Zach Benson: how good will he be this year?

[Porous Five Hole]

31 minutes ago, spndnchz said:

The sparkle in your eyes keeps me alive. 

The Cult will be at the OLG stage in Niagara Falls in October. But you’ll be paying re-sale prices if you don’t already have tix.  

[LTS]

On 8/22/2025 at 1:30 PM, pi2000 said:

Is that a good thing? 

IMO he would've been better off continuing to develop in junior playing +25min/gm.

Instead he's been pigeon holed in Buffalo during his critical developmental years, stunting his growth as an offensive contributor.

The flaw in this argument is that he's been in Buffalo during his critical developmental years. He has not played any years in the NHL where he would be beyond his critical developmental years and as such you cannot predict whether it's stunted his growth or not.  If he had played the past two years in juniors then he would have been a player who played in juniors with no NHL stats and a question of whether it would translate.  Then we'd talk about him being 21-23 and his early growth years in the NHL and still be trying to project his growth and what he would be when he hits 24.

The only way to know how this has impacted him won't be known for another few years and even then you won't know what could or could not have happened. He may never have been the player you think he was supposed to be.  

And the problem with staying in juniors is that if he's too good for that level, then it does not benefit him to play there either. You learn nothing by dominating lower competition.

The thing is, I don't think anyone would argue that the AHL was where he would have been best served but because of the system (not the team) he was unable to get there. The system could have failed him, but the Sabres did what they could which was play him in the NHL.

And given his ability to stand toe to toe (he won't really ever be eye to eye) with some pretty tough people in the NHL, I don't think it's harmed him at all.

[Archie Lee]

1 hour ago, LTS said:

The flaw in this argument is that he's been in Buffalo during his critical developmental years. He has not played any years in the NHL where he would be beyond his critical developmental years and as such you cannot predict whether it's stunted his growth or not.  If he had played the past two years in juniors then he would have been a player who played in juniors with no NHL stats and a question of whether it would translate.  Then we'd talk about him being 21-23 and his early growth years in the NHL and still be trying to project his growth and what he would be when he hits 24.

The only way to know how this has impacted him won't be known for another few years and even then you won't know what could or could not have happened. He may never have been the player you think he was supposed to be.  

And the problem with staying in juniors is that if he's too good for that level, then it does not benefit him to play there either. You learn nothing by dominating lower competition.

The thing is, I don't think anyone would argue that the AHL was where he would have been best served but because of the system (not the team) he was unable to get there. The system could have failed him, but the Sabres did what they could which was play him in the NHL.

And given his ability to stand toe to toe (he won't really ever be eye to eye) with some pretty tough people in the NHL, I don't think it's harmed him at all.

To the bolded.  It might be true, to a degree.  But I largely reject the notion.  I mean, is anybody seriously arguing that Benson would have dominated junior hockey as an 18 year old more than McDavid dominated the NHL as a 24-25 year old?  And, is anybody seriously arguing that McDavid stopped learning once he started dominating the NHL? The list of players who dominated lesser competition for a year or two in junior, post-draft, and who then went on to have great NHL careers is very long. Very long. Benson, in my view, is the sort of player who would have found many things in his game to improve on whether he was in junior, college, the AHL, or the NHL. He's not the sort of kid who would have pouted, or got lazy, or forgot about the defensive side of the game. 

 

[JohnC]

16 minutes ago, Archie Lee said:

To the bolded.  It might be true, to a degree.  But I largely reject the notion.  I mean, is anybody seriously arguing that Benson would have dominated junior hockey as an 18 year old more than McDavid dominated the NHL as a 24-25 year old?  And, is anybody seriously arguing that McDavid stopped learning once he started dominating the NHL? The list of players who dominated lesser competition for a year or two in junior, post-draft, and who then went on to have great NHL careers is very long. Very long. Benson, in my view, is the sort of player who would have found many things in his game to improve on whether he was in junior, college, the AHL, or the NHL. He's not the sort of kid who would have pouted, or got lazy, or forgot about the defensive side of the game. 

 

With respected to your comment about being able to learn when dominating at a lower level, that isn't the issue. The primary issue is whether he would have benefited more in the juniors or playing in the NHL. @LTS gave a strong argument why it made a lot of sense for him to play in the NHL given the rules that would have prohibited him from playing in the AHL. And there is another element to whether Benson would have benefited more in the juniors than the NHL i.e. physical development. It's more likely that the workout and training facilities and staff would be at a higher level in the NHL than it would have been in the juniors where a lot of his time would have been spent on buses. 

