Picks, Prospects, or Players???

[GASabresIUFAN]

18 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

No I didn't know that at all...

anyways, yes, I would predict Dahlin getting in the 70pt range by year 3 or 4. Seems about right. Of course he could also go higher, I am not sure he has a true ceiling. 

Also

Ekblad 39pts year of his draft

And he hasn’t been there since (although he may surpass it this year - 21 pts in 48 games). Myers hit 48 pts his rookie year and hasn’t been close since.

 

[LGR4GM]

12 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

And he hasn’t been there since (although he may surpass it this year - 21 pts in 48 games). Myers hit 48 pts his rookie year and hasn’t been close since.

 

True. I think Myers never was able to adapt to teams that learned to put the puck in his skates and pressure him. Myers brain never caught up. Ekblad I think can be better but hasn't. Dahlin... I am unsure what his ceiling is. The only weakness in his game is his shot. 

[Samson's Flow]

I think @GASabresIUFAN is valid in pointing out that defenseman early scoring peaks are sometimes not sustainable. Now I don't think anyone here expects that Dahlin will be a one-and-done scorer like Ekblad and Myers were, but let's also not automatically assume his point production will be a linear growth model.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

3 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:

I think @GASabresIUFAN is valid in pointing out that defenseman early scoring peaks are sometimes not sustainable. Now I don't think anyone here expects that Dahlin will be a one-and-done scorer like Ekblad and Myers were, but let's also not automatically assume his point production will be a linear growth model.

My hope is that Dahlin's growth will not be in scoring, but as he matures and learns the game he will dominate the league in the way that he controls the game.  Like in more of a Potvin, Pronger and Chara way, but much better scorer than any of them.

[Taro T]

40 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

And he hasn’t been there since (although he may surpass it this year - 21 pts in 48 games). Myers hit 48 pts his rookie year and hasn’t been close since.

 

Pretty sure a big issue for scoring sustainability for Ekblad was dealing with concussions.  Those seem to be past him.  Would have expected him to have continued to be up there or increasing his scoring had he been healthy.

Myers didn't have the same pedigree that Aaron nor Dahlin came in with.  He also never seemed to click with anyone like he did Tallinder that rookie year.

[Carmel Corn]

19 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

My hope is that Dahlin's growth will not be in scoring, but as he matures and learns the game he will dominate the league in the way that he controls the game.  Like in more of a Potvin, Pronger and Chara way, but much better scorer than any of them.

Great names above.  It might be too early to judge, but I think Dahlin could end up being the best puck carrier of any of them.  Maybe Paul Coffey-ish?

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Just now, Carmel Corn said:

Great names above.  It might be too early to judge, but I think Dahlin could end up being the best puck carrier of any of them.  Maybe Paul Coffey-ish?

Coffey was a great puck mover and scorer.  One of the best ever.  Only one better, IMO, was Orr.

I would like a good mix of Coffey in there, as well.  I don't think Paul controlled the game in the same way as Potvin, or Pronger.  I would like to see Dahlin able to do that.  I really think that he will.

 

[Carmel Corn]

8 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Coffey was a great puck mover and scorer.  One of the best ever.  Only one better, IMO, was Orr.

I would like a good mix of Coffey in there, as well.  I don't think Paul controlled the game in the same way as Potvin, or Pronger.  I would like to see Dahlin able to do that.  I really think that he will.

 

I can definitely see Dahlin > Coffey down the road.  IMHO Dahlin has just a little more of a tendency to play a physical checking game (vs. Coffey).  He may not be able to control the game deep in the D-zone like a Chara or Pronger, but some opposing forwards will know he is out there and keep their heads-up. 

That being said, the stats may not be in Dahlin's favor as Coffey had maybe one of the most lethal set of offensive forwards in history to help his assist numbers.

Edited January 25, 2019 by Carmel Corn

[French Collection]

50 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

My hope is that Dahlin's growth will not be in scoring, but as he matures and learns the game he will dominate the league in the way that he controls the game.  Like in more of a Potvin, Pronger and Chara way, but much better scorer than any of them.

Potvin would be fine.

Point a game guy for his career, 3 seasons over 90 points including one of 101.

[French Collection]

19 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:

I can definitely see Dahlin > Coffey down the road.  IMHO Dahlin has just a little more of a tendency to play a physical checking game (vs. Coffey).  He may not be able to control the game deep in the D-zone like a Chara or Pronger, but some opposing forwards will know he is out there and keep their heads-up. 

That being said, the stats may not be in Dahlin's favor as Coffey had maybe one of the most lethal set of offensive forwards in history to help his assist numbers.

Coffey's game was pure speed on the rush, blowing around guys. The PP was deadly and you could get many points by being out there a few times per game.

Rasmus is more of a slippery stickhandler in my opinion. If hides numbers are between Lidstrom and Bourque that would be great.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

10 minutes ago, French Collection said:

Potvin would be fine.

Point a game guy for his career, 3 seasons over 90 points including one of 101.

