Hired: Tim Murray, GM and Craig Patrick, Advisor

[darksabre]

It really begs the following question: what if Miller won't sign an extension before the deadline and the best they can get for him is a 2nd-rounder from a contender (i.e. a low 2nd-rounder)? Would you rather keep him for the rest of the year and try to re-sign him at the end of the season, which risks him leaving for zero return?

 

By, say, July 10, he and the team will know what's happened in the draft, which FAs they've brought in, any other moves, general direction of the franchise, and, most importantly, what Miller's options are in terms of cash and location.

 

I'm not sure what I would do.

 

If there's a second rounder on the table and Miller doesn't have any intention of re-signing, I absolutely trade him. Something is better than nothing.

[26CornerBlitz]

ICYMI, Good interview with Murray this morning on WGR: Tim Murray on the Howard Simon Show <24:36>

[wjag]

It's been almost 24 hours and no trades have been made.. Come on TM, where's the bold move? Surely you can get some return for Zemgus or Tyler.

 

On a slightly more serious note, I didn't hear a ringing endorsement of TN from TM. He sounded like he really didn't know him. Said he scouted his sons and seen him around a few rinks. Hope to engage in :"small talk" with him and get to know him... My spider senses are up... My gut tells me TN is not a TM kind of guy and he was being politically correct. He may have come out stronger on some of the other interviews, but in the one to the NHL network, he was definitely not sending out a ringing endorsement.

 

Maybe the bold move he has planned doesn't involve a player...

Edited January 10, 2014 by wjag

[nfreeman]

If there's a second rounder on the table and Miller doesn't have any intention of re-signing, I absolutely trade him. Something is better than nothing.

.

 

Sure, but what if Miller says "guys, I appreciate the offer, and I haven't made any decisions yet, but I really want to see what my options are in FA. If I can get a fat contract from a Cup contender, I'll probably take it, but if not, I'll probably come back to Buffalo."?

 

I actually think this is a pretty realistic scenario -- i.e. I don't think he'll sign with a team that isn't a true contender, and I don't think he'll take a cheapo contract from anyone. So unless a true contender is willing to give him, say, $7MM x 4+ years, I think he'd be inclined to stay.

[Derrico]

If there's a second rounder on the table and Miller doesn't have any intention of re-signing, I absolutely trade him. Something is better than nothing.

 

Agreed. IMO I just don't see him re-signing with us. Could be wrong but a guy that age with no real family ties here that sold his house last year, I just don't know why he wouldn't want to go to a team with a chance next year. Also, based on some of TM interviews, it sounds like they want to tank this year and next and then start to be competitive after the 2015 draft (which I completely agree with). Wasn't there a quote somewhere saying the trade deadline can even manipulate that? I think the market is soft for goalies but we will still make the trade for something and bottom out over the next two years. I'm sure he will be acquiring young pieces over the next year and a half but no quick fixes from what I've heard (thank God).

[Assquatch]

It really begs the following question: what if Miller won't sign an extension before the deadline and the best they can get for him is a 2nd-rounder from a contender (i.e. a low 2nd-rounder)? Would you rather keep him for the rest of the year and try to re-sign him at the end of the season, which risks him leaving for zero return?

 

By, say, July 10, he and the team will know what's happened in the draft, which FAs they've brought in, any other moves, general direction of the franchise, and, most importantly, what Miller's options are in terms of cash and location.

 

I'm not sure what I would do.

I'd take the 2nd rounder. Too much of a mismatch between his age and the age of the new core. I'd use my giant scouting department and extra currency to get what I project to be a decent but reasonably priced goaltender of appropriate age.

[darksabre]

.

 

Sure, but what if Miller says "guys, I appreciate the offer, and I haven't made any decisions yet, but I really want to see what my options are in FA. If I can get a fat contract from a Cup contender, I'll probably take it, but if not, I'll probably come back to Buffalo."?

 

I actually think this is a pretty realistic scenario -- i.e. I don't think he'll sign with a team that isn't a true contender, and I don't think he'll take a cheapo contract from anyone. So unless a true contender is willing to give him, say, $7MM x 4+ years, I think he'd be inclined to stay.

 

I still trade him. He's testing free agency no matter what at that point. Regardless of whether he's choosing between us or a contender as a FA, we might as well get a little return for taking that risk.

