Sabres clinch last place...or did they?

[JoeSchmoe]

3 hours ago, Weave said:

What we saw with the kids after RK is what you typically see when people are put into featured roles that don't really belong there.  This isn't sustainable, and can't be counted on to continue.  We've seen this over and over and over on the Sabres every time they go through an era of mediocrity.  Heck, Zemgus is an example of it.  Feature him in a role over his head and he doubles his point totals.  Same thing happening with the kids here.  We're forced to feature them, they put up respectable points, and some folks see this as a sign that we have what we need already.  We don't.  It's not sustainable.  It never was.  The kids need support and they need roles that fit the slots they are currently fitting.

I know you have a bunch of likes on this, but i dont think I agree with it. Every cup winner is largely made up with players that are/were put into roles beyond their expectation... And in the end they rise to the challenge and succeed. I think that's what we're seeing with the ATM line.

In some cases, those kids that exceed expectations eventually become veterans and form the core of their teams. 

A cup winning team is NEVER made through free agency or through a wiley GM trading his way to the top, which is what it sounds like you and many others are looking for by bringing in "support".

Also, on average... Home grown talent can typically be locked up for terms that are more friendly than what it would take to get those players by competing for them on the open market.

So, i think we need to continue to give our young talent every chance to succeed time and time again, until we finally hit it right. At the same time, we need to be patient by accumulating and developing as many picks as we can until we build our cup winning core.

[GASabresIUFAN]

3 hours ago, Weave said:

What we saw with the kids after RK is what you typically see when people are put into featured roles that don't really belong there.  This isn't sustainable, and can't be counted on to continue.  We've seen this over and over and over on the Sabres every time they go through an era of mediocrity.  Heck, Zemgus is an example of it.  Feature him in a role over his head and he doubles his point totals.  Same thing happening with the kids here.  We're forced to feature them, they put up respectable points, and some folks see this as a sign that we have what we need already.  We don't.  It's not sustainable.  It never was.  The kids need support and they need roles that fit the slots they are currently fitting.

Is Girgensons is the only example you can come up with? Larsson once had a bigger role and failed at it.  However we have seen the opposite as well.  Hasek, Pominville, and Vanek to name but 3.  McCabe and Ullmark have literally improved every year in pro hockey.  Do you think players like Tuch and Karlson would have been made available in expansion if their original team had known what they could become.  How do ever know what someone can do unless you give them a chance to show what they can do?  Why pigeon hole someone?

Mitts is showing every night he is ready for the role he is playing.    I'd say Cozens is the opposite right now, but I'm not worried about him at all.  This is the first truly real chance Thompson and Asplund have really been given.  KA and Jbot kept bringing in guys like Vesey, Sheary, Rieder, Eakin, and Sheahan making it easy to pull the plug on our kids in favor of the more veteran player.  That has been a mistake and this season is proving it. 

[Weave]

Girgensons is a recent example, but by no means the only.  How far back do we want to go?  Plante and Dawe?  I’m not gonna spend my Friday night listing the kids this team has featured and then disappointed.
 

I agree that you don’t build a cup winner through free agency but when you look around the league at the top teams all of their home grown talent was groomed with good vets supporting them.  We don’t have the hood supporting vets.  We jettisoned the good base we had to implement the tank and we never did build up a base of good vets to replace them.  So our kids are not in the same environment as the kids in TB, or Bos, or Col, or Tor.  It’s been a full athlete’s generation since this team has had a good base for its young kids to build upon.

[JoeSchmoe]

LA, Pitt, Chi, Wash, TB, etc, etc are all home grown cores of elite talent. In all cases but Wash, they were winning cups based around these cores too. In Wash's and TB's case, their core was still home grown and playing under team friendly contracts keeping them as a cup contender year after year. 

The veteran's they brought in did not win the cups for these teams.

[Weave]

9 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

LA, Pitt, Chi, Wash, TB, etc, etc are all home grown cores of elite talent. In all cases but Wash, they were winning cups based around these cores too. In Wash's and TB's case, their core was still home grown and playing under team friendly contracts keeping them as a cup contender year after year. 

The veteran's they brought in did not win the cups for these teams.

Their kids all had strong veteran presence as the grew.  There is the difference.  We don’t have that.

[GASabresIUFAN]

25 minutes ago, Weave said:

Girgensons is a recent example, but by no means the only.  How far back do we want to go?  Plante and Dawe?  I’m not gonna spend my Friday night listing the kids this team has featured and then disappointed.
 

