Non Sabres Deadline Trades/Rumors

[North Buffalo]

29 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

MacKinnon!!

Could only wish... and pigs fly too.

[North Buffalo]

3 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Not that either is an insider, but both Mike Harrington in a column and John Vogl on the Instigators have mentioned they expect any Risto Trade to be part of a larger package. 

Hmm and the plot thickens... no Clue but with a candlestick in the ballroom... but who?

Edited July 12, 2019 by North Buffalo

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, TrueBlueGED said:

...so you're saying Benning really likes deeply flawed, expensive RHD? There's hope!!! 

Although I think Risto ultimately does get moved, I do continue to have a slight worry that Botterill's set the price too high and there's a risk we get stuck keeping him. 

That sound an awful lot like you’re OK with Risto being moved for parts. Are you? Or is it top 6 forward or bust?

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

I'm always going to have nightmares that we should have drafted Newhook until Cozens erases that doubt from my mind. 

I get that he was your guy (and I like him a lot too) but most observers would have looked at Newhook at nine as a reach. He went 16 and was considered good value at that slot. Cozens went right around where consensus had him as well. This is not Lehner instead of Boeser

[LGR4GM]

Oh no I don't view it Boeser but I also don't care much for the consensus rankings. 

[Scottysabres]

22 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Not that either is an insider, but both Mike Harrington in a column and John Vogl on the Instigators have mentioned they expect any Risto Trade to be part of a larger package. 

I happen to agree with this given the amount of contracts on D and forward we should be looking to move.

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

I really think that @North Buffalo was just messing with you.

ik

[TrueBlueGED]

16 minutes ago, dudacek said:

That sound an awful lot like you’re OK with Risto being moved for parts. Are you? Or is it top 6 forward or bust?

I get that he was your guy (and I like him a lot too) but most observers would have looked at Newhook at nine as a reach. He went 16 and was considered good value at that slot. Cozens went right around where consensus had him as well. This is not Lehner instead of Boeser

So, I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, I value him as a 3rd pair Dman, which doesn't have a lot of value in a trade obviously. So from that perspective, if we snag a really good 3C type, I should be happy. On the other hand, my belief (hope?) is that there are GMs out there who value him quite a bit more than I do, and under that view, a 3C type would be a disappointing return. 

[...]

19 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

On the other hand, my belief (hope?) is that there are GMs out there who value him quite a bit more than I do, and under that view, a 3C type would be a disappointing return. 

I think the Nylander trade ought to give you some hope.  Someone in that thread mentioned that there are two different contexts for trades: the fans' context and the GMs' context.  The Nylander trade seems to, at least in a vacuum, illustrate that.

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, ... said:

I think the Nylander trade ought to give you some hope.  Someone in that thread mentioned that there are two different contexts for trades: the fans' context and the GMs' context.  The Nylander trade seems to, at least in a vacuum, illustrate that.

I think there is a portion of fandom that rates hockey players solely on charts that has gained vocal dominance in the internet court of hardcore hockey nerds like us. That element tends to dismiss GMs as idiots who don’t pay attention analytics.

I think that what actually happens is most GMs pay a lot of attention to analytics, they just don’t use them as the arbiter of whether a player is good or not, any more than they used 60 goals to determine whether Dennis Maruk was elite.

Analytics show effect, not cause; they draw attention to things that conventional stats don’t. They say “this isn’t working.” But it’s still up to the GM to determine why. Is the player being used improperly? Does the system suck? Is he a bad fit for the system? Is he just bad?

And in passing that judgement, they still care whether a player can skate and shoot and pass and battle and create and defend and be relied upon to make good decisions because those are the things that decades of hockey culture have shown make a difference between winning a losing and GMs are a product of that culture. I’m willing to bet that the critics who say size is irrelevant have never been in the corner with Zdeno Chara.

Risto has value because of his age and because of his contract, but mostly because of his skill set. Before analytics, his +/- would have still drawn the critics, but he would still be regarded as a first-pairing defencemen for his size, his skill and his snarl. Analytics have devalued him in GM circles, certainly, or at least raised questions. But his skill set still holds a lot of weight.

