2020-'21 Sabres Prospects

[North Buffalo]

5 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

https://theathletic.com/2229558/2021/01/21/nhl-team-prospect-rankings/

Scott Wheeler is doing his NHL prospect pools.  So far he has ranked 21-31 (Sabres aren't ranked yet).  

However the reason I bring this up now is his definition of a prospect.  We have had this discussion here and I am and remain against the artificial 100 game NHL limit.  Apparently Wheeler no longer believe is such a limit either.  Here is his definition.

To be eligible for inclusion, a skater must be:

I would use 24 and under, because I think some guys, like VO, continue to develop past 23. For NHL experience, I'm glad he isn't using any pre-determine number of games. However, for both parts of his definition I'd like to see him use some more objective criteria such as waiver status, rookie status, and what league someone is playing in.  I'd also like to know how their NHL organization views them.  My guess is the Sabres viewed 24 year old VO as an important prospect two year ago.  The 100 game cutoff would have eliminated guys like Thompson and Mitts, but as we now know, both guys were and are still developing.  

I'm curious where Wheeler places our pipeline.  Under the expanded definition we are looking at Cozens, Quinn, Mitts, Thompson, Asplund, R2,  JJP and Pekar upfront. (Also Rousek, now 21, is blowing up in the czeck republic, w 24 pts (12 goals) in 33 games; He had 29 pts in 52 games last year) Bryson, Samuelsson, Johnson, and Laaksonen on defense plus UPL and Portillo in goal.  I know my friend @LGR4GM is not a huge fan of our pipeline before JJP and Quinn were added, but it will be interesting to see what Wheeler thinks.  

You did forget Peterka... he has shown well overseas so far

[tom webster]

7 minutes ago, North Buffalo said:

You did forget Peterka... he has shown well overseas so far

No, he has JJP included 

[GASabresIUFAN]

54 minutes ago, tom webster said:

No, he has JJP included 

Mentioned twice in fact.

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, tom webster said:

I love that you consistently put Casey in the “still developing” category.

What is really surprising is that you, who argue about players getting better because they get more physically developed, don’t have Mitts, 22, as still developing.  Given what we saw with the development of Thompson and VO and the comments from Taylor and RK, I actually find it hard to believe how many here disagree.  

[GASabresIUFAN]

57 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

VO is almost the same player he was when he joined Rochester. The only development he did was picking up the speed and rink of the NA game. 

Tage still has the jury out. I think his size means he will always be a somewhat slow and awkward giraffe. I will give him credit for adding weight. 

Mitts problem wasn't his muscles, it was his lack of compete and being able to play a team game. He's soft in the corners and his skating is just okay. 

Other then the last scrimmage, where he played well with Quinn, when is the last time you saw him play? Buffalo last season?  Did you see him every game and practice in Rochester?  How do you know your evaluation is accurate without recent information?  Until he plays again in the NHL, you have zero idea and either do I of what he has become.  The only people that see him day in and day out say his compete level is better, he is more physically mature and is play a more complete game.  

Edited January 22, 2021 by GASabresIUFAN

[dudacek]

I don't think Tage has looked slow or awkward at all this year, especially considering where he was in his first year here.

 

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

I don't think Tage has looked slow or awkward at all this year, especially considering where he was in his first year here.

 

When watching TT's games this season I didn't see him being out of place. That's not to say that his play was very noteworthy. Because it wasn't.  But as you noted not being a drag on the ice and being an active participant is in itself a step (not leap) forward. If with playing time his play doesn't show improvement then that status quo performance will indicate that what he is is what he is and not what was hoped for. I'm cautiously optimistic about him. In comparison, I'm incautiously optimistic about Cozens. It's not difficult to believe that he is going to steadily get better as the season advances and become a contributing player in his rookie year.  

[tom webster]

2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

What is really surprising is that you, who argue about players getting better because they get more physically developed, don’t have Mitts, 22, as still developing.  Given what we saw with the development of Thompson and VO and the comments from Taylor and RK, I actually find it hard to believe how many here disagree.  

All I know is he is so far this year he has fallen behind Tage and Asplund. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

11 minutes ago, tom webster said:

All I know is he is so far this year he has fallen behind Tage and Asplund. 

I figured this was coming.  Asplund was placed in the lineup because he is a D first forward and that was the role RK wanted in the one game he played.

[tom webster]

4 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I figured this was coming.  Asplund was placed in the lineup because he is a D first forward and that was the role RK wanted in the one game he played.

Do you have a quote indicating that? 
Anyway, like  LGR4GM said, I hope I’m wrong but I wouldn’t be surprised if Casey never plays another minute for Buffalo. 
 

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, tom webster said:

Do you have a quote indicating that? 
Anyway, like  LGR4GM said, I hope I’m wrong but I wouldn’t be surprised if Casey never plays another minute for Buffalo. 
 

He part of the (presumably) impending goaltender trade?

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, tom webster said:

Do you have a quote indicating that? 
Anyway, like  LGR4GM said, I hope I’m wrong but I wouldn’t be surprised if Casey never plays another minute for Buffalo. 
 

Your opinion strictly based on what you've seen of his play, or coloured by things you've heard being said in or around the organization?