I agree that you don’t build a cup winner through free agency but when you look around the league at the top teams all of their home grown talent was groomed with good vets supporting them.  We don’t have the hood supporting vets.  We jettisoned the good base we had to implement the tank and we never did build up a base of good vets to replace them.  So our kids are not in the same environment as the kids in TB, or Bos, or Col, or Tor.  It’s been a full athlete’s generation since this team has had a good base for its young kids to build upon.

Weren't vets like Kane, Bogo, Okposo, Gionta, Georges, ROR, Pominville, Scandella and others brought in to support the kids and teach them how to win?  We even added an MVP in Hall and a Cup winner in Staal. Hasn't done any good, because as @LGR4GM has pointed out the crap job DR and TM did drafting players to build around.  

Truth is we have vets here now to support the kids such as Skinner, McCabe, KO, and Ullmark. McCabe and Ullmark were playing their best hockey before injuries derailed their seasons.  Despite this the kids have come in an done the job.  Mostly Jbot acquisitions such as R2, Thompson, Mitts, Cozens, Bryson, UPL and Samuelsson. 🙂

I have always believed the best way to build a team is to draft well and let the kids grow together.  Once they have done that, then supplement to fill holes.  This is what the Pens and Blackhawks did.

For example the Blackhawks.  From 2002 to 2007 they drafted the following - 2002 - Keith, Wisniewski, and Burish, 2003 - Seabrook, Crawford, and Byfuglien, 2004 - Barker, Bolland, Bickell, and Bouwer, 2005 - Skille and Hjalmarsson, 2006 - Toews and 2007 - Kane.  First playoffs came in 2008-9 featuring 10 of the guys listed here.  The Hawks added Sharp in 2005, but Versteeg and Campbell came in 2008 and Hossa in 2009.  Build your core first and then supplement.  We did the reverse.

Edited May 8, 2021 by GASabresIUFAN

[mjd1001]

16 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

 

I have always believed the best way to build a team is to draft well and let the kids grow together.  Once they have done that, then supplement to fill holes.  This is what the Pens and Blackhawks did.

 

I agree 100%.  This board is filled with people every offseason EVERY offseason...asking for or wanting to sign free agents, who are the best guys available, etc.  It happened the year they drafted Sam, the year they drafted Eichel, and every year since.  At some point you have to start over and do what you say, just let the young guys play together, EVEN IF that means in Rochester when you THINK they are already good enough to be in the NHL.  Too many shortcuts were taken by this team, and it continues.  Sure, if you stop taking shortcuts now maybe this team won't be good for a few years...but no matter how little patience you have its what you need to do.

[GASabresIUFAN]

@Weave Which of these performances specifically do you think is an aberration and won’t carry over to next season in the stated role.

1. Mittelstadt - playing extremely well as a 2C?  Likely earning the 3C role next year when Eichel returns

2. Reinhart - playing excellently as a 1C? Likely playing the 2C role next season.

3. Bryson - playing solid top 4 D? Earning a full time job next season.

4. Asplund - playing well as a middle six winger and continuing as Mitt’s winger next season.

5. Thompson - see Asplund.

[Hoss]

17 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

@Weave Which of these performances specifically do you think is an aberration and won’t carry over to next season in the stated role.

1. Mittelstadt - playing extremely well as a 2C?  Likely earning the 3C role next year when Eichel returns

2. Reinhart - playing excellently as a 1C? Likely playing the 2C role next season.

3. Bryson - playing solid top 4 D? Earning a full time job next season.

4. Asplund - playing well as a middle six winger and continuing as Mitt’s winger next season.

5. Thompson - see Asplund.

I think if all this were accurate they wouldn’t have finished dead last. If Mittelstadt was actually playing “extremely well” as 2C, Reinhart was playing “excellently as a 1C,” Bryson ... Asplund ... so on.

[dudacek]

3 minutes ago, Hoss said:

I think if all this were accurate they wouldn’t have finished dead last. If Mittelstadt was actually playing “extremely well” as 2C, Reinhart was playing “excellently as a 1C,” Bryson ... Asplund ... so on.

Since those the players and roles GA listed started happening, the Sabres have not been dead last.

They are 9/10/2 for 20 points, tied with the Canadiens and the Islanders for 15th in points, 19th in Pts%

[GASabresIUFAN]

6 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Since those the players and roles GA listed started happening, the Sabres have not been dead last.

