2013 NHL Entry Draft: Buffalo Sabres Select...

[deluca67]

Most projections I've seen have Gauthier as a defensive center (3rd liner) with some offensive upside. His skating and faceoffs are suspect. I don't see him top 20 unless he has a monster combine or something. I haven't seen anyone project him as a top 6 player yet.

Except for one mock draft, I haven't seen him outside the top 20.

 

At 6' 5" and some skill, this is a kid I'd like to see in the Sabres pipeline, even if you end up moving him to wing. I've seen the same concerns about his skating, if he didn't have a couple of warts he'd be a guaranteed top ten.

[...]

 

Okay but do the Buffalo Sabres have enough talent to succeed? If you go into this draft going for size aren't you off balancing the very thing you are arguing about, team chemistry?

 

Dude! You can't agree with me above and then argue with deluca. We're advocating the same principles here for the draft. It's not just size...get that our your head...it's the combination of factors per individual PLUS how these individuals mesh together as a TEAM.

[SabresBillsFan]

Picking Gauthier in the first round for the Sabres would be a mistake. We need to draft for talent and drive, not size. If Lindholm is available when we pick and they chose to go with a 3rd line center because he is tall I will not be too thrilled.

 

Fully agree we can address size later on this team needs talented forwards.

[...]

 

The draft is a crap shoot, so you pick the player that you think can be great. You don't pick someone who has less talent because they don't "fit the mold." Targeting individual players in the top of the 1st is definitely what you do. You have the second half of the first round, rounds 2-7, trades, and FA to build an entire roster.

 

 

You may as well ignore me, then, for the rest of this thread because we simply will not agree on how to approach this draft and the Sabres rebuild going forward.

[deluca67]

Okay but do the Buffalo Sabres have enough talent to succeed? If you go into this draft going for size aren't you off balancing the very thing you are arguing about, team chemistry?

I'm advocating drafting size with talent. We have to get out of the Regeir-esq mindset that the two are mutually exclusive.

[26CornerBlitz]

I'm advocating drafting size with talent. We have to get out of the Regeir-esq mindset that the two are mutually exclusive.

 

So Darcy's a lawyer? :)

[LGR4GM]

You may as well ignore me, then, for the rest of this thread because we simply will not agree on how to approach this draft and the Sabres rebuild going forward.

Can you explain what your draft strategy would be then because right now I don't think I fully understand what it is you want to do.

 

I'm advocating drafting size with talent. We have to get out of the Regeir-esq mindset that the two are mutually exclusive.

Okay so Lindholm and Monahan, what are your objections for each player? You seem to be fine with Monahan from what I have read but can you argue against taking Lindholm from a size or talent angle?

[qwksndmonster]

I'm advocating drafting size with talent. We have to get out of the Regeir-esq mindset that the two are mutually exclusive.

Nobody has said anything like this. I agree wholeheartedly that the Sabres need more players with size and skill. Talented players with supposed heart and grit (thanks for the blurbs on Lindholm and Monahan Liger, but i can't say a player plays with heart until I watch him) are just as important to the Sabres right now as players with size and skill.

[deluca67]

Can you explain what your draft strategy would be then because right now I don't think I fully understand what it is you want to do.

 

 

Okay so Lindholm and Monahan, what are your objections for each player? You seem to be fine with Monahan from what I have read but can you argue against taking Lindholm from a size or talent angle?

From what I have read, Monahan is one of the most complete players in the draft. Two way forward, proficient in the face-off circle and has the size. Lindholm seems to be very talented and a very smart player. He's going to get picked high. I'd prefer Monahan with the edge in size.

[dudacek]

So with the Ducks gone in the first round does that put Bobby Ryan back on the market?

And with the way he performed in the first round, do we still want him?

[inkman]

So with the Ducks gone in the first round does that put Bobby Ryan back on the market?

And with the way he performed in the first round, do we still want him?

Sure. Lets get Lecavalier and Ovechkin too. I mean, they can't get much worse can they? If they do, perfect.

[TrueBlueGED]

You and TrueBlue are completely overlooking something very important:

 

Just because we may be advocating size,heart/toughness, doesn't mean we (or, at least, I or me) are willing to sacrifice talent. The words roll out in one, complete phrase to create the proper mental image: SIZE-TOUGHNESS-TALENT. So, it's the combination that is important...you seem to be focusing in on one or two factors of the combination which is wrong.

