Ristolainen, time to trade him away

[matter2003]

15 hours ago, gilbert11 said:

At least the Sabres took the right Sam in the 2014 draft.  Sam Bennett has been a bust.

Maybe...or maybe Calgary has so many good players in front of him he can't get enough ice time unlike here?

[Eleven]

1 minute ago, matter2003 said:

Maybe...or maybe Calgary has so many good players in front of him he can't get enough ice time unlike here?

No; Reinhart was the right one.

[dudacek]

8 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said:

During play he hits but after the whistle he shuts it off. There have been a couple times in his short career I thought he’d drop the gloves but it is what is. I think his ceiling in terms of aggressiveness is Tyler Myers. 

I’m sure a trade would get us a second pair defenseman. I have a feeling that once moved he would start to shine and we’d have threads dedicated to life without Risto. Followed by threads crying about threads about Risto. 

The bold is what I want in a player.

Risto has his flaws but, he's a big, right-handed defenceman who plays both special teams, is reasonably good skater who can carry the puck and he likes to play physical. They don't grow on trees.

What always surprises me is the lack of respect his offensive game gets. He is among the top 20 highest-scoring defencemen in hockey this year and among the top 25 over the past four years and he has a knack for scoring big goals.

Edited February 21, 2019 by dudacek

[Carmel Corn]

2 hours ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

We draft worse than who? Your point was we draft a player and the next 15-20 players drafted are better than the one we drafted. And we were discussing 1st and 2nd rd picks.

My question was to show me a draft where every player is better than ours 15-20 spots after our pick. What did you do? You listed all our 3rd-7th rd picks and not even a comparison to any other team in the league. How is that not either deflecting or at least ignoring the context of the question?

I was actually hoping you could back up your statement and prove me wrong. I guess we'll just have to wait a couple more years to find out if we hit on the draft. The last couple drafts are looking like they could be game changers.

I really don't get your point.  The point I am trying to make is fairly simple....our draft history has not produced an abundance of successful/impactful players (whatever rounds).  If you want to defend the Sabres 'stellar' draft effectiveness by saying we are no worse than other teams, then be my guest and good luck with that!  IMHO we are living with the result of being too cheap with our scouting resources and relying too much on video, etc.

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

11 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:

I really don't get your point.  The point I am trying to make is fairly simple....our draft history has not produced an abundance of successful/impactful players (whatever rounds).  If you want to defend the Sabres 'stellar' draft effectiveness by saying we are no worse than other teams, then be my guest and good luck with that!  IMHO we are living with the result of being too cheap with our scouting resources and relying too much on video, etc.

I wasn't the one questioning the draft. I was the one questioning your claim that 15-20 players drafted after ours are always seemingly better. Asking you too back up your claim was much more "simple" to understand than your unsubstantiated claim.

Whatever!! forget it. I was hoping you would prove me wrong and we could solve a team issue, maybe.

[woods-racer]

14 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:

I really don't get your point.  The point I am trying to make is fairly simple....our draft history has not produced an abundance of successful/impactful players (whatever rounds).  If you want to defend the Sabres 'stellar' draft effectiveness by saying we are no worse than other teams, then be my guest and good luck with that!  IMHO we are living with the result of being too cheap with our scouting resources and relying too much on video, etc.

I believe this to be true.

BUT.

I believe that era has come to an end and we are starting to see (Rochester) the fruits of better drafting. The likes of which we haven't seen since the early years of Darcy.

[Carmel Corn]

2 hours ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

I wasn't the one questioning the draft. I was the one questioning your claim that 15-20 players drafted after ours are always seemingly better. Asking you too back up your claim was much more "simple" to understand than your unsubstantiated claim.

Whatever!! forget it. I was hoping you would prove me wrong and we could solve a team issue, maybe.

That wasn't me claiming that :)

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

15 minutes ago, Carmel Corn said:

That wasn't me claiming that ?

looking back further and found you are correct. You responded to a post meant for someone else and I didn't catch that. I sincerely apologize.

Our drafting has not been the greatest and is getting better, so it seems. The issue I have with some people is that they look at the now. For example....right now I could say that Grigorenko was pretty much a bust and we should've drafted Mike Matheson. At the time of that draft most were excited that he fell to us at #12 because he was likely at least a top3 pick and was touted as the #1 over Yakapov for most of the year. You get excited when a player falls like that and you get him. Problem is that somehow nobody remembers how the draft went down and how excited they were for their team 5yrs later when they're claiming they knew it all along, or that we always seem to pick the worst players, and other teams get guys after us that are always better.

Excuse my rant as it was not meant for your ears but I hope you understand. Hope we're all good and again I apologize and will learn to watch where the response to my post is coming from.  

[LGR4GM]

3 hours ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

I wasn't the one questioning the draft. I was the one questioning your claim that 15-20 players drafted after ours are always seemingly better. Asking you too back up your claim was much more "simple" to understand than your unsubstantiated claim.