They are 9/10/2 for 20 points, tied with the Canadiens and the Islanders for 15th in points, 19th in Pts%

....and without Eichel, McCabe and Ullmark.

[GASabresIUFAN]

23 minutes ago, Hoss said:

I think if all this were accurate they wouldn’t have finished dead last. If Mittelstadt was actually playing “extremely well” as 2C, Reinhart was playing “excellently as a 1C,” Bryson ... Asplund ... so on.

@dudacek-pointed out they haven’t been dead last since the kids took over, not even close.  They would have had to be the best team in the NHL to get out of the hole RK dug for them.

Instead, without Eichel, Hall and Staal these kids have taken a dead last team that was scoring 2 goals a game, and turned the team into a competitive team scoring 3.14 goals a game.  

 

[drnkirishone]

Couple things. You can label me an ever optimist like GASabresIUFAN. If I or anyone else wasn't optimistic about the team why would you bother watching/following/discussing them?

Was I wrong about Myers? Yes of course. He has become more Mike Wilson than Chris Pronger.

Was I wrong about Nikita Zadorov? Also Yes!

But so what? Why has being a optimist become such a horrible thing?

Also don't nobody be bad mouthing Derek Plante that tiny ass man scored a memorable goal in the playoffs!!!!! Perhaps I am biased by the fact that I still have several rookie cards of him.

[Weave]

7 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

@Weave Which of these performances specifically do you think is an aberration and won’t carry over to next season in the stated role.

1. Mittelstadt - playing extremely well as a 2C?  Likely earning the 3C role next year when Eichel returns

2. Reinhart - playing excellently as a 1C? Likely playing the 2C role next season.

3. Bryson - playing solid top 4 D? Earning a full time job next season.

4. Asplund - playing well as a middle six winger and continuing as Mitt’s winger next season.

5. Thompson - see Asplund.

First off, I disagree with your description of their play to begin with. 

Mitts was not playing "extremely well" as a 2C.  He was demonstrating basic competence as an NHL center.  Nothing more.  He's always had a nice shot.  Basic competence, a nice shot, and a role one level up from where he should be and he's got numbers that send GA all gaga. 

Sam played about how I expected, admittedly he put up more goals than I expected, but his overall play was not some great leap for him.  The goals came because he was featured in Jack's absence, not because his heart grew 3 sizes that day.  Patrick Sharp.  I've said it all along, and he continues to show that is the comparable.  Sharp stepped up and did that too when Toews was out with injury.

Bryson?  He might be earning a full time position next season, but we'lll agree to disagree on the characteriziation that he was playing solid top 4 D.  I think you've forgotten what solid D looks like in a Sabres sweater.  He's got promise.  He's demonstrating that his skill level is NHL caliber.  Let's not overstate the rest.

Asplund might become a 3rd liner on a good team.  I'm not sure he's a 3rd liner on a good team yet.  Again, he's demonstrated an NHL skill level.  Playing well is relative to the circus we've watcched for 10 seasons, not relative to the playoff teams in the league.

I was wrong about Thompson.  I don't think he is ever going to show consistency in his game necessary to depend on him.  He's Taylor Pyatt all over again.

The last 10 games of the season were watchable because we saw 4 lines that had basic level competence and guys who wanted to be here.  They scored some goals and got scored against alot.  They still got caved in fairly frequently.  They took a few teams by surprise.  Jack's return would certainly move each of those forwards down a level in the lineup.  But unless those kids are augmented with a couple of good vets from good teams that know how to change their game when things tighten up we're still looking at the Sabres playing Spring golf next season.

If its me running the show, my offseason includes moving Asplund, Thompson, and depending on whether we can get a 2C another way (I still think Sam is most valuable paired with Jack but concede if we can't get a 2C he might be our best option.  Not ideal), Mitts or Olofsson for 2 playoff tested mid career players that can add some character and snarl to the 2nd line.  Bjork and Cozens can grow together on the 3rd line, and hopefully we can find a way to keep Eakin and Reider in the press box.

It's not that I am low on these players.  We seem to have sufficient NHL level talent for the first time in a very long time.  But this mix isn't right and we need to get the mix right.  Too many kids.  Too many finesse players.  Good teams recognize surplus and move the surplus to bolster areas of weakness.  We now have a bunch of kids that have shown they have NHL abilities.  Let's take advantage of that and move a couple of them to fill the holes that aren't going to be filled by internal candidates.

