All about St. Louis's Blues

[inkman]

And 10 players after Vanek who are much better? Are we talking in the first round, or the entire draft? Because in the first round I count 4 who are "much" better: Suter, Parise, Getzlaf, Perry. Comparables include Carter, Richards, Seabrook, and Kesler.

I don't consider those guys comparables. The closest being Carter who is almost as soft as TV.

[JJFIVEOH]

Clutterbuck has less offensive ability than Paul Gaustad and no possession ability to speak of, who averages 20 points per year. He hits...whoop-de-freakin-do. Stafford is 3x the player Clutterbuck is.

 

And 10 players after Vanek who are much better? Are we talking in the first round, or the entire draft? Because in the first round I count 4 who are "much" better: Suter, Parise, Getzlaf, Perry. Comparables include Carter, Richards, Seabrook, and Kesler.

 

But Clutterbuck has grit. :rolleyes:

[X. Benedict]

What is the complete list of skaters taken in rounds one and two from Stafford (2004) to Myers (2008) too much to handle?

 

Funk, Zagarapan, Gogulla, Persson, Weber, Brennan, and Schiestel?

 

Or is this list worse?

 

Krejci, Oshie, Letang, Berglund, Clutterbuck, Subban, Simmonds. All taken shortly after each of those picks.

 

What you should really look at in drafting is the player taken directly after and you get a better idea of the real process......

 

In which case you get:

 

Dubnyk, Tuskiak, Pokuluk, Denny, Berglund, Mathias (after Enroth), Vasynouv (after Weber).....

 

and so on .....

 

..

Basically drafting is looking at thousands of 12 year olds girls all year and trying to guess which ones will turn into supermodels by the time they turn 18.

[deluca67]

Now you're just being a sadist.

 

 

 

 

You have got to be kidding.

 

 

 

 

Well, I can't speak for DeLuca, but I suspect he was being serious in criticizing the Vanek pick -- and rightly so. There were at least 10 players drafted after Vanek in 2003 that are much better than he is.

2003 was a great example of how the #5 pick doesn't guarantee the 5th best player in the draft. I like Vanek, he is a good player, yet he doesn't make the top 10 best players drafted in round one that year. The Sabres drafted him according to Hoyle. Which is why I am hoping that Tim Murray is looking beyond the rankings and the projected top 3 and giving consideration to players outside what is perceived to be the upper tier of talent.

[LastPommerFan]

2003 was a great example of how the #5 pick doesn't guarantee the 5th best player in the draft. I like Vanek, he is a good player, yet he doesn't make the top 10 best players drafted in round one that year. The Sabres drafted him according to Hoyle. Which is why I am hoping that Tim Murray is looking beyond the rankings and the projected top 3 and giving consideration to players outside what is perceived to be the upper tier of talent.

 

Oh I agree on the Vanek pick. Could have been much better, but at least he turned into actual top-6/4 material. Which is what you are shooting for with 1st and 2nd round picks. I bookended with stafford and Myers because not a single f'n first or second round pick for 4 years between them panned out to be even a third line or consistent 5/6. That is terrible drafting, and it is the third leg of why we never developed and instead degraded since 2006, along with failure to have a team-wide vision, and letting 4 top line/pair players walk out the door with nothing in return (Briere, Drury, Lydman, Tallinder).

[Iron Crotch]

"All about the St. Louis Blues" ;)

[Jsixspd]

Emphasis on the "Blues" - ;)

[LGR4GM]

Agreed. Also, he failed to draft a center other than Luke Adam in the first 2 rounds for 7 years between marek and mikhail.

I mean, he only picked 3 forwards total in the first 2 rounds between 2006 and 2010. And Ennis is the only one of the three who's played 200 games.

And that ladies and gentlemen is why we just had the lowest scoring team. We have no elite [top 6] forwards because we stopped drafting them.

First 2 rounds of Sabres draft picks beginning in 2006:

2006:

Dennis Persson - 24th

Jhonas Enroth - 46th

Mike Weber - 57th

 

2007:

TJ Brennan - 31st

Drew Shiestal - 59th

 

2008:

Tyler Myers - 12th

Tyler Ennis - 26th

Luke Adam - 44th

 

2009:

Zack Kassian - 13th

 

2010:

Mark Pysyk - 23rd

 

2011:

Joel Armia - 16th

 

 

So between 2006-2011 we had 11picks in the first 2 rounds and 7 of them were defense (63.4%) including 3 of the 6 first round picks we had.

