What should the Sabres do with the 8th pick?

[Palm Trees And Taxes]

10 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Murray targeted what he wanted and paid the price. Botterill was all about low-risk conventional thinking.

Adams is preaching an unconventional approach to Scouting and rating players, which I suspect may result in unconventional conclusions and unexpected moves. Pick 8s availability will depend on its value in his system versus its value in the free market.

Agree, which is why I can see Adams taking a guy like C/RW Dawson Mercer or C Anton Lundell at 8 and many here will grumble initially.

[kas23]

1 hour ago, Curt said:

Right, and because of his skill set and the game he plays, I’m concerned that he won’t score all that much, and also doesn’t bring much else to the table.

If he was able to get himself into high danger areas more often, I might feel differently, but he often seems content to shoot it from low danger areas.  I’m concerned that he doesn’t create, or get himself in position for, scoring chances.  Even with a great shot, I don’t think shooting it from distance as a go to move is a recipe for success in the NHL.

I guess the question becomes, can we improve the production of this player by coaching him to be in those tough areas? There’s no question the guy knows how to put the puck in the net. But, in the NHL, he’ll need to be in front of net more. Can he develop into this type of player? I have no clue, but people like Crowe may have a better idea of the success rate of such a transition. If there is a very low success rate of this, then cross him off the list. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

The Sabres need to turn this pick into 2 players.  My thought is trading down to pick up an NHL forward or a prospect close to NHL ready and a mid to late first.  

[dudacek]

3 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

The Sabres need to turn this pick into 2 players.  My thought is trading down to pick up an NHL forward or a prospect close to NHL ready and a mid to late first.  

The Sabres need to turn this pick into a top six forward. Preferably now, but within three years from now is acceptable.

If they can get more, that’s gravy.

[PromoTheRobot]

3 hours ago, Gatorman0519 said:

8th is useless to turn this thing around.  I would of needed top 5 to stay.  It’s mind-boggling to believe 7 of the last 8 years we’ve lost position.  But our management can’t draft worth a hill of beans anyways.  We need players now to change this culture ASAP.  This year is about culture change and saving Eichel. 

 

Well those people are gone now. We freaked out over the bloodbath but we're those people doing the job? Will the Kru & Kev crew reinvent the team?

[Thorner]

2 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Seriously though I think we need to start considering a reduced salary cap next two years.  It certainly won't go up and we'll need cheap players on their ELC.

You will see a lot of young players being pushed into the league because of it too along with there might not being an AHL season.

Our top 6 next year might very well be

Oloffson - Eichel - Reinhart

Skinner - Cozens - Holtz ???

Don't really know how close Holtz is to being NHL ready, but if its only one year and no AHL I can see him getting a shot, still wonder what mike hoffman would ask though.

An absolutely unacceptable top 6, both in terms of the quality of team fans deserve, and the fact that they'll be going out of their way to ruin Cozens. I don't know that I can support this team if Cozens is the 2C plan as a rookie, and I watch every game. 

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

Friedman said the league is projecting a static cap for the next three years in order to cope with the COVID losses.

@Thorny, how does that affect your Reinhart scenario?

Not a ton, if the cap is static. Players like Reinhart fetch on the open market. Some teams may be out of it with a lower budget, but there will be teams that can make it happen and it only takes one to drive up the price. 

I don't think the scenario is likely, at all, that there isn't at least 1 team out there that would be willing to give Sam more than the sub-7 figures I've seen tossed around. Someone will be willing to pay more than that/Buffalo. 

The good news is perhaps a *slight* overpay on our end gets it done. We still only have 3 unarguable top 6 forwards, we need to keep Sam. I'd give him the 7.5 now if it keeps him from arbitration, and getting one year perilously closer to UFA, where he knows he's going to get at least what the Sabres would term "fair" (6.5?) value. 

Edited June 27, 2020 by Thorny

[Thorner]

P.S. I love the results of the poll so far

[GASabresIUFAN]

34 minutes ago, dudacek said:

The Sabres need to turn this pick into a top six forward. Preferably now, but within three years from now is acceptable.

