Fan Frustrations: Sabres Edition

[GASabresIUFAN]

I do not agree. This team actually appears to be playing real hockey at times. I saw that once last year, and it was the game Eichel came back in.

 

Really!?

We are on pace for 55pts. (78pts last year)

We are on pace for 198 gf and 301 ga. (Last year 199 gf and 231 ga)

Our PP went from no. 1 and now sits at 23rd not counting the 6 shorties.

 

If these numbers aren’t the definition of a step back, I don’t know what is.

[LGR4GM]

Really!?

We are on pace for 55pts. (78pts last year)

We are on pace for 198 gf and 301 ga. (Last year 199 gf and 231 ga)

Our PP went from no. 1 and now sits at 23rd not counting the 6 shorties.

 

If these numbers aren’t the definition of a step back, I don’t know what is.

Really really. I expected most of what is occurring, the shorties not so much. The year was always going to start rough. I'm not projecting out a season based off of 12 games. Ask me at the end of November what I think and we shall. 

[LTS]

Actually I gave Tm the benefit of the doubt, assumed Nylander et al were going to make the NHL and play 100+ games and gave him credit for drafting them. Lemieux also.

 

Right now TM picks on track to play 100 NHL games are

Jack, Sam, Nylander, Lemieux, Asplund, Guhle and maybe Pu and Borgen. That’s it. Based on historical data that is average for the amount he picks he had and were he drafted them.

 

The comment about only 7 games is meant to convey, that outside Jack and Sam, the Sabres have yet to really benefit from any other TM draft pick. We can argue whether or not we should be seeing results yet, but your comment says look 3-4 years out. By this time all the guys listed should be in the NHL. My argument is that even if all make the grade, the evaluation of TM the drafted is still average. To give TM a passing grade as a drafter would mean that guys like Olofsson, Hagel, Fitzgerald make the team and produce. If that happens then we all might look back more kindly on the TM era.

 

However that will not change the fact that his zeal to rebuild quickly ultimately failed and set the franchise and the rebuild back years. So no matter how his draft picks ultimately do, his era here will always be viewed as a failure.

 

Taking Sam and Jack out of the equation for now and using the Cullen chart.

 

Guide: Player Name (draft pick) - % to play 100 / % to be top 6F, top 4D, or 1G / 4th line or fringe player

 

Lemieux (31) -     29% / 11% / 85%

Cornel (44) -        41% / 13% / 73%

Karabacek (49) - 34% / 11% / 82%

Martin (74) -         27% / 8% / 86%

Nylander (8) -      71% / 29% / 46%

Guhle (51)           33% / 10% / 82%

Borgen (92)         24% / 5% / 90%

Asplund (33)        29% / 11% / 85%

Pu (69)                 32% / 8% / 87%

Fitzgerald (86)      25% / 7% / 90%

Glotov (190)         9% / 2% / 97%

 

Based on those picks there is an average 32% chance that his picks play 100 games, 10% chance they are top 6/top 4, and 82% that are fringe.

 

There are 11 picks so each player represents a chance at being above or below the average.  So, if 4 players make 100 games it's above average for those picks.  If 2 players make top 6 or top 4 it's above average and if 10 players are fringe he's above average.  There are actually quite a few more picks as we know.

 

Let's see how they pan out over their careers and check back on his success (above or below).  I'm not worried just about games played.  By rights those players shouldn't even be a top 6 forward or top 4 d.  If Guhle and Nylander make it into that category then by definition of the draft chart he's above average in the league.

 

BTW: If I am not thinking of this correctly I am happy to hear so.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Taking Sam and Jack out of the equation for now and using the Cullen chart.

 

Guide: Player Name (draft pick) - % to play 100 / % to be top 6F, top 4D, or 1G / 4th line or fringe player

 

Lemieux (31) -     29% / 11% / 85%

Cornel (44) -        41% / 13% / 73%

Karabacek (49) - 34% / 11% / 82%

Martin (74) -         27% / 8% / 86%

Nylander (8) -      71% / 29% / 46%

Guhle (51)           33% / 10% / 82%

Borgen (92)         24% / 5% / 90%

Asplund (33)        29% / 11% / 85%

Pu (69)                 32% / 8% / 87%

Fitzgerald (86)      25% / 7% / 90%

Glotov (190)         9% / 2% / 97%

 

Based on those picks there is an average 32% chance that his picks play 100 games, 10% chance they are top 6/top 4, and 82% that are fringe.

