Do we have a single prospect that will be any good next year?

[Pimlach]

3 hours ago, mjd1001 said:

Benson is having an interesting year.....maybe tied to Jack Quinn more than I thought.

I think Benson's year this year is behind what both Quinn and Peterka did last year overall, but again, he is younger than they were so its to be expected (at least expected by me).  

From the end of December through the beginning of February, he went though a horrible stretch, just when the team was staring to play better around him (Dec 27 - Feb 10, he played 15 games, 0 goals, 1 assist, -6, not a single game where he was a 'plus', but he was still getting 14 minutes of ice time per game.

Since then, hes played 22 games, 5 goals and 4 assists, is a +3, and is getting about the same ice time.

Yeah, its easy to pick and choose stretches were players do well and others were they don't do well, but as a Rookie, I think the last 22 games he has shown an improvement. Not only in the stats, but to me I notice him more in a positive way the last month.

 

Going back to his 15 game stretch were he basically did zero offensively.....that is the EXACT time that Quinn came back.  In the 15 games where Benson had only 1 assist, Quinn had 3 goals and 7 assists in 14 games.  Now, Benson got the same ice time (a bit over 14 minutes) as usual when Quinn was in the lineup or out of the lineup, but once Quinn played, did Benson play with different linemates then entire time, or was his usage drastically different?

So I looked into all the games Quinn played, and this is Benson's production:

In games Jack Quinn played, Benson: 16 games, 0 goals, 4 assists, -3, 14:46 minutes per game

In games Quinn hasn't played, Benson:  55 games, 9 goals, 10 assists, +2, 14:34 minutes per game.

So, maybe its usage, but he got about the same ice time, yet he scored at a 13-14 goal pace with no Quinn in the lineup...and didn't score a goal in 16 straight games with him in the lineup.

One more interesting thing about Benson...From the beginning of the Season UNTIL Quinn came back he was getting about 1.5 minutes per game on the Power Play. When Quinn came back, Benson got MORE power play time (almost 2 minutes per game, but had zero goals in that time.)  Since Quinn got hurt again, the last 23 games Benson has been taken off the power play totally (8 seconds on average per game played.)

Some good stuff here.

Referring to the bolded sentence.  How do you arrive at this?  Looking beyond scoring, I see Benson getting ice time in critical situations and playing a much more solid two way game than Quinn and Peterka did last year.  He is smaller and much younger, and yet he mixes it up more too.  

Benson currently lacks the shot that Quinn and Peterka have, but they are 3 years older and got to sharpen their game in the AHL.  

Benson is going to be a hard guy to play against. 

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Some good stuff here.

Referring to the bolded sentence.  How do you arrive at this?  Looking beyond scoring, I see Benson getting ice time in critical situations and playing a much more solid two way game than Quinn and Peterka did last year.  He is smaller and much younger, and yet he mixes it up more too.  

Benson currently lacks the shot that Quinn and Peterka have, but they are 3 years older and got to sharpen their game in the AHL.  

Benson is going to be a hard guy to play against. 

He's that already. 

At no point in the season have I felt that he is a liability on the ice. On the contrary, a lot of players can learn from his play on how to position themselves in front of the opposing team's net. He and Greenway are our best players in that aspect of the game. Benson already is one of our better back checkers. It's exciting to consider how good he is going to be when he gets more physically developed. This was a terrific draft pick. 

 

[PerreaultForever]

10 hours ago, tom webster said:

As I’ve stated before, there is no real way to prove the point unless you were able to create an alternate universe. Would player A turn out any different if he was drafted by another team? How can you ever know? 

There are ways to do it but it would take a lot of time that I'm not going to put in and I'm sure nobody else will either. You simply compare teams and how they do it and consider their success rates comparable to their draft positions. That math could be done and done over a long time period. 

 

[PerreaultForever]

6 hours ago, JohnC said:

On this player we mostly agree. However, I don't see him fading as much as you do. From an offensive production standpoint, he hasn't been much of a factor. But his tenacity and responsible two-way play has been good. What no one can fairly say about him is that he is a liability on the ice. 

