ESPN+ Article on Prospects

[xzy89c1]

Sabres rated number one. Boston last. Would love to see specifics around sabres prospects. I can share Athletic specifics later tonight

[JoeSchmoe]

Love these annual articles. 

Unfortunately, I can't think of a prospect in the pipeline with a realistic ceiling better than a 2nd liner. And we're worse on defense.

[Mr. Allen]

14 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Love these annual articles. 

Unfortunately, I can't think of a prospect in the pipeline with a realistic ceiling better than a 2nd liner. And we're worse on defense.

I feel like Savoi can be an excellent 1st line scoring winger.  

[LGR4GM]

19 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Love these annual articles. 

Unfortunately, I can't think of a prospect in the pipeline with a realistic ceiling better than a 2nd liner. And we're worse on defense.

We have 2 1st overall defenders. And a 3rd overall defender. Sure, this season has been disappointing but not having a bunch of 1st pairing defenders in the pipeline is just inconsequential. We've probably got at least one that's a 4/5 which is more than enough. 

[JoeSchmoe]

7 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

We have 2 1st overall defenders. And a 3rd overall defender. Sure, this season has been disappointing but not having a bunch of 1st pairing defenders in the pipeline is just inconsequential. We've probably got at least one that's a 4/5 which is more than enough. 

I didn't see the article itself, but the thread title says we're number 1 in "prospects".

So they have to be talking about the pipeline, not players with multiple years of NHL experience.

[Weave]

Too bad, “best in prospects “ is such a worthless thing to win.

[Porous Five Hole]

Raise the banner!!!

[msw2112]

I guess I'd rather the team miss the playoffs and be highly ranked in prospects than miss the playoffs and be at the bottom of the prospect rankings.  Glass half full type of thing....That's certainly not to say that this season has not been a complete disappointment.  It certainly has.

[SwampD]

We have had the brightest future for thirteen years.

[TheAud]

The article was useless. Didn't list prospects by team, just sort of breezed over each team. The Athletic has much better content on this. It's not great but even The Hockey News is better. 

[matter2003]

2 hours ago, xzy89c1 said:

Sabres rated number one. Boston last. Would love to see specifics around sabres prospects. I can share Athletic specifics later tonight

Quite remarkable the Sabres have promoted so many young players to the NHL including Benson, this years #1 pick and STILL have the best prospect pool. Literally sitting on an almost embarrassing amount of prospect riches at this point.

12 minutes ago, SwampD said:

We have had the brightest future for thirteen years.

Wouldn't have been 13 years if Murray had been a little more patient and not traded all the prospects and picks for players that left the cupboard bare when it didn't work out. He set us back 5 years at least.

[In The Buff]

Haven't we had the "best prospect pool" for like the past 5-6 years? It hasnt translated into much success, thats for sure.

Every postseason you cant help but see all the ex-Sabres in the playoffs & here we are in year 13 of the drought. I cant help but wonder what would happen if you put them all on our team... would we be a playoff team with the roster just of exSabres?

Makes you think our problems aren't just talent related. Given how many exSabres are in the postseason. They were good enough to make it with these other teams. Just not here i guess 😢

[Weave]

3 hours ago, matter2003 said:

Quite remarkable the Sabres have promoted so many young players to the NHL including Benson, this years #1 pick and STILL have the best prospect pool. Literally sitting on an almost embarrassing amount of prospect riches at this point.

Wouldn't have been 13 years if Murray had been a little more patient and not traded all the prospects and picks for players that left the cupboard bare when it didn't work out. He set us back 5 years at least.

Have you not learned the lesson that you can’t have a team full of kids?  Murray did the right thing, but he chose ***** players for the plan.

[Thorner]

6 hours ago, xzy89c1 said:

Sabres rated number one. Boston last. Would love to see specifics around sabres prospects. I can share Athletic specifics later tonight

[Thorner]

3 hours ago, matter2003 said:

Quite remarkable the Sabres have promoted so many young players to the NHL including Benson, this years #1 pick and STILL have the best prospect pool. Literally sitting on an almost embarrassing amount of prospect riches at this point.

Wouldn't have been 13 years if Murray had been a little more patient and not traded all the prospects and picks for players that left the cupboard bare when it didn't work out. He set us back 5 years at least.

No, he didn’t. And for the 50 billionth time: *BOTTERILL* traded more picks and prospects away

Nothing a GM does sets a team back “5 years”. The turnover to competitiveness in a league half the teams make the playoffs is *demonstrably* shorter for all but the significant outliers 

[Weave]

Anyone remember a whole bunch of us saying things like “I’d rather be Buffalo than Boston cuz they have no future” like 5-6, maybe 7 seasons ago?  That slowly stopped getting pronounced ever year.