 

There are 11 picks so each player represents a chance at being above or below the average.  So, if 4 players make 100 games it's above average for those picks.  If 2 players make top 6 or top 4 it's above average and if 10 players are fringe he's above average.  There are actually quite a few more picks as we know.

 

Let's see how they pan out over their careers and check back on his success (above or below).  I'm not worried just about games played.  By rights those players shouldn't even be a top 6 forward or top 4 d.  If Guhle and Nylander make it into that category then by definition of the draft chart he's above average in the league.

 

BTW: If I am not thinking of this correctly I am happy to hear so.

Your math is a little off since you can’t average the players in that manner. However using your 32% on 25 picks yields 8 players, which is exactly what I wrote above. This is the NHL average. We are trying to build a franchise. Hiring a guy who is supposed to be a draft guru can’t lead to average results.

[MattPie]

Your math is a little off since you can’t average the players in that manner. However using your 32% on 25 picks yields 8 players, which is exactly what I wrote above. This is the NHL average. We are trying to build a franchise. Hiring a guy who is supposed to be a draft guru can’t lead to average results.

 

Are we getting into mythical Sabres Exceptionalism? It's be great if the Sabres are better than the average, but say that and actually doing it is the hard part. If it were easy, every team would be above average. ;)

 

It'd be interesting to see what individual team spreads are. I have a suspicion that if 8 is the average, there are few if any teams outside the range of 6-10. I'm not sure arguing that getting one extra player out of the draft is make or break for a franchise.

[Radar]

Okay, my number one frustration...fans and or sports talk shows. Is it me or does it seem like no matter what is done people complain. Talk shows get ratings by stirring the pot but some fans on these forums seem to enjoy not being happy. The Bills make a trade and all of the sudden a third round draft choice is such a valuable commodity? Some of these same people are the ones probably complaining "just do something!". Don't get me started about our local sports show hosts. Particularly Bull on at three. I used to think he was salvageable. Oh well just thought I'd join in on the griping.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Okay, my number one frustration...fans and or sports talk shows. Is it me or does it seem like no matter what is done people complain. Talk shows get ratings by stirring the pot but some fans on these forums seem to enjoy not being happy. The Bills make a trade and all of the sudden a third round draft choice is such a valuable commodity? Some of these same people are the ones probably complaining "just do something!". Don't get me started about our local sports show hosts. Particularly Bull ###### on at three. I used to think he was salvageable. Oh well just thought I'd join in on the griping.

Who is pissed at the Bills? 

[dudacek]

Shouldn’t Murray’s picks get another half-dozen years to see how well they do?

His oldest picks are 21.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Shouldn’t Murray’s picks get another half-dozen years to see how well they do?

His oldest picks are 21.

?

Unlike TM, Jbot is (so far) trading away all the former GM's picks

[LGR4GM]

?

Unlike TM, Jbot is (so far) trading away all the former GM's picks

Which picks did he trade away?

[Radar]

?

Unlike TM, Jbot is (so far) trading away all the former GM's picks

Please list them for us. What picks?

[mjd1001]

The lack of scoring.  Of course I want the team to win, but I can at least be entertained if they lose but put the puck in the net.  Goals per game...they are second or third worst in the league right now.

 

First goal is making the playoffs. But if they miss the playoffs, I'd much rather watch a 75 point team that is near the top third in scoring than a 90 point team that is in the bottom third in scoring.

 

Most of the time, even when they win, I get bored watching this team.

[dudacek]

The lack of scoring. Of course I want the team to win, but I can at least be entertained if they lose but put the puck in the net. Goals per game...they are second or third worst in the league right now.

 

First goal is making the playoffs. But if they miss the playoffs, I'd much rather watch a 75 point team that is near the top third in scoring than a 90 point team that is in the bottom third in scoring.

 

Most of the time, even when they win, I get bored watching this team.

Well, at least the winning doesn’t bore you that often. ???? Edited November 2, 2017 by dudacek

[GASabresIUFAN]

Which picks did he trade away?

