2013 NHL Entry Draft: Buffalo Sabres Select...

[X. Benedict]

I'm afraid the draft will go similar to Craig Button's predictions. I also feel like there is a good chance this is how the draft will go down.

 

http://www.tsn.ca/dr...ature/?id=93427

 

Some will be very happy with Nichushkin 'falling' to us. However, I've already read some articles on his work ethic being questioned and there is obviously the fact he has a KHL contract for the next three years. The fact he hasn't played over here and may have compete issues are big enough red flags in a deep draft like this to take a pass on this talent. I'd take Zadarov in this spot all day. I hope we all realize that although a forward is preferred, I can easily see a scenario play out where we should take a dman if we don't trade up.

 

I'd be delighted to land Nichushkin. A KHL contract could get bought out. I wouldn't pass on him.

The kid has sick skills, blazing speed, and great hands. If he's there at 8. He's the pick.

[IKnowPhysics]

Would people do any of these:

 

Vanek for 4th

Vanek + salary retained for 4th

Vanek + 16th for 4th

Vanek + salary retained +16th for 4th

Vanek + 8th for 4th

Vanek + salary retained + 8th for 4th

 

I wouldn't do any of them. Maybe the first one if my arm was twisted.

 

The trade value thread puts Vanek as low as a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, about two 1sts including a high first, and as high as multiple 1sts and 2nds and/or roster players. I figure we should aim for the median, two 1sts, including a high 1st, where high 1st is picks 5-10ish and the other is likely 17-30ish. In order for even the first suggestion to be viable, it muct be considered reasonable to trade a 17-30ish pick and a 5-10ish pick for the #4 pick. It's close, but I'd much rather take the multiple picks (even if they're spread out to next year) OR trade the 5-10ish pick and a high 2nd rounder (38ish) to do this.

 

This all very hand-wavey, and a top four pick is probably good return for the minimum return of a mid/low-1st + 2nd + 3rd for Vanek, but I think he's worth more than that, meaning he's worth more than the #4 pick by itself. If we were talking about the #1 or #2 pick, I'd probably trade Vanek stright up at that point.

[IKnowPhysics]

I don't think Nashville does any. They already have an old top-6 and desperately need an infusion of talent in the middle of the ice.

 

I think this is all valid, and will tack on that they traded last year's 1st rounder (for Gaustad, semi-lol) and would be hesistant to do so again.

[TrueBlueGED]

I wouldn't do any of them. Maybe the first one if my arm was twisted.

 

The trade value thread puts Vanek as low as a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, about two 1sts including a high first, and as high as multiple 1sts and 2nds and/or roster players. I figure we should aim for the median, two 1sts, including a high 1st, where high 1st is picks 5-10ish and the other is likely 17-30ish. In order for even the first suggestion to be viable, it muct be considered reasonable to trade a 17-30ish pick and a 5-10ish pick for the #4 pick. It's close, but I'd much rather take the multiple picks (even if they're spread out to next year) OR trade the 5-10ish pick and a high 2nd rounder (38ish) to do this.

 

This all very hand-wavey, and a top four pick is probably good return for the minimum return of a mid/low-1st + 2nd + 3rd for Vanek, but I think he's worth more than that, meaning he's worth more than the #4 pick by itself. If we were talking about the #1 or #2 pick, I'd probably trade Vanek stright up at that point.

 

I think an argument could be made that the #4 pick is worth more than say a #9 and 28 (just picking numbers in your ranges). Teams picking in the top-5 usually lack talent...if you're running one of those teams, would you move from a ~50% chance at a perennial all-star for a 20% chance at a perennial all-star and a 20% chance of a good 3rd liner? I'd laugh the team off the phone personally.

 

Edit: And if we trade Vanek for just picks (assuming they're not top-5), I'll be pissed. Any return should include a good NHL player (despite the fact I think we're in full rebuild mode, we still have to field a roster :lol:), good prospect, and a 1st. I'd assume a Gaborik-like return.

[Weave]

I wouldn't do any of them. Maybe the first one if my arm was twisted.

