The ".500" record and playoff race thread

[Robviously]

Given that we already have an extra 2nd and 3rd this year, I'm interested in adding some 2018 picks for next year's deadline, when we're (hopefully) buyers.

Yes.

Do you really think this?

 

I think Montour is an interesting prospect, an undersized 22-year-old puckmover who has played five NHL games and has yet to score an NHL point. Clayton Stoner is a salary albatross and may be a slight upgrade on Justin Falk.

Justin Bailey and Nicholas Baptiste are interesting 21-year-olds who have combined for three goals in 30 NHL games. Evander Kane is 25 and has 14 goals in 39 games.

 

In no world do these moves make us a better team this season.

If we're trading with the Ducks, I'd go younger: Jacob Larsson (LHD, 1st round pick in 2015) or Marcus Pettersson (LHD, 2nd round pick in 2014).  Neither guy would help us this year but, conceivably, either guy could be like having a second Guhle on the way to help us next year.

 

When you're rebuilding -- and we still are because Tim Murray hasn't managed to accomplish anything in his first 2 years on the job -- every trade should be inter temporal.  Trade talent now for talent later.  We're not going to get value for Kane trading for guys that are already in the NHL.  But if we're trading for guys that are *on their way* to the NHL, we might be better next year or the year after.  And if you're the Ducks, Kane helps you in the playoffs this year and all of next season, so it's not a bad deal.

 

I also factor in that I don't see Kane re-signing here.  I think he'd rather be in a bigger city and he probably wants a (or 'another') free start. 

Edited February 4, 2017 by Robviously

[GASabresIUFAN]

I don't understand this logic at all. There isn't a single prospect in the system that has shown enough ability to secure a roster spot on a bad team, and you think that one of these guys can replace probably our best performing forward over the last 6 weeks. If we move Kane, be prepared to see an overwhelmed 3rd AND 4th lines for 20 minutes every game. It will be ugly. Er. Uglier. Alot uglier.

So what! Even if you are right and my notion of solidfiying the D by trading Kane is wrong, where does it get us? We are 27th in the NHL right now but 12 pts clear of 29th. So we fall to 28th! Yikes! The downside of my idea is that we are worse on the ice, but we get a better shot at one of the 2 elite players in the 2017 draft. Ok, I'll take that risk

 

This team is not making the playoffs now or in the future if we don't fix the terrible D group. Right now we only have 2 D (Risto and McCabe) of a caliber for a chamionship team. We have only one D, Guhle, in the pipeline who is arguably close to NHL Ready and he is still in Jrs. 3 guys who I admit have played their hearts out for us, Franson, Falk and Fedun are UFA's along with the horrible Kulikov. We are stuck with Gorges and Bogo for now, but by trading Kane we'll clear some cap space, and improve the D. I think that is a chance worth taking.

 

Remember that Edm recently traded former 1st overall Taylor Hall for Adam Larsson. Fans and media laughed at the lopsided deal. However, Edm knew to finally get out of the celler they needed to solidify their D. Larsson was a huge step in that direction. NJ has improved to 25th, but the Oilers are 10th.

Yes.

 

If we're trading with the Ducks, I'd go younger: Jacob Larsson (LHD, 1st round pick in 2015) or Marcus Pettersson (LHD, 2nd round pick in 2014). Neither guy would help us this year but, conceivably, either guy could be like having a second Guhle on the way to help us next year.

 

When you're rebuilding -- and we still are because Tim Murray hasn't managed to accomplish anything in his first 2 years on the job -- every trade should be inter temporal. Trade talent now for talent later. We're not going to get value for Kane trading for guys that are already in the NHL. But if we're trading for guys that are *on their way* to the NHL, we might be better next year or the year after. And if you're the Ducks, Kane helps you in the playoffs this year and all of next season, so it's not a bad deal.

 

I also factor in that I don't see Kane re-signing here. I think he'd rather be in a bigger city and he probably wants a (or 'another') free start.

 

Exactly, but to make the cap work and to field a team for this year you are going to have to take a body or two such as Stoner. Montour or Theodore are only 22 and 21 respectively and could help us now and for the next decade.

This is not accurate. He is only eligible for recall on an emergency basis, which requires a certain number of injuries at his position.

