Where in development are Murray's 2016 draft picks

[LGR4GM]

Cue Rakish, his charts will provide the answers you seek, and then sum

Fat chance for that, seems Rakish has taken an indefinite leave of absence. 

[TrueBlueGED]

There are 30 NHL teams. So the average team would have 1.67 Top 50 prospects. And the Sabres then have 0.33 more Top 50 prospects than average. Yippee?

 

Two seasons after drafting Jack Eichel, the Sabres have moved from 30th to 28th place. They could have done that *just* by drafting Jack Eichel. So Murray has done basically nothing to turn them around.

 

Asplund, Pu, Borgen, Guhle, Nylander, etc. are all prospects so it's still too soon to celebrate them. Nylander might be a star but he still hasn't figured out the AHL so he has a ways to go. And the rest are all roughly on par with Bailey, Baptiste, and Fasching, so they could be anything from AHL players to depth players to key contributors. We're years away from knowing.

 

In the meantime, three more years of Bogo's huge contract and plenty more dead weight on this roster.

Hyperbole alert! Hyperbole alert! Yes, surely O'Reilly and Okposo and Reinhart add zero to the team. Yup, the two spots in the standings could have been accomplished with only Eichel added to the tank teams.

[nfreeman]

Hyperbole alert! Hyperbole alert! Yes, surely O'Reilly and Okposo and Reinhart add zero to the team. Yup, the two spots in the standings could have been accomplished with only Eichel added to the tank teams.

 

OK -- but the ultimate point remains:  the look-good-on-paper additions haven't translated into materially better results.  That is on GMTM.

[Crusader1969]

What trades? What signings? How about the failed or failing trades for Fasching, Kane, Bogo, Lehner, Gorges and Kulikov.  How about the mediocre signings of Moulson, McCormick and Franson?  This team is mired at the bottom of the standings because these trades and signings haven't worked as hoped.  You have ROR, Gionta, Nilsson and Okposo on the positive side of the ledger, but that isn't enough to field a successful team.  Ultimately GMTM will be judged on the team's W/L record (as I said before).  As of right now, his attempt to accelerate by acquiring youngish vets is mostly a failure.  I'm not calling for him to be fired and I hope that the keys prospects like Nylander and Guhle ultimately help us build a winner here.  However, if we draft in the top 5 again, then I think we can all agree that the team has taken a step back.    

Seriously? Fasching is a failed trade? Its the kids first year as a professional? you are ready to call him a bust? 

 

How is Kane and Bogo a failed trade? First, the trade help ensure last place in 2015. Second, Kane has 12 goals this season (2nd on the team). are you saying this team would be better off if we still had Stafford, Armia and Myers? Lemieux and the first rounder he gave up haven't played in the NHL yet, why are they not busts like Fasching?

 

No one seems to be complaining in Toronto about Andersen costing a 1st rounder? why, because they are winning even though Lehner has a better GAA and SV% then Andersen and has played most of the season with at least 2 if not 3 AHL Dmen.

 

Gorges, Moulson were brought in to reach the salary floor. And no one could have predicted Kulikov would get hurt in the preseason. Are we really missing Pysyk and his 1G and 6A?? I guess you're are ready to call Asplund a bust as well?

 

They are at the bottom of the standings because there is still a lot of dead weight on this team thatwill soon be cleared with younger faster better players and they've had a $hitload of injuries to key players. I judge Murray on the entire organization not just the NHL team.I still see a team that will compete for a cup in a few years. Drafting in the top 5 will ultimately be a step forward.

 

They are 7 points behind the Leafs, you dont think that if they didn't have any key injuries (like the leafs until last night) there may not be a gap between the two teams?

Edited January 20, 2017 by Crusader1969

[Crusader1969]

OK -- but the ultimate point remains:  the look-good-on-paper additions haven't translated into materially better results.  That is on GMTM.

 

 

you guys make is sound we are down in the standings with Arizona and Colorado.

 

 7 more points and we are 15th overall.  10 more points and its 11th overall. 

 

Be honest, if Eichel wasnt hurt, how many more points would the Sabres have in your opinion?

[North Buffalo]

you guys make is sound we are down in the standings with Arizona and Colorado.

 

 7 more points and we are 15th overall.  10 more points and its 11th overall. 

 

Be honest, if Eichel wasnt hurt, how many more points would the Sabres have in your opinion?

Depends on Jack's attitude. Right now maybe 4-6 more points, but that is a big if...

[pi2000]

you guys make is sound we are down in the standings with Arizona and Colorado.

