Pick #31 Ryan Johnson Defenseman

[North Buffalo]

Based on the run D in the second, not as frustrated as yesterday.. wow and not in as much pain so that helps.  Seriously though holy D batman.

[Derrico]

6 minutes ago, North Buffalo said:

Based on the run D in the second, not as frustrated as yesterday.. wow and not in as much pain so that helps.  Seriously though holy D batman.

Speedy recovery man.

[North Buffalo]

Ill be fine, just sitting around all day and I think yeaterday was the worst of it, thank you ? 

[sabresparaavida]

Happy we picked a defenseman fairly high. I've heard next year's class is packed at the top with forwards. 

[triumph_communes]

I don’t understand any comparison with Psysk. He was a below average skater that had no offense. Just played things safe and had a decent first pass. 

 

This kids a top-10 in his draft year skater, has moxie, and played for a winning team.  He isn’t your flashy goal scorer, but Sexton/Botterill have their own metrics they track with these kids and hit a bunch of times with the Penguins— maybe give them the benefit of the doubt here. 

[dudacek]

Pysyk was an excellent skater.

[Curt]

13 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Pysyk was an excellent skater.

RIP Mark Pysyk

seriously though, yes, he is a good skater, a good passer, and all around pretty smart decision maker.

[Randall Flagg]

If Pysyk had ONE other notable trait, whether it's a booming shot, lightning speed, mean streak, whatever, he'd be thought of by everyone as a really good mid-pairing defenseman. As it stands, he still* has a role to play on a good NHL roster, but will polarize fans everywhere he goes

*unless he's fallen off a cliff in the last few months since I've seen and thought about him

[GASabresIUFAN]

Quote

 

31. Buffalo Sabres: Ryan Johnson, D

Team: Sioux Falls (USHL)
Ranking: 42 | Nationality: USA
Age: 17 | Ht: 6-0 | Wt: 170 | Shot: L
Stats: 54 GP, 6 G, 19 A

Scouting report: Johnson is one of the best skating defensemen in this entire class. He's an exceptional defender who performed at his best in big games this season. But he is a pretty raw talent when it comes to ability to make plays in the offensive zone. In faster-paced games, he focuses a lot more on defending, and I don't know that he has the offensive sense to make effective plays up ice. -- Peters

Team fit: Johnson is an elite skating defenseman who defends at an especially high level. He's also a winner, having won titles at the World Junior A Challenge and the Clark Cup with Sioux Falls. That's got to speak to an organization that's trying to turn the tide. The offensive upside is limited, but I think there could be a bit more to give there. After all, this was only his first season in junior hockey after playing Triple-A youth hockey in California. He's just scratching the surface. -- Peters

Where Johnson is most likely to play in 2019-20: NCAA (Minnesota)

 

From ESPN https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/27016392/2019-nhl-draft-pick-pick-analysis

[WildCard]

Dude can skate as a defensemen, sign me up

[nfreeman]

13 hours ago, dudacek said:

Pysyk was an excellent skater.

 

13 hours ago, Curtisp5286 said:

RIP Mark Pysyk

seriously though, yes, he is a good skater, a good passer, and all around pretty smart decision maker.

Pysyk isn't super-fast in terms of chasing guys down, but he's very quick and agile on his skates and can move fast in tight spaces in the D-zone.  He just doesn't have much game beyond that quality.

[Pimlach]

On 6/21/2019 at 10:59 PM, GASabresIUFAN said:

Here is where we stand on D prospects without Johnson

1) Pilut - 23 - FA - small pucking moving LHD

2) Borgen - 22 - 4th rd (2015) -physical stay at home RHD

3) Laaksonen - 20 (in July) - 3rd rd (2017) - swift puck moving RHD

4) Samuelsson - 19 - 2nd rd (2018) - physical stay at home LHD

5) Bryson - 21 - 4th rd (2017) - small all around LHD

6) Dougherty - 23 - 2nd rd (2015) - Stay at home RHD

Johnson doesn't turn 18 until the end of July.  He is a fast puck moving LHD and is over 5 year younger then the other LHD prospect with a similar skill set Pilut.  Looking at this prospect depth chart it's pretty easy to see where he fits long-term.

 

^ Best post in the thread.  

Hope to see Johnson move up to the top tier of this group by the end of his sophomore year, he will still be only 19 after that season. 

We will know all we need to know about Pilut and Borgen by then   Adding Johnson to the pipeline is a good move.  

JBots is drafting as if he has a long term plan and timeframe in mind.  No shortcuts.  Build a playoff team and stay there.  