How much weight, and with who is a fascinating study.

Edited July 12, 2019 by dudacek

[Neo]

2 hours ago, North Buffalo said:

Could only wish... and pigs fly too.

Could be the NHL’s best contract (acknowledging that my visits to CapFriendly began only recently).

[TrueBlueGED]

18 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think there is a portion of fandom that rates hockey players solely on charts that has gained vocal dominance in the internet court of hardcore hockey nerds like us. That element tends to dismiss GMs as idiots who don’t pay attention analytics.

I think that what actually happens is most GMs pay a lot of attention to analytics, they just don’t use them as the arbiter of whether a player is good or not, any more than they used 60 goals to determine whether Dennis Maruk was elite.

Analytics show effect, not cause; they draw attention to things that conventional stats don’t. They say “this isn’t working.” But it’s still up to the GM to determine why. Is the player being used improperly? Does the system suck? Is he a bad fit for the system? Is he just bad?

And in passing that judgement, they still care whether a player can skate and shoot and pass and battle and create and defend and be relied upon to make good decisions because those are the things that decades of hockey culture have shown make a difference between winning a losing and GMs are a product of that culture. I’m willing to bet that the critics who say size is irrelevant have never been in the corner with Zdeno Chara.

Risto has value because of his age and because of his contract, but mostly because of his skill set. Before analytics, his +/- would have still drawn the critics, but he would still be regarded as a first-pairing defencemen for his size, his skill and his snarl. Analytics have devalued him in GM circles, certainly, or at least raised questions. But his skill set still holds a lot of weight.

How much weight, and with who is a fascinating study.

The flip side is that those who are drawn to Risto's physical attributes and attitude may go searching for justifications, accurate or not, to explain the poor metrics. It's not hard to imagine somebody thinking, perhaps subconsciously, "a 6'3 RHD who scores 40 with a mean streak simply has to be good, the numbers can't be right" and go from there. It's what I'm counting on when thinking of potential returns in a Risto trade. 

[LGR4GM]

44 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think there is a portion of fandom that rates hockey players solely on charts that has gained vocal dominance in the internet court of hardcore hockey nerds like us. That element tends to dismiss GMs as idiots who don’t pay attention analytics.

I think that what actually happens is most GMs pay a lot of attention to analytics, they just don’t use them as the arbiter of whether a player is good or not, any more than they used 60 goals to determine whether Dennis Maruk was elite.

Analytics show effect, not cause; they draw attention to things that conventional stats don’t. They say “this isn’t working.” But it’s still up to the GM to determine why. Is the player being used improperly? Does the system suck? Is he a bad fit for the system? Is he just bad?

And in passing that judgement, they still care whether a player can skate and shoot and pass and battle and create and defend and be relied upon to make good decisions because those are the things that decades of hockey culture have shown make a difference between winning a losing and GMs are a product of that culture. I’m willing to bet that the critics who say size is irrelevant have never been in the corner with Zdeno Chara.

Risto has value because of his age and because of his contract, but mostly because of his skill set. Before analytics, his +/- would have still drawn the critics, but he would still be regarded as a first-pairing defencemen for his size, his skill and his snarl. Analytics have devalued him in GM circles, certainly, or at least raised questions. But his skill set still holds a lot of weight.

How much weight, and with who is a fascinating study.

Zdeno Chara is an outlier and at his current age, his effectiveness has dropped quite a lot. 

Analytics are not all showing effect. That's just an untrue statement. Some do, some don't. 

[jsb]

I don't think the next trade is going to be a 1 for 1, I think it's going to be more like the Kane/Bogosian trade where we give up several pieces and we get back several pieces. Too many guys need to be moved and nobody is taking our trash with a gift without taking some of their trash with a gift.

