LGR4GM Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 1. Mikhail Grigorenko Pro 7.5 B 2. Zemgus Girgensons Pro 6.5 B 3. Johan Larsson Pro 6.5 B 4. JT Compher NCAA 6.5 C Hodgson also while grabbing that our number one strength on hockeys future is DEPTH AT CENTER Larsson is not a top 2. Compher will be an NHL winger in all likelihood. Girgensons is already and NHL winger. Grigorenko is an unknown but could be a top 2 center. So that gives you 1 maybe two if you count Compher. Neither has the same ceiling as Bennett or Reinhart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Girgensons is a #3 center, ideally. Grigo, as we all know, hasn't impressed. Compher, I haven't seen enough of. Larsson is at a PPG in Rochester, but he's not impressing me that much, either, for some reason. Hodgson would be an excellent #2 center and is a passable #1 center. That's about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Larsson is not a top 2. Compher will be an NHL winger in all likelihood. Girgensons is already and NHL winger. Grigorenko is an unknown but could be a top 2 center. So that gives you 1 maybe two if you count Compher. Neither has the same ceiling as Bennett or Reinhart. Not only is Larsson not a top-6 player, but he also won't be a bottom-6 centerman. He's almost perfect to play the wing on the third line. Hard worker, strong by the boards, fights for pucks, a 200-foot player, good hands, and very good in his own end. As Matthew Collar says, a puck possession guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) Girgensons is a #3 center, ideally. Grigo, as we all know, hasn't impressed. Compher, I haven't seen enough of. Larsson is at a PPG in Rochester, but he's not impressing me that much, either, for some reason. Hodgson would be an excellent #2 center and is a passable #1 center. That's about it. So we have two #2 centers one in which you want in a checking line role. However our center needs are not as dire as they were two years ago. If even one of these guys progresses fast, which is pretty likely we are looking at a pretty good stable of centers. Plus a pretty easy way of making a good center is giving him good wingers. Edited January 30, 2014 by FolignosJock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Not only is Larsson not a top-6 player, but he also won't be a bottom-6 centerman. He's almost perfect to play the wing on the third line. Hard worker, strong by the boards, fights for pucks, a 200-foot player, good hands, and very good in his own end. As Matthew Collar says, a puck possession guy. Larsson was great in the last Phoenix game in December. If that's what he becomes full-time in the NHL, he'll be awesome for us to have on the 3rd line and PK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Might be. Hard to tell. It is one of the reasons Reinhart is more appealing in certain regards. (Yes I have advocated for Bennett over Reinhart etc... but if scouts decide Bennett is a LW not a NHL C, we need to go Center no doubt.) If we are picking 10th overall with the Isles pick, it's ok to reach on someone to grab a need over a want. But if you're handed a gift from the NHL and pick first overall, you decide who the best player is and you select him. Not saying Bennett is the clear cut better player then Reinhart, cuz i truly don't know. But i have no interest in who they believe will play which position. Grab the best player you can and then figure out the rest. I like both player a lot. The two things why i am leaning towards Bennett right now and last several weeks is... i love his swagger. He plays like a Mike Richards/Doug Gilmour. Likes to get dirty. Is a gamer. Will go through a wall to get the puck type player... and also he is best friends with Connor McDavid and a former linemate of McDavids, and i am 100% in on McDavid. Any connection to McDavid just gets me to drool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) If we are picking 10th overall with the Isles pick, it's ok to reach on someone to grab a need over a want. But if you're handed a gift from the NHL and pick first overall, you decide who the best player is and you select him. Not saying Bennett is the clear cut better player then Reinhart, cuz i truly don't know. But i have no interest in who they believe will play which position. Grab the best player you can and then figure out the rest. I like both player a lot. The two things why i am leaning towards Bennett right now and last several weeks is... i love his swagger. He plays like a Mike Richards/Doug Gilmour. Likes to get dirty. Is a gamer. Will go through a wall to get the puck type player... and also he is best friends with Connor McDavid and a former