Around the NHL 2018-2019

[Sabre Dance]

In order to score you have to be in the play.  Also, I hate the idea of Vanek the first time around.

 

 

That's not true... it is as TrueBlue says below.

 

 

Here's the question.  The definition of better as narrowly defined by where you finish the regular season, yes.  If, however, you consider that it also does not guarantee a top 3 draft position in the following draft one might argue that it reduces your ability to improve the overall talent through the draft.  As such, is finishing 26th more important than finishing 30th (or 31st really).  I would prefer to finish dead last than finish 26th. 

 

In fact, if you are not finishing within the top 20 and more importantly are not in the hunt for a wild card spot I would prefer to finish last.

 

     Gee, I wonder where the Sabres' "culture of losing" is coming from.  So, if we are in 20th place in March and 15 points out of a playoff spot, let's just fold up the tents and lose the rest of our games so we can move up a few spots in the draft. I'm sure that will go over well with the players and coaches who are trying to improve.  No wonder we are in the position we are in.  :blink:

Edited June 20, 2018 by Sabre Dance

[Trettioåtta]

Liger - what alternatives do you suggest? ATM we need to upgrade our wings, especially LW. How do we do that? Either trade or free agency. It is a real desert of talent in the UFA pool, so if you don't like the idea of a 40 point winger from there, whoa re you trading?

 

Also, the last time the Sabres were great Vanek played 3rd line LW... hashtag full circle

[LGR4GM]

Mattias Janmark, Oliver Bjorkstrand, or Adam Lowry. 

[Randall Flagg]

I don't give a rat's ass what his name is. I care that he's slow and doesn't play the style being discussed by the entire organization

Nolan is gone

I expect Larson to be gone or playing 4th line center.

Pommers is a rw

So do I think vanek will score more points then Wilson, yes. Guess that means we should get him. We can have a line of vanek, Larson, pommers. Montreal will be afraid... and maybe Ottawa.

Well that's all most of us are saying. If there's an upgrade to be had with Vanek, and there's a pretty damn good chance there would be, then we'd be silly not to make it. 

 

There is not one team in the league where every single player fits the team's identity. 

[LGR4GM]

I do not view him as an upgrade. Adding a 34 year old winger who does not player the style you want the team to just so you can squeak out 2-3 extra wins next year does nothing for me. 

[WildCard]

I do not view him as an upgrade. Adding a 34 year old winger who does not player the style you want the team to just so you can squeak out 2-3 extra wins next year does nothing for me. 

Same. We hear again and again Bots wants speed. Where exactly does Vanek fit into that? Even when he was younger he was never considered fast

[Randall Flagg]

I do not view him as an upgrade. Adding a 34 year old winger who does not player the style you want the team to just so you can squeak out 2-3 extra wins next year does nothing for me. 

He will literally be an upgrade to at least 3 players that we end up icing this year, by definition of the word "upgrade." 

 

Statistically speaking, the Sabres are less than 2-3 wins better when Eichel plays. should they just bench him all year because it's not a big deal? 

 

It's foolish to not make any upgrade available, no matter how slight. 2-3 extra wins would be amazing, quite frankly. ask the teams in 07-09 if they wouldn't have liked those 4-6 extra points. Ask the cup winning Kings in 2012 if they'd rather not have had 2-3 extra wins, and had missed the playoffs instead. Same as the cup finalist Predators last year.

 

What the hell is the style we want the team to play? Skate fast? We had better get trading all of Okposo, ROR, and Reinhart then, they don't fit our style. 

Edited June 20, 2018 by Randall Flagg

[darksabre]

I think team speed is an admirable goal, but it shouldn't be the only goal. You need good players even if they aren't speed demons. Vanek was always a good "pick your spots" skater with the hands to make it work. Until he's as ineffective as Jagr he's worth having.

