Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GASabresIUFAN

2020 Off-season gameplan

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, WildCard said:

That would be incredible. I think you're much more likely to get 30-40

I think this too. I think what’s missing is how much of an upgrade that would be from Vesey or Rodrigues. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Right winger or Center. There is no point in adding another lw to this team. 

Depends. I think the most successful organizations usually adopt the "draft the best player available" plan. Of course, if a RW and LW are similar we should go RW, but there is nothing wrong with too much of a good thing at any position as you can always trade surplus later.  The real key is drafting well and developing those picks properly.

and I will always say that you pick a goalie somewhere in every single draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Depends. I think the most successful organizations usually adopt the "draft the best player available" plan. Of course, if a RW and LW are similar we should go RW, but there is nothing wrong with too much of a good thing at any position as you can always trade surplus later.  The real key is drafting well and developing those picks properly.

and I will always say that you pick a goalie somewhere in every single draft.

He was talking about trading that pick. 

No you can't. See the Sabres defense 2019. 

Goalies should always be picked outside of the top 2 rounds. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2020 at 8:07 AM, Huckleberry said:

I don't want Cirelli -  for me Cozens will be our 2C and he'll be good at it.       We should focus on finding a 3C and 2RW.

I’d be interested to see a poll on this. I’m seeing a lot of “I know it’s not a common opinion but I’ve got Cozens as the 2C next season”.

Not sure its all that uncommon to be honest. 

On 7/30/2020 at 10:51 AM, Huckleberry said:

I think he'll surprise many next year with a 50-60 point season.

Hi Jason. 

On 7/29/2020 at 12:56 PM, LGR4GM said:

You mean their approach since... checks math... 2015?

Botterill and Murray traded away massive amounts of picks and got nothing useful. Draft better. 

This isn’t true regarding Murray and I recently broke it down pick by pick. Not doing it again though as the myth persists regardless. 

Murray replenished most of the picks he sent out, Botterill did not. Short version - the Sabres made 25 picks in 3 drafts under Murray (baseline of 21). The Sabres made only 18 under Botterill, also in a 3 years timeframe. Over 2 picks per year more under Murray.

Botterill was the guy pissing away picks for nothing.

Edited by Thorny
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Thorny said:

This isn’t true regarding Murray and I recently broke it down pick by pick. Not doing it again though as the myth persists regardless. 

Murray replenished most of the picks he sent out, Botterill did not. Short version - the Sabres made 25 picks in 3 drafts under Murray (baseline of 21). The Sabres made only 18 under Botterill, also in a 3 years timeframe. Over 2 picks per year more under Murray.

Botterill was the guy pissing away picks for nothing.

Was the baseline of 21 the # of picks bequeathed to him by Darcy?  Or just the average # of picks a team would normally have (i.e. 7 picks x 3 years)?  Not to nitpick, but I think the former is the correct starting point for an analysis of whether TM frittered away picks.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Was the baseline of 21 the # of picks bequeathed to him by Darcy?  Or just the average # of picks a team would normally have (i.e. 7 picks x 3 years)?  Not to nitpick, but I think the former is the correct starting point for an analysis of whether TM frittered away picks.

People remember that Murray gave up two seconds for Hudson Fasching. They forget he acquired two seconds for 6 weeks of loaning Minny Matt Moulson. Picks were flying in and out like crazy. By my quick count he gave up 10 and acquired 10?

http://www.nhltradetracker.com/user/trade_list_by_GM/Tim_Murray/274/1

 

Edited by dudacek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nfreeman said:

Was the baseline of 21 the # of picks bequeathed to him by Darcy?  Or just the average # of picks a team would normally have (i.e. 7 picks x 3 years)?  Not to nitpick, but I think the former is the correct starting point for an analysis of whether TM frittered away picks.

 

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

People remember that Murray gave up two seconds for Hudson Fasching. They forget he acquired two seconds for 6 weeks of loaning Minny Matt Moulson. Picks were flying in and out like crazy. By my quick count he gave up 10 and acquired 10?

http://www.nhltradetracker.com/user/trade_list_by_GM/Tim_Murray/274/1

 

Yep, exactly. Last I looked he was a net of like minus 1 pick or something, and that was inclusive of an addition that added a ROR level player. 

Botterill was negative a handful. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Thorny said:

 

Yep, exactly. Last I looked he was a net of like minus 1 pick or something, and that was inclusive of an addition that added a ROR level player. 

Botterill was negative a handful. 

Looking at this from a net draft count is not telling the whole story.  The narrow scope of just draft picks, with no assigned value does show a net positive for TM.   However when you add the draft value of what each pick is assigned based on the round and position within the round, as well as the value of the prospect given/received in the transaction of trade (which is not factored in your evaluation) the net loss under Murray is more substantial.  Below is a breakdown of the trades and the estimated net value of the exact draft pick or prospect.  If you look at the total number of outs (draft and prospects) they are the same at 16.  Only the value of Murray's out's is 79% higher than that of JB's.  My own personal feeling is that if you factor into the equation how much more valuable the draft picks were in 2015, it makes the 4 he gave up for Lehner, Kane, O'Reilly and Fasching even that more egregious.  If we could only see the order of what his scouts had on the draft board through pick # 43......but alas.  