[pi2000]

9 hours ago, LTS said:

The flaw in this argument is that he's been in Buffalo during his critical developmental years. He has not played any years in the NHL where he would be beyond his critical developmental years and as such you cannot predict whether it's stunted his growth or not.  If he had played the past two years in juniors then he would have been a player who played in juniors with no NHL stats and a question of whether it would translate.  Then we'd talk about him being 21-23 and his early growth years in the NHL and still be trying to project his growth and what he would be when he hits 24.

The only way to know how this has impacted him won't be known for another few years and even then you won't know what could or could not have happened. He may never have been the player you think he was supposed to be.  

And the problem with staying in juniors is that if he's too good for that level, then it does not benefit him to play there either. You learn nothing by dominating lower competition.

The thing is, I don't think anyone would argue that the AHL was where he would have been best served but because of the system (not the team) he was unable to get there. The system could have failed him, but the Sabres did what they could which was play him in the NHL.

And given his ability to stand toe to toe (he won't really ever be eye to eye) with some pretty tough people in the NHL, I don't think it's harmed him at all.

The list of players who entered the league too soon and never fully blossomed, is very very long.   

The list of players ruined because they played 1 or 2 more years in junior (or NCAA) post draft, is very short, if it even exists.

If his career arc resembles that of Zemgus Girgensons, would that be satisfactory?  Zemgus also had 30 points his sophomore year.

I believe he would've grown his offensive game in junior more than he has is the NHL.   That could've paid dividends down the road, but we'll never know.

[dudacek]

48 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

The list of players who entered the league too soon and never fully blossomed, is very very long.   

The list of players ruined because they played 1 or 2 more years in junior (or NCAA) post draft, is very short, if it even exists.

If his career arc resembles that of Zemgus Girgensons, would that be satisfactory?  Zemgus also had 30 points his sophomore year.

I believe he would've grown his offensive game in junior more than he has is the NHL.   That could've paid dividends down the road, but we'll never know.

The list of players who played 40 games as an 18-year-old in the NHL this century is exactly 40 players deep.

https://www.eliteprospects.com/league/nhl/stats/all-time-season?age=u19&from=2000-2001&sort=gp

Show me this very, very long list of ruined players.

[SABRES 0311]

8 hours ago, pi2000 said:

The list of players who entered the league too soon and never fully blossomed, is very very long.   

The list of players ruined because they played 1 or 2 more years in junior (or NCAA) post draft, is very short, if it even exists.

If his career arc resembles that of Zemgus Girgensons, would that be satisfactory?  Zemgus also had 30 points his sophomore year.

I believe he would've grown his offensive game in junior more than he has is the NHL.   That could've paid dividends down the road, but we'll never know.

Girgensons did show flashes of offensive upside in his first couple years. Benson has too. Unless he’s putting up 20 goals in the top six he can stay on the third line. Third liners aren’t bad players and he brings energy along with some offensive capabilities.

When he’s 23-24 we’ll know better if he is a top six guy.

[JohnC]

10 hours ago, pi2000 said:

The list of players who entered the league too soon and never fully blossomed, is very very long.   

The list of players ruined because they played 1 or 2 more years in junior (or NCAA) post draft, is very short, if it even exists.

If his career arc resembles that of Zemgus Girgensons, would that be satisfactory?  Zemgus also had 30 points his sophomore year.

I believe he would've grown his offensive game in junior more than he has is the NHL.   That could've paid dividends down the road, but we'll never know.

When dealing with prospects and young players you are rarely certain how they will develop and what level of player they will be with the exception of the few ultra elite players. Whether Zemgus was rushed or not he would have turned out to be the same player that shown to be over a long career.

[LGR4GM]

12 hours ago, pi2000 said:

The list of players who entered the league too soon and never fully blossomed, is very very long.   

The list of players ruined because they played 1 or 2 more years in junior (or NCAA) post draft, is very short, if it even exists.

If his career arc resembles that of Zemgus Girgensons, would that be satisfactory?  Zemgus also had 30 points his sophomore year.

I believe he would've grown his offensive game in junior more than he has is the NHL.   That could've paid dividends down the road, but we'll never know.