[GASabresIUFAN]

24 minutes ago, tom webster said:

Do you have a quote indicating that? 
Anyway, like  LGR4GM said, I hope I’m wrong but I wouldn’t be surprised if Casey never plays another minute for Buffalo. 
 

Yeah, he was placed on RK’s shutdown line with Eakin and Rieder.  

[dudacek]

6 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Yeah, he was placed on RK’s shutdown line with Eakin and Rieder.  

This is something most of us, including me, have defaulted to. I think it needs to be challenged.

I have not noticed any attempt to match this line against the Backstrom or Giroux lines. I have not noticed Ralph doing much matching at all, save an apparent preference to match strength (Jack's line) against strength.

Does anyone have access to this info?

[Curt]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I figured this was coming.  Asplund was placed in the lineup because he is a D first forward and that was the role RK wanted in the one game he played.

I actually agree with this.  Asplund could very well be ahead of Mitts in the hearts and minds of the organization, but they are very different players, so it hard to say.  Could just depends what type of player Ralph wanted to add to the lineup.

[Brawndo]

Scott Wheeler has the Sabres Prospect Group at 15th on His List 

[Brawndo]

The Tiers

Each of my prospect pool rankings will be broken down into team-specific tiers to give you a better sense of the talent proximity from one player to the next (a gap which is sometimes minute and in other cases quite pronounced).

There’s not a lot to get excited about in players 7-15 within the Sabres’ pool but they could get two star forwards, a middle-of-the-roster forward, a goalie (I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect one of them to work out) and a useful defender out of those first three tiers.

He likes the Top Six a lot, the remaining is what weakens the pool ranking 

[tom webster]

28 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

The Tiers

Each of my prospect pool rankings will be broken down into team-specific tiers to give you a better sense of the talent proximity from one player to the next (a gap which is sometimes minute and in other cases quite pronounced).

There’s not a lot to get excited about in players 7-15 within the Sabres’ pool but they could get two star forwards, a middle-of-the-roster forward, a goalie (I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect one of them to work out) and a useful defender out of those first three tiers.

He likes the Top Six a lot, the remaining is what weakens the pool ranking 

To me, Huglen is the wildcard. He had top six potential till injuries curtailed him. He’s looked pretty good in his comeback but usually back injuries never fully go away. He’s a long shot but would be a real feel good story.

Samuelsson is the lightning rod. Some seem to see him as a legit 4/5 defenseman while others seem to see him as a washout.

Edited January 27, 2021 by tom webster

[LGR4GM]

15th... could be top 5 but at least we see Quinn and JJ up there. I finally have a sliver of hope that the drafting philosophy has changed although the Rossi thing still worries me. 

[dudacek]

No Mittelstadt, Borgen, Bryson or Thompson in there, eh?

What does Sabrespace think? Are they still prospects, or have they maxed out as minor leaguers/tweeners?

[dudacek]

Damn, Wheeler really high on Portillo off a relatively small sample size.

[dudacek]

I still think Samuelsson is devalued because people too easily slip him into a dead-puck era model stereotype.

He's not Dana Murzyn, he can skate well enough to defend. He will be killing penalties and manning the walls of the Alamo for a long time.

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

No Mittelstadt, Borgen, Bryson or Thompson in there, eh?

What does Sabrespace think? Are they still prospects, or have they maxed out as minor leaguers/tweeners?

Bryson and Thompson are out because he over limits his definition to UNDER 23 year olds.  To say Bryson isn’t still a prospect is silly.  

As to Mitts, even though he says he won’t use an artificial game limit, he used one with Mitts.  He is 22 and finished last year in the minors.  He is also still waiver exempt.  He just subjectively said he isn’t a prospect any longer. I think if you ask RK and KA, they’ll tell you Mitts is still a prospect.

 

[DarthEbriate]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I still think Samuelsson is devalued because people too easily slip him into a dead-puck era model stereotype.

He's not Dana Murzyn, he can skate well enough to defend. He will be killing penalties and manning the walls of the Alamo for a long time.

Nice Murzyn pull! If Samuelsson can become McCabe, that's fine, right? I mean, McCabe has been solid-if-unspectacular over a career where is primary partners have been Bogosain, Franson, rookie Dahlin, and now Ristolainen (who is finally showing real signs of responsible growth).

20 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Bryson and Thompson are out because he over limits his definition to UNDER 23 year olds.  To say Bryson isn’t still a prospect is silly.  

As to Mitts, even though he says he won’t use an artificial game limit, he used one with Mitts.  He is 22 and finished last year in the minors.  He is also still waiver exempt.  He just subjectively said he isn’t a prospect any longer. I think if you ask RK and KA, they’ll tell you Mitts is still a prospect.

Watching the lone game he skated in this season, I'm still labeling Mitts as a prospect.

Agreed on Bryson -- I almost think it's a combination of age and NHL game played. You're a prospect until you've made it or you're simply known as an AHL veteran. Take Olofsson's rookie year last year. He'd have already aged out from this list, but his all-around game this season is noticeably better in terms of forecheck and working the boards. He should've come off the list this offseason, but wasn't on the 2020 list either. Likewise, R2 Ruotsalainen -- not on this year's list simply because of age, but he's totally a prospect.

[dudacek]

I agree with Samuelsson/McCabe comparison: similar talent level and role, on and off the ice.