If they can get more, that’s gravy.

There is so much depth in this draft that I think we can get nearly as good a prospect at 18-20 that we will at 8 but dropping the 10 slots might help our depth now. This way we get the best of both worlds.

[Thorner]

5 hours ago, Cal Naughton Jr said:

To me it’s a no brainer. The 8th overall pick does nothing to help this team for the next 2-3 years. #8 pick, player, prospect for a 2nd line center.

SHAKE AND BAKE, Cal, Shake and Bake!

[Thorner]

4 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

By the way, here is a comparison of VO to Holtz from Vogl.  https://theathletic.com/1893736/2020/06/26/nhl-mock-draft-completing-all-the-first-round-picks-after-the-first-lottery/

 

The, "ya, Buffalo would be happy to have Holtz" thing from the article....

Maybe I'm on an island, but from that spot? Hell no. I'm not even sure Olofsson is a top 6 even strength player yet. I like the guy, but he's a PP fiend right now and that's about it. 

3 hours ago, Weave said:

I’m for moving the pick for the right player coming back.  I’ll worry about depth in our development system only after we’ve got a full roster of decent NHL players on the ice.

We've seen what happens when we don’t have players to slot into key positions.  We end up playing kids that aren’t ready like Casey and Tage.  So I’m hoping the team prioritizes filling key holes like 2C and goal and then fill the developmental system.

Exactly. 

The easiest and best way to give your kids a fighting shot at adequately seizing roles on your team is to make those roles attainable. Let's get a legit, current Top 6 in there, and then worry about stocking the farm with guys, who now have much less pressure and much more reasonable expectations. 

If the pick can't be moved for a top 6 player (or we can get that for less), then yes, keep it. But absolutely you move it for a young bonafide talent that has already achieved 2nd line status. 

Of course you do. How damn good does Cozens look right now if the extent of what we NEED from his is 3C in a couple years? If we say, had a certain someone else holding down that spot right now? Hell, we wouldn't even be needing to worry about him necessarily taking over a C spot in timely fashion and Eichel may have himself a young winger, for now, with excellent drive, put in a place to succeed next to an ice-tilter like Jack and a net-fiend like Skinner. 

Edited June 27, 2020 by Thorny

[Thorner]

2 hours ago, Curt said:

Nah, Ovechkin is built like a bull, plays like a bull, goes hard to the net, in addition to his elite shot.

The Laine comparisons to Ovi used to drive me up the wall. Come on. Not even close to the same type of player. 

2 hours ago, Curt said:

Right, and because of his skill set and the game he plays, I’m concerned that he won’t score all that much, and also doesn’t bring much else to the table.

If he was able to get himself into high danger areas more often, I might feel differently, but he often seems content to shoot it from low danger areas.  I’m concerned that he doesn’t create, or get himself in position for, scoring chances.  Even with a great shot, I don’t think shooting it from distance as a go to move is a recipe for success in the NHL.

I'm looking for players that are top 6 staples regardless of who they are lining up with. Eichel, Reinhart, and Skinner are those players. Olofsson, at this stage, is not, IMO. That's not to say he can't play top 6, if he's matched up with an elite level Eichel feeding him every which way, with that type of style fit. 

But for true flexibility and success we need the bonafides. I obviously can't say Holtz won't be that one day, but the possibility of acquiring that top-6-certain talent level player, if possible, is why the pick needs to be on the table. 

Makes it all the more likely the Holtz we draft in 2021 or 2022 finds an easier path to success. 

 

Edited June 27, 2020 by Thorny

[Thorner]

2 hours ago, Ruff Around The Edges said:

I would keep the 8th overall pick. I truly believe an organization can never have enough top young talent.

The sins of GMTM have really hurt. It's time to restock.

The #8 overall this year is actually better then most seasons; the Top 10 of this draft is superb. I would deal Risto to get that 2nd center.

Botterill traded more picks than Murray. It's a funny thing that that's the narrative around Murray but not Botterill. Botterill pissed away mid round picks like they were valueless. 

But that's ok, we have Jimmy Veeeezey instead of the option of an offer sheet for Cirelli. 

