Sabres Officially Select #9, #16, and #28

[LabattBlue]

4 hours ago, dudacek said:

4 in the first 41 picks - one of our best situated drafts ever.

Best comparable was 2013 when we had 8, 16, 35 and 38 (Ristolainen, Zadorov, Compher and Hurley). For those who tend to expect too much from draft picks, 3 full-time NHLers is a pretty good haul for what those picks typically deliver. Cross your fingers for a Barzal or a Pastrnak, but you shouldn’t expect one.

The Sabres have had multiple 1st rounders in 9 drafts previous to this one. If we hang on to the picks it will be the 3rd time we pick 3 times in the first round.

The best situated draft ever is ever is a toss-up between 1982 (6, 9, 16, 26 and 30) and 1983 (5, 10, 11, 31 and 34). We took Housley, Cyr, Andreychuk, Mike Anderson and Jens Johanssen, then Barrasso, Lacombe, Creighton, Tucker and Hajdu.

In 2015 we had 4 of the first 31 but traded 21, 25 and 31 away.

In 2014 we had just one 1st rounder, but 4 picks in the top 49

Last year we had 7 of the 1st 97, which had only previously happened in ‘82 and ‘83, back when there was just 21 teams, and 1970, when there were 14.

Whatever happened to Hurley?

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

When Yzerman returned to Detroit after his stint with Tampa he was asked at his first Detroit draft how was he going to get Detroit back to prominence in the NHL. He tersely told the interviewer: I'll do it the right way: draft and develop. He then walked away. 

He's right, it is the best plan always. These days you also need one other aspect I think. You need a good set of forward salary cap projections. You have too many guys up for big raises at the same time, that might be the  time you move somebody, planning ahead. otherwise, yes, it's all about the draft and development. 

[JohnC]

34 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

He's right, it is the best plan always. These days you also need one other aspect I think. You need a good set of forward salary cap projections. You have too many guys up for big raises at the same time, that might be the  time you move somebody, planning ahead. otherwise, yes, it's all about the draft and development. 

I agree with your comments. As far as the cap situation being negatively influenced by too many players requiring pay increases that isn't a problem that one should lament over. It's a problem that although challenging to handle indicates that you have a number of good players who will soon have to get paid more. That's a situation to celebrate! All good teams have to make tough personnel decisions as who to keep and who to deal because of cap considerations. I would rather be in that situation than be in a situation where your roster is filled with low cost mediocrities resulting in plenty of cap space. And as you note, the key is to draft and development well so that you have a steady stream of replacement players. 

What is encouraging is that I see KA not only following that draft and development model but also impressively executing that model. The train is moving in the right direction. The only thing that can knock this train off course is not adequately addressing the goalie situation. 

 

[dudacek]

8 hours ago, LabattBlue said:

Whatever happened to Hurley?

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=161181

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, JohnC said:

I agree with your comments. As far as the cap situation being negatively influenced by too many players requiring pay increases that isn't a problem that one should lament over. It's a problem that although challenging to handle indicates that you have a number of good players who will soon have to get paid more. That's a situation to celebrate! All good teams have to make tough personnel decisions as who to keep and who to deal because of cap considerations. I would rather be in that situation than be in a situation where your roster is filled with low cost mediocrities resulting in plenty of cap space. And as you note, the key is to draft and development well so that you have a steady stream of replacement players. 

What is encouraging is that I see KA not only following that draft and development model but also impressively executing that model. The train is moving in the right direction. The only thing that can knock this train off course is not adequately addressing the goalie situation. 

 

Oh absolutely. All I'm saying is the smartest GMs think about cap projections for coming years as well as this year. Plan ahead so that core pieces don't end up leaving. 

But ya, the goalie thing worries me a little. I want to start winning, seriously winning, next season, and don't want any hoping for Bedard or one more year of building stuff. The ship is righted, it's on course, time to sail, and we need solid goaltending to do that. Sign a good veteran to a 3-4 year deal to play with UPL. Near the end of that deal Levi and/or Portello come in. In the meantime draft a few more in later rounds as projects with potential. Make goalie a strength again and not a weakness. 

[dudacek]

Did the draft thread disappear? I guess this fits here as well.

One guy who strikes me as a very Sabres-type selection is Swedish centre Noah Ostlund. Plays fast, smart and hungry. Djurgarden kid, which I believe is an organization with a lot of ties to our Swedish scout. Not small, but physically immature and certainly has a lot of filling out to do.