 

Now lets do 2012-2013:

2012:

Mikhail Grigorenko - 12th

Zemgus Girgensons - 14th

Jake McCabe - 44th

 

2013:

Rasmus Ristolainen - 8th

Nikita Zadorov - 16th

J.T. Compher - 35th

Connor Hurley - 38th

Justin Bailey - 52nd

 

So only 3 picks at defense but 5 on forwards. Or 37.5% used on defense

Edited April 29, 2014 by LGR4GM

[nfreeman]

Clutterbuck has less offensive ability than Paul Gaustad and no possession ability to speak of, who averages 20 points per year. He hits...whoop-de-freakin-do. Stafford is 3x the player Clutterbuck is.

 

And 10 players after Vanek who are much better? Are we talking in the first round, or the entire draft? Because in the first round I count 4 who are "much" better: Suter, Parise, Getzlaf, Perry. Comparables include Carter, Richards, Seabrook, and Kesler.

 

All 4 of those "comparables" are significantly better than Vanek. I would include Dustin Brown as "significantly better" and Phaneuf as a comparable.

 

 

Oh I agree on the Vanek pick. Could have been much better, but at least he turned into actual top-6/4 material. Which is what you are shooting for with 1st and 2nd round picks. I bookended with stafford and Myers because not a single f'n first or second round pick for 4 years between them panned out to be even a third line or consistent 5/6. That is terrible drafting, and it is the third leg of why we never developed and instead degraded since 2006, along with failure to have a team-wide vision, and letting 4 top line/pair players walk out the door with nothing in return (Briere, Drury, Lydman, Tallinder).

 

This. Very well said.

[shrader]

And that ladies and gentlemen is why we just had the lowest scoring team. We have no elite forwards because we stopped drafting them.

First 2 rounds of Sabres draft picks beginning in 2006:

2006:

Dennis Persson - 24th

Jhonas Enroth - 46th

Mike Weber - 57th

 

2007:

TJ Brennan - 31st

Drew Shiestal - 59th

 

2008:

Tyler Myers - 12th

Tyler Ennis - 26th

Luke Adam - 44th

 

I hope you still have your research hat on. How many of these so called "elite forwards" were selected within the pick window of the guys you've mentioned here? None of these were exactly what I'd call early picks. I scan through those drafts quickly and I don't see any real jaw dropping talent up front going anywhere in that span.

 

I just don't see swapping out a couple crap shoot draft picks as being the magic cause for where this team is right now.

[LGR4GM]

2006: Patrick Berglund and Nick Foligno taken within 4 picks of Persson. Milan Lucic, Artem Anisimov were all taken between Enroth and Weber.

 

2007: Wayne Simmons was taken 2 picks after Shiestal

 

I am sure we could do this same exercise for almost any draft, my point wasn't we should have done X or Y but that we didn't have enough irons in the fire to develop any forward depth and thus we have none. That being said using the word "Elite" in my original post was wrong. How about we say top 6 forward?

Edited April 29, 2014 by LGR4GM

[shrader]

2006: Patrick Berglund and Nick Foligno taken within 4 picks of Persson. Milan Lucic, Artem Anisimov and Brent Seabroke were all taken between Enroth and Weber.

 

2007: Wayne Simmons was taken 2 picks after Shiestal

 

I am sure we could do this same exercise for almost any draft, my point wasn't we should have done X or Y but that we didn't have enough irons in the fire to develop any forward depth and thus we have none. That being said using the word "Elite" in my original post was wrong. How about we say top 6 forward?

 

You probably shouldn't mention Seabrook as a defense for your argument. ;)

[LGR4GM]

You probably shouldn't mention Seabrook as a defense for your argument. ;)

My apologies.

 

Here is another example from Round 3 of 2008: we took Defensman Corey Fienhage 81st overall. The 82nd overall pick, Center Adam Henrique. I understand that it gets harder and becomes a crap shoot but we didn't even play the game really. You need 12 Forwards and 6 Defenders or a 67% forward to 33% defender rate on a team and we drafted the exact opposite percentage in the first 2 rounds during that time. So we have less forward prospects now because we had less irons in the fire than we should have had because in 2006 Darcy the moron didn't sign a vet defender and then we had 5 get injured. He over corrected because Darcy Regier is a reactionary and would use 63.4% of our 1st and 2nd round picks from 2006-2011 on Defenders.

Edited April 29, 2014 by LGR4GM

[LastPommerFan]

You don't have to hit on all 11 picks, I'm not suggesting that. But you absolutely must get at least one first or second round player to the top 6/4 every 2 drafts. That is a minimum to tread water. figuring 2 years development and a 16 year career, that gives you 7 of your 10 top 6/4 assets (to play or trade as needed). Then you just need 3 "lucky finds" in the later rounds plus your depth.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Glass Case Of Emotion

[shrader]

You don't have to hit on all 11 picks, I'm not suggesting that. But you absolutely must get at least one first or second round player to the top 6/4 every 2 drafts. That is a minimum to tread water. figuring 2 years development and a 16 year career, that gives you 7 of your 10 top 6/4 assets (to play or trade as needed). Then you just need 3 "lucky finds" in the later rounds plus your depth.