**also note this commentary is in no way, shape or form support for JB's trades and how he treated the currency of draft capital. It just looks at the individual draft pick for what it's worth, not as equal in value. 

TM.thumb.png.6f02996a7230936e2619e0e371aa8ae7.pngJB2.thumb.png.7edb70000357aea88fee9bfb2799c5aa.png

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Broken Ankles said:

Looking at this from a net draft count is not telling the whole story.  The narrow scope of just draft picks, with no assigned value does show a net positive for TM.   However when you add the draft value of what each pick is assigned based on the round and position within the round, as well as the value of the prospect given/received in the transaction of trade (which is not factored in your evaluation) the net loss under Murray is more substantial.  Below is a breakdown of the trades and the estimated net value of the exact draft pick or prospect.  If you look at the total number of outs (draft and prospects) they are the same at 16.  Only the value of Murray's out's is 79% higher than that of JB's.  My own personal feeling is that if you factor into the equation how much more valuable the draft picks were in 2015, it makes the 4 he gave up for Lehner, Kane, O'Reilly and Fasching even that more egregious.  If we could only see the order of what his scouts had on the draft board through pick # 43......but alas.  

**also note this commentary is in no way, shape or form support for JB's trades and how he treated the currency of draft capital. It just looks at the individual draft pick for what it's worth, not as equal in value. 

TM.thumb.png.6f02996a7230936e2619e0e371aa8ae7.pngJB2.thumb.png.7edb70000357aea88fee9bfb2799c5aa.png

The only thing I might change is I'd take Carrier's value out of the expansion draft and only stick the 6th rounder on Botts. He didn't exactly have any choice in losing a player there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

He was talking about trading that pick. 

No you can't. See the Sabres defense 2019. 

Goalies should always be picked outside of the top 2 rounds. 

Yes you can trade surplus for need. Just because JBot screwed things up and didn't know how to fix them doesn't mean a competent GM can't make smarter moves. It involves forward thinking and a real plan. The D was the biggest weakness so he over addressed it, but as soon as he saw that Jokiharju was going to be better and more ready than expected he should have made a follow up move(s).

At least we agree on the goalies :)

Oh and personally I would never trade a first round top 10 pick if I was GM. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/31/2020 at 6:01 PM, Broken Ankles said:

Looking at this from a net draft count is not telling the whole story.  The narrow scope of just draft picks, with no assigned value does show a net positive for TM.   However when you add the draft value of what each pick is assigned based on the round and position within the round, as well as the value of the prospect given/received in the transaction of trade (which is not factored in your evaluation) the net loss under Murray is more substantial.  Below is a breakdown of the trades and the estimated net value of the exact draft pick or prospect.  If you look at the total number of outs (draft and prospects) they are the same at 16.  Only the value of Murray's out's is 79% higher than that of JB's.  My own personal feeling is that if you factor into the equation how much more valuable the draft picks were in 2015, it makes the 4 he gave up for Lehner, Kane, O'Reilly and Fasching even that more egregious.  If we could only see the order of what his scouts had on the draft board through pick # 43......but alas.  

**also note this commentary is in no way, shape or form support for JB's trades and how he treated the currency of draft capital. It just looks at the individual draft pick for what it's worth, not as equal in value. 

TM.thumb.png.6f02996a7230936e2619e0e371aa8ae7.pngJB2.thumb.png.7edb70000357aea88fee9bfb2799c5aa.png

Giving up picks for ROR and Kane isn’t egregious 

The quality of pick given up is reflected in the return. There’s an argument to be made that Murray made the trades at that wrong time but the ROR and Kane transactions are not ammunition for a “trades too many picks” or “shouldn’t trade picks” argument. 

Botterill both traded more picks are saw less return on said trades. 

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Thorny said:

Giving up picks for ROR and Kane isn’t egregious 

The quality of pick given up is reflected in the return. There’s an argument to be made that Murray made the trades at that wrong time but the ROR and Kane transactions are not ammunition for a “trades too many picks” or “shouldn’t trade picks” argument. 

Botterill both traded more picks are saw less return on said trades. 

I would argue that the only reason that Murray's surrendering of picks in the ROR and Kane trades may not seem egregious is because the over-over-payments were asinine to begin with, were ill-timed in addition, and smacked of trying to make Bylsma look good because of the Mike Babcock spurning.  But at least I understood why he targetted whom he did and what direction he had.

I got no such feeling of direction from Botterill.  His appear worse than they might otherwise seem because they seemed aimless and did not help at all.  And he had the gift of the Skinner trade to help out his numbers.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many of GMTM's picks are currently playing in the NHL and how many are still in the Sabres system?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ducky said:

How many of GMTM's picks are currently playing in the NHL and how many are still in the Sabres system?

