Jump to content


Photo

Players not listening to Dan?


  • Please log in to reply
394 replies to this topic

#361 JJFIVEOH

JJFIVEOH

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,994 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boca Raton, FL

Posted 17 February 2017 - 04:29 PM

There isn't one single team with four solid top four defensemen. Either because people overvalue what a top four should be, or there just aren't enough to go around. How does anybody plan to afford to be the only team with four top notch top 4 D-men while fielding what should be a top 5 scoring team in the near future? It's not going to happen. Eventually fans are going to have to accept the fact that they highly overvalue the position because they put way too much emphasis on what should be expected.

#362 yse325

yse325

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Marietta, GA; from Williamsville

Posted 17 February 2017 - 04:36 PM

Minn, Ana, ......



#363 JJFIVEOH

JJFIVEOH

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,994 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boca Raton, FL

Posted 17 February 2017 - 04:43 PM

Minn, Ana, ......


Bring them all here and this group will find something wrong with them, just like every other team's fans.

And Anaheim will soon be splitting that up because they won't be able too afford them..... Like I said.

#364 Doohickie

Doohickie

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,483 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 17 February 2017 - 04:51 PM

Bring them all here and this group will find something wrong with them, just like every other team's fans.

And Anaheim will soon be splitting that up because they won't be able too afford them..... Like I said.

 

That's what the cap does.  It makes every team in the league have to make decisions about how to spread its cap money to maximize wins.  Every GM is looking for that magic formula:  Is it better to have 4 effective scoring lines, or do you put a lot of money into 3 lines to the point that your 4th line is hardly worth playing?  Do you put all your money into stud defensemen, or do you try to win with top scorers.  Really, that's the whole point of the cap:  To force certain big market teams from hogging all the best players.


It forces redistribution of talent.



#365 JJFIVEOH

JJFIVEOH

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,994 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boca Raton, FL

Posted 17 February 2017 - 04:53 PM

That's what the cap does. It makes every team in the league have to make decisions about how to spread its cap money to maximize wins. Every GM is looking for that magic formula: Is it better to have 4 effective scoring lines, or do you put a lot of money into 3 lines to the point that your 4th line is hardly worth playing? Do you put all your money into stud defensemen, or do you try to win with top scorers. Really, that's the whole point of the cap: To force certain big market teams from hogging all the best players.

It forces redistribution of talent.


Exactly. And this team isn't setting up to be one of those teams to be stacked defensively. So why force the issue when some of the most successful teams aren't defensively stacked either?

#366 Doohickie

Doohickie

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,483 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 17 February 2017 - 04:59 PM

Exactly. And this team isn't setting up to be one of those teams to be stacked defensively. So why force the issue when some of the most successful teams aren't defensively stacked either?

 

Can I take that question?

 

Because in the first couple years after the 2004 lockout, they called interference/hooking/tripping/holding with impunity and the Sabres excelled.  Then after a season or two they returned to the old ways where all that stuff is tolerated.  The Sabres went from a successful, high scoring team to a mediocre team that had trouble scoring.  The Buffalo fan base is convinced we'll never be a high scoring team again, and if you take that as a given, having the best defense seems to make logical sense.

 

I think it's hogwash, and the last couple games supports that view.  Even with scoring a 2-0 win against the Avs, the Sabres won with offense.  The offensive pressure won the game, even without scoring that many goals.



#367 yse325

yse325

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Marietta, GA; from Williamsville

Posted 17 February 2017 - 05:12 PM

You can't play with only 1 good D group no matter how many great forwards you have.  We have only 1 D pair worth a crap.  Why is this so hard to understand?

 

Ana can afford to lose a player like Fowler because they have a deep pipeline of quality D.  

 

The NHL is short on quality D.  That is why every team is out looking for it with a few exceptions, and those exceptions have drafted D properly and consistently.  

 

We haven't.  That is why our team, despite nearly every forward having improved numbers year over year, still isn't worth a crap.  We are playing with 2 statues (Gorges, Franson) two AHLers (Falk and Fedun), two injury riddled under-performing overpaid veterans in their "prime" (Kulikov & Bogo) and we are asking two kids (Risto and McCabe) to pick up all the slack.  We have only one high end D prospect (Guhle) because GMTM didn't see fit to draft any others and he is 19.  Great!

 

And this is somehow DD's fault because he isn't playing uptempo hockey. 