[Randall Flagg]

I think team speed is an admirable goal, but it shouldn't be the only goal. You need good players even if they aren't speed demons. Vanek was always a good "pick your spots" skater with the hands to make it work. Until he's as ineffective as Jagr he's worth having.

Right. I would get Liger's anguish if we were talking a 4 year deal, but we just want him for a year or two until the Asplund/Mitts/Davidsson/Olofsson crew starts to hopefully fill in the wings (with Panarin on top of course). It'd be better than using any of the other trash we always end up using because we don't seem to feel like grabbing actual depth. 

 

Sam Gagner went to Columbus two seasons ago and put up 50 points being sheltered on their fourth line, even though their identity is to have a huge, physically imposing forward group. They hated the signing in the summer because it didn't fit, and loved it when I believe they got the most points per dollar out of him than almost any other player in the league. Vanek has to be in that territory too over the last few years. Grab him, stick him with Mitts and Erod, shelter the hell out of the line, and watch Casey win the Calder. Then in a year or two Casey can start to carry his own line, and maybe start elevating wingers like Jack is supposed to do (and our UFA signing Tavares might be the best in the league at behind Sid and McD)

Edited June 20, 2018 by Randall Flagg

[LTS]

     Gee, I wonder where the Sabres' "culture of losing" is coming from.  So, if we are in 20th place in March and 15 points out of a playoff spot, let's just fold up the tents and lose the rest of our games so we can move up a few spots in the draft. I'm sure that will go over well with the players and coaches who are trying to improve.  No wonder we are in the position we are in.  :blink:

 

That's an awfully spirited read into what I said.

 

I didn't say they should lose on purpose or try to lose.  I merely said it is better to finish last than 20th.  If your team is built so it finishes 20th it is doing you a disservice.  So, in the CONTEXT of what is being discussed, if the Sabres add Vanek and it only moves them up 4 spots in the final standings (or 5) from 31st to 26th it's not really helping them.  It hurts them because finishing last would be better than finishing 26th.  Keep in mind, since we seem to have spell things out in full legal disclaimers on here.  I am referring to the addition of Vanek.  I am not referring to a team that finishes 20th because of its core youth improving year over year.  That is a positive sign.  Vanek is a temporary free agent piece that should be signed to put you over the top, not a bump from the bottom.

 

You have somehow taken the statement, reapplied it outside of the context of the conversation and have now implied that I think the Sabres should intentionally lose.  At the same time, you are attempting to insult me by telling me that I contribute to the "culture of losing".  It would be better to spend your energy working to understand what I am saying than trying to find a way to attack me.

[WildCard]

Auston Watson arrested for domestic violence

 

http://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/23851477/austin-watson-nashville-predators-charged-domestic-violence

[That Aud Smell]

Adding a 34 year old winger who does not player the style you want the team to just so you can squeak out 2-3 extra wins next year does nothing for me. 

Same. We hear again and again Bots wants speed. Where exactly does Vanek fit into that? 

 

I am generally in agreement with these sentiments.

 

2-3 extra wins would be amazing, quite frankly.  

 

Um. Okay?

 

More seriously: If you're deviating from an overall plan, it's not worth it to purchase 2-3 more wins for a team that will finish in the bottom 5 or 6 of the league.

 

Btw, I have no way of knowing whether adding Vanek would constitute a deviation from the plan, nor do I know that the Sabres are destined to stink. Maybe they'll be good.

 

I think team speed is an admirable goal, but it shouldn't be the only goal. You need good players even if they aren't speed demons. Vanek was always a good "pick your spots" skater with the hands to make it work. Until he's as ineffective as Jagr he's worth having.

 

I can get down with this, too, I guess. I'm fairly wishy washy on the subject.

[Randall Flagg]

 

Um. Okay?

 

More seriously: If you're deviating from an overall plan, it's not worth it to purchase 2-3 more wins for a team that will finish in the bottom 5 or 6 of the league.