Draft picks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

I would argue that the only reason that Murray's surrendering of picks in the ROR and Kane trades may not seem egregious is because the over-over-payments were asinine to begin with, were ill-timed in addition, and smacked of trying to make Bylsma look good because of the Mike Babcock spurning.  But at least I understood why he targetted whom he did and what direction he had.

I got no such feeling of direction from Botterill.  His appear worse than they might otherwise seem because they seemed aimless and did not help at all.  And he had the gift of the Skinner trade to help out his numbers.

  I agree completely with the bold.  Didn't trade as much capital as TM but outside Skinner they were mostly shite.  And while Kane and O'Reilly were clearly the best players in those respective trades, and typically you judge the winner as who got the best player, time has shown us that had we held off the O'Reilly/Kane deals, perhaps Colorado trades him to another team in Feb at the deadline that year, and maybe he signs a long term contract to avoid UFA in July but the Sabres might have been rewarded with Matthews the next year instead of Nylander.  And I'd like to believe that maybe one of the 4 picks between 21-43 was going to be Aho or Boeser or Carlo.   

Here is a little nugget from researching those draft picks from TM.  An early trade by TM is moving Halak to the Caps immediately after getting him as part of the return in the Miller/Ott trade.  He gives up Halak and the 2015 3rd for Neuvirth.   Seemingly innocuous.  And, he gets gets a 3rd in return from the Isles (+ Chad J) for Neuvirth a year later which on paper is kind of a wash.    In retrospect keeping Halak would have been best.  But only 9 picks after this 2015 3rd round selection (#62 overall was the pick we traded) one Anthony Cirelli is selected by Tampa Bay.  Would our scouting staff had Cirelli in their sights if they had a pick here? They drafted Guhle and Borgen in the 2nd and 4th.  We will never know but interesting  to speculate what that pick would have been had it not been traded. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

I got no such feeling of direction from Botterill.  His appear worse than they might otherwise seem because they seemed aimless and did not help at all.  And he had the gift of the Skinner trade to help out his numbers.

I'm not sure you can say that. JBot's plan seems clear, if wrong or misguided. 

Step 1, fix the locker room, culture and such so you remove the prominent components brought in by Murray to make it his team. Kane, Lehner and then (perhaps wrongly) ROR. Problem is, he got little or nothing in return. 

Step 2, fix the D which was a total disaster when he got here. he hired a coach who had new fresh ideas and had coached D. He drafted Dahlin when he won the lottery. Traded for Montour, Miller and Jokiharju. Got so much fresh D in fact he had too much of it and then failed to respond to that.

He grabbed cheap assets when he could, like Sheary, who were supposed to hold the places until kids developed but everybody seems to play worse in Buffalo than they did before.

Skinner was his sniper for Eichel but then he overpaid him. I see the plan, he just didn't execute the plan very well and got fleeced in his trades as it turned out. Drafting? Jury's not out yet, but likely average at best, maybe worse.

So my point is he had a direction and a vision, but he couldn't find trade partners that offered anything decent or had any real interest in what we already had. Or so it seems. Maybe he turned down some great deals, but I doubt it. Adams will have the exact same problem. Aside from Eichel and Dahlin, nobody wants Sabres, or if they do, they'll want them at clearance bargain prices.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to my source, the sabres are in discussions that would bring in a second line center, as well as a top 6 winter from a team that is currently playing. The center is a player the board has talked about before. The sabres main blocks are tentatively agreed upon, but they may have to add significantly depending on playoff performance.

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sabresparaavida said:

According to my source, the sabres are in discussions that would bring in a second line center, as well as a top 6 winter from a team that is currently playing. The center is a player the board has talked about before. The sabres main blocks are tentatively agreed upon, but they may have to add significantly depending on playoff performance.

Please tell me that team is a Canadian team...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

According to my source, the sabres are in discussions that would bring in a second line center, as well as a top 6 winter from a team that is currently playing. The center is a player the board has talked about before. The sabres main blocks are tentatively agreed upon, but they may have to add significantly depending on playoff performance.

Well let's hope that Strome doesn't do anything in the playoffs. Or Cirelli. Or... I am trying to think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Well let's hope that Strome doesn't do anything in the playoffs. Or Cirelli. Or... I am trying to think. 

I want a Flame

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WildCard said:

I want a Flame

Monahan?

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LGR4GM said:

Monahan?

That would be ideal, but I'd be happy with Lindholm 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, WildCard said:

That would be ideal, but I'd be happy with Lindholm 

Oh yea... I always forget they have Lindholm. I would take Lindholm, only 2 years late for us to acquire him for ROR. 

 

If we are trading with Calgary it has to be sending out a RHD. I forget if the guy who said no to Risto is still there but they might take Montour. That is a very interesting option. 

Edited by LGR4GM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

According to my source, the sabres are in discussions that would bring in a second line center, as well as a top 6 winter from a team that is currently playing. The center is a player the board has talked about before. The sabres main blocks are tentatively agreed upon, but they may have to add significantly depending on playoff performance.

 

14 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

I have been asked not to reveal much Information, as this is still all very tentative. 

I can't put my finger on it but this whole rhetoric rubs me the wrong way.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...