Whatever!! forget it. I was hoping you would prove me wrong and we could solve a team issue, maybe.

And as I told you, it's a bs argument. There aren't 15 players in a row in any draft that hit

Edited February 22, 2019 by LGR4GM

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

14 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

And as I told you, it's a bs argument. There aren't 15 players in a row in any draft that hit

There are a few I looked at that would make a good argument. And like I said you didn't understand the argument in the first place which is proven by your response about Dahlin.

You can "tell" me what you want but you can't (and won't)  make me believe you know what you're talking about when you obviously don't. 

[Carmel Corn]

1 hour ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

looking back further and found you are correct. You responded to a post meant for someone else and I didn't catch that. I sincerely apologize.

Our drafting has not been the greatest and is getting better, so it seems. The issue I have with some people is that they look at the now. For example....right now I could say that Grigorenko was pretty much a bust and we should've drafted Mike Matheson. At the time of that draft most were excited that he fell to us at #12 because he was likely at least a top3 pick and was touted as the #1 over Yakapov for most of the year. You get excited when a player falls like that and you get him. Problem is that somehow nobody remembers how the draft went down and how excited they were for their team 5yrs later when they're claiming they knew it all along, or that we always seem to pick the worst players, and other teams get guys after us that are always better.

Excuse my rant as it was not meant for your ears but I hope you understand. Hope we're all good and again I apologize and will learn to watch where the response to my post is coming from.  

Thanks and I sincerely appreciate your checking back.  We are definitely good to go....ready for the next topic :)

I remember watching the 2012 draft...In all fairness to management, the draft "experts" all seemed to think Grigorenko was a slam dunk....big, skilled and a perfect fit for a team like Buffalo needing centers at the time.  People would have been shocked if we did not take him.  Soon afterwards, along came Girgensons.  My recollection there was that those same experts thought of Zemgus as a real 'warrior' who would play hurt and still give max effort.  Every year optimism is high after the draft that we have some real gems that will blossom into future studs.  Unfortunately, that optimism fades and here we are again talking about players we should have taken....ah yes, hindsight is 20-20 vision!

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

1 minute ago, Carmel Corn said:

Thanks and I sincerely appreciate your checking back.  We are definitely good to go....ready for the next topic ?

I remember watching the 2012 draft...In all fairness to management, the draft "experts" all seemed to think Grigorenko was a slam dunk....big, skilled and a perfect fit for a team like Buffalo needing centers at the time.  People would have been shocked if we did not take him.  Soon afterwards, along came Girgensons.  My recollection there was that those same experts thought of Zemgus as a real 'warrior' who would play hurt and still give max effort.  Every year optimism is high after the draft that we have some real gems that will blossom into future studs.  Unfortunately, that optimism fades and here we are again talking about players we should have taken....ah yes, hindsight is 20-20 vision!

Exactly.

Glad to see we're on the same page. The only knock on Grigs was consistant effort which most thought could be coached out of him (hence his being included in the trade).

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

There are a few I looked at that would make a good argument. And like I said you didn't understand the argument in the first place which is proven by your response about Dahlin.

You can "tell" me what you want but you can't (and won't)  make me believe you know what you're talking about when you obviously don't. 

Ok,  what's your point then. Without me looking at 15 players or whatever, what's your big ah ha! point?

[PerreaultForever]

Anyone who watched the Tampa game still want to trade him? Not me. We could use a clone. 

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Ok,  what's your point then. Without me looking at 15 players or whatever, what's your big ah ha! point?

The point is .....there wasn't any real point. There was a question however to a posted comment that was discerning IMO. My question was just asking for proof of a claim. The intention was in hope that the poster either did some research before the claim, or would do the research and either prove it correct or enlighten them to whatever they find is fact.

If there were a so called point, you hopefully wouldn't use a very good player like Dahlin to support your claim that the next 15-20 picks are better than him. But, if you look at 2012 draft when we took Grigorenko, you could almost make a good argument to support your cause. It was the first draft I actually looked at so I'm not cherry picking and honestly don't know if there are others. Remember that this is all hindsight. This fits the bill years later but at the time it was expected to be a great pick at #12 and I don't remember too many people arguing that we should've drafted player XYZ instead at that time.

The comment at the time I responded to it, just seemed like a "woe is me" type statement, kind of like when someone says "I won $5,000.00 on a scratch off ticket" and the response is "seems like everyone wins on them but me". Just didn't sit right with me knowing even simple facts about the lottery tickets, like not everyone wins. Sometimes I think of the slots at the casino.....you put in a dollar and pull the handle (or push spin), three cherries come up on the line and it says "You Win $.40" when actually you just lost $.60. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

Maybe I missed it earlier in the thread, but if we trade Risto, given our lack of good RHD, what do we get back that justifies his loss? 