For those crying that playoff teams are built with homegrown talent my response is, Jack, Sam, one of Mitts or Olofosson, Cozens, Dahlin, Risto, Bryson, Borgen, Arrtu, Samuelsson, Zemgus still remain.  That's a pretty ***** home grown group.  11 out of 16 game day skaters.  Moving a few guys to adjust the makeup of the team is normal.  Hording them like a depression era grandmother hordes tupperware containers is not.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Weave

[Radar]

10 minutes ago, Weave said:

First off, I disagree with your description of their play to begin with. 

Mitts was not playing "extremely well" as a 2C.  He was demonstrating basic competence as an NHL center.  Nothing more.  He's always had a nice shot.  Basic competence, a nice shot, and a role one level up from where he should be and he's got numbers that send GA all gaga. 

Sam played about how I expected, admittedly he put up more goals than I expected, but his overall play was not some great leap for him.  The goals came because he was featured in Jack's absence, not because his heart grew 3 sizes that day.  Patrick Sharp.  I've said it all along, and he continues to show that is the comparable.  Sharp stepped up and did that too when Toews was out with injury.

Bryson?  He might be earning a full time position next season, but we'lll agree to disagree on the characteriziation that he was playing solid top 4 D.  I think you've forgotten what solid D looks like in a Sabres sweater.  He's got promise.  He's demonstrating that his skill level is NHL caliber.  Let's not overstate the rest.

Asplund might become a 3rd liner on a good team.  I'm not sure he's a 3rd liner on a good team yet.  Again, he's demonstrated an NHL skill level.  Playing well is relative to the circus we've watcched for 10 seasons, not relative to the playoff teams in the league.

I was wrong about Thompson.  I don't think he is ever going to show consistency in his game necessary to depend on him.  He's Taylor Pyatt all over again.

The last 10 games of the season were watchable because we saw 4 lines that had basic level competence and guys who wanted to be here.  They scored some goals and got scored against alot.  They still got caved in fairly frequently.  They took a few teams by surprise.  Jack's return would certainly move each of those forwards down a level in the lineup.  But unless those kids are augmented with a couple of good vets from good teams that know how to change their game when things tighten up we're still looking at the Sabres playing Spring golf next season.

If its me running the show, my offseason includes moving Asplund, Thompson, and depending on whether we can get a 2C another way (I still think Sam is most valuable paired with Jack but concede if we can't get a 2C he might be our best option.  Not ideal), Mitts or Olofsson for 2 playoff tested mid career players that can add some character and snarl to the 2nd line.  Bjork and Cozens can grow together on the 3rd line, and hopefully we can find a way to keep Eakin and Reider in the press box.

It's not that I am low on these players.  We seem to have sufficient NHL level talent for the first time in a very long time.  But this mix isn't right and we need to get the mix right.  Too many kids.  Too many finesse players.  Good teams recognize surplus and move the surplus to bolster areas of weakness.  We now have a bunch of kids that have shown they have NHL abilities.  Let's take advantage of that and move them to fill the holes that aren't going to be filled by internal candidates.

For those crying that playoff teams are built with homegrown talent my response is, Jack, Sam, one of Mitts or Olofosson, Cozens, Dahlin, Risto, Bryson, Borgen, Arrtu, Samuelsson still remain.  That's a pretty ***** home grown group.  10 out of 16 game day skaters.  Moving a few guys to adjust the makeup of the team is normal.  Hording them like a depression era grandmother hordes tupperware containers is not

Good post! Would prefer VO trade before Mitts. I would also like to get a better mix on defense and upgrade in goal.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Radar

[Weave]

28 minutes ago, Radar said:

Good post! Would prefer VO trade before Mitts. I would also like to get a better mix on defense and upgrade in goal.

I can get on board with moving VO over Mitts.  I think VO is done developing.  WYSIWYG now.  He's a powerplay specialist.  Mitts still has room to grow and has a 2C ceiling still.  On the other hand, Mitts value right now is probably higher so we likely would get a better return for him.  For the right guy I'd move either.

[GASabresIUFAN]

2 hours ago, Weave said:

First off, I disagree with your description of their play to begin with. 

