dudacek

That Anaheim deal is so much better than the Vegas one: In order of value for me in terms of how high a pick I trade for them in an average draft Drysdale top five Krebs top 10 Ducks 1st top 10 Comtois top 20 Vegas first top 30 Elvenes top top 50 Smith top 50 Henrique top 100

I would take that deal in a second. Drysdale is a premier prospect and a RD, Comtois is 22 and already top 6 forward with edge and the pick will be a high one. Henrique fills a need and helps the kids grow. I’m not waiting around to see if Minnesota or Vegas offers up a centre because I doubt their extras are anywhere near an Anaheim 1st or Comtois. I know people won’t agree with me, but Drysdale might be better than Rossi or Krebs. He certainly was at the WJC. I take three centres in the first round next year and ride Drysdale/Power/Dahlin for a decade.

Might have posted this on here before, but I think NHL GMs look at value through a prism of 4Ps. Production It’s surprising how much this is overlooked by internet fandom, but it simply means “what can this player do right now?” Yes, it’s goals and assists, but it is also minutes played, forechecking, backchecking, special teams, entries and exits - everything a player can contribute on the ice for my team, right now. Price This is simply the cap hit, the value of that hit, how it fits into my overall contract situation, and what that contract could turn into moving forward. Position This relates to supply and demand. How big is the hole I need to fill, how important is it that I fill it and how readily available are players that meet my need? Part of this applies to off-ice things, like leadership, and marketability as well. Probably be better called “fit” but that doesn’t start with P Potential This is the projection element: where is this player in terms of his career growth? Does he have more to give? How much?

I wasn’t including Gaudreau as a now piece, but as an expiring contract to be flipped - probably for the best return for any of the players in that slot. And yes, Dahlin is the only player in the Sabres system who projects for me as potentially becoming elite. It does not mean Power or Cozens won’t be , or preclude someone like Poltapov or Quinn or Levi becoming a Marchand or a Stone or a Quick. Stuff like that happens in the NHL all the time, just not in the past decade for Buffalo.

Even though I agree with most of your point, I do think the garbage time element is being overstated. The Sabres played 13 of their final 15 games against playoff teams in a very tough race on top of the east, with the other 2 against the 5th place Rangers. Almost all those games were part of back-to-backs against the same teams, They were not playing against good teams going through the motions, or bad teams playing out the string.

I get you in that odds are good Brandon Montour is probably going to contribute more for your team than the 29th pick you gave up for him, and almost certainly more than the 88th pick you got for him. But from a hockey economics point of view picks are league currency and an excellent way of measuring how much actual teams value an asset. Prospects are a different animal. Devon Levi and Lucas Elvenes might be worth a late 1st and a late 3rd respectively to one team and the opposite to another. But ultimately market value is the price the highest bidder will pay, not the average price. As the Risto trade proves.

Not sure if you are one of those “not NY, no matter what the cost” posters, but I think you are drastically under-rating that package. Chytil is legit. He’s played 3 NHL seasons and he’s only 21 and shown the ability to score close to a 40-point pace as a 3C with no PP time. Schneider is a very good NHL prospect with a profile that fills a huge organizational need. The 1st is a 1st. They are a very good comparison to what Wilson, Peca and McKee were at the time of the Mogilny trade. Plus you are getting two legit NHLers who fill current holes in our roster. It’s become increasingly clear that no Eichel return is going to be “good” but it’s hardly garbage.

Not saying you’re wrong, but had you heard of Elvenes prior to the recent rumour? He was the Knights 2nd, 4th and 7th ranked prospect on the three lists I’ve read, and the Knights have an average prospect group. I looked at 2 top 100 prospect lists and another that ranked 150 and he wasn’t listed. I can’t recall a player with his pedigree ever being traded for a 1st-round pick.

Larry Brooks reported the Rangers offered Kravtsov, Jones, Georgiev and a 1st. Whether he or his sources made it up, I have no idea.

The point is that players will sign where they feel it is in their best interest to sign. Their first and foremost consideration is almost always fit and opportunity: where am I being offered a role that will put me in a position where I can succeed? After that, money, team success, family, lifestyle, travel and familiarity will all play a part in their decision and different people look for different things in each category. The Sabres certainly rank at the bottom of the team success scale, but it’s only one element. They can compete with the others.

I’m think in the case of Minnesota, the issue is less cap hit this year, and more the following three years when they are carrying about 14 million in dead cap space for Parise and Suter. I’d retain $2 million on Eichel but they’re going to have to add to Boldy and Rossi.

Vegas 1st = St.Louis 1st Elvenes = 2nd Krebs > Thompson Smith > Berglund, Sobotka If anyone is keeping score

I will say that as a guy who throughly enjoyed the play of Team Canada at the World Juniors this year, the thought of potentially adding Krebs to our team puts a huge smile on my face. That was a team that outscored their opponents 41-6 and didn’t allow an even strength goal until their seventh game, and it’s best players were Byrum, Drysdale, Krebs, Levi and Cozens, with Jack Quinn chipping in 5 points and a tourney 3rd best overall +10.

