2019-2020 Lineup

[North Buffalo]

5 minutes ago, Curt said:

Could be true.  I actually edited my post to add that he is still a possibility at C, but you were too quick.

Again if you put him with Sam... you have two very good passers and line drivers and then add a scorer.  Mojo is good in the corners and shifty on the rush.  Sam has gotten a lot better in the corners and a hard  nose guy like Vesey may fit them well, but Vesey may very well end up initially with his buddy Jack. 

Edited July 7, 2019 by North Buffalo

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, Curt said:

The bolded is untrue.  He was only a full time C his first 2 seasons.  7 seasons ago.  He has played C only sparingly since then.

With that being said, Buffalo’s play may still be to play him at C, I don’t know.

Trotz played Johansson at center most of the 2016 season and he was very effective.  

 

[Scottysabres]

3 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Trotz played Johansson at center most of the 2016 season and he was very effective.  

 

judging by Pegula's statements, Botterill's statements, they are well aware the fan base isn't going to wait around any longer. I don't see Johansson at 2c given what we know.

[Curt]

30 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Trotz played Johansson at center most of the 2016 season and he was very effective.  

In 2015-16?  He took 278 faceoffs that season, his highest total in any of the past 7 seasons.  Fewer than Jeff Skinner took for the 2018-19 Sabres.  An average of about 3.75 faceoffs per game.

So, yes, I can believe that he played a fair amount of C that season.  Perhaps as much as half the season.  That would fall under being sparingly used at C over the past 7 years.  I didn’t say that he never played C and I don’t doubt that he can play C effectively.

Your original assertion was that he has played C for most of his career, implying that he is primarily a C.  Yet this is untrue, he has played primarily wing while only occasionally playing C.  The fact that you had to go back 3 years to pick out a time when he played some C, sort of proves this point.

Edited July 7, 2019 by Curt

[Weave]

17 minutes ago, Curt said:

In 2015-16?  He took 278 faceoffs that season, his highest total in any of the past 7 seasons.  Fewer than Jeff Skinner took for the 2018-19 Sabres.  An average of about 3.75 faceoffs per game.

So, yes, I can believe that he played a fair amount of C that season.  Perhaps as much as half the season.  That would fall under being sparingly used at C over the past 7 years.  I didn’t say that he never played C and I don’t doubt that he can play C effectively.

Your original assertion was that he has played C for most of his career, implying that he is primarily a C.  Yet this is untrue, he has played primarily wing while only occasionally playing C.  The fact that you had to go back 3 years to pick out a time when he played some C, sort of proves this point.

It's not uncommon for wings to take the majority of faceoffs on a given line.  I wouldn't expect to see that out of my top center, but for example, Giroux plays primarily on the wing but was in the top 20 in league faceoff attempts.  I think it is more common on lines 2 and 3 players though.

It's not ideal, but Johansson's faceoff attempts may only mean that he's not particulaly good on the dot.

[Curt]

10 minutes ago, Weave said:

It's not uncommon for wings to take the majority of faceoffs on a given line.  I wouldn't expect to see that out of my top center, but for example, Giroux plays primarily on the wing but was in the top 20 in league faceoff attempts.  I think it is more common on lines 2 and 3 players though.

It's not ideal, but Johansson's faceoff attempts may only mean that he's not particulaly good on the dot.

Interesting.  I didn’t realize that Giroux took so many faceoffs even after moving to the wing a couple years ago.  I would still say that is  uncommon, but it could something that’s applied to Johansson at times.

[dudacek]

3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

@dudacek

Why no Johansson at center? It seems to me he was signed to play 2C.

We had about $17 mill in cap space entering the off-season and Jbot has spent it plus.

We have 3 important RFAs to re-sign (Ullmark, Erod, and McCabe) all with arbitration rights - Cost here will be about 6 mill or more.  All still unsigned.

We had 2 expendable RFAs in Girgensons and Larsson.  However Z has re-signed at 1.6 mill

Jbot then signed or acquired Vesey (2.275). Miller (3.875) and Johansson (4.5). That's 10.6 mill additional cap hit.

The sigings/trades bolstered our D, improved our depth at wing and gave us a new 2C.  This was the off-season plan.  Other then getting rid of a player or two such as Wilson and Hunwick, my guess is Jbot is done.

