GDT - Sabres @ Blue Jackets - Feb 20, 2022 - 6:00 PM (EST) - MSG-B, WGR, BSOH

[Thorny]

6 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Yes indeed.  Murray was a very poor selection to rebuild the team.   I am not suggesting that Adams pull a Murray and purge assets and gut Rochester, but he has to take a few steps to help pull this team up in the standings.  If not the new core may have the same fate as the old core.  

The last really good Sabres team was built by draft and develop, but was bolstered by the savvy acquisition of

players like Drury, Briere, Teppo, Dumont, Grier, etc. 

 

Yup, just like above 

[dudacek]

20 minutes ago, Thorny said:

It’s a difficult balancing act. The window was also once open through the duration of our former two #2 overalls’ primes - but if you overwater or underwater, over expose or under expose what you are trying to grow, as we have seen: that prime may not ever come to fruition in the environment we want it to. 

The future we see coming must be actively nurtured or it may not come at all. The primes of Dahlin and Power must be grown in a healthy environment.

People terrified of the Murray approach tend to ignore what the team would have looked like if we had Grigorenko, Zadorov, Compher, Samsonov, Roslovic, Myers, Armia and Stafford instead of Kane, Bogosian, O'Reilly and Lehner.

Edited February 22, 2022 by dudacek

[PASabreFan]

41 minutes ago, Thorny said:

People felt the hot stove of the Murray accelerated rebuild and have now turned the heat off completely, retreating to the equally extreme (but on the opposite end) desire to hoard picks and prospects.  The suggestion of even a single upgrade or two for now is met with “that’s not draft and develop.”

In reality, there’s a healthy middle ground, like you have been alluding to 

A certain poster has changed his avatar to whoever the hot pick is (I assume; maybe it's the poster's son).

If it's the new saviour, it makes me want to upchuck.

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

No it is not! It can be complementary. There are a variety of avenues that all teams use to improve their rosters. What you are suggesting is that the Sabres should only use only one avenue (draft and develop) and foreclose other options to get better. That is akin to using one arm in a fight when your opponent is using both of his arms to kick the dumb asssss who is self-destructively limiting himself. That makes no bloody sense!

Yes it is. You want to trade draft picks and young assets (you may try to hide this part but the old assets aren't worth anything). That's a bad way to build a team.

If I though we could trade Vegas' first for a player under 23 that has top 6 potential I would do it, the issue is and everyone on here seems to ignore it repeatedly for some reason, is that the cost isn't just that 1st round pick. You are talking a top prospect like JJ Peterka, that 1st, plus something else to acquire that player. I don't think that is worth it considering where this team is in its rebuild cycle. 

[Believer]

Depends on the player… and the package…

[LGR4GM]

53 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Yes indeed.  Murray was a very poor selection to rebuild the team.   I am not suggesting that Adams pull a Murray and purge assets and gut Rochester, but he has to take a few steps to help pull this team up in the standings.  If not the new core may have the same fate as the old core.  

The last really good Sabres team was built by draft and develop, but was bolstered by the savvy acquisition of

players like Drury, Briere, Teppo, Dumont, Grier, etc. 

 

What did it take the Sabres to Acquire ROR, Kane, and Bogo (so two top 9 forwards and 1 top 6 defender)? 

ROR: Zadorov, Grigorenko, Compher, 2nd round pick

2022 equivalent: Samuelsson, Poltapov, Quinn? Nadeau maybe instead, 2nd

Kane + BOGO: Lemieux, Armia, Stafford, Myers, and a 1st

2022 equivalent: Rosen, Peterka, Olofsson, Jokiharju? Ryan Johnson?, and a 1st

Do I think it is worth doing that even if we get players without all the baggage... not at this time. Next year maybe and we could get lucky and Adams could find a Skinner like deal this summer and that is what he should look for. I don't have a problem with getting better but with the cost that ppl seem to not be discussing when you trade for an impact player in todays NHL. 

Edited February 22, 2022 by LGR4GM

[Thorny]

33 minutes ago, dudacek said:

People terrified of the Murray approach tend to ignore what the team would have looked like if we had Grigorenko, Zadorov, Compher, Samsonov, Roslovic, Myers, Armia, Myers and Stafford instead of Kane, Bogosian, O'Reilly and Lehner.

Adams may be headed for a healthy balance. In my opinion it’s unknown at this time. The approach he took for this year may have been completely appropriate, sans his work in goal, if there is an accompanying consideration for this coming offseason to be open to/inclusive of a small number of outside additions to help our young core along. 

