Jbot Do Something Already - 4 Saving the Playoffs Edition

[jame]

10 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

They won a cup in 2009 I think because they drafted well. They then won cups in 2016/17 I think because they drafted well. 

Your bolded is just flat out wrong. Guentzel, Matta, Murray were all draft picks and helped them win cups. So what if they weren't 1st or 2nd round guys? It shows the importance of drafting well regardless. There is a list of other players they drafted and traded who helped them add pieces to win cups. It all starts with drafting. All of it. 

We are talking about building through the draft within the context of trading top assets (1st round picks, 1st round prospects).

Guentzel and Murray are lottery tickets, not "building through the draft". You would NOT agree if I said, "hey, we can trade our first rounders and still build through the draft... look at Pittsburgh, they built through the draft with Guentzel, Murray, and Rust"

Matta is god awful at hockey

And you're also dead wrong about 2009.... look at all the talent they traded for, signed, and rented to support Crosby/Malkin. They didn't draft Bill Guerin, Sergei Gonchar, Kunitz, Dupuis, Fedotenko, Satan, Eaton, etc and that's just the 2009 cup team.

From the minute Pittsburgh had it's young core in place (Crosby, Malkin, Letang, Orpik, Staal)... they've been aggressively building through trade and free agency. They haven't "built through the draft" since 2006.

Edited January 25, 2019 by jame

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, jame said:

We are talking about building through the draft within the context of trading top assets (1st round picks, 1st round prospects).

Guentzel and Murray are lottery tickets, not "building through the draft". You would NOT agree if I said, "hey, we can trade our first rounders and still build through the draft... look at Pittsburgh, they built through the draft with Guentzel, Murray, and Rust"

Matta is god awful at hockey

And you're also dead wrong about 2009.... look at all the talent they traded for, signed, and rented to support Crosby/Malkin. They didn't draft Bill Guerin, Sergei Gonchar, Kunitz, Fedotenko, Satan, Eaton, etc and that's just the 2009 cup team.

From the minute Pittsburgh had it's young core in place (Crosby, Malkin, Letang, Orpik, Staal)... they've been aggressively building through trade and free agency. They haven't "built through the draft" since 2006.

I don't agree. I have explained why I don't agree. Pittsburgh drafts better than Buffalo which is why they have been able to make some of the trades you are advocating for. It is as simple as that. They didn't win anything for years because they didn't have the players they needed and traded away picks. They then developed a bunch of internal talent and bam, won again. 

 

[LGR4GM]

Buffalo made 77 picks between 2006 and 2015. Of those 77 picks, 20 of them have hit the 100 games mark. That is a rate of 26%. 

15 of those 20 players are 1st or 2nd round picks. Buffalo doesn't have the luxury of trading away high picks because they haven't proven they can draft well enough to recover from it. Of the 15, 11 are first round picks. 

If we drafted at the Penguins level we would have 25 players instead of 20 that hit during that same time period. Imagine having 5 more players on this team. Over time this stuff matters. 

Edited January 25, 2019 by LGR4GM

[jame]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't agree. I have explained why I don't agree. Pittsburgh drafts better than Buffalo which is why they have been able to make some of the trades you are advocating for. It is as simple as that. They didn't win anything for years because they didn't have the players they needed and traded away picks. They then developed a bunch of internal talent and bam, won again. 

 

Yea drafting Guentzel is why they won, not They acquisition of Dumoulin, Kessel, Hornqvist, Bonino, etc

(Insert the worlds biggest eye roll)

[LGR4GM]

2 minutes ago, jame said:

Yea drafting Guentzel is why they won, not They acquisition of Dumoulin, Kessel, Hornqvist, Bonino, etc

(Insert the worlds biggest eye roll)

You certainly like bastardizing people's words. I explained why and how they won. Funny you mention Kessel because of a big component of that trade (Kapanen) was a 1st round draft pick. It all starts with the draft and Buffalo does not have the luxury to trade away picks when they are rebuilding a broken pipeline. 

Edited January 25, 2019 by LGR4GM

[...]

4 hours ago, Hoss said:

That’s essentially the same roster, so we’re banking on a lot of guys making huge jumps in the next few years and nobody flaming out. That doesn’t give me the warm and fuzzies.

Less bleak in terms of contracts/money/cap.  Performance is another issue.  

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

And the best and most effective way to get talent is finding it in the draft. That is how you navigate the Salary Cap Era. 

LA is screwed for a long time. They have 3 forwards under 25, their youngest defender is 26, and their best and only really good prospect is Rasmus Kupari. I wouldn't want to be LA right now. 

