and Tampa walked similar paths; the Hawks had the supporting cast building and laid Toews and Kane over top. Tampa grabbed Hedman and Stamkos early and kept adding pieces around them.

I mean, in 15 years ago, Byfuglien and Sharp and Keith may as well have been Samuelsson and Vesey and Jokiharju. Five years ago Nikita Kucherov was an interesting mid-round draft pick who looked like he might be a steal and Yanni Gourde and Brayden Point were nobodies.

 

There were indications that Point had potential during his draft year. He was 13th in scoring out of all WHL Players during his draft year at Age 17, (He turned 18 in March) and was 3th in scoring in players who were first year draft eligible.  Draistal, Reinhart were the two in front of him.  He had speed and skill but was on the smaller side which was the reason Johnny Gaudreau, Alex Debrincat dropped.  

His equivalent NHL Scoring equaled to 32 points in the NHL, that's at least 10 points higher than any player drafted by any player by a team that had five picks in the second and third round selections all before the 79th selection, including double a 6' 195 Ib winger from the Q. 

But this is similar to Monday Morning Quarterbacking, so I digress. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We talk as if nothing has changed, the entire right side of the defense is new except Risto. Montour played only a handful of games. Miller is an interesting option. Jokiharju is greatly skilled. Dahlin is entering his 2nd season on the left. Pilut may be properly used. The defense alone has been greatly upgraded. It will be curious to see how that coupled with the coaching change impacts a team that spent 3 months underachieving. 

Potentially 5 starting defenders that were not on the team at the end of 2017. 3 were not here to start 2018 and the 2 who were, were rookies. 

Just now, Brawndo said:

There were indications that Point had potential during his draft year. He was 13th in scoring out of all WHL Players during his draft year at Age 17, (He turned 18 in March) and was 3th in scoring in players who were first year draft eligible.  Draistal, Reinhart were the two in front of him.  He had speed and skill but was on the smaller side which was the reason Johnny Gaudreau, Alex Debrincat dropped.  

His equivalent NHL Scoring equaled to 32 points in the NHL, that's at least 10 points higher than any player drafted by any player by a team that had five picks in the second and third round selections all before the 79th selection, including double a 6' 195 Ib winger from the Q. 

But this is similar to Monday Morning Quarterbacking, so I digress. 

 

Always follow the points. It's why Rakish and his rankings should be researched. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

We talk as if nothing has changed, the entire right side of the defense is new except Risto. Montour played only a handful of games. Miller is an interesting option. Jokiharju is greatly skilled. Dahlin is entering his 2nd season on the left. Pilut may be properly used. The defense alone has been greatly upgraded. It will be curious to see how that coupled with the coaching change impacts a team that spent 3 months underachieving. 

Potentially 5 starting defenders that were not on the team at the end of 2017. 3 were not here to start 2018 and the 2 who were, were rookies. 

Always follow the points. It's why Rakish and his rankings should be researched. 

Undoubtedly the defence looks much improved, said it many times. The bolded may be exactly what Botterill is thinking.

Barring a forward upgrade, we'll have to see if that strategy, combined with only a couple of tweaks at forward, is proven to be a smart one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Nitpick 2, but Point was 3rd-round draft pick in one of the shallowest drafts in recent memory. Nobody.

 

I’m not sure you’re getting my point, because I’m certainly not posting this stuff as evidence as to why we should be optimistic about the Sabres. I’m not optimistic or pessimistic because 40 years of watching way too closely has taught me that hockey is chaos and the role of luck is huge.

I’m not trying to say Samuelsson Vesey and Jokiharju could be Byfuglien, Sharp and Keith, I’m trying to point out how bloody unlikely it was that Byfuglien, Sharp and Keith could be Byfuglien, Sharp and Keith. They were a fat 8th-rounder, a minor leaguer who couldn’t make the Flyers three years running and was acquired for another minor leaguer, and a random 2nd-round pick.

 

Teams and players come out of the blue all the time, especially when you’ve got key guys in place.

In 06 the Sabres did nothing except acquire Lydman for a 3rd rounder. No one expected them to make the playoffs in August.

In ‘72 that Sabres team looked like Gilbert and Rico and bunch of nobodies. They finished with 51 points, worst in franchise history.

They had a 2nd-rounder pop a modest 6 goals and 16 points as a rookie. They traded popular Eddie Shack to Pittsburgh for an unsung young minor leaguer who had 7 total NHL goals in 54 games. They had a 22-year-old Centre who put up 18 points that year as a throw-in to the joe Daley for Mike Robitaille deal.

The next year, they became the Craig Ramsay, Rene Robert and Don Luce everyone remembers and the team made the playoffs. In hindsight you say, “wow, shrewd moves,” but then? Nobody saw that coming, not even Punch.

 

I’m not saying that means this year’s Sabres will be good. Common sense tells me they shouldn’t be. 

But it’s hockey and sometimes hockey just doesn’t make sense.

Umm, 2 things there.  1st off, some did believe they were a playoff team heading out of the lockout.  (That they'd be a 100+ point SC contender was the serious outlier opinion.)

2nd.  Heading into the lockout, that team had been 1 of the 3 best teams in the back half of that season.  They had been bad overall, but were definitely moving in the right direction.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Undoubtedly the defence looks much improved, said it many times. The bolded may be exactly what Botterill is thinking.

Barring a forward upgrade, we'll have to see if that strategy, combined with only a couple of tweaks at forward, is proven to be a smart one.

What if Botterill has been ahead of the NHL curve and a year from now everyone is talking about mobile defencemen being the key to the future and trying to copy the Sabres D corps? ?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dudacek said:

What if Botterill has been ahead of the NHL curve and a year from now everyone is talking about mobile defencemen being the key to the future and trying to copy the Sabres D corps? ?