That isn't true. Players can be recalled from the CHL but if they are under 20 they must be returned to the CHL no matter how many games they have played. The classic example is Luca Sbisa, who played 39 games for the Flyers before being returned to the WHL.

Edited February 4, 2017 by GASabresIUFAN

[ubkev]

After the start of the season a player may only be recalled from Major Junior if his NHL team is on their 3rd emergency situation(3 injuries at that position). Or if their major junior season has ended.

 

A junior eligible player may be returned to juniors from the NHL at any time during the season. The only bearing games played has at that point is if their contract slides or not.

[Weave]

So what! Even if you are right and my notion of solidfiying the D by trading Kane is wrong, where does it get us? We are 27th in the NHL right now but 12 pts clear of 29th. So we fall to 28th! Yikes! The downside of my idea is that we are worse on the ice, but we get a better shot at one of the 2 elite players in the 2017 draft. Ok, I'll take that risk

 

This team is not making the playoffs now or in the future if we don't fix the terrible D group. Right now we only have 2 D (Risto and McCabe) of a caliber for a chamionship team. We have only one D, Guhle, in the pipeline who is arguably close to NHL Ready and he is still in Jrs. 3 guys who I admit have played their hearts out for us, Franson, Falk and Fedun are UFA's along with the horrible Kulikov. We are stuck with Gorges and Bogo for now, but by trading Kane we'll clear some cap space, and improve the D. I think that is a chance worth taking.

 

Remember that Edm recently traded former 1st overall Taylor Hall for Adam Larsson. Fans and media laughed at the lopsided deal. However, Edm knew to finally get out of the celler they needed to solidify their D. Larsson was a huge step in that direction. NJ has improved to 25th, but the Oilers are 10th.

Exactly, but to make the cap work and to field a team for this year you are going to have to take a body or two such as Stoner. Montour or Theodore are only 22 and 21 respectively and could help us now and for the next decade.

 

That isn't true. Players can be recalled from the CHL but if they are under 20 they must be returned to the CHL no matter how many games they have played. The classic example is Luca Sbisa, who played 39 games for the Flyers before being returned to the WHL.

I was specifically responding to your suggestion that we have prospects that can replace Kane's game and production. We dont. The rest is a differrence in what we want to see to end the season, and I wont argue that.

 

And you're flat out wrong about Guhle. We can only recall him on an emergency basis. Hint, we used an "emergency recall" the last time we brought him up. It is the only way he can come up until his junior season ends.

[dudacek]

Your (Yse) argument would make a heck of a lot more sense if Evander Kane was Drew Stafford or if Montour was a player that had actually shown some facility in the NHL.

 

Players like Kane don't grow on trees; they aren't easily replaceable. I'm struggling to find the last Sabre with his skill set. Mike Foligno?

Montour might be Cam Fowler in waiting, but he may also be Jason Woolley, or god forbid, Marc Andre Gragnani.

 

This is not a team that needs to be blown up. It is a team that needs to be added to and nurtured.

Trading Evander Kane creates a hole, now and in the future. If we trade him, get an NHL player back, not another lottery ticket.

 

*****

 

Guhle came up on emergency recall and had to be sent down once the emergency was over.

 

http://www.buffalohockeybeat.com/defensemen-healthy-sabres-rookie-brendan-guhle-must-leave/

Edited February 4, 2017 by dudacek

[pi2000]

Your argument would make a heck of a lot more sense if Evander Kane was Drew Stafford or if Montour was a player that had actually shown some facility in the NHL.

 

Players like Kane don't grow on trees; they aren't easily replaceable. I'm struggling to find the last Sabre with his skill set. Mike Foligno?

Montour might be Cam Fowler in waiting, but he may also be Jason Woolley, or god forbid, Marc Andre Gragnani.

 

This is not a team that needs to be blown up. It is a team that needs to be added to and nurtured.

Trading Evander Kane creates a hole, now and in the future. If we trade him, get an NHL player back, not another lottery ticket.

 

*****

 

Guhle came up on emergency recall and had to be sent down once the emergency was over.