 

By the way, speaking of forward performance. I compared our returning forwards numbers (g/p, a/p and pts/g) year over year and all, except Ennis, Folgino and ROR all our forwards are having more productive years (pts/g) year over year.  Foligno is about the same and ROR has slipped from .85 pts/game to .77 pts/g.  What an awful system where everyone improves upfront despite having a terrible D group supporting them. 


Edited by yse325, 17 February 2017 - 05:17 PM.


#368 JJFIVEOH

JJFIVEOH

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,994 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boca Raton, FL

Posted 17 February 2017 - 05:17 PM

Can I take that question?

Because in the first couple years after the 2004 lockout, they called interference/hooking/tripping/holding with impunity and the Sabres excelled. Then after a season or two they returned to the old ways where all that stuff is tolerated. The Sabres went from a successful, high scoring team to a mediocre team that had trouble scoring. The Buffalo fan base is convinced we'll never be a high scoring team again, and if you take that as a given, having the best defense seems to make logical sense.

I think it's hogwash, and the last couple games supports that view. Even with scoring a 2-0 win against the Avs, the Sabres won with offense. The offensive pressure won the game, even without scoring that many goals.


That's a fair explanation. Not too long ago the Sabres were in the bottom of theeague in scoring (two months the ago). They've moved up considerably.

#369 yse325

yse325

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Marietta, GA; from Williamsville

Posted 17 February 2017 - 05:39 PM

Also why did the Edm and now Col rebuilds fail?  Anyone... Bueller?... Anyone?  

 

Lack of D!  

Edm drafted "great" forward after "great" forward.  Hall, RNH, Gagner, Yakupov etc  In fact from 2007-2016, they have used their 1st pick on a forward every time but 1 and that was Darnell Nurse in 2013,  Their D got so bad, they finally got rid of a star forward for a D last year in the Hall for Larsson trade.   They are still an O juggernaut (having McJesus will do that), but with the signing of Sekera & Russell, development of Klefbom, the trade for Larsson and getting good play from college FA Matt Benning, the Oilers now have a competent D group and are in a playoff spot.

 

Colorado has 3 hugely talented forward in Duchene, MacKinnon and Landeskog and their team is 2013-14 Sabres awful. Why? No D.  Other then the injured Eric Johnson, and the defensively challenged Barrie, I'm not sure anyone of the team is worth a darn.  

 

I don't care how great your O is, if you aren't at least decent on D, you aren't winning a thing in the NHL.

 

I do agree that the Cap helps move talent around the NHL and helps parity.  However, that makes drafting and developing cheap young talent so important.  It's why Regier ulimately failed,  (for some reason he hated drafting centers) and ultimately if GMTM doesn't fix the D in the NHL and in our pipeline, he'll fail as well.


Edited by yse325, 17 February 2017 - 05:41 PM.


#370 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,748 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 17 February 2017 - 05:42 PM

In his three drafts, Murray has drafted one defenceman in the first two rounds.

During the same time, so has Chicago, Colorado, Dallas, Detroit, Florida, NJ, Phoenix, St Louis, Toronto, Vancouver, and Winnipeg.
Anaheim drafted two. So did Calgary, Montreal, Ottawa, Philadelphia,San Jose and Washington
Edmonton none. Same with Minnesota, NYI, NYR, and Pittsburgh.

That's 24 teams that added two or less "top" prospect defenceman in the past three years.
Looks like GMTM isn't the only boss man asleep at the switch.

Edited by dudacek, 17 February 2017 - 05:44 PM.


#371 Taro T

Taro T

    It leads you here despite your destination under the MW tonight.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,150 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 February 2017 - 08:07 PM

In his three drafts, Murray has drafted one defenceman in the first two rounds.
During the same time, so has Chicago, Colorado, Dallas, Detroit, Florida, NJ, Phoenix, St Louis, Toronto, Vancouver, and Winnipeg.
Anaheim drafted two. So did Calgary, Montreal, Ottawa, Philadelphia,San Jose and Washington
Edmonton none. Same with Minnesota, NYI, NYR, and Pittsburgh.
That's 24 teams that added two or less "top" prospect defenceman in the past three years.
Looks like GMTM isn't the only boss man asleep at the switch.


Interesting stat. Thanks for posting that.