 

 

[dudacek]

Rivet and Craig Button just on WGR comparing this kid's upside as Marc-Edouard Vlasic.

[Taro T]

2 hours ago, Pimlach said:

^ Best post in the thread.  

Hope to see Johnson move up to the top tier of this group by the end of his sophomore year, he will still be only 19 after that season. 

We will know all we need to know about Pilut and Borgen by then   Adding Johnson to the pipeline is a good move.  

JBots is drafting as if he has a long term plan and timeframe in mind.  No shortcuts.  Build a playoff team and stay there. 

 

 

Which is troubling.  Hopefully we see something good happen the next 2 weeks, but based on his unwillingness to make moves last year when the team was a 2C away from hanging onto a playoff spot and no major movement this past week; am really starting to get concerned that he doesn't expect to compete for a playoff spot until after the new CBA goes into effect.& doesn't plan on contending until Seattle is playing.

That slow but steady progression might be the right way to go, but after about 1 season's worth of good hockey out of the last 8; it will do nothing to quell the masses.

Really want to see minimum 2 2nd liners brought in & if Ristolainen or McCabe is a part of making that happen, would want a 2nd pairing D brought in as well.

[Curt]

34 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Which is troubling.  Hopefully we see something good happen the next 2 weeks, but based on his unwillingness to make moves last year when the team was a 2C away from hanging onto a playoff spot and no major movement this past week; am really starting to get concerned that he doesn't expect to compete for a playoff spot until after the new CBA goes into effect.& doesn't plan on contending until Seattle is playing.

That slow but steady progression might be the right way to go, but after about 1 season's worth of good hockey out of the last 8; it will do nothing to quell the masses.

Really want to see minimum 2 2nd liners brought in & if Ristolainen or McCabe is a part of making that happen, would want a 2nd pairing D brought in as well.

Its not troubling for me.  I think its about time that the organization acted like it had an actual long term plan.  I'm fine with not changing course on a long term plan due to the results of a handful of games.

I support bringing in a couple middle-6 forwards, because I think that's what they need to be a playoff team, but it has to be done in a way that won't hinder the team long term and it has to be someone who fits what the organization wants long term.  If that opportunity isn't there, I'm fine with the patient approach.

I don't believe that Botterill should concern himself with quelling the masses.  He should ignore the masses completely.

[TrueBlueGED]

25 minutes ago, Curtisp5286 said:

Its not troubling for me.  I think its about time that the organization acted like it had an actual long term plan.  I'm fine with not changing course on a long term plan due to the results of a handful of games.

I support bringing in a couple middle-6 forwards, because I think that's what they need to be a playoff team, but it has to be done in a way that won't hinder the team long term and it has to be someone who fits what the organization wants long term.  If that opportunity isn't there, I'm fine with the patient approach.

I don't believe that Botterill should concern himself with quelling the masses.  He should ignore the masses completely.

Know what else can hinder the team long term? Continuing to miss the playoffs so players are less likely to waive trade protection to come here and UFAs need to be even more overpaid to be convinced to sign. Long term planning isn't as simple as holding onto picks and prospects. 

[Derrico]

8 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Know what else can hinder the team long term? Continuing to miss the playoffs so players are less likely to waive trade protection to come here and UFAs need to be even more overpaid to be convinced to sign. Long term planning isn't as simple as holding onto picks and prospects. 

While I agree with your last sentence I'm not sure things can get much worse in terms of Buffalo being a destination.  They've already been out so long, small market yada yada that we already have to overpay for all these things.  My biggest fear is eventually someone big on the team will want out.  They have to become a legit playoff contender this season.  Not until American Thanksgiving, not until March, until the very end.

[Taro T]

22 minutes ago, Curtisp5286 said:

Its not troubling for me.  I think its about time that the organization acted like it had an actual long term plan.  I'm fine with not changing course on a long term plan due to the results of a handful of games.

I support bringing in a couple middle-6 forwards, because I think that's what they need to be a playoff team, but it has to be done in a way that won't hinder the team long term and it has to be someone who fits what the organization wants long term.  If that opportunity isn't there, I'm fine with the patient approach.

I don't believe that Botterill should concern himself with quelling the masses.  He should ignore the masses completely.

The team absolutely has had a long term plan throughout this entire teardown/rebuild.  The problem is, the plans of each GM were radically different which makes the whole thing seem muddled when looking in at it.