[Taro T]

26 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

The flip side is that those who are drawn to Risto's physical attributes and attitude may go searching for justifications, accurate or not, to explain the poor metrics. It's not hard to imagine somebody thinking, perhaps subconsciously, "a 6'3 RHD who scores 40 with a mean streak simply has to be good, the numbers can't be right" and go from there. It's what I'm counting on when thinking of potential returns in a Risto trade. 

Or, it could be in the middle: he has some good strengths: he has good wheels, is strong in the corner, can box out well in front of the net, is a good PKer, has a solid shot, can make a good pass when given a bit of space, he looks to join the rush, is decent pinching in & winning battles along the boards, & has good stamina; and his flaws are obvious (at least to those of us who see every game & then analyze the #### out of it):

He doesn't hold his blue line well, can get lost when the other team has a good cycle going (which compounds when Eichel & he are on the ice together, as both can lose their coverage), lets up a bit when lower quality players are on the rush, is slow recovering when beaten, & is slow to process where to move the puck to at times (most noticeable when on a long shift under pressure in his own end or when QBing the PP). But a lot of that can be mitigated by giving him a partner that doesn't have those same issues, by playing him against other than the opponent's top line, and by limiting his ice time with Eichel.

He's not a top pairing material, but should be good as a 2nd pairing guy especially if paired with a complementary partner such as Pilut or McCabe.

For the love of all that is holy, don't pair him with Dahlin or Scandella.

[dudacek]

Here’s the flip side of the fan context:

Fans (speaking very generally) have a good grasp of their own players, but they also have an enormous tendency to exaggerate their flaws and the ceilings in the context of the league (Stafford, Roy, Pysyk, Guhle, Lehner...) and first impressions tend to cling. They have only a superficial grasp of the rest of the league, usually fuelled more by what they’ve read than what they’ve actually seen. 

Nylander: top 10 pick who wasn’t a popular choice, who didn’t make the NHL quickly and didn’t light it up outside the NHL - distraught Sabres fans say bust.

Jokiharju: late first who nobody heard of who played in the NHL early and got complimented by Q - desperate Hawks fans say star in the making.

Those impressions become their internet labels and the court of the internet declares “Sabres fleeced them.”

More objectively, Nylander was a top 10 talent who has yet to establish himself as an NHL player but showed signs at the end of the first year of his ELC that he might belong and Jokiharju was a top 30 talent who has yet to establish himself as an NHL player but showed signs at the beginning of the first year of his ELC that he might belong. Both showed very well against their peers at the WJC level. Both chafed at not being in the NHL. Jokiharju was more productive in the AHL, particularly when you factor in age and position. 

[LTS]

5 hours ago, tom webster said:

Two of the worst things about twitter. Respected insider randomly throwing out a name and then other people reporting half the story setting off a whole conversation about nothing.

The best thing about Twitter is that this tweet could have been floated as a favor to Botterill to see if it would generate a discussion.  It could also be floated by Detroit to see if Buffalo takes the bait. It could also be floated by....

Game theory baby!

[dudacek]

20 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Analytics are not all showing effect. That's just an untrue statement. Some do, some don't. 

Im sure that’s correct, but I was not referring to “analytics” like zone entries, which I consider just a new kind of counting stat, but the more cumulative ones that measure “how well the team does when Player A is on the ice” which are usually the ones that are cited to damn Risto.

 

[TrueBlueGED]

10 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Or, it could be in the middle: he has some good strengths: he has good wheels, is strong in the corner, can box out well in front of the net, is a good PKer, has a solid shot, can make a good pass when given a bit of space, he looks to join the rush, is decent pinching in & winning battles along the boards, & has good stamina; and his flaws are obvious (at least to those of us who see every game & then analyze the #### out of it):

He doesn't hold his blue line well, can get lost when the other team has a good cycle going (which compounds when Eichel & he are on the ice together, as both can lose their coverage), lets up a bit when lower quality players are on the rush, is slow recovering when beaten, & is slow to process where to move the puck to at times (most noticeable when on a long shift under pressure in his own end or when QBing the PP). But a lot of that can be mitigated by giving him a partner that doesn't have those same issues, by playing him against other than the opponent's top line, and by limiting his ice time with Eichel.