Most projections I’ve seen have him going in between 16 and 32, but depending on how the board falls I could see the Sabres reaching or happily snatching him up with Florida’s pick.

[SDS]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Did the draft thread disappear? I guess this fits here as well.

One guy who strikes me as a very Sabres-type selection is Swedish centre Noah Ostlund. Plays fast, smart and hungry. Djurgarden kid, which I believe is an organization with a lot of ties to our Swedish scout. Not small, but physically immature and certainly has a lot of filling out to do.

Most projections I’ve seen have him going in between 16 and 32, but depending on how the board falls I could see the Sabres reaching or happily snatching him up with Florida’s pick.

 

[Crusader1969]

New Mock from Corey Pronman 

#9 Savoie 

#16. Yurov

#32. Reid Schaefer, LW, Seattle-WHL.  I’m not familiar with him at all.  Supposed to be a big physical winger

I love the roll of the dice at 16.   You’ve got a guy with a pretty good floor with Savoie.  He should become a decent Center / winger and PP guy and then you take a big swing on Yurov who should have been a top 10 pick  

Pronman has lambert go at 15 but he is another I hope they can get 

 

Edited May 17, 2022 by Crusader1969

[bob_sauve28]

I saw this and am just passing it along. 

 

 

[inkman]

On 5/15/2022 at 12:59 AM, dudacek said:

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=161181

The ol 26 year old ECHL player.  Ouch.  

[sabresparaavida]

1 hour ago, inkman said:

The ol 26 year old ECHL player.  Ouch.  

Not quite… played in Norway in 2019-2020, hasn’t played since.

[DarthEbriate]

15 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:

New Mock from Corey Pronman 

#9 Savoie 

#16. Yurov

#32. Reid Schaefer, LW, Seattle-WHL.  I’m not familiar with him at all.  Supposed to be a big physical winger

I love the roll of the dice at 16.   You’ve got a guy with a pretty good floor with Savoie.  He should become a decent Center / winger and PP guy and then you take a big swing on Yurov who should have been a top 10 pick  

Pronman has lambert go at 15 but he is another I hope they can get 

Schaefer at 32 is... fine. I'd want a more dynamic offensive player in the first round, but he's definitely solid. I think he'd project really well to a bottom 6 who will cycle strongly and then get to the front of the net (something the team will need as Okposo and Girgs get older/retire).

Edit: Also, I think Schaefer is still available in the 2nd round -- perhaps at Sabres #41. He is having a really solid WHL playoffs.

The T-Bird I'm wary of is LHD Korchinski at 9. I see a really solid puck-moving D who picks up a ton of assists, but who does not control the game in all zones. Big caveat: yet. His Draft+1 year is when I'd expect to really watch him closely and expect him to crush the WHL in all zones (ala Mark Pysyk or Cal Foote). I'm wary at 9 (and I'd rather go top-skill forward), but if he slips to 16 for some odd reason... sure, nab Korchinski.

Edited May 18, 2022 by DarthEbriate

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, DarthEbriate said:

Schaefer at 32 is... fine. I'd want a more dynamic offensive player in the first round, but he's definitely solid. I think he'd project really well to a bottom 6 who will cycle strongly and then get to the front of the net (something the team will need as Okposo and Girgs get older/retire).

The T-Bird I'm wary of is LHD Korchinski at 9. I see a really solid puck-moving D who picks up a ton of assists, but who does not control the game in all zones. Big caveat: yet. His Draft+1 year is when I'd expect to really watch him closely and expect him to crush the WHL in all zones (ala Mark Pysyk or Cal Foote). I'm wary at 9 (and I'd rather go top-skill forward), but if he slips to 16 for some odd reason... sure, nab Korchinski.

Get a chance to watch these guys much in Seattle?

[sabresparaavida]

2 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

Schaefer at 32 is... fine. I'd want a more dynamic offensive player in the first round, but he's definitely solid. I think he'd project really well to a bottom 6 who will cycle strongly and then get to the front of the net (something the team will need as Okposo and Girgs get older/retire).

