2018 - 2019 Lineup

[LGR4GM]

7 hours ago, dudacek said:

Over the course of this season I’ve seen a lot of complaints about how Rodrigues is an effective player being underutilized by Housley and how Mittelstadt has been getting too much ice time and has been ineffective.

It’s resurfaced in the context of Eichel going down.

Evan is -5 with 11 points. Casey is -5 with 11 points.

Evan has 2 goals. Casey has 5 goals.

Evan is 4th among forwards, averaging 15:13 minutes a game. Casey is 10th averaging 13:22.

Perception is an interesting thing.

Rodrigues is getting a 69.5% defensive zone start where as Mittelstadt is getting 71.2% offensive zone starts. Add into that, he's played almost 61 minutes of PK time to CM 31 seconds of PK time. That means Erod is playing 1:42 each game on the PK.  Almost making up the gap in playing time. Further CM has gotten 68 minutes of PP compared to Erods 52.

Erod may be playing slightly more but he is starting in the defensive zone far more and some of that time is easily explained by his use as a PK player compared to CM spending almost 0 time on the PK. Housley continues to under-utilize Evan Rodrigues' offensive abilities in favor of lesser players.

[dudacek]

So you’re saying that if Evan got a chance to play with Reinhart and Skinner, and got some time on PP1 he’d probably double his goal production?

Edited January 4, 2019 by dudacek

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

So your saying that if Evan got a chance to play with Reinhart and Skinner, and got some time on PP1 he’d probably double his goal production?

No. I am saying if he did get a chance to play with better players and didn't always start at a disadvantage he could contribute more offensively to the team. I am not sure 1st line with Skinner and Reinhart is his place but certainly he is good enough to play with Sheary and Thompson. 

[shrader]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Third: There is not an A in Victor Olofsson's name. Idk why I keep seeing that here, it is about has bad as the people spelling Reinhart's name with a D. #petpeeve

I've always wondered why that spelling always shows up for Reinhart and I finally figured out why.  Yesterday my phone autocorrected it and added in the D.  I almost never catch those erroneous autocorrects before I submit the post/text, but fortunately I did that time.

[LGR4GM]

Ooh that's why? That makes a lot of sense then. I will try to not bring it up again. 

[tom webster]

Well hopefully we will get to find out because if they end up using all four of those picks their season ticket base may shrink to 5,000.

Also, the Sabre’s just traded a strong number two center for a first round pick and Tage and took on salary so the notion they couldn’t acquire one that fit better for two picks seems dubious. I’m not going to get into names because I don’t go there but I believe it can be done and with that top nine and other prospects in the system there is plenty of time to restock the cupboard before they have room for anyone else.

Edited January 4, 2019 by tom webster

[WildCard]

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

So you’re saying that if Evan got a chance to play with Reinhart and Skinner, and got some time on PP1 he’d probably double his goal production?

Mean he probably would. He'd go from what? 6 goals to 12? 

[tom webster]

Last point, you seem to assume the high end for your window(8) and take the low end(2) for my window. Without getting into a response of biblical proportions, I see the likely window for my proposal at 4/5 and that’s if they don’t add anything and the players on the third line never elevate to second or borderline first.

I will take a 4/5 window that starts now versus an 8 year window that starts in 2 years.

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, tom webster said:

Last point, you seem to assume the high end for your window(8) and take the low end(2) for my window. Without getting into a response of biblical proportions, I see the likely window for my proposal at 4/5 and that’s if they don’t add anything and the players on the third line never elevate to second or borderline first.

I will take a 4/5 window that starts now versus an 8 year window that starts in 2 years.

Your window is only 4-5 if you get a 26yr old with that much term left on their deal. I don't think you find that. I think you find a guy with this year and maybe 1 or 2 more years and then there's a lot of questions. Also I don't think your window has any chance of being open for 5 years. The lack of of those firsts and seconds will see to that. 

[dudacek]

37 minutes ago, tom webster said:

Well hopefully we will get to find out because if they end up using all four of those picks their season ticket base may shrink to 5,000.

Also, the Sabre’s just traded a strong number two center for a first round pick and Tage and took on salary so the notion they couldn’t acquire one that fit better for two picks seems dubious. I’m not going to get into names because I don’t go there but I believe it can be done and with that top nine and other prospects in the system there is plenty of time to restock the cupboard before they have room for anyone else.

I’m mostly with you in this debate, but if the season ticket holders don’t want to pay to see Eichel, Skinner and Dahlin, I don’t think a 2nd line centre is going to make a difference

27 minutes ago, WildCard said:

Mean he probably would. He'd go from what? 6 goals to 12? 

I was thinking 4 to 8, but nothing wrong with a bit of optimism.

[LGR4GM]

52 minutes ago, tom webster said:

Well hopefully we will get to find out because if they end up using all four of those picks their season ticket base may shrink to 5,000.

Also, the Sabre’s just traded a strong number two center for a first round pick and Tage and took on salary so the notion they couldn’t acquire one that fit better for two picks seems dubious. I’m not going to get into names because I don’t go there but I believe it can be done and with that top nine and other prospects in the system there is plenty of time to restock the cupboard before they have room for anyone else.

The Sabres did not take on salary. They took back what they gave out almost exactly. That makes the trade work. How are you going to take in salary here and not send out any? Why wouldn't a team also want a NHL body back? Who would that be? 

And the other problem I have is that you are only talking in 100% hypothetical. I can name players we could get with those picks. I have no idea what level of 2nd line center I am getting who is 26 with term left on his deal. Am I getting ROR level or am I getting Galchenyuk? 

