So #8

[Brawndo]

 

[Eleven]

6 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

 

The former congressman?

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

It’s one of the reasons I want to find away to get back into 1st rd by possibly trading next year’s first.  I think this draft is actually 13 deep and maybe 14 if Holloway takes off.

If I'm going to trade away next year's first round pick I would rather do it for a moderately young second line player that can help us this year. As I have repeatedly stated before I would be willing to trade our first round pick this year if the offer warranted it. If not, then keep the pick and make the right pick. From where the Sabres are positioned in this draft it should result in adding a talented prospect. When all is said and done this organization has to be more proficient and consistent in making sound hockey decisions. Eventually, when you do that it will be exhibited with better performances on the ice. It's not magic; it's basic competence.  

[Shootica]

1 hour ago, Brawndo said:

 

I'm sure the PR department likely knows no more about who Adams likes than we do, but it's interesting that they started with Rossi and Quinn after Pronman specifically mentioned both of them.

[Thorner]

7 hours ago, Shootica said:

Corey Pronman put out a new mock draft today that has us taking Rossi at #8.  He mentions that from what he's heard, the names most connected to us are Rossi, Raymond, and Quinn.

https://theathletic.com/2090914/2020/10/01/nhl-mock-draft-2020-corey-pronman-projects-all-seven-rounds?source=user-shared-article

 

2 hours ago, Shootica said:

I'm sure the PR department likely knows no more about who Adams likes than we do, but it's interesting that they started with Rossi and Quinn after Pronman specifically mentioned both of them.

Caught that too. Good, as I think I like their list. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

I Quinn a product of playing with Rossi or did they elevate each other? Serious question.  Is there concerns over his skating.

Scenario:  What if Rossi and Raymond are gone.  Would you trade down a slot or two draft Quinn at 10 or 11and try to get more picks which we desperately need?

[JohnC]

9 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I Quinn a product of playing with Rossi or did they elevate each other? Serious question.  Is there concerns over his skating.

Scenario:  What if Rossi and Raymond are gone.  Would you trade down a slot or two draft Quinn at 10 or 11and try to get more picks which we desperately need?

Don't overthink the situation. Take the best player when your turn comes up to go to the podium. 

[Curt]

27 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I Quinn a product of playing with Rossi or did they elevate each other? Serious question.  Is there concerns over his skating.

Scenario:  What if Rossi and Raymond are gone.  Would you trade down a slot or two draft Quinn at 10 or 11and try to get more picks which we desperately need?

They didn’t play together at ES, just on the PP.  I think it helped both of them that there was another very good line for the opposition to worry about.

Quinn’s skating is good.  It improved a lot from the season before and that’s one reason that he was able to have such an impressive jump in production.  Its not amazing but I wouldn’t be worried about his skating.

I would be worried more about his age.  He is super old for his draft year.  He was only 4 days away from being eligible for the 2019 draft, and he maybe wouldn’t even have been drafted if he’d been eligible in 2019.  He improved from last season due to improved skating and physical development.  How much better is he going to get?

Personally, I probably wouldn’t trade down for Quinn.  If I did trade down, it would be with someone else in mind.

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I Quinn a product of playing with Rossi or did they elevate each other? Serious question.  Is there concerns over his skating.

Scenario:  What if Rossi and Raymond are gone.  Would you trade down a slot or two draft Quinn at 10 or 11and try to get more picks which we desperately need?

Curt answered your question well, but what sold me on Quinn was the tape.

He’s by no means one of those goal scorers who just lurks and snipes. He creates his own offence and he attacks the defence and the puck carrier. Goes both ways hard.

As far as the age goes,  he is four days older than Rossi. He’s also six months younger than Dylan Cozens and put up similar numbers in arguably a harder league.

[kas23]

Older age can also be to our advantage. The more physically (and mentally) mature/developed they are, the sooner they will be able to secure a roster spot on the Sabres. 

[Brawndo]

4 minutes ago, kas23 said:

Older age can also be to our advantage. The more physically (and mentally) mature/developed they are, the sooner they will be able to secure a roster spot on the Sabres. 

Absolutely, Rossi could make the team this year, Quinn probably next.

[Curt]

9 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Curt answered your question well, but what sold me on Quinn was the tape.