#372 yse325

yse325

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Marietta, GA; from Williamsville

Posted 17 February 2017 - 09:28 PM

In his three drafts, Murray has drafted one defenceman in the first two rounds.
During the same time, so has Chicago, Colorado, Dallas, Detroit, Florida, NJ, Phoenix, St Louis, Toronto, Vancouver, and Winnipeg.
Anaheim drafted two. So did Calgary, Montreal, Ottawa, Philadelphia,San Jose and Washington
Edmonton none. Same with Minnesota, NYI, NYR, and Pittsburgh.
That's 24 teams that added two or less "top" prospect defenceman in the past three years.
Looks like GMTM isn't the only boss man asleep at the switch.

That stat is meaningless and in the case of Ana wrong. How many 1 & 2 rd picks did they have? What is the condition of their D pipeline? How good is their NHL D? How high were the picks? For example Ana has been drafting D for years. They drafted fowler 1st in 2010, Linholm 1st in 2012 and Theodore 1st in 2013. In the last 3 years they have had 7 picks in the 1st 2 rounds; 3 have been D, including Larsson 1st in 2015 and Petterson and Montour with 2nd rd picks in 2014. So that's 3/7 with an already stacked pipeline compared to GMTM's 1/8 with an empty pipeline.

Philly is 2/8, but their 2 were both first rd picks and that comes despite already having the Ghost, Morin (1st in 2013 and Hagg 2nd in 2013) already in the system.

Obviously when you look just a little deeper on your GM list, it looks like Ana and Philly aren't sleeping at the switch after all. I haven't looked at all the teams you mentioned, but so far you are 0 for 2.

Edited by yse325, 17 February 2017 - 09:45 PM.


#373 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,678 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 17 February 2017 - 09:35 PM

You can't play with only 1 good D group no matter how many great forwards you have. We have only 1 D pair worth a crap. Why is this so hard to understand?

Ana can afford to lose a player like Fowler because they have a deep pipeline of quality D.

The NHL is short on quality D. That is why every team is out looking for it with a few exceptions, and those exceptions have drafted D properly and consistently.

We haven't. That is why our team, despite nearly every forward having improved numbers year over year, still isn't worth a crap. We are playing with 2 statues (Gorges, Franson) two AHLers (Falk and Fedun), two injury riddled under-performing overpaid veterans in their "prime" (Kulikov & Bogo) and we are asking two kids (Risto and McCabe) to pick up all the slack. We have only one high end D prospect (Guhle) because GMTM didn't see fit to draft any others and he is 19. Great!

And this is somehow DD's fault because he isn't playing uptempo hockey.

By the way, speaking of forward performance. I compared our returning forwards numbers (g/p, a/p and pts/g) year over year and all, except Ennis, Folgino and ROR all our forwards are having more productive years (pts/g) year over year. Foligno is about the same and ROR has slipped from .85 pts/game to .77 pts/g. What an awful system where everyone improves upfront despite having a terrible D group supporting them.

Anaheim isn't trading away their best player.

#374 yse325

yse325

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Marietta, GA; from Williamsville

Posted 17 February 2017 - 09:41 PM

Anaheim isn't trading away their best player.


What? The point was Ana has the ability to move any of their young D. Fowler is just an example. It can just as easily be Lindholm, Vatanen, Theodore etc...

#375 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,678 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 17 February 2017 - 09:51 PM

What? The point was Ana has the ability to move any of their young D. Fowler is just an example. It can just as easily be Lindholm, Vatanen, Theodore etc...


I think it can much more easily be any of the other players you mentioned.

#376 Briere48

Briere48

    Blood and Guts

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,138 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 17 February 2017 - 11:08 PM

Also why did the Edm and now Col rebuilds fail?  Anyone... Bueller?... Anyone?  

 

Lack of D!  

Edm drafted "great" forward after "great" forward.  Hall, RNH, Gagner, Yakupov etc  In fact from 2007-2016, they have used their 1st pick on a forward every time but 1 and that was Darnell Nurse in 2013,  Their D got so bad, they finally got rid of a star forward for a D last year in the Hall for Larsson trade.   They are still an O juggernaut (having McJesus will do that), but with the signing of Sekera & Russell, development of Klefbom, the trade for Larsson and getting good play from college FA Matt Benning, the Oilers now have a competent D group and are in a playoff spot.

 

Colorado has 3 hugely talented forward in Duchene, MacKinnon and Landeskog and their team is 2013-14 Sabres awful. Why? No D.  Other then the injured Eric Johnson, and the defensively challenged Barrie, I'm not sure anyone of the team is worth

 

 

It was part of the issue.