Zemgus Girgensons was 21yrs old in his 2nd season and he played an entire AHL season at 18yrs old. In his 30pt season he averaged 19:05toi a game for 1163:51 total TOI for the year. His CF% was 37.8 but he was getting 58.5% dzone starts. His xGF% is 39.6% or -16.2 depending on how you want to look at the split. He had 0.8g/60 and 0.8a/60 but 0.5a/60 were secondary. Zemgus has never reached 30pts again and has never even reached 20 again. In fact Benson's first 2 season would ranked tied for 1st with zemgus and standalone in 2nd in terms of points.

Zach Benson just completed his 2nd season at age 19 (he's about 1.5yrs younger than Zemgus was in his 2nd season). He has no AHL season previously. In his 28pt season he averaged 14:31toi a game for 1030:44 total TOI for the year. His CF% was 56.6% and he got 44.4% dzone starts. His xGF% was 52.65%or +3.7 depending on how you want to look at the splits. He had 36.8xGF compared to Zemgus' 30.8 in more ice time. Benson had 0.5g/60 and 1.0a/60 with 0.8a/60 as primary. 

To recap, a younger Zach Benson put up better assist numbers, better CF%, and better xGF% including a better xGF than Zemgus while being 1.5 years younger in only his 2nd, not 3rd pro season like Zemgus but this is the comparison you think makes your argument? What number of points would Zach Benson need to put up this year in order for you to "know" that playing the last 2 years in the NHL didn't stifle his offensive game? 50pts? 60pts? I am genuinely asking what would Benson have to produce this year?

[LGR4GM]

11 hours ago, dudacek said:

The list of players who played 40 games as an 18-year-old in the NHL this century is exactly 40 players deep.

https://www.eliteprospects.com/league/nhl/stats/all-time-season?age=u19&from=2000-2001&sort=gp

Show me this very, very long list of ruined players.

Zach Benson is in 24th on this list alongside names like Tim Stutzle (29pts), David Pastrnak (27pts), Cole Sillinger (31pts), and I would like to toss out Aleksander Barkov (24pts). We also have Alex Galchenyuk (27pts and Jesper Kotkoniemi (34pts) as maybe some less than great guys around there too. The list of players who played in the NHL at 19 for 40+ games is 100 players long. 

[pi2000]

4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Zemgus Girgensons was 21yrs old in his 2nd season and he played an entire AHL season at 18yrs old. In his 30pt season he averaged 19:05toi a game for 1163:51 total TOI for the year. His CF% was 37.8 but he was getting 58.5% dzone starts. His xGF% is 39.6% or -16.2 depending on how you want to look at the split. He had 0.8g/60 and 0.8a/60 but 0.5a/60 were secondary. Zemgus has never reached 30pts again and has never even reached 20 again. In fact Benson's first 2 season would ranked tied for 1st with zemgus and standalone in 2nd in terms of points.

Zach Benson just completed his 2nd season at age 19 (he's about 1.5yrs younger than Zemgus was in his 2nd season). He has no AHL season previously. In his 28pt season he averaged 14:31toi a game for 1030:44 total TOI for the year. His CF% was 56.6% and he got 44.4% dzone starts. His xGF% was 52.65%or +3.7 depending on how you want to look at the splits. He had 36.8xGF compared to Zemgus' 30.8 in more ice time. Benson had 0.5g/60 and 1.0a/60 with 0.8a/60 as primary. 

To recap, a younger Zach Benson put up better assist numbers, better CF%, and better xGF% including a better xGF than Zemgus while being 1.5 years younger in only his 2nd, not 3rd pro season like Zemgus but this is the comparison you think makes your argument? What number of points would Zach Benson need to put up this year in order for you to "know" that playing the last 2 years in the NHL didn't stifle his offensive game? 50pts? 60pts? I am genuinely asking what would Benson have to produce this year?

It depends where they deploy him.   I've said this before... if he plays top line and PP, I expect somewhere in the 45-55 pt range.     If he plays 3rd line and very little PP time then probably somewhere around 35-40pts.   

I look at a guy like Andrew Cristall, who put up similar numbers as Benson his draft year in the WHL.    Unlike Benson, he stayed in junior and put up 132 points in his d+2 season, an NHLe of 48 points.   That's a good target for Benson imo.     If he plays the full season and puts up <40 points, then I'll considered him damaged goods.

