Jump to content

2020-'21 Sabres Prospects


Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, tom webster said:

We all want them to be better. The fact is that have have hovered around average for years. To read some of the posts around here you would think they’ve been historically bad.

Fact of the matter is that there is a lot of luck involved. Bad timing and some terrible decisions. Some things out of there control, some things in their control. There is a reason that most front office guys who were successful in one place don’t find the same success in another place.

For as high as they have drafted, they shouldn't be hovering around average and I never want me to team to be average drafting. 

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

Ideal situation for Casey is he comes to camp in the best shape of his life, is one of the best 12 and he gets sent down anyway, where he dominates and forces his way back up. Basically, that would definitely answer the questions @LGR4GM is posing.

Probably the second most interesting player in camp for me, after Dahlin

Whoa.  Not Cozens or Taylor Freaking Hall?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dudacek said:

Ryan Johnson is not a PP specialist in any way, shape or form. 
He’s a shutdown defenceman whose game is based on elite skating. His game looks a lot like Jokiharju’s did last year, with his strengths being preventing zone entries and getting the puck out of our zone.

Your description of him argues that he was a worthy pick where he was selected. It also suggests that the smart way to handle a prospect is to be patient and allow the player to develop at his pace. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2020 at 10:37 PM, chloewoj said:

my biggest problem with the mittelstadt pick is that the sabres watched him fail miserably at the combine. they watched his no pull up performance and they knew he finished in the bottom for virtually every test but they still selected him. makes no sense to me. 

I did a little research on the Mittlestadt pick. Turns out it was probably the best option for us. Casey has a some skill and hopefully he can translate that to production with good coaching and development. If you look at the overall production of that draft you will see the top five players drafted have done very well. After that, there is a big dropoff. So, if you are making a selection at number 8 after the can't miss players are gone, take the prospect with the upside. At the time, Casey had upside and I think he still does. He may not be an All-Star caliber, but he could still develop into a contributor for us. 

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

Your description of him argues that he was a worthy pick where he was selected. It also suggests that the smart way to handle a prospect is to be patient and allow the player to develop at his pace. 

I think dudacek was speaking more to the style of Johnson’s game as opposed to the quality.  It still appears that there were better choices on the board when Johnson was selected.

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

I think dudacek was speaking more to the style of Johnson’s game as opposed to the quality.  It still appears that there were better choices on the board when Johnson was selected.

I still say if he turns out as he described then it was a reasonable pick. I'm not saying you are wrong but what I am saying is when assessing prospects it is often wise to let the process run its course before making a declarative judgment. With prospects patience is a virtue and not a fault. 

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

Whoa.  Not Cozens or Taylor Freaking Hall?

 

54 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I think he is saying from a development standpoint.  

 Pretty much. I said interesting, not exciting.
Neither of those guys are at the same sort of crossroads, in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

You seem to have more faith in Borgen then I do.  That's great, but I'd love to know why.

My 2 cents...from what I saw of Laaksonen, Borgen and Bryson either at rookie camp, training camp or the rare Amerks game on TV here in WNY, in terms of potential to have an NHL future(even as a 5-6-7 guy), I’d go Borgen, Bryson and Laaksonen a distant 3rd. 
 

Every time I’ve seen Laaksonen, he doesn’t impress at all, and it doesn’t surprise me that he was a complete off the charts pick.   He has improved, but it’s all relative. His 1st rookie camp he was by far the worst player on the ice.  Last year was better, but nowhere near being the cream of the crop among his peers at rookie camp.  
 

This year?  Who knows.  Is he slated for the Amerks...if there is an AHL season?

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

I still say if he turns out as he described then it was a reasonable pick. I'm not saying you are wrong but what I am saying is when assessing prospects it is often wise to let the process run its course before making a declarative judgment. With prospects patience is a virtue and not a fault. 

Yes, I certainly see a path for him to become a good, useful player, but when discussing draft picks, the question is generally whether the team made the best pick, not whether  they made a reasonable pick.  Best is what we are looking for, reasonable is more like baseline competency.

I say this while also understanding that “best” is not always easily identifiable.

Edited by Curt
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Curt said:

Yes, I certainly see a path for him to become a good, useful player, but when discussing draft picks, the question is generally whether the team made the best pick, not whether  they made a reasonable pick.  Best is what we are looking for, reasonable is more like baseline competency.

I say this while also understanding that “best” is not always easily identifiable.