I’d still rather be in Boston’s shoes if it were possible to transfer their recent past and near future to the Sabres.  They have a loooong way to go before embarrassment.  And we keep slathering it on.

[Thorner]

1 hour ago, In The Buff said:

Haven't we had the "best prospect pool" for like the past 5-6 years? It hasnt translated into much success, thats for sure.

Every postseason you cant help but see all the ex-Sabres in the playoffs & here we are in year 13 of the drought. I cant help but wonder what would happen if you put them all on our team... would we be a playoff team with the roster just of exSabres?

Makes you think our problems aren't just talent related. Given how many exSabres are in the postseason. They were good enough to make it with these other teams. Just not here i guess 😢

Because it takes forever to make up ground building purely through prospects because

A) we have such a talent gap to make up

b) it takes prospects a long time

c) teams get a FREE 7 PICKS EVERY YEAR. Even the *good ones*. In the painstakingly long time we take to make a small bit of progress, there’s more than enough time for teams to address their much smaller holes through the draft picks they’ve been granted. Their draft capital is “weaker” but it’s relative: they don’t have the holes to fill on the main roster we do.

You can’t make up ground purely through youth before disenfranchisement sets in. You HAVE to be fluid in a team building approach. It’s shocking this gets any pushback at all but the name of the game is variety. A GM need to be agile and adaptable and combine many different avenues for team building into a competent whole

its always about balance

[Thorner]

All having the top ranked prospect pool guarantees you, if you don’t build a team, if you don’t use it as a means to an end, is future years with the highest ranked prospect pool.

As we have seen. A good prospect pool yields a good prospect pool more often than a good team

[Cranky old man]

Dispite our long term mismanagement, dysfunction, lousy coaching, and poor nhl level player performance, we have gathered many young talented minor league players. It fills me with pride. 

[inkman]

8 minutes ago, Cranky old man said:

Dispite our long term mismanagement, dysfunction, lousy coaching, and poor nhl level player performance, we have gathered many young talented minor league players. It fills me with pride. 

Eh Kulich, Rosen, Novikov, Neuchev, Levi, Savoie, Östlund, Strbak, Ratzlaff, Wahlburg.  Is that good?  And they are spread over 6 leagues.  I suppose you could include Benson.  Not sure if that’s great or not. Strbak, Savoie and Wahlburg are the only non-goaltending prospects I’m interested in.  I think the rest of the players are more of the same as we have.  Maybe Östlund becomes a good two way NHL forward.  

[...]

I am aware of the path a prospect takes to appear in the NHL only in a broad sense. Each prospect's path is different. They grow and learn at different rates. Their skillsets develop and mature (or not) over time.

So my position will seem really ignorant and I am happy to admit that it is. BUT. Unless our prospect pool is full of players like Benson who could legit start in the NHL in their first year then I think our pool is fundamentally no different than any other team's prospect pool.

 

[SwampD]

1 hour ago, Cranky old man said:

Dispite our long term mismanagement, dysfunction, lousy coaching, and poor nhl level player performance, we have gathered many young talented minor league players. It fills me with pride. 

We don’t have any more than any other team, and less than others.

Imo, your pride is misguided.

[Cranky old man]

1 hour ago, SwampD said:

We don’t have any more than any other team, and less than others.

Imo, your pride is misguided.

Dammit!

[shrader]

On 4/11/2024 at 5:47 PM, Thorny said:

No, he didn’t. And for the 50 billionth time: *BOTTERILL* traded more picks and prospects away

Nothing a GM does sets a team back “5 years”. The turnover to competitiveness in a league half the teams make the playoffs is *demonstrably* shorter for all but the significant outliers 

I know this conversation was held elsewhere, but I’m not really sure where you got the prospect part from. Botterill traded 3 total: Pu, Guhle, and Nylander. Murray matched that count in just the O’Reilly deal. 

[Thorner]

4 hours ago, shrader said:

I know this conversation was held elsewhere, but I’m not really sure where you got the prospect part from. Botterill traded 3 total: Pu, Guhle, and Nylander. Murray matched that count in just the O’Reilly deal. 

Typo. Should just say picks. The contention with Murray was always his dealing of picks not prospects. And I’ve posted the research on here a few times for anyone who actually wants to look it up: Botterill traded more than he brought in relative to Murray and Murray made more picks.

Edited April 15 by Thorny