 

 

Please list them for us. What picks?

isn't (typo)

[LGR4GM]

So you're saying Murray traded away the former GMs picks, but Botterill has not done that. Is that correct?

[R_Dudley]

I have not read through the whole thread so sorry for any redundancy. From the games I have watched these are some of my frustrations. 

 

First from the start of the season it appeared that what i considered to be the new core came in less than top shape or ready. With the changes and hype around style change I expected the core to have worked hard over the summer and have picked up where they left off last season out of the gate. I didn't see that from O'Reilly, Reinhart, Risto, Lehner  and I know they were coming back from injury Larsson or Okposo.

 

Second, the PP. With largely the same key players the PP went form a strength to a detriment with the SH give away's. Now I know there is different coaching and strategies but what i have seen have been brain farts and over thinking instead of simple hockey shoot and go to the net. The coach is saying he's telling them to play that way but the players aren't doing it. ?? Don't get it becuase that is  I believe hockey 101, shoot and go to the net they have heard and been doing that since they started  playing hockey. I hope it's not I can't hear you with my helmet on.. 

 

Last, leadership. I don't see it yet. The key players that should and some talked about doing more and stepping up have not done that yet in a demonstrable way. Yes that's you Jack stop pouting, O'Reilly  and Risto, The few that started to look like they were were injured early(Bogo, Mccabe, Zemgus).. They are solid contributors but we need the supposed stars to shine as well.

 

Now I also know its early still and a new system and I have seen a lot of bright spots so I believe the needle is pointing up if we can address these items above and get to playing fast fundamental hockey. 

[dudacek]

Seems to me XGMTM kept the Darcy picks he liked (Risto, Girgensons) and traded away the ones he wasn’t sold on (Grigorenko, Zadorov, Armia and Pysyk) while they still had value in order to get still-young players he liked (O’Reilly, Kane, Kulikov). Seems like he was right more than he was wrong there.

 

In all the dissing of Murray, how come no mention of how O’Reilly and Kane are so much better than anything he ever traded away?

[dudacek]

Remember when Murray was trying to trade all three second-rounders in 2014?

No wonder he got no takers.

 

Three players seem to have made the NHL: Montour, Dvorak and Barbashev.

The other 27 have combined for 13 NHL games.

 

The Sabres had picks 21, 25, 31 and 46 in 2015 and traded them away in the Kane, O’Reilly, Lehner and Fasching deals

The draft went like this

21 Colin White, 22 Ilya Samsonov, 23 Brock Boeser

25 Jack Roslovic 26 Noah Juulsen, 27Jacob Larsson

31 Jeremy Roy, 32 Christian Fischer, 33 Mitchell Stevens

43 Eric Cernak, 44 Matthew Spencer, 45 Jacob Forsbacka-Karlsson

 

I’d rather have Kane and O’Reilly than my pick of any one from each group, although I’d want the Lehner trade back.

[GASabresIUFAN]

So you're saying Murray traded away the former GMs picks, but Botterill has not done that. Is that correct?

Correct

 

Remember when Murray was trying to trade all three second-rounders in 2014?

No wonder he got no takers.

 

Three players seem to have made the NHL: Montour, Dvorak and Barbashev.

The other 27 have combined for 13 NHL games.

 

The Sabres had picks 21, 25, 31 and 46 in 2015 and traded them away in the Kane, O’Reilly, Lehner and Fasching deals

The draft went like this

21 Colin White, 22 Ilya Samsonov, 23 Brock Boeser

25 Jack Roslovic 26 Noah Juulsen, 27Jacob Larsson

31 Jeremy Roy, 32 Christian Fischer, 33 Mitchell Stevens

43 Eric Cernak, 44 Matthew Spencer, 45 Jacob Forsbacka-Karlsson

 

I’d rather have Kane and O’Reilly than my pick of any one from each group, although I’d want the Lehner trade back.