 

Oilers were unlucky, as they kept picking what seemed to be the best available player and all the high end talent was all one-dimensional. All those players Oilers drafted were fast, small, not physical, not overly good in their own end... there was no Ekblad or someone like Monahan or Barkov at the top. As for Colorado, their defense is a major issue for sure, but also team management and the type of players they drafted should also be looked at. Matt Duchene is a ultra-selfish player (http://www.thehockey...n-losing-effort) and they had constantly battles with ROR.

 

On the overall point though, i do agree with you on improving the defense, i just think the Oilers and Aves rebuilds are much different stories and many factors go into them for their failures.



#377 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,748 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 17 February 2017 - 11:16 PM

That stat is meaningless and in the case of Ana wrong. How many 1 & 2 rd picks did they have? What is the condition of their D pipeline? How good is their NHL D? How high were the picks? For example Ana has been drafting D for years. They drafted fowler 1st in 2010, Linholm 1st in 2012 and Theodore 1st in 2013. In the last 3 years they have had 7 picks in the 1st 2 rounds; 3 have been D, including Larsson 1st in 2015 and Petterson and Montour with 2nd rd picks in 2014. So that's 3/7 with an already stacked pipeline compared to GMTM's 1/8 with an empty pipeline.
Philly is 2/8, but their 2 were both first rd picks and that comes despite already having the Ghost, Morin (1st in 2013 and Hagg 2nd in 2013) already in the system.
Obviously when you look just a little deeper on your GM list, it looks like Ana and Philly aren't sleeping at the switch after all. I haven't looked at all the teams you mentioned, but so far you are 0 for 2.

I did miss Petterson. I did not miss on Philly. They've picked 2. I guess it's 23 of 30 teams, then.

Backing things up doesn't really help your argument. The Sabres drafted Ristolainen and Zadorov (2 1st rounders) in 2013, McCabe in 2012 and Pysyk in 2010. And Murray traded Pysyk for another 2010 1st rounder in Kulikov. I guess the Sabres weren't sleeping at the switch after all.

And you are choosing to compare Murray to Anaheim, the team with the best set of defensive prospects in the league.
Shall we compare the forwards the Sabres picked in that span to Anaheim's?

Simple mathematics would say an average team would have six picks in the first two rounds over three years and to stock your team with balance, one would conclude three would be forwards, two defencemen and one a goalie.

Look, I wish we had more young defencemen in the system too.
You could argue Murray should have picked Sergachev over Nylander last year, and that one of the second rounders in 2014 should have been a defenceman and youd have an argument. Instead they took the highest-ranked player on their board.

Would you have taken Hanifan over Eichel? Fleury over Reinhart? Hajek or Peeke over Asplund?
Other than Montour, the 2014 second round looks terrible. More than 20 other teams besides us passed on him.
Murray has tried to get lucky by stocking up on defence in the later rounds.

If you look a little deeper, maybe Murray's done alright with the hand he was dealt in the draft.

Edited by dudacek, 17 February 2017 - 11:17 PM.


#378 JJFIVEOH

JJFIVEOH

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,994 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boca Raton, FL

Posted 17 February 2017 - 11:17 PM

What? The point was Ana has the ability to move any of their young D. Fowler is just an example. It can just as easily be Lindholm, Vatanen, Theodore etc...


But, why would they?

#379 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,748 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 18 February 2017 - 12:05 AM

If you are defining "pipeline" as the number of 1st or 2nd round defenceman 23 and under in your organization, here's what the league looks like:

Anaheim: Lindholm, Theodore, Montour, Petterson, Larsson
Boston: Arnesson, Zboril, Carlo, Lauzon, McAvoy, Lingren
Buffalo: McCabe, Ristolainen, Guhle
Calgary: Seiloff, Anderson, Kylington,
Carolina: Fleury, Hanifan, Bean
Chicago: Pokka, Fournier, Dahlstrom, Gilbert, Krys
Colorado: Zadorov, Bigras, Meloche
Columbus: Murray, Hetherington, Jones, Collins, Carlsson, Werenski, Peeke
Dallas: Bystrom, Honka
Detroit: Cholowski, Hronek
Edmonton: Reinhart, Nurse
Florida: Matheson, McCoshen, Ekblad
LA: McKeown, Lintuniemi, Cernak, Clague
Minnesota: Dumba, Olofsson
Montreal: Thrower, Juulsen, Sergachev
Nashville: Dougherty, Girard, Fabbro
New Jersey: Severson, Santini, Jacobs
NY Islanders: Pulock
NY Rangers: Skjei
Ottawa: Ceci, Englund, Chabot
Philadelphia: Morin, Hagg, Sanheim, Provorov
Phoenix: DeAngelo, Chychrun
Pittsburgh: Pouliot, Maatta
San Jose: Mueller, Bergman, Roy
St. Louis: Schmaltz, Vannelli, Dunn
Tampa: Koekkoek, Blujus, Masin, McLeod, Spencer, Hajek
Toronto: Reilly, Finn, Dermott
Vancouver: Juolevi
Washington: Bowey, Seigenthaler, Johansen
Winnipeg: Trouba, Morrisey, Stanley