Edited June 27, 2020 by Thorny

[DHawerchuk10]

10 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Botterill traded more picks than Murray. It's a funny thing that that's the narrative around Murray but not Botterill. Botterill pissed away mid round picks like they were valueless. 

But that's ok, we have Jimmy Veeeezey instead of the option of an offer sheet for Cirelli. 

Murray tossed away 1st and 2nd rounders, thus the narrative.

[Thorner]

Just now, DHawerchuk10 said:

Murray tossed away 1st and 2nd rounders, thus the narrative.

He traded less away in totality than Botterill, though. 

[dudacek]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Botterill traded more picks than Murray. It's a funny thing that that's the narrative around Murray but not Botterill. Botterill pissed away mid round picks like they were valueless. 

Blaming Murray's drafting for the Sabres woes is overdone. In three drafts he acquired:

A franchise centre (Jack), an elite 2C (O'Reilly), 3 top-6 wingers (Sam, Evander, Victor), a starting goalie (Lehner) and 4 other players who still have NHL potential (Asplund, Borgen, Nylander, Guhle)

Yes, he had extra ammunition, but I doubt you'd find many teams who pulled a better haul over three years of drafts than that.

[Thorner]

5 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Blaming Murray's drafting for the Sabres woes is overdone. In three drafts he acquired:

A franchise centre (Jack), an elite 2C (O'Reilly), 3 top-6 wingers (Sam, Evander, Victor), a starting goalie (Lehner) and 4 other players who still have NHL potential (Asplund, Borgen, Nylander, Guhle)

Yes, he had extra ammunition, but I doubt you'd find many teams who pulled a better haul over three years of drafts than that.

Right. And I'm adding up their traded picks right now. It's a rough calculation, but:

Murray - After cancelling out every, say, traded 2nd for acquired 2nd, gave up: (1) 4th, (1) 2nd, and (1) first. Added to that (2) 3rds, and (1) 5th

Can we cancel out the 2 acquired 3rds, and that acquired 5th, for the traded away 2nd and 4th? If so, Murray in grand total...traded a 1st. Obviously I'm not taking the time to factor in placement of the picks, but this is a rough calculation just to get an idea. 

Botterill next...

Edited June 27, 2020 by Thorny

[bob_sauve28]

Trade a high quality player that will be in the organization for a decade, probably at a decent salary cap hit, for a more expensive and shorter term player. I think any trade would have to include a salary dump on our part. 

 

Just take the pick 

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Right. And I'm adding up their traded picks right now. It's a rough calculation, but:

Murray - After cancelling out every, say, traded 2nd for acquired 2nd, gave up: (1) 4th, (1) 2nd, and (1) first. Added to that (2) 3rds, and (1) 5th

Can we cancel out the 2 acquired 3rds, and that acquired 5th, for the traded away 2nd and 4th? If so, Murray in grand total...traded a 1st. 

Who traded Brandon McNab? I can’t keep track of the revolving door 

[Thorner]

19 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Right. And I'm adding up their traded picks right now. It's a rough calculation, but:

Murray - After cancelling out every, say, traded 2nd for acquired 2nd, gave up: (1) 4th, (1) 2nd, and (1) first. Added to that (2) 3rds, and (1) 5th

Can we cancel out the 2 acquired 3rds, and that acquired 5th, for the traded away 2nd and 4th? If so, Murray in grand total...traded a 1st. Obviously I'm not taking the time to factor in placement of the picks, but this is a rough calculation just to get an idea. 

Botterill next...

Botterill - 

Gave away in picks what amounted to: (1) 2nd, (4) 3rds, (2) 5ths. 

And added - (1) 1st. 

Can a 2nd, and 4 3rd round picks cancel out a late 1st? If so, Botterill lost 2 5th rounds picks, and Murray, the bastard who gave away all our draft picks, gave away one 1st. If the narrative is Murray pissed away all our picks for immediate help, Botterill, the patient builder, did nearly the same thing. 

Yes, by this calculation, Botteril gave up a couple 5ths and Murray a 1st, but how many legit first line centers did Botterill trade for? Botterill's total return includes GIVING UP that player, to @dudacek's point. 