 

 

A few points:

-Short depth forward additions pretty much can't deviate from your team plans. Tampa added Chris Kunitz and Dan Girardi as part of a high skill puck possession team, Pittsburgh Ryan Reaves (they traded a 1st, he wasn't a free agent signing). Columbus, the heaviest team in the league, grabbed noted weakling Gagner for their bottom six, like I mentioned, and he blossomed and gave them tremendous depth scoring. The fact remains that it is likely we have some trash on our roster this year, and Vanek is likely better than a couple forwards we intend to ice. We shouldn't let some vague notion of what we want our team to look like deter the signing of a player that can still do some things, we should just be cognizant of what he can and can't do and incorporate that into his usage. That is what good teams and coaches do. 

-2-3 wins is freaking huge in a league where, quite often, 40%+ of the teams are fighting for 2-4 playoff spots at the end. 

- WAR, wins above replacement, is in its infancy in hockey and will likely never be anywhere near as good of a stat as it is in baseball, but here are some of the players that have 2-3 WAR: 

Tarasenko

Point

Ehlers

Pastrnak

Bergeron

Toews

Stamkos

Scheifele 

 

So in theory if you were adding 2-3 wins with a signing and you don't do it, you should be fired. Of course, Vanek is not a player that adds 2-3 wins by himself, and hockey is very much a team sport which is why those numbers are so low. 

[Mustache of God]

Vanek is a more productive winger than Larsson, Wilson, Girgensonson, Pominville and Rodriguez (maybe not for long, he's trending upwards and is more versatile and he'd be the last on this list of players for Vanek to replace).

 

Adding Vanek and having him push out one of the above would boost our offensive production, which this team is desperate for, and upgrade the team.

 

I still think there's a lot of action to be had in the next two weeks and my hopes are JBOTS makes some moves that have better wingers coming to this team and we won't need talk about adding Vanek as the needs have been addressed.

[SwampD]

I am dumbfounded that even after the season Vegas just had, in year one, people are still spewing this "it's better to lose the right way because Future,  than to get better players and win more now" garbage.

 

Do whatever it takes, play whatever system you need to play, get whomever you can get to make the team better and win more now.

 

Winning begets winning.

 

Jebus effing Christmas!

[Trettioåtta]

Mattias Janmark, Oliver Bjorkstrand, or Adam Lowry. 

 

So your preference for LW is 2 centres and a RW.

 

I like those players, but I also think they'll cost a tidy penny to get

I am dumbfounded that even after the season Vegas just had, in year one, people are still spewing this "it's better to lose the right way because Future,  than to get better players and win more now" garbage.

 

Do whatever it takes, play whatever system you need to play, get whomever you can get to make the team better and win more now.

 

Winning begets winning.

 

Jebus effing Christmas!

 

In fairness, we have drafted awfully in the last few years. That's why its always for the futures. There is nothing in the pipe line despite being bottom of the league for half a decade.

[Randall Flagg]

So your preference for LW is 2 centres and a RW.

 

I like those players, but I also think they'll cost a tidy penny to get

 

In fairness, we have drafted awfully in the last few years. That's why its always for the futures. There is nothing in the pipe line despite being bottom of the league for half a decade.

"Cost a tidy penny"

 

Awesome.

[dudacek]

In fairness, we have drafted awfully in the last few years. That's why its always for the futures. There is nothing in the pipe line despite being bottom of the league for half a decade.

Casey Mittelstadt, Alex Nylander, Marcus Davidson, Ukko Pekka Luukonnen, Rasmus Asplund, Cliff Pu, Brendan Guhle, Will Borgen, Casey Fitzgerald, Victor olafsson, Justin Bailey, Nick Baptiste, and Linus Ullmark would beg to differ.

 

Then there are the kids that have already arrived: here (McCabe, Girgensons, Ristolainen, Reinhart and Eichel) and elsewhere (Grigorenko, Zadorov, Compher, Lemieux, Petersen)

 

It takes 3-5 years to know what you got out of a draft. We are six years into our dismal run. The pipeline is just fine.