[LGR4GM]

37 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

It depends where they deploy him.   I've said this before... if he plays top line and PP, I expect somewhere in the 45-55 pt range.     If he plays 3rd line and very little PP time then probably somewhere around 35-40pts.   

I look at a guy like Andrew Cristall, who put up similar numbers as Benson his draft year in the WHL.    Unlike Benson, he stayed in junior and put up 132 points in his d+2 season, an NHLe of 48 points.   That's a good target for Benson imo.     If he plays the full season and puts up <40 points, then I'll considered him damaged goods.

There's our threshold then, 40.5o/u

I think I put Benson at 45pts this season but forget where I put that projection. 

[dudacek]

42 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

There's our threshold then, 40.5o/u

I think I put Benson at 45pts this season but forget where I put that projection. 

If i had to make a prediction I'd say 50.

I think Peterka's departure and Zucker's likely regression will leave a hole that almost guarantees a jump for at least one of Kulich/Quinn/Benson and I think Bennie is the one most likely stapled to Thompson.

[oddoublee]

6 hours ago, dudacek said:

If i had to make a prediction I'd say 50.

I think Peterka's departure and Zucker's likely regression will leave a hole that almost guarantees a jump for at least one of Kulich/Quinn/Benson and I think Bennie is the one most likely stapled to Thompson.

36

18-18

And we should all be ok with that. Good season for a kid his age.

[K-9]

This notion that an 18 year old right out of juniors can’t develop in the NHL is absurd. 

[Pimlach]

25 minutes ago, K-9 said:

This notion that an 18 year old right out of juniors can’t develop in the NHL is absurd. 

Would he be better off playing at 18 and 19 in Juniors or in the NHL is the question at hand. 

It is an argument that either side cant really prove.  Depends on the player and the team he is playing for.  

McDavid and Eichel could make the jump at 18.  Reinhart didn't, Tage didn't, very few 18 year old players make that jump.    

Benson did it but did he get enough ice time and play in enough situations that maximized his development at 18?  

My opinion is that Adams blew it by not bringing in more veterans that would keep Benson in Juniors for at least another year.  Benson making the team at 18 was more about how terrible the Sabres roster depth was.   Benson does not have the skills of McDavid/Eichel.   

I say this and yet I still like Benson a lot.  I don't think Benson will get hurt by being rushed because his mindset won't allow it.  I can't say that about most 18 year olds.  

[K-9]

12 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Would he be better off playing at 18 and 19 in Juniors or in the NHL is the question at hand. 

It is an argument that either side cant really prove.  Depends on the player and the team he is playing for.  

McDavid and Eichel could make the jump at 18.  Reinhart didn't, Tage didn't, very few 18 year old players make that jump.    

Benson did it but did he get enough ice time and play in enough situations that maximized his development at 18?  

My opinion is that Adams blew it by not bringing in more veterans that would keep Benson in Juniors for at least another year.  Benson making the team at 18 was more about how terrible the Sabres roster depth was.   Benson does not have the skills of McDavid/Eichel.   

I say this and yet I still like Benson a lot.  I don't think Benson will get hurt by being rushed because his mindset won't allow it.  I can't say that about most 18 year olds.  

I don’t disagree in general and as you say, it depends on the player. Benson has more hockey sense and skill than half of the older players on the team. He certainly has more heart and hustle as well. Instead of his development being stunted by not returning to juniors, his development has been accelerated by having to acclimate to the NHL early on. He will be that much more developed when he reaches the age he would have been by waiting. 

Perhaps a season or two in the A would have been beneficial but imo, additional time in juniors would have been of little to no benefit to his development. He had already surpassed that level of play. 

[LGR4GM]

There are 2 things that can happen and for the most part we are only considering 1. 

First is what we are talking about, Benson goes back to jrs and gets lots of minutes a night which helps him learn about this or that and practice in a lower stakes and easier environment. The inverse is that by coming to the NHL he doesn't get those minutes and therefore does not get to learn in that lower stakes environment. 

