Report Sabres preparing for An Additional Top Ten Pick

[Hoss]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Why would the Canucks trade any of them for Sam though?

Petterson is a better 1C, Horvat is a better 2C and they aren’t trading for Sam to be a 3C

Boeser is a better trigger man and Miller a better power forward. There aren’t any roster-building reasons there.

Tnere aren’t any contract reasons either, given what Sam will be signing for.

I’m not aware of any dressing room reasons other than Miller’s temper.

Because they’re trying to change the makeup of a roster that has gotten them nowhere. Same reason we likely would’ve considered a Samson trade even prior to he and Eichel’s postseason pressers. These are good players but at some point you’ve got to give to get and you can’t just throw prospects into a deal for an expensive forward when money is already an issue.

[Rasmus_]

14 hours ago, Mike Honcho said:

In the next 3 days i expect to hear something like this...

the Sabres trade eichel, sam and next years round 1 pick for the number 10 pick this year. They are keeping 96% of the salaries 

 

I would say, that Sam Reinhart, given his RFA status, should be able to net a 1st round pick in the 6-10 range on his own plus a palatable asset.  So for me, that's an easy yes.  Depending on the teams need, a team like New Jersey could offer a high second, and a decent B level prospect for Ristolainen.  Eichel, for me, is pay up, or we move on. 

Reinhart to LA for #8 overall, Jarret Anderson Dolan and Samuel Fagemo or Tobias Bjornfot?

Ristolainen to NJ for their 2022 2nd, and Miles Wood, or Pavel Zacha?  This might be closer to Jesper Boqvist, but I am not sure what Rasmus is truly worth. 

Colin Miller, for a 3rd in any year. 

Edited June 16, 2021 by TheCerebral1

[Rasmus_]

13 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

They could take Guenther first overall too still. 

If you're taking Guenther 1st overall, trade down.  Trade down to 3, get a 3rd round pick.  It has to be Beniers, Power or Eklund for me at #1.  Those are the only options here.  Guenther is really solid, and could easily have a Farabee type leap in two seasons or so.  But, for me, he's still just on the outside of #1.  Am I wrong, maybe. 

[Rasmus_]

10 hours ago, OhMyDahlin said:

They have Luukkonen and Portillo...there's no reason to draft a goalie in the first round.

Undrafted Nick Malik in the 4th/5th round is a fine addition to the goalie pool.  

[dudacek]

28 minutes ago, Hoss said:

Because they’re trying to change the makeup of a roster that has gotten them nowhere. Same reason we likely would’ve considered a Samson trade even prior to he and Eichel’s postseason pressers. These are good players but at some point you’ve got to give to get and you can’t just throw prospects into a deal for an expensive forward when money is already an issue.

This is a valid argument.

It does not at all fit with the messaging coming out of Vancouver and where they seem to see themselves.

[PerreaultForever]

10 hours ago, Brawndo said:

Based on the fact that Reinhart and/or Eichel will probably actually improve their new teams, a guaranteed Top Ten Pick this year maybe more beneficial.

This is NOT a fact, it is an assumption. They certainly haven't improved us. 

[PerreaultForever]

11 hours ago, OhMyDahlin said:

They have Luukkonen and Portillo...there's no reason to draft a goalie in the first round.

Sorry, 2 goalies in the system isn't enough. Draft one every year. Not saying 1st round, but somewhere. Can never have too many. They are always a valuable commodity. 

[Brawndo]

4 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

This is NOT a fact, it is an assumption. They certainly haven't improved us. 

Other NHL GMs have proven capable in building a balanced roster, something that GMTM, Botterill and so far Adams have proven incapable of. 
 

The complete lack of success that the Sabres Organization has had isn’t on Eichel and Reinhart. 
 

A Tradition like no other Buffalo Sports Fans blaming the good players for the teams sucking. 

[mjd1001]

14 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Other NHL GMs have proven capable in building a balanced roster, something that GMTM, Botterill and so far Adams have proven incapable of. 
 

The complete lack of success that the Sabres Organization has had isn’t on Eichel and Reinhart. 
 

A Tradition like no other Buffalo Sports Fans blaming the good players for the teams sucking. 

Its kinda strange to me.....I think it depends on your point of view.