Mitts was not playing "extremely well" as a 2C.  He was demonstrating basic competence as an NHL center.  Nothing more.  He's always had a nice shot.  Basic competence, a nice shot, and a role one level up from where he should be and he's got numbers that send GA all gaga. 

Sam played about how I expected, admittedly he put up more goals than I expected, but his overall play was not some great leap for him.  The goals came because he was featured in Jack's absence, not because his heart grew 3 sizes that day.  Patrick Sharp.  I've said it all along, and he continues to show that is the comparable.  Sharp stepped up and did that too when Toews was out with injury.

Bryson?  He might be earning a full time position next season, but we'lll agree to disagree on the characteriziation that he was playing solid top 4 D.  I think you've forgotten what solid D looks like in a Sabres sweater.  He's got promise.  He's demonstrating that his skill level is NHL caliber.  Let's not overstate the rest.

Asplund might become a 3rd liner on a good team.  I'm not sure he's a 3rd liner on a good team yet.  Again, he's demonstrated an NHL skill level.  Playing well is relative to the circus we've watcched for 10 seasons, not relative to the playoff teams in the league.

I was wrong about Thompson.  I don't think he is ever going to show consistency in his game necessary to depend on him.  He's Taylor Pyatt all over again.

The last 10 games of the season were watchable because we saw 4 lines that had basic level competence and guys who wanted to be here.  They scored some goals and got scored against alot.  They still got caved in fairly frequently.  They took a few teams by surprise.  Jack's return would certainly move each of those forwards down a level in the lineup.  But unless those kids are augmented with a couple of good vets from good teams that know how to change their game when things tighten up we're still looking at the Sabres playing Spring golf next season.

If its me running the show, my offseason includes moving Asplund, Thompson, and depending on whether we can get a 2C another way (I still think Sam is most valuable paired with Jack but concede if we can't get a 2C he might be our best option.  Not ideal), Mitts or Olofsson for 2 playoff tested mid career players that can add some character and snarl to the 2nd line.  Bjork and Cozens can grow together on the 3rd line, and hopefully we can find a way to keep Eakin and Reider in the press box.

It's not that I am low on these players.  We seem to have sufficient NHL level talent for the first time in a very long time.  But this mix isn't right and we need to get the mix right.  Too many kids.  Too many finesse players.  Good teams recognize surplus and move the surplus to bolster areas of weakness.  We now have a bunch of kids that have shown they have NHL abilities.  Let's take advantage of that and move a couple of them to fill the holes that aren't going to be filled by internal candidates.

For those crying that playoff teams are built with homegrown talent my response is, Jack, Sam, one of Mitts or Olofosson, Cozens, Dahlin, Risto, Bryson, Borgen, Arrtu, Samuelsson, Zemgus still remain.  That's a pretty ***** home grown group.  11 out of 16 game day skaters.  Moving a few guys to adjust the makeup of the team is normal.  Hording them like a depression era grandmother hordes tupperware containers is not.

Interesting thoughts but not exactly accurate.  This team has been solid not for the last 10 games but the last 21. Mitts has 17 pts in his last 21 games. That isn’t bare competence that’s high end 2C production and it’s been consistent since he assumed the role. Reinhart is our best option at 2C as he has also proven this season.  No one is trading us a capable 2C and it’s folly to continue to believe they will, especially with KA as GM and two legit candidates already here and producing. Also who are you willing to part with to acquire this mythical 2C, because they’ll ask for Cozens plus.  It’s cap foolish as well.  

I do agree that we need to get tougher upfront and am also on board with adding veteran depth on D, especially if McCabe walks, but trading productive kids on bargain contracts is again cap mis-management.  Finding hockey trades for someone like VO to get more physical upfront makes some sense, but to simply move on from the kids because they are “surplus” doesn’t work in a cap world because their trade value is limited and you’d have to replace them with the Sheahans of the world at the same cost or more then you were paying someone like Asplund.  Smaller hockey trades swapping excess young winger for an excess young D makes sense on paper but isn’t exactly a need here. 

Right now we have internal candidates for nearly every job.  We have 4 centers for the top 3 jobs in Eichel, Reinhart, Mitts and Cozens.  We have 8 plus wingers including kids, Asplund, R2, Thompson, Bjork, Cozens, and Quinn, plus vets Skinner, Girgensons and VO (age wise).  On defense we have vets Risto, and Miller, plus kids Dahlin, Borgen, Jokiharju, Samuelsson and Bryson under contract or control.  