When you are dealing with prospects who are in their late teens the evaluations made at that point are not necessarily the same as two or three years down the line. I'm sure you will agree that except with the elite prospects there is a lot of unpredictability in the evaluation process.  So I will continue to maintain the "reasonable standard" and have a less jaundiced eye when looking back.  

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

For as high as they have drafted, they shouldn't be hovering around average and I never want me to team to be average drafting. 

Again, you know history shows little correlation to how well a team drafts. At least not outside a statistically relevant number.

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

For as high as they have drafted, they shouldn't be hovering around average and I never want me to team to be average drafting. 

Where they were slotted only matters for their 1sst round pick and maybe some years the 2nd round pick.  After that whether you are picking 68 or 82 really isn't significant overall in terms drafting expectations.  Have we missed more 1st round picks than league average, or even league top 1/3?  Too disinterested to look myself, but I think that is a much more realistic expectation.  They absolutely should be getting better 1st round pick performance than 2/3 of the league.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Since many of you complain about prospect rankings, here you go. The best players under 23. 

2, 26, 80 (we didn't draft), 85, 97, 110 (didn't draft), 132, 

That's it. 7 players under 23 and 2 we didn't draft who are on the top 155 list. We have 5 players from the last 4 drafts that made the list and only 1 of those guys is from outside the 1st round, JJ Peterka. It is nice to see that Buffalo got potentially 2 players in this past draft but that will need to be a pattern for several years. 

https://theathletic.com/2132927/2020/10/22/ranking-the-best-nhl-players-under-23-corey-pronmans-top-155/

Who are our players, if you don't mind? Two in the top 31 is pretty good, especially when one is at 2. Dahlin and Cozens?

7 hours ago, nfreeman said:

This is pretty generous.  I think they'd probably be a bubble playoff team but not top 10.

 

First bolded -- this is incorrect.  You are right that he was a lousy 2-way player early in his career (although it goes without saying that his plus-minus as a member of 2 terrible teams is pretty much a useless stat), but by the end of his tenure here, TC was the Sabres' best 2-way center and penalty-killing center. 

2nd bolded -- the likelihood of this happening is less than 10%.

3rd bolded -- this is a huge assumption that so far looks to be false.  Mitts has been utterly unable to adapt his game to NHL speed and talent levels.  He has not shown even a hint of being able to beat NHL defensemen by either skating or passing the puck.

4th bolded -- this is not supported by the quotes you posted.  Those quotes support him having a good attitude and wanting to be a good player and a leader -- not that he is willing to put the time and work in to get there.

I, and I think many others here, would like to see some kind of photo of him working out over the summer and looking ripped, instead of hanging out with his buddies on a boat and drinking beer, as evidence of his determination and work ethic. 

I'd bet we'd be solidly a playoff team, but not top 10, probably. But adding very good goaltending and a 1C as our 2C would have gotten us into the playoffs I have to think - I sure hope so, as it's likely a better G add than we are going to see this offseason, and ROR would represent a skater add better than any we've seen this off-season, all around, as well. And I'm counting on the moves to get us there in combination, provided we add a reasonable goalie. 

5 hours ago, dudacek said:

Casey Mittelstadt has shown more inside and outside the NHL than Rasmus Asplund a lot more.

He was not an NHL player last year, but I am amazed at how many people think he has shown nothing.

He scored 12 goals in the season he turned 20. Do you know how many players turning 20 scored 12 this year? One: Svechinikov.

Six players from his draft class have scored more NHL goals than he has.

He sucked last year and has a lot of work to do. But his story has yet to be written.

It's forgotten that more so than his middling offence, Casey has failed thus far because his two way game is atrocious. We can't just look at his goals and say he's shown way more than Asplund. There's so much more to it than that. 

It's not, damn, I'd like to see his offensive numbers tick up. It's, his offensive numbers HAVE to tick up for him to be salvageable because he's terrible at everything else. That's the discouraging thing - he doesn't really do anything well right now. 

And that's not to say he can't improve other aspects, as well. What I mean is just that, if he seemed a dedicated and responsibly defensive player during the NHL action I witnessed, his lack of offence would be less needling. So I can understand people being down on the guy, even while I still value the asset and am not ruling out his chances of becoming a mainstay NHL-er. 

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

Whoa.  Not Cozens or Taylor Freaking Hall?

From a development standpoint I'm definitely going with Cozens. He's so much more important than Casey right now. 

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

You don’t think ROR and elite goaltending gets them 7 or 8 more wins last year?

As @Zamboni points out, I don't think Lehner was elite or close to elite.  I think he was solid to good and held up his end on 2 very good teams -- which is much better than he was here, and I'm happy for him that he's established himself as a legit, quality NHL starting goalie.