I will be genuinely surprised if Risto is traded away at this point. I wonder if he kept Risto partially because Bogo's medical reports aren't looking good. 

 

I find it hard to handwave away the fact that for most of the past 7 years, he hasn’t been a centre.

I think that going into the season planning to run Mittelstadt and Johansson as your middle 2 centres looks a heck of a lot like going into last season running Mittelstadt and Berglund as your middle 2 centres. It’s forced and it’s risky.

I also find it hard to believe that the Sabres plan includes keeping all of their prospects in Rochester and regularly stuffing NHL defencemen in the press box.

I think the Sabres have an absurd number of NHL contracts, particularly on defence and they have a lot of prospects on the wing. It makes sense to use that depth to re-allocate assets into their area of weakness - centre. To me, it’s common sense.

Could Botterill be planning to count on a winger who has averaged 9 goals and 22 points in his past two seasons to be the answer at 2C? Could he be planning to go through the year spending $12 million on his 5-6-7 D?

It’s possible, but I sure hope not.

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

58 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I find it hard to handwave away the fact that for most of the past 7 years, he hasn’t been a centre.

I think that going into the season planning to run Mittelstadt and Johansson as your middle 2 centres looks a heck of a lot like going into last season running Mittelstadt and Berglund as your middle 2 centres. It’s forced and it’s risky.

I also find it hard to believe that the Sabres plan includes keeping all of their prospects in Rochester and regularly stuffing NHL defencemen in the press box.

I think the Sabres have an absurd number of NHL contracts, particularly on defence and they have a lot of prospects on the wing. It makes sense to use that depth to re-allocate assets into their area of weakness - centre. To me, it’s common sense.

Could Botterill be planning to count on a winger who has averaged 9 goals and 22 points in his past two seasons to be the answer at 2C? Could he be planning to go through the year spending $12 million on his 5-6-7 D?

It’s possible, but I sure hope not.

Just a thought on the bolded.....

The reason could be fit for a decent player. Girgensons is a C but has played mostly wing and fit a role and NHL caliber roster spot.

NJ has Hischier, Zajak, Zacha. CAPS had Backstrom, Kuzetsnov, Burakovsky. Bruins have Krecji, Bergeron. Playing wing on these teams was more "fit" and talent level while helping the fill out the roster with good players. He may also be looking forward to playing center with us as it might be where he wants to play position wise.

[dudacek]

13 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

Just a thought on the bolded.....

The reason could be fit for a decent player. Girgensons is a C but has played mostly wing and fit a role and NHL caliber roster spot.

NJ has Hischier, Zajak, Zacha. CAPS had Backstrom, Kuzetsnov, Burakovsky. Bruins have Krecji, Bergeron. Playing wing on these teams was more "fit" and talent level while helping the fill out the roster with good players. He may also be looking forward to playing center with us as it might be where he wants to play position wise.

Probably to the bold, possibly to the last.

Im not saying he can’t be the 2C. I am saying the argument for it is about as compelling as the argument for Berglund, or for Reinhart, or for Mittelstadt.

[Randall Flagg]

On 7/3/2019 at 2:00 PM, dudacek said:

Vesey is fast goes to the net and scores reasonably well at even strength. The team needs that.

 

We said these same things about Sheary last offseason (and I was leader of the charge). Maybe we can quibble about "going to the net" but I can show you an hour of film of other Sabres going to the net and being useless there, despite having a decent number of goals in the "ES" column too. I'm not even sure I know what it means anymore

I haven't watched dozens of games of Jimmy Vesey, but I've probably seen ~15. 

Please convince me this situation tangibly different from the Sheary one, and that I shouldn't worry about the fact that Vesey appears to be notably worse than Conor in their own zone, because I was the guy that said two weeks before the trade was made that I'd pay an asset to make sure we didn't give up an asset to roster Jimmy Vesey 

[North Buffalo]

19 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

We said these same things about Sheary last offseason (and I was leader of the charge). Maybe we can quibble about "going to the net" but I can show you an hour of film of other Sabres going to the net and being useless there, despite having a decent number of goals in the "ES" column too. I'm not even sure I know what it means anymore

I haven't watched dozens of games of Jimmy Vesey, but I've probably seen ~15. 