I see that 'tradition' as just the opposite.  When I visit these forums (and Bills also) I see a group of fans that seem to defend the players no matter what, and blame the coaches and GMs for the teams sucking when that happens. New coach, old coach, experienced coach, former player as a coach.  Experienced GM, GM that served as an assistant GM...GM with no former experience....To me there are some that say the players are great and can do little wrong..but it is always the fault of management and coaching.

[steveoath]

Couldn't it be a mixture? Those coaches and/or GMs and/or players at that point in history were not good enough? I think the reasons for underperformance are more nuanced than are discussed. Counterpoint though, the direction of the franchise must, surely, be guided by the owners who are the common denominator in all this. And, perhaps, we have seen in remarks from KA that the whole culture must change and this season we could see evidence when he has "his" guys in place. 

[LGR4GM]

7 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

This is NOT a fact, it is an assumption. They certainly haven't improved us. 

A major reason you watched mildly competitive hockey down the stretch was because Sam Reinhart ascended to center and improved the team. 

[OhMyDahlin]

7 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Sorry, 2 goalies in the system isn't enough. Draft one every year. Not saying 1st round, but somewhere. Can never have too many. They are always a valuable commodity. 

I can agree with taking one somewhere in the draft, but I don't agree with spending a first round pick on a goalie right now.

8 hours ago, TheCerebral1 said:

Undrafted Nick Malik in the 4th/5th round is a fine addition to the goalie pool.  

Sure. I'll take more goalies, I just don't want to spend a first round pick on one right now.

[Curt]

49 minutes ago, OhMyDahlin said:

I can agree with taking one somewhere in the draft, but I don't agree with spending a first round pick on a goalie right now.

Sure. I'll take more goalies, I just don't want to spend a first round pick on one right now.

I would be ok with drafting Wallstedt around 10, or that Cossa guy in the late 1st after pick 20.  Especially in a year where the overall depth of skater talent is pretty weak.

Goaltending is really important. 

Edited June 16, 2021 by Curt

[Crusader1969]

4 hours ago, Brawndo said:

Other NHL GMs have proven capable in building a balanced roster, something that GMTM, Botterill and so far Adams have proven incapable of. 
 

The complete lack of success that the Sabres Organization has had isn’t on Eichel and Reinhart. 
 

A Tradition like no other Buffalo Sports Fans blaming the good players for the teams sucking. 

i will go to my deathbed arguing that the Tank worked, its was the incompetent rebuild that failed.

1 hour ago, OhMyDahlin said:

I can agree with taking one somewhere in the draft, but I don't agree with spending a first round pick on a goalie right now.

Sure. I'll take more goalies, I just don't want to spend a first round pick on one right now.

goaltending may be the number one reason they Sabres are 9 years and counting out of the playoffs. 

 

[OhMyDahlin]

2 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

i will go to my deathbed arguing that the Tank worked, its was the incompetent rebuild that failed.

goaltending may be the number one reason they Sabres are 9 years and counting out of the playoffs. 

 

You mean besides the fact they can't score or defend? I guess so.

[Crusader1969]

Just now, OhMyDahlin said:

You mean besides the fact they can't score or defend? I guess so.

the Hasek era team didn't score much either. A competent goaltender can remedy a lot of ills 

[Sabel79]

Just now, Crusader1969 said:

the Hasek era team didn't score much either. A competent goaltender can remedy a lot of ills 

Ehhhhhh….. you’re not getting more lightning to go in that bottle.  Hasek was an off-the-charts anomaly, the team in front of him was, for the most part, hot garbage made to look better than it was in the standings by the inexplicable exploits of the greatest goalie ever at his absolute prime.  
 

I wouldn’t say no to a competent goalie, mind you… 

[OhMyDahlin]

8 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

the Hasek era team didn't score much either. A competent goaltender can remedy a lot of ills 

Hasek was also drafted 199th overall...not in the first round.

[Brawndo]

13 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

i will go to my deathbed arguing that the Tank worked, its was the incompetent rebuild that failed.

 

 

Agree wholeheartedly. Even The Media’s Most Adamant Anti Tanker Mike Harrington said on a Podcast yesterday that the tank should have worked 

[LGR4GM]

8 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Agree wholeheartedly. Even The Media’s Most Adamant Anti Tanker Mike Harrington said on a Podcast yesterday that the tank should have worked 

Only works if you rebuild properly and while ROR was a good acquisition, Bogo and Kane were not. 