Edited January 4, 2019 by LGR4GM

[Crusader1969]

On 1/3/2019 at 9:45 AM, LGR4GM said:

Who's their top 4 defenders. 

I think the leafs for the short term will have better forwards than us. However short and long term their defense is not currently projected to be as good. If we can be better there, we can close the gap. Also our forwards can improve too. Mitts in particular. 

plus they aren't going to be able to keep a lot of their depth once Matthews and Marner get their new deals.  They lose Gardiner and who's going to replace him? 

[Crusader1969]

On 1/3/2019 at 11:29 AM, tom webster said:

Depth is overrated. It’s about the top 4-5 forwards, 2-3 defenseman and solid goaltending. Waiting on draft picks that have less then a 25% chance of being impact players within three years and added to the fact that 4 of the forwards, 2 of the defenseman and the goaltender are already be part of the organization and all under 26, most under 23 is puzzling to me.

 I’ll bet that not one player drafted in the top two rounds over the next three years means anything to anyone if the team acquires a true number two center and is challenging for the Cup within the next two years.

this is a terrible take - Depth is the key reason why Buffalo is behind Toronto and Tampa

[Crusader1969]

21 hours ago, Broken Ankles said:

It’s obvious you cannot win a Cup with players on large AAV’s.   See Pittsburgh 2017 salary of Leteng, Sidney, Kessel, and Malkin.  They  had an average of $8.3m for their top 4.  The timeline is not Jack, it’s Rasmus.  I expect at least one of the first rounders this year to contribute top 6 minutes on the 2020/21 team.  By then Rasmus will have established himself as a dominate force on defense.   And if Rasmus gets a $12m deal for 2021 so be it.  Based on an estimated $90m cap, you will have plenty of room for Skinner, Jack, Dahlin and TBD (Sam?).  Bottom line, this year it’s important to take a step, not win the Cup.   Concede this year to TB and Toronto.  Continued progress next year.

 It’s just 3.5 years removed from the most egregious and reckless attempt to mortgage the future by an incompetent GM.   Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.  

Excellent Post!

[tom webster]

18 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

this is a terrible take - Depth is the key reason why Buffalo is behind Toronto and Tampa

You like everyone else is mud-reading this. My point is that you have none forward, all 26 or under, you don’t four first round picks the next couple of years.

[LGR4GM]

2 minutes ago, tom webster said:

You like everyone else is mud-reading this. My point is that you have none forward, all 26 or under, you don’t four first round picks the next couple of years.

What? 

[tom webster]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

What? 

Wow, sorry, a little distracted.

My point was, if you have my 9 forwards, plus the prospects currently in system, you don’t need four first round picks in the near future.

FWIW, you make a valid argument but while you see me as over rating what they can get and how long they can keep it together, I think you tend to way over value picks and prospects.

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, tom webster said:

Wow, sorry, a little distracted.

My point was, if you have my 9 forwards, plus the prospects currently in system, you don’t need four first round picks in the near future.

FWIW, you make a valid argument but while you see me as over rating what they can get and how long they can keep it together, I think you tend to way over value picks and prospects.

Your right you don't but you know when you will need them? Right when they should be hitting the NHL in 2-4 years. 

Yes I do because it is my preferred method of building after watching what happened under Murray. 

Edited January 4, 2019 by LGR4GM

[Crusader1969]

4 minutes ago, tom webster said:

Wow, sorry, a little distracted.

My point was, if you have my 9 forwards, plus the prospects currently in system, you don’t need four first round picks in the near future.

FWIW, you make a valid argument but while you see me as over rating what they can get and how long they can keep it together, I think you tend to way over value picks and prospects.

Can you name any potential centers who "could" be available and would be worth giving up a 1st rounder for? 

[tom webster]

15 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

Can you name any potential centers who "could" be available and would be worth giving up a 1st rounder for? 

I really don’t want to get into names but you just have to look at teams ready to do a tear down. There are at least three that I could name without any research and to be clear, I said available for two first rounders.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Charlie Coyle?

[shrader]

50 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

Excellent Post!

The point you're mentioning is valid only if you assume the current GM is also incompetent.  That goes hand in hand with the "reckless" part.  Otherwise, it's completely random.  One GM's poor moves does not predict another's.

[tom webster]

23 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Your right you don't but you know when you will need them? Right when they should be hitting the NHL in 2-4 years. 

Yes I do because it is my preferred method of building after watching what happened under Murray. 

If you need them in less then four years you over estimated Jack, Casey and ???.

You also are assuming they trade the picks, and do nothing else for four years. At least a couple of the current prospects should be ready to either play or turn into future picks, one of the top nine should be sold at the right time to infuse new blood and picks into the equation.

My proposal is fluid, you identify your core, move them a year early, recycle some picks, eventually you may end up where Chicago is but who wouldn’t take what they’ve done as our template?

 

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

13 minutes ago, tom webster said:

If you need them in less then four years you over estimated Jack, Casey and ???.

You also are assuming they trade the picks, and do nothing else for four years. At least a couple of the current prospects should be ready to either play or turn into future picks, one of the top nine should be sold at the right time to infuse new blood and picks into the equation.

My proposal is fluid, you identify your core, move them a year early, recycle some picks, eventually you may end up where Chicago is but who wouldn’t take what they’ve done as our template?

 

And where is Chicago? (and don't say ...in Illinois).

[shrader]

5 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

And where is Chicago? (and don't say ...in Illinois).

3 cups in the last 9 years?  I'm guessing most people would love that, even with the recent struggles.