Botterill’s makeover

[In The Buff]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

Fair enough, but those two wing sets, Skinner and Reinhart, Sheary and Okposo, don't have to stay together as pairs. Could try:

Skinner - Eichel - Okposo

Sheary - Mittelstadt - Reinhart

That gives our best centre our best winger, and our rookie centre a more stable vet presence in Sheary, and the playmaking/finishing ability of Reinhart. 

I dont think there is any reason for us to not expect Housley will try all sorts of line combinations. In training camp & preseason & thruout the regular season. They'll roll with whatever combinations provide the most energy & scoring. I do expect to see Mittlestadt starting the season on the 3rd line, perhaps sometime on the 2nd line. But theyve already said they want to put the new guys in a position to succeed. So youre gonna have to shelter the newbies until they get acclimated to the system & team.

And i've said this before, but i don't think we're gonna miss ROR as much as many claim. We didnt exactly do that great when he was here lol. And our bottom 6 was horrible last year. With better depth we'll have better balance on the lines & can roll 4 lines consistently thru the 1st 40 minutes of each game. I just wish the season were here already

[IKnowPhysics]

Botterill's trades since June 1 2017:

2017 3rd (Scott Walford) ==========> Nathan Beaulieu

Grade: C-

Magnitude: 2 out of 5

Reasoning: Beaulieu had an alright sophomore year in MTL with 28 points in 74 GP, but boy did he not seem to find a fit in Buffalo.  Previous analysis I've done shows that he wasn't as bad as many would suggest, but he had a difficult time passing the eye test.  Because he was relegated to a 5/6/7 role among defensemen that really had no business playing in the NHL (Falk, Fedun, et al), it suggests that paying a 3rd was a fair sticker price on paper (Grade B-) for what would end up being a poor actual return (becomes grade C-).

Tyler Ennis, Marcus Foligno, 2018 3rd (Jack McBain) ==========> Jason Pominville, Marco Scandella, 2018 4th (Linus Kronholm)

Grade: A-

Magnitude: 4 out of 5

Reasoning: Scandella aided an awful, awful defense, ended up being one the Sabres best two defensemen this past year, and proved he's likely a 3/4 guy on a contender.  Pominville initially provided offense, and showed his future is a decent defensive forward.  Cronholm is a project stay-at-home defenseman with good potential. Ennis and Foligno's move to MIN didn't improve their struggling production at all.  Ennis would be bought out by MIN; Scandella and Pominville were both immediately better players than the players sent to MIN.

2019 5th ==========> Scott Wilson

Grade: B+

Magnitude: 2 out of 5

Reasoning: Scott Wilson brought a level of effort and compete to a dogshit bottom six, and was rewarded with 1st/2nd line minutes that he shouldn't get on a contender.  Helped the locker room.  Probably will compete as a competent 4th liner.  2019 5th is cheap for an NHL-ready bottom six player.

Evander Kane ==========> 2019 Cnd 1st, 2019 Cnd 4th, Danny O'Regan

Grade: C

Magnitude: 5 out of 5

Reasoning: Kane was producing bigly on a terrible Sabres team, but Botterill sought a culture shift.  Waiting until the trade deadline maybe hampered return, but he was able to extract at least 2/3 of what he was looking for in a 1st round pick, roster player, and prospect.  O'Regan was good in NCAA and so far he's good in the AHL.  The loss of Kane's goals was a huge hit to the Sabres offensive production and caused a gaping hole at LW, but this may be offset by Skinner.  Kane's re-signing with SJ enabled a conditional 1st round pick, increasing this trade from an F.

Hudson Fasching ==========> Brandon Hickey

Grade: C

Magnitude: 1 out of 5

Reasoning: Giving a stalled Fasching other options in exchange for BU's captain that may evolve to a contributor in Rochester and adds a 6/7 stay-at-home depth defenseman in a defensive depth that's kiddie-pool shallow.  Small potatoes.

2018 6th (Pontus Holmberg) ==========> 2019 6th

Grade: C

Magnitude: 1 out of 5

Reasoning: Nobody you like in the 6th round in a shallow draft?  Grab trade ammo for next year.  NBD.

