2013 NHL Entry Draft: Buffalo Sabres Select...

[LGR4GM]

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.

No but it drops him a hair below the big 3. I'd personally love Barkov on the Sabres.

I didn't know where to put this but as we are talking the top picks...

WGR posted this on Facebook: "After watching him in Rochester this year, Matt Coller says he would NOT trade Zemgus Girgensons straight-up for the #1 pick in this year's NHL draft. Do you agree? Are there any "untouchables" in the Sabres organization?"

[rakish]

Could you repost your mock X, I saw it pages ago, it would take some time to find

[LGR4GM]

Could you repost your mock X, I saw it pages ago, it would take some time to find

Since we are almost to 50pages, how about a couple people put up a mock draft for picks 1-16?

[X. Benedict]

Could you repost your mock X, I saw it pages ago, it would take some time to find

This is what I wrote I JUNE 5

If the draft was tomorrow without trades - I think it would play out like this:

 

Colorado takes Seth Jones

Florida takes Nathan MacKinnon

Tampa Bay takes Jonathan Drouin

Nashville takes Valery Nichushkin

Carolina takes Sasha Alexsander Barkov

Calgary takes Sean Monahan

Edmonton takes Elias Lindholm

Buffalo takes Rasmus Ristolainen

New Jersey takes Nikita Zadorov

Dallas takes Darnell Nurse

Philadelphia takes Bo Horvat

Phoenix takes Ryan Pulock

Winnipeg takes Hunter Shinkaruk

Columbus takes Alexander Wennberg

NY Islanders takes Max Domi

Buffalo takes Adam Erne

[deluca67]

No but it drops him a hair below the big 3. I'd personally love Barkov on the Sabres.

I didn't know where to put this but as we are talking the top picks...

WGR posted this on Facebook: "After watching him in Rochester this year, Matt Coller says he would NOT trade Zemgus Girgensons straight-up for the #1 pick in this year's NHL draft. Do you agree? Are there any "untouchables" in the Sabres organization?"

After reading this from Matthew Coller http://www.wgr550.com/pages/16605201.php?contentType=4&contentId=13246046 I don't believe he has a realistic grasp of where the Sabres are as a franchise.

 

To answer your question, No, there are no "untouchables" in this organization.

[X. Benedict]

After reading this from Matthew Coller http://www.wgr550.co...tentId=13246046 I don't believe he has a realistic grasp of where the Sabres are as a franchise.

 

To answer your question, No, there are no "untouchables" in this organization.

 

Man that is a weak Free Agency class.

[deluca67]

Man that is a weak Free Agency class.

I wouldn't be surprised if many of those players named will still be available when training camps open. I can also imagine many of those players signing 1 -2 year deals deals well below market value.

[X. Benedict]

I wouldn't be surprised if many of those players named will still be available when training camps open. I can also imagine many of those players signing 1 -2 year deals deals well below market value.

Interesting point.

I don't see many cashing in. Not many teams have much to spend.

[LGR4GM]

here is why I have no desire to trade down... 65% of 1st-round draft picks can make the NHL and play a significant number of games, only 27% of 2nd-round draft picks make the same grade of success.

[26CornerBlitz]

No but it drops him a hair below the big 3. I'd personally love Barkov on the Sabres.

I didn't know where to put this but as we are talking the top picks...

WGR posted this on Facebook: "After watching him in Rochester this year, Matt Coller says he would NOT trade Zemgus Girgensons straight-up for the #1 pick in this year's NHL draft. Do you agree? Are there any "untouchables" in the Sabres organization?"

 

@MatthewWGR

My phone was in and out (sorry) but here's me on @WGR550 explaining why I wouldn't deal Zemgus for No. 1 overall pick http://audio.wgr550.com/a/76559680/6-17-matthew-coller-on-zemgus-girgensons-and-nhl-free-agency.htm …

[LGR4GM]

http://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2013/6/17/4437676/nhl-draft-2013-carolina-hurricanes-edmonton-oilers

 

Carolina hearing offers for #5 as it is believed by some experts 1-4picks will not be moved.

[deluca67]

here is why I have no desire to trade down... 65% of 1st-round draft picks can make the NHL and play a significant number of games, only 27% of 2nd-round draft picks make the same grade of success.

You take one pick #8 with a 65% chance of playing significant number of games and trade it for two 1st round picks with a 65% chance and a second with a 27%. Seems like the trade I proposed increases the Sabres chances.

