2019-20 Sabres Prospects

[triumph_communes]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Let me spend the next few minutes on this... 

1) Actually Reinhart isn't locked up at all and neither for that matter is Mittelstadt. In addition Mittlestadt to date has not shown he can be a top 6 player. So that is a big leap. Further Cozens has not shown he is a top 6 player if either of those 2 guys fall below that expectation everything else you lay out falls to pieces. 

2) Tage might sure but let's say he doesn't. Who is up next? In this very real scenario Mitts and Tage are bottom 6 players. So you now have only 4 top 6 players on your roster or in your prospect pool. Let's continue though. 

3) I would agree that Asplund appears to be headed for 3rd line status and that Pekar has the potential for that although like Tage we don't know. 

4) This is my favorite sentence because of how contradictory it is by not only reality but how you wrote it. First Dahlin, Jokiharju, Montour, Miller all have contracts going forward or are RFA's and are younger. So I just listed 4 defenders going forward. Second at the beginning you say "We need defenders even sooner..." we just put Gilmour on waivers because we have so many NHL level defenders on this team. The best part is you end the sentence with "and we have a handful of them." So which it is it? We need them or we have a handful? 

5) How can anyone look at the pipeline and be stressed? Ok I will take this. Name 4 players in the pipeline that have top 6 potential. We have Cozens. Hell I will give you Tage. That's it. There aren't any hidden offensive gems right now. Now for fun, and I mean FUN!, let's do the defense. Not currently playing in Buffalo you have Laaksonen, Borgen, Johnson, Samuelsson, Pilut, maybe fitzgerald. There's 6 total defenders but 12 forward spots. So even if you have an extra top 6 forward all that does is make your bottom 6 better because one of those top 6 guys has to play there.

6) Just like a guy named Gym you took the time to prove my point for me. Murray didn't do Botterill any favors and only managed to get us Olofsson and Asplund and yet you are arguing our prospect pool at forward isn't f####d? I mean you yourself lay the ground work for why it is. Anyone coming to the conclusion that the forward part of our prospect pool isn't bad isn't paying attention to the Sabres pro team or who and how we have drafted especially in the last 3 years. 

Since Jason Botterill became GM the Sabres have drafted 18 players. 8 forwards, 8 defenders, and 2 goalies. Again there are 12 forward slots and 6 defense slots. A little bit concerning since Murray left the cupboards empty and we have barely addressed the lack of forwards of high quality in our pool. 

There were no contradictions. 

 

Our only long-term defender before Botterill was Guhle.  Ignoring Dahlin, now we have Joki, Montour, Pilut, Laaksonen, Samuelsson, Johnson...

Our only top-6 forwards on term before Botterill were Eichel, Reinhart, ROR, Okposo lol, and Nylander??.  Now we've swapped ROR with Skinner, and added Mittelstadt (who is at least a top-6 LW, if you think less you are crazy biased), Cozens (future ROR replacement) and Tage (huge framed forwards ALWAYS TAKE LONGER TO DEVELOP).  Oh, don't forget Ristolainen has been made completely redundant as has been shopped for over a year now to fix the forward position.

 

Yes, we need forwards.  One Top-6 quality guy long-term would be nice, especially since half of what we have is too young to help today.  But we need depth guys more than anything.  And Murray left him with little to none.  Funny to argue against a guy working with cap hell, turning over the roster 10+ players each season so far, and a bad aura players love to talk to the press about.

Edited November 22, 2019 by triumph_communes

[Doohicksie]

10 minutes ago, triumph_communes said:

Our only long-term defender before Botterill was Guhle.

[freester]

1 hour ago, triumph_communes said:

There were no contradictions. 

 

Our only long-term defender before Botterill was Guhle.  Ignoring Dahlin, now we have Joki, Montour, Pilut, Laaksonen, Samuelsson, Johnson...

Our only top-6 forwards on term before Botterill were Eichel, Reinhart, ROR, Okposo lol, and Nylander??.  Now we've swapped ROR with Skinner, and added Mittelstadt (who is at least a top-6 LW, if you think less you are crazy biased), Cozens (future ROR replacement) and Tage (huge framed forwards ALWAYS TAKE LONGER TO DEVELOP).  Oh, don't forget Ristolainen has been made completely redundant as has been shopped for over a year now to fix the forward position.