“10 (mostly) NHL club head scouts”, according to Bob. (Direct quote) Worlds away wouldn’t be my choice of words, but I agree with your basic point: just because Power is an industry #1 this year doesn’t mean he’d be in contention other years. However, it is my perception that the number of observers who believe Power will be a legit 25-minutes a night 1st-pairing D is greater than the number of observers who predict Cozens or Krebs will be legit 1Cs. Doesnt mean I believe that, or that they’re right, it’s just my perception of what’s being said by actual scouts.

Ristolainen. If you want to argue #2 it was used factually, in the sense that over that stretch I was citing he was 2nd in ice time. As you say, McCabe was injured and Borgen contributed a handful of games on the 3rd pairing to the Granato version of the team.

I hope my subsequent posts have clarified that I am arguing that is part of why I think the industry thinks that, which doesn’t necessarily mean I think it, and it certainly doesn’t mean the industry is right.

You’re very hard to talk to when it comes to Power. It feels like you are less responding to my posts than you are carts full of baggage from previous conversations with other posters. You said I have no idea how many teams had Power at the top of their boards. I said I do, and posted evidence. Im not sure why I shouldn’t have responded. I know you think less of Power than the industry and I know why. I tend to agree with you and certainly aren’t attempting to argue that point. I’m not sure why you think I don’t understand your point. My point was that I think the industry (as in NHL scouts) likely has Power ranked ahead of Krebs and probably Cozens as well. It’s an observation. It shouldn’t be infuriating.

I hope not either, since I personally don’t have “1st overall” hopes for him. I project him as good but not elite and if I’m outright disappointed in him, he’s going to probably be Ryan Murray.

Bob McKenzie asked 10 teams. Every single one had Power number 1 it was no surprise that — just as they did in TSN’s mid-season rankings in April — 10 out of 10 NHL scouts surveyed ranked Power No. 1 on TSN’s Final 2021 NHL Draft Rankings. It was unanimous, obvious and fully deserving. “If there was any debate who the No. 1 prospect was, and I’m not sure there was, but if you were looking to create or engage in a ‘Who’s No. 1’ debate, [Power] ended that at the Worlds,” said one NHL head scout. “How could you not make him No. 1?” said another team’s head scout. “His game reached another level at the World Championship.” “He reinforced, reaffirmed and erased any doubt,” said a third NHL team head scout. “He really earned it there. He didn’t start out the tournament as a top-pair, 20-to-30-minute guy, but he got to that point by earning the trust of [Team Canada head coach] Gerard Gallant. He did exactly in that tournament what he’s expected to do in the NHL — play top-pair minutes and impact the game in every situation, penalty kill, power play, 5 on 5 — and he did it against pro-level competition.”

I have a pretty damn good idea from Bob McKenzie’s report, and credible reports from the Athletic. You can dismiss them if you wish. If you don’t see the irony following your first sentence with your second, I don’t know what to say.

Minnesota version: Rossi, Rask, Beckman and a 1st Montreal: Kotkaniemi, Drouin, Guhle and a 1st Anaheim: Unprotected 1st, Rakell, Lundestrom, Perreault Rangers: Kakko, Strome, Georgiev, 1st Flames: Zary, Gaudreau, Pelletier, 1st Anyone like any of those? Or at least prefer them to Vegas?

When listing where you or I, as an individual, rank prospects, no. But when attempting to show how highly-ranked a prospect is by the industry, it is one of the very few pieces of evidence you have. It becomes less relevant the further away you move from the draft, but it gives you a starting point from which to draw a line from the player’s subsequent performance. In the case of Cozens he was ranked at about 5 going in, was picked at 7 and did nothing but cement his stock since; arguing that the industry ranks him as among the top 5 in his class based on that is fair and logical. In the case of Power, he topped the draft board of a majority of teams going in to the draft and was picked #1. No games have been played since. It is absolutely fair to say you don’t think he is the best prospect in his draft class, but arguing against his industry status as the top prospect in his class is kinda silly.

This is blatantly revisionist history. They refused to flip him at the deadline for an asset and were negotiating with him right up until free agency arrived. They wanted him back and acted like they expected him back, but they drew a line in the sand on term, refused to cross it and it cost them. You’re telling me Plan A was effectively pulling a guy out of retirement and signing the man who was statistically the worst goalie in the NHL last year?

After losing its first 6 under Granato, the team went 9/11/2 to finish the season. However that 9/11/2 became 5/10/1 without Ullmark, who they haven’t replaced. And it has also dumped its first-line centre and its #2D without adding anything of significance to replace them. Barring further significant additions, if he guides this team to more than 65 points next year, Granato should win the Jack Adams.

Cozens left the WJC tournament neck-and-neck with Zegras for top prospect in the world. He was the best player on Team Canada at this WJC and led the tourney in goals - 8 in 7 games to go along with 8 assists. Krebs played top 6 minutes on wing and at centre. He had 3 goals and 8 points. He left the tournament probably ranking in the top 20 drafted prospects in the world. I don’t think there is any doubt Cozens is more highly thought of than Krebs Power is an interesting one. It seems to me the lack of hype for this draft a few months ago has really affected his ranking here. I find it hard to see how the best prospect in this entire draft class is behind the ~ 5th and ~ 10th best prospects from 2 years ago but I guess it’s possible. I’d have to rank him 1st in our pipeline, even including Cozens.