The problem is the fact we have no one over 25 in the organization because of the disasters that were the six drafts prior.

Edited June 20, 2018 by dudacek

[WildCard]

Casey Mittelstadt, Alex Nylander, Marcus Davidson, Ukko Pekka Luukonnen, Rasmus Asplund, Cliff Pu, Brendan Guhle, Will Borgen, Casey Fitzgerald, Victor olafsson, Justin Bailey, Nick Baptiste, and Linus Ullmark would beg to differ.

[That Aud Smell]

I heard Fitzgerald has a chance of becoming a player in the NHL.

 

I also continue to think that Baptiste may carve out a role as an effective 4th liner on a good team.

[Trettioåtta]

Casey Mittelstadt, Alex Nylander, Marcus Davidson, Ukko Pekka Luukonnen, Rasmus Asplund, Cliff Pu, Brendan Guhle, Will Borgen, Casey Fitzgerald, Victor olafsson, Justin Bailey, Nick Baptiste, and Linus Ullmark would beg to differ.

 

Then there are the kids that have already arrived: here (McCabe, Girgensons, Ristolainen, Reinhart and Eichel) and elsewhere (Grigorenko, Zadorov, Compher, Lemieux, Petersen)

 

It takes 3-5 years to know what you got out of a draft. We are six years into our dismal run. The pipeline is just fine.

The problem is the fact we have no one over 25 in the organization because of the disasters that were the six drafts prior.

 

Other teams seem to hit on impact players outside of the top 5. With the exception of maybe Casey, do you think anyone in that list will be a 60 point guy? or a 30 point D man.

 

Role players are good and needed, but we dont have that spark.

[LTS]

I am dumbfounded that even after the season Vegas just had, in year one, people are still spewing this "it's better to lose the right way because Future,  than to get better players and win more now" garbage.

 

Do whatever it takes, play whatever system you need to play, get whomever you can get to make the team better and win more now.

 

Winning begets winning.

 

Jebus effing Christmas!

 

That's not always true.  The Chicago Blackhawks have won a lot, but they were not good last season.  

 

The Rangers were once a team that just signed free agents.. they won, but never anything that mattered.

 

Roster management is critical and just signing whomever you want to make the team better now will ultimately bite you in the rear-end.  

[LGR4GM]

Other teams seem to hit on impact players outside of the top 5. With the exception of maybe Casey, do you think anyone in that list will be a 60 point guy? or a 30 point D man.

 

Role players are good and needed, but we dont have that spark.

The Stanley Cup winning Washington Capitals had 4 players over 60 points (Eichel, ROR, Mittelstadt and X (Reinhart)) the 4th player was a defender, Jon Carlson. 

 

The Capitals had 1 defensemen over 30pts but I will give them 2 cuz Niskanen was at 29. (Risto, Dahlin) 

The Vegas Knights had 4 players over 60 with a 5th at 55points. From what I can see they had 0 defenders over 30 points. Shea Theodore did have 29 however. 

[Trettioåtta]

The Stanley Cup winning Washington Capitals had 4 players over 60 points (Eichel, ROR, Mittelstadt and X (Reinhart)) the 4th player was a defender, Jon Carlson. 

 

The Capitals had 1 defensemen over 30pts but I will give them 2 cuz Niskanen was at 29. (Risto, Dahlin) 

 

Two of the four were drafted in the late 20s. That's my point, you have to get impact players outside the top 5 if you want remain outside the bottom 5

[LGR4GM]

Two of the four were drafted in the late 20s. That's my point, you have to get impact players outside the top 5 if you want remain outside the bottom 5

Yea but Darcy failed and here we are. To sustain success as we drag the carcass of this team back to respectability we will have to hit on players outside of the top 10. Those players however do not have to be 60pt forwards or 30pt defenders because we will already have those. If they become that, freaking awesome for us. 

Edited June 20, 2018 by Skurk Liger