Updated Sabres Prospect Pool 2021 and beyond

[dudacek]

7 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Apologies, which is the correct order of the top 5?

Edited February 9, 2022 by dudacek

[Thorner]

5 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Thanks a bunch.

If Krebs does indeed end up at LW, we have to go all the way down to spot *16* to find the first C listed (a player unlikely to make the League) and spot *14* to find the first RHD. Frankly I find the fact we rank so highly in terms of system strength, those things considered, somewhat astounding. Impressive is probably a better word, as I don’t doubt the prospect-strength of the other players listed: if anything it serves to illustrate just how deep the system is at the other spots. It would have to be. 

Considering the C youth on the current team, to me it doesn’t represent an issue, either, so long as with all the coming picks an effort is made to balance up. 

Mentioned this before but it’s at RHD we’ll need trades for NHL players, imo. Any we add to the system will be a ways away and unlike at C, where we have the rostered youth/players, we can’t really afford to wait as long as it’ll take. 

[dudacek]

21 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Thanks a bunch.

If Krebs does indeed end up at LW, we have to go all the way down to spot *16* to find the first C listed (a player unlikely to make the League) and spot *14* to find the first RHD. Frankly I find the fact we rank so highly in terms of system strength, those things considered, somewhat astounding. Impressive is probably a better word, as I don’t doubt the prospect-strength of the other players listed: if anything it serves to illustrate just how deep the system is at the other spots. It would have to be. 

Considering the C youth on the current team, to me it doesn’t represent an issue, either, so long as with all the coming picks an effort is made to balance up. 

Mentioned this before but it’s at RHD we’ll need trades for NHL players, imo. Any we add to the system will be a ways away and unlike at C, where we have the rostered youth/players, we can’t really afford to wait as long as it’ll take. 

I found it interesting that Wheeler made a point of Johnson playing both sides.

I wonder if the Sabres are looking at him on the right, which certainly shifts the way you look at this group.

He does project well as complementary ES top 4 guy.

Edited February 9, 2022 by dudacek

[DarthEbriate]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

It’s nice to see we moved from 15 to 1 in large part because we acquired Krebs and Levi, but it’s not like the on-roster cost to do that wasn’t extravagant. Shuffling strengths. 

Well... yes... but it was a prospects column and not an overall organization column. We have the NHL Standings the last 10 years for that. 😇

[DarthEbriate]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I found it interesting that Wheeler made a point of Johnson playing both sides.

If I'm Johnson or Bryson or hell... William Worge Kreu...  I'm telling my coach I'd like to work on playing the right side.

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I found it interesting that Wheeler made a point of Johnson playing both sides.

I wonder if the Sabres are looking at him on the right, which certainly shifts the way you look at this group.

He does project well as complementary ES top 4 guy.

It’s just one of those things for me. I admit I ignore it outright when there’s talk of “Sabres looking at so-and-so on opposite side”. The numbers are just too statistically daunting to me. I just renewed what seems to be my now yearly update for this site on the proclivity of d-men playing their off hand at the NHL level in the top 4 and..it breaks down the same as always. It’s very rare. 

So once it happens I’ll say “awesome!” but to me the chances Johnson successfully plays his off hand in a top 4 role at the NHL level is about as likely as Josh Bloom carving out an NHL role at all

[Thorner]

It’s hard enough to become a mainstay nhl defender, never mind top 4. Top 4 on a *good* team? Now do it on your offhand? 

Its hard

What the numbers show is that, unlike at F, handedness matters on the back end. That’s how the coaches are structuring their rosters 

[dudacek]

17 minutes ago, Thorny said:

It’s hard enough to become a mainstay nhl defender, never mind top 4. Top 4 on a *good* team? Now do it on your offhand? 

Its hard

What the numbers show is that, unlike at F, handedness matters on the back end. That’s how the coaches are structuring their rosters 

Not disputing anything about big picture trends.

Im wondering about Johnson’s skill set specifically, and how the Sabres see him.

 

I see 12 of the top 100 highest paid D listed as capable of playing on their off-hands.

[Taro T]

3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Not disputing anything about big picture trends.

Im wondering about Johnson’s skill set specifically, and how the Sabres see him.

 

I see 12 of the top 100 highest paid D listed as capable of playing on their off-hands.

Completely spitballing here. 

Wondering, does anybody know which, if any, of those guys shoot with the same handedness of their dominant hand?  Because, it would seem a guy that holds the stick with the lower hand his dominant hand ("American" style with the dominant hand lower on the stick losing some power but gaining accuracy when shooting but also having his likely dominant eye closer to the boards when playing his typical side) might have an easier time playing D on his offhand w/ the dominant hand up higher on the stick providing more power ("Canadian' style w/ the dominant hand providing more power as the fulcrum of the lever & his presumably dominant eye facing the center of the ice on his typical side) both because he should have a bit more agility w/ his stick so it should be easier to control a puck along the boards on his off-hand & also because when playing on his off-hand side, his dominant eye will be towards the center of the ice and it should be easier to diagnose the situation on the ice.