The Sabres were tied for 6th-worst last year.  Other than the top line they were terrible at generating offense.  ROR probably would've ignited Skinner and given them a credible 2nd line, but I still think the jump from where they were to a top 10 team is a bridge too far.

 

6 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Sorry, but Hecht was the top 2 way center.  Roy was second, both saw more PK time and more defensive starts and it's not close.  Tim Connolly improved as I said, but not to the level of the other.  Nice try.

I'm shocked truly that a kid age 19  & 20 struggled in the NHL.  Shocked I say.  But it's wrong to say he hasn't shown the ability.  He has.  He had periods of good play in the NHL where he was playing 15-16 minutes a night.  He has 25 pts (with 12 goals) his first full season, something Johan Larsson has never even approached.  He has proven he can beat NHL D, he just hasn't proven he can do it consistently.  Unfortunately, when he started to really struggle with his confidence, they just diminished his PT instead of sending him down and allowing him to get his game back. 

I suggest you read the quotes again.  After a rough start, his game improved as they feed him more PT.  His defensive awareness improved and then his O came around.  That doesn't happen without being coachable, having the necessary talent and game IQ and without putting the work in.

You are right that Hecht was a better defensive center.  Connolly was a far superior offensive player and still a very credible defensive player, so I'd go with him as a better "2-way" player, but certainly YMMV.  Roy was the classic "empty calories" numbers guy who was not a meaningful contributor once he was needed in the top 6.

I do not agree that Mitts has shown he can beat NHL D.  He had 9 ES goals in 77 games in the season you mentioned, and has 12 ES goals and 8 ES assists in 114 NHL games.  

As for the Rochester coaches' quotes -- I think you are inferring affirmation of Casey's work habits out of general coachspeak, but of course YMMV.

 

6 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I get it.  I was there once my self without the drugs and alcohol.  I used to work like a dog, get involved in my kids sports and other organizations etc..  Now the kids are living on their own and I have more time to argue on Sabrespace.  Enjoy you kid, they grow so fast.

Now this is 100% correct.

 

5 hours ago, dudacek said:

Casey Mittelstadt has shown more inside and outside the NHL than Rasmus Asplund a lot more.

He was not an NHL player last year, but I am amazed at how many people think he has shown nothing.

He scored 12 goals in the season he turned 20. Do you know how many players turning 20 scored 12 this year? One: Svechinikov.

Six players from his draft class have scored more NHL goals than he has.

He sucked last year and has a lot of work to do. But his story has yet to be written.

This is fair and as I've said previously I am in no hurry to unload Casey.  They should keep him until they are required to make a roster or contract decision on him.  I am simply objecting in general to the general assertions about his talent level, which I do not believe are borne out by his play, and I firmly believe that the organization should not count on him to becoming a contributing NHL player.  Anything they get from him will be a bonus.

 

7 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Who are our players, if you don't mind? Two in the top 31 is pretty good, especially when one is at 2. Dahlin and Cozens?

I'd bet we'd be solidly a playoff team, but not top 10, probably. But adding very good goaltending and a 1C as our 2C would have gotten us into the playoffs I have to think - I sure hope so, as it's likely a better G add than we are going to see this offseason, and ROR would represent a skater add better than any we've seen this off-season, all around, as well. And I'm counting on the moves to get us there in combination, provided we add a reasonable goalie. 

It's forgotten that more so than his middling offence, Casey has failed thus far because his two way game is atrocious. We can't just look at his goals and say he's shown way more than Asplund. There's so much more to it than that. 

It's not, damn, I'd like to see his offensive numbers tick up. It's, his offensive numbers HAVE to tick up for him to be salvageable because he's terrible at everything else. That's the discouraging thing - he doesn't really do anything well right now. 

1st bolded -- do you think most NHL GMs would rather have Hall or ROR?  I think most would prefer Hall.

2nd bolded -- yes indeed.

 

4 minutes ago, Thorny said:

From a development standpoint I'm definitely going with Cozens. He's so much more important than Casey right now. 

This too.

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

As @Zamboni points out, I don't think Lehner was elite or close to elite.  I think he was solid to good and held up his end on 2 very good teams -- which is much better than he was here, and I'm happy for him that he's established himself as a legit, quality NHL starting goalie.

The Sabres were tied for 6th-worst last year.  Other than the top line they were terrible at generating offense.  ROR probably would've ignited Skinner and given them a credible 2nd line, but I still think the jump from where they were to a top 10 team is a bridge too far.