2019 4th ==========> Conor Sheary, Matt Hunwick

Grade: A

Magnitude: 3 out of 5

Reasoning: Botterill picked up familiar assets in Sheary and Hunwick, adding to areas of need.  Sheary initially (53 points in 2016/17) gets penciled in as the 1st line LW on a depleted LW before Skinner arrives, but will compete as a middle six wing on a better team.  Hunwick, a former captain of Michigan, turned stay-at-home journeyman adds LH depth in a depleted D, and will fight Beaulieu or an up-and-comer for the #7 spot.  A 4th for Sheary was pretty good value, adding in D depth makes the grade.

Ryan O'Reilly ==========> Tage Thompson, Patrik Berglund, Vlad Sobotka, 2019 1st, 2021 2nd

Grade: C

Magnitude: 5 out of 5

Reasoning: Oof, what a kick in the nuts this initially was.  Botterill traded Buffalo's jack-of-all trades and a major stat leader, one of the league's best two-way centermen, a potential team captain, and a Lady Byng finalist for a slew of names and picks.  When the dust settles, we find it's possible that ROR asked to be traded, and if not, perhaps acted like he wanted to be.  Botterill claimed "changing the culture" as he justifies the move and tries to bring back a large enough haul in the aggregate to prevent his tires from being slashed.  Berglund can makeup ROR's defensive minutes.  Sobotka adds quality bottom six depth.  Six-foot-five Tage Thompson, 2016's 26th overall, shows promise and has a ceiling in the top six.  2019 1st is top-ten protected.  2021 2nd is miles away.  At first glance, the trade looks like a sell off for future assets in Thompson, 1st, and 2nd.  Upon deeper review, this was return was helped, if not driven, by analytics that say this trade works slightly in Buffalo's favor right now because of ROR's particular offensive contributions and Berglund, Sobotka, and Thompson contributions in other areas (and then add the picks on top).  This trade will be defined by whether Thompson and Sobotka find success and then it will be potentially made great using or dealing the draft picks.

Cliff Pu, 2019 2nd, 2020 3rd, 2020 6th ==========> Jeff Skinner

Grade: A+

Magnitude: 5 out of 5

Reasoning: It's simple.  Botterill robs Carolina for an elite scoring LW in return for no NHL-ready asset and no 1st round pick.  It immediately gives the top line a replacement for Kane with very strong even strength shot generation, and lets Conor Sheary go to work in the middle six.  This is already A+.  If Skinner, who waived his NTC to come here, produces and re-signs, it could be the most Buffalo-favorable trade since Gratton-Briere.

 

Boiling it all down (crossing out equal value):

Net players:

Tyler Ennis, Marcus Foligno, Evander Kane, Hudson Fasching, Ryan O'Reilly, Cliff Pu ==========> Nathan Beaulieu, Jason Pominville, Marco Scandella, Scott Wilson, Danny O'Regan, Brandon Hickey, Conor Sheary, Matt Dunwick, Tage Thompson, Patrik Berglund, Vlad Sobotka, Jeff Skinner

Analysis: Six players into twelve players.  Equating Kane ~ Skinner, Foligno ~ Wilson, Fasching ~ Hickey, Pu ~ O'Regan, Tyler Ennis ~ Nathan Beaulieu + Matt Dunwick, this leaves the remainder:

Ryan O'Reilly ==========> Jason Pominville, Marco Scandella, Conor Sheary, Tage Thompson, Patrik Berglund, Vlad Sobotka

That's a 1A C for an entire 3rd line (Pominville, Berglund, Sobotka), a #4D (Scandella), a middle six winger (Sheary), and a high-ceiling young winger (Thompson).  I think if O'Reilly implies he wants to be traded, your bottom six is trash, and your defense and wing depth are zero, you easily make this deal.

Net picks (crossing out equal-ish value, ignoring years):

2019 2nd, 2017 3rd, 2018 3rd, 2020 3rd, 2019 4th, 2019 5th, 2018 6th, 2020 6th ==========> 2019 1st, 2019 1st, 2021 2nd, 2018 4th, 2019 4th, 2019 6th

3, 3, 3, 5, 6 ==========> 1, 1, 4 (bold = yet unused)

Analysis: Eight picks into six picks, but moving way up from three 3rds and change to two 1sts and change; definite improvement.

