Jump to content

Where do the Sabres Rank in terms of Prospect Pools post draft?


matter2003
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

So many skilled forwards.  I also wonder if the Sabres will say F*ck it to the traditional 4th line pluggers  and just roll 4 lines that have skill, speed with a touch of grit 

 

I’m all for rolling 4 lines but they still need to find anyone that plays the body regularly minus Loobie.  

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

20 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

I went to see both Bailey and Baptiste a few times in the OHL.  Easily the best players on the ice in the games I saw.  Still can’t believe neither were able to carve out a NHL career as 3rd or 4th line guys 

 

Bailey is hanging on by a thread and Baptiste is in Europe.  I do wonder how they would have turned out if they were coached under the current development team?

 

I watched them both in the OHL. They were good players. Maybe they just didn’t progress beyond that level. Their hockey IQ held them back when everyone else was as big and fast.

Cliff Pu was another guy that was good in the OHL, he could really skate and put up good numbers in London.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

The Sabres being good and the prospect pool being good are not synonymous. There's lag there but again, you'd be really hard pressed to find a prospect system as deep as Buffalo. 

Then why should I (anybody) care?

We’ve been ranked high before and still haven’t seen the playoffs In forever.

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

21 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Yea but are we really comparing Bailey, Baptiste, Fasching, and Carrier to Kulich, Östlund, Savoie, and Rosen? 

Not to mention that was basically it, those 4 needed to hit. I can name another 4 or 8 right now in this pool outside of the 4 1st round guys. Poltapov, Kisakov, Peterka, Neuchev, Kozak, Rousek, etc... that are at or above the level of those other 4.

Hell, I didn't even mention jack quinn. It's not the same. The skill level, the development team in place, the number of options, the fact we draft smarter. It could turn out the same but I doubt that. Just because something happened that's surface level similar, doesn't make this the same.

No idea what you're taking exception to.

Eichel, Reinhart, & the "big 4" WERE the reason people has the Sabres prospect pool ranked highly during the Murray era.

There is no doubt this prospect pool is more highly regarded & deeper that that one was as that 1 had 2 very high 1st rounders in it & then a handful of 2nd rounders.  It could've been much deeper, but Murray went for the quick fix & traded at least 3 high picks & at least 6 highly regarded prospects.  Adams hasn't done that & actually did the opposite trading much of his top line & pairing for prospects/picks.  

Please be so kind as to show where the point you are arguing against was actually made.  🍺

PS - To answer your question, not particularly.  Which brings back this post's original statement: no idea what you're taking exception to. 😉

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Yea but are we really comparing Bailey, Baptiste, Fasching, and Carrier to Kulich, Östlund, Savoie, and Rosen? 

Not to mention that was basically it, those 4 needed to hit. I can name another 4 or 8 right now in this pool outside of the 4 1st round guys. Poltapov, Kisakov, Peterka, Neuchev, Kozak, Rousek, etc... that are at or above the level of those other 4.

Hell, I didn't even mention jack quinn. It's not the same. The skill level, the development team in place, the number of options, the fact we draft smarter. It could turn out the same but I doubt that. Just because something happened that's surface level similar, doesn't make this the same.

No idea what you're taking exception to.

Eichel, Reinhart, & the "big 4" WERE the reason people has the Sabres prospect pool ranked highly during the Murray era.

There is no doubt this prospect pool is more highly regarded & deeper that that one was as that 1 had 2 very high 1st rounders in it & then a handful of 2nd rounders.  It could've been much deeper, but Murray went for the quick fix & traded at least 3 high picks & at least 6 highly regarded prospects.  Adams hasn't done that & actually did the opposite trading much of his top line & pairing for prospects/picks.  

Please be so kind as to show where the point you are arguing against was actually made.  🍺

PS - To answer your question, not particularly.  Which brings back this post's original statement: no idea what you're taking exception to. 😉

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

So many skilled forwards.  I also wonder if the Sabres will say F*ck it to the traditional 4th line pluggers  and just roll 4 lines that have skill, speed with a touch of grit 

 

You can kind of do this, but you need a 2 lines, IMPO, that you feel good about rolling out against opponents top offensive players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Then why should I (anybody) care?

We’ve been ranked high before and still haven’t seen the playoffs In forever.

Why should anyone care?  Having a great prospect pool does not guarantee success, but it does help. It is just one of many factors that determine how good a team is.  Just because having a 'top rated' prospect pool in the past didn't equate to a great team a few years ago....that is no reason to dismiss it as not mattering.  It is one factor, and to be good you want to have as many of those 'factors' as you can.

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

5 minutes ago, Taro T said:

No idea what you're taking exception to.

Eichel, Reinhart, & the "big 4" WERE the reason people has the Sabres prospect pool ranked highly during the Murray era.