The appropriate strategy overall leans Draft and Develop by perception, because at this stage, when the youthful pieces are still coming together, they need room to stretch their roots and grow as we figure out what we have. Only a few supplementations should therefore be made. We are making more draft selections than we are trades. 

But be made, they should. Because we can’t forget that, according to the work posted recently on this site (apologies as I can’t recall right now who posted it. I’m guessing Liger), Cup teams are only composed on average of about 45% “drafted players”. The roster DOES get to the point where it has plenty of traded for/signed pieces (it’s already started - Tuch, Krebs*, Thompson), so we do need to keep, like you said, all means open.

Again, it’s just moderation. We need to supplement the roster this offseason when options become available, with the aim of moving the team towards that balanced destination, we just cannot jumpstart the process by attempting to bring in all the outside additions we think we’ll hypothetically need, at once. There aren’t enough letters filled in, in this puzzle, to attempt to solve it in one swoop.

Continue filling in pieces, continue eliminating variables. It’ll get easier to make/identify acquisitions as we go.

- - - 

*All context considered, the Eichel trade looks very good. If Adams is showing a talent for wheeling-and-dealing, that art of negotiation, the last thing I’d want to do is remove that tool from his toolbox, in the aim of adherence to a slow play that need not be adhered to. 

Adams isn’t going to bring in a Kane with no regard to the room - we’ve all listened to his interviews and can be safe in that assumption. (Taking a deep breath here to steady myself before saying this):  I trust my GM to make more trades. 

[LGR4GM]

11 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Adams may be headed for a healthy balance. In my opinion it’s unknown at this time. The approach he took for this year may have been completely appropriate, sans his work in goal, if there is an accompanying consideration for this coming offseason to be open to/inclusive of a small number of outside additions to help our young core along. 

The appropriate strategy overall leans Draft and Develop by perception, because at this stage, when the youthful pieces are still coming together, they need room to stretch their roots and grow as we figure out what we have. Only a few supplementations should therefore be made. We are making more draft selections than we are trades. 

But be made, they should. Because we can’t forget that, according to the work posted recently on this site (apologies as I can’t recall right now who posted it. I’m guessing Liger), Cup teams are only composed on average of about 45% “drafted players”. The roster DOES get to the point where it has plenty of traded for/signed pieces (it’s already started - Tuch, Krebs*, Thompson), so we do need to keep, like you said, all means open.

Again, it’s just moderation. We need to supplement the roster this offseason when options become available, with the aim of moving the team towards that balanced destination, we just cannot jumpstart the process by attempting to bring in all the outside additions we think we’ll hypothetically need, at once. There aren’t enough letters filled in, in this puzzle, to attempt to solve it in one swoop.

Continue filling in pieces, continue eliminating variables. It’ll get easier to make/identify acquisitions as we go.

- - - 

*All context considered, the Eichel trade looks very good. If Adams is showing a talent for wheeling-and-dealing, that art of negotiation, the last thing I’d want to do is remove that tool from his toolbox, in the aim of adherence to a slow play that need not be adhered to. 

Adams isn’t going to bring in a Kane with no regard to the room - we’ve all listened to his interviews and can be safe in that assumption. (Taking a deep breath here to steady myself before saying this):  I trust my GM to make more trades. 

I am all for supplements as long as we are exceedingly careful in how we acquire them. 

[Thorny]

29 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

A certain poster has changed his avatar to whoever the hot pick is (I assume; maybe it's the poster's son).

If it's the new saviour, it makes me want to upchuck.

If the strategy next season is a high pick...actually let me be more clear - if the strategy next season is even inclusive of a high selection being amenable to said strategy, I think we have the wrong strategy.

Edited February 22, 2022 by Thorny

[LGR4GM]

10 minutes ago, Thorny said:

If the strategy next season is a high pick...actually let me be more clear - if the strategy next season is even inclusive of a high selection being amenable to said strategy, I think we have the wrong strategy 

Looks at the top of the 2023 draft... 

[Thorny]

I don’t believe Adams was TANKing this season, merely that he was knowingly accepting of losses being the result of prioritizing what needed to be prioritized. 

Next season, winning hockey games needs to move up the priority list. We actually need to begin the balancing act of prioritizing both winning AND development. Yes, it’s hard. 