Maybe that logic is precisely backwards, or maybe it doesn't matter.  But would be interested in knowing if it is a factor in that.  It seems that it might.

[Thorner]

9 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Completely spitballing here. 

Wondering, does anybody know which, if any, of those guys shoot with the same handedness of their dominant hand?  Because, it would seem a guy that holds the stick with the lower hand his dominant hand ("American" style with the dominant hand lower on the stick losing some power but gaining accuracy when shooting but also having his likely dominant eye closer to the boards when playing his typical side) might have an easier time playing D on his offhand w/ the dominant hand up higher on the stick providing more power ("Canadian' style w/ the dominant hand providing more power as the fulcrum of the lever & his presumably dominant eye facing the center of the ice on his typical side) both because he should have a bit more agility w/ his stick so it should be easier to control a puck along the boards on his off-hand & also because when playing on his off-hand side, his dominant eye will be towards the center of the ice and it should be easier to diagnose the situation on the ice.

Maybe that logic is precisely backwards, or maybe it doesn't matter.  But would be interested in knowing if it is a factor in that.  It seems that it might.

Wait, there’s an American and Canadian style when it comes to hockey handedness? Had no idea

I’m left handed, Canadian, shoot right, golf right 

How does that all line up 

Oh I throw a frisbee with my left and a baseball with my right 

Oh btw I was born on national left handers day, too, as a left hander, which everyone needs to hear at least once as its IMO an interesting (uninteresting?) factoid 

Edited February 9, 2022 by Thorny

[Taro T]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Wait, there’s an American and Canadian style when it comes to hockey handedness? Had no idea

I’m left handed, Canadian, shoot right, golf right 

How does that all line up 

Oh I throw a frisbee with my left and a baseball with my right 

Oh btw I was born on national left handers day, too, as a left hander, which everyone needs to hear at least once as its IMO an interesting (uninteresting?) factoid 

 

Not sure if it's "official" or not, but see way more Americans shoot the same way they write (righties shoot right handed, lefties left handed - it probably actually is about 50-50) than Canadians do.  Way more Canadians shoot opposite how they write (it's probably close to 80% write right & shoot left or write left & shoot right).

Shooting from your dominant side typically costs power but adds some accuracy but flipping that helps create more power at the cost of some accuracy.  

Most people are right handed and most Canadian players shoot left.

And you golfing right is just weird for a lefty.  You pull an opposite Nadal playing tennis?

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

 

Not sure if it's "official" or not, but see way more Americans shoot the same way they write (righties shoot right handed, lefties left handed - it probably actually is about 50-50) than Canadians do.  Way more Canadians shoot opposite how they write (it's probably close to 80% write right & shoot left or write left & shoot right).

Shooting from your dominant side typically costs power but adds some accuracy but flipping that helps create more power at the cost of some accuracy.  

Most people are right handed and most Canadian players shoot left.

Is USA really a close to 50/50 breakdown of left shots vs right? I always assumed there were a lot more left shots, but that could be my Canadian bias as you lay out with the numbers there 

very interesting 

[Thorner]

4 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Not sure if it's "official" or not, but see way more Americans shoot the same way they write (righties shoot right handed, lefties left handed - it probably actually is about 50-50) than Canadians do.  Way more Canadians shoot opposite how they write (it's probably close to 80% write right & shoot left or write left & shoot right).

Shooting from your dominant side typically costs power but adds some accuracy but flipping that helps create more power at the cost of some accuracy.  

Most people are right handed and most Canadian players shoot left.

And you golfing right is just weird for a lefty.  You pull an opposite Nadal playing tennis?

Tennis I switch hands based on ball position 

[GASabresIUFAN]

18 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Wait, there’s an American and Canadian style when it comes to hockey handedness? Had no idea

I’m left handed, Canadian, shoot right, golf right 

How does that all line up 

Oh I throw a frisbee with my left and a baseball with my right 

Oh btw I was born on national left handers day, too, as a left hander, which everyone needs to hear at least once as its IMO an interesting (uninteresting?) factoid 

Ditto, except I'm only part Canadian and I throw a ball left handed. 

You this means we are in our right state of mind. 

 

  

[GASabresIUFAN]

A couple of thoughts on Wheeler's list.

1) Samuelsson IMHO is a better prospect then Johnson.  Wheeler's comments about Matt's lack of offense in the NHL may or may not come true, but I don't see much from Johnson either and Samuelsson adds a physical dimension that Johnson lacks.