The only thing we don’t have is goaltending.  With Ullmark in net this season we played at a playoff level with both coaches but better under Granato.  This status quo team with the return of McCabe and Ullmark or similar UFAs will cost 77 million.  It’s great to say bring in vets over and over again, but it hasn’t exactly worked.  Sheary KO, Staal, Gionta, Scandella, Pominville, and Gorges all came from winning organizations and did nothing.  We also really can’t afford to bring in a bunch of contracts.  

The strategy now is to trim the fat.  Getting rid of Bjork, Eakin and Miller is a great place to start.  This frees up the money to add more physical and scoring depth upfront and replace McCabe if he walks.  How do we do this?  Eakin is demoted to the AHL, you give Seattle a draft pick to take Miller, and hopefully you can swap Bjork for the 4C we need to replace Lazar and the failed Eakin experiment.  Ultimately this is actually the time for patience.  Next season is the season when the kids get to make the team their own.  

Edited May 8, 2021 by GASabresIUFAN

[Weave]

Yeah, you and I are nowhere near agreement.  The last 21 games have not been rainbows and sunshine.  At least not compared to a playoff standard.

And we are obviously evaluating what we see differently. This team has most definitely NOT solid for 21 games.  We've taken advantage of teams taking us lightly a few times, and genuinely played well a few times.  The rest has been merely competent and outgunned.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Weave

[JoeSchmoe]

4 hours ago, Weave said:

If its me running the show, my offseason includes moving Asplund, Thompson, and depending on whether we can get a 2C another way (I still think Sam is most valuable paired with Jack but concede if we can't get a 2C he might be our best option.  Not ideal), Mitts or Olofsson for 2 playoff tested mid career players that can add some character and snarl to the 2nd line

This type of thinking is precisely why we still suck all these years after the tank.

Aspland and Thompson are good hockey players that still haven't hit their ceilings. And most of all, they're cheap....way cheaper than any vets a team would be willing to trade away that have already hit their ceilings and are on the decline.

Edited May 8, 2021 by JoeSchmoe

[3putt]

54 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

This type of thinking is precisely why we still suck all these years after the tank.

Aspland and Thompson are good hockey players that still haven't hit their ceilings. And most of all, they're cheap....way cheaper than any vets a team would be willing to trade away that have already hit their ceilings and are on the decline.

Asplund is a good hockey player. Thompson has skills not often seen in a player of his size. He is mentally challenged when it comes to seeing the ice and making the right play. He is not a good hockey player. But either or both should be bait for a better player that can play a full 82 games above NHL replacement level. 

[Carmel Corn]

3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Interesting thoughts but not exactly accurate.  This team has been solid not for the last 10 games but the last 21. Mitts has 17 pts in his last 21 games. That isn’t bare competence that’s high end 2C production and it’s been consistent since he assumed the role. Reinhart is our best option at 2C as he has also proven this season.  No one is trading us a capable 2C and it’s folly to continue to believe they will, especially with KA as GM and two legit candidates already here and producing. Also who are you willing to part with to acquire this mythical 2C, because they’ll ask for Cozens plus.  It’s cap foolish as well.  

I do agree that we need to get tougher upfront and am also on board with adding veteran depth on D, especially if McCabe walks, but trading productive kids on bargain contracts is again cap mis-management.  Finding hockey trades for someone like VO to get more physical upfront makes some sense, but to simply move on from the kids because they are “surplus” doesn’t work in a cap world because their trade value is limited and you’d have to replace them with the Sheahans of the world at the same cost or more then you were paying someone like Asplund.  Smaller hockey trades swapping excess young winger for an excess young D makes sense on paper but isn’t exactly a need here. 

Right now we have internal candidates for nearly every job.  We have 4 centers for the top 3 jobs in Eichel, Reinhart, Mitts and Cozens.  We have 8 plus wingers including kids, Asplund, R2, Thompson, Bjork, Cozens, and Quinn, plus vets Skinner, Girgensons and VO (age wise).  On defense we have vets Risto, and Miller, plus kids Dahlin, Borgen, Jokiharju, Samuelsson and Bryson under contract or control.  

The only thing we don’t have is goaltending.  With Ullmark in net this season we played at a playoff level with both coaches but better under Granato.  This status quo team with the return of McCabe and Ullmark or similar UFAs will cost 77 million.  It’s great to say bring in vets over and over again, but it hasn’t exactly worked.  Sheary KO, Staal, Gionta, Scandella, Pominville, and Gorges all came from winning organizations and did nothing.  We also really can’t afford to bring in a bunch of contracts.  