It is more likely than not that from a developmental standpoint playing in Rochester would have been better for him. But because of the quirk in the rules that wasn't possible. You may disagree but playing in the NHL is better for him than being relegated to the juniors and dazzling down there. As it turned out, he earned his roster spot in camp. 

As you note, he has taken a number of foolish stick penalties. But it should also be acknowledged that many of them are marginal calls that don't get called against veteran players.  This guy is going to be a good player for us for a long time. I'm confident that in hindsight playing this season in Buffalo will have benefited him and the team in the long run. 

I'm not debating NHL vs junior. I'm debating his ice time and how much they have used him. Going back to junior was clearly not valuable. 

[Weave]

I suspect that if Quinn didn’t start the season on IR there would not have been room for Benson and he would have spent the season in juniors.

[PerreaultForever]

42 minutes ago, French Collection said:

He could.

He doesn’t have the same defensive game as Benson but he has way more speed. He will be 20 next winter so he should be a bit stronger than Benson right now.

maybe, but I don't think he is. Benson might actually be stronger than Quinn or Peterka. His build, despite his height, seems to have a more solid and compact look to it. Doesn't have as much of a skinny kid look as most 18 year olds have. Still has much growing to do, but I can see him turning into a Briere (as a comparable). Savoie still looks like a lightweight from what I've seen. 

[mjd1001]

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

Some good stuff here.

Referring to the bolded sentence.  How do you arrive at this?  Looking beyond scoring, I see Benson getting ice time in critical situations and playing a much more solid two way game than Quinn and Peterka did last year.  He is smaller and much younger, and yet he mixes it up more too.  

Benson currently lacks the shot that Quinn and Peterka have, but they are 3 years older and got to sharpen their game in the AHL.  

Benson is going to be a hard guy to play against. 

Just the eye test (my opinion, Quinn and Peterka were a bit more dangerous) and the stat sheet.   Not saying Benson isn't playing well away from the puck, just when he is on the ice, I don't always think of him as a threat to score yet. With Quinn and Peterka their rookie years, I did. Just an opinion.

[tom webster]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

There are ways to do it but it would take a lot of time that I'm not going to put in and I'm sure nobody else will either. You simply compare teams and how they do it and consider their success rates comparable to their draft positions. That math could be done and done over a long time period. 

 

You can get all the data you want but there’s no way of knowing player A became a better player than player B because team Y kept player A in the minors three years while team X made player B play in the NHl right away. You believe that because that’s what you were taught your whole life along with other great truisms like rookie QB’s can’t play in the NFL. I don’t because I learned to question everything. My belief is that player A was just the better player all along but team Y had no room on its NHL roster.

[tom webster]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

Under the current system which doesn't allow him to start off in Rochester I agree with you that he should be on the big club roster. Playing in the juniors would not have served much value for him from a developmental standpoint. This is just my opinion but I believe that if the Sabres had their preference they would have started him off in Rochester if that option was available to him. 

I’m not sure that’s true but that is old school thinking so you might be right. I think the difference between Benson and Kulich and Rosen is that Bensin’s game is mature enough for the NHL and then putting on weight and years, things he’ll do without playing in the AHL, there is nothing he could have learned from the AHL experience.

[ska-T Chitown]

2 minutes ago, tom webster said:

You can get all the data you want but there’s no way of knowing player A became a better player than player B because team Y kept player A in the minors three years while team X made player B play in the NHl right away. You believe that because that’s what you were taught your whole life along with other great truisms like rookie QB’s can’t play in the NFL. I don’t because I learned to question everything. My belief is that player A was just the better player all along but team Y had no room on its NHL roster.

I would wager the advantage that the big club sees is that the player who "marinates" in the minors gets to make their growing pain mistakes in minors with no bearing on the big club's W-L. When a player is then granted access to the NHL as a more finished product, the difference is more glaring as most fans have not seen them before and marvel at the more polished version they are presented with. It takes more effort to objectively go back and look at the 18 yr NHL old rookie and compare him to his 22 yr old self. Not to mention the perhaps unrealistic expectations that come with entering the league at a younger age.