The bolded is true to a point, but there is a caveat.  You need a strong scouting department and competent front office to make the draft be the primary source of getting talent be effective.  If they aren't, the draft doesn't really help enough.

The Eulers have been drafting highly and poorly for well over a decade now.  The Otters were very prolific in their drafts for at least 15 years, though not sure that they've still be good lately.  (Haven't really looked at what they've done recently.)

And back when the Aisles took Dal Colle (who some people here were drooling over) the consolation we here on the board had was that at least they still looked like a trainwreck heading into the '14-'15 season and the Sabres were thought to have a great chance at getting a 2nd lottery ball for '15 McEichelfest.  Except ~the day before the season started they turned 2 2nd round picks into Leddy and Boychuk and ended up in the playoffs.

And back pre-salary cap, Regier was awful at 1st round picks generally but better than most with later round picks.  The Sabres also ended up with a lot of useful players via trade as well.  After the salary cap, the Sabres went video scounting and their drafting definitely was worse in the later rounds.  There's reason for optimism that Botterill and his crew will be good at the draft, but until there's a longer track record of success a lot of that optimism is merely hopeful.

There's lots of ways to get talent.  Need to have all the tools in the toolkit (draft, trade, FA, & internal development) to put together a winning team.  Botterill seems to be trying to use them all, which is good.  (Just wish he'd be a smidge less patient on getting that 2C.)

[jame]

30 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You certainly like bastardizing people's words. I explained why and how they won. Funny you mention Kessel because of a big component of that trade (Kapanen) was a 1st round draft pick. It all starts with the draft and Buffalo does not have the luxury to trade away picks when they are rebuilding a broken pipeline. 

You did nothing of the sort.

 

[LGR4GM]

14 minutes ago, jame said:

You did nothing of the sort.

[jame]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

The Crosby, Malkin, Letang, Fleury core didn't win a Stanley Cup for 6 years... because they didn't draft well... yea, that's some opinion... that's for sure. Dan Bylsma is with you on this one.

Edited January 25, 2019 by jame

[Samson's Flow]

28 minutes ago, Taro T said:

The bolded is true to a point, but there is a caveat.  You need a strong scouting department and competent front office to make the draft be the primary source of getting talent be effective.  If they aren't, the draft doesn't really help enough.

The Eulers have been drafting highly and poorly for well over a decade now.  The Otters were very prolific in their drafts for at least 15 years, though not sure that they've still be good lately.  (Haven't really looked at what they've done recently.)

And back when the Aisles took Dal Colle (who some people here were drooling over) the consolation we here on the board had was that at least they still looked like a trainwreck heading into the '14-'15 season and the Sabres were thought to have a great chance at getting a 2nd lottery ball for '15 McEichelfest.  Except ~the day before the season started they turned 2 2nd round picks into Leddy and Boychuk and ended up in the playoffs.

And back pre-salary cap, Regier was awful at 1st round picks generally but better than most with later round picks.  The Sabres also ended up with a lot of useful players via trade as well.  After the salary cap, the Sabres went video scounting and their drafting definitely was worse in the later rounds.  There's reason for optimism that Botterill and his crew will be good at the draft, but until there's a longer track record of success a lot of that optimism is merely hopeful.

There's lots of ways to get talent.  Need to have all the tools in the toolkit (draft, trade, FA, & internal development) to put together a winning team.  Botterill seems to be trying to use them all, which is good.  (Just wish he'd be a smidge less patient on getting that 2C.)

This is true universally.

I would say the best way to have consistent success is to have as many shots at drafting players as possible (i.e. maximizing the number of picks you have) so that you have both high end talent (rd. 1 picks) and as many lottery tickets (rd. 2+ picks) as possible. But to your point, getting these picks is only half the battle - the team needs to have enough scouting acumen to be able to hit on a higher-than-league-average percentage.

Doing those two things in tandem for multiple years eventually leads to a critical mass of quality players where you have more good players than NHL roster spots. Its the contrast of teams like Tampa Bay or old Detroit (who bring up players who can contribute immediately/are able to get value from aging players as a result) compared to Edmonton or Buffalo who in years past would gift high picks NHL roster spots they weren't ready for, or trade multiple picks for guys like Hudson Fasching.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

9 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:

This is true universally.

I would say the best way to have consistent success is to have as many shots at drafting players as possible (i.e. maximizing the number of picks you have) so that you have both high end talent (rd. 1 picks) and as many lottery tickets (rd. 2+ picks) as possible. But to your point, getting these picks is only half the battle - the team needs to have enough scouting acumen to be able to hit on a higher-than-league-average percentage.

