2013 NHL Entry Draft: Buffalo Sabres Select...

[Hoss]

This scenario is not under consideration. No worries.

 

Only way this happens is if it's a part of a trade up/down. Like with Calgary (8 and 16 for 6 and 22).

 

I finished a few blog posts

 

Part 2 - A little more on December/January

Part 3 - Drafted From - The takeaway, US college picks heavily undervalued, OHL undervalued, US high school picks good in the first round, terrible after. WHL overvalued, US juniors overvalued, Q - overvalued.

Part 4- Centers and height. - The takeaway, the bigger the center, the less likely you find him in later rounds.

Part 5- Comparables - The takeaway - Like what everyone else says, there are 6 forwards as legitimate top 5 picks

Part 6 - Plus/Minus - Does it matter? yes, it does.

 

I feel like this is a pretty cool study, but I can't quite understand your graphs. Have you described them elsewhere buddy? Would like to understand better.

 

Here's my blog post prospect profile on Seth Jones: http://sabresoftomorrow.wordpress.com/2013/06/16/seth-jones-prospect-profile/

 

 

Aleksander Barkov will be up tomorrow!

[rakish]

but I can't quite understand your graphs

 

The x-axis is picks, When there are 30, it's the first round, if there's 270, it's all picks. The very left is pick 1, of course.

The y-axis is games played per season. The green dots are the average for all ten picks between 2003 and 2012, the blue dot is labeled as the player. If the player hasn't played 20 games per year, I list him below the chart.

[ALF]

Atlanta outbids us 6-22-28 unless AVS want 8-16 , Miller & Stafford , thats a very high offer if I were GM. I won't go higher then that.

[X. Benedict]

Atlanta outbids us 6-22-28 unless AVS want 8-16 , Miller & Stafford , thats a very high offer if I were GM. I won't go higher then that.

 

Atlanta? The organization formerly formerly known as Atlanta.

[ALF]

I'am getting too old X.Benedict, Calgary Flames not Atlanta Flames

[Hoss]

Atlanta outbids us 6-22-28 unless AVS want 8-16 , Miller & Stafford , thats a very high offer if I were GM. I won't go higher then that.

 

6-22-28 isn't that impressive of an offer. We can top that easily.

[inkman]

Atlanta outbids us 6-22-28 unless AVS want 8-16 , Miller & Stafford , thats a very high offer if I were GM. I won't go higher then that.

Why is Drew Stafford's name a part of any trade scenario?

[HopefulFuture]

Why is Drew Stafford's name a part of any trade scenario?

 

Because Stafford made the comment through his agent that he'd like to move on from Buffalo.

 

http://sabrenoise.com/2013/03/26/how-long-before-drew-stafford-asks-for-trade/

[inkman]

Because Stafford made the comment May 4th that he'd like to move on from Buffalo.

Cool that 6th round pick they get for him will come in handy

[HopefulFuture]

Cool that 6th round pick they get for him will come in handy

 

I doubt it will be a 6th rounder, but if your point is to say the organization squandered a 1st rd pick on him (13th overall I believe), well then, yes, I agree with you, we won't be getting remotely close to equal value back on another Regier screw up.

[Koomkie]

6-22-28 isn't that impressive of an offer. We can top that easily.

 

i guess looking back at it now, you are right. i think if i they had 5-22-28 it would be a different scenario. but if they are offering the 6th...it could turn out to be the same player as our 8th pick. and then with us owning the 16th and two 2nd rounders, we can easily top that. right on.....i can't wait for this draft to be over already. one quick question. is free agency the 1st or 5th of july? thanks

[Lanny]

 

 

Because Stafford made the comment through his agent that he'd like to move on from Buffalo.

 

http://sabrenoise.com/2013/03/26/how-long-before-drew-stafford-asks-for-trade/

I don't recall this, is it confirmed anywhere other than this fan blog site?

[thesportsbuff]

i guess looking back at it now, you are right. i think if i they had 5-22-28 it would be a different scenario. but if they are offering the 6th...it could turn out to be the same player as our 8th pick. and then with us owning the 16th and two 2nd rounders, we can easily top that. right on.....i can't wait for this draft to be over already. one quick question. is free agency the 1st or 5th of july? thanks

 

Players can sign on July 5th, but I believe under the new CBA they can now meet with teams and perhaps negotiate starting July 1st.

 

I don't recall this, is it confirmed anywhere other than this fan blog site?

 

Was wondering this myself. Not that it's any surprise if it's true, I think most here would agree both sides benefit from a change of scenery. But with no source listed how can you trust what Blog X says -- he could have read it from @HockeyyInsiderr haha

[inkman]

I doubt it will be a 6th rounder, but if your point is to say the organization squandered a 1st rd pick on him (13th overall I believe), well then, yes, I agree with you, we won't be getting remotely close to equal value back on another Regier screw up.

My point is Drew Stafford shouldn't be mentioned in any trades involving moving up in the draft. He's close to worthless.