 

This year's Presidents' Trophy winner immediately breaks from your theory. There are ways to account for horrible drafting. Hopefully we will get to a point where we can productively build a team through multiple fronts.

[LastPommerFan]

This year's Presidents' Trophy winner immediately breaks from your theory. There are ways to account for horrible drafting. Hopefully we will get to a point where we can productively build a team through multiple fronts.

 

Except for the part where they don't:

 

Seguin, Lucic, Kessel 2006-2010 top 6/4 assets selected in the first or second rounds, above my 1 every 2 years rate.

Stuart, Bergeron, Krejci 2001-2005 top 6/4 assets selected in the first or second rounds, above my 1 every 2 years rate.

[shrader]

Except for the part where they don't:

 

Seguin, Lucic, Kessel 2006-2010 top 6/4 assets selected in the first or second rounds, above my 1 every 2 years rate.

Stuart, Bergeron, Krejci 2001-2005 top 6/4 assets selected in the first or second rounds, above my 1 every 2 years rate.

 

I'm not willing to call a long period of drafting a success based on one year alone. They've been downright miserable except for 3-4 picks. Their fortunes came significantly from other areas. Hell just look at 2007-2009, and maybe even 2010 (where other than the gift they were handed, their results were bad). You'd be hard pressed to find ANY team who drafted that poorly. Their only salvation in your system is that one single draft pick produced two of those players.

 

I also get my former Boston players named Stuart mixed up.

[TrueBlueGED]

All 4 of those "comparables" are significantly better than Vanek. I would include Dustin Brown as "significantly better" and Phaneuf as a comparable.

 

I really think you have a lil' DeLuca in you, in that you love other teams' good-great, but flawed, players. Brown has been a worthless pile of poop this season (and yes, that is as opposed to a worthwhile pile of poop), both in the NHL and during the Olympics. Vanek's never had this kind of a season. Sure it's probably just a down year, and as a whole Brown is a great player...but to say he's significantly better than Vanek? On what grounds?

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

 

 

I really think you have a lil' DeLuca in you, in that you love other teams' good-great, but flawed, players. Brown has been a worthless pile of poop this season (and yes, that is as opposed to a worthwhile pile of poop), both in the NHL and during the Olympics. Vanek's never had this kind of a season. Sure it's probably just a down year, and as a whole Brown is a great player...but to say he's significantly better than Vanek? On what grounds?

 

It's 1AM and you have a BAC of .12 and you need to drive home in an hour. Do you order...A) The caviar sampler...or B)The 1/2 pound bacon cheeseburger?

 

It's the playoffs man......

 

 

 

drafting is looking at thousands of 12 year olds girls all year and trying to guess which ones will turn into supermodels by the time they turn 18.

 

Can you be my defense attorney?

[JJFIVEOH]

In terms of GPG average, the Sabres have #3 and #5 from the 2008 draft.

 

Just sayin'

Edited April 29, 2014 by JJFIVEOH

[LGR4GM]

In terms of GPG average, the Sabres have #3 and #5 from the 2008 draft.

 

Just sayin'

Hodgson and Ennis?

[JJFIVEOH]

Hodgson and Ennis?

 

Yes sir.

[nfreeman]

I really think you have a lil' DeLuca in you, in that you love other teams' good-great, but flawed, players. Brown has been a worthless pile of poop this season (and yes, that is as opposed to a worthwhile pile of poop), both in the NHL and during the Olympics. Vanek's never had this kind of a season. Sure it's probably just a down year, and as a whole Brown is a great player...but to say he's significantly better than Vanek? On what grounds?

 

On the grounds that he plays a man's game, can score and has captained the Kings to the playoffs 5 years in a row, including a Cup (he led them in playoff scoring that year, btw) and a comeback from down 3-0 this year.

 

Of course he's a flawed player. Who isn't? But imagine if he'd been the Sabres' captain when Lucic ran over Miller.

 

EDIT: as it happens, Brown was named as a finalist for the Messier award tonight.

 

That's Messier as in Mark Messier, the NHL's answer to the Terminator -- not as in "Thomas Vanek's basement after his slumber party was even messier than Royzie's was! LOL!"

 

In terms of GPG average, the Sabres have #3 and #5 from the 2008 draft.

 

Just sayin'

 

Interesting. Good info.

Edited April 30, 2014 by nfreeman

[Sabres Fan in NS]

 

 

That's Messier as in Mark Messier, the NHL's answer to the Terminator -- not as in "Thomas Vanek's basement after his slumber party was even messier than Royzie's was! LOL!"

 

 

 

Thanks. I really needed a :w00t: .