He’s by no means one of those goal scorers who just lurks and snipes. He creates his own offence and he attacks the defence and the puck carrier. Goes both ways hard.

As far as the age goes,  he is four days older than Rossi. He’s also six months younger than Dylan Cozens and put up similar numbers in arguably a harder league.

Yeah, I don’t hate him.  Just not one of my favorites.  I tend to like players with a wide skill set, so I don’t tend to be in on “pure” goal scorers.  You are right though, he isn’t really “just” a lurker/sniper type.

Age is one factor.  There are a lot of other things about Rossi that I like so much more.

OHL generally has more goals than the WHL.  It’s harder to produce points in the WHL.  The OHL goals per game went way up this season.  In general OHL defense was not good.

11 minutes ago, kas23 said:

Older age can also be to our advantage. The more physically (and mentally) mature/developed they are, the sooner they will be able to secure a roster spot on the Sabres. 

This is certainly true in some cases.

[Weave]

9 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

 

Scenario:  What if Rossi and Raymond are gone.  Would you trade down a slot or two draft Quinn at 10 or 11and try to get more picks which we desperately need?

No.  You don't trade down in the NHL draft.  The odds of a lower pick making it are so much worse in the NHL draft.  Trading down gets you a lower odds unknown commodity.  Select the best on your draft board or trade it for a player.  Period.

[LGR4GM]

This is a quick reminder that Arthur Kaliyev who we could have drafted at 31, scored 51 goals last season. Also Nick Robertson scored 55 goals this season in the OHL. Robertson is 8 days younger than Quinn. 

While ppl are all giddy about Quinn, I would urge caution. Quinn played for a very very good team. He scored 34 ES goals in the OHL which had a massive increase in scoring this past season. Seth Jarvis who was the best player on his team scored 32 ES goals. 

My point is I don't think Quinn is as good as the 52 goals make it look. He was the triggerman on a very good PP with Marco Rossi. Meanwhile Seth Jarvis was over there on his own doing it on his own. Quinn is the 3rd or 4th highest scoring player on his team. Jarvis is 1st... by 28 points. The WHL is a harder defensive league on top of that. My point is that if I want a righty that scores goals, I am taking Seth Jarvis. His prior 2 years are better and I will take 10 less goals on a worse team in a tougher league for a player that has simply more talent. Alllllllllll that said, Quinn is good and if you watch his tape you can see a player that does drive play. I will find a highlight and post it. 

Quinn: Even strength 34g, 44pts

Jarvis: Even strength 32g, 55pts

Edited October 2, 2020 by LGR4GM

[LGR4GM]

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

2 hours ago, Weave said:

No.  You don't trade down in the NHL draft.  The odds of a lower pick making it are so much worse in the NHL draft.  Trading down gets you a lower odds unknown commodity.  Select the best on your draft board or trade it for a player.  Period.

Actually according to the research done by Scott Cullen when he was at TSN, the 8th slot has historically been the worst slot in the top 10, aka most top 10 busts.  Also the odds of getting a top 6 player or top 4D in the top 10 to 12 are about the same historically.  The significant drops are at 15 and then at 25.  

The marginal difference if any between 8 and 10 plus getting a 2nd rd pick is often worth it historically.  

if I can dig up his old articles I’ll post the numbers

Edited October 2, 2020 by GASabresIUFAN

[JohnC]

19 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Actually according to the research done by Scott Cullen when he was at TSN, the 8th slot has historically been the worst slot in the top 10, aka most top 10 busts.  Also the odds of getting a top 6 player or top 4D in the top 10 to 12 are about the same historically.  The significant drops are at 15 and then at 25.  

The marginal difference if any between 8 and 10 plus getting a 2nd rd pick is often worth it historically.  

if I can dig up his old articles I’ll post the numbers

When evaluating this draft it would be misguided in taking an historical approach to it. Each draft year is different. Assessing it from a historical perspective can be deceiving compared to assessing this draft year. It is likely that if the Sabres maintain their draft position they will come away with a second line caliber of forward, or maybe even better. And in this draft there is a clump of players from 4-10 or so that from a ranking standpoint are indistinguishable/interchangeable. As I said in a prior post it would be a mistake to play it cute and try to outsmart others. The advice that most people are advocating for is to follow your draft board and make your pick when your turn comes up. That is the right approach to take. 