 

You are right that Hecht was a better defensive center.  Connolly was a far superior offensive player and still a very credible defensive player, so I'd go with him as a better "2-way" player, but certainly YMMV.  Roy was the classic "empty calories" numbers guy who was not a meaningful contributor once he was needed in the top 6.

I do not agree that Mitts has shown he can beat NHL D.  He had 9 ES goals in 77 games in the season you mentioned, and has 12 ES goals and 8 ES assists in 114 NHL games.  

As for the Rochester coaches' quotes -- I think you are inferring affirmation of Casey's work habits out of general coachspeak, but of course YMMV.

 

Now this is 100% correct.

 

This is fair and as I've said previously I am in no hurry to unload Casey.  They should keep him until they are required to make a roster or contract decision on him.  I am simply objecting in general to the general assertions about his talent level, which I do not believe are borne out by his play, and I firmly believe that the organization should not count on him to becoming a contributing NHL player.  Anything they get from him will be a bonus.

 

1st bolded -- do you think most NHL GMs would rather have Hall or ROR?  I think most would prefer Hall.

2nd bolded -- yes indeed.

 

This too.

You'd probably get a fair few "Hall" answers but I'd expect the centre to get a few more. Could be wrong. 

The pre-injury Hall? Hall for sure. 

Edited by Thorny
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Thorny said:

It's forgotten that more so than his middling offence, Casey has failed thus far because his two way game is atrocious. We can't just look at his goals and say he's shown way more than Asplund. There's so much more to it than that. 

It's not, damn, I'd like to see his offensive numbers tick up. It's, his offensive numbers HAVE to tick up for him to be salvageable because he's terrible at everything else. That's the discouraging thing - he doesn't really do anything well right now. 

And that's not to say he can't improve other aspects, as well. What I mean is just that, if he seemed a dedicated and responsibly defensive player during the NHL action I witnessed, his lack of offence would be less needling. So I can understand people being down on the guy, even while I still value the asset and am not ruling out his chances of becoming a mainstay NHL-er. 

 

4 hours ago, nfreeman said:

AsThis is fair and as I've said previously I am in no hurry to unload Casey.  They should keep him until they are required to make a roster or contract decision on him.  I am simply objecting in general to the general assertions about his talent level, which I do not believe are borne out by his play, and I firmly believe that the organization should not count on him to becoming a contributing NHL player.  Anything they get from him will be a bonus.

You see I want to make sure that people understand I agree with 98 per cent of what you guys have written.

My sole argument is with the people who have written him off at 21.

When you say “anything we get from him will be a bonus” does that sentence finish with “just like Ryan Johnson or JJ Peterka” or “just like Andrew Oglevie and JOnas Johansson .” Because there is a big difference.

  • When Rene Robert was Casey’s age he hadn’t played an NHL game. He scored 13 goals as a rookie at 24.
  • Tony McKegny had 8 goals as a rookie when he was the age Casey is now.
  • JP Dumont (a 3rd overall pick), nine goals when he was Casey’s age, 10 the following year
  • Stu Barnes (a 4th overall pick) had 8 goals, then 12
  • Briere was in the minors, then he had 8 the following year and 1 the year after.
  • Pominville was in the minors, and in the minors the next year too.
  • Tim Connolly, no matter what revisionist history you want to put on him had 10. His 22 year old season was almost identical to Casey at 20

You either saw big holes, or didn’t see much at all from any of those guys in the NHL at Casey’s age either. That obviously didn’t mean they couldn’t play, it meant they weren’t ready.

And of course I recognize it’s not just about goals. Asplund was the inverse of Casey; his average defence couldn’t make up for his non-existent offence.

It’s about being ready.

The fact Casey wasn’t ready at 21 might mean he never will be. Or it just might mean he wasn’t ready and Botterill was too dumb to recognize it.

Edited by dudacek
  • Like (+1) 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dudacek said:

 

You see I want to make sure that people understand I agree with 98 per cent of what you guys have written.

My sole argument is with the people who have written him off at 21.

When you say “anything we get from him will be a bonus” does that sentence finish with “just like Ryan Johnson or JJ Peterka” or “just like Andrew Oglevie and JOnas Johansson .” Because there is a big difference.