This season was always, always the easy part 

Have to start cooking on heat again, a little bit. Can’t hide from expectations forever 

Edited February 22, 2022 by Thorny

[Doohickie]

20 hours ago, Thwomp! said:

They set off an actual cannon in the arena when the Jackets score.  So at least I got to hear that 7 times.  It's a cool celebration item. 

Yep.  Aware of that too.  They do some cool stuff.

There are things that some franchises do that I can like and admire even if I don't favor that team.  In fact I think I think I'll start a thread about that.

[LGR4GM]

10 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I don’t believe Adams was TANKing this season, merely that he was knowingly accepting of losses being the result of prioritizing what needed to be prioritized. 

Next season, winning hockey games needs to move up the priority list. We actually need to begin the balancing act of prioritizing both winning AND development. Yes, it’s hard. 

This season was always, always the easy part 

It a lot of ways yes. 

[dudacek]

22 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Yes it is. You want to trade draft picks and young assets (you may try to hide this part but the old assets aren't worth anything). That's a bad way to build a team.

If I though we could trade Vegas' first for a player under 23 that has top 6 potential I would do it, the issue is and everyone on here seems to ignore it repeatedly for some reason, is that the cost isn't just that 1st round pick. You are talking a top prospect like JJ Peterka, that 1st, plus something else to acquire that player. I don't think that is worth it considering where this team is in its rebuild cycle. 

Florida traded a 2nd-round pick and an Aleksandr Kisakov/Josh Bloom level prospect for 25-year-old Sam Bennett, then signed him to a 4-year, $4.2 million cap hit.

The Panthers identified Bennett as a still-young player with unrealized potential who might benefit from a change of scenery (kinda like the Sabres identified Alex Tuch) and pounced.

These are the kind of trades the Sabres are well-positioned to make, and should make.

It is my hope that is what they have positioned themselves to do, and that they are patiently waiting to move when a buy-low opportunity presents itself.

Edited February 22, 2022 by dudacek

[LGR4GM]

11 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Florida traded a 2nd-round pick and an Aleksandr Kisakov/Josh Bloom level prospect for 25-year-old Sam Bennett, then signed him to a 4-year, $4.2 million cap hit.

The Panthers identified Bennett as a still-young player with unrealized potential who might benefit from a change of scenery (kinda like the Sabres identified Alex Tuch) and pounced.

These are the kind of trades the Sabres are well-positioned to make, and should make.

It is my hope that is what they have positioned themselves to do, and that they are patiently waiting to move when a buy-low opportunity presents itself.

Bennett is an outlier and they are hard to find. We found one in Tage but typically 24 and 25 years don't suddenly produce on those tiers. 

That said, you are 100% right and if such a deal as that presented itself, I would be in favor of it. I think those deals are exceedingly difficult to find.

[LGR4GM]

Buchnevich would be another player traded on the cheap who is good. Looking around there is maybe 1-2 of these a summer so you can get lucky, I just think it is a hard ask. 

[dudacek]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Bennett is an outlier and they are hard to find. We found one in Tage but typically 24 and 25 years don't suddenly produce on those tiers. 

That said, you are 100% right and if such a deal as that presented itself, I would be in favor of it. I think those deals are exceedingly difficult to find.

Not disagreeing per se, but firmly believe this is what good GMs do.

Miro Satan, Danny Briere, Stu Barnes, Toni Lydman, Chris Drury, Rhett Warrener...none of those trades looked significant or lopsided at the times they were made, all of them worked out very well for Buffalo.

[Believer]

8 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I think those deals are exceedingly difficult to find.

That’s KA’s job… Did good work getting  Tuch, Krebs, Levi… My bet he makes a couple off season moves to make learning how to win a next step in developing our young core…

[Taro T]

30 minutes ago, Thorny said:

If the strategy next season is a high pick...actually let me be more clear - if the strategy next season is even inclusive of a high selection being amenable to said strategy, I think we have the wrong strategy.

A - ####ing - men.

[triumph_communes]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

People terrified of the Murray approach tend to ignore what the team would have looked like if we had Grigorenko, Zadorov, Compher, Samsonov, Roslovic, Myers, Armia and Stafford instead of Kane, Bogosian, O'Reilly and Lehner.

Better?  Without a locker room of 4 headcases?

Edited February 22, 2022 by triumph_communes

[Taro T]

33 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Looks at the top of the 2023 draft... 

And if (when) they miss the playoffs by a handful of points but still win a lottery draw that is COMPLETELY different than going into next season w/ UPL & Levi penciled in w/ no true plan B & no upgrade to the RHD depth and "shockingly" ending up w/ the 28th best record.