2) Novikov should have been much higher on the list.  An 18 year old D who can successfully play in the KHL will likely be an NHL regular in the next few years.  Guys like Laaksonen, Rousek, and Costantini may never make the NHL full time if at all yet Wheeler has then rated ahead of Novikov.

3) Novak should also be rated higher and Rosen lower.  I'm not seeing him as a better prospect right now over Kisakov and Poltapov.  His description of Kisakov made me think of Max Afinogenov.

4) I agree on his placement of Portillo who has really blossomed in the last month.  If I was re-doing my updated list again, I'd have Portillo higher as well.   I also agree on moving Nadeau up.  He maybe our fastest rising prospect.

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

A couple of thoughts on Wheeler's list.

1) Samuelsson IMHO is a better prospect then Johnson.  Wheeler's comments about Matt's lack of offense in the NHL may or may not come true, but I don't see much from Johnson either and Samuelsson adds a physical dimension that Johnson lacks.

2) Novikov should have been much higher on the list.  An 18 year old D who can successfully play in the KHL will likely be an NHL regular in the next few years.  Guys like Laaksonen, Rousek, and Costantini may never make the NHL full time if at all yet Wheeler has then rated ahead of Novikov.

3) Novak should also be rated higher and Rosen lower.  I'm not seeing him as a better prospect right now over Kisakov and Poltapov.  His description of Kisakov made me think of Max Afinogenov.

4) I agree on his placement of Portillo who has really blossomed in the last month.  If I was re-doing my updated list again, I'd have Portillo higher as well.   I also agree on moving Nadeau up.  He maybe our fastest rising prospect.

 ^ Novak lol still stuck on taro’s tennis comment 

[Taro T]

17 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Is USA really a close to 50/50 breakdown of left shots vs right? I always assumed there were a lot more left shots, but that could be my Canadian bias as you lay out with the numbers there 

very interesting 

At the youth levels it's more like 60-40 right to lefty.  There are definitely more righties than lefties here.

[GASabresIUFAN]

44 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Not sure if it's "official" or not, but see way more Americans shoot the same way they write (righties shoot right handed, lefties left handed - it probably actually is about 50-50) than Canadians do.  Way more Canadians shoot opposite how they write (it's probably close to 80% write right & shoot left or write left & shoot right).

Shooting from your dominant side typically costs power but adds some accuracy but flipping that helps create more power at the cost of some accuracy.  

Most people are right handed and most Canadian players shoot left.

And you golfing right is just weird for a lefty.  You pull an opposite Nadal playing tennis?

Actually it’s not.  I like having my dominate eye closer to the target, just like hitting a baseball. 

[Broken Ankles]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Ditto, except I'm only part Canadian and I throw a ball left handed. 

You this means we are in our right state of mind. 

 

  

Left handed - Throw a football and baseball with my left, shoot left in basketball, throw darts with the left.  Shoot right in hockey and golf right too.  Horrible at tennis, but when I tried, left.  No Canadian lineage. 

Seinfeld - also Left handed. 

 

 

[Zamboni]

1 hour ago, Broken Ankles said:

Left handed - Throw a football and baseball with my left, shoot left in basketball, throw darts with the left.  Shoot right in hockey and golf right too.  Horrible at tennis, but when I tried, left.  No Canadian lineage. 

Seinfeld - also Left handed. 

 

Wow …

I swear I’m the same exact way! You don’t know how happy I am to read you are like me in this regard!
 

write left

throw left 

play bass lefty

kick a ball left

shoot guns lefty

If I have to look through a telescope, microscope or magnifying glass. It’s with my left eye.

when I approach stairs, I usually line up my stride so I start the first stair with my left foot. Not always, but usually.

but hockey right, golf right, swing bat right.

Edited February 10, 2022 by Zamboni

[K-9]

1 hour ago, Broken Ankles said:

Left handed - Throw a football and baseball with my left, shoot left in basketball, throw darts with the left.  Shoot right in hockey and golf right too.  Horrible at tennis, but when I tried, left.  No Canadian lineage. 

Seinfeld - also Left handed. 

 

 

I’d give my right arm to be ambidextrous.

[bunomatic]

Interesting. Canadian, right handed. Shoot left in hockey. Swing right in golf. Bat right in ball. 

[LGR4GM]

 

[Curt]

On 2/9/2022 at 7:11 PM, Thorny said:

Tennis I switch hands based on ball position 

As someone who plays tennis, the thought of consistently doing that is horrifying.

[Thorner]

20 minutes ago, Curt said:

As someone who plays tennis, the thought of consistently doing that is horrifying.

As someone who doesn’t play very often and when I do, not very well, I do not have a thought of doing it consistently