 

The trade value thread puts Vanek as low as a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, about two 1sts including a high first, and as high as multiple 1sts and 2nds and/or roster players. I figure we should aim for the median, two 1sts, including a high 1st, where high 1st is picks 5-10ish and the other is likely 17-30ish. In order for even the first suggestion to be viable, it muct be considered reasonable to trade a 17-30ish pick and a 5-10ish pick for the #4 pick. It's close, but I'd much rather take the multiple picks (even if they're spread out to next year) OR trade the 5-10ish pick and a high 2nd rounder (38ish) to do this.

 

This all very hand-wavey, and a top four pick is probably good return for the minimum return of a mid/low-1st + 2nd + 3rd for Vanek, but I think he's worth more than that, meaning he's worth more than the #4 pick by itself. If we were talking about the #1 or #2 pick, I'd probably trade Vanek stright up at that point.

 

No team makes that trade. #1 and 2's are elite talent most years. All stars this year. Vanek has plenty of value. He doesn't equate to a draft pick with elite skill though.

[TrueBlueGED]

No team makes that trade. #1 and 2's are elite talent most years. All stars this year. Vanek has plenty of value. He doesn't equate to a draft pick with elite skill though.

 

Especially when you consider the position a franchise tends to be in when they're drafting that high....they aren't in the right spot to spend assets acquiring 1 guaranteed year of a 30 year old scoring winger. Vanek's value will be maximized from a team that is either a contender but thinks it needs scoring punch, or a team that thinks it's a top end goal-scorer away from really contending.

[North Buffalo]

Hopefully Khymlev, our man in Russia, will sort out whether this kid is a red flag or not.

 

If all of the impact forwards are gone at 8 it means that impact D-men are still on the board and we'll have a choice of them. I'm OK with that. Gets me some top end talent, front end or back.

I understand the logic and that just means I will have to update my Avatar, waiting for 2 years from now. The Sabres need a Number 1 center and anything less than that will be a disappointment and a waste IMO.

[dudacek]

Of the teams in front of us, Nashville is the only team Vanek would be any kind of fit for. They are a decent team that needs offence.

But they have never had a first-line forward prospect and I really can't see them leaving this draft without one.

 

Still, it's all about how other teams are drawing their boards.

Vanek and eight would get you as high as four if the team you are swapping with thinks their guy is still there at eight, guaranteed.

And it should get you at least four if the team in front of you thinks Nurse, Barkov, nichushkin, Monohan and Lindholm are basically pick'em.

And you know someone in the top ten will go off the board. It might even be Buffalo.

 

But is Barkov worth Vanek and eight, considering who should be there at eight?

I'd want to see what else Vanek could fetch first.

[Weave]

I understand the logic and that just means I will have to update my Avatar, waiting for 2 years from now. The Sabres need a Number 1 center and anything less than that will be a disappointment and a waste IMO.

 

Disappointment I get. But a waste? If the top 8 worhty center talent is gone you don't reach just to get a center. Top pair D men with size, offense, and nasty don't grow on trees and the Sabres are woefully short on them too.

[Robviously]

Why haven't we drafted anyone yet?? :unsure:

[...]

 

 

I'd be delighted to land Nichushkin. A KHL contract could get bought out. I wouldn't pass on him.

The kid has sick skills, blazing speed, and great hands. If he's there at 8. He's the pick.

 

I was trying to find the quotes I thought I read from Nichushkin to back up my point, but I think, perhaps, I mis-read them.

 

I will be interested to see what he has to say between now and the draft.

 

It seems he wants to do the honorable thing and honor his contract, which I think no one can argue with. I would still like to hear from him the kind of reassurance we heard from Grigs before he was drafted.

[North Buffalo]

Disappointment I get. But a waste? If the top 8 worhty center talent is gone you don't reach just to get a center. Top pair D men with size, offense, and nasty don't grow on trees and the Sabres are woefully short on them too.

The Sabres are already supposed to have that in Myers, Psysk, Weber, Sekera, Erhoff and Sulzer. That being said, if the Sabres could draft such a prospect and trade him and say Vanek for a number 1 center that I am all for it. But no, I don't think the Sabres need to draft another top end D prospect right now. They need a top end center, however they go about it.

[Iron Crotch]

Of the teams in front of us, Nashville is the only team Vanek would be any kind of fit for. They are a decent team that needs offence.

But they have never had a first-line forward prospect and I really can't see them leaving this draft without one.