[Claude_Verret]

Might it also be in our interest to offer to overpay Miller some to help us to the cap floor?

[Eleven]

.

 

Sure, but what if Miller says "guys, I appreciate the offer, and I haven't made any decisions yet, but I really want to see what my options are in FA. If I can get a fat contract from a Cup contender, I'll probably take it, but if not, I'll probably come back to Buffalo."?

 

I actually think this is a pretty realistic scenario -- i.e. I don't think he'll sign with a team that isn't a true contender, and I don't think he'll take a cheapo contract from anyone. So unless a true contender is willing to give him, say, $7MM x 4+ years, I think he'd be inclined to stay.

 

If I can get him to promise not to make any decisions until 7/10, then I don't trade him.

[LTS]

I like his "this team is in last place everyone can be traded quote" :w00t:

 

Except for Girgensons. Unless he could get monumental returns for that kid there is no way he's up for trade. Personally I would accept getting rid of Nolan first (although Nolan may be influencing Girgensons level of play at the moment) before I would consider moving Girgensons. He just has.. it.

 

His chemistry with Moulson seems to be pretty good too.

 

I love these moves. At least it removes questions from the franchise and now allows us to begin evaluating real moves. We're going to see what can happen within the next month when people are moved or not.

[Derrico]

Except for Girgensons. Unless he could get monumental returns for that kid there is no way he's up for trade. Personally I would accept getting rid of Nolan first (although Nolan may be influencing Girgensons level of play at the moment) before I would consider moving Girgensons. He just has.. it.

 

His chemistry with Moulson seems to be pretty good too.

 

I love these moves. At least it removes questions from the franchise and now allows us to begin evaluating real moves. We're going to see what can happen within the next month when people are moved or not.

 

I would say the same for Zadarov.

[Campy]

ICYMI, Good interview with Murray this morning on WGR: Tim Murray on the Howard Simon Show <24:36>

 

Thanks for posting the link 26CB! :thumbsup:

 

A few highlights for those unable to listen:

 

He talked about his role during games while with Ottawa - scouting the opponent - and that he knows the abilities of Buffalo's players well. He said he already knows the players he wants to keep and the players he's ready to move on from.

 

Said Grigorenko is big, strong, talented, and like a lot of young players, needs to be pushed. Said that at times he was the best player in Junior hockey and at others he was invisible. He prefers players who don't need to be pushed but acknowledged there are a finite number of those guys. He said that it's common to have to push young players, and it's up to the organization to develop them properly so they no longer have to be pushed.

 

Howard brought up analytics, said there are things he can learn from them but that they are more useful the less you know about the game (and I agree). He said "hockey sense" is far more important but it isn't always visible to casual fans and doesn't always show up in statistics.

[...]

Going to be an interesting off-season, that's fer shure.

[TrueBlueGED]

Thanks for posting the link 26CB! :thumbsup:

 

A few highlights for those unable to listen:

 

He talked about his role during games while with Ottawa - scouting the opponent - and that he knows the abilities of Buffalo's players well. He said he already knows the players he wants to keep and the players he's ready to move on from.

 

Said Grigorenko is big, strong, talented, and like a lot of young players, needs to be pushed. Said that at times he was the best player in Junior hockey and at others he was invisible. He prefers players who don't need to be pushed but acknowledged there are a finite number of those guys. He said that it's common to have to push young players, and it's up to the organization to develop them properly so they no longer have to be pushed.

 

Howard brought up analytics, said there are things he can learn from them but that they are more useful the less you know about the game (and I agree). He said "hockey sense" is far more important but it isn't always visible to casual fans and doesn't always show up in statistics.

 

NOOOOOOOOOOO! ABORT! ABORT!

 

Nobody ever said stats capture everything, or can replace scouting entirely. And I suppose Darryl Sutter doesn't know much about hockey then, since he and the Kings make heavy use of analytics (a few games back he said something like "That was our best possession game of the year, we had the puck for 64% of the game"....which coincidentally (?) was their CF% for the game).

Edited January 10, 2014 by TrueBluePhD

[Wilbur]

Squirrel!

[That Aud Smell]

Howard brought up analytics, said there are things he can learn from them but that they are more useful the less you know about the game (and I agree). He said "hockey sense" is far more important but it isn't always visible to casual fans and doesn't always show up in statistics.