 

http://www.buffalohockeybeat.com/defensemen-healthy-sabres-rookie-brendan-guhle-must-leave/

I agree with this. Kane plays an up tempo north south game which Bylsma is preaching. His skillset is a perfect fit for his system. He's not the problem... assuming he can keep his nose clean.

[Robviously]

Your argument would make a heck of a lot more sense if Evander Kane was Drew Stafford or if Montour was a player that had actually shown some facility in the NHL.

 

Players like Kane don't grow on trees; they aren't easily replaceable. I'm struggling to find the last Sabre with his skill set. Mike Foligno?

Montour might be Cam Fowler in waiting, but he may also be Jason Woolley, or god forbid, Marc Andre Gragnani.

 

This is not a team that needs to be blown up. It is a team that needs to be added to and nurtured.

Trading Evander Kane creates a hole, now and in the future. If we trade him, get an NHL player back, not another lottery ticket.

 

*****

 

Guhle came up on emergency recall and had to be sent down once the emergency was over.

 

http://www.buffalohockeybeat.com/defensemen-healthy-sabres-rookie-brendan-guhle-must-leave/

I don't think trading Kane is "blowing the team up."  He's a good 2nd liner on a contender and he's probably not here after next year no matter what (based both on what he'd cost to re-sign and where he probably wants to live).

 

If you're going to trade NHL players for NHL players, the team that gets the best player wins.  Which means it's a trade you can't win, because no contender is going to give us players that could help them win this year that are as good as Kane.  The only way you could possibly win a Kane trade is if you trade for guys that won't help this year but could help much more down the line (and as early as next year).

[dudacek]

I don't think trading Kane is "blowing the team up."  He's a good 2nd liner on a contender and he's probably not here after next year no matter what (based both on what he'd cost to re-sign and where he probably wants to live).

 

If you're going to trade NHL players for NHL players, the team that gets the best player wins.  Which means it's a trade you can't win, because no contender is going to give us players that could help them win this year that are as good as Kane.  The only way you could possibly win a Kane trade is if you trade for guys that won't help this year but could help much more down the line (and as early as next year).

Blowing it up was the wrong phrase. Hopefully this expresses my thoughts better:

Kane was acquired specifically to be part of the core as part of a plan; he is "the big fast tough winger who can score goals." As long as he is filling that role - and he is - trading him away for futures is moving away from the plan.

 

What you say makes perfect sense if there is not a Buffalo contract in Kane's future.

He says he likes it here, He is playing well. Pegula likes to spend.

We'll see what happens.

[Weave]

Your (Yse) argument would make a heck of a lot more sense if Evander Kane was Drew Stafford or if Montour was a player that had actually shown some facility in the NHL.

 

Players like Kane don't grow on trees; they aren't easily replaceable. I'm struggling to find the last Sabre with his skill set. Mike Foligno?

Montour might be Cam Fowler in waiting, but he may also be Jason Woolley, or god forbid, Marc Andre Gragnani.

 

This is not a team that needs to be blown up. It is a team that needs to be added to and nurtured.

Trading Evander Kane creates a hole, now and in the future. If we trade him, get an NHL player back, not another lottery ticket.

 

*****

 

Guhle came up on emergency recall and had to be sent down once the emergency was over.

 

http://www.buffalohockeybeat.com/defensemen-healthy-sabres-rookie-brendan-guhle-must-leave/

Exactly. Moving Kane leaves a big hole. He's the kind of talent we need to be finding ways to collect, not move for added swings at the plate ina year or two.

 

At some point we need to start working to sign guys, not ship them off for picks.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Your (Yse) argument would make a heck of a lot more sense if Evander Kane was Drew Stafford or if Montour was a player that had actually shown some facility in the NHL.

Players like Kane don't grow on trees; they aren't easily replaceable. I'm struggling to find the last Sabre with his skill set. Mike Foligno?

Montour might be Cam Fowler in waiting, but he may also be Jason Woolley, or god forbid, Marc Andre Gragnani.

This is not a team that needs to be blown up. It is a team that needs to be added to and nurtured.

Trading Evander Kane creates a hole, now and in the future. If we trade him, get an NHL player back, not another lottery ticket.