 

Still, it's all about how other teams are drawing their boards.

Vanek and eight would get you as high as four if the team you are swapping with thinks their guy is still there at eight, guaranteed.

And it should get you at least four if the team in front of you thinks Nurse, Barkov, nichushkin, Monohan and Lindholm are basically pick'em.

And you know someone in the top ten will go off the board. It might even be Buffalo.

 

But is Barkov worth Vanek and eight, considering who should be there at eight?

I'd want to see what else Vanek could fetch first.

 

As a Preds season ticket holder, I feel compelled to chime in any time anyone talks Preds. :)

 

The trade of Marty Erat (who is a very underrated player IMHO) brought back C/LW Filip Forsberg, who was ranked #2 by ISS last year and taken right before Grigo in last year's draft. Poile himself said that the trade basically got the first rounder back from last year that was sent to Buffalo for Goose. On top of Forsberg, the Preds also have Austin Watson (18th pick in 2010) as a top center prospect who will almost certainly make the club this year. And, Taylor Beck is the best LW prospect that no one has ever heard of. Watching him play live, he is the real deal. No way he isn't in the NHL this year. The Preds actually have several good young forwards (Wilson, Bourque, Hornqvist, etc.) that those who don't watch the team regularly have perhaps never heard of. But they were all hurt last year hence the late season slide. So I would expect Poille to keep the pick and add to that mix. It is normally how he builds. Picking up a $7 million cap hit for potentially a 1 year rental doesn't seem to make a lot of sense for Nashville... although Vanek would certainly help the power play and the Preds are thin at Left Wing.

 

My money is on Vanek resigning in Buffalo (another Terry signing bonus special). I don't see as many trade partners this summer due to the diminished salary cap (which would work to our favor given we have plenty of space). If he doesn't resign, I think he'll be a trade deadline deal.

 

The Sabres are already supposed to have that in Myers, Psysk, Weber, Sekera, Erhoff and Sulzer. That being said, if the Sabres could draft such a prospect and trade him and say Vanek for a number 1 center that I am all for it. But no, I don't think the Sabres need to draft another top end D prospect right now. They need a top end center, however they go about it.

 

I thought we drafted a top-end center prospect last year. Give Grigo some time to develop before you find his replacement. :D

 

Today is Grigo's 19th birthday BTW. Happy birthday, kid!

[TrueBlueGED]

Of the teams in front of us, Nashville is the only team Vanek would be any kind of fit for. They are a decent team that needs offence.

But they have never had a first-line forward prospect and I really can't see them leaving this draft without one.

 

Still, it's all about how other teams are drawing their boards.

Vanek and eight would get you as high as four if the team you are swapping with thinks their guy is still there at eight, guaranteed.

And it should get you at least four if the team in front of you thinks Nurse, Barkov, nichushkin, Monohan and Lindholm are basically pick'em.

And you know someone in the top ten will go off the board. It might even be Buffalo.

 

But is Barkov worth Vanek and eight, considering who should be there at eight?

I'd want to see what else Vanek could fetch first.

 

From everything I've read about him, yes (and obviously if Vanek won't re-sign, it's a no-brainer), especially since I'm not entirely convinced any of the top forwards make it to #8. I think this draft is going to be the exact opposite of last year: there were forwards who everybody thought would go top-10 and slid just because the defensive talent was so good....this year the forward talent is so good that the defensemen will drop. Just my read on it.

[North Buffalo]

As a Preds season ticket holder, I feel compelled to chime in any time anyone talks Preds. :)

 

The trade of Marty Erat (who is a very underrated player IMHO) brought back C/LW Filip Forsberg, who was ranked #2 by ISS last year and taken right before Grigo in last year's draft. Poile himself said that the trade basically got the first rounder back from last year that was sent to Buffalo for Goose. On top of Forsberg, the Preds also have Austin Watson (18th pick in 2010) as a top center prospect who will almost certainly make the club this year. And, Taylor Beck is the best LW prospect that no one has ever heard of. Watching him play live, he is the real deal. No way he isn't in the NHL this year. The Preds actually have several good young forwards (Wilson, Bourque, Hornqvist, etc.) that those who don't watch the team regularly have perhaps never heard of. But they were all hurt last year hence the late season slide. So I would expect Poille to keep the pick and add to that mix. It is normally how he builds. Picking up a $7 million cap hit for potentially a 1 year rental doesn't seem to make a lot of sense for Nashville... although Vanek would certainly help the power play and the Preds are thin at Left Wing.