 

I heard the same thing -- he said advanced stats are of some use, but that hockey sense leads the evaluation process and is more important.

 

Predictably, Jeremy White has engaged several people on Twitter about how Murray expressed nothing but love for analytics.

 

NOOOOOOOOOOO! ABORT! ABORT!

 

Nobody ever said stats capture everything, or can replace scouting entirely. And I suppose Darryl Sutter doesn't know much about hockey then, since he and the Kings make heavy use of analytics (a few games back he said something like "That was our best possession game of the year, we had the puck for 64% of the game"....which coincidentally (?) was their CF% for the game).

 

Now, now. Go listen for yourself - it's at the very end of the interview. Murray doesn't say advanced stats are useless, just that they're somewhat useful to the process (a piece of the puzzle, if you will).

[Taro T]

###### I'm actually really excited, might still be all the gin tonics i had last night but the culture change PLF has brought to the sabres in two months.

He has made it so that people actually want to be working for the sabres.

 

The statement from PLF that stood out to me is that he wants to bring in players from the area.

Does this mean they'll be going after Callahan in the summer, and kane in a couple of summers ?

I'm pretty sure it means they'll land Konopka. :P

[TrueBlueGED]

I heard the same thing -- he said advanced stats are of some use, but that hockey sense leads the evaluation process and is more important.

 

Predictably, Jeremy White has engaged several people on Twitter about how Murray expressed nothing but love for analytics.

 

Now, now. Go listen for yourself - it's at the very end of the interview. Murray doesn't say advanced stats are useless, just that they're somewhat useful to the process (a piece of the puzzle, if you will).

 

I saw the twitter spat, but won't be able to listen for myself until later this afternoon. I will say, the one article White linked on team adoption of analytics was very good--it's not just internet bloggers and Darcy Regier who are using this stuff.

[That Aud Smell]

I saw the twitter spat, but won't be able to listen for myself until later this afternoon. I will say, the one article White linked on team adoption of analytics was very good--it's not just internet bloggers and Darcy Regier who are using this stuff.

 

to be sure. the analytics stuff is real, and it's here to stay. but, to my ear, TM gave it only faint praise -- said that a scout's or exec's hockey sense has to come first.

[darksabre]

I saw the twitter spat, but won't be able to listen for myself until later this afternoon. I will say, the one article White linked on team adoption of analytics was very good--it's not just internet bloggers and Darcy Regier who are using this stuff.

 

That's really the rub about the whole analytics argument. There's no reason to be vehemently in favor or vehemently against the use. Mix a little numbers with a little old fashioned video scouting and you're all set. Using one while rejecting the other is silly. But watching a player in person while taking statistical analysis of them into account is perfect.

[That Aud Smell]

watching a player in person while taking statistical analysis of them into account is perfect.

 

i don't know that TM would disagree with this. i do think that, if he were asked to quantify the role that analytics plays in that evaluation process, it would be in the low double-digits (mid-teens would be my guess).

[Taro T]

That's really the rub about the whole analytics argument. There's no reason to be vehemently in favor or vehemently against the use. Mix a little numbers with a little old fashioned video scouting and you're all set. Using one while rejecting the other is silly. But watching a player in person while taking statistical analysis of them into account is perfect.

Pretty much. They're another tool in the tool box. And like most tools, they're only useful if the user isn't a fool.

[darksabre]

i don't know that TM would disagree with this. i do think that, if he were asked to quantify the role that analytics plays in that evaluation process, it would be in the low double-digits (mid-teens would be my guess).

 

I would rank it a little higher. I would say actual scouting accounts for 80% of the decision making process. But who the heck am I to try and quantify that. :lol:

 

Pretty much. They're another tool in the tool box. And like most tools, they're only useful if the user isn't a fool.

 

Perfectly stated.

[spndnchz]

Squirrel!

 

You need to help PA do a hockey stop Wilbur.

[That Aud Smell]

Pretty much. They're another tool in the tool box. And like most tools, they're only useful if the user isn't a fool.

I would rank it a little higher. I would say actual scouting accounts for 80% of the decision making process. But who the heck am I to try and quantify that. :lol: Perfectly stated.

 

the dust gets kicked up because there are those who pimp and extol analytics to a point where it seems like advanced stats are equal to (even greater than) what TM called "hockey sense."