 

Conclusion: I think we're going in the right direction.

 

[Weave]

1 hour ago, MillerVaive said:

We didnt exactly do that great when he was here lol.

I hate this argument.  We didn't exactly do great when Jack was here either.  If he's an upgrade over his replacement, he's worth keeping around.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Physics,

Very sold breakdown, but I have a couple of quibbles.

1) "Bigly" is that actually a word?

2) Kane deal vs Skinner deal.  The value of the two trades is nearly identical and had they not re-signed Kane, we would have given up more to acquire Skinner then we got for Kane.

Comparing the two trades.  Skinner has been the slightly more productive offensive player then Kane, but Kane is more physical and better defensively.  Skinner is a year younger and still under contract.  However, Pu is a better prospect then O'Regan at this point.  We originally got a 2nd and 4th for Kane,  while giving up a 2nd, 3rd and 6th for Skinner. From a draft chart point of view the original picks for Kane were worthless then the picks for Skinner even taking into account the 3rd and 6th are 2020.  The Kane pick became a first when SJ re-signed Kane, but can still be moved to 2020 if SJ misses that playoffs and this change elevated the draft chart value of the Kane trade over the Skinner trade.

Imho the two trades are pretty close value wide for similarly productive scoring wingers.  Overall I'd give our trade of Kane a "C+" and the Skinner deal a B.

3) Fasching trade.  I'd give Jbot an A on this deal.  Fasching is a good kid who needed a fresh start somewhere also was never going to be an NHLer here.  Jbot basically turned him into a player who has a legit shot of developing into an NHL D and soon.  Jbot did what TM couldn't do with Vesey; and that is trade for the rights to an NCAA potential UFA and get him to sign here.

Edited August 7, 2018 by GASabresIUFAN

[IKnowPhysics]

19 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Physics,

Very sold breakdown, but I have a couple of quibbles.

1) "Bigly" is that actually a word? It is a word, but the person who brought it into the popular lexicon didn't know that.

2) Kane deal vs Skinner deal.  The value of the two trades is nearly identical and had they not re-signed Kane, we would have given up more to acquire Skinner then we got for Kane.

Comparing the two trades.  Skinner has been the slightly more productive offensive player then Kane, but Kane is more physical and better defensively.  Skinner is a year younger and still under contract.  However, Pu is a better prospect then O'Regan at this point.  We originally got a 2nd and 4th for Kane,  while giving up a 2nd, 3rd and 6th for Skinner. From a draft chart point of view the original picks for Kane were worthless then the picks for Skinner even taking into account the 3rd and 6th are 2020.  The Kane pick became a first when SJ re-signed Kane, but can still be moved to 2020 if SJ misses that playoffs and this change elevated the draft chart value of the Kane trade over the Skinner trade.

Imho the two trades are pretty close value wide for similarly productive scoring wingers.  Overall I'd give our trade of Kane a "C+" and the Skinner deal a B.  Even considering Kane's hot goal production, I think Skinner is the better player and has more upside in BUF than CAR.  But what you're asking is: why does Botterill get a potential F for Kane and an A+ for Skinner for nearly identical but reversed trades?  You could claim that's what the market is, an both trades were fair, but I disagree with that: the assets spent to acquire those two proven top-line goal scorers was too low.  Botterill held out for more return all year, but had to take the best available weak deal for Kane: a very cheap rental price before re-signing.  Kane re-signing, yielding the 1st, saves that deal for BUF.  Carolina arguably sold Skinner too early/for too little, perhaps because of the NTC or because of salary.  And that's a good deal before you consider that Skinner could re-sign here.