[Weave]

You take one pick #8 with a 65% chance of playing significant number of games and trade it for two 1st round picks with a 65% chance and a second with a 27%. Seems like the trade I proposed increases the Sabres chances.

 

Except the overall average for 1st round picks to make the NHL is 65%, and that includes the damned-near gimmes in the top few spots. The further back you go, the lower odds of them sticking. Moving from 16 to get two twenty-somethings means you've moved one pick at X% odds to get two picks at X-Y% odds. You aren't increasing the odds that a player sticks by getting more picks later.

 

And you lose control over what type of player you pick because there are more teams selecting ahead of you.

[SwampD]

You take one pick #8 with a 65% chance of playing significant number of games and trade it for two 1st round picks with a 65% chance and a second with a 27%. Seems like the trade I proposed increases the Sabres chances.

Also, the first 5 picks skews that 1st round number higher.

 

EDIT: dammit weave. you beat me to it.

 

But aren't you making deluca's case for him. Since aside from the few top spots, the chances are the same of making the NHL, isn't it better to have more chances?

[X. Benedict]

You take one pick #8 with a 65% chance of playing significant number of games and trade it for two 1st round picks with a 65% chance and a second with a 27%. Seems like the trade I proposed increases the Sabres chances.

 

I think this is a strong draft. There looks to be a lot of NHL players in this draft well into the 2nd round. I'm not so sure there are a lot of Top 3, first pairing players. But there are a lot of NHL players.

 

Trading down might be tempting if Devine thinks they missed out on top 3 or first pairing players.

[LGR4GM]

I think this is a strong draft. There looks to be a lot of NHL players in this draft well into the 2nd round. I'm not so sure there are a lot of Top 3, first pairing players. But there are a lot of NHL players.

 

Trading down might be tempting if Devine thinks they missed out on top 3 or first pairing players.

Which at 8 they wont. The Magnificent 7 should all be top guys. Than you have Nurse/Ristolainen as top pairing guys sitting there. They won't be there after 10 (Unless ristolainen falls a bit because of his foreigness).

[deluca67]

Except the overall average for 1st round picks to make the NHL is 65%, and that includes the damned-near gimmes in the top few spots. The further back you go, the lower odds of them sticking. Moving from 16 to get two twenty-somethings means you've moved one pick at X% odds to get two picks at X-Y% odds. You aren't increasing the odds that a player sticks by getting more picks later.

 

And you lose control over what type of player you pick because there are more teams selecting ahead of you.

You make the move with players in mind for those later picks. It comes down to the value you assign to this years prospects. IMO, there is enough value later in the 1st round and in the second round that makes the #8 pick expendable for the right price. I understand the allure of the top portion of the draft. I would be happy if the Sabres stay pat and draft #8 and #16 if the return for trading is not there. Two 1st and a top ten 2nd is a good return. Either direction is fine with me. Just stay away from bundling assets to move up.

[Robviously]

@MatthewWGR

My phone was in and out (sorry) but here's me on @WGR550 explaining why I wouldn't deal Zemgus for No. 1 overall pick http://audio.wgr550....ee-agency.htm …

I love all of Coller's reasons for keeping him and being excited about him, but I still have a hard time saying we'd be better off with Girgensons than the no.1 overall pick (straight up!).

 

The two guys I remember Girgensons had instant chemistry with since being drafted are Foligno and Larsson. Take those three together and that's the type of team I'd love to have someday.

[LGR4GM]

I love all of Coller's reasons for keeping him and being excited about him, but I still have a hard time saying we'd be better off with Girgensons than the no.1 overall pick (straight up!).

 

The two guys I remember Girgensons had instant chemistry with since being drafted are Foligno and Larsson. Take those three together and that's the type of team I'd love to have someday.

Foligno - Girgensons - Larsson as your 3rd line shutdown group... that makes me salivate a bit.

[X. Benedict]

Foligno - Girgensons - Larsson as your 3rd line shutdown group... that makes me salivate a bit.

 

I like the idea of a third line with talent and a lunch-pail work ethic.

 

If only there was a top 6.....

[LGR4GM]

I like the idea of a third line with talent and a lunch-pail work ethic.

 

If only there was a top 6.....

which brings me to my crazy draft scenarios. What if... we trade Vanek to Columbus for stuff involving their 1st round pick #14. Columbus has a plethora of young talent and more picks in the 1st.