*****

Guhle came up on emergency recall and had to be sent down once the emergency was over.http://www.buffalohockeybeat.com/defensemen-healthy-sabres-rookie-brendan-guhle-must-leave/

You can't say someone who played 5 games of 3rd pairing minutes in the NHL hasn't shown "some facility in the NHL" Guhle didn't score or assist in his 3 games are we going to say the same about him? That said, if we get Theodore or Larsson, I'm ok with that also. Montour made (so did Larsson and Theodore) ESPN's Pronman's list of top prospects for this season. Guhle didn't. http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/top-nhl-prospects-2016-17-nhl-season/story?id=42622944

 

However, I truly don't understand this fascination with Kane. He has had a great run of late no question, but to ignore his history both on and off the ice is imho putting your head in the sand. This isn't Marchand or Simmonds or even Okposo who consistently improved year after year in their careers. We have seen similar runs of great play such as Bogo's in the 2nd half of last season. Everyone, including myself, has always admired his skill set, but he has proven over his career that he never brings it all season and rarely stays healthy. I also think he isn't re-signing here because we aren't going to invest $6 a year in a 20 goal 40pt player who is playing on the 3rd line of a crappy team. Your allusion to Drew Stafford is right on target. Go compare their career production and you'll see a very similar track record. In fact, Hockey-reference.com has Stafford is a 90% comparable after 7 years.

 

Right now his trade value may never be higher. Oh by the way Woolley averaged 8g and 25a in his 5 seasons here. If Montour becomes that kind of player, I'm ok with that.

Edited February 4, 2017 by GASabresIUFAN

[dudacek]

I would say exactly the same thing about Guhle.

He is an interesting but unproven 2nd round draft pick.

That is exactly my point, Weave's as well

 

Clearly we have a considerable difference of opinion on Kane if you think he is a Stafford or Woolley level player.

Edited February 4, 2017 by dudacek

[GASabresIUFAN]

Stafford in his first 7 seasons scored 120g w 144a in 443 games

Kane in his first 7 seasons scored 129g w 128a in 426 games

[Weave]

Stafford in his first 7 seasons scored 120g w 144a in 443 games

Kane in his first 7 seasons scored 129g w 128a in 426 games

 

Yes, points-wise they are similar.  Good, 2nd line player production.

 

That is where the similarity ends though. Kane plays a hard game with a strong forecheck, speed, and aggression.  0.5 pts/game with speed and aggression is difficult to find.  If you have those players you usually try to keep them.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Yes, points-wise they are similar.  Good, 2nd line player production.

 

That is where the similarity ends though. Kane plays a hard game with a strong forecheck, speed, and aggression.  0.5 pts/game with speed and aggression is difficult to find.  If you have those players you usually try to keep them.

See that is the problem with the keep Kane argument. Y'all talk about him as this great 2nd line player, but he isn't. His production only started as soon as he was demoted to the 3rd line, where he plays against 3rd lines and 3rd pairing D. I'm sorry but i'm not about to committ huge $ long-term to a 3rd line LW.

 

The good thing about moving Kane now is his recent production may convince other teams he is ready for prime time and we can get max value especially as he signed for another year.

[dudacek]

This misuse of "3rd-liner" needs to go away.

Bylsma does not have a heirarchy of lines and he was not "demoted."

He's 4th on the team in ice time, 13th among NHL left wings, 49th in the league overall.

 

His production started as soon as his ribs healed.

[Weave]

This misuse of "3rd-liner" needs to go away.

Bylsma does not have a heirarchy of lines and he was not "demoted."

He's 4th on the team in ice time, 13th among NHL left wings, 49th in the league overall.

 

His production started as soon as his ribs healed.

Yes, yes, and yes.

See that is the problem with the keep Kane argument. Y'all talk about him as this great 2nd line player, but he isn't. His production only started as soon as he was demoted to the 3rd line, where he plays against 3rd lines and 3rd pairing D. I'm sorry but i'm not about to committ huge $ long-term to a 3rd line LW.

 

The good thing about moving Kane now is his recent production may convince other teams he is ready for prime time and we can get max value especially as he signed for another year.

Is Foligno a 2nd liner? He is using your argument.

 

He's not.

Edited February 5, 2017 by We've

[GASabresIUFAN]

I agree he is not a 2nd liner.  On a really good team Foligno might be a 4th line player.  