 

 7 more points and we are 15th overall.  10 more points and its 11th overall. 

 

Be honest, if Eichel wasnt hurt, how many more points would the Sabres have in your opinion?

 

If you look at their goals per game average with and without Eichel, it's about a 0.5 goal per game difference (2.7 with vs 2.2 without).

 

So you look at how many games they lost by 1 goal over the first 21 games... which is 9 games.  

 

Figure with an extra 0.5 goals per game, that's 1 goal every two games, meaning they would've gotten points in roughly half of the 9 games they lost by 1 goal... so that.s 4.5 games.

 

Figure half of those 4.5 games they would've gotten 2 points (let's say +5 points), and the other half 1 point (+2-3 points)... 

 

That gives them roughly an extra 7-8 more points (50-51 points) in the standings if they had Jack the entire season,  putting them right in the mix for the final wildcard spot (TOR w/ 50 points).

[nfreeman]

you guys make is sound we are down in the standings with Arizona and Colorado.

 

 7 more points and we are 15th overall.  10 more points and its 11th overall. 

 

Be honest, if Eichel wasnt hurt, how many more points would the Sabres have in your opinion?

 

 

If you look at their goals per game average with and without Eichel, it's about a 0.5 goal per game difference (2.7 with vs 2.2 without).

 

So you look at how many games they lost by 1 goal over the first 21 games... which is 9 games.  

 

Figure with an extra 0.5 goals per game, that's 1 goal every two games, meaning they would've gotten points in roughly half of the 9 games they lost by 1 goal... so that.s 4.5 games.

 

Figure half of those 4.5 games they would've gotten 2 points (let's say +5 points), and the other half 1 point (+2-3 points)... 

 

That gives them roughly an extra 7-8 more points (50-51 points) in the standings if they had Jack the entire season,  putting them right in the mix for the final wildcard spot (TOR w/ 50 points).

 

No need to guesstimate.

 

Eichel's been back for 23 games.  The Sabres are 10-9-4 in those games, for 24 pts.  That is an 86-point pace for the season, or 46 pts in 44 games.

 

As it stands, they have 43 points in 44 games (an 80-point pace).

 

So it's fair to say they would've had 3 more pts -- so instead of 3rd-last in the NHL, they'd be tied for 5th-last.

 

BFD.

[Randall Flagg]

Also, you can't just add Jack's goals on top of everything else all neat and pretty - NFW Moulson scores more than 1 or 2 goals during those 20 something games if Jack wasn't hurt, because he wouldn't be on the power play unit. Similarly, other players getting minutes Jack would have had would lose a couple points. This team is bottom five with or without Jack. 

[pi2000]

Also, you can't just add Jack's goals on top of everything else all neat and pretty - NFW Moulson scores more than 1 or 2 goals during those 20 something games if Jack wasn't hurt, because he wouldn't be on the power play unit. Similarly, other players getting minutes Jack would have had would lose a couple points. This team is bottom five with or without Jack. 

 

I'm not adding Jack's goals.

 

The team as whole is averaging 0.5 more goals per game with Jack in the lineup.   Doesn't matter who's scoring, that's 0.5 more goals per game.

 

 

No need to guesstimate.

 

Eichel's been back for 23 games.  The Sabres are 10-9-4 in those games, for 24 pts.  That is an 86-point pace for the season, or 46 pts in 44 games.

 

As it stands, they have 43 points in 44 games (an 80-point pace).

 

So it's fair to say they would've had 3 more pts -- so instead of 3rd-last in the NHL, they'd be tied for 5th-last.

 

BFD.

 

That's not right.   You simply can't extrapolate out their record over those 23 games because they played different teams the first 21 games.   

 

If you add the Jack effect to the first 21 games, that get's them 0.5 more goals per game over that stretch, which means roughly 7-8 more points in the standings.

[Crusader1969]

Even if the Sabres had 3 more points, now you are 4 points out of the playoffs. Now add in all the other injuries to their top 9 and top 4.

 

You can choose to be doom and gloom, I'm just not about to join you.

 

I see what he is building and realize it going to take time - literally the Sabres were historically bad only 2 years ago. To think the turn around would be any faster when you are relying on young players to carry your team is completely misguided IMO.

[Randall Flagg]

So in this Jack-isn't-injured scenario, was Bylsma magically coaching more aggressively without the need for GMTM to come and scream at him 10 games in? How do goals-against compare during the two separate situations too? It's a lot more complicated than those basic extrapolations suggest.