There is no doubt this prospect pool is more highly regarded & deeper that that one was as that 1 had 2 very high 1st rounders in it & then a handful of 2nd rounders.  It could've been much deeper, but Murray went for the quick fix & traded at least 3 high picks & at least 6 highly regarded prospects.  Adams hasn't done that & actually did the opposite trading much of his top line & pairing for prospects/picks.  

Please be so kind as to show where the point you are arguing against was actually made.  🍺

PS - To answer your question, not particularly.  Which brings back this post's original statement: no idea what you're taking exception to. 😉

 

I'm not taking exception to anything. I'm comparing the 4 players mentioned to our current prospect pool. 

I'm not arguing against anything other than the Sabres pool in 2015 wasn't as good as the pool in 2022 so we shouldn't assume similar results. 

You seem offended over nothing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Then why should I (anybody) care?

We’ve been ranked high before and still haven’t seen the playoffs In forever.

I’m going to stress a few points.  The prospect pool and the NHL team are not the same thing.  The prospect pool can be good while the NHL team is bad, because the prospects aren’t playing in the NHL.

You don’t need to believe me, but I’m telling you that the Sabres current group of young NHLers + prospects is much deeper than anything they have had in the past decade.

If you only care about the NHL team and don’t care about the prospect pool then you don’t need to post in a thread about the prospect pool.

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

2 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

Why should anyone care?  Having a great prospect pool does not guarantee success, but it does help. It is just one of many factors that determine how good a team is.  Just because having a 'top rated' prospect pool in the past didn't equate to a great team a few years ago....that is no reason to dismiss it as not mattering.  It is one factor, and to be good you want to have as many of those 'factors' as you can.

Agree.

Would further add that when a parent club is stocked w/ ACTUAL NHLers from top to bottom, having a strong prospect pool can ensure that the roster will stay stocked w/ actual NHLers in the future.  Prior to the advent of video scouting, the Sabres consistently had strong prospect pools (even if they didn't necessarily have the absolute top prospects, they had a lot of them) and prior to the decision to tank, the Sabres consistently had competitive to strong teams.  Movingnon from both of those poor decisions, we're at a point where having a strong prospect pool can actually matter again.  Hallelujah!

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Agree.

Would further add that when a parent club is stocked w/ ACTUAL NHLers from top to bottom, having a strong prospect pool can ensure that the roster will stay stocked w/ actual NHLers in the future.  Prior to the advent of video scouting, the Sabres consistently had strong prospect pools (even if they didn't necessarily have the absolute top prospects, they had a lot of them) and prior to the decision to tank, the Sabres consistently had competitive to strong teams.  Movingnon from both of those poor decisions, we're at a point where having a strong prospect pool can actually matter again.  Hallelujah!

Will we actually see this this October?

If our 12th forward is Girgensons/Hinostroza and our 6th defenceman is Bryson, I believe we will.

First time in a decade that would be the case.

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I'm not taking exception to anything. I'm comparing the 4 players mentioned to our current prospect pool. 

I'm not arguing against anything other than the Sabres pool in 2015 wasn't as good as the pool in 2022 so we shouldn't assume similar results. 

You seem offended over nothing. 

Funny, by asking "are we really comparing ..."  and throwing in "hell" to start another one of your points makes it appear that you ARE taking exception to something that wasn't even stated.  And by stating out w/ your 1st sentence, it sure does appear that you are arguing against a point that wasn't made.

Am not offended by your post at all.  Merely trying to understand why you chose that OP to argue against as it did not make any claim explicit nor implicit that the pool from that era is as good as the current pool appears nor that the lack of substantial material success by the 4 players cited implies anything towards the chances of success nor lack thereof for the current prospect pool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, SwampD said:

Like PA said, we’ve been at or near the top of the prospect pool rankings off an on for a decade.

It means nothing until it means something. I’m going to wait until the first 2 months of a season look good before I’m convinced.

We also typically used them to trade for players during those times, so I am not sure how this really relates. Having a deep prospect pool only to turn around and trade the majority for players doesn't really help much in the long term.

The worst part about it was they seemed to have no real concept of how to build the team, just acquire players, trade their prospects away and have no real sense of how those players would mesh into a team that would succeed.  Kind of reminded me a lot of Whaley. Got good players, but they didn't always fit well within the team.

The last time we developed our own picks well and had them help the team might be back when Roy, Pominville and Vanek came up from Rochester. 

 

Edited by matter2003
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

Will we actually see this this October?

If our 12th forward is Girgensons/Hinostroza and our 6th defenceman is Bryson, I believe we will.

First time in a decade that would be the case.

Had mentioned that in a thread a couple of days ago that this is the 1st time since a path towards suffering was taken that this is very likely the 1st season post making that choice that all 20 opening day roster slots will be filled w/ NHLers (presuming Hinostroza, Bryson, & Anderson actually are NHLers; IMHO they are though not necessarily good/ideal).