Please convince me this situation tangibly different from the Sheary one, and that I shouldn't worry about the fact that Vesey appears to be notably worse than Conor in their own zone, because I was the guy that said two weeks before the trade was made that I'd pay an asset to make sure we didn't give up an asset to roster Jimmy Vesey 

Ive watched more than a dozen games of his and to me what concerns me about Vesey is he seems to be an on and off again guy.  He hustles but occasionally looks like TT last year turning the puck over.  Other times he is on his game and is a force in the corners and going to the net... a bit inconsistent.

[dudacek]

41 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

We said these same things about Sheary last offseason (and I was leader of the charge). Maybe we can quibble about "going to the net" but I can show you an hour of film of other Sabres going to the net and being useless there, despite having a decent number of goals in the "ES" column too. I'm not even sure I know what it means anymore

I haven't watched dozens of games of Jimmy Vesey, but I've probably seen ~15. 

Please convince me this situation tangibly different from the Sheary one, and that I shouldn't worry about the fact that Vesey appears to be notably worse than Conor in their own zone, because I was the guy that said two weeks before the trade was made that I'd pay an asset to make sure we didn't give up an asset to roster Jimmy Vesey 

I can’t. I have a relatively superficial understanding of Jimmy Vesey and am basing that comment on the fact he produced a relatively high number of even strength goals by going to the net.

In theory, he should benefit from playing more with guys like Sam and Jack than the Rangers 3rd liners, but until he hits the ice it’s all supposition and conjecture, just like it was with Sheary.

That said, Sheary was an improvement over Benoit Pouliot, and there is evidence to suggest Vesey will be better than Tage Thompson. Hockey isn’t basketball. Teams don’t improve by 10 per cent with the addition of one player, they improve by incremental upgrades, 10 percent over five players.

[Randall Flagg]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 I can’t. I have a relatively superficial understanding of Jimmy Vesey and am basing that comment on the fact he produced a relatively high number of even strength goals by going to the net.

 In theory, he should benefit from playing more with guys like Sam and Jack than the Rangers 3rd liners, but until he hits the ice it’s all supposition and conjecture, just like it was with Sheary.

 That said, Sheary was an improvement over Benoit Pouliot, and there is evidence to suggest Vesey will be better than Tage Thompson. Hockey isn’t basketball. Teams don’t improve by 10 per cent with the addition of one player, they improve by incremental upgrades, 10 percent over five players.

Will he be used over Tage Thompson, or as justification to send an Olofsson back to Rochester, or an ERod away in a trade with Risto? 

[Radar]

34 minutes ago, North Buffalo said:

Ive watched more than a dozen games of his and to me what concerns me about Vesey is he seems to be an on and off again guy.  He hustles but occasionally looks like TT last year turning the puck over.  Other times he is on his game and is a force in the corners and going to the net... a bit inconsistent.

Sort of like most hockey players.

[dudacek]

16 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

Will he be used over Tage Thompson, or as justification to send an Olofsson back to Rochester, or an ERod away in a trade with Risto? 

Shouldn’t that depend on whether he outperforms Olofsson, or on what we’re getting in return for Erod and Risto?

There is nothing inherently wrong, and a lot right, with making Olofsson and Thompson compete with Vesey; it could bring out the best in each of them and it gives us better options when injuries hit and more flexibility when it comes to making trades.

The issues come when Thompson is failing in his role and you stick with him despite having other reasonable options.

Colin Miller and Marco Scandella as a 1st pair will fail. Miller and Scandella (or at least the Scandella that was prior to last season) as a 3rd pair will help you win hockey games.

Edited July 7, 2019 by dudacek

[Randall Flagg]

48 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Shouldn’t that depend on whether he outperforms Olofsson, or on what we’re getting in return for Erod and Risto?

There is nothing inherently wrong, and a lot right, with making Olofsson and Thompson compete with Vesey; it could bring out the best in each of them and it gives us better options when injuries hit and more flexibility when it comes to making trades.

 The issues come when Thompson is failing in his role and you stick with him despite having other reasonable options.

