Is the new core already here?

[TrueBlueGED]

Like the concept of this. If every current prospect and young player hits their ceiling, the new core is absolutely here. But we all know that's not happening; some will flame out entirely, others will be NHL players but won't his their ceiling. Ultimately I peg 8 as being useful players on a Cup team in the next 3 years, but that doesn't necessarily mean I think they all belong on the same Cup team, if that makes sense. There's still a distinct deficiency in the impact player department IMO (unless there's a lot of ceiling-hitting, which I find unlikely).

[nobody]

None, unless they are traded. :devil:

 

Sad but probably true.

[DaveSnuggerud]

This thread is pretty funny...thanks for the Grumpy Cat pic!

 

I really like the pedigree of Rolston/Sacco developing young players for USA Hockey. This has potential...my issue is that the entire organization struggles with coddling those who do not perform. The balance between expectation and support is thrown waaay towards accepting poor performance. I see a talented mix of players that will struggle to win in the midst of the intensity of the playoffs unless the organization changes this philosophical imbalance.

[That Aud Smell]

This thread is pretty funny...thanks for the Grumpy Cat pic!

 

Snuggerud is among my favorite obscure Sabres -- for the name alone. And now we get that majestic mullet in your avatar. Very nice.

[Claude_Verret]

[/size]

 

Snuggerud is among my favorite obscure Sabres -- for the name alone. And now we get that majestic mullet in your avatar. Very nice.

 

When I bartended in college, one of the waitresses that I worked with was obsessed with Snuggerud. She must have had a thing for that big, curly mullet.

[Stoner]

Like the concept of this. If every current prospect and young player hits their ceiling, the new core is absolutely here. But we all know that's not happening; some will flame out entirely, others will be NHL players but won't his their ceiling. Ultimately I peg 8 as being useful players on a Cup team in the next 3 years, but that doesn't necessarily mean I think they all belong on the same Cup team, if that makes sense. There's still a distinct deficiency in the impact player department IMO (unless there's a lot of ceiling-hitting, which I find unlikely).

 

It's useful to point out (how's that for a pompous intro?) that Ted Black thinks the Sabres need to have 50% of their first and second round picks in the next four years turn into "impact players." Ain't happenin'.

[darksabre]

 

 

It's useful to point out (how's that for a pompous intro?) that Ted Black thinks the Sabres need to have 50% of their first and second round picks in the next four years turn into "impact players." Ain't happenin'.

 

Nothing wrong with laying it out there. They might not achieve 50% but ideally you want your first and second round players to hit more than miss. I don't think that is unreasonable if you are confident in your scouting department.

 

I also wonder if there is precedent for teams hitting the 50% mark?

[Hoss]

Anybody voting for the 2014 first rounder, or the return in the trades, is confused. We have NO idea what they will be.

[Andrew Amerk]

I think my cat has a shot at the 3rd line this year.

[Weave]

Nothing wrong with laying it out there. They might not achieve 50% but ideally you want your first and second round players to hit more than miss. I don't think that is unreasonable if you are confident in your scouting department.

 

I also wonder if there is precedent for teams hitting the 50% mark?

 

I'm not going to hunt down links now but it is usually accepted that about 50% of 1st rounders overall have a decent NHL career. 2nd rounders are more like 25%. Hitting 50% on 1st and 2nd combined would be success for sure.

[CallawaySabres]

I think my cat has a shot at the 3rd line this year.

 

Not a chance, Mr. Snuggs has at least 5 pounds on your cat and his nameplate would be a top 5 seller.

[TrueBlueGED]

I'm not going to hunt down links now but it is usually accepted that about 50% of 1st rounders overall have a decent NHL career. 2nd rounders are more like 25%. Hitting 50% on 1st and 2nd combined would be success for sure.

 

Right. The other thing with Black's comment, is how does he define an impact player? I think a lot of scouts would describe it as a solid NHL player, whereas a typical fan would describe it as one of the better players at a position. If using the latter definition, those hit rates are even lower.

[darksabre]

I'm not going to hunt down links now but it is usually accepted that about 50% of 1st rounders overall have a decent NHL career. 2nd rounders are more like 25%. Hitting 50% on 1st and 2nd combined would be success for sure.