 

If we can do that we can do something like trading 16 plus our 38th overall pick to Philly who has traded around a bit and could use some influx of talent. Philly gets 16 + 38 and we get 11.

 

In the end we have 8, 11, 14 and we trade our 2nd 2nd rounder (52nd)+8 for 6 from calgary

 

6: Lindholm

11: Ristolainen

14: Wennberg

we go Finnish/Swedish and come away with a top C/RW, a top D, and a potential #2/#3 center with great skill and speed.

[TrueBlueGED]

Except the overall average for 1st round picks to make the NHL is 65%, and that includes the damned-near gimmes in the top few spots. The further back you go, the lower odds of them sticking. Moving from 16 to get two twenty-somethings means you've moved one pick at X% odds to get two picks at X-Y% odds. You aren't increasing the odds that a player sticks by getting more picks later.

 

And you lose control over what type of player you pick because there are more teams selecting ahead of you.

 

Yup. Also, "making the NHL" is a bit of a nebulous accomplishment. Even if the odds of making it were evenly distributed across the first round, who would rather have two prospects with a 65% chance of making the NHL as 3rd liners over one prospect with a 65% chance of making the NHL as a 1st liner or top pairing Dman?

 

I like the idea of a third line with talent and a lunch-pail work ethic.

 

If only there was a top 6.....

 

This, this and this! Top-6s and top-pairing Dmen are what separate the great teams from the pack. That's not to say that having good depth and a 3rd line that can play two-way hockey aren't important aspects of Cup teams, but without the top-6 in place that 3rd line is borderline irrelevant because the team isn't going anywhere. Get a top line, get a top-pairing on D, and the rest will be a lot easier to fill in than doing this process in reverse.

 

I love all of Coller's reasons for keeping him and being excited about him, but I still have a hard time saying we'd be better off with Girgensons than the no.1 overall pick (straight up!).

 

I think he's out to lunch personally. I respect a lot of Coller's work, but I'm really disappointed in him on this. It just comes off as the kind of sensationalist position Skip Bayless would take to give ratings a boost.

[deluca67]

which brings me to my crazy draft scenarios. What if... we trade Vanek to Columbus for stuff involving their 1st round pick #14. Columbus has a plethora of young talent and more picks in the 1st.

 

If we can do that we can do something like trading 16 plus our 38th overall pick to Philly who has traded around a bit and could use some influx of talent. Philly gets 16 + 38 and we get 11.

 

In the end we have 8, 11, 14 and we trade our 2nd 2nd rounder (52nd)+8 for 6 from calgary

 

6: Lindholm

11: Ristolainen

14: Wennberg

we go Finnish/Swedish and come away with a top C/RW, a top D, and a potential #2/#3 center with great skill and speed.

Vanek to Columbus is interesting. There is no reason Vanek couldn't garner #14 and #19 from Columbus.

 

I would be disappointed if the Sabre came away with Lindholm, Ristolainen and Wennberg while passing on Monahan.

 

I'd prefer :

 

#6 Monahan

#11 Zadorov

#14 Lazar

 

These are the type of players that need to become common place within the Sabres organization.

[LGR4GM]

Vanek to Columbus is interesting. There is no reason Vanek couldn't garner #14 and #19 from Columbus.

 

I would be disappointed if the Sabre came away with Lindholm, Ristolainen and Wennberg while passing on Monahan.

 

I'd prefer :

 

#6 Monahan

#11 Zadorov

#14 Lazar

 

These are the type of players that need to become common place within the Sabres organization.

I assumed Monahan would be gone but I prefer him over Lindholm as well.

 

So I would say

#6 Monahan

#11 Ristolainen

#16 Lazar (I don't think we would have to trade up and he would be there)

[X. Benedict]

Vanek to Columbus is interesting. There is no reason Vanek couldn't garner #14 and #19 from Columbus.

 

I would be disappointed if the Sabre came away with Lindholm, Ristolainen and Wennberg while passing on Monahan.

 

I'd prefer :

 

#6 Monahan

#11 Zadorov

#14 Lazar

 

These are the type of players that need to become common place within the Sabres organization.

 

I really think Monahan is the guy I would not be excited about at 8.

He's a bit of an all around player that is good at everything - and his size is liked which tends to push him up

draft boards.

 

But not as strong on the puck or as physical as one would hope.

I think he's a bit more of a development project than any of the top 10 guys.

 

I'd take Lindholm who is an inch and a quarter shorter but more refined in skills and skating and reportedly a more intense player.