 

Yes, we need forwards.  One Top-6 quality guy long-term would be nice, especially since half of what we have is too young to help today.  But we need depth guys more than anything.  And Murray left him with little to none.  Funny to argue against a guy working with cap hell, turning over the roster 10+ players each season so far, and a bad aura players love to talk to the press about.

We have 3 top 6 forwards (4 if you count Johanssen)  You can't win like that in the NHL. We need 2 more top 6 forwards immediately.   Bottom 6 players are a dime a dozen.  They are readily available.  Please don't ever say Mitts is a top 6 anything.  At this point its not clear he's an NHL player.

[triumph_communes]

2 hours ago, freester said:

We have 3 top 6 forwards (4 if you count Johanssen)  You can't win like that in the NHL. We need 2 more top 6 forwards immediately.   Bottom 6 players are a dime a dozen.  They are readily available.  Please don't ever say Mitts is a top 6 anything.  At this point its not clear he's an NHL player.

this is the prospects thread. You’re posting as if it’s the roster thread. 

[Crusader1969]

https://thehockeynews.com/video/article/sabres-luukkonen-is-a-top-goalie-prospect-but-theres-no-need-to-rush-him

[GASabresIUFAN]

7 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:

https://thehockeynews.com/video/article/sabres-luukkonen-is-a-top-goalie-prospect-but-theres-no-need-to-rush-him

That’s what people said about Carter Hart, but I agree in general.

[French Collection]

Cozens is still leading the WHL in scoring.

I hope Dale Hunter takes him on Team Canada for the WJHC, we could see him play on a bigger stage against some top peers.

[dudacek]

8 minutes ago, French Collection said:

Cozens is still leading the WHL in scoring.

I hope Dale Hunter takes him on Team Canada for the WJHC, we could see him play on a bigger stage against some top peers.

It would be a stunner if the highest-drafted Canadian forward (with Dach in the NHL) in the most recent draft is healthy and playing well and doesnt get picked for Team Canada. I’d be surprised if it has ever happened before. 

He’ll be picked and will likely be playing the top 6.

Edited November 30, 2019 by dudacek

[GASabresIUFAN]

Wheeler is ranking each team' NHL prospect pipeline. https://theathletic.com/1449623/2020/01/19/scott-wheelers-2020-nhl-prospect-pool-rankings/

He has done 25-31 with San Jose at 25.

26. Calgary

27. St Louis

28. Pitt

29. Washington

30. Boston

31. Columbus

His criteria"

Quote

 

To be eligible for inclusion as a prospect, a player must be:

Under 23 years old. We now know that by the time a player turns 23, he is largely done the steep upward progression we see in prospects and will begin to plateau. (Note: He uses 24 for goalies.)

Not currently in the NHL, with rare exceptions for players who I believe could still bounce between levels and aren’t yet considered full-time NHLers by their teams. Though this is the only arbitrary section of the criteria, preference for exemption was given to teenaged players, rather than 22-year-olds.

Either signed to an NHL contract or selected in the entry draft, without the expiration of either of those rights.

 

He also looks at a minimum 15 players and a max of 20 based on his perception if they might have an NHL future (Borgen and Pilut are out as they are 23 and over, Johansson is also out as he is 24).  My guess is Mitts and Thompson are also out because to the number of games played in the NHL.

Using his criteria: Cozens, UPL Asplund, Samuelsson, Ruotsalainen, Johnson, Laaksonen, Pekar, Portillo, Davidsson, Bryson, Weissbach, Fitzgerald and Huglen.  

I don't even get to 15. It will be interesting to read his take.  I like our top 9, but after that I think there isn't much.  I suspect he'll place us at 21.

Edited January 20, 2020 by GASabresIUFAN

[PerreaultForever]

4 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

31. Columbus

Funny how every year that team is supposed to fall and every year they are supposed to be done and yet every year there they are, and so so much better than us.

Our prospect pool does look better than it has for a while, but it's still nowhere near where it needs to be. You watch good teams like Boston, and despite their supposed lack of prospects, when they get the injury bug they have younger guys come up and fill in, even if just for a few games. We have a few (Pilut, Asplund) but mostly we just end up filling the roster with retreads and cast offs like Wilson. Too many CJ Smith types that simply aren't NHLers. 