 

The right balance of SIZE-TOUGHNESS/HEART-TALENT per player is critically important here. The Sabres need to take their time and rebuild the roster correctly, not lose focus because a small, amateur player has so-called "elite-level" stats.

 

You might not be dismissing talent, but DeLuca certainly is. He clearly stated that "He would need to be a couple tiers above the 1-2 tiers you mentioned for me to be willing to forgo the size." Yes, he believes the difference between a potential 1st line all-star and a good 3rd line center or mediocre 2nd line center is worth less than (as listed) 4 inches and 30 pounds of size. A couple of tiers above Lindolm's potential is Crosby territory....so if a guy isn't Crosby, he can't be "small" (and I use that very lightly, as Lindolm isn't small).

 

Seriously, I think people need to revise their definition of what a small hockey player is. Nobody is advocating more Gerbe-sized players on this roster.

 

This is also completely ignoring that using the NHL draft to fill today's needs isn't particularly efficient. The entire BPA strategy is appropriate because most of these guys won't see the NHL for 3 years, and there is absolutely no guarantee (and no reason, most of the time) that today's weaknesses will still exist in three years.

[dudacek]

 

Sure. Lets get Lecavalier and Ovechkin too. I mean, they can't get much worse can they? If they do, perfect.

Yeah, that's right, they'll fit right in!

[deluca67]

You might not be dismissing talent, but DeLuca certainly is. He clearly stated that "He would need to be a couple tiers above the 1-2 tiers you mentioned for me to be willing to forgo the size." Yes, he believes the difference between a potential 1st line all-star and a good 3rd line center or mediocre 2nd line center is worth less than (as listed) 4 inches and 30 pounds of size. A couple of tiers above Lindolm's potential is Crosby territory....so if a guy isn't Crosby, he can't be "small" (and I use that very lightly, as Lindolm isn't small).

 

Seriously, I think people need to revise their definition of what a small hockey player is. Nobody is advocating more Gerbe-sized players on this roster.

 

This is also completely ignoring that using the NHL draft to fill today's needs isn't particularly efficient. The entire BPA strategy is appropriate because most of these guys won't see the NHL for 3 years, and there is absolutely no guarantee (and no reason, most of the time) that today's weaknesses will still exist in three years.

Again, how many teams use this strategy and fail to accomplish anything?

 

"A couple of tiers above Lindholm is Crosby Territory?" Holly let's blow up the kids upside to fit your argument Batman. If Lindholm was anywhere near the level of Crosby it would be the "big four" at the top of the draft not the "big three." That just reeks of desperation on your part. You'll have to excuse the rest of us who would like to continue the conversation while keeping a more realistic tone in regards to the players available and their value.

[LGR4GM]

From what I have read, Monahan is one of the most complete players in the draft. Two way forward, proficient in the face-off circle and has the size. Lindholm seems to be very talented and a very smart player. He's going to get picked high. I'd prefer Monahan with the edge in size.

I prefer Monahan but it isn't because he is 2" taller. I prefer him because his ability to win draws and his leadership skills are unquestioned and I think he edges out Lindholm in terms of talent and how complete he is. That being said Lindholm is still a very complete and excellent player.

 

At the 15 second mark Kevin Devine talks about Sean Monahan

 

Again, how many teams use this strategy and fail to accomplish anything?

 

"A couple of tiers above Lindholm is Crosby Territory?" Holly let's blow up the kids upside to fit your argument Batman. If Lindholm was anywhere near the level of Crosby it would be the "big four" at the top of the draft not the "big three." That just reeks of desperation on your part. You'll have to excuse the rest of us who would like to continue the conversation while keeping a more realistic tone in regards to the players available and their value.

Lindholm's style/skill set is comparable to Forsberg. He is at the top of that second tier of players who should be picked 5-9. Lindholm, Monahan, Ristolainen, Nurse, and I would also include Barkov and Nichushkins in this group with those final two at the top. Crosby is the best player of a generation but Lindholm could be a highly respected #1 center in the NHL and even if he is only Forsberg like, we would be happy to have him.