The T-Bird I'm wary of is LHD Korchinski at 9. I see a really solid puck-moving D who picks up a ton of assists, but who does not control the game in all zones. Big caveat: yet. His Draft+1 year is when I'd expect to really watch him closely and expect him to crush the WHL in all zones (ala Mark Pysyk or Cal Foote). I'm wary at 9 (and I'd rather go top-skill forward), but if he slips to 16 for some odd reason... sure, nab Korchinski.

The Sabres are stacked at LHD, there isn’t a LhD in the draft I would take at 9. If I were gm, for me to take a LhD in the first 2 rounds, they would have to be a tier above the remaining players. If it’s close, I would opt for the forward or rhd. At 16 I don’t think Korchinski would be in a tier of his own. 
 

As of April 21st he was ranked:

NHL Central Scouting: 20th (amongst NA skaters)

FC Hockey: 7th

Recruit Scouting: 31st

Peter Baracchini’s March Rankings: 26th

Andrew Forbes’ March Rankings: 24th

Matthew Zator’s April Rankings: 24th

Smaht Scouting: 27th

Bob McKenzie’s Rankings: 25th

Dobber Prospects Mid-Season Rankings: Honorable Mention (50+)
 

I would be alright with him at the Florida pick or our second, but not with the Vegas pick.

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

The Sabres are stacked at LHD, there isn’t a LhD in the draft I would take at 9. If I were gm, for me to take a LhD in the first 2 rounds, they would have to be a tier above the remaining players. If it’s close, I would opt for the forward or rhd. At 16 I don’t think Korchinski would be in a tier of his own. 
 

As of April 21st he was ranked:

NHL Central Scouting: 20th (amongst NA skaters)

FC Hockey: 7th

Recruit Scouting: 31st

Peter Baracchini’s March Rankings: 26th

Andrew Forbes’ March Rankings: 24th

Matthew Zator’s April Rankings: 24th

Smaht Scouting: 27th

Bob McKenzie’s Rankings: 25th

Dobber Prospects Mid-Season Rankings: Honorable Mention (50+)
 

I would be alright with him at the Florida pick or our second, but not with the Vegas pick.

From what I've been reading Korchinski's late season and playoff has put him firmly in the conversation for 3rd D taken.

[DarthEbriate]

6 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Get a chance to watch these guys much in Seattle?

Much less this season than in years past. I only went to 3 games this season... so any of my Schaefer/Korchinski scouting is so limited as to be negligible. They're the best players on the T-Birds no doubt, but they're no Matt Barzal, so to speak.

[DarthEbriate]

7 minutes ago, dudacek said:

From what I've been reading Korchinski's late season and playoff has put him firmly in the conversation for 3rd D taken.

This is what I've been seeing on Korchinski lately, too. My fear is he's more Laaksonen than Morgan Rielly. Raelly, Rielly, it's not Reilly?

@sabresparaavida As to NHL draft -- gotta go best player available with 18 year-olds. All the better if it matches an organizational need. (Sadly, the 2 RHD we could really use will be gone at 9... or it they're available it means they've done a crime or gotten a terrible injury between now and draft day). Agreed that the LHD is the lowest organizational need and would get prioritized below an equally rated skater at another position. But if you get to #9 and you've got a LHD you rate as the next Cale Makar... you take him.

[sabresparaavida]

16 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

This is what I've been seeing on Korchinski lately, too. My fear is he's more Laaksonen than Morgan Rielly. Raelly, Rielly, it's not Reilly?

@sabresparaavida As to NHL draft -- gotta go best player available with 18 year-olds. All the better if it matches an organizational need. (Sadly, the 2 RHD we could really use will be gone at 9... or it they're available it means they've done a crime or gotten a terrible injury between now and draft day). Agreed that the LHD is the lowest organizational need and would get prioritized below an equally rated skater at another position. But if you get to #9 and you've got a LHD you rate as the next Cale Makar... you take him.

If you think that LHD is gonna be Cale Makar, at 9 he’s going to be in a tier of his own and of course you take him. I’d imagine KA’s long term plan involves keeping Dahlin, Samuelson and Power. Unless we see power shift to the right side, we’d need a Cale Makar (or slightly worse) to have a shot at playing top 4 minutes, and at 9 we’d have a much higher chance of a player making an impact if he isn’t a LhD. 

[Doohickie]

On 5/15/2022 at 12:26 AM, PerreaultForever said:

Plan ahead so that core pieces don't end up leaving. 