How many would you pick over the Sabres?
Has Murray really made a mess of our pipeline?

Edited by dudacek, 18 February 2017 - 12:13 AM.


#380 yse325

yse325

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Marietta, GA; from Williamsville

Posted 18 February 2017 - 12:49 AM

I did miss Petterson. I did not miss on Philly. They've picked 2. I guess it's 23 of 30 teams, then.
Backing things up doesn't really help your argument. The Sabres drafted Ristolainen and Zadorov (2 1st rounders) in 2013, McCabe in 2012 and Pysyk in 2010. And Murray traded Pysyk for another 2010 1st rounder in Kulikov. I guess the Sabres weren't sleeping at the switch after all.
And you are choosing to compare Murray to Anaheim, the team with the best set of defensive prospects in the league.
Shall we compare the forwards the Sabres picked in that span to Anaheim's?
Simple mathematics would say an average team would have six picks in the first two rounds over three years and to stock your team with balance, one would conclude three would be forwards, two defencemen and one a goalie.
Look, I wish we had more young defencemen in the system too.
You could argue Murray should have picked Sergachev over Nylander last year, and that one of the second rounders in 2014 should have been a defenceman and youd have an argument. Instead they took the highest-ranked player on their board.
Would you have taken Hanifan over Eichel? Fleury over Reinhart? Hajek or Peeke over Asplund?'
Other than Montour, the 2014 second round looks terrible. More than 20 other teams besides us passed on him.
Murray has tried to get lucky by stocking up on defence in the later rounds.
If you look a little deeper, maybe Murray's done alright with the hand he was dealt in the draft.

Now this is a post I can agree with.

Where I think he went wrong was as he emptied the D pipeline he didn't replace them with similar quality draftees. No question we take Reinhart and Eichel. No choice, but after that D should have come into play. Drafting forward after forward in the first two rounds has given us great depth at forward but it has left the organization with no D prospects in the pros. Not one in Rochester. To make matters worse he also acquired forward prospects Carrier and Fasching. Seriously, how many 2-3 line wingers does one organization need? Also solid D prospects are harder to develop, but are a much more tradeable asset. How many teams would love to get their hands on just one of Ana's or Philly's prospects?

I also agree we should have drafted Sergachev (I liked Chychrun over Sergachev) Nylander. I like Nylander and think he'll ultimately be a top 6 forward for us, someday, but how much better would we feel about our D group going forward if we had Sergachev and Guhle fighting for jobs next year? Kane certainly wouldn't be going anywhere.

Trying to get lucky with later rd picks isn't a smart strategy. According to Tsn's Scott Cullen after the 2nd round the odds of finding a player that lasts 100 games in the NHL falls to about 25% for early 3rd and decreases from there down to 11% in later rounds and even if they do make it the majority are bottom pairing or 4th line players. Those are long odds. Will Borgen and Fitzgerald buck that trend? Maybe, but if they do that's a bonus.

Edited by yse325, 18 February 2017 - 12:50 AM.


#381 JJFIVEOH

JJFIVEOH

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,994 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boca Raton, FL

Posted 18 February 2017 - 12:53 AM

Now this is a post I can agree with.

Where I think he went wrong was as he emptied the D pipeline he didn't replace them with similar quality draftees. No question we take Reinhart and Eichel. No choice, but after that D should have come into play. Drafting forward after forward in the first two rounds has given us great depth at forward but it has left the organization with no D prospects in the pros. Not one in Rochester. To make matters worse he also acquired forward prospects Carrier and Fasching. Seriously, how many 2-3 line wingers does one organization need? Also solid D prospects are harder to develop, but are a much more tradeable asset. How many teams would love to get their hands on just one of Ana's or Philly's prospects?