[deluca67]

As you just said, staying at #8 isn't swinging for the fences. Not wanting to put together a huge package to move up is a defensible position (one I disagree with, but I digress). Wanting to move down from #8 just to acquire a couple of mid-level prospects as opposed to one high-end prospect, on the other hand, is simply not a position which can reasonably be defended IMO. I'll say this one last time: the Sabres' problem for ages hasn't been good players...we've had plenty of good players, and we will continue to have good players. The problem has been the lack of great players, and your chance of getting a great player at #8 is significantly higher than the combined chance that one of the two in the 15-20 range end up being great players.

I never thought to consider 1st & second round talent as "mid-level prospects", IMO ending up with 6 of the top 52 players, if used correctly, can land the Sabres a few "good players." The Sabres problem is that they are lacking in both quality, quantity and depth at all positions. The best way to cure that is bringing in as many quality young players as possible.

 

Selecting Monahan at #8 wouldn't be swinging for the fences, it would be using one asset on 1 prospect. There isn't one player in this year's draft worthy of burning multiple assets.

Agreed on all counts. Moving down to get a couple extra picks is stupid. This team has lacked high end talent and continues to do so and getting another couple staffords isn't going to help us. If Darcy trades down he should be fired.

Yet we expect teams like Colorado to want to do exactly that? It's about maximizing assets, the only thing that would be "stupid" is not exploring all options and opportunities.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

I'd say the first part is probably true. That said, the value of a lower first-rounder has also probably risen accordingly.

As for the second part, I'm not sure that's true overall, but it was probably true the years those trades were made.

I look at it this way: if you rate Barkov, MacKinnon and Drouin as relatively equal, of course you'd take a second rounder to drop a spot or two. Why wouldn't you? But you'd also be pushing hard to see how much more than that teams would be willing to pay.

 

I don't think many do, IMO.

 

General consensus is that the big three are significantly better talent then the next level of talent.

[Trettioåtta]

I don't think many do, IMO.

 

General consensus is that the big three are significantly better talent then the next level of talent.

 

I'm not so sure, quite a few GMs say there is a big 4. Barkov is a much more known quantity. He was a ppg player against men in a defensive league. Even if his potential is lower he is a much much safer pick and is night and day the most well rounded of the top 4. Drouin and Mackinnon might be St louis and Stamkos, but Barkov is Toews

[X. Benedict]

I'am getting too old X.Benedict, Calgary Flames not Atlanta Flames

 

I thought you were joking - and appreciated it. My memory isn't as sharp as 5 years ago.

 

I just hope we can work out a trade with the California Golden Seals. :lol:

[LGR4GM]

So we are all hoping he trades down then?

Key word being should.

 

I don't want to maximize crap. I want to draft as high as possible and actually get some talent around here for once that we could build around. It'd be nice when Vanek's gone not to just have CoHo and? Ennis maybe? Obviously I hope Armia pans out but that is unknown. If you can't move up from 8 than keep it and 16 and stay put.

[Robviously]

I'm not so sure, quite a few GMs say there is a big 4. Barkov is a much more known quantity. He was a ppg player against men in a defensive league. Even if his potential is lower he is a much much safer pick and is night and day the most well rounded of the top 4. Drouin and Mackinnon might be St louis and Stamkos, but Barkov is Toews

This. The only reason Barkov doesn't get consideration for no.1 overall is that he's European. He's bigger than Drouin and MacKinnon and he's dominating a men's league as a 17 year old.

[LGR4GM]

I should also add that our Draft Strategy should also include taking a long hard look at College kids. I have seen multiple studies and reports talking about how so and so playing for 4 years at the University of Whatever has made him a better hockey player. Obviously we won't see these guys for years but even within our system the non drafted or drafted college kids have done fairly well. Stafford and Flynn for example (yes I know we hate stafford but he still plays)

 

This. The only reason Barkov doesn't get consideration for no.1 overall is that he's European. He's bigger than Drouin and MacKinnon and he's dominating a men's league as a 17 year old.

That and he has average skating/speed

[X. Benedict]

This. The only reason Barkov doesn't get consideration for no.1 overall is that he's European. He's bigger than Drouin and MacKinnon and he's dominating a men's league as a 17 year old.

 

Barkov - Russian genes with Finnish discipline. He might be a steal at 4.

[Robviously]

 

Key word being should.

 

I don't want to maximize crap. I want to draft as high as possible and actually get some talent around here for once that we could build around. It'd be nice when Vanek's gone not to just have CoHo and? Ennis maybe? Obviously I hope Armia pans out but that is unknown. If you can't move up from 8 than keep it and 16 and stay put.

If we can't move up from 8, I hope we try to move up from 16. Two top ten picks would be awesome this year.

 

Plus we should be able to add late first rounders with Vanek/Miller trades.

 

(I feel like every post should come with a disclaimer that I know I'm talking about the Sabres and therefore do not expect all that much to happen though.)

[X. Benedict]

 

That and he has average skating/speed

 

I'm not sure that scares anyone off. He's a wide body - protects the puck really well. His shoulders remind me of Ducky Dale.

[Claude_Verret]

Darcy should be fired if he DOESN'T have a trade down scenario at the ready going into the draft. It's a GM's job to be prepared for all potential scenarios. Something like this:

 

If we are unable to trade up, and these seven players are off the board by the 8th pick, we will consider moving down x spots to likely still grab our targeted prospect(s) and gain another pick in the top 35-40.

 

There would be nothing whatsoever wrong with this IMO.