What are our top tradeable assets really worth?

[inkman]

3 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Realistically, Östlund and Rosen will never have much impact in the NHL. I know this, I'd expect NHL GM's to know them as well.

Savoie and Kulich are more likely to break into the league on a more meaningful basis, and may be able to get you back an NHL ready player on a cap-stressed team. I'd be shopping them hard.

I disagree on Östlund.  I waver on Rosen. Östlund looked great with the Amerks.  Rosen isn’t flashy which is probably why he slides down the prospect ranks but I see him in the league soon.  

[DarthEbriate]

Per the thread title, it’s not prospects only. 

Dahlin and Power could get 4 first equivalents. Dahlin is arguably better at his position than Eichel was.

Cozens is beloved around the league front offices and is locked up with 30-goal potential. He’d fetch quite a nice little haul.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

 

One of the most prevailing myths in the league that will probably never go away is the idea a star player can carry a team. If you suck, your star player will be disliked, that’s sort of just the way 

Your comment really goes to the misguided belief that has plagued this organization. It is the naive belief that the key to success is acquiring a savior player or two instead of doing the spade work of building a capable roster that would allow those elite players to drive their team to success. What this distorted reality has caused is making these talented players become disillusioned and exhibiting behavior that will create a divisive situation. It shouldn't be surprising when these highly competitive players become disgruntled and end up forcing their way out of this stuck organization. And to make matters even more untenable, the fans then direct their frustrations on these players resulting in even more disgruntlement. (As you point out.) 

[dudacek]

20 minutes ago, inkman said:

I disagree on Östlund.  I waver on Rosen. Östlund looked great with the Amerks.  Rosen isn’t flashy which is probably why he slides down the prospect ranks but I see him in the league soon.  

It’s a weird take on Östlund. 

There were 3 kids in his entire draft class playing regularly in the NHL last year.

Östlund played a regular shift in a middle 6 role against men in the best Swedish league and was league’s second-most productive teenager.

Tied for 3rd in the WJC in points and looked good doing it. His skill, pace and hockey sense also stood out with the Amerks.

He’s progressing nicely from what I’ve seen.

[Thorner]

4 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Realistically, Östlund and Rosen will never have much impact in the NHL. I know this, I'd expect NHL GM's to know them as well.

Savoie and Kulich are more likely to break into the league on a more meaningful basis, and may be able to get you back an NHL ready player on a cap-stressed team. I'd be shopping them hard.

I like Östlund’s future nhl prospects best of the lot tbh

[JoeSchmoe]

52 minutes ago, inkman said:

I disagree on Östlund.  I waver on Rosen. Östlund looked great with the Amerks.  Rosen isn’t flashy which is probably why he slides down the prospect ranks but I see him in the league soon.  

I base what I think about prospects by comparing them to other recent players.

2 years after his draft, Östlund had 23 points in 38 games in the SHL.

Peterka, who looks to be a bonafide 2nd liner, had 68 points in 70 games. 

That's a pretty big spread. Does the quality of the SHL vs AHL bridge the 0.61 vs 0.97 ppg gap?

Maybe someone with more time on their hands can evaluate where an undersized 0.61ppg SHL forward typically ends up career wise. Guaranteed, there are outliers who have succeeded, but where does the typical player of Ostlunds ilk end up?

[dudacek]

9 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

I base what I think about prospects by comparing them to other recent players.

2 years after his draft, Östlund had 23 points in 38 games in the SHL.

Peterka, who looks to be a bonafide 2nd liner, had 68 points in 70 games. 

That's a pretty big spread. Does the quality of the SHL vs AHL bridge the 0.61 vs 0.97 ppg gap?

Maybe someone with more time on their hands can evaluate where an undersized 0.61ppg SHL forward typically ends up career wise. Guaranteed, there are outliers who have succeeded, but where does the typical player of Ostlunds ilk end up?

There’s nothing in Östlund’s statistical profile that suggests he’s a longshot as an NHLer.

Peterka and Quinn were outliers. Quinn’s AHL numbers were the best by any prospect his age in 20 years in the AHL and Peterka was not far behind.

For what it’s worth, I ran Östlund, Savoie and Kulich through an NHLe calculator a month or so back and their numbers were almost identical: 25-27 points if I remember correctly.

Edited June 7 by dudacek

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, JoeSchmoe said:

2 years after his draft, Östlund had 23 points in 38 games in the SHL.