I also agree we should have drafted Sergachev (I liked Chychrun over Sergachev) Nylander. I like Nylander and think he'll ultimately be a top 6 forward for us, someday, but how much better would we feel about our D group going forward if we had Sergachev and Guhle fighting for jobs next year? Kane certainly wouldn't be going anywhere.

Trying to get lucky with later rd picks isn't a smart strategy. According to Tsn's Scott Cullen after the 2nd round the odds of finding a player that lasts 100 games in the NHL falls to about 25% for early 3rd and decreases from there down to 11% in later rounds and even if they do make it the majority are bottom pairing or 4th line players. Those are long odds. Will Borgen and Fitzgerald buck that trend? Maybe, but if they do that's a bonus.

 

You're right, he replaced them with NHL ready top 4 D-men in Kulikov and Bogosian. 



#382 yse325

yse325

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Marietta, GA; from Williamsville

Posted 18 February 2017 - 01:07 AM

You're right, he replaced them with NHL ready top 4 D-men in Kulikov and Bogosian.


That's not correct. He swapped Myers for Bogo. He did swap Pysyk for Kulikov, but that hasn't exactly helped. However, he moved out McNabb and Zadarov, and didn't replace them. It would have been wise to do so.

#383 JJFIVEOH

JJFIVEOH

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,994 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boca Raton, FL

Posted 18 February 2017 - 01:20 AM

That's not correct. He swapped Myers for Bogo. He did swap Pysyk for Kulikov, but that hasn't exactly helped. However, he moved out McNabb and Zadarov, and didn't replace them. It would have been wise to do so.

 

Fair enough.

 

But what exactly are you trying to prove here? 


And it seems like we got the better of the deal there, Bogosian has been the healthier of the two. 



#384 nfreeman

nfreeman

    All I want is everything you got.

  • SS Mod Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,893 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn

Posted 18 February 2017 - 09:03 AM

Good stuff here boys.

#385 We've

We've

    Self-appointed Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,842 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:in your head

Posted 18 February 2017 - 09:19 AM

All this stuff about whether we ignored D in the draft.  GMTM has been consistently adamant about this.  Best.  Player.  Available.  in every round.  He's not looking for position, and he shouldn't be.  Luck of the draw determines whether that player is a forward or D.  And then you make trades if there is an imbalance.

 

right now I don't think we have an imbalance.  Other than center, we do not have much positional depth.  The kids in Rochester aren't exactly setting the world on fire.  I wouldn't assume any of them blossom higher than bottom 6.



#386 LTS

LTS

    Why I Love Hockey.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,762 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mendon, NY (by way of Tonawanda)

Posted 18 February 2017 - 10:09 AM

Yes, I think their terrible play and inability to stay healthy was a major issue in the first 1/2 of the season.  The failure of our second pair has been the root cause of our D problems this year.  

 

The drafting issue is huge.  For example in 2014 GMTM drafted Reinhart (2), Lemieux (31), Cornel (44) and then Karabacek (49).  Montour went 55th, McKeown 50th and Dougherty 51st.  Van's Tryamkin when 66th.

 

I know where you are going, but applying today's knowledge back to the draft at the time it happened you have to accept that Montour was looked over 54 times before drafted right?  So, a lot of GM's didn't think he'd be where he is today. Simple litmus test for your thinking... where does Tom Brady get drafted if every GM knew then what they know now?

 

That's not correct. He swapped Myers for Bogo. He did swap Pysyk for Kulikov, but that hasn't exactly helped. However, he moved out McNabb and Zadarov, and didn't replace them. It would have been wise to do so.

 

Here's the thing.  While Kulikov has not worked out it's not because he's not good. Who foresees a player breaking his tailbone because of a gate flying open when he hits it?  How often does that ever happen?  Do you think that if Kulikov never injured himself in that way that he would have improved the D?  I believe it.

 

I didn't quote one other post but you mentioned how Edmonton had to trade a top forward to get a D to shore up their woes.  Well, this is exactly what we are talking about here.  Trading a top forward to get a D to shore up our woes.  It happens.  It's not like Edmonton has taken a massive setback because they traded away Hall.  We assume the Sabres will have that set back.  However, if the D is improved and it allows the Sabres to begin getting out of the zone more and change their breakouts then do we expect our talented forwards to score?  I would.



#387 yse325

yse325

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Marietta, GA; from Williamsville

Posted 18 February 2017 - 10:27 AM

All this stuff about whether we ignored D in the draft.  GMTM has been consistently adamant about this.  Best.  Player.  Available.  in every round.  He's not looking for position, and he shouldn't be.  Luck of the draw determines whether that player is a forward or D.  And then you make trades if there is an imbalance.