 Colin Miller and Marco Scandella as a 1st pair will fail. Miller and Scandella (or at least the Scandella that was prior to last season) as a 3rd pair will help you win hockey games.

In principle, yeah. In practice, we all have reason to be skeptical that it will. 

And I just think Vesey is a pretty bad hockey player, and am worried he will not fix what ails a middle six line - instead merely being a continuation of the problem while ensuring we don't adequately replace it in at least his position this offseason, since we already "addressed" it by bringing him in

this worry is what drove me to say I'd spend a 7th so that we didn't trade a 3rd for him, a few weeks ago

 

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

4 hours ago, dudacek said:

Probably to the bold, possibly to the last.

Im not saying he can’t be the 2C. I am saying the argument for it is about as compelling as the argument for Berglund, or for Reinhart, or for Mittelstadt.

I agree....not a real good argument for 2C. 

[Taro T]

Really expecting at least 1 more move.  

For now, anticipating that Vesey gets pencilledin with Eichel & Skinner and that Johansson gets 1st crack at 2C.  But it just looks like Botterill is building up assets to trade for either a true 2C or a true 2RW.

With no additional major move, would expect

Skinner - Eichel - Vesey

Olofsson - Johansson - Reinhart

Sheary - Mittelstadt - Rodrigues

Girgensons - Larsson - Okposo

Press box - Wilson

McCabe - Montour

Dahlin - Miller

Bogosian - Ristolainen

Press box - Pilut, Scandella

Which would have Hunwick, Borgen, Elie, Thompson, Asplund, Nylander, & Sobotka assigned to Ra-cha-cha along with Lazar and the other recent signings along with Hickey & Redmond.  Do Borgen, Thompson, Asplund, &/or Nylander need to clear waivers to go down?

Just seems like they have too much tweener talent and moving a couple of guys like Sheary, Ristolainen, & a prospect would be a goal of Botterill to add to that 2nd line.  Don't know if that would get a move made, but have to believe Botterill's trying for something like that.

[Weave]

Given our remaining cap space, RFAs to be signed, and the need for a cushion during the season,  there HAS to be another move.  A move of a body or bodies out.  Unfortunately, it’s not likely to be someone we want moved (they likely have no market value), so it’ll be someone that we’d rather have on the roster. And given our cap situation, it won’t be a hockey trade.  

 

Who are candidates to move that have value and can make cap room?  Sheary, Erod, Wilson, McCabe, Scandella.  Does that sound about right?

I think best case is Sheary and Scandella are moved for picks.

[Tondas]

1 hour ago, Weave said:

Given our remaining cap space, RFAs to be signed, and the need for a cushion during the season,  there HAS to be another move.  A move of a body or bodies out.  Unfortunately, it’s not likely to be someone we want moved (they likely have no market value), so it’ll be someone that we’d rather have on the roster. And given our cap situation, it won’t be a hockey trade.  

 

Who are candidates to move that have value and can make cap room?  Sheary, Erod, Wilson, McCabe, Scandella.  Does that sound about right?

I think best case is Sheary and Scandella are moved for picks.

I agree.  Slim pickins there.  I'd add Zemgus and Larsson to that list.  I think BOGO at the deadline could bring a 4-5 rounder (if he's not injured on trade deadline day).

[Brawndo]

4 hours ago, Taro T said:

Really expecting at least 1 more move.  

For now, anticipating that Vesey gets pencilledin with Eichel & Skinner and that Johansson gets 1st crack at 2C.  But it just looks like Botterill is building up assets to trade for either a true 2C or a true 2RW.

With no additional major move, would expect

Skinner - Eichel - Vesey

Olofsson - Johansson - Reinhart

Sheary - Mittelstadt - Rodrigues

Girgensons - Larsson - Okposo

Press box - Wilson

McCabe - Montour

Dahlin - Miller

Bogosian - Ristolainen

Press box - Pilut, Scandella

Which would have Hunwick, Borgen, Elie, Thompson, Asplund, Nylander, & Sobotka assigned to Ra-cha-cha along with Lazar and the other recent signings along with Hickey & Redmond.  Do Borgen, Thompson, Asplund, &/or Nylander need to clear waivers to go down?