Or plan so that you exchange an expensive core piece for a cost controlled core piece.  Adams traded away his foundational piece, Eichel, for a non-foundational top 6er in Tuch (at half the cost), a blue chip, cost controlled prospect in Krebs, and a coupla picks.  He moved the present for the future.

The ROR trade (if you through out Berglund and Sabotka who were total busts) was also trading a core piece for cost-controlled futures.

In the ROR trade, the futures in return have taken longer to pan out but in the Eichel trade they're already bearing fruit.  Happily for the Sabres, they seem to all be hitting at the same time.

The point is a savvy GM can play those games, letting very good players go when they get expensive (which a team competing for the Cup values) and replacing them with players that are cheaper and haven't achieved their upside quite yet.  As long as you have the right mix coming up you can handle that outflow of talent.  The key is to have the right number of proven stars on monster contracts versus young but mature or nearly mature talent on value contracts.  I think this is what's killing the teams in cap hell (VGK, TO)- they have too many premium contracts and not enough value contracts with the right talent level.

I also think this is where analytics comes in, in terms of knowing which players to hang onto, which new players to acquire.

[Doohickie]

(and obviously which players to sell high before they fall off the table)

[IKnowPhysics]

On 5/14/2022 at 9:59 PM, dudacek said:

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=161181

"Undisclosed Personal Issue" caused him to sit out the 2nd half of his junior year at Notre Dame after posting 16P in 21GP.  Team reportedly excluded him in that summer's media communication.  He transferred to Minnesota, being forced to sit out a year due to NCAA transfer rules.  Didn't suit up for Minnesota in Fall 2018 (reason unknown) and immediately signed with Norfolk (which eliminated his NCAA eligibility), played 2018/19 there.  Sabres rights to him expired August 2018, before he signed with Norfolk.

[LabattBlue]

24 minutes ago, IKnowPhysics said:

"Undisclosed Personal Issue" caused him to sit out the 2nd half of his junior year at Notre Dame after posting 16P in 21GP.  Team reportedly excluded him in that summer's media communication.  He transferred to Minnesota, being forced to sit out a year due to NCAA transfer rules.  Didn't suit up for Minnesota in Fall 2018 (reason unknown) and immediately signed with Norfolk (which eliminated his NCAA eligibility), played 2018/19 there.  Sabres rights to him expired August 2018, before he signed with Norfolk.

Thx.  

[Sabres Fan in NS]

When's the draft ??

[inkman]

16 minutes ago, Sabres Fan in NS said:

When's the draft ??

July 7/8.  

[PerreaultForever]

14 hours ago, Doohickie said:

Or plan so that you exchange an expensive core piece for a cost controlled core piece.  Adams traded away his foundational piece, Eichel, for a non-foundational top 6er in Tuch (at half the cost), a blue chip, cost controlled prospect in Krebs, and a coupla picks.  He moved the present for the future.

The ROR trade (if you through out Berglund and Sabotka who were total busts) was also trading a core piece for cost-controlled futures.

In the ROR trade, the futures in return have taken longer to pan out but in the Eichel trade they're already bearing fruit.  Happily for the Sabres, they seem to all be hitting at the same time.

The point is a savvy GM can play those games, letting very good players go when they get expensive (which a team competing for the Cup values) and replacing them with players that are cheaper and haven't achieved their upside quite yet.  As long as you have the right mix coming up you can handle that outflow of talent.  The key is to have the right number of proven stars on monster contracts versus young but mature or nearly mature talent on value contracts.  I think this is what's killing the teams in cap hell (VGK, TO)- they have too many premium contracts and not enough value contracts with the right talent level.

I also think this is where analytics comes in, in terms of knowing which players to hang onto, which new players to acquire.

yes definitely. I'd say the Eichel trade is a bit different but was a smart one to make. A guy like Tuch, already proven and a childhood fan won't come to them every day, and Krebs isn't all that proven yet, I'd call him a probable, but not sure on his ceiling yet. But otherwise yes. 

To you latter point that's definitely Toronto's problem. Vegas is a little different. They had a good thing going and could have built off that step by step but they got so close so fast they got greedy and that has flipped it upside down so it'll collapse soon enough if not already. 

This is why in free agency I usually advocate going after specific weaknesses, role players and stop gap people rather than over priced stars. Better value can be found in slightly over paying (if necessary) 3rd and 4th liners and depth players who compliment and enhance your home grown talent. Just have to steer clear of those long term no move clauses.