 

My money is on Vanek resigning in Buffalo (another Terry signing bonus special). I don't see as many trade partners this summer due to the diminished salary cap (which would work to our favor given we have plenty of space). If he doesn't resign, I think he'll be a trade deadline deal.

 

 

 

I thought we drafted a top-end center prospect last year. Give Grigo some time to develop before you find his replacement. :D

 

Today is Grigo's 19th birthday BTW. Happy birthday, kid!

 

Again, I hear your except he was sold as NHL ready and sure he needs some time, but Darcy has had time to find a guy or two and if Grigo is one of them, that is still a big if because of his compete level, the Sabres still imo need to find and elite guy at center that can compete and until they do expect them to wander between 8-12.

 

They are just good enough to not be last, too bad, they could have been in the running for one of the top two centers last 2 yearsr.

 

If they are truly in rebuild mode, let them suck next year, trade Miller and Vanek and go for it, get young talented guys up the middle and let them develop. But, this Chinese water torture is infuriating.

 

I stilll think the D will be solid for years and should not be a priority with the number 1 draft picks. Any help should come by adding some talent up the middle and the hole is still glaring. Get 'r done.

[Derrico]

The Sabres are already supposed to have that in Myers, Psysk, Weber, Sekera, Erhoff and Sulzer. That being said, if the Sabres could draft such a prospect and trade him and say Vanek for a number 1 center that I am all for it. But no, I don't think the Sabres need to draft another top end D prospect right now. They need a top end center, however they go about it.

 

There is just no room on the Buffalo Sabres for a high end D prospect. I get that we have better depth at D than F but would you really reach for the 6th or 7th best forward in the draft rather than the second rated Dman who has a better shot at being a top 1 or 2 guy than a second line forward?

[LGR4GM]

Well we did give up the most shots in the NHL this season by a wide margin and were bottom-8 in goals against (our goaltending was strong given all the shots they faced).

 

...and then if we look at which teams gave up the fewest goals against this year it is (in order): Chicago, Boston, Ottawa, the Rangers, Detroit, San Jose, the Kings, St. Louis, Columbus, Vancouver, Annaheim, then the Penguins. You'll note that the 4 teams in each conference that gave up the fewest goals against are, in fact, the four remaining playoff teams in each conference. Stunning correlation, don't you think?

 

I'm seeing a whole lot of evidence that the defining factor of success in this league at current is defense.

 

...but what the hell. Ignore our awful defense. Score, score, score.

You will also note that those 8 remaining teams all have solid centers. Our defense IMHO was not the problem it was our complete lack of backcheck, puck pursuit, and support from our offense starting in the middle and working out. Also the 2 centers that have been discussed most (Monahan, Lindholm) are considered extremely good 2-way players with Monahan being billed as the best 2-way player in the draft by some. Finally, the more time you control the puck and are on offense the less the other team is. If we have a legitimate center group with some good defensively skills we will be better than if we just have some good defenders.

 

From everything I've read about him, yes (and obviously if Vanek won't re-sign, it's a no-brainer), especially since I'm not entirely convinced any of the top forwards make it to #8. I think this draft is going to be the exact opposite of last year: there were forwards who everybody thought would go top-10 and slid just because the defensive talent was so good....this year the forward talent is so good that the defensemen will drop. Just my read on it.

the only 2 things that need to happen for us to get 1 of those top guys is someone needs to draft a defender. I think Nichushkin will be gone before us anyways. There is a real possibility that Carolina and Edmonton will take defense. If ppl are concerned about Edmonton trading down, we have extra 2nd picks, give them 1 and trade with them so no one else can.

[North Buffalo]

There is just no room on the Buffalo Sabres for a high end D prospect. I get that we have better depth at D than F but would you really reach for the 6th or 7th best forward in the draft rather than the second rated Dman who has a better shot at being a top 1 or 2 guy than a second line forward?