[pi2000]

So in this Jack-isn't-injured scenario, was Bylsma magically coaching more aggressively without the need for GMTM to come and scream at him 10 games in? How do goals-against compare during the two separate situations too? It's a lot more complicated than those basic extrapolations suggest.

 

without Jack they gave up 2.76 goals against/gm

 

with Jack 3.08 goals against/gm

 

...so that's a net positive of 0.18 goals per game.... not great... so yeah, maybe not much would be different if he wasn't hurt.

[Randall Flagg]

without Jack they gave up 2.76 goals against/gm

 

with Jack 3.08 goals against/gm

 

...so that's a net positive of 0.18 goals per game.... not great... so yeah, maybe not much would be different if he wasn't hurt.

There are obviously so many variables that go into that too...but Jack's defensive zone play doesn't help his case :P

[nfreeman]

Even if the Sabres had 3 more points, now you are 4 points out of the playoffs. Now add in all the other injuries to their top 9 and top 4.

 

You can choose to be doom and gloom, I'm just not about to join you.

 

I see what he is building and realize it going to take time - literally the Sabres were historically bad only 2 years ago. To think the turn around would be any faster when you are relying on young players to carry your team is completely misguided IMO.

 

I will ask you again:  if the Sabres are well out of the playoffs again next year, should GMTM be accountable?

[GASabresIUFAN]

Seriously? Fasching is a failed trade? Its the kids first year as a professional? you are ready to call him a bust? 

 

How is Kane and Bogo a failed trade? First, the trade help ensure last place in 2015. Second, Kane has 12 goals this season (2nd on the team). are you saying this team would be better off if we still had Stafford, Armia and Myers? Lemieux and the first rounder he gave up haven't played in the NHL yet, why are they not busts like Fasching?

 

No one seems to be complaining in Toronto about Andersen costing a 1st rounder? why, because they are winning even though Lehner has a better GAA and SV% then Andersen and has played most of the season with at least 2 if not 3 AHL Dmen.

 

Gorges, Moulson were brought in to reach the salary floor. And no one could have predicted Kulikov would get hurt in the preseason. Are we really missing Pysyk and his 1G and 6A?? I guess you're are ready to call Asplund a bust as well?

 

They are at the bottom of the standings because there is still a lot of dead weight on this team thatwill soon be cleared with younger faster better players and they've had a $hitload of injuries to key players. I judge Murray on the entire organization not just the NHL team.I still see a team that will compete for a cup in a few years. Drafting in the top 5 will ultimately be a step forward.

 

They are 7 points behind the Leafs, you dont think that if they didn't have any key injuries (like the leafs until last night) there may not be a gap between the two teams?

I'm not calling Fasching a failed player, but when you evaluate a trade you have to look at what you gave up for what you got.  

We gave up McNabb and 2 2nd rd picks for 4th rd pick Fasching and 3rd pick Delo.  We desperately need McNabb a great deal more then we need a marginal NHLer (Delo) and another depth forward (Fasching), especially when you consider we have Carrier, Baptiste, Bailey and Cornel also.

We actually traded a 2nd rd pick for Gorges who is now nothing more then a 5/6 D at nearly $4 mill per season.  Not exactly great value.

Lehner has been outplayed by two backups we got for nearly nothing in Nilsson and Chad Johnson.  Again, a waste of assets.  We would be just as good in net with a combo of Nilsson and Johnson and then we'd have Roslovic in the system.  You also can't compare the Lehner and Andersen deals.  Andersen was a proven NHL starter with 125 games of experience plus 28 playoff games including seasons of 43 and 54 starts with a GAA under 2.30.  Lehner had never started more then 36 games, had an injury history and had GAA over 3 in his last 2 nhl campaigns.  One is a correct payment (Anderson) and one is overpayment (Lehner) especially when you consider we got stuck to Legwand and his $3 cap hit.  

How can you ask if we are missing Psysk, a solid stay at home D who can skate and get the puck out of the zone, when Kulikov has been injured and we are starting 2 career AHLers on D?  I don't know if Asplund is going to make the NHL or not, but history is against 70% of 2nd rd picks.

Kane and Bogo are a failed trade because we are paying $10 mill for production from 2 guys who were supposed to be central to this rebuild, who haven't stayed healthy or produced.  Bogo has regressed to being a 5/6 D at best and Kane, who is finally scoring some, is also grossly overpaid for his 20 goal production.  And yes, we'd be better off with Myers slotted in behind Risto then Bogo.

[North Buffalo]

I will ask you again:  if the Sabres are well out of the playoffs again next year, should GMTM be accountable?