Unfortunately, prospects usually take time, and JBot's success or failure wont' be fully known until after he might even be fired. Good drafting GMs often don't get the credit they should have, just ask Ron Hextall.  JBot? Who knows. It's 50-50 at this point imo. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

4 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Funny how every year that team is supposed to fall and every year they are supposed to be done and yet every year there they are, and so so much better than us.

Our prospect pool does look better than it has for a while, but it's still nowhere near where it needs to be. You watch good teams like Boston, and despite their supposed lack of prospects, when they get the injury bug they have younger guys come up and fill in, even if just for a few games. We have a few (Pilut, Asplund) but mostly we just end up filling the roster with retreads and cast offs like Wilson. Too many CJ Smith types that simply aren't NHLers. 

Unfortunately, prospects usually take time, and JBot's success or failure wont' be fully known until after he might even be fired. Good drafting GMs often don't get the credit they should have, just ask Ron Hextall.  JBot? Who knows. It's 50-50 at this point imo. 

I know I have a harder success/failure rate for GM's in the draft then others.  I like to see 3 players play 100+ NHL games from each class.  So far I think Jbot has that potential.  For his 1st class, we could hit on 4 or more.

2017 - Mittelstadt, Davidsson, UPL, Laaksonen, Bryson and Weissbach could all make the NHL.  Unlikely but a real possibility.  

2018 - Dahlin, plus Samuelsson and Pekar have NHL futures.  Both played in this year's WJrs.  Pekar is dominating in the OHL.  in 31 games he has 18g and 21a for 39pts

2019 - Cozens, Johnson and Portillo lead this class.  Portillo made the Swedish WJr team. 

[PerreaultForever]

If you're measuring/comparing them though you really have to account for when they drafted as well. I mean nobody wouldn't have drafted Eichel. Dahlin was the top rated pick in his draft. These are no brainers and a GM can't be called good for winning a lottery or for tanking for that matter.  Cozens seems to be a good pick, but he too was one of a few obvious picks all rated similarly.

Mitts has to be viewed as a failure because there are lower drafted players who are better (unless Mitts has a miraculous late blooming turnaround) including Jokiharju. 

If the lower picks you list make the NHL, those are successful drafts. If not, JBot fails.

For me, your first rounder has to make the team at some point. Rounds 2-4, if you hit on 30% so 1 of the 3 you did a good job, 2 you did a great job. Rounds 5-7 you were just lucky. If somehow you consistently hit on late round picks you're either the luckiest man alive or a true GM genius. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

15 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

If you're measuring/comparing them though you really have to account for when they drafted as well. I mean nobody wouldn't have drafted Eichel. Dahlin was the top rated pick in his draft. These are no brainers and a GM can't be called good for winning a lottery or for tanking for that matter.  Cozens seems to be a good pick, but he too was one of a few obvious picks all rated similarly.

Mitts has to be viewed as a failure because there are lower drafted players who are better (unless Mitts has a miraculous late blooming turnaround) including Jokiharju. 

If the lower picks you list make the NHL, those are successful drafts. If not, JBot fails.

For me, your first rounder has to make the team at some point. Rounds 2-4, if you hit on 30% so 1 of the 3 you did a good job, 2 you did a great job. Rounds 5-7 you were just lucky. If somehow you consistently hit on late round picks you're either the luckiest man alive or a true GM genius. 

There are no sure things.  None. Reinhart seemed like a sure thing, and he has been solid, but in hindsight he wasn't the 2nd best player in the draft.  There are also plenty of top picks (Brian Lawton, Patrik Stefan to name two off the top of my head) that doen't succeed. Gm's should get credit or scorn for all the players they draft.  It doesn't matter that "everyone" said he'd be great.  If you draft him and he succeeds you get credit.  However the success of the franchise and depth in the organization comes from succeeding in the draft beyond the top 3. 