 

So as suspected his numbers are ambitious. That's not surprising to me from a guy who sets the expectations for the people below him like Darcy and the scouting staff.

[Claude_Verret]

Right. The other thing with Black's comment, is how does he define an impact player? I think a lot of scouts would describe it as a solid NHL player, whereas a typical fan would describe it as one of the better players at a position. If using the latter definition, those hit rates are even lower.

 

That's how I see the definition coming from a team representative. An impact player is someone you draft that is a 3rd line fringe to solid 4th liner and above. By this definition someone like Kaleta is an impact player, but Matt Ellis is not.

[Stoner]

Ted said "impact player" in the context of how does the franchise win its first Cup. Kaleta is not the bar.

 

Nothing wrong with laying it out there. They might not achieve 50% but ideally you want your first and second round players to hit more than miss. I don't think that is unreasonable if you are confident in your scouting department.

 

I also wonder if there is precedent for teams hitting the 50% mark?

 

Why don't you just look at how Regier and Divine have done?

[IKnowPhysics]

Divine

 

Isn't he though?

[darksabre]

Ted said "impact player" in the context of how does the franchise win its first Cup. Kaleta is not the bar.

 

 

 

Why don't you just look at how Regier and Divine have done?

 

During which building phase?

[Stoner]

First three drafts after losing Drury and Briere:

 

3 firsts — Myers, Ennis, Kassian

 

3 seconds — Brennan, Schiestel, Adam

 

So, why aren't we "contenders" four years later?

[LGR4GM]

First three drafts after losing Drury and Briere:

 

3 firsts — Myers, Ennis, Kassian

 

3 seconds — Brennan, Schiestel, Adam

 

So, why aren't we "contenders" four years later?

None of those players are NHL centers which is what Briere and Drury were.

[darksabre]

First three drafts after losing Drury and Briere:

 

3 firsts — Myers, Ennis, Kassian

 

3 seconds — Brennan, Schiestel, Adam

 

So, why aren't we "contenders" four years later?

 

Because there's no way that math works out. Taking into account that three of six are still on the team and developing, perhaps you wind up with two, Myers and Ennis, being impact players. Then you hope for the same result over then next three drafts including this most recent one, where you hopefully end up with a core of at least 8 players who you have drafted over the past six to seven years, depending on how many picks you have in a given year. The player development approach takes time and in terms of the Sabres is already in process.

[Claude_Verret]

Ted said "impact player" in the context of how does the franchise win its first Cup. Kaleta is not the bar.

 

But for what he is asked to do Kaleta is indeed an impact player and would be an important piece in that role for a Stanley Cup contending team. Now if 50% of your first and second round picks pan out at Kaleta level that obviously isn't going to get the job done. I was just commenting on what Blue said about the definition of impact player being different coming from the team versus fans.

[Stoner]

But for what he is asked to do Kaleta is indeed an impact player and would be an important piece in that role for a Stanley Cup contending team. Now if 50% of your first and second round picks pan out at Kaleta level that obviously isn't going to get the job done. I was just commenting on what Blue said about the definition of impact player being different coming from the team versus fans.

 

Impact players beget impact players. It feeds on itself. Without somehow finding higher-end talent, or a generational-type player, I don't see how this plan works.

[TrueBlueGED]

Impact players beget impact players. It feeds on itself. Without somehow finding higher-end talent, or a generational-type player, I don't see how this plan works.

 

I think you're missing the point. All we're saying is that for most fans, "impact player" is probably close to a synonym for "high-end player"....whereas for a team, an impact player is simply somebody who is on an NHL roster and is contributing in some fashion. Taking this into account will greatly influence how "right" Black ends up being.

[Claude_Verret]

Impact players beget impact players. It feeds on itself. Without somehow finding higher-end talent, or a generational-type player, I don't see how this plan works.

 

It appeared as though we had our shot this year, and I truly believe DR was trying to tank it last season to get one of those guys, but of course the Sabres are the Sabres and it's just not meant to be.

[sicknfla]

I have noticed that recently some of you have started to feel that Armia's impact may not be as great as you may have believed. Admittedly, I have not followed him a real lot. What has led to the apparent downgrade in his impact?