Reasonable question... to me it depends on how many guys in development take the next step forward by the end of the year... Nylander, Pu on O and Guhle and say Borgen on D and if Lehner can be fixed and show promise.

[LTS]

Why do all points get argued in a vacuum?

 

The Sabres have had long term injuries to many of their top players this season.  Does anyone deny that having ROR, Eichel, and Kane add a significant punch to the lineup?  

 

We can't judge Kulikov's impact yet because he's been injured too much this season.  But it's probably safe to say that it's not insignificant.

 

I'd go hunt down man games lost to injury but I hate that stat overall because losing a 4th line player isn't the same impact as missing Eichel, etc.  That said, the Sabres have a lot of man games lost to injury and they aren't to their 3/4 line players.

 

I think we need a thread that establishes the base foundation for arguing points on the forum.  Take a question and debate it until we have an agreed upon foundation.

 

For example, is Moulson a bust?  Well, how much do factor in his presence for helping Eichel develop last year and bringing in Okposo this year?  Do you agree that if you remove Moulson from the team you remove his salary (better served by X player that they would have definitely been able to sign) and they would have not signed Okposo either.  Would that 1 player make up for Moulson/Okposo?  If the Sabres hadn't been able to get Okposo would they have signed Shaw? 

 

These are all factors that play into the entirety of the debate.  Unless we somehow agree they do not.

[pi2000]

For example, is Moulson a bust?  

 

no.

[nfreeman]

Why do all points get argued in a vacuum?

 

The Sabres have had long term injuries to many of their top players this season.  Does anyone deny that having ROR, Eichel, and Kane add a significant punch to the lineup?  

 

We can't judge Kulikov's impact yet because he's been injured too much this season.  But it's probably safe to say that it's not insignificant.

 

I'd go hunt down man games lost to injury but I hate that stat overall because losing a 4th line player isn't the same impact as missing Eichel, etc.  That said, the Sabres have a lot of man games lost to injury and they aren't to their 3/4 line players.

 

I think we need a thread that establishes the base foundation for arguing points on the forum.  Take a question and debate it until we have an agreed upon foundation.

 

For example, is Moulson a bust?  Well, how much do factor in his presence for helping Eichel develop last year and bringing in Okposo this year?  Do you agree that if you remove Moulson from the team you remove his salary (better served by X player that they would have definitely been able to sign) and they would have not signed Okposo either.  Would that 1 player make up for Moulson/Okposo?  If the Sabres hadn't been able to get Okposo would they have signed Shaw? 

 

These are all factors that play into the entirety of the debate.  Unless we somehow agree they do not.

 

I don't think we're arguing in a vacuum.

 

I think everyone here is well aware of the various difficulties the Sabres have been confronted with this season.

 

I think everyone here is also capable of considering those difficulties in evaluating the overall state of the Sabres.  Some of us think GMTM deserves a pass, while others do not. 

 

No one is pretending that Eichel and Kane didn't miss games -- it's just that some people think that even with those (and other) setbacks, the team should be better than it is.

[North Buffalo]

I don't think we're arguing in a vacuum.

 

I think everyone here is well aware of the various difficulties the Sabres have been confronted with this season.

 

I think everyone here is also capable of considering those difficulties in evaluating the overall state of the Sabres.  Some of us think GMTM deserves a pass, while others do not. 

 

No one is pretending that Eichel and Kane didn't miss games -- it's just that some people think that even with those (and other) setbacks, the team should be better than it is.

Or at the very least, better in certain areas now that many of the injuries have been resolved. Goaltending was not suppose to be the issue it is and scoring should be better now that Jack is back and so is OReilly. Enis return should help some, but under performers including non of the kids a la fasching, nylander, Bailey or Baptiste making significant contributions on O this year has been a disappointment. Not saying all had to but at least one could have. Carrier may finally be finding his touch but even he has been slower in development than hoped for.

[Crusader1969]

I don't think we're arguing in a vacuum.

 

I think everyone here is well aware of the various difficulties the Sabres have been confronted with this season.

 

I think everyone here is also capable of considering those difficulties in evaluating the overall state of the Sabres.  Some of us think GMTM deserves a pass, while others do not. 

 

No one is pretending that Eichel and Kane didn't miss games -- it's just that some people think that even with those (and other) setbacks, the team should be better than it is.

Just because you (and some others) think it, doesn't make it right. Sabres are maybe 3 or 4 points below where I thought they would be. If you told me at the start of the season that they would be decimated by injuries to key players, they might actually be ahead of where I would think they would be.