This may sound contradictory but I do see a scenario where I would be willing to trade down. If a trade offer was made for a moderately young second line caliber of player for an exchange of first round picks I would seriously consider the offer. As with every trade discussion it comes down to what is the return. If Tampa offered Cirelli and an exchange of picks I would make that deal.  

[Thorner]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Actually according to the research done by Scott Cullen when he was at TSN, the 8th slot has historically been the worst slot in the top 10, aka most top 10 busts.  Also the odds of getting a top 6 player or top 4D in the top 10 to 12 are about the same historically.  The significant drops are at 15 and then at 25.  

The marginal difference if any between 8 and 10 plus getting a 2nd rd pick is often worth it historically.  

if I can dig up his old articles I’ll post the numbers

Yep. It's trading up that's more dicey from an asset standpoint. 

"Don't play it cute, take the guy highest on your board" (full stop) is actually questionable logic - it requires the hubris to think you are any more likely to come up with a definitive list for an admittedly craps shoot process. If you can move down to a spot that is still within your current evaluaed tier (you'll have a reasonable range, it's impossible to definitively and assuredly rank who'll be better), it absolutely makes sense to trade down a bit, remaining in the tier, and picking up assets that can be used on additional picks, or more importantly trades for real players. 

You don't trade down out of Rossi if you've think he's a future 1C. That's the misconception - you don't trade down from a player you rank as having a high likelihood of being better than the next guy on your list. Counting on the added assets to make up the difference. That's getting cute. 

But if you are sitting at 8 hypothetically and you are picking between 3 wingers you have very closely ranked - yes trade down a couple spots if someone offers you a nice asset. 

With closely ranked players you can't predict who will end up better and it's foolish to think you can to a certainty. The surefire asset gain while maintaining your pick in that tier is the best bet. 

Edited October 2, 2020 by Thorny

[Curt]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Actually according to the research done by Scott Cullen when he was at TSN, the 8th slot has historically been the worst slot in the top 10, aka most top 10 busts.  Also the odds of getting a top 6 player or top 4D in the top 10 to 12 are about the same historically.  The significant drops are at 15 and then at 25.  

The marginal difference if any between 8 and 10 plus getting a 2nd rd pick is often worth it historically.  

if I can dig up his old articles I’ll post the numbers

This as a generalization may be true, but I think that’s often the wrong way to look at it.

I think that when considering trading down from 8 to wherever, you need to look at the specific players who are there at 8 and who you project to be available at 10, or 12, or wherever.

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Quinn: Even strength 34g, 44pts

Jarvis: Even strength 32g, 55pts

Rossi: Even Strength 31g, 58pts (these points are primary points btw so goals and first assists)

[JohnC]

42 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Yep. It's trading up that's more dicey from an asset standpoint. 

"Don't play it cute, take the guy highest on your board" (full stop) is actually questionable logic - it requires the hubris to think you are any more likely to come up with a definitive list for an admittedly craps shoot process. If you can move down to a spot that is still within your current evaluaed tier (you'll have a reasonable range, it's impossible to definitively and assuredly rank who'll be better), it absolutely makes sense to trade down a bit, remaining in the tier, and picking up assets that can be used on additional picks, or more importantly trades for real players. 

You don't trade down out of Rossi if you've think he's a future 1C. That's the misconception - you don't trade down from a player you rank as having a high likelihood of being better than the next guy on your list. Counting on the added assets to make up the difference. That's getting cute. 

But if you are sitting at 8 hypothetically and you are picking between 3 wingers you have very closely ranked - yes trade down a couple spots if someone offers you a nice asset. 

With closely ranked players you can't predict who will end up better and it's foolish to think you can to a certainty. The surefire asset gain while maintaining your pick in that tier is the best bet. 

Trading down a spot or two is a reasonable tactic to take but that is not the more likely scenario. It is more likely that a team desiring to move up is farther down the draft board moving you beyond your tier group. And what you are not accounting for is that other teams that you don't suspect can move ahead of you in your lower position. You can't control for those surprise movements of other teams moving up to pick one of the players that you are eyeballing. My preference considering where we are drafting from is simply make the pick. It should result in a high quality prospect. 

If you go back and read my prior response it stated that if a scenario came up where a trade was offered for an established quality player and an exchange of picks I would consider it. So contrary to what you stated I am open to trade options but I'm also leaning toward caution.  