The strategy now is to trim the fat.  Getting rid of Bjork, Eakin and Miller is a great place to start.  This frees up the money to add more physical and scoring depth upfront and replace McCabe if he walks.  How do we do this?  Eakin is demoted to the AHL, you give Seattle a draft pick to take Miller, and hopefully you can swap Bjork for the 4C we need to replace Lazar and the failed Eakin experiment.  Ultimately this is actually the time for patience.  Next season is the season when the kids get to make the team their own.  

I appreciate your optimism, but IMHO the Sabre's went from BUTT ugly under HCRK to putting lipstick on a pig under HCDG.   GMKA still has a lot of work to do.

[JoeSchmoe]

14 minutes ago, 3putt said:

He is mentally challenged when it comes to seeing the ice and making the right play. He is not a good hockey player.

He gets better and better all the time. Seeing the ice comes with minutes played... Something hes just starting to get consistently under DG.

[freester]

3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Interesting thoughts but not exactly accurate.  This team has been solid not for the last 10 games but the last 21. Mitts has 17 pts in his last 21 games. That isn’t bare competence that’s high end 2C production and it’s been consistent since he assumed the role. Reinhart is our best option at 2C as he has also proven this season.  No one is trading us a capable 2C and it’s folly to continue to believe they will, especially with KA as GM and two legit candidates already here and producing. Also who are you willing to part with to acquire this mythical 2C, because they’ll ask for Cozens plus.  It’s cap foolish as well.  

I do agree that we need to get tougher upfront and am also on board with adding veteran depth on D, especially if McCabe walks, but trading productive kids on bargain contracts is again cap mis-management.  Finding hockey trades for someone like VO to get more physical upfront makes some sense, but to simply move on from the kids because they are “surplus” doesn’t work in a cap world because their trade value is limited and you’d have to replace them with the Sheahans of the world at the same cost or more then you were paying someone like Asplund.  Smaller hockey trades swapping excess young winger for an excess young D makes sense on paper but isn’t exactly a need here. 

Right now we have internal candidates for nearly every job.  We have 4 centers for the top 3 jobs in Eichel, Reinhart, Mitts and Cozens.  We have 8 plus wingers including kids, Asplund, R2, Thompson, Bjork, Cozens, and Quinn, plus vets Skinner, Girgensons and VO (age wise).  On defense we have vets Risto, and Miller, plus kids Dahlin, Borgen, Jokiharju, Samuelsson and Bryson under contract or control.  

The only thing we don’t have is goaltending.  With Ullmark in net this season we played at a playoff level with both coaches but better under Granato.  This status quo team with the return of McCabe and Ullmark or similar UFAs will cost 77 million.  It’s great to say bring in vets over and over again, but it hasn’t exactly worked.  Sheary KO, Staal, Gionta, Scandella, Pominville, and Gorges all came from winning organizations and did nothing.  We also really can’t afford to bring in a bunch of contracts.  

The strategy now is to trim the fat.  Getting rid of Bjork, Eakin and Miller is a great place to start.  This frees up the money to add more physical and scoring depth upfront and replace McCabe if he walks.  How do we do this?  Eakin is demoted to the AHL, you give Seattle a draft pick to take Miller, and hopefully you can swap Bjork for the 4C we need to replace Lazar and the failed Eakin experiment.  Ultimately this is actually the time for patience.  Next season is the season when the kids get to make the team their own.  

Agree with most of this but I like Bjork a bit more than you. We will also lose someone to the expansion draft likely Thompson or Bjork or Asplund. 

[Radar]

2 minutes ago, freester said:

Agree with most of this but I like Bjork a bit more than you. We will also lose someone to the expansion draft likely Thompson or Bjork or Asplund. 

Out of those three I think Thompson.

[Weave]

5 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said:

This type of thinking is precisely why we still suck all these years after the tank.

Aspland and Thompson are good hockey players that still haven't hit their ceilings. And most of all, they're cheap....way cheaper than any vets a team would be willing to trade away that have already hit their ceilings and are on the decline.

We still suck all these years after the tank becuase we never had enough NHLers to field a full roster, not beause we picked up a handful of veterans.  The best team we've iced since the fateful decision to burn the house down was the season we had all those vets.