 

Anyone who thinks Mcnabb, Pysyk and Myers are the difference that would get them into playoff position is truly delusional. Not to mention the fact that Myers and McNabb have been hurt almost all season!

I'm not calling Fasching a failed player, but when you evaluate a trade you have to look at what you gave up for what you got.  

We gave up McNabb and 2 2nd rd picks for 4th rd pick Fasching and 3rd pick Delo.  We desperately need McNabb a great deal more then we need a marginal NHLer (Delo) and another depth forward (Fasching), especially when you consider we have Carrier, Baptiste, Bailey and Cornel also.

We actually traded a 2nd rd pick for Gorges who is now nothing more then a 5/6 D at nearly $4 mill per season.  Not exactly great value.

Lehner has been outplayed by two backups we got for nearly nothing in Nilsson and Chad Johnson.  Again, a waste of assets.  We would be just as good in net with a combo of Nilsson and Johnson and then we'd have Roslovic in the system.  You also can't compare the Lehner and Andersen deals.  Andersen was a proven NHL starter with 125 games of experience plus 28 playoff games including seasons of 43 and 54 starts with a GAA under 2.30.  Lehner had never started more then 36 games, had an injury history and had GAA over 3 in his last 2 nhl campaigns.  One is a correct payment (Anderson) and one is overpayment (Lehner) especially when you consider we got stuck to Legwand and his $3 cap hit.  

How can you ask if we are missing Psysk, a solid stay at home D who can skate and get the puck out of the zone, when Kulikov has been injured and we are starting 2 career AHLers on D?  I don't know if Asplund is going to make the NHL or not, but history is against 70% of 2nd rd picks.

Kane and Bogo are a failed trade because we are paying $10 mill for production from 2 guys who were supposed to be central to this rebuild, who haven't stayed healthy or produced.  Bogo has regressed to being a 5/6 D at best and Kane, who is finally scoring some, is also grossly overpaid for his 20 goal production.  And yes, we'd be better off with Myers slotted in behind Risto then Bogo.

 

Funny, in one paragraph you say that history is against a second round pick making the NHL and in another you are up in arms about giving up 2nd round picks!!! And what exactly was the downside of having to pay $3 million for 1 year to legwand? They didn't have cap issues and it's not your money? You are grasping at straws!

 

How much would they be paying for stafford and Myers? Myers has been hurt and Stafford has 4 goals!

[3putt]

I'm not calling Fasching a failed player, but when you evaluate a trade you have to look at what you gave up for what you got.  

We gave up McNabb and 2 2nd rd picks for 4th rd pick Fasching and 3rd pick Delo.  We desperately need McNabb a great deal more then we need a marginal NHLer (Delo) and another depth forward (Fasching), especially when you consider we have Carrier, Baptiste, Bailey and Cornel also.

We actually traded a 2nd rd pick for Gorges who is now nothing more then a 5/6 D at nearly $4 mill per season.  Not exactly great value.

Lehner has been outplayed by two backups we got for nearly nothing in Nilsson and Chad Johnson.  Again, a waste of assets.  We would be just as good in net with a combo of Nilsson and Johnson and then we'd have Roslovic in the system.  You also can't compare the Lehner and Andersen deals.  Andersen was a proven NHL starter with 125 games of experience plus 28 playoff games including seasons of 43 and 54 starts with a GAA under 2.30.  Lehner had never started more then 36 games, had an injury history and had GAA over 3 in his last 2 nhl campaigns.  One is a correct payment (Anderson) and one is overpayment (Lehner) especially when you consider we got stuck to Legwand and his $3 cap hit.  

How can you ask if we are missing Psysk, a solid stay at home D who can skate and get the puck out of the zone, when Kulikov has been injured and we are starting 2 career AHLers on D?  I don't know if Asplund is going to make the NHL or not, but history is against 70% of 2nd rd picks.

Kane and Bogo are a failed trade because we are paying $10 mill for production from 2 guys who were supposed to be central to this rebuild, who haven't stayed healthy or produced.  Bogo has regressed to being a 5/6 D at best and Kane, who is finally scoring some, is also grossly overpaid for his 20 goal production.  And yes, we'd be better off with Myers slotted in behind Risto then Bogo.

McNabb is not good. Doughty covers his many flaws. He is Franson level.

[Randall Flagg]

McNabb is not good. Doughty covers his many flaws. He is Franson level.

Agreed. I think he'd look like a slower Bogo here.

[3putt]

Agreed. I think he'd look like a slower Bogo here.

That's about how I see it. And we need a slower Bogo like we need a slower Moulson.