3) Fasching trade.  I'd give Jbot an A on this deal.  Fasching is a good kid who needed a fresh start somewhere also was never going to be an NHLer here.  Jbot basically turned him into a player who has a legit shot of developing into an NHL D and soon.  Jbot did what TM couldn't do with Vesey; and that is trade for the rights to an NCAA potential UFA and get him to sign here.  I know Fasching's time was up, and I like the idea of aggressively pursuing NCAA UFAs, and I know we need LHD depth.  But I think Hickey, who once had a ceiling as a serviceable NHL Dman, is going to contribute more to Rochester than Buffalo.  At best, he's a project.  At worst, he's everything Fasching is to Buffalo now.

 

[Scottysabres]

Speed up front with stable puck movement from the back. That is what I expected from Bots given his statements since taking over to date.

We'll see how the Skinner deal pans out on speed, but the D is still a bit of a question mark on existing top 4. 

[In The Buff]

1 hour ago, Weave said:

I hate this argument.  We didn't exactly do great when Jack was here either.  If he's an upgrade over his replacement, he's worth keeping around.

True enough but we didn't get rid of Jack, we got rid of ROR. I find it kind of frustrating hearing the same stuff over & over again about that ROR trade on how much we're gonna miss him. Thats why i said that. I think people miss the bigger picture. 1 player doesn't make a team. A team makes a team & we desperately needed to improve our depth overall, increase our even strength scoring & change the culture. Who on our team at that point could we have dealt to make that happen? ROR was the guy. Now some people will say well if we would've gotten Robert Thomas or kostin they wouldve evaulated it differently. Yeah & i wouldve liked if we couldve gotten Connor McDavid. Sometimes a GM has to take what he can get if you wanna get something done. But with a lack of great options ROR was the piece we moved. And who knows, maybe our GM knows more than we do & sees Thompson as a good fit for what they want to do.

Yes ROR on a good team can be an excellent addition. But him on a bad team as we saw last year, he wasnt gonna make or break us whether he was here or not. I think we improved overall with the trade, even if we didn't receive 1 player that was equal to him. We were that bad of a team last year with players who didn't belong.

[Radar]

Whaley could see talent. Murray could evaluate talent. Neither could assemble a team. Hopefully Beane and Botterill can see the big picture not only individual talent. Great scouts may not be great general managers. Great general managers know what their team needs to fit all the pieces together.

[jsb]

I'm a big fan of the Skinner trade but I'll reserve a grade on it until he re-signs with the team. Different player than Kane but a better team mate and scorer. I always liked Kane's energy but he wasn't the sharpest blade in the tool shed either. As for Skinner signing a new contract, I do believe unless something catastrophic happens, the 2 sides will come to some agreement. 

The ROR trade I believe is going to be the surprise big winner for the team. We gave up a 2nd line Center that for whatever his skill level was never elevated the team to greater heights. In return we received an entire NHL level 3rd line in Berg-Sobo and Thompson. I truly think Casey made ROR expendable and the trio returned everyone will be happy with when we see them play. Plus we received another 1st round pick. This trade will pay immediate dividends and has the potential to being a long term gain to. I don't think we'll miss ROR for long.

[...]

IKP, that was a very nice summary of all GMJB has done.  Your grades are fair enough, especially for now, but I would review them after the season is over.  I think the "culture change deals" could potentially be up or down-graded depending on how the season goes.  If, for example, we can deduce that an improvement in the team's overall game is a result of changes off-ice, then I think at least the Kane and ROR grades should be upgraded.

The reasons being:

• GMJB was able to properly define what "culture change" means/meant for the Sabres 
• GMJB had recognized a culture change was needed and acted on that recognition
• GMJB had identified the correct parts to change that would:

1. Effectively change the culture (whether for better or worse)
2. Result in a culture change that actually benefited the team (the "for better" of the above)

 

Edited August 7, 2018 by ...

[GASabresIUFAN]

Physics,

The long-term key to these deals will be whether Skinner performs well for us, whether we find a player with the 1st from the Kane deal and how Pu does.  I suspect will become a top 6 forward for them in the coming years .

 

Edited August 7, 2018 by GASabresIUFAN

[pi2000]

7 hours ago, Radar said:

Whaley could see talent. Murray could evaluate talent. Neither could assemble a team. Hopefully Beane and Botterill can see the big picture not only individual talent. Great scouts may not be great general managers. Great general managers know what their team needs to fit all the pieces together.

very well stated