Edited October 2, 2020 by JohnC

[French Collection]

Without an NHL combine, it has been more challenging to determine any growth in size or strength on some of these guys. Jarvis could now be 5’11 175, which would eliminate all of the small chatter.I hope there is some due diligence done during the FaceTime interviews.

I am still in the Rossi camp but if the Sabres are left with a choice of 3 of the RW, Raymond, Holtz, Quinn and Jarvis, Lundell and 1 of the D, it could be possible to move down and still get their guy + an asset.

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

This is a quick reminder that Arthur Kaliyev who we could have drafted at 31, scored 51 goals last season. Also Nick Robertson scored 55 goals this season in the OHL. Robertson is 8 days younger than Quinn. 

While ppl are all giddy about Quinn, I would urge caution. Quinn played for a very very good team. He scored 34 ES goals in the OHL which had a massive increase in scoring this past season. Seth Jarvis who was the best player on his team scored 32 ES goals. 

My point is I don't think Quinn is as good as the 52 goals make it look. He was the triggerman on a very good PP with Marco Rossi. Meanwhile Seth Jarvis was over there on his own doing it on his own. Quinn is the 3rd or 4th highest scoring player on his team. Jarvis is 1st... by 28 points. The WHL is a harder defensive league on top of that. My point is that if I want a righty that scores goals, I am taking Seth Jarvis. His prior 2 years are better and I will take 10 less goals on a worse team in a tougher league for a player that has simply more talent. Alllllllllll that said, Quinn is good and if you watch his tape you can see a player that does drive play. I will find a highlight and post it. 

Quinn: Even strength 34g, 44pts

Jarvis: Even strength 32g, 55pts

What I read here is Quinn produces at a similar rate to three players LGR really, really loves and talks about all the time, one of whom even got a taste of the NHL this year. (Minor correction, Robertson is 8 days older)

As an aside, not a fan of the developing shorthand that PP goals somehow don’t count. The narrative here should be that Quinn is a very good ES scorer, AND he’s a huge threat on the PP.

[LGR4GM]

23 minutes ago, dudacek said:

What I read here is Quinn produces at a similar rate to three players LGR really, really loves and talks about all the time, one of whom even got a taste of the NHL this year. (Minor correction, Robertson is 8 days older)

As an aside, not a fan of the developing shorthand that PP goals somehow don’t count. The narrative here should be that Quinn is a very good ES scorer, AND he’s a huge threat on the PP.

Then you read that incorrectly. Kaliyev and Roberston went in the 2nd round. I wouldn't have taken either in the top 10. My point is how badly the Sabres find value. They could have drafted a player the same age with equivalent production to Quinn at 31 and ***** it up.

PP points are less stable than even strength production. If I put Seth Jarvis on Ottawa 67's pp he would double his pp points. Even strength scoring is a way to normalize some of the noise that comes with pp time. Even still you are talking about 52 goals for Quinn versus 42 (in 4 less games) for Jarvis all while Jarvis plays in a more defensive league and beat Quinn in overall points. 89 to 98. 

I don't see it in video, I don't see it in numbers, I don't see it in scouting reports. Seth Jarvis by all accounts is the better player but Quinn because he hit that magical 52 goal threshold is getting all the praise even though if you back up and look at how they did without PP numbers, Jarvis is equivalent and was on a worse team. 

[Weave]

2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Actually according to the research done by Scott Cullen when he was at TSN, the 8th slot has historically been the worst slot in the top 10, aka most top 10 busts.  Also the odds of getting a top 6 player or top 4D in the top 10 to 12 are about the same historically.  The significant drops are at 15 and then at 25.  

The marginal difference if any between 8 and 10 plus getting a 2nd rd pick is often worth it historically.  

if I can dig up his old articles I’ll post the numbers

Moving 2-4 spots?  Hell no.  Take the player you want at the spot you're in.  Trading down gains you a low % draft pick for the privilege of picking from whats left over afer the teams above you pick. The greatest advantage to picking 8 is you have more to choose from than the teams picking after you.  A 2nd, or 3rd round pick with a 25% or less chance of ever making an impact  is not good compensation for taking away the number of choices you have at 8 to get a player that makes an impact.