He's not a top pairing material, but should be good as a 2nd pairing guy especially if paired with a complementary partner such as Pilut or McCabe.

For the love of all that is holy, don't pair him with Dahlin or Scandella.

This is where I disagree. I don't think he's useless or among the worst defensemen in the league, but I think he fits to a T the classic 3rd pairing Dman who should run your second unit PP and get as little even strength ice as is reasonable. And for $5.4M, I need more than that. 

[Mustache of God]

8 minutes ago, LTS said:

The best thing about Twitter is that this tweet could have been floated as a favor to Botterill to see if it would generate a discussion.  It could also be floated by Detroit to see if Buffalo takes the bait. It could also be floated by....

Game theory baby!

Terry Pegula and his new tactic of guerilla-meddling.

[tom webster]

14 minutes ago, LTS said:

The best thing about Twitter is that this tweet could have been floated as a favor to Botterill to see if it would generate a discussion.  It could also be floated by Detroit to see if Buffalo takes the bait. It could also be floated by....

Game theory baby!

Do you seriously believe that similar conversations didn’t happen before Twitter?

On the other hand, ok, I’ll go with it

 

[Taro T]

10 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

This is where I disagree. I don't think he's useless or among the worst defensemen in the league, but I think he fits to a T the classic 3rd pairing Dman who should run your second unit PP and get as little even strength ice as is reasonable. And for $5.4M, I need more than that. 

That is clearly where we disagree. ?e

 We very likely though will get to see who's right this season as if he's traded he won't be top pairing (it'll likely be 2nd pairing ? ) and we can see how he does.  And should he somehow still be a Sabre in October, really have to believe Montour gets that 1RD slot ahead of him.

PS - He is clearly overpaid, but that really doesn't factor into where he actually belongs in a D battery.

Edited July 12, 2019 by Taro T

[North Buffalo]

30 minutes ago, LTS said:

The best thing about Twitter is that this tweet could have been floated as a favor to Botterill to see if it would generate a discussion.  It could also be floated by Detroit to see if Buffalo takes the bait. It could also be floated by....

Game theory baby!

Could be, we used float ideas in the press anonymously to get a discussion going especially if it made the other side look bad, or if we were concerned an idea internally had to many flaws.  Bad press allowed us justification on killing the idea... or helped raise funds even if we knew it was going nowhere. 

[dudacek]

38 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Zdeno Chara is an outlier and at his current age, his effectiveness has dropped quite a lot. 

This is true, but it doesn’t change my point.

I have never played at a high level at any age, but I’ve played rec hockey with my peers for most of my life and I don’t think the principle changes at higher levels.

I’ve got three inches and 15 pounds on one of my buddies, who is quicker and more athletic than me. He wins 2/3 of his battles against me, partly because of his quickness, but mostly because he has a strong lower half that he uses very effectively to get leverage underneath me. I give up 4 inches and 40 pounds to another friend who is neither quicker, nor more athletic than me. He wins 98 per cent of his battles no matter his opponent because he is a ***** monster and he knows how to use it.

I agree with you that size is not a huge factor in terms of how tall, or how heavy a player is. But strength, particularly leg strength, is. I would be surprised to see anyone who has played hockey disagreeing.

 

[dudacek]

So Friedman says Laine and the Jets are not on the same page at all.

He wants a short deal. They aren’t happy with his buy-in last year. He wasn’t happy with the way he was handled.

The Sabres are waiting to see who shakes free due to RFA issues. The Jets need an RD.

Thoughts?

[Sabres Fan in NS]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

So Friedman says Laine and the Jets are not on the same page at all.

He wants a short deal. They aren’t happy with his buy-in last year. He wasn’t happy with the way he was handled.

The Sabres are waiting to see who shakes free due to RFA issues. The Jets need an RD.

Thoughts?

Friedman is an idiot.