linemate of McDavids, and i am 100% in on McDavid. Any connection to McDavid just gets me to drool. I guess I should clarify. If the scouts grade Reinhart and Bennett the same, i would then chose the center over the winger. Now if those same scouts say Bennett can be an NHL center and is the same or better than Reinhart... Bennett it is. As for the rest of your post... I agree 100%. I like Bennett, I love McDavid... please TM make that happen! Edited January 30, 2014 by LGR4GM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 I guess I should clarify. If the scouts grade Reinhart and Bennett the same, i would then chose the center over the winger. As for the rest of your post... I agree 100%. I like Bennett, I love McDavid... please TM make that happen! I want em both! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) Sam Bennett - 41gp, 27g, 41a, 68pts which comes out to: 44g, 68a, 112pts in 68games Sam Reinhart - 38gp, 24g, 37a, 61pts which comes out to: 43g, 66a, 109pts in 68games They are pretty close. I do know that Bennett has been injured and Reinhart has been on fire since the top prospects game. Edited January 30, 2014 by LGR4GM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Malooga Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) So, I am planning a trip to Erie, with my nephews, to watch Connor McDavid play. Out of the remaining games left, who would be the best team to watch in your opinion? (I'm looking at London [Zadorov] and Kitchener [bailey], for obvious reasons.) Saginaw...London...Barrie...Niagara...Plymouth...Windsor...Kitchener...Sarnia? Edited January 30, 2014 by Bob Malooga Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Girgensons is a #3 center, ideally. Grigo, as we all know, hasn't impressed. Compher, I haven't seen enough of. Larsson is at a PPG in Rochester, but he's not impressing me that much, either, for some reason. Hodgson would be an excellent #2 center and is a passable #1 center. That's about it. Exactly. You draft the center. Worst-case you have to move them to wing later when you have "too many" good centers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 So, I am planning a trip to Erie, with my nephews, to watch Connor McDavid play. Out of the remaining games left, who would be the best team to watch in your opinion? (I'm looking at London [Zadorov] and Kitchener [bailey], for obvious reasons.) Saginaw...London...Barrie...Niagara...Plymouth...Windsor...Kitchener...Sarnia? I'm not sure but I just picked up my gens knights tickets for feb 17, I get to watch zadorov for cheap and up close and continue to watch dal colle progress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assquatch Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 (edited) According to Sportsclubstats.com, after last night's win at Phoenix, the Sabres chance of finishing: 30th: 72% 29th: 22% 28th: 5% 27th: 1% 26th or higher: 0% (rounded to nearest whole %) Edit: I see now it used "weighted" predictions on the remainder of the season which somehow used past performance to predict future outcomes. If I change it to use coin flips for the rest of the games: 30th: 51% 29th: 30% 28th: 11% 27th: 5% 26th: 2% 25th: 1% 24th or higher: 0% Edited January 31, 2014 by Assquatch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny DangerFace Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 According to Sportsclubstats.com, after last night's win at Phoenix, the Sabres chance of finishing: 30th: 72% 29th: 22% 28th: 5% 27th: 1% 26th or higher: 0% (rounded to nearest whole %) They obviously don't know the sabres!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 As disappointed as #TankNation was on our meaningless win, we got some more out of town help with a Flames win last night. I'm not as concerned as Edmonton passing us as Calgary (although I would obviously rather neither). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Lets assume Sabres trade Miller and plan to take a serious run at finishing last in 2014-15 and getting either McDavid or Eichel who are both C's. Does this put Dal Colle to the top of the wish list? I'm good with Sabres getting a top 4 pick this year. Doesn't seem to be much seperation between Reinhart, Dal Colle, Bennett. I'll assume Ekblad is picked in top 4 leaving one of the 3 top forwards to the Sabres. Magic number for this scenario is 47. Tank Nation Strong! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Sam Bennett - 41gp, 27g, 41a, 68pts which comes out to: 44g, 68a, 112pts in 68games Sam Reinhart - 38gp, 24g, 37a, 61pts which comes out to: 43g, 66a, 109pts in 68games They are pretty close. I do know that Bennett has been injured and Reinhart has been on fire since the top prospects game. Lets assume Sabres trade Miller and plan to take a serious run at finishing last in 2014-15 and getting either McDavid or Eichel who are both C's. Does this put Dal Colle to the top of the wish list? I'm good with Sabres getting a top 4 pick this year. Doesn't seem to be much seperation between Reinhart, Dal Colle, Bennett. I'll assume Ekblad is picked in top 4 leaving one of the 3 top forwards to the Sabres. Magic number for this scenario is 47. Tank Nation Strong! Dal Colle is on their radar yes but if Bennett or Reinhart are avialable the pick will be one of them regardless of the 2015 draft. You have to draft based on this year and not next year. Next year we could go on a run and end up drafted 5-14th or something like that. Drafting that high up this year they should take the best forward available and Dal Colle is a bit below the other two. Dal Colle 48gp, 31g, 39a, 70pts which comes out to: 44g, 55a, 99pts in 68games Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKnowPhysics Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 One of them must be better than the other. I want that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 You take Reinhart or Bennett over Dal Colle every time. BUT all three will be very good NHL players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 One of them must be better than the other. I want that one. I wish you were the GM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 One of them must be better than the other. I want that one. pre prospects game, I would have thought Bennett. Post (and Bennett hasn't played due to a groin injury) I have to say Reinhart. He took his game up a level. Also Bennett is being labeled a lw at the NHL level. Reinhart is a RH-C so that could also be in his favor as far as the Sabres go. Reinhart's first fight. http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/jrhockey-buzzing-the-net/top-nhl-draft-prospect-sam-reinhart-first-whl-142334722.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 Future Cosiderations have released their February rankings: Ekblad, Rienhart, Bennett in that order are your top 3 http://futureconsiderations.ca/fc-releases-february-ranking-for-2014-nhl-draft/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 @SabresProspects Draft stuff: Sam Reinhart ended January w/ a show of hands, logging a nice assist and his first-ever WHL scrap ►http://www.sabresprospects.com/2014/02/draft-stuff-reinhart-caps-january-with.html … Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sicknfla Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 (edited) Not sure what thread to post this in but with Ekblad emerging as a possible consensus #1 what about this scenario. If we end up getting the #1 pick do we take Ekblad or the forward we desperately need? If we go the forward route we are not drafting the best player available which i believe is not ever a good idea. So here is another option. Are there any picks from last years draft that would be considered stronger players than Reinhart/Bennett? Yes there are. Now would any of those teams trade that player for Ekblad? Could we get Druin out of Tampa for Ekblad? Maybe add a 2nd or something if last years #3 is that much better than this years #1. Or Ekblad to Ottawa for Lazar and another top prospect. Just a thought. Edited February 2, 2014 by sicknfla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny DangerFace Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 Not sure what thread to post this in but with Ekblad emerging as a possible consensus #1 what about this scenario. If we end up getting the #1 pick do we take Ekblad or the forward we desperately need? If we go the forward route we are not drafting the best player available which i believe is not ever a good idea. So here is another option. Are there any picks from last years draft that would be considered stronger players than Reinhart/Bennett? Yes there are. Now would any of those teams trade that player for Ekblad? Could we get Druin out of Tampa for Ekblad? Maybe add a 2nd or something if last years #3 is that much better than this years #1. Or Ekblad to Ottawa for Lazar and another top prospect. Just a thought. I don't think you take the consensus #1 and then trade him (I see what you are saying and I'm not saying its a bad idea, but I don't think it would realistically happen). If they think ekblad is that much better, then that gives us Myers, Ristolainen, Ekblad, Zadorov, McCabe, Pysyk. That's six potential top 2/top 4 defensemen. I think one or two would be traded, but it wouldn't be ekblad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.