It is the trend. Krueger has even talked about it. 5 man attacks and pressure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Umm, 2 things there.  1st off, some did believe they were a playoff team heading out of the lockout.  (That they'd be a 100+ point SC contender was the serious outlier opinion.)

2nd.  Heading into the lockout, that team had been 1 of the 3 best teams in the back half of that season.  They had been bad overall, but were definitely moving in the right direction.

Yes, I remember my Dad saying at the time, somewhat jokingly I assume, that if they had made the playoffs that year, they would have "won the cup". I remember them finishing really strong that season, and Briere settling in, in particular.

14 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

It is the trend. Krueger has even talked about it. 5 man attacks and pressure. 

Defensemen are called Backs now. 

Edited by Thorny
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, dudacek said:

If you go by points, the Sabres worst off-seasons ever were:

2013 (dropped 30 points)* We traded our best players for picks, hired Ron Rolston and deliberately bottomed out

2008 (23 points) We let our co-captains walk for free

1978 (17 points) We sat on our ‘75 team one more season

1990 (17 points) we made one of the biggest trades in franchise history, Housley for Hawerchuk

2001 (16 points) We dumped Hasek for nothing

1986 (16 points) We brought in a handful of over-the-hill vets and counted on Scotty’s young core to take a big step

2017 (16 points) We fired Murray and Bylsma and brought in Botterill and Housley

 

The best were:

1972 (improved by 37 points) Added Schoenfeld as a rookie to the emerging young core Punch had assembled the previous two years.

1974 (37 points) Added Stanfield, hired Floyd Smith and got healthy

2015 (27 points) Added Eichel O‘Reilly, Kane and Lehner

2004 (25 points)* Dumped Satan and Brown, Added Lydman, had the youngsters take a huge step during the lockout.

1979 (22 points) Fired Imlach, Added Bowman, traded Robert for Van Boxmeer

1987 (21 points) Rookie trio of Shepard, Turgeon, Johansson, replaced fired Bowman with Meehan and Sator.

1996 (19 points) Lost Lafontaine to injury most of the season

 

It’s interesting that only once (2015) was a huge jump in the standings preceded by a flashy off-season of major additions.

 

And what does that tell you?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Brawndo said:

There were indications that Point had potential during his draft year. He was 13th in scoring out of all WHL Players during his draft year at Age 17, (He turned 18 in March) and was 3th in scoring in players who were first year draft eligible.  Draistal, Reinhart were the two in front of him.  He had speed and skill but was on the smaller side which was the reason Johnny Gaudreau, Alex Debrincat dropped.  

His equivalent NHL Scoring equaled to 32 points in the NHL, that's at least 10 points higher than any player drafted by any player by a team that had five picks in the second and third round selections all before the 79th selection, including double a 6' 195 Ib winger from the Q. 

But this is similar to Monday Morning Quarterbacking, so I digress. 

 

This is more in line with what I am trying to say.

You could look back in a year and say there were signs that Jimmy Vesey could score 25 in the right situation or that Joker could evolve into a first pairing guy, but most people won’t say that now, and most of the time most people would be right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Ya, but I think NHL rosters (on good teams) are populated more by guys producing at the rate that was more/less expected of them and less by guys succeeding beyond expectations. 

We don’t want to be reliant on and powered by “hmm, I knew it was possible but didn’t really see THAT coming” players. 

To the bold, for sure. 

To the first I’m not so sure. Tampa and Boston are loaded with guys who weren’t supposed to be that good.

I go back to the good Sabres teams, sure Perreault and Martin and Schoenfeld were supposed to be that good, but Ramsay Luce and Robert? We already went through the Hawk trio.

And if you are right with the first point, then we should be able to count on most of Mittelstadt, Cozens, Lukkonnen, Jokiharju and especially Dahlin to get better and some of Olofsson, Asplund, Thompson, Johnson, Samuelsson and Pilut to join them.

And to hopefully drag the team with them.

Edited by dudacek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, dudacek said:

To the bold, for sure. 

To the first I’m not so sure. Tampa and Boston are loaded with guys who weren’t supposed to be that good.

I go back to the good Sabres teams, sure Perreault and Martin and Schoenfeld were supposed to be that good, but Ramsay Luce and Robert? We already went through the Hawk trio.

And if you are right with the first point, then we should be able to count on most of Mittelstadt, Cozens, Lukkonnen, Jokiharju and especially Dahlin to get better and some of Olofsson, Asplund, Thompson, Johnson, Samuelsson and Pilut to join them.

And to hopefully drag the team with them.

You are talking about guys developing into more than what was expected at the time of draft here, but originally we were talking about guys unexpectedly having a “big” year for lack of a better term, like Vesey unexpectedly scoring 25. That’s what I was referencing their with the first point: in any given season, most of the players on a good team are performing close to pre-season expectations. The good teams aren’t usually full of players having unexpectedly good seasons.

We are relying on too many unknowns currently in the “what does a winning season look like” scenario, if you were to describe what that would look like should it happen. 

Teams have breakouts for that reason but I think more often a team looks good on paper first. 

Edited by Thorny
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, dudacek said:

This is more in line with what I am trying to say.

You could look back in a year and say there were signs that Jimmy Vesey could score 25 in the right situation or that Joker could evolve into a first pairing guy, but most people won’t say that now, and most of the time most people would be right.

My post wasn’t a shot against you, 29 GMs passed on Point and even Stevie Y passed on him twice. 

As @LGR4GM and @rakish have pointed out GMs need to look at the underlying numbers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...