Man, I didn't remember Potvin being such a good scorer.

[PerreaultForever]

7 hours ago, dudacek said:

Sam is an RFA at the end of his bridge. He will not be walking.

And even if he is traded it won’t be for cap reasons.

 

Lehner was an RFA too. 

I could be wrong, but JBot just strikes me as a guy who will only want his own players and I'm not sure he thinks Sam is a "fit" for what he wants. Hence the bridge to buy time, but in the long run he will try to move him and if he can't he will let him go and pay the money Sam will want to someone else who he thinks "fits". 

As for the rest of the cap issue I think you need to take a longer view and you have to anticipate two other things. 1) there will be other draft picks who will be good and will need money later and 2) he will sign free agents that are not on the roster now, so we can't be privy to that plan and how much future money he is planning to put aside for that.

[dudacek]

Look, I get you don’t think much of Sam, and there is always the possibility of a player and a GM disagreeing on that player’s worth to his team. Players can always get traded for hockey reasons too. But Sam Reinhart is not Robin Lehner.

Would you - would anyone - be OK with Botterill not making a 3.6 million qualifying offer to a 25-year-old soon-to-be 70-point scorer? Do you not think there is a single GM out of 31 who wouldn’t offer at least a draft pick for such a player?

Thats gross negligence and incompetence.

 

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

Lehner was an RFA too. 

I could be wrong, but JBot just strikes me as a guy who will only want his own players and I'm not sure he thinks Sam is a "fit" for what he wants. Hence the bridge to buy time, but in the long run he will try to move him and if he can't he will let him go and pay the money Sam will want to someone else who he thinks "fits". 

 

Edited January 25, 2019 by dudacek

[PerreaultForever]

46 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Look, I get you don’t think much of Sam, and there is always the possibility of a player and a GM disagreeing on that player’s worth to his team. Players can always get traded for hockey reasons too. But Sam Reinhart is not Robin Lehner.

Would you - would anyone - be OK with Botterill not making a 3.6 million qualifying offer to a 25-year-old soon-to-be 70-point scorer? Do you not think there is a single GM out of 31 who wouldn’t offer at least a draft pick for such a player?

Thats gross negligence and incompetence.

 

 

No, Sam is not Robin Lehner, just saying letting an RFA walk is not unheard of and that is just a recent example here.

Ok with a 3.6 million qualifying offer sure, but I doubt that's money he'd settle for. I'm talking about if his agent says we did the bridge and we proved our worth and we want a long term deal for bigger money, which is what I'd expect him to do. So in that scenario I can easily see JBot signing some other FA that he considers a better fit. 

Scenario one would be signing Skinner and then adding a FA this year that ends up clicking with that line. Now Sam is bumped to Casey's wing or the third line, his numbers drop dramatically and suddenly everyone is questioning his worth. Could easily happen.  

[jame]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

Lehner was an RFA too. 

I could be wrong, but JBot just strikes me as a guy who will only want his own players and I'm not sure he thinks Sam is a "fit" for what he wants. Hence the bridge to buy time, but in the long run he will try to move him and if he can't he will let him go and pay the money Sam will want to someone else who he thinks "fits". 

As for the rest of the cap issue I think you need to take a longer view and you have to anticipate two other things. 1) there will be other draft picks who will be good and will need money later and 2) he will sign free agents that are not on the roster now, so we can't be privy to that plan and how much future money he is planning to put aside for that.

what? You think there is a plausible scenario where Botts let’s Reinhart walk for free because he didn’t draft him????

 

[jame]

26 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

No, Sam is not Robin Lehner, just saying letting an RFA walk is not unheard of and that is just a recent example here.

Ok with a 3.6 million qualifying offer sure, but I doubt that's money he'd settle for. I'm talking about if his agent says we did the bridge and we proved our worth and we want a long term deal for bigger money, which is what I'd expect him to do. So in that scenario I can easily see JBot signing some other FA that he considers a better fit. 

Scenario one would be signing Skinner and then adding a FA this year that ends up clicking with that line. Now Sam is bumped to Casey's wing or the third line, his numbers drop dramatically and suddenly everyone is questioning his worth. Could easily happen.  

A completely incomparable scenario (Lehner) shouldn’t be an example for anything regarding Reinhart....

[PerreaultForever]

6 hours ago, jame said:

what? You think there is a plausible scenario where Botts let’s Reinhart walk for free because he didn’t draft him????

 

Yup, if he can't trade him and he signs a replacement FA. Easy.

6 hours ago, jame said:

A completely incomparable scenario (Lehner) shouldn’t be an example for anything regarding Reinhart....

an RFA is an RFA. 

and besides that Jame, 

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

No Reinhart is not leaving here for free.  He is an RFA after next year and he'll be qualified and then signed or qualified and then traded.  That's it.  He is a former 2nd overall pick who, like it or not, has improved every year he has been in the NHL. 

If Jbot doesn't get another center at the deadline, I'm am beyond willing to try Samson back in the middle again.  What do we are have to lose?  