Second, something we are not talking about much, is Benson could learn a few things in jrs but by mid-season he would be bored and not challenged. He then develops bad habits because for the most part he is better than those he faces. This actually happens a lot, it is why Justin Carbonneau should have moved on from the Q. Now it doesn't just break a player, lots of guys overcome it, but we should consider would Zach Benson have become bored in jrs and developed less because it lacked the challenge he needs? For example the speed of JR is easy for Benson to keep up with, the NHL was not. If Benson spent 2 years vigorously working on his speed to be closer to NHL levels as opposed to being confident in his jr level ability, he would not have developed as much. What about his shot? That is a big criticism around here and if he went back to jr could he have worked on it? Would he have realized where it was in relation to NHL goaltending? 

I tend to think Zach Benson in particular needs the 2nd development path. The more you push him, the more he responds. Stagnating by being too good for jrs would have been more detrimental to his NHL skillset than spending 2 years refining himself against NHL competition. That's just my opinion though. 

[French Collection]

As others have said there is no way of proving either side of this debate. The Sabres didn’t have enough talent on the roster to send him back and that is on KA’s watch but credit to Benson for doing well as a smallish 18 year old.

Returning to juniors for one season would not have hurt his development but being around pros to practice, work out and travel accelerated the mental part of being a pro for him. His defensive game was good and he had already scored a lot at the junior level so his improvements there would have been some speed and strength by getting a year older.

Matt Savoie went back to the same junior club they came from and I don’t think there was much benefit for him except getting traded to Moose Jaw and competing in the Memorial Cup.

IMO, the NCAA would have been a great place for him to go, had that option been available at the time. This is now another option for prospects and could help a lot of them.

A lot of guys from his draft class will be turning pro this year while he has two NHL years in his pocket. They will be up against a new challenge that he has already surmounted. I think he is ready for another bump up this year.

[dudacek]

I keep coming back to basics on this:

Zach Benson was in the NHL the past two seasons because he was good enough to be in the NHL the past two seasons.

People keep focusing on the 30 points part of the equation (which is NHL-calibre) and ignoring the defensive part of the equation: that he is an absolute unicorn for a teenager in that aspect of the game.

All the development cliches that people keep leaning into come from players who can't play defence and have games built around overpowering opponents with skill-based tactics that don't work at higher levels; they turn pucks over, get caught cheating and get frustrated when those tactics fail; their numbers drop and their ice time gets cut because their coaches can't trust them..

That's not Benson: he's playing because his coaches trust him.

People are confused because what he's doing is extremely rare; most teenage prospects make the league due to their superior offence while they learn defence on the fly; with Benson, its his advanced defence earns him a spot in the NHL while he learns offence on the fly.

But there is one obvious comparable:

Ryan O'Reilly who had 26 points in 81 games at 18, 26 points in 74 at 19 and 55 in 81 games at 20

 

[dudacek]

Zach Benson at 19 10/18/28 TOI: 14:40 SAT% 55.5 GF% 51.2 xGF% 53.7

JJ Peterka at 20 12/20/32 TOI: 13:39 SAT% 49.0 GF% 43.5 xGF% 48.5

 

Benson was demonstrably more ready for the NHL at 19 than Peterka was at 20

 

[K-9]

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

There are 2 things that can happen and for the most part we are only considering 1. 

First is what we are talking about, Benson goes back to jrs and gets lots of minutes a night which helps him learn about this or that and practice in a lower stakes and easier environment. The inverse is that by coming to the NHL he doesn't get those minutes and therefore does not get to learn in that lower stakes environment. 

Second, something we are not talking about much, is Benson could learn a few things in jrs but by mid-season he would be bored and not challenged. He then develops bad habits because for the most part he is better than those he faces. This actually happens a lot, it is why Justin Carbonneau should have moved on from the Q. Now it doesn't just break a player, lots of guys overcome it, but we should consider would Zach Benson have become bored in jrs and developed less because it lacked the challenge he needs? For example the speed of JR is easy for Benson to keep up with, the NHL was not. If Benson spent 2 years vigorously working on his speed to be closer to NHL levels as opposed to being confident in his jr level ability, he would not have developed as much. What about his shot? That is a big criticism around here and if he went back to jr could he have worked on it? Would he have realized where it was in relation to NHL goaltending? 

I tend to think Zach Benson in particular needs the 2nd development path. The more you push him, the more he responds. Stagnating by being too good for jrs would have been more detrimental to his NHL skillset than spending 2 years refining himself against NHL competition. That's just my opinion though. 

Getting minutes in games is only part of the equation in terms of development as practicing with major leaguers lends a certain level of development as well. Not to mention the other ancillary aspects of being in the show.