 

right now I don't think we have an imbalance.  Other than center, we do not have much positional depth.  The kids in Rochester aren't exactly setting the world on fire.  I wouldn't assume any of them blossom higher than bottom 6.

 

Fair enough.

 

But what exactly are you trying to prove here? 


And it seems like we got the better of the deal there, Bogosian has been the healthier of the two. 

The point here is that the best rebuilds are built out from the blueline after getting a few elite forwards at the top of the draft. Once we secured Reinhart and Eichel, getting D depth should have been a priority, not an after thought.  GMTM thought swapping Myers for Bogo and Pysyk for Kulikov would solidify his second pair.  Each has been a step back.  He then filled the gap he created by trading away the other near NHL ready prospects with AHL journeymen like Falk and Fedun.  He also never acquired decent D for Rochester.  Thus once the injuries hit, we didn't have enough adequate depth in the organization to field a solid D group, which has lead to the Sabres being the worst team in the NHL in shots allowed and gutted the Amerks.  This is not dissimilar to the failure of the 2005-6 club that again had nothing in the system to help out in the NHL once the injuries hit on the D in the playoffs, and more specifically the Conference Finals.  

 

Trading good prospect forwards for good prospect D as We've suggest is very difficult because it so hard to develop good D.  Also while drafting the "best available" player is a great theory, but it doesn't work in practice.  Regier followed the same mantra and failed to draft and develop any centers during his tenure except Derek Roy and 4th liner Paul Gaustad.  Sometimes you have to side with a position of need if it's close between two players.  If you look at the draft ratings of players, once you get out of the top 5 the difference in ratings is negligible.   For example, how different were the ratings between Karabacek drafted 49th and McKeown drafted 50th or Doughterty drafted 51st?  Well according to CSS's final rankings, McKeown was 27th, Doughterty 30th and Karabacek 41st.   So after taking 3 straight forwards did GMTM really take the best player available with a 4th forward in Karabacek when he could have taken 2 higher rated players at a position of need? 


I know where you are going, but applying today's knowledge back to the draft at the time it happened you have to accept that Montour was looked over 54 times before drafted right?  So, a lot of GM's didn't think he'd be where he is today. Simple litmus test for your thinking... where does Tom Brady get drafted if every GM knew then what they know now?

 

 

Here's the thing.  While Kulikov has not worked out it's not because he's not good. Who foresees a player breaking his tailbone because of a gate flying open when he hits it?  How often does that ever happen?  Do you think that if Kulikov never injured himself in that way that he would have improved the D?  I believe it.

 

I didn't quote one other post but you mentioned how Edmonton had to trade a top forward to get a D to shore up their woes.  Well, this is exactly what we are talking about here.  Trading a top forward to get a D to shore up our woes.  It happens.  It's not like Edmonton has taken a massive setback because they traded away Hall.  We assume the Sabres will have that set back.  However, if the D is improved and it allows the Sabres to begin getting out of the zone more and change their breakouts then do we expect our talented forwards to score?  I would.

 

I have no problem with trading a Kane to get a top 4 D.  I don't think it will setback the Sabres at all.  It will give Bailey a better opportunity and that is fine with me.  I just hate the GMTM put himself in the that position.



#388 We've

We've

    Self-appointed Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,842 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:in your head

Posted 18 February 2017 - 11:09 AM

Regier didn't fail because he drafted best player available.  He failed because his evaluation of who was best player was so far off. 

 

Drafting is a craps shoot as it is.  You don't lower the odds even a small amount by favoring position over player strength.



#389 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,748 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 18 February 2017 - 11:21 AM

For the record, McKeown and Dougherty have sucked almost as badly as Karabacek.

Yse, I think I've shown pretty clearly that:
* Today's NHL blueline in Buffalo is probably better and certainly not worse than the one Murray inherited.
* Our collection of young defenceman is pretty typical for the NHL, maybe a bit better because Risto
* At most, Murray missed two opportunities to draft a promising young defenceman, neither of which would be helping us now

Maybe this is semantics, but "hasn't done enough to fix the blueline" is a far cry from "creating a mess"

I think you are glomming on to two legitimate organizational weaknesses and not only assuming excellent opportunities to address those weaknesses were ignored, but also assuming your preferred moves come with no opportunity cost in other areas.
And you ignore how bereft of talent this team was when Murray arrived.