I don't suspect that much, if any, of Aaron Rodgers' mid-to-late career success had anything to do with the year or two he spent on the bench behind Brett Fah-ahhh-vruh. (sticking with the QB thing as our other example)

[tom webster]

9 minutes ago, ska-T Chitown said:

I would wager the advantage that the big club sees is that the player who "marinates" in the minors gets to make their growing pain mistakes in minors with no bearing on the big club's W-L. When a player is then granted access to the NHL as a more finished product, the difference is more glaring as most fans have not seen them before and marvel at the more polished version they are presented with. It takes more effort to objectively go back and look at the 18 yr NHL old rookie and compare him to his 22 yr old self. Not to mention the perhaps unrealistic expectations that come with entering the league at a younger age.

I don't suspect that much, if any, of Aaron Rodgers' mid-to-late career success had anything to do with the year or two he spent on the bench behind Brett Fah-ahhh-vruh. (sticking with the QB thing as our other example)

I’m still waiting for someone to explain to me how a talented rookie learns anything from skating around the Brett Murray’s and other AHL pylons and scoring goals from the blue line against goalies who can’t move laterally.

Yes, I would wager the opposite. Let me know if you discover that alternative universe.
 

Sticking with the QB theme, I’m guessing Josh Allen didn’t gain anything from watching Peterman throw five first half interceptions.

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, tom webster said:

You can get all the data you want but there’s no way of knowing player A became a better player than player B because team Y kept player A in the minors three years while team X made player B play in the NHl right away. You believe that because that’s what you were taught your whole life along with other great truisms like rookie QB’s can’t play in the NFL. I don’t because I learned to question everything. My belief is that player A was just the better player all along but team Y had no room on its NHL roster.

Oh yes you know inside my mind and what I believe and you are the superior view because you question everything. lmfao. You know nothing about me.

Young players need to be taught. That's a simple fact. Even the greats need to learn things when they hit the NHL. If your NHL team is just a big training camp all year sure, maybe it works and they get the individual attention to details they need, but if your NHL team is busy trying to win hockey games you need to send these kids to school.

I will tell you what is true Mr. Questioner, and that is you have lived in the Sabres bubble for far too long. 

[ska-T Chitown]

29 minutes ago, tom webster said:

I’m still waiting for someone to explain to me how a talented rookie learns anything from skating around the Brett Murray’s and other AHL pylons and scoring goals from the blue line against goalies who can’t move laterally.

Yes, I would wager the opposite. Let me know if you discover that alternative universe.
 

Sticking with the QB theme, I’m guessing Josh Allen didn’t gain anything from watching Peterman throw five first half interceptions.

I think I did a poor job of trying to agree with you without just coming out and saying it. I just think the big club "saves face" by not having too many rookies making the kind of mistakes that young players make for everyone to see. I fully agree 22 yr old Benson will be better off having spent this year in the NHL. I don't think the top teams in the league would have had a roster spot for him due to their far superior talent depth, but I guess good for him that he came to Buffalo!

My remark about Rodgers was that he became a great QB because he had all the physical and mental tools to be a great QB and would have likely been as good in year 3 or 4 whether he had "learned" from Brett or not.

Having any formulaic approach on how to deal with people might be convenient, but I think it is just an excuse to be lazy and not think about each situation. (It happens in my industry a lot "grumble grumble, these young engineers need to just sit at their desk and do calculations by hand! grumble grumble") 

Tangentially - with star player contracts rising a bit disproportionately to the cap, I wonder if we see more NHL teams needing to fill gaps with entry level contracts, similar to the "rookie contract QB" craze in the NFL. I am in Chicago and all the talk about resetting the rookie contract clock at QB is amazing.

[tom webster]

9 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Oh yes you know inside my mind and what I believe and you are the superior view because you question everything. lmfao. You know nothing about me.

Young players need to be taught. That's a simple fact. Even the greats need to learn things when they hit the NHL. If your NHL team is just a big training camp all year sure, maybe it works and they get the individual attention to details they need, but if your NHL team is busy trying to win hockey games you need to send these kids to school.

I will tell you what is true Mr. Questioner, and that is you have lived in the Sabres bubble for far too long. 

Maybe I worded it wrong but what I meant is that most people in general have grown up believing unprovable facts are absolute because that’s the way it’s always been. I allow for the possibility you are right, I just doubt anything that is regarded “as the only way.”
Also, for the record, this has nothing to do with life in the Sabre bubble, quite the opposite in fact. In a perfect world, they agree with you.