But this is where you are missing the point.  It doesn't matter that they are better players today.  The fact is these deals were unnecessary, premature and cost us talent from one of the deepest drafts in a decade.  The Sabres hadn't yet drafted and developed enough internal players to justify the cost.  To rebuild properly we needed to build first and then supplement later.  These "stars" not only cost us assets, but also moved us into a cap crunch, thus causing to have the double whammy of blotted contracts for unproductive players and a limited pipeline to draw from.  While you can look at a single deal like ROR and say "we won" that deal, the totality of TM's veteran acquisitions have been a dismal failure because of the cap ramifications and the failure to deliver on the alleged talent.  Gorges, Moulson, Bogo, Franson, Kulikov, Kane, and even ROR and now KO have mostly been failures for the Sabres.  ROR, while an very good player, his performance doesn't come close to justifying his cost.  Lehner is the best of the acquisitions performance wise, but has huge holes in his game and isn't the goalie of the future.  I'd much rather have kept the 1st rd pick, drafted Boeser and stayed with guys like Neuvirth and Johnson, both of whom performed at a level similar to Lehner.  Sadly, by the time the Sabres actually turn the corner in 2-3 years, Lehner, Kane, ROR, Bogo, and KO, the center pieces of TM rebuild it quick scheme will be 28 or older.  How much "prime" will they have left?  Do these guys as a group justify the 22.6 mill cost?

 

FYI, If I had to guess Boeser, 20, will be outperforming Kane over the next years and Juulsen and Larsson (as well as Gabriel Carlsson) would have been excellent D additions to our shallow D pool and like Guhle are NHL ready now or next year at the latest.  All three have top 4 potential and excellent puck moving skills.  In addition, we could also use Fischer, as well as guys like Aho and Carlo who went soon after Fischer in the 2nd rd.

 

How much better would our future look with Boeser, Larsson and Aho, instead of KO, Bogo and Moulson.  Also you like to bring up Cernak.  Cernak is a solid stay at home physical D and decent wheels and is likely to earn a call up later this year.  I'd love to have him in the organization as well.  I'd take him over Falk and Gorges.

 

Overall, I'd say had we kept our 2015 picks, in one of the deepest drafts in a decade, we'd be much closer to contention then we are today.  

Edited November 2, 2017 by GASabresIUFAN

[LTS]

Your math is a little off since you can’t average the players in that manner. However using your 32% on 25 picks yields 8 players, which is exactly what I wrote above. This is the NHL average. We are trying to build a franchise. Hiring a guy who is supposed to be a draft guru can’t lead to average results.

 

Why can't you do that?  And again, you keep talking about games played.  A crappy 4th line player could play 100 games and it wouldn't help the franchise.  I would focus more on top 6 and top 4 d and how likely they end up in those slots.

 

If you draft 10 players and combined they have a 10% chance of making it.  Then if 20% of them make it how would that not be above average?  In the example above one would anticipate that Nylander should make top 6, he's the best odds to do so.  The rest are all long shots, but if they make it then shouldn't that be considered a success?

 

One other thing you are not taking into consideration is that having a team of players all drafted from 2-3 years means you have contract negotiations that are all around the same time.  As such, when they call come due you end up having to move assets because you likely can't take on ALL that new salary at once.  Remove Kane and O'Reilly and add another 3-4 20-23 year olds on this team and you have a contract nightmare, especially if they all perform.

 

Your only option, besides praying for an increased salary cap is to then trade away those assets.  So, you end up not having some of them anyway.

 

At this point it's all speculation.  Therefore it is wrong to and unsupportable at this time to cast current judgment on something that has not played out yet.  

[GASabresIUFAN]

The contracts are only a problem if everyone makes the team at the same time and all perform as top 6 players. That never happens. When u draft people from Europe The CHL and NCAA you can somewhat control when they get their ELCs. For example Olofsson may finally come to NA. College kids, depending on if they play an extra year in the USHL can arrive 1-5 years from their draft date.

 

However let’s say we kept all of those 2015 picks. Those guys contracts are already spread out. Jack is done with his ELC this season. Guys like Roslovic and Boeser are on year 2 and the rest year 1. Also based on their development, performance and role on the team will greatly influence the length and size of their second contract. Look at the bridge deals for McCabe as an example. Furthermore, if I drafted 6 the top6/4 players and their deals all come due at the same time, what a great problem to have. Better to much young talent, then the garbage we are watching now.

 

Also you say this is all speculation and it is to a certain extent. However teams evaluate just like this all the time. They know which prospects are on track to be NHL players and who isn’t. It’s why, despite good Jr numbers Estephan wasn’t offered a contract.

 

I also think most of the fans on this board have a pretty good idea as well as to which prospects are on an NHL track.