Doing those two things in tandem for multiple years eventually leads to a critical mass of quality players where you have more good players than NHL roster spots. Its the contrast of teams like Tampa Bay or old Detroit (who bring up players who can contribute immediately/are able to get value from aging players as a result) compared to Edmonton or Buffalo who in years past would gift high picks NHL roster spots they weren't ready for, or trade multiple picks for guys like Hudson Fasching.

Hey, I have been scouting the Mooseheads for years and actively trying to convince the Sabres to draft at least one Moosehead every year since the 2013 draft.

I have a very strong feeling that this is the draft.

 

 

 

LAVOIE!!

?

Edited January 25, 2019 by New Scotland (NS)
another letter issue ...

[Samson's Flow]

4 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:

This is true universally.

I would say the best way to have consistent success is to have as many shots at drafting players as possible (i.e. maximizing the number of picks you have) so that you have both high end talent (rd. 1 picks) and as many lottery tickets (rd. 2+ picks) as possible. But to your point, getting these picks is only half the battle - the team needs to have enough scouting acumen to be able to hit on a higher-than-league-average percentage.

Doing those two things in tandem for multiple years eventually leads to a critical mass of quality players where you have more good players than NHL roster spots. Its the contrast of teams like Tampa Bay or old Detroit (who bring up players who can contribute immediately/are able to get value from aging players as a result) compared to Edmonton or Buffalo who in years past would gift high picks NHL roster spots they weren't ready for, or trade multiple picks for guys like Hudson Fasching.

or the TL:DR version

"Maximize the assets available to improve your team, and don't waste those assets once you get them"

1 minute ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Hey, I have been scouting the Mooseheads for years and actively trying to convince the Sabres to draft at least one Moosehead every year since the 2013 draft.

I have a very strong feeling that this is the draft.

 

 

 

LAVOIE!!

?

I find it hilarious that your focus on Moosehead players probably would have helped the team if they listened to you - some of them have turned out to be pretty good NHL players :)

[Sabres Fan in NS]

3 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:

or the TL:DR version

"Maximize the assets available to improve your team, and don't waste those assets once you get them"

I find it hilarious that your focus on Moosehead players probably would have helped the team if they listened to you - some of them have turned out to be pretty good NHL players ?

I like your longer version just fine.  It is nowhere near the too long point.

Some?????? (insert winkie thingie here)

Let's see ... Fucale ... oooppppssss

MacKinnon, Drouin (I came up with Wookieesq skeem to draft all three), Ehlers, Meier, Hischier ... 

[Samson's Flow]

11 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

I like your longer version just fine.  It is nowhere near the too long point.

Some?????? (insert winkie thingie here)

Let's see ... Fucale ... oooppppssss

MacKinnon, Drouin (I came up with Wookieesq skeem to draft all three), Ehlers, Meier, Hischier ... 

The bolded were the ones I was thinking of.

The some was in reference to your pining for Fucale!!! who turned out to not be very useful in the NHL.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

3 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:

The bolded were the ones I was thinking of.

The some was in reference to your pining for Fucale!!! who turned out to not be very useful in the NHL.

I knew where you were drifting.  Just playing.  The Sabres have been on an extended break (why is it that it seems like only they are on holiday for 10 days) and all the natives are quite restless.

I still hold out hope, as he is still very young as goalers go.  I have not really followed his development post draft.  Is he still in the Montréal org?

Edited January 25, 2019 by New Scotland (NS)
I have graduated from missing letters to missing words ...

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

1 hour ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Hey, I have been scouting the Mooseheads for years and actively trying to convince the Sabres to draft at least one Moosehead every year since the 2013 draft.

I have a very strong feeling that this is the draft.

 

 

 

LAVOIE!!

?

I like it......do it again but put some ummmmph in it.

[Weave]

1 hour ago, Samson's Flow said:

or the TL:DR version

"Maximize the assets available to improve your team, and don't waste those assets once you get them"

This really is the key.  It’s perfectly OK to trade away top picks occasionally.  Good teams manage to stay good this way every season.  The bottom line is you just can’t waste the assets.

The problem with GMTMs plan wasn’t that he traded away picks.  The problem was the players he traded them for were poor choices.

It’s the same story if he kept the picks.  If he drafted well... awesome plan.

The discussion really boils down to what is more wasteful, a 20-40% shot at a player or a known quantity with a shorter lifespan?  You can validly argue either and be correct.

 

 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

27 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

I like it......do it again but put some ummmmph in it.

Hey, hey, hey, hey ... this is what you wanted ... this is what you're going to get .......

 

 

 

 

LAVOIE!!

?

[dudacek]

The thing is, the draft - like hockey itself - has a large element of luck.

You can’t tell me that Boston are geniuses for picking Pastrnak 26, Bergeron 45 and Marchand 71.