 

Again remember that Lindholm is not small. He is 6' and roughly 192lbs or so depending on where I look. He also has no problem engaging physically with other players during puck battles. Here are some WJC highlights.

[LGR4GM]

Sean Monahan #20 shows off his wrist shot, excellent hands, and some of his other playmaking skills. My only issue is I don't see more of him away from the puck due to how the highlight reel is edited.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8P00ymZXoc

 

Also here is some more breakdown of Monahan:

[TrueBlueGED]

Again, how many teams use this strategy and fail to accomplish anything?

 

"A couple of tiers above Lindholm is Crosby Territory?" Holly let's blow up the kids upside to fit your argument Batman. If Lindholm was anywhere near the level of Crosby it would be the "big four" at the top of the draft not the "big three." That just reeks of desperation on your part. You'll have to excuse the rest of us who would like to continue the conversation while keeping a more realistic tone in regards to the players available and their value.

 

I'm pretty sure every team uses BPA....just how they define "best" may vary.

 

How would you break down tiers of talent? Lindolm's ceiling is an all-star center. If 2 tiers above that isn't Crosby-like, what is it? To me a tier above all-star is elite, and a tier above elite is HoFer. You could add a 3rd tier for generational talent I suppose, but you could also argue my elite and HoFer tiers are one in the same. Seriously, break it down for me so we can try to speak the same language here.

[LGR4GM]

I'm pretty sure every team uses BPA....just how they define "best" may vary.

 

How would you break down tiers of talent? Lindolm's ceiling is an all-star center. If 2 tiers above that isn't Crosby-like, what is it? To me a tier above all-star is elite, and a tier above elite is HoFer. You could add a 3rd tier for generational talent I suppose, but you could also argue my elite and HoFer tiers are one in the same. Seriously, break it down for me so we can try to speak the same language here.

In my mind I look at talent like this:

A) 1st Ballot Hall of Fame (Crosby, Stamkos, and Ovechkin when he wants to be)

B) All Star/Borderline HoF (Datsyuk, Teows, guys who are amazing but not at the above tier)

C) Average 1st liner/Occasional All Star (Jason Pominville type)

D) Top End 2nd liner (David Krejci, Joe Pavelski, guys who could log 1st line minutes but will excel on the 2nd line)

E) Average 2nd liner (A lot of guys fall into this but you know the types, Derek Roy, Danius Zubrus, guys who are solid on the 2nd line)

F) Top End 3rd liner (Stafford (lol), anyone who could be on the 2nd but on a legit team should hold down the 3rd line.)

G) Average 3rd liner (Porter, Kaleta, guys who are players but sure only be up on the 2nd line in time of major injuries)

H) 4th liners (everyone else who can play in the NHL because there is a big drop off once you get down to here in my mind.

 

I expect this and the players mentioned to be criticized but this is just MPO on how I look at talent. Lindholm and Monahan project out to B level.

[LGR4GM]

Okay, Bo Horvat and why I don't think we should take him at #8 even if Lindholm and Monahan are drafted.

Well Bo is a good player and will most likely be in the NHL, I think taking him at 8 would be a mistake considering what that would mean was available at 8. In this scenario, which is a worst case scenario, The big 3, Barkov, Monahan, Lindholm, and Nichushkins are gone. So 6 forwards and 1 defender get drafted ahead us. That means we would have our pick of Nurse, Ristolainen, and Zadarov who are all very highly ranked defenders with grit and size. I don't think Darcy or the Sabres should pass on all of them to take Horvat even if he does play center. All 3 of them I have ranked higher. Also according to a different list http://www.nhl.com/i...spectbrowse.htm Horvat is ranked 15th among NA Skaters and that disregards Euro's or the possibility of Fucale being taken ahead of us. What I am saying is considering how deep this draft is, it is possible he falls to 16th but he is a reach at 8 and I would expect him to go 14-18th.

 

I should add that in my Mock (forums.sabrespace.com/topic/21694-2013-nhl-entry-draft-buffalo-sabres-select/page__st__920#entry483005), I have NJD taking him at 9 which I think is a reach but I think NJD will be desperate for Center depth... unless they take Fucale in an effort to replace Brodeur.