Remove all the noise and Murray's net turnover in the pipeline on defence is: Zadorov and McNabb for Guhle.
If that's the price we paid for significant talent upgrades elsewhere, I'm glad he paid it.
Maybe he will use some of those other assets to upgrade the defence. We know he tried last summer and I am sure he is still trying.

Much ado about very little.

Edited by dudacek, 18 February 2017 - 11:25 AM.


#390 JJFIVEOH

JJFIVEOH

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,994 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boca Raton, FL

Posted 18 February 2017 - 11:42 AM

I know where you are going, but applying today's knowledge back to the draft at the time it happened you have to accept that Montour was looked over 54 times before drafted right? So, a lot of GM's didn't think he'd be where he is today. Simple litmus test for your thinking... where does Tom Brady get drafted if every GM knew then what they know now?


Here's the thing. While Kulikov has not worked out it's not because he's not good. Who foresees a player breaking his tailbone because of a gate flying open when he hits it? How often does that ever happen? Do you think that if Kulikov never injured himself in that way that he would have improved the D? I believe it.

I didn't quote one other post but you mentioned how Edmonton had to trade a top forward to get a D to shore up their woes. Well, this is exactly what we are talking about here. Trading a top forward to get a D to shore up our woes. It happens. It's not like Edmonton has taken a massive setback because they traded away Hall. We assume the Sabres will have that set back. However, if the D is improved and it allows the Sabres to begin getting out of the zone more and change their breakouts then do we expect our talented forwards to score? I would.


And that's just it, everybody keeps throwing Kulikov out with yesterday's trash because of what he has (or hasn't) done all year. I've watched him since his rookie year and he brings much more than he has shown. He won't put up points like Risto, but he can move the puck. He's physical, fairly fast and can eat a ton of minutes. There's a reason why he is a 2/3 D-man. The Sabres have two players who can fill the holes that need to be addressed and people want to trade one and let the other walk. I don't get it.

#391 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,748 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 18 February 2017 - 11:54 AM

Yes, on paper Bogosian and Kulikov should be exactly what this team needs.
Kulikov at least has an excuse. I think he's been better in his most recent stint.
I'd be OK with re-signing him.

#392 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    Second Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,875 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 February 2017 - 08:47 PM

Also why did the Edm and now Col rebuilds fail? Anyone... Bueller?... Anyone?

Lack of D!
Edm drafted "great" forward after "great" forward. Hall, RNH, Gagner, Yakupov etc In fact from 2007-2016, they have used their 1st pick on a forward every time but 1 and that was Darnell Nurse in 2013, Their D got so bad, they finally got rid of a star forward for a D last year in the Hall for Larsson trade. They are still an O juggernaut (having McJesus will do that), but with the signing of Sekera & Russell, development of Klefbom, the trade for Larsson and getting good play from college FA Matt Benning, the Oilers now have a competent D group and are in a playoff spot.

Colorado has 3 hugely talented forward in Duchene, MacKinnon and Landeskog and their team is 2013-14 Sabres awful. Why? No D. Other then the injured Eric Johnson, and the defensively challenged Barrie, I'm not sure anyone of the team is worth a darn.

I don't care how great your O is, if you aren't at least decent on D, you aren't winning a thing in the NHL.

I do agree that the Cap helps move talent around the NHL and helps parity. However, that makes drafting and developing cheap young talent so important. It's why Regier ulimately failed, (for some reason he hated drafting centers) and ultimately if GMTM doesn't fix the D in the NHL and in our pipeline, he'll fail as well.


If there is such a dearth of good defense, why would anyone trade away that magical, can't-miss young defenseman everyone seems to think Kane could get us?

#393 Scottysabres

Scottysabres

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 431 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 09:23 PM

If there is such a dearth of good defense, why would anyone trade away that magical, can't-miss young defenseman everyone seems to think Kane could get us?


Some teams are top 4 D heavy but lack in scoring
Some teams are heavy scoring but lack top 4 D
Some teams lack both
A select few have just the right balance


Where do you believe the Sabres fall in these categories?

#394 Doohickie

Doohickie

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,483 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 19 February 2017 - 12:28 AM

Maybe the players aren't listening to Dan, but they listen to Robin.



#395 Scottysabres

Scottysabres

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 431 posts

Posted 19 February 2017 - 12:33 AM

Maybe the players aren't listening to Dan, but they listen to Robin.

Don't puss off the giant swede...lol

We need a video snippet of the swede from heartbreak ridge :)