Assuming Jbot throws in the towel on this season and does nothing to improve the forwards on this team by the deadline, I'd do the following.  We are stuck with Pommers until the end of the year. KO longer.  We have 6 legit forwards in Sheary, Skinner, Tage, Mitts, Jack and Samson who should be playing in our top 9.  We have 2 capable energy guys in Larsson and Girgensons.  Right now I'd dump, waive, or lend Sobotka to the KHL.  I'd waive Elie.  I'd place either Pommers or KO on the bench.  I'd then bring up (or keep here) 3 of Smith, Olofsson, Nylander or O'Regan.  

Skinner Jack Olofsson

Sheary Reinhart Thompson

Smith Mitts Nylander

Girgensons Larsson KO

I then give them a piece of advice.  Go have fun.  

    

Edited January 26, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN

[Sabres Fan in NS]

9 hours ago, jame said:

what? You think there is a plausible scenario where Botts let’s Reinhart walk for free because he didn’t draft him????

 

He didn't draft Eich either.

[jame]

5 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Yup, if he can't trade him and he signs a replacement FA. Easy.

an RFA is an RFA. 

and besides that Jame, 

 

Yea, walking away from Tim Kennedy’s RFA arbitration award would totally be the same as letting a 70 point 25 year old walk for free.... ?

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

2 hours ago, jame said:

Yea, walking away from Tim Kennedy’s RFA arbitration award would totally be the same as letting a 70 point 25 year old walk for free.... ?

And comparing Darcy and JBots would be totally the same too.

[StuckinFL]

6 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

No Reinhart is not leaving here for free.  He is an RFA after next year and he'll be qualified and then signed or qualified and then traded.  That's it.  He is a former 2nd overall pick who, like it or not, has improved every year he has been in the NHL. 

If Jbot doesn't get another center at the deadline, I'm am beyond willing to try Samson back in the middle again.  What do we are have to lose?  

Assuming Jbot throws in the towel on this season and does nothing to improve the forwards on this team by the deadline, I'd do the following.  We are stuck with Pommers until the end of the year. KO longer.  We have 6 legit forwards in Sheary, Skinner, Tage, Mitts, Jack and Samson who should be playing in our top 9.  We have 2 capable energy guys in Larsson and Girgensons.  Right now I'd dump, waive, or lend Sobotka to the KHL.  I'd waive Elie.  I'd place either Pommers or KO on the bench.  I'd then bring up (or keep here) 3 of Smith, Olofsson, Nylander or O'Regan.  

Skinner Jack Olofsson

Sheary Reinhart Thompson

Smith Mitts Nylander

Girgensons Larsson KO

I then give them a piece of advice.  Go have fun.  

    

Problem being that Sam got HORRIBLY lost as a center last time we tried and his confidence plummeted and took half a season to get his groove back. Doesn't matter what he played prior, he can't translate his game to the center position at the NHL level. No amount of hopes and dreams can change that. Too tight of a game and too much responsibility. If he's not in your top 6 on wing, trade him for someone who fits your vision better. 

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

2 hours ago, StuckinFL said:

Problem being that Sam got HORRIBLY lost as a center last time we tried and his confidence plummeted and took half a season to get his groove back. Doesn't matter what he played prior, he can't translate his game to the center position at the NHL level. No amount of hopes and dreams can change that. Too tight of a game and too much responsibility. If he's not in your top 6 on wing, trade him for someone who fits your vision better. 

If you're trading a 70pt winger because he doesn't fit your vision, then you either need binoculars or you better be trading for someone on the level of Couturier or better for a 2C.  This is where I'd be willing to give up a 1st ++ to get a player like Couturier in order to keep Reino. In fact, I think the two could work well together and then find a winger for L1.

Edited January 26, 2019 by MakeSabresGrr8Again
for NS

[Sabres Fan in NS]

25 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

If you're trading a 70pt winger because he doesn't fit your vision, then you either need glasses to see better or you better be trading for someone on the level of Couturier or better for a 2C.  This is where I'd be willing to give up a 1st ++ to get a player like Couturier in order to keep Reino. In fact, I think the two could work well together and then find a winger for L1.

This is a very good post, except for the bolded, but I think it is meant to be tongue in cheekish.  Maybe it's just sensitive old me.

Anyway, I am on record as not wanting to trade any of our first round picks, but if Couturier was coming this way then I would do it.  There are very few other players around that I would trade a 1st for.

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

1 hour ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

This is a very good post, except for the bolded, but I think it is meant to be tongue in cheekish.  Maybe it's just sensitive old me.

Anyway, I am on record as not wanting to trade any of our first round picks, but if Couturier was coming this way then I would do it.  There are very few other players around that I would trade a 1st for.

just a reference to the "vision" thing....sarcasm? cliche? nothing meant  by it. Sorry if you took any offense to it.

I agree that there aren't many players I would use a 1st on.

Hopefully , I fixed it for you.

Edited January 26, 2019 by MakeSabresGrr8Again
fixed for NS