Regier's plan was to tear everything down to the studs (while actually burning about 1/2 of it down entirely).  He was leaving NOTHING to chance in trying to finish dead last for 2-3 years, going so far as to hire a coach that was good working with kids but was absolutely out of his league in the NHL icing a completely unwatchable product before he got canned.

No doubt he'd've had a team better than the one we've watched the past 2 seasons as there would be at least 2-3 more top 6 forwards and maybe another top 4 D - man on the squad now with almost all of them early 20's.  The problem is, the product would have continued to be unwatchable at least Eichel's rookie year and likely the one after that as well and there's no knowing how badly that would have messed with the players and fans psyches.

Murray tried to speed the rebuild & brought in some really good players on paper but seemed to view athletes like horses and apparently had the communication & people skills of a dish rag.  On paper his last team should have been a playoff contender, but he neglected to consider chemistry in any of his equations.  He also, probably because he had so many prospects and picks, was willing to overpay to make sure he came away with the guy he wanted so the cupboards were barer than they needed to be.  He also swung for the fences when drafting figuring that he'd strike out a lot but the homers he'd hit would more than make up for it.  He also figured that he'd know before outsiders would which each of the picks would turn into so he'd be able to use the guys that wouldn't turn out to sweeten deals to make sure he got guys that would turn out.  This likely also left the cupboards barer than they needed to be.

Now Botterill seems to be more like Regier as he is far more conservative than Murray, but unlike Regier is willing to risk losing a trade in his quest to make the team better LT.  Unfortunately part of that is selling assets that Murray prized for pennies on the $ as those moves didn't pan out.

Troubling probably wasn't the right word, but frustrating isn't either.  And the problem with Botterill looking 2-3 years down the road means we won't know if he's wrong for that long.  So if he's wrong, we'll be looking to change direction again 11 years into our stay in this purgatory.  Not his fault the 1st 6 years were really bad, but if he does remain patient (say he only brings in 1 FA and doesn't address 2C) we're likely looking at another lousy year.  Hopefully this all ends up moot and he brings in Statsny & Donskoi or Dzingel which would be a good compromise between waiting another 3 years to get good and mortgaging the future.

And either way, we SEEM to be at worse 1 season away from watchable hockey.  Unfortunately, we've been there for about 4 years and except for 30 games to start this year and a handful here and there in prior seasons, they haven't been good nor entertaining.  Only giving us 1 of those is acceptable, though not ideal.  Giving us neither is, once again, troubling for lack of a better word.

[TrueBlueGED]

15 minutes ago, Derrico said:

While I agree with your last sentence I'm not sure things can get much worse in terms of Buffalo being a destination.  They've already been out so long, small market yada yada that we already have to overpay for all these things.  My biggest fear is eventually someone big on the team will want out.  They have to become a legit playoff contender this season.  Not until American Thanksgiving, not until March, until the very end.

Oh, I definitely don't think it can get much worse for Buffalo from a recruitment perspective. I'm just trying to frame it the other way: I want to do something to make it better rather than avoiding something that makes it worse. 

[jsb]

What I find the most interesting in this pick is both he and Samuelsson last year (both 2nd pick of draft for Sabres) fathers played in the NHL. I guess GMJB is hoping there's good genes in those boys. 

[Curt]

2 hours ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Know what else can hinder the team long term? Continuing to miss the playoffs so players are less likely to waive trade protection to come here and UFAs need to be even more overpaid to be convinced to sign. Long term planning isn't as simple as holding onto picks and prospects. 

Not really, because I don’t think they should go after much in the way of UFA’s or even trade for high priced veterans who mostly have those NTC’s.

Just so we are clear, we are talking about taking the steps necessary to build a sustainably good team, even if it takes a few years.  As opposed to using up a good portion of the organizational depth to bring in 3-4 good players and do everything reasonably possible to try to make the playoffs immediately.

What I want and expect to see is a continued slow building of organizational depth with the occasional trade to acquire a young NHL player that fits what management wants.  I would expect very little in the way of significant UFA signings.

[North Buffalo]

One could hope or another Skinner/Montour type... 

[Curt]

2 hours ago, Taro T said:

The team absolutely has had a long term plan throughout this entire teardown/rebuild.  The problem is, the plans of each GM were radically different which makes the whole thing seem muddled when looking in at it.

Regier's plan was to tear everything down to the studs (while actually burning about 1/2 of it down entirely).  He was leaving NOTHING to chance in trying to finish dead last for 2-3 years, going so far as to hire a coach that was good working with kids but was absolutely out of his league in the NHL icing a completely unwatchable product before he got canned.