For me, his outstanding performance at the U20's was a better indicator of his develop than his point totals in the SHL where he was the youngest player to receive regular PT.  His SHL roster ranged from Noah at 19 to Peter Rosen at 36.  Most of the roster are men 27+.  

At the U20s he put up 17 pts in 12 games against his peers and to lead the Swedish team in scoring.  In the WJC U20 he put up 10 pts in 7 games to tie for the team lead.  By comparison he has 5 pts in 9 games in the U20 the year prior and 4 in 7 in the WJC U20.  

We'll get a much better feel for where his future lies in NA when he plays for Rochester in the fall.

Edited June 8 by GASabresIUFAN

[JoeSchmoe]

10 minutes ago, dudacek said:

There’s nothing in Östlund’s statistical profile that suggests he’s a longshot as an NHLer.

Peterka and Quinn were outliers. Quinn’s AHL numbers were the best by any prospect his age in 20 years in the AHL and Peterka was not far behind.

For what it’s worth, I ran Östlund, Savoie and Kulich through an NHLe calculator a month or so back and their numbers were almost identical: 25-27 points if I remember correctly.

Ok... I've got nothing going on on a Friday night. Here goes.

I'm going back year by year in Elite Prospects to find SHL players that are U20 with points in the range of 0.6ppg. I have to manually filter out the U18s and U19s that are also listed, since their way further back on their improvement curves.

19-20: Filip Hallender 0.52ppg U20 SHL.  

18-19: Emil Bemstrom 0.74ppg U20 SHL. 

18-19: Samuel Fagemo 0.60ppg U20 SHL.

16-17: Joel Eriksen Ek 0.62ppg U20 SHL.

15-16: Oskar Lindblom 0.52ppg U20 SHL.

12-13: William Karlsson 0.58ppg U20 SHL.

11-12: Johan Larsson 0.73ppg U20 SHL.

08-09: Lars Eller 0.60ppg U20 SHL.

There's not a lot of NHL'ers that played SHL as U20s. Of the ones that made it on my list above (Ek, Karlsson, Eller) they're all bigger than Östlund.

[dudacek]

5 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Ok... I've got nothing going on on a Friday night. Here goes.

I'm going back year by year in Elite Prospects to find SHL players that are U20 with points in the range of 0.6ppg. I have to manually filter out the U18s and U19s that are also listed, since their way further back on their improvement curves.

19-20: Filip Hallender 0.52ppg U20 SHL.  

18-19: Emil Bemstrom 0.74ppg U20 SHL. 

18-19: Samuel Fagemo 0.60ppg U20 SHL.

16-17: Joel Eriksen Ek 0.62ppg U20 SHL.

15-16: Oskar Lindblom 0.52ppg U20 SHL.

12-13: William Karlsson 0.58ppg U20 SHL.

11-12: Johan Larsson 0.73ppg U20 SHL.

08-09: Lars Eller 0.60ppg U20 SHL.

There's not a lot of NHL'ers that played SHL as U20s. Of the ones that made it on my list above (Ek, Karlsson, Eller) they're all bigger than Östlund.

I think the bold is probably the most significant thing in this post. The fact he is in the SHL at all at his age tells where his development is at.

But I’m getting from you a sense that you think if you aren’t big, your offence really needs to pop, or you won’t make it.

Which is a fair take.

The main reason I like Östlund is that every time I watch him, the puck always seems to end up on his stick, kid is everywhere.

And when he’s got the puck he doesn’t waste any time getting it where it needs to go.

Edited June 7 by dudacek

[GASabresIUFAN]

When I look at the Sabres, I see a team that has 5-6 good to excellent forward prospects (not including Benson) in this order: Savoie, Kulich Östlund, Rosen, Wahlberg and Neuchev.  On defense I see Johnson, Novikov, Komarov and Strbak as future NHLers.  Of these 2 groups I think only Johnson and Savoie could step in and contribute to the Sabres is a meaningful way to start the season.  Kulich, Rosen and Novikov may be ready by mid to late season.

If you are the Sabres, how many of these guys would you make available in trade?  Of the forwards, I'm inclined to move as many as 3, but if I go to 3, I'm keeping the 11th overall pick.  On defense, I'd prefer to keep Johnson so that I can trade Joki.  The other 3 I have no interest in trading, but can understand if someone wanted Komarov in a deal.  Strbak is still much too green to be of much trade value.  

Edited June 8 by GASabresIUFAN

[tom webster]

I think Krebs gets traded and I think people are surprised with the return

[GASabresIUFAN]

2 minutes ago, tom webster said:

I think Krebs gets traded and I think people are surprised with the return

Pleasantly or un-pleasantly surprised?