[Thorner]

It's semantics. The inherent mandate of any strategy is to be successful - it doesn't even need to be stated. If the strategy was to lose to get a generational player, the strategy is to lose to get a generational player so that the team wins games. If the results aren't achieved because the workers couldn't pull off the rebuild in the wake of the wreckage the strategy caused, the strategy failed. 

Trading Jack Eichel after 6 years seals it - the tank inarguably failed. It created an environment those in charge were unable to navigate through. Maybe other rebuilding strategies would have failed, too - all we know is that tanking did not result in a winning hockey team. 

Edited June 16, 2021 by Thorny

[Thorner]

My goal was to get to Hollywood so I could become the next Jason Statham. I cut ties with everyone I needed to, sold all of my possession for money, quit my job, and moved there. Even shaved my head bald! I didn't become the next Jason Statham once I got there, turns out I didn't have enough talent. But the strategy worked, I got where I needed to be: the bottom of the standings  I acquired a moderately priced living arrangement! I just couldn't navigate the waters of Hollywood once I got there, though.

The strategy was smart though, and the right one. I'm sure of it.  I made it to the location I set out for. Turns out it didn't guarantee anything on it's own, who knew. 

Edited June 16, 2021 by Thorny

[Crusader1969]

13 minutes ago, Thorny said:

It's semantics. The inherent mandate of any strategy is to be successful - it doesn't even need to be stated. If the strategy was to lose to get a generational player, the strategy is to lose to get a generational player so that the team wins games. If the results aren't achieved because the workers couldn't pull off the rebuild in the wake of the wreckage the strategy caused, the strategy failed. 

Trading Jack Eichel after 6 years seals it - the tank inarguably failed. It created an environment those in charge were unable to navigate through. Maybe other rebuilding strategies would have failed, too - all we know is that tanking did not result in a winning hockey team. 

i don't really want to get into it but it's not like they broke up a stanley cup contender.  in the 6 years prior to the tank, what exactly did the Sabres win?

2008 missed playoffs

2009 missed playoffs

2010 lost in rd 1

2011 lost in Rd 1

2012 Missed Playoffs Missed playoffs

2013 missed playoffs

The "core" needed to be rampamped.

 

 

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

4 hours ago, Brawndo said:

Other NHL GMs have proven capable in building a balanced roster, something that GMTM, Botterill and so far Adams have proven incapable of. 
 

The complete lack of success that the Sabres Organization has had isn’t on Eichel and Reinhart. 
 

A Tradition like no other Buffalo Sports Fans blaming the good players for the teams sucking. 

Who is really blaming Sam and Jack for the team's failings?  Jack has played well every year and Sam has been solid always and was excellent last year after being moved back to center.

We have laid most of the blame on TP and KP for their terrible hires and the inexperienced GM's for their lousy coaches, bad drafting and poor roster management.  Yes we dislike certain guys who have been here (Taylor Hall), but little of this mess can be blamed at the two top picks. 

Edited June 16, 2021 by GASabresIUFAN

[Thorner]

13 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

i don't really want to get into it but it's not like they broke up a stanley cup contender.  in the 6 years prior to the tank, what exactly did the Sabres win?

2008 missed playoffs

2009 missed playoffs

2010 lost in rd 1

2011 lost in Rd 1

2012 Missed Playoffs Missed playoffs

2013 missed playoffs

The "core" needed to be rampamped.

 

 

 

Should I post the results after said tank?

The intention isn't to prove that a tank COULD NOT have worked, full stop (or that a rebuild wasn't necessary) - it's just to point out that, well, it didn't. It didn't work. The strategy failed - the modus operandi didn't end with "acquire Jack Eichel, mission accomplished". It was to both acquire that player and build around them. Unless you want to argue that being unable to build sufficiently around him had literally zero to do with the means undertaken to acquire him, (and the *mentality* required to obtain him, and what that might imply for how the rest of the roster would be treated AFTER the acquisition) I'd say the whole Op failed. 

To me the degree of difficulty of said plan was unquestionably upped do to the means of implementing said plan. 

We haven't even gotten into how anointing Jack the "savior" may have burdened him mentally. Any and all responsibility attributed to our best player was exponentially increased due to it not only being asked of him, but specifically required in the conception of that plan. 

- - - 

In short, try to land on a ridiculously difficult runway by choice, and it's a failure of both execution and decision making

Edited June 16, 2021 by Thorny