Boston thought Yuri Alexandrov was better than Marchand and Mark Stuart was better than Bergeron. They thought Jakob Zboril and Zach Senyshyn were better than Thomas Chabot, Kyle Connor and Matt Barzal. Geniuses.

Sometimes you win 10 in a row at the last minute and other times you limit an opponent to zero real scoring chances and find yourself down 3-1 to a ***** team because of fluke bounces off the boards. 

Draft can work the same way. It’s not like we employed some great strategy or insight to get Rasmus Dahlin.

Edited January 25, 2019 by dudacek

[Samson's Flow]

13 minutes ago, dudacek said:

The thing is, the draft - like hockey itself - has a large element of luck.

You can’t tell me that Boston are geniuses for picking Pastrnak 26, Bergeron 45 and Marchand 71.

Boston thought Yuri Alexandrov was better than Marchand and Mark Stuart was better than Bergeron. They thought Jakob Zboril and Zach Senyshyn were better than Thomas Chabot, Kyle Connor and Matt Barzal. Geniuses.

Sometimes you win 10 in a row at the last minute and other times you limit an opponent to zero real scoring chances and find yourself down 3-1 to a ***** team because of fluke bounces off the boards. 

Draft can work the same way. It’s not like we employed some great strategy or insight to get Rasmus Dahlin.

Boston is a really interesting example because they have both 1) hit on late round picks that have become key contributors while also 2) wasting a whole bunch of 1st rounders with questionable reaches (3 picks in a row in 2015) and sending away Drouin for basically nothing. Some great moves and others that are real head scratchers. They could be so much better if they didn't make the mistakes mentioned.

[Broken Ankles]

12 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:

Boston is a really interesting example because they have both 1) hit on late round picks that have become key contributors while also 2) wasting a whole bunch of 1st rounders with questionable reaches (3 picks in a row in 2015) and sending away Drouin for basically nothing. Some great moves and others that are real head scratchers. They could be so much better if they didn't make the mistakes mentioned.

Debrusk will contribute.  But I agree with the larger point about 3 picks in a loaded draft and coming away with only one.

2016 first rounder was Charlie McAvoy, who looks like a home run.  And Pastrnak in 2014.   Three years of hitting allowed them to take a chance and trade 2018's 1st round - although not to any success.  

Also - Drouin was not a Bruin.  Seguin? 

[Samson's Flow]

10 minutes ago, Broken Ankles said:

Debrusk will contribute.  But I agree with the larger point about 3 picks in a loaded draft and coming away with only one.

2016 first rounder was Charlie McAvoy, who looks like a home run.  And Pastrnak in 2014.   Three years of hitting allowed them to take a chance and trade 2018's 1st round - although not to any success.  

Also - Drouin was not a Bruin.  Seguin? 

Missed it by that much. yeah Seguin.

[LGR4GM]

3 hours ago, jame said:

The Crosby, Malkin, Letang, Fleury core didn't win a Stanley Cup for 6 years... because they didn't draft well... yea, that's some opinion... that's for sure. Dan Bylsma is with you on this one.

The point is they were able to win those later cups because they drafted well enough to trade for or simply add good pieces, like the Kessel trade or Guentzel.  You always have to draft well and you being condescending about that belief, which I hold, is going to do jack s### to change my mind. 

 

As for the 6 year thing, yes. They didn't repeat as cup champions because they had all of their useful prospects in the NHL already. There was no one to replace players who left with cheap deals. It's why the LA kings suck now. We could burn all these picks and might repeat what the kings did and win a cup but we could also be like San Jose who did that a couple times and missed. It's just a different philosophy on team building that I believe in. Their 2007-2012 drafting was meh. They then start getting better, finding better impact guys, and there you go. 

The interesting thing is that I think we are about to see another Pens downturn. Crosby is getting older and they haven't drafted enough high round players to restock. When the Sabres are a cup contender, sure I will be all for trading that 1st to get the guy to put us over the top, but we are a bubble team, we just aren't there yet and continually gutting depth to try and win now isn't the answer and wasn't in 2015 when Murray did it. 

Edited January 25, 2019 by LGR4GM

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, Samson's Flow said:

Boston is a really interesting example because they have both 1) hit on late round picks that have become key contributors while also 2) wasting a whole bunch of 1st rounders with questionable reaches (3 picks in a row in 2015) and sending away Drouin for basically nothing. Some great moves and others that are real head scratchers. They could be so much better if they didn't make the mistakes mentioned.

Boston could have drafted Debrusk, Boeser, and Barzal in 2015. I understand the Debrusk and Zboril pick but Senyshyn was and is one of the worst reaches in the modern NHL.