[dudacek]

Always wondered how much interest a Krebs Jokiharju package would have from Calgary.

Backlund would certainly help the Sabres.

Ages would make me nervous.

[JoeSchmoe]

22 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think the bold is probably the most significant thing in this post. The fact he is in the SHL at all at his age tells where his development is at.

But I’m getting from you a sense that you think if you aren’t big, your offence really needs to pop, or you won’t make it.

Which is a fair take.

The main reason I like Östlund is that every time I watch him, the puck always seems to end up on his stick, kid is everywhere.

And when he’s got the puck he doesn’t waste any time getting it where it needs to go.

I agree with all this, including your analysis of my analysis.

But based on the limited amount of roster spots for players of his cohort, I'm hoping 1 out of the 31 GMs in the league saw what GA saw at the WJ's and will give us an NHL ready player for him. Especially given I like our odds on Kulich and Savoie more.

[Thorner]

If we trade Krebs Adams is definitely reading my posts 

[tom webster]

39 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Pleasantly or un-pleasantly surprised?

Pleasantly 

[LGR4GM]

5 minutes ago, tom webster said:

Pleasantly 

I like Krebs as a person and think he had an NHL future. I'm just not convinced that future is in Buffalo. 

[JoeSchmoe]

1 hour ago, tom webster said:

I think Krebs gets traded and I think people are surprised with the return

The biggest surprise if Krebs gets traded will be if he goes as a solo piece. 

As a solo piece, what else does he get you besides draft picks? I think everyone is in agreement we don't need draft picks.

To get an NHL ready contributor back for Krebs, we'll need to package him up with either picks or additional prospects. At that point, it'll be a toss up whether it was Krebs that made the deal, or whatever else we packaged him with.

[dudacek]

5 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

The biggest surprise if Krebs gets traded will be if he goes as a solo piece. 

As a solo piece, what else does he get you besides draft picks? I think everyone is in agreement we don't need draft picks.

To get an NHL ready contributor back for Krebs, we'll need to package him up with either picks or additional prospects. At that point, it'll be a toss up whether it was Krebs that made the deal, or whatever else we packaged him with.

It’s not unusual to pick up a #4/5 D or a middle-six forward for a 2nd or 3rd rounder.

Id say Krebs’ value is in that range 🤷

Edited June 8 by dudacek

[dudacek]

31 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I like Krebs as a person and think he had an NHL future. I'm just not convinced that future is in Buffalo. 

I think Krebs is probably headed for a Cody Eakin-esque career.

Unlike @Thorny, I like him; he’s all in.

Id like to see him succeed here, but it goes without saying that Mitts was never going to be the only asset that will get flipped on this journey.

[7+6=13]

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

Your comment really goes to the misguided belief that has plagued this organization. It is the naive belief that the key to success is acquiring a savior player or two instead of doing the spade work of building a capable roster that would allow those elite players to drive their team to success. What this distorted reality has caused is making these talented players become disillusioned and exhibiting behavior that will create a divisive situation. It shouldn't be surprising when these highly competitive players become disgruntled and end up forcing their way out of this stuck organization. And to make matters even more untenable, the fans then direct their frustrations on these players resulting in even more disgruntlement. (As you point out.) 

Ah yes, I grow weary of this organizations endless plague acquiring star players.  It's literally the opposite of what we've done, except one time, and trying to get McDavid was worth trying for.

[inkman]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I think the bold is probably the most significant thing in this post. The fact he is in the SHL at all at his age tells where his development is at.

But I’m getting from you a sense that you think if you aren’t big, your offence really needs to pop, or you won’t make it.

Which is a fair take.

The main reason I like Östlund is that every time I watch him, the puck always seems to end up on his stick, kid is everywhere.

And when he’s got the puck he doesn’t waste any time getting it where it needs to go.

His game is pleasing to the eye 

[Thorner]

8 minutes ago, inkman said:

His game is pleasing to the eye 

My eyes would be more pleased by someone capable of contributing on the scoresheet. Though he himself assuredly agrees with you considering he likes watching himself play so much he got a tattoo of it 

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I think Krebs is probably headed for a Cody Eakin-esque career.

Unlike @Thorny, I like him; he’s all in.

Id like to see him succeed here, but it goes without saying that Mitts was never going to be the only asset that will get flipped on this journey.

Curtis Lazar.