 

One other note, just because DD doesn't call it a 3rd line, the matchups against other team show that Kane's competition is not a s good as the Eichel Line or ROR line.  Eichel and ROR are playing against the other team's better D and better defensive forwards.  Kane has benefited from the easier matchups. So call Kane a 2nd liner if you will, but I'll change my mind only when he starts producing against the top pairings on our opponents.

Edited February 5, 2017 by GASabresIUFAN

[inkman]

I agree he is not a 2nd liner. On a really good team Foligno might be a 4th line player.

 

One other note, just because DD doesn't call it a 3rd line, the matchups against other team show that Kane's competition is not a s good as the Eichel Line or ROR line. Eichel and ROR are playing against the other team's better D and better defensive forwards. Kane has benefited from the easier matchups. So call Kane a 2nd liner if you will, but I'll change my mind only when he starts producing against the top pairings on our opponents.

Doesn't the Kane line often draw the opponents top 2 lines?

[SwampD]

Ink beat me to it.

[dudacek]

I agree he is not a 2nd liner.  On a really good team Foligno might be a 4th line player.  

 

One other note, just because DD doesn't call it a 3rd line, the matchups against other team show that Kane's competition is not a s good as the Eichel Line or ROR line.  Eichel and ROR are playing against the other team's better D and better defensive forwards.  Kane has benefited from the easier matchups. So call Kane a 2nd liner if you will, but I'll change my mind only when he starts producing against the top pairings on our opponents.

 

Or maybe having Kane, Eichel and O'Reilly on different lines is by design so at least one of them gets a mismatch.

Maybe this is actually part of a plan?

[WildCard]

Or maybe having Kane, Eichel and O'Reilly on different lines is by design so at least one of them gets a mismatch.

Maybe this is actually part of a plan?

I think it's cause those players need to dominate puck possession relative to their teammates in order to be effective

[Mig22]

Or maybe having Kane, Eichel and O'Reilly on different lines is by design so at least one of them gets a mismatch.

Maybe this is actually part of a plan?

Ding ding!  Spreading the (somewhat thin) talent is clearly intentional by the coach.  And let's be honest, the team is scoring goals right now.  If a lot of them are PP goals, that's in part because they are drawing those penalties by rolling three lines that can score.   Cheers.

[Drunkard]

6' 200 lbs isn't exactly undersized. He has only played 5 games because Ana can't afford to bring him up and play him. Both he and Stoner would be a significant upgrades on what we are fielding right now on defense thereby improving the team now. Stoner has only one year left on his deal at 3.25. I think he is a faster, cheaper version of Gorges. I honestly believe fixing our D group, would allow us to clear our zone faster leading to better goal production on offense and less goals allowed.

 

As to Kane's production, he has certainly played well of late, but to say we can't replace his production is wrong. I think Bailey and or Baptiste, given a full time top 2 line role, could produce well for the rest of the season and they have the size speed and skill to be a 20 goal scorers in the NHL. Kane has 1 30 goal season and 1 20 goal season in 7+ NHL seasons. His recent performance is great, but odds are he'll return to his previous form.

 

However, Let's say that you are right and all the moves I suggest don't make the entire team better immediately, is that really so awful if it leads to a better 1st rd pick, more NHL experience for our prospects, and a better D group long-term?

 

Well that bum Ryan O'Reilly has zero 30 goal seasons and two 20 goal seasons in 7+ NHL seasons as well. Plus he makes 2 million more.

[MattPie]

What is all this player analysis doing in a math and record thread?

 

Current wildcard teams are .557 and .518 P%, East and West, respectively. Both off the .585 and .530 the wildcard teams had last year at the end of the season. We'll have to see if they pace picks up as the season goes on.

[Randall Flagg]

We've been swept by: Boston, Carolina, New Jersey, Washington

We're in the process of being swept by: Toronto, Tampa

 

Our record: 21-21-10

Imagine if we had just won a single game against 3 of those teams. Still played them with a losing record, but managed to get a win against three of them. That's hardly asking for a respectable showing, and yet we'd be right in the playoff race if that had happened. 

 

Can't make the playoffs when you don't win a single game against a bunch of teams (not Wash, obviously) that are right in front of you, or just behind.