Edited June 27, 2020 by Thorny

[dudacek]

The Bruins did a terrific job restocking their franchise thought the draft between 2014-16, headlined by McAvoy and Pastrnak. The Leafs added their three young studs.

The rest of the division did very little other than Ekblad and Cirelli.

 

If you want to play what if, think if the Sabres had taken McAvoy or Sergachev in 2016, and Botterill never made the O'Reilly trade. Everything else stayed the same.

Olofsson Eichel Reinhart

Skinner O'Reilly Simmonds

Johansson Cozens Kahun

Girgensons Larsson Okposo

Dahlin McAvoy

Pilut Ristolainen

McCabe Montour

Ulmark

Edited June 27, 2020 by dudacek

[Thorner]

^ yer an arse

[SpaceAlbatross]

We need to trade a couple of our D men for a 2C if possible. We can’t trade picks that we will be needing when we have 4/5 players making 7-10 million a year each. I know saying that it’s all about now. I just think we are, as crazy as it sounds, a couple of hockey trades away from really turning the corner. We have enough Defensemen getting ready to make the jump over the next 3 years or so. We need to really manage the cap with all the high end contracts we have. 

[Thorner]

42 minutes ago, SpaceAlbatross said:

We need to trade a couple of our D men for a 2C if possible. We can’t trade picks that we will be needing when we have 4/5 players making 7-10 million a year each. I know saying that it’s all about now. I just think we are, as crazy as it sounds, a couple of hockey trades away from really turning the corner. We have enough Defensemen getting ready to make the jump over the next 3 years or so. We need to really manage the cap with all the high end contracts we have. 

Acquiring 2C w/o dealing 2020 1st > Acquiring 2C with dealing 2020 1st > Not acquiring a 2C

[Huckleberry]

3 hours ago, Thorny said:

An absolutely unacceptable top 6, both in terms of the quality of team fans deserve, and the fact that they'll be going out of their way to ruin Cozens. I don't know that I can support this team if Cozens is the 2C plan as a rookie, and I watch every game. 

Not a ton, if the cap is static. Players like Reinhart fetch on the open market. Some teams may be out of it with a lower budget, but there will be teams that can make it happen and it only takes one to drive up the price. 

I don't think the scenario is likely, at all, that there isn't at least 1 team out there that would be willing to give Sam more than the sub-7 figures I've seen tossed around. Someone will be willing to pay more than that/Buffalo. 

The good news is perhaps a *slight* overpay on our end gets it done. We still only have 3 unarguable top 6 forwards, we need to keep Sam. I'd give him the 7.5 now if it keeps him from arbitration, and getting one year perilously closer to UFA, where he knows he's going to get at least what the Sabres would term "fair" (6.5?) value. 

I'm being realistic, Cozens is a much more advanced than Mittelstadt and with the new parity coming up....

I really have no reason to believe than any team in any pro league wouldn't need to downsize in the current economic climate.

[Thorner]

11 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I'm being realistic, Cozens is a much more advanced than Mittelstadt and with the new parity coming up....

I really have no reason to believe than any team in any pro league wouldn't need to downsize in the current economic climate.

The only way that top 6 would be acceptable is if that downsize you speak of causes the rest of the league to regress to the point where it's actually representative of an average team's top 6. The cap is staying the same as last year. Maybe teams don't get better, but I don't see them coming so far back to the pack that a bad team doing nothing is all of a sudden playoff caliber. 

Edited June 28, 2020 by Thorny

[Huckleberry]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

The only way that top 6 would be acceptable is if that downsize you speak of causes the rest of the league to regress to the point where it's actually representative of an average team's top 6. The cap is staying the same as last year. Maybe teams don't get better, but I don't see them coming so far back to the pack that a bad team doing nothing is all of a sudden playoff caliber. 

I'm not talking about next years cap, a lot of pro teams are still in lalalala land, same same as housing market.

People talk about second covid-19 wave coming, no clue at all no one, but worst case everyone shrinks down and economy too.