 

Should TP have kept TM for another 5 years before evaluating his performance as GM?

Edited November 2, 2017 by GASabresIUFAN

[Rasmus_]

Seems to me XGMTM kept the Darcy picks he liked (Risto, Girgensons) and traded away the ones he wasn’t sold on (Grigorenko, Zadorov, Armia and Pysyk) while they still had value in order to get still-young players he liked (O’Reilly, Kane, Kulikov). Seems like he was right more than he was wrong there.

 

In all the dissing of Murray, how come no mention of how O’Reilly and Kane are so much better than anything he ever traded away?

 

Exactly, because Myers, and Armia have done nothing.  While there is still time for Lemieux to possibly pan out.  The O'Reilly trade is still a slam dunk.  

[LTS]

The contracts are only a problem if everyone makes the team at the same time and all perform as top 6 players. That never happens. When u draft people from Europe The CHL and NCAA you can somewhat control when they get their ELCs. For example Olofsson may finally come to NA. College kids, depending on if they play an extra year in the USHL can arrive 1-5 years from their draft date.

 

However let’s say we kept all of those 2015 picks. Those guys contracts are already spread out. Jack is done with his ELC this season. Guys like Roslovic and Boeser are on year 2 and the rest year 1. Also based on their development, performance and role on the team will greatly influence the length and size of their second contract. Look at the bridge deals for McCabe as an example. Furthermore, if I drafted 6 the top6/4 players and their deals all come due at the same time, what a great problem to have. Better to much young talent, then the garbage we are watching now.

 

Also you say this is all speculation and it is to a certain extent. However teams evaluate just like this all the time. They know which prospects are on track to be NHL players and who isn’t. It’s why, despite good Jr numbers Estephan wasn’t offered a contract.

 

I also think most of the fans on this board have a pretty good idea as well as to which prospects are on an NHL track.

 

Should TP have kept TM for another 5 years before evaluating his performance as GM?

 

You have a little bit of control on when contracts hit, sure.  It's just not the same level of control.  At the same time, no one wins without having a few veterans in the lineup who can help guide the youth.  So at some point you need to move something to get them unless you want your veteran leaders on the 4th line. 

 

I agree players are evaluated all the time as well.  It's also sometimes hard to evaluate some players when they are in a bad environment.

 

As for removing Murray.  I don't think moving Murray boiled down to his performance as a talent evaluator which is what we are discussing here.  His ability to run an organization certainly wasn't up to snuff and that's why he was let go.  I think we can all pretty much say with little doubt that the players wanted Murray and Bylsma gone and Pegula had little choice but to comply.  Especially if a major part of that voice is your "generational" talent.

[GASabresIUFAN]

You have a little bit of control on when contracts hit, sure.  It's just not the same level of control.  At the same time, no one wins without having a few veterans in the lineup who can help guide the youth.  So at some point you need to move something to get them unless you want your veteran leaders on the 4th line. 

 

I agree players are evaluated all the time as well.  It's also sometimes hard to evaluate some players when they are in a bad environment.

 

As for removing Murray.  I don't think moving Murray boiled down to his performance as a talent evaluator which is what we are discussing here.  His ability to run an organization certainly wasn't up to snuff and that's why he was let go.  I think we can all pretty much say with little doubt that the players wanted Murray and Bylsma gone and Pegula had little choice but to comply.  Especially if a major part of that voice is your "generational" talent.

I agree on having some vets. I liked the Gionta signing and love the Scandella/Pommers trade. However I think TM was fired for his bad judgement. Bad trades, bad organization, bad drafting, bad cap management and bad fa signings are the hallmarks of the TM era. Saying we won the ROR trade or even the Kane trade is meaningless when the team they were supposed to elevate fails.

[Pokey Jones]

I agree on having some vets. I liked the Gionta signing and love the Scandella/Pommers trade. However I think TM was fired for his bad judgement. Bad trades, bad organization, bad drafting, bad cap management and bad fa signings are the hallmarks of the TM era. Saying we won the ROR trade or even the Kane trade is meaningless when the team they were supposed to elevate fails.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't it come down to Bylsma? Didn't he stand by his coach and so they said ok, you're gone as well? I might have that wrong, I stop paying attention last year.