  • When Rene Robert was Casey’s age he hadn’t played an NHL game. He scored 13 goals as a rookie at 24.
  • Tony McKegny had 8 goals as a rookie when he was the age Casey is now.
  • JP Dumont (a 3rd overall pick), nine goals when he was Casey’s age, 10 the following year
  • Stu Barnes (a 4th overall pick) had 8 goals, then 12
  • Briere was in the minors, then he had 8 the following year and 1 the year after.
  • Pominville was in the minors, and in the minors the next year too.
  • Tim Connolly, no matter what revisionist history you want to put on him had 10. His 22 year old season was almost identical to Casey at 20

You either saw big holes, or didn’t see much at all from any of those guys in the NHL at Casey’s age either. That obviously didn’t mean they couldn’t play, it meant they weren’t ready.

And of course I recognize it’s not just about goals. Asplund was the inverse of Casey; his average defence couldn’t make up for his non-existent offence.

It’s about being ready.

The fact Casey wasn’t ready at 21 might mean he never will be. Or it just might mean he wasn’t ready and Botterill was too dumb to recognize it.

Here's the problem. Everyone you listed is from a past era. Things are different now because these players are simply developed better. Mitts was rushed but he also stagnated. 

Again as I keep saying, I believe in Mitts skill but not his heart. We'll know at the end of this year if he's got the attitude to fix his game. 

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

Here's the problem. Everyone you listed is from a past era. Things are different now because these players are simply developed better. Mitts was rushed but he also stagnated. 

Again as I keep saying, I believe in Mitts skill but not his heart. We'll know at the end of this year if he's got the attitude to fix his game. 

I know you don't believe all players have the same development curves, or that teams don't screw up any more.

The two leading rookie goal scorers from last year were 25!

  • When Victor Olofsson was 21 he scored only 9 goals, and he was playing in the 4th-best league in the world.
  • Sam Bennett a huge disappointment who finally seems to have emerged this playoff.
  • Kevin Fiala 16 points when he was Casey's age.
  • Jacob Vrana, 3 goals when he was Casey's age

There are a ton of Casey's peers who haven't "made it" yet — Jordan Kyrou, Morgan Frost, Cody Glass, Josh Norris, Owen Tippett, Eeli Tolvanen, Gabe Villardi, Lias Anderson, Logan Brown, Keiffer Bellows, German Rubtsov, Henrik Borgstom, Mike McLeod... And that's not counting the Alex Nylanders and Tyson Josts who have made it, but are still considered disappointments because they haven't broken out.

Some of them never will and some will become very good NHLers.

Edited by dudacek
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Thorny said:

You'd probably get a fair few "Hall" answers but I'd expect the centre to get a few more. Could be wrong. 

The pre-injury Hall? Hall for sure. 

This is fair.  I suppose I'm kinda assuming that we're getting the pre-injury Hall, since he's now had more time to rehab (and is back with RK, and is in a contract year, and will be playing with Eichel), but of course we'll need to see how it plays out.

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

I know you don't believe all players have the same development curves, or that teams don't screw up any more.

The two leading rookie goal scorers from last year were 25!

  • When Victor Olofsson was 21 he scored only 9 goals, and he was playing in the 4th-best league in the world.
  • Sam Bennett a huge disappointment who finally seems to have emerged this playoff.
  • Kevin Fiala 16 points when he was Casey's age.
  • Jacob Vrana, 3 goals when he was Casey's age

There are a ton of Casey's peers who haven't "made it" yet — Jordan Kyrou, Morgan Frost, Cody Glass, Josh Norris, Owen Tippett, Eeli Tolvanen, Gabe Villardi, Lias Anderson, Logan Brown, Keiffer Bellows, German Rubtsov, Henrik Borgstom, Mike McLeod... And that's not counting the Alex Nylanders and Tyson Josts who have made it, but are still considered disappointments because they haven't broken out.

Some of them never will and some will become very good NHLers.

You are missing my main point. It isn't exactly what these ppl scored compared to casey, it is that he stagnated for 2 years and did nothing. Morgan Frost for the record, I would trade Mitts for him immediately without a 2nd thought. 

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

You are missing my main point. It isn't exactly what these ppl scored compared to casey, it is that he stagnated for 2 years and did nothing. Morgan Frost for the record, I would trade Mitts for him immediately without a 2nd thought. 

I think you're missing mine: that he's not alone in that. Lots of players plateau and even regress before finding themselves.

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

Read this article on our Defensive Prospects earlier today & thought I'd share it in case any of you want to read it.

Goes into Borgen, Laaksonen & the bunch & has some not too rosy things to say about Johnson & Samuelsson.

Its more of a general "where are they now" type piece & doesn't get too analytical or data driven. Still thought some might find it interesting

https://thehockeywriters.com/sabres-defense-prospects-laaksonen-brysen-borgen/

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...
×
×
  • Create New...