Just seems like they have too much tweener talent and moving a couple of guys like Sheary, Ristolainen, & a prospect would be a goal of Botterill to add to that 2nd line.  Don't know if that would get a move made, but have to believe Botterill's trying for something like that.

No they do not have to clear waivers 

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Weave said:

Given our remaining cap space, RFAs to be signed, and the need for a cushion during the season,  there HAS to be another move.  A move of a body or bodies out.  Unfortunately, it’s not likely to be someone we want moved (they likely have no market value), so it’ll be someone that we’d rather have on the roster. And given our cap situation, it won’t be a hockey trade.  

 

Who are candidates to move that have value and can make cap room?  Sheary, Erod, Wilson, McCabe, Scandella.  Does that sound about right?

I think best case is Sheary and Scandella are moved for picks.

You’re probably right, but I think Botterill is aiming for something more like a 2/3 for one deal - think Peca Wilson and a 1st for Mogilny, only Mogilny is a centre and coming to Buffalo.

[dudacek]

9 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

In principle, yeah. In practice, we all have reason to be skeptical that it will. 

And I just think Vesey is a pretty bad hockey player, and am worried he will not fix what ails a middle six line - instead merely being a continuation of the problem while ensuring we don't adequately replace it in at least his position this offseason, since we already "addressed" it by bringing him in

this worry is what drove me to say I'd spend a 7th so that we didn't trade a 3rd for him, a few weeks ago
 

 

I am in favour of adding a fast winger on an expiring contract who goes to the net and has consistently put up 15-20 goals, at the cost of a 3rd rounder. Depth breeds competition, depth overcomes injuries and slumps, depth creates options.This team is woefully short of mid-roster players and I’ll take as many lotto tickets as I can.

But that comes with the caveat that the depth has the ability to contribute at an NHL level, as opposed to a Pouliot-style placeholder who is going to be out of the league in a year.

On the surface, Vesey seems more the former than the latter, but as I said earlier, I have only a very superficial knowledge of the player. If you think he is just another Pouliot that our hockey department has improperly identified as something greater then I agree with your conclusion. If he has a chance to be another Conor Sheary - and I’ve been disappointed with Sheary - I’ll make the trade every time.

How the investment might marry the team to the player doesn’t worry me in the slightest, even disregarding the possibility that Krueger might be as inflexible as Housley was.

It’s a 3rd rounder. GMs toss them around like frisbees.

 

Edited July 8, 2019 by dudacek

[TrueBlueGED]

10 hours ago, Weave said:

Given our remaining cap space, RFAs to be signed, and the need for a cushion during the season,  there HAS to be another move.  A move of a body or bodies out.  Unfortunately, it’s not likely to be someone we want moved (they likely have no market value), so it’ll be someone that we’d rather have on the roster. And given our cap situation, it won’t be a hockey trade.  

 

Who are candidates to move that have value and can make cap room?  Sheary, Erod, Wilson, McCabe, Scandella.  Does that sound about right?

I think best case is Sheary and Scandella are moved for picks.

Why not? We're not in a position to take a cap dump, but we can certainly make a hockey trade with a certain Finnish defenseman. 

[TrueBlueGED]

7 hours ago, dudacek said:

 

I am in favour of adding a fast winger on an expiring contract who goes to the net and has consistently put up 15-20 goals, at the cost of a 3rd rounder. Depth breeds competition, depth overcomes injuries and slumps, depth creates options.This team is woefully short of mid-roster players and I’ll take as many lotto tickets as I can.

But that comes with the caveat that the depth has the ability to contribute at an NHL level, as opposed to a Pouliot-style placeholder who is going to be out of the league in a year.

On the surface, Vesey seems more the former than the latter, but as I said earlier, I have only a very superficial knowledge of the player. If you think he is just another Pouliot that our hockey department has improperly identified as something greater then I agree with your conclusion. If he has a chance to be another Conor Sheary - and I’ve been disappointed with Sheary - I’ll make the trade every time.

How the investment might marry the team to the player doesn’t worry me in the slightest, even disregarding the possibility that Krueger might be as inflexible as Housley was.

It’s a 3rd rounder. GMs toss them around like frisbees.

 

I'll never understand the Sheary disappointment unless you expected him to produce like he did when skating with Sidney Crosby.