And there are still 3 months to add players that bump at least 1, and maybe more, out of their roster spot.

So, to answer your question, yes.  😉

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the Sabres roster will be filled with genuine NHLers. They are also the youngest roster in the league. Combine that with a deep prospect pool and my confidence in DG coaching them to improve as individuals and as a team has me thinking they are over the hump.

This is looking like good times ahead for the Sabres. If Comrie is ready now and UPL takes a step forward I will be ready to think about playoff runs coming up.

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

31 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Funny, by asking "are we really comparing ..."  and throwing in "hell" to start another one of your points makes it appear that you ARE taking exception to something that wasn't even stated.  And by stating out w/ your 1st sentence, it sure does appear that you are arguing against a point that wasn't made.

Am not offended by your post at all.  Merely trying to understand why you chose that OP to argue against as it did not make any claim explicit nor implicit that the pool from that era is as good as the current pool appears nor that the lack of substantial material success by the 4 players cited implies anything towards the chances of success nor lack thereof for the current prospect pool.

You're trying to start an argument and I don't really understand why. I responded to your post because it was the most recent one discussing the 4 players I started my post with: Baptiste, Bailey, Carrier, and Fasching. It was the natural progression of that conversation to query if we really should compare that level of prospect to the 4 1st rounders. I then listed other players we currently have who are roughly on the level of the 2015 pool.

"Hell" in that context was used as a way of expressing surprise. Hell, insert thing we forgot to this point. 

Again, you seem to have taken exception and you seem to want to argue. Sabres pool now is better than 2015, not sure there's a debate there from anyone. Was just fleshing out some points around the pool then versus now.

Not sure why you've spent 2 posts accusing me of "being offended" or "taking exception to" or throwing in "be so kind to". Just really weird considering no one is doing any of those. 

You were clearly offended though as evidence by whatever this is. Again really weird because I don't think anyone is arguing different sides. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You're trying to start an argument and I don't really understand why. I responded to your post because it was the most recent one discussing the 4 players I started my post with: Baptiste, Bailey, Carrier, and Fasching. It was the natural progression of that conversation to query if we really should compare that level of prospect to the 4 1st rounders. I then listed other players we currently have who are roughly on the level of the 2015 pool.

"Hell" in that context was used as a way of expressing surprise. Hell, insert thing we forgot to this point. 

Again, you seem to have taken exception and you seem to want to argue. Sabres pool now is better than 2015, not sure there's a debate there from anyone. Was just fleshing out some points around the pool then versus now.

Not sure why you've spent 2 posts accusing me of "being offended" or "taking exception to" or throwing in "be so kind to". Just really weird considering no one is doing any of those. 

You were clearly offended though as evidence by whatever this is. Again really weird because I don't think anyone is arguing different sides. 

To the bolded, no, actually was not offended.  But am willing to let it drop & realize now, the following was the more appropriate path.

2 hours ago, Taro T said:

The bolded is true.  But people were also pretty hopeful/excited about the "big 4" prospects - Bailey, Baptiste, Fascinating, & Carrier.  And the only one that became a regular NHLer was lost in an expansion draft. 

He kept the guys that didn't pan out & like you said traded away/ lost the guys that became NHLers (Armia, Compfer, Lemieux, Carrier - that can't be the entire list, can it?).

 

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Yea but are we really comparing Bailey, Baptiste, Fasching, and Carrier to Kulich, Östlund, Savoie, and Rosen

Not to mention that was basically it, those 4 needed to hit. I can name another 4 or 8 right now in this pool outside of the 4 1st round guys. Poltapov, Kisakov, Peterka, Neuchev, Kozak, Rousek, etc... that are at or above the level of those other 4.

Hell, I didn't even mention jack quinn. It's not the same. The skill level, the development team in place, the number of options, the fact we draft smarter. It could turn out the same but I doubt that. Just because something happened that's surface level similar, doesn't make this the same.

No, we aren't.  But carry on,  😉

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

 

3 hours ago, SwampD said:

Like PA said, we’ve been at or near the top of the prospect pool rankings off an on for a decade.

It means nothing until it means something. I’m going to wait until the first 2 months of a season look good before I’m convinced.

 

3 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said:

When we were high in the Tim Murray days, he foolishly traded a lot of the prospects away. Besides, I don't think we had anyway near the volume of prospects we do now. It was Eichel and Reinhart that had us so high.

 

2 hours ago, Taro T said:

The bolded is true.  But people were also pretty hopeful/excited about the "big 4" prospects - Bailey, Baptiste, Fascinating, & Carrier.  And the only one that became a regular NHLer was lost in an expansion draft. 

He kept the guys that didn't pan out & like you said traded away/ lost the guys that became NHLers (Armia, Compfer, Lemieux, Carrier - that can't be the entire list, can it?).