Lastly, at 64, I don’t take anything personal and I don’t mean anything personal. I enjoy that back and forth. Sorry if I offended you.

[JoeSchmoe]

47 minutes ago, tom webster said:

Maybe I worded it wrong but what I meant is that most people in general have grown up believing unprovable facts are absolute because that’s the way it’s always been.

At risk of taking this off topic, my biggest thing is why do we still have starting pitchers in baseball? Pitchers should still pitch the same number of innings in a year, but spread them over less innings per game in more games. There are so many benefits:

-You can maximize lefty/lefty righty/righty matchups.

-Your weaker pitchers can pitch against the bottom of their order.

-The batters only see a pitcher once per game and never will time them up the 2nd or 3rd time around or recognize their tips.

-Your never leave a guy in too long.

-You should be able to manage and prevent injuries.

I know some teams like TB do dabble with this sort of thing sometimes, but try telling a Verlander that he's not a true starting pitcher anymore.

I believe a team could win 10-20 extra games a year if they adopted this full-time. Won't happen though.

[ska-T Chitown]

1 minute ago, JoeSchmoe said:

At risk of taking this off topic, my biggest thing is why do we still have starting pitchers in baseball? Pitchers should still pitch the same number of innings in a year, but spread them over less innings per game in more games. There are so many benefits:

-You can maximize lefty/lefty righty/righty matchups.

-Your weaker pitchers can pitch against the bottom of their order.

-The batters only see a pitcher once per game and never will time them up the 2nd or 3rd time around or recognize their tips.

-Your never leave a guy in too long.

-You should be able to manage and prevent injuries.

I know some teams like TB do dabble with this sort of thing sometimes, but try telling a Verlander that he's not a true starting pitcher anymore.

I believe a team could win 10-20 extra games a year if they adopted this full-time. Won't happen though.

"At risk of taking this off topic" <reaches over grabs wheel and pulls harrrrrrrrrrrrrrd> lol

[tom webster]

11 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

At risk of taking this off topic, my biggest thing is why do we still have starting pitchers in baseball? Pitchers should still pitch the same number of innings in a year, but spread them over less innings per game in more games. There are so many benefits:

-You can maximize lefty/lefty righty/righty matchups.

-Your weaker pitchers can pitch against the bottom of their order.

-The batters only see a pitcher once per game and never will time them up the 2nd or 3rd time around or recognize their tips.

-Your never leave a guy in too long.

-You should be able to manage and prevent injuries.

I know some teams like TB do dabble with this sort of thing sometimes, but try telling a Verlander that he's not a true starting pitcher anymore.

I believe a team could win 10-20 extra games a year if they adopted this full-time. Won't happen though.

I don’t follow baseball as closely as I did but I thought it had started to move in this direction.

[JoeSchmoe]

59 minutes ago, tom webster said:

I don’t follow baseball as closely as I did but I thought it had started to move in this direction.

It has... But nowhere close to fully. Starters are still starters.

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, tom webster said:

I’m not sure that’s true but that is old school thinking so you might be right. I think the difference between Benson and Kulich and Rosen is that Bensin’s game is mature enough for the NHL and then putting on weight and years, things he’ll do without playing in the AHL, there is nothing he could have learned from the AHL experience.

I'm an unabashed Benson fan. For a young player who is far from being physically developed, he has a tough and gritty style of play. In a couple of years when he's more physically mature, he's going to be a top two-line player for us. (My opinion.) However, I disagree that there was nothing he could have learned in the AHL. He would have gotten a lot more playing time with a lot more roles than he has now. 

As it turned out, it worked out well for him and for the team. There's no question that this has been a disappointing season. And there's no question that he has been a pleasant surprise. Ultimately, he got an opportunity, and he seized it. Good for him! 