Mitts isn't a failure.  He's 21.  Lias Anderson draft the pick ahead of him is also struggling.  That doesn't mean they are failures or busts yet.  VO finally made  the NHL at 24.  In 2014 Victor Arvidsson went in the 4th rd.  He is 8th in GP and 7th in pts for his draft class.  Using your criteria everyone drafted before him that sit below him in the measurables is a bad pick or failures.  Really?  Alex Tuch, Kaspari Kapanen, Adrian Kempe, Nick Schmartz were all middle to late 1st rd picks that year.  They were all excellent draft picks, all players if on the Sabres we'd love and praise the GM for taking him.  The bottom line is we have zero idea of what Mitts will become and to label him as anything but a prospect at this point is pre-mature.

[PerreaultForever]

Failure at this point. You are right, things may change if he develops later, but at this point it looks like a bad pick. He isn't tearing the AHL up at this point after all is he? I will be more than happy to praise him should things change, but not at this point. 

[LGR4GM]

For the record, Metaj Pekar is not dominating the OHL. He's 34th in OHL ppg. That isn't that impressive for an overager. He's doing well for sure but Pekar also now plays on a team with Byfield and others so his numbers will probably inflate a bit.

[GASabresIUFAN]

52 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

For the record, Metaj Pekar is not dominating the OHL. He's 34th in OHL ppg. That isn't that impressive for an overager. He's doing well for sure but Pekar also now plays on a team with Byfield and others so his numbers will probably inflate a bit.

He isn’t an overager. He is 19.  If he returned next season at 20 he’d be an overager.  

Edited January 21, 2020 by GASabresIUFAN

[LGR4GM]

21 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

He isn’t an overager. He is 19.  If he returned next season at 20 he’d be an overager.  

I believe he has to return next season. I think he misses the age cutoff to go to the AHL. 

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

38 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I believe he has to return next season. I think he misses the age cutoff to go to the AHL. 

He turns 20 next month (Feb. 10th).

[Curt]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

He isn’t an overager. He is 19.  If he returned next season at 20 he’d be an overager.  

Isn’t anyone past their draft year considered an overeager in the CHL?

[shrader]

48 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I believe he has to return next season. I think he misses the age cutoff to go to the AHL. 

All of the age cutoffs line up so that once any player is two years removed from their first year of draft eligibility, they are no longer bound by the CHL transfer agreement.  The older guys only have one year, but that's roughly a quarter of the draft class.

[shrader]

4 minutes ago, Curt said:

Isn’t anyone past their draft year considered an overeager in the CHL?

Overagers are those who turn 20 at or before 12/31 during the season.  So if a kid turns 20 prior to the new year, he is considered an overager for that season.

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

I believe he has to return next season. I think he misses the age cutoff to go to the AHL. 

No.  CHL teams can only have 3 20 year old players (or players who have played 4 CHL seasons).  Age cutoff for the AHL is 18.  The CHL/NHL agreement bars CHL drafted players from going to the AHL before they are 20.  They can either play CHL or NHL but not AHL until their CHL season ends.  

Pekar is 19 and turns 20 in February. He therefore would be eligible to play in the AHL next season. 

He actually may be eligible to play in the AHL now. His route to the CHL wasn’t through the CHL draft. He is a foreign born player, but was drafted out of the USHL and only went to the CHL after being placed there by the Sabres.  I know foreign born players can be loaned to the CHL and then moved to the AHL, see Alex Nylander for example.  Girgensons went straight to the AHL instead of college or the CHL after being drafted by the Sabres out of the USHL. I’m glad Jbot is taking a more conservative route with Pekar, but I think he can actually play in the AHL right now if Jbot wanted.

 

Edited January 21, 2020 by GASabresIUFAN

[LGR4GM]

Either way, Pekar is not dominating the ohl based on age and point production. 

32 minutes ago, Curt said:

Isn’t anyone past their draft year considered an overeager in the CHL?

I view it that way. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

33 minutes ago, Curt said:

Isn’t anyone past their draft year considered an overeager in the CHL?

 

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Either way, Pekar is not dominating the ohl based on age and point production. 

I view it that way. 

Can’t be since most can’t play anywhere else until they are 20.

[Curt]

1 hour ago, shrader said:

Overagers are those who turn 20 at or before 12/31 during the season.  So if a kid turns 20 prior to the new year, he is considered an overager for that season.

Ah, thanks.  Yes, this seems to be the correct definition of CHL overager.