This isn’t trading McCabe, with Guhle, Scandella, Pilut and Baloo hanging around.  This is taking away our most productive RHD and replacing him with basically nothing.

Therefore we must be getting something pretty incredible to justify the trade.

Edited February 22, 2019 by GASabresIUFAN

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

28 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Maybe I missed it earlier in the thread, but if we trade Risto, given our lack of good RHD, what do we get back that justifies his loss? 

This isn’t trading McCabe, with Guhle, Scandella, Pilut and Baloo hanging around.  This is taking away our most productive RHD and replacing him with basically nothing.

Therefore we must be getting something pretty incredible to justify the trade.

I agree and think that it shouldn't be to trade Risto, it should be to make a trade that will push Risto to the 2nd pairing.

[MODO Hockey]

If we could complement Risto with a very good defensive partner i would keep Risto by any means

Risto has some really good offensive talants together with his toughness, he is good with getting under the skin on players. 
Unless we complement Ristolainen with a good partner he will keep looking bad more than good, his value is most likely pretty high anyhow

 

[Crusader1969]

9 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Maybe I missed it earlier in the thread, but if we trade Risto, given our lack of good RHD, what do we get back that justifies his loss? 

This isn’t trading McCabe, with Guhle, Scandella, Pilut and Baloo hanging around.  This is taking away our most productive RHD and replacing him with basically nothing.

Therefore we must be getting something pretty incredible to justify the trade.

100% on point.  He isn't a perfect player at all but as a second pair RHD, dont think they can do much better.   The one thing the analytics guys can't measure is "tough to play against".  I believe he has more than double the hits than any other Sabres player.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SDS]

5 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

100% on point.  He isn't a perfect player at all but as a second pair RHD, dont think they can do much better.   The one thing the analytics guys can't measure is "tough to play against".  I believe he has more than double the hits than any other Sabres player.

Didn’t you just put a number on his ability to be tough to play against? ?

[In The Buff]

Trading Risto as if he's causing more harm to the team than bringing positives to it is ridiculous imo. He's big, he's smart, he plays tons of minutes & the most important ones during games,  & is a well rounded dman with good offensive skills. And when he goes into beast mode & starts throwing his body around, he looks like a tough player to play against. I've been waiting for him to take on a bigger leadership role on the ice & these past few weeks it appears like he's coming into his own in that regard, which is exciting.

But I don't see what we gain from trading away Risto lol, i really don't. Scandella would make more sense or even McCabe or Pilut, even tho I'd rather keep Pilut around since i see a lot of potential in him as well. Beaulieu should be on this list b4 Risto. Pretty much anyone else since Risto is our best Dman right now, along with Bogo who has really impressed me this season. The turnaround Bogosian has had here has really been nice. I had all but written him off.

Like others have said, it takes a long time for a dman to mature & come into his own. Especially a young kid coming over from Finland & having to adjust to so many new things. He's been asked to do way too much way too soon & now its appearing to pay dividends & people say trade him as if we're missing out on the playoffs because of him.

We have 1 offensive line that can score so lets trade one of our top dmen. Brilliant idea! Luckily its not gonna happen.

[JJFIVEOH]

Risto might not be the elite superstar we hoped he would turn out to be. Of course he's still young and I think he has yet to hit his prime. But, he is an elite athlete who can play serious minutes without tiring. He's in the top 20 in D-man scoring. He plays all aspects of the game. He's 12th in D-man hits. And while not elite, he is well above average and certainly still has the potential to become elite. 

The Sabres defense is pathetic. You don't go getting rid of somebody with the talent of Risto when you can't get your defense working right in the first place. Guys like Risto don't come around very often. Work on the rest of the defense, leave Risto be. Re-signing Bogo next year is imperative. McCabe, Risto, Dahlin and Bogo are a great core. The Sabres need to do some serious work on #5,6 and 7 D-men. 

[Weave]

There were hints last season that Risto wasn’t really accepting of being coached.  Haven’t heard that talk at all this season. I wonder about that.

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Crusader1969 said:

100% on point.  He isn't a perfect player at all but as a second pair RHD, dont think they can do much better.   The one thing the analytics guys can't measure is "tough to play against".  I believe he has more than double the hits than any other Sabres player.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Never mind the hits, its the puck battles in the corner. Risto is very good at getting the puck, then protecting it from the forechecker.

Unfortunately he's not as good at the next step, but that's why he's not a number one.

[Brawndo]

Matt Larkin from the Hockey News was on talking about the future of the Sabres, he spoke about trading a first near the draft for an established player. Unsolicited he also brought up the idea of trading Risto for a Top 6 Forward, two names he brought up as examples were Kaspri Kapanen and Jake DeBrusk as possible returns. If they ever thought of moving him this would have to be the return.