[26CornerBlitz]

Okay, Bo Horvat and why I don't think we should take him at #8 even if Lindholm and Monahan are drafted.

Well Bo is a good player and will most likely be in the NHL, I think taking him at 8 would be a mistake considering what that would mean was available at 8. In this scenario, which is a worst case scenario, The big 3, Barkov, Monahan, Lindholm, and Nichushkins are gone. So 6 forwards and 1 defender get drafted ahead us. That means we would have our pick of Nurse, Ristolainen, and Zadarov who are all very highly ranked defenders with grit and size. I don't think Darcy or the Sabres should pass on all of them to take Horvat even if he does play center. All 3 of them I have ranked higher. Also according to a different list http://www.nhl.com/i...spectbrowse.htm Horvat is ranked 15th among NA Skaters and that disregards Euro's or the possibility of Fucale being taken ahead of us. What I am saying is considering how deep this draft is, it is possible he falls to 16th but he is a reach at 8 and I would expect him to go 14-18th.

 

I should add that in my Mock, I have NJD taking him at 9 which I think is a reach but I think NJD will be desperate for Center depth... unless they take Fucale in an effort to replace Brodeur.

 

The top 5 consensus available talents are Jones, MacKinnon, Drouin, Barkov, and Nichushkin. After that I think you'll see varying opinion on the next group of players. Horvat is in that group and I have no doubt that the Sabres will consider him at # 8 if your scenario plays out: http://www.hockeysfuture.com/articles/88715/2013-iss-draft-rankings-little-change-in-top-30-with-jones-nichushkin-still-the-top-prospects/

[LGR4GM]

The top 5 consensus available talents are Jones, MacKinnon, Drouin, Barkov, and Nichushkin. After that I think you'll see varying opinion on the next group of players. Horvat is in that group and I have no doubt that the Sabres will consider him at # 8 if your scenario plays out: http://www.hockeysfu...-top-prospects/

I think he is in the end of that group. I took a long look at the ISS rankings when I did that mock because they are usually really good. That is why I had NJD taking Horvat. I just doubt that no one in front of us will take a defender in that 5-7 slot. Carolina and Edmonton could most definitely use one. If however my scenario did play out I still think it is a reach to take Horvat. He could be D or C level talent but I think there is still some C or B level defenders sitting their that you would want.

[dudacek]

I think most of those rankings were set before the playoffs and Horvat's play there is pushing him way up on boards around the league.

He's doing what counts most - getting it done in crunch time.

I will be doing cartwheels if he is available at 16.

[26CornerBlitz]

I think most of those rankings were set before the playoffs and Horvat's play there is pushing him way up on boards around the league.

He's doing what counts most - getting it done in crunch time.

I will be doing cartwheels if he is available at 16.

 

If Horvat has a strong MCMC Tournament, you can forget him being available at #16.

[LGR4GM]

If Horvat has a strong MCMC Tournament, you can forget him being available at #16.

I don't think he will be available, he has shown a lot in the postseason from what I have seen. Like I said if NJD passes than Phoenix and Winnipeg are good bets for Horvat.

[tom webster]

In my mind I look at talent like this:

A) 1st Ballot Hall of Fame (Crosby, Stamkos, and Ovechkin when he wants to be)

B) All Star/Borderline HoF (Datsyuk, Teows, guys who are amazing but not at the above tier)

C) Average 1st liner/Occasional All Star (Jason Pominville type)

D) Top End 2nd liner (David Krejci, Joe Pavelski, guys who could log 1st line minutes but will excel on the 2nd line)

E) Average 2nd liner (A lot of guys fall into this but you know the types, Derek Roy, Danius Zubrus, guys who are solid on the 2nd line)

F) Top End 3rd liner (Stafford (lol), anyone who could be on the 2nd but on a legit team should hold down the 3rd line.)

G) Average 3rd liner (Porter, Kaleta, guys who are players but sure only be up on the 2nd line in time of major injuries)

H) 4th liners (everyone else who can play in the NHL because there is a big drop off once you get down to here in my mind.

 

I expect this and the players mentioned to be criticized but this is just MPO on how I look at talent. Lindholm and Monahan project out to B level.

 

I think you are way undervaluing Datsyuk and Toews. Both rank ahead of Stamkos and Ovechkin in my opinion.