Heck, missing the playoffs by 4 points AND winning the Berard sweepstakes is just about the optimal outcome based on where they sit now.  But winning a lottery w/ ~2% of a chance of doing so is NOT planning to do so.  Setting up a roster that needs a whole lot of luck to keep from finishing 28th IS planning to try to lose and is NOT acceptable.

[JohnC]

48 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Yes it is. You want to trade draft picks and young assets (you may try to hide this part but the old assets aren't worth anything). That's a bad way to build a team.

If I though we could trade Vegas' first for a player under 23 that has top 6 potential I would do it, the issue is and everyone on here seems to ignore it repeatedly for some reason, is that the cost isn't just that 1st round pick. You are talking a top prospect like JJ Peterka, that 1st, plus something else to acquire that player. I don't think that is worth it considering where this team is in its rebuild cycle. 

You are distorting by exaggerating what I am advocating for. Our top prospects such as JJ and Quinn will be on our roster next season. One of our lower first picks included with taking on salary could be parlayed into a good young player or high end prospect who could be projected to be a top two line player. Could our defenseman prospect in Johnson be included in a deal that could help this team? There are options and opportunities to be had with a little creativity and initiative. How about using a second round pick in a deal to acquire a solid goalie? Even if UPL is ready next year we could use another goalie. 

Repeating what I and others have stated: The Sabres have draft capital and a large cap availability to work with. Using some of the chips on hand doesn't translate into deviating from a rebuild strategy as you suggest. 

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

And if (when) they miss the playoffs by a handful of points but still win a lottery draw that is COMPLETELY different than going into next season w/ UPL & Levi penciled in w/ no true plan B & no upgrade to the RHD depth and "shockingly" ending up w/ the 28th best record.

Heck, missing the playoffs by 4 points AND winning the Berard sweepstakes is just about the optimal outcome based on where they sit now.  But winning a lottery w/ ~2% of a chance of doing so is NOT planning to do so.  Setting up a roster that needs a whole lot of luck to keep from finishing 28th IS planning to try to lose and is NOT acceptable.

Convo is great in here don’t really want to get off topic but a quick hypothetical, based on what you said was optimal: if the Sabres WERE in 8th next season, with a playoff berth on the way for the first time in 12 years, and we were given the option by a magic genie to drop to 9th, but get Bedard, would you take it? 

In the macro you are probably exactly right but given the option to cast aside the playoff berth, after all this time..I don’t think I could do it. “The Ring is mine.”

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

Convo is great in here don’t really want to get off topic but a quick hypothetical, based on what you said was optimal: if the Sabres WERE in 8th next season, with a playoff berth on the way for the first time in 12 years, and we were given the option by a magic genie to drop to 9th, but get Bedard, would you take it? 

In the macro you are probably exactly right but given the option to cast aside the playoff berth, after all this time..I don’t think I could do it. “The Ring is mine.”

Taking the playoff spot.  Once you're in the dance anything can happen.  And, there's likely a 1 in 4 chance that if you're there you get the playoff choking Loafs in the 1st round.  Getting to the 2nd round would be way more beneficial & would be within their control.  Wouldn't trust that genie to be true to his word. 😉

 

[Thorny]

12 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You are distorting by exaggerating what I am advocating for. Our top prospects such as JJ and Quinn will be on our roster next season. One of our lower first picks included with taking on salary could be parlayed into a good young player or high end prospect who could be projected to be a top two line player. Could our defenseman prospect in Johnson be included in a deal that could help this team? There are options and opportunities to be had with a little creativity and initiative. How about using a second round pick in a deal to acquire a solid goalie? Even if UPL is ready next year we could use another goalie. 

Repeating what I and others have stated: The Sabres have draft capital and a large cap availability to work with. Using some of the chips on hand doesn't translate into deviating from a rebuild strategy as you suggest. 

Another good point you touch on here is what I’d call a surplus of LHD prospects. Of course it’s a little different when dealing with prospects rather than fully developed players, but we saw what happened to the right side of our D when Botterill hoarded RHD - it worked to the detriment of the overall pool. He torpedoed the value of the players within the surplus and now the surplus is a deficit. It’s tough to swap an area of strength for need when the players making up said Strength aren’t being given the proper runway. 

To me, one of our young LHD prospects is a prime trade chip in the now term due to their “mystery box” attribute being in full effect. 

Edited February 22, 2022 by Thorny