No doubt he'd've had a team better than the one we've watched the past 2 seasons as there would be at least 2-3 more top 6 forwards and maybe another top 4 D - man on the squad now with almost all of them early 20's.  The problem is, the product would have continued to be unwatchable at least Eichel's rookie year and likely the one after that as well and there's no knowing how badly that would have messed with the players and fans psyches.

Murray tried to speed the rebuild & brought in some really good players on paper but seemed to view athletes like horses and apparently had the communication & people skills of a dish rag.  On paper his last team should have been a playoff contender, but he neglected to consider chemistry in any of his equations.  He also, probably because he had so many prospects and picks, was willing to overpay to make sure he came away with the guy he wanted so the cupboards were barer than they needed to be.  He also swung for the fences when drafting figuring that he'd strike out a lot but the homers he'd hit would more than make up for it.  He also figured that he'd know before outsiders would which each of the picks would turn into so he'd be able to use the guys that wouldn't turn out to sweeten deals to make sure he got guys that would turn out.  This likely also left the cupboards barer than they needed to be.

Now Botterill seems to be more like Regier as he is far more conservative than Murray, but unlike Regier is willing to risk losing a trade in his quest to make the team better LT.  Unfortunately part of that is selling assets that Murray prized for pennies on the $ as those moves didn't pan out.

Troubling probably wasn't the right word, but frustrating isn't either.  And the problem with Botterill looking 2-3 years down the road means we won't know if he's wrong for that long.  So if he's wrong, we'll be looking to change direction again 11 years into our stay in this purgatory.  Not his fault the 1st 6 years were really bad, but if he does remain patient (say he only brings in 1 FA and doesn't address 2C) we're likely looking at another lousy year.  Hopefully this all ends up moot and he brings in Statsny & Donskoi or Dzingel which would be a good compromise between waiting another 3 years to get good and mortgaging the future.

And either way, we SEEM to be at worse 1 season away from watchable hockey.  Unfortunately, we've been there for about 4 years and except for 30 games to start this year and a handful here and there in prior seasons, they haven't been good nor entertaining.  Only giving us 1 of those is acceptable, though not ideal.  Giving us neither is, once again, troubling for lack of a better word.

I see what you mean.  

Yes, Regier had a long term plan, but it was not well executed towards the end and was especially sunk by poor drafting.  Also, I think completely tanking is part of a long term plan, but a poor one.  

Yes, Murray had a plan, but I never saw a long term plan there.  Seems like he just went after the biggest fish available and thought everything else would just work itself out.  It did not.

I like the Botterill style plan much better.  Regier was somewhat similar.  As with any plan, it needs to be well executed.  That’s where we are now.  Unfortunately this plan requires patience from a fan base that has little left.

I can understand your concern about whether or not this is all going to work out, but you can screw up an aggressive plan (Murray) just as easily as you can screw up a conservative one (Regier).  I would say the one bright spot is that even if Botterill ends up not really getting it done, the organization should still be left with a deep pool of assets because I feel pretty confident that he isn’t going to fritter them away.  So, I think the team is on the right path, but there is no guarantee that the execution of the plan doesn’t get screwed up somehow.  I guess I share your concern about that.

[Pimlach]

5 hours ago, Taro T said:

Which is troubling.  Hopefully we see something good happen the next 2 weeks, but based on his unwillingness to make moves last year when the team was a 2C away from hanging onto a playoff spot and no major movement this past week; am really starting to get concerned that he doesn't expect to compete for a playoff spot until after the new CBA goes into effect.& doesn't plan on contending until Seattle is playing.

That slow but steady progression might be the right way to go, but after about 1 season's worth of good hockey out of the last 8; it will do nothing to quell the masses.

Really want to see minimum 2 2nd liners brought in & if Ristolainen or McCabe is a part of making that happen, would want a 2nd pairing D brought in as well.

I don’t mind him drafting and developing with a long term plan but I would like to see him bring in some better veterans via trades and free agency.  I think this ease some of your concerns.  Look at the NHL veterans he brought in so far.  Skinner and that deal was very good.  Montour is a maybe.  Sheary was a low risk filler trade.  The rest of the players have been pretty underwhelming much at all. Pilut has a chance to be a good player  

I really do get your point.  I want the feeling of those first 30 games last season for a whole season.  

[LGR4GM]

Just want to say one last time. Ryan Johnson is a good prospect with 2nd pairing potential. His skating is very good but he really needs to work on his shot and bulking up. Long road ahead for him but if we are lucky in 3-5 years he will become a regular. He is young and should be interesting to watch going forward.