 

That is where a talented GM comes into play. The Sabres need to make a trade to either move up, my preference or trade an asset to get a talented center in return. If not trade down and get more picks etc. Be creative, Darcy has shown he can be when trading established players, his draft prowess though is suspect so I think if he is in that situation, you trade out of the pick and bring in a proven player in return, but don't bother with a D.

[LGR4GM]

There is just no room on the Buffalo Sabres for a high end D prospect. I get that we have better depth at D than F but would you really reach for the 6th or 7th best forward in the draft rather than the second rated Dman who has a better shot at being a top 1 or 2 guy than a second line forward?

This isn't true and I have not heard anyone really talk seriously about reaching on a forward.

If Drouin, MacKinnon, Barkov, Monahan, Nichushkin, and Lindholm are all gone (which means no one drafted a defender (carolina? edmonton?) than we should take a defender since we will have our pick of the top tier minus Jones. Then you take a good forward with your 16th overall pick (Wennberg for instance) and that draft is okay and I think we could all live. However if carolina or most likely edmonton take a defender than you draft the remaining top forward, even if it is Nichushkin who I think will never see NHL ice.

 

Carolina Poll for who to draft: http://fans.hurricanes.nhl.com/community/topic/21377-poll-and-with-the-5th-pick-in-the-2013-nhl-draft-the-carolina-hurricanes-pick/page-27

[shrader]

Unless we're dressing a squad of 7 Bobby Orrs with 7 Nik Lidstrom's in Rochester, there's plenty of room for an elite D prospect. This team needs help just about everywhere and with the glut of picks they've built up in the coming years, they should have the chance to stock up just about everywhere.

[LGR4GM]

Unless we're dressing a squad of 7 Bobby Orrs with 7 Nik Lidstrom's in Rochester, there's plenty of room for an elite D prospect. This team needs help just about everywhere and with the glut of picks they've built up in the coming years, they should have the chance to stock up just about everywhere.

Totally agree. If all the big forward names are gone, we should draft Rasmus Ristolainen. 6'2" 190lbs he likes to model his play after Chris Pronger. Also he plays in the Finnish Elite league so he is already playing against Men. Skates, shoots, and passes well. His 1 downside is he doesn't diagnose plays correctly sometimes... which may be one of the more coachable things. If the magnificent 7 (Jones, MacKinnon, Barkov, Doruin, Nichushkin, Monahan, Lindholm) are gone than I take Ristolaninen at 8th.

 

I should note that some places have Ristolainen at 6'3" 207lbs

http://thehockeywriters.com/rasmus-ristolainen-the-next-ones-nhl-2013-draft-prospect-profile/

[Claude_Verret]

Unless we're dressing a squad of 7 Bobby Orrs with 7 Nik Lidstrom's in Rochester, there's plenty of room for an elite D prospect. This team needs help just about everywhere and with the glut of picks they've built up in the coming years, they should have the chance to stock up just about everywhere.

 

Agreed, and this is why if the scenario plays out where all the elite forward talent is off the board by pick 8, I'd be ok with Darcy trying to trade down to get another top 40-ish pick. Being able to grab four of the top 40 players in this draft would help immensely with so many holes to fill.

[X. Benedict]

If Nurse falls to 8. I don't see the problem. The kid is such an exceptional athlete.

[Derrico]

This isn't true and I have not heard anyone really talk seriously about reaching on a forward.

If Drouin, MacKinnon, Barkov, Monahan, Nichushkin, and Lindholm are all gone (which means no one drafted a defender (carolina? edmonton?) than we should take a defender since we will have our pick of the top tier minus Jones. Then you take a good forward with your 16th overall pick (Wennberg for instance) and that draft is okay and I think we could all live. However if carolina or most likely edmonton take a defender than you draft the remaining top forward, even if it is Nichushkin who I think will never see NHL ice.

 

Carolina Poll for who to draft: http://fans.hurrican...es-pick/page-27

 

North Buffalo just did. Again, I really think Edmonton trades out of that pick (obviously could be wrong). Why would you draft Nichuskin and then say he will never see the NHL ice? I somewhat agree with that point, that's why you DON'T draft him.

[LGR4GM]

I will get shot for this but...

 

If Carolina was willing to trade down because they are targeting defense, hypothetically and with a lot of speculation, what if we offered them a defender and our 8 pick to jump up to 5th?