 

2 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said:

I don't think any of those big 4 were highly regarded outside of the Sabres fanbase. As someone that only saw their scoresheets, I never understood the hype. Once I actually saw Bailey and Baptiste play, you could see the tools were there... they just couldn't figure out how to use them. That's where Bjork sits today and will likely soon be out of the league.

 

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Yea but are we really comparing Bailey, Baptiste, Fasching, and Carrier to Kulich, Östlund, Savoie, and Rosen? 

Not to mention that was basically it, those 4 needed to hit. I can name another 4 or 8 right now in this pool outside of the 4 1st round guys. Poltapov, Kisakov, Peterka, Neuchev, Kozak, Rousek, etc... that are at or above the level of those other 4.

Hell, I didn't even mention jack quinn. It's not the same. The skill level, the development team in place, the number of options, the fact we draft smarter. It could turn out the same but I doubt that. Just because something happened that's surface level similar, doesn't make this the same.

Here's the thread. Again, you brought up those 4 and I carried on the conversation. 

Only thing I find offensive is this weird gaslighting attempt to draw me into some argument that other than PA, no one is having. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

To the bolded, no, actually was not offended.  But am willing to let it drop & realize now, the following was the more appropriate path.

 

No, we aren't.  But carry on,  😉

 

Yes, you could easily argue that PA was comparing the 2014 pool to now. You just named them and I filled in the other side of the comparison. 

This has been a truly strange interaction. I'm not offended, I'm not really arguing a point other than A doesn't equal B which I think you also agree with. Truly a bizarre defense I've had to mount over a very casual look at prospect pools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Yes, you could easily argue that PA was comparing the 2014 pool to now. You just named them and I filled in the other side of the comparison. 

This has been a truly strange interaction. I'm not offended, I'm not really arguing a point other than A doesn't equal B which I think you also agree with. Truly a bizarre defense I've had to mount over a very casual look at prospect pools.

Again, the correct response to your original query was:  No, we aren't.  But carry on,  😉

🍺

 

And if you have issues w/ what PA said, please feel free to take them up w/ him.  😉

Would never attempt to speak for him. 😉

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Curt said:

I’m going to stress a few points.  The prospect pool and the NHL team are not the same thing.  The prospect pool can be good while the NHL team is bad, because the prospects aren’t playing in the NHL.

You don’t need to believe me, but I’m telling you that the Sabres current group of young NHLers + prospects is much deeper than anything they have had in the past decade.

If you only care about the NHL team and don’t care about the prospect pool then you don’t need to post in a thread about the prospect pool.

I’m posting about the prospect pool in a thread about the prospect pool. Not sure where else I should post it.

I just find it funny that everyone is so convinced that it is somehow different this time. Everyone likes each other and gets along and “wants to be here” and so therefore they’ve turned some mythical corner because they played some decent hockey at the end of another lost season.

I hope y’all are right. But we have been here before. And right now, in the middle of summer, I see nothing to tell me we are going to be good in the regular season. Until our glorious prospect pool proves itself in the regular season, it means nothing.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SwampD said:

I’m posting about the prospect pool in a thread about the prospect pool. Not sure where else I should post it.

I just find it funny that everyone is so convinced that it is somehow different this time. Everyone likes each other and gets along and “wants to be here” and so therefore they’ve turned some mythical corner because they played some decent hockey at the end of another lost season.

I hope y’all are right. But we have been here before. And right now, in the middle of summer, I see nothing to tell me we are going to be good in the regular season. Until our glorious prospect pool proves itself in the regular season, it means nothing.

I haven’t read many posts in this thread, but my reaction is perhaps the recently hired analytics department might pay dividends this time around?

Also, no prospect tore up the AHL like Quinn & Peterka, so that is a positive difference. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, French Collection said:

I watched them both in the OHL. They were good players. Maybe they just didn’t progress beyond that level. Their hockey IQ held them back when everyone else was as big and fast.

Cliff Pu was another guy that was good in the OHL, he could really skate and put up good numbers in London.

Yep he was another, seemed destined to have anNHL career and now May never play a game 

again, just my gut feeling but the Sabres lack of a decent development staff was a huge factor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

Had mentioned that in a thread a couple of days ago that this is the 1st time since a path towards suffering was taken that this is very likely the 1st season post making that choice that all 20 opening day roster slots will be filled w/ NHLers (presuming Hinostroza, Bryson, & Anderson actually are NHLers; IMHO they are though not necessarily good/ideal).

And there are still 3 months to add players that bump at least 1, and maybe more, out of their roster spot.

So, to answer your question, yes.  😉

 

No doubt in my mind that Bryson and Hinostroza are at least on par with 4th liners/3rd pairing guys around the league.

Anderson of last year as well. At his age though that status could disappear at any time.

  • Agree 1
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...