 

[WhenWillItEnd66]

Totally agree with a lot of the thoughts on Benson. Should he have left in the juniors, Yes. Has he played well with the club, Yes. He has an unlimited supply of energy and brings it every shift!!! He forechecks, he fights on the boards, he back checks like crazy! The rest of the team can learn a lot from his actions! As he gets older and gets his man bod and gets stronger, he is going to be a bitch to play against. He has crazy talent that is waiting to bloom as we have seen in spurts. You all know that i scream we are easy to play against, but with 4-5 more players that play like him (Size or not) we will be hard to play against. 

[mjd1001]

13 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said:

At risk of taking this off topic, my biggest thing is why do we still have starting pitchers in baseball? Pitchers should still pitch the same number of innings in a year, but spread them over less innings per game in more games. There are so many benefits:

-You can maximize lefty/lefty righty/righty matchups.

-Your weaker pitchers can pitch against the bottom of their order.

-The batters only see a pitcher once per game and never will time them up the 2nd or 3rd time around or recognize their tips.

-Your never leave a guy in too long.

-You should be able to manage and prevent injuries.

I know some teams like TB do dabble with this sort of thing sometimes, but try telling a Verlander that he's not a true starting pitcher anymore.

I believe a team could win 10-20 extra games a year if they adopted this full-time. Won't happen though.

I think things are going in that direction, not having starting pitchers (other than the ones who start the game but don't pitch more innings than anyone else).  I don't like that myself, but things are going in that direction rapidly:

-Last year a total of 5 pitchers had over 200 innings.  The leader had 216. 5 years ago there were 15 starting pitchers with over 200 innings. 10 years ago there were 34. 20 years ago there were 43.  The number of innings starters are pitching is going way down, and its happening every year.

-I agree with you that guys like Verlander and some older vets won't like it, but the new guys in the system now...the teenagers, the 20-something breaking into the league...those guys aren't going to 'know' the game of pitching 7-8 innings per start, pitching with the goal of a complete game.  So, once the guys with connections to the way the game was played 10+ years ago are gone, it will be even easier as each year goes on to having a pitcher be...simply a pitcher.

[Flashsabre]

Michael Russo, the Wild beat reporter says the Wild might be considering trading Marco Rossi mainly because they don’t think he is big enough for their type of team.

He has 37 points as a rookie including 20 goals. Pals with Quinn.

He would be an ideal 3C for next year but then what is the cost and how many 5’9 forwards do they want. Would let Savoie and Östlund develop in Rochester. 
 

I would offer Krebs+ or swapping 1st round picks with them or maybe Joker.

He is a very good two way hockey player just coming into his own.

[Weave]

3 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

Michael Russo, the Wild beat reporter says the Wild might be considering trading Marco Rossi mainly because they don’t think he is big enough for their type of team.

He has 37 points as a rookie including 20 goals. Pals with Quinn.

He would be an ideal 3C for next year but then what is the cost and how many 5’9 forwards do they want. Would let Savoie and Östlund develop in Rochester. 
 

I would offer Krebs+ or swapping 1st round picks with them or maybe Joker.

He is a very good two way hockey player just coming into his own.

If Rossi is too small for Minny’s system, WTF would they be interested in Krebs as a return?

[WhenWillItEnd66]

49 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

Michael Russo, the Wild beat reporter says the Wild might be considering trading Marco Rossi mainly because they don’t think he is big enough for their type of team.

He has 37 points as a rookie including 20 goals. Pals with Quinn.

He would be an ideal 3C for next year but then what is the cost and how many 5’9 forwards do they want. Would let Savoie and Östlund develop in Rochester. 
 

I would offer Krebs+ or swapping 1st round picks with them or maybe Joker.

He is a very good two way hockey player just coming into his own.

Ok i know in my post above i said size does not matter, but we need some bigger bodies, unless we are going to get rid of someone like Krebs, Oloffson etc. 

[Flashsabre]

2 hours ago, Weave said:

If Rossi is too small for Minny’s system, WTF would they be interested in Krebs as a return?

Uh 2 inches😜

Probably Krebs isn’t a good fit. But if you are bringing in a Rossi Krebs is probably done. 
 

I think Joker would be the better offer. A younger RHD that can play top 4. Don’t know if the Sabres can fit him in on a long term deal.

This is all hypothetical but if they did bring in a Rossi then Savoie would probably be out the door in another deal. Benson and Rossi would be your 5’9 quota for a team.