IKnowPhysics

He was a team-worst -45 in 46GP on a very bad DET team.

If Adams intentionally doesn't qualify him, only to prevent expensive arbitration, then signs him for less before he gets to UFA.

Everything pointed towards keeping Kahun. Still gotta believe there's a deal there. Adams gonna get it in the post-draft presser. Sick 'em @john wawrow.

RIP Jokiharju.

***** that. Btw, the list of RFAs turned UFAs via no qualifying offer: https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/free-agents/2021/points/all/all/ufa-no-qualifying-offer

I would prefer that if his deal is in the works, we extend a QO and then fix it instead of technically exposing him to UFA 43 hours from now.

Gotta be a deal in place. Otherwise it's lynching time. We're so weak on the RW and Kahun had a great stint with us.

I was not aware of this monster. Reading up now. Seems like a lock.

Homer pick from the Buffalo Jr Sabres. https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/504013/matteo-costantini Plays C, shoots left. 36G-32A-68P in 50GP. 6'0" 174lb. Ranked #225 by FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS Ranked #96 by NHL CENTRAL SCOUTING (NA Skaters) Won OJHL rookie of the year. Will skate for Penticton in the BCHL this year, then on to University of North Dakota next year.

GOT 'EM.

I think my theory is correct. No scouting staff. Next up: the starting goalie from St. Joe's.

Homer pick from the Buffalo Jr Sabres. https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/504013/matteo-costantini LOL

Buffalo #131 Matteo Constantini.

Not agreeing or disagreeing on merit, but that would probably shape up to be in the top ten weirdest drafts for us. RW Move up to RW No pick No pick G No pick ?, ? It'd make me wonder if the Sabres' draft board, after the early 2nd round, was just like "***** it, there's nobody left." Or worse, a reflection of cleaning out the scouting staff four months ago: "don't need scouts if we got no picks." Buffalo #131, up next btw.

Reports on Locke also identified several weaknesses that aren't reported for Rossi: slow feet, subpar defensive side, and weak strength in puck battles. It's not a strong comparison outside of height. But that's the trouble here: small sample size and few comparables.

Both absolutely true statements. Even at 1.3+PPG, the sample size of Rossi's height cohorts is exceedingly small. And, of course, at 2.143PPG it would theoretically be even smaller. It begs the question of what's more important: size or point production? Even studying Rossi's future performance may not be able to answer that, since he'll be sample size n=1. If you extrapolate the available trends, it seems like the CHL point production correlation is stronger than the size correlation, but there's uncertainty there. Rossi is a unique player with a unique risk profile.

Buffalo picks after 8 (Quinn) and 34 (Peterka) as of the start of Round 4: 131 (5th round) and 193 (7th round).

I keep coming back to Rossi's height and how it may have factored into the decision. He's listed as 5'9" and the perception is that he's just about done growing. But it's possible that he's shorter than that because of height inflation, and without a combine to do independent measurements, he could well be two inches shorter than that. His listed 5'9" is already two standard deviations (2.09") down from the mean NHL height (6'1"), which means that Rossi is shorter than at least ~97.8% of the NHL. Non-analytically, there's also the old saying: "You can teach them to skate and you can teach them to shoot, but you can't teach them to be 6'4" 220lbs." And regarding anecodotal evidence, scoring superiority in the OHL doesn't 100% translate to the NHL for smaller players. See: Corey Locke (5'9"); Luciano Aquino (5'9'). But there are many examples from 2000 and later of OHL success translating just fine, even for shorter players. See Alex DeBrincat (5'7") in CHI among several others. But in some analytical models, small size adds uncertainty to Rossi's ability to translate his OHL success to the NHL. In this post, we look at player size and production. We were missing MoneyPuck's 2015 analysis, which I was able to find today using the Internet Wayback Machine. Scoring in the CHL: Scoring in the CHL correlates to NHL success- if you can't score in the CHL, you won't be good in the NHL. But if you're short, even if you score in the CHL, you have a smaller chance of success than taller players that score just as much (three representations of the same data): In Rossi's demographics (<5'10"), 0-of-5 (0%) players listed shorter than 5'10" that scored >1.3PPG in the CHL went on to play >200 NHL games. In Quinn's demographics (6'1"), 11-of-21 (52.4%) players listed at 6'1" that scored >1.3PPG in the CHL went on to play >200 NHL games. However, Rossi's analysis suffers from small sample size (n=5). In a draft game where teams try to maximize the odds of NHL success, Rossi's risk profile (established-and-extremely-high-stats and risky short height) is simply a different flavor than Quinn's risk profile (good-but-less-established-stats and mean height). It's possible that the the scouting staff looked at this and settled on the old adage: they could coach and develop Jack Quinn to Marco Rossi's level despite the uncertainty in his stats without taking on the risk of Rossi's small size.

Seems like good value at 34. Gauging NHL performance based on DEL performance is difficult because of small sample sizes. Based on a 2018 factor of 0.2949, JJP's NHLe is 6 points on an 82 game NHL season, but it sounds like he had reduced usage because he was a rare 17 year old (one of only three) to play in the DEL grown-man's league. My guess is that analytics are showing good production per 60. Nonetheless, there's near-zero chance he makes the team this year. He'll likely be transitioned to the AHL/North American game this year or next and for a duration of at least a year.

lol within seconds

I think so. He's got room to physically develop and develop different aspects of his game, probably moreso than currently 95% physically developed Rossi. Rossi, because of that development, can probably put up more points and make a bigger impact until Quinn develops, but the possibility of plugging Quinn into our unique situation right away could mitigate some of that difference. I think Adams' staff sees Quinn's potential growth and ability to be plugged in right away. If it doesn't work, whoever sold the rest of the staff on Quinn could get fired, but there's as good a chance as any 4-10 pick in this draft that this works. Scajaqueda Line? Skinner-Cozens-Quinn.

This is almost too ridiculous to fathom, but at face value, I agree. This pick does not replace Reinhart.