Should We Trade Our Number One Pick This Year?

[SabreFinn]

3 hours ago, Jorcus said:

 

Here is a list of people you probably can not get with that pick. or pick and package. We are so screwed the only way to get out of it is keep drafting until there is so much talent on the ice a hamster could coach them.

https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2024/07/players-with-no-move-no-trade-clauses-in-2024-25.html

Florida picked up Forsling from waivers, added Mikkola and Kulikov as free agents. It doesn't need to be something that special as long as they do their job.

[Crusader1969]

As they sink down the standings, I will say probably not unless you get a real difference maker in return.  
 

things I would need answered if they fall into a position to draft one of the top 4

1) how close to a Jack Hughes clone is Hagens? 
2) how long will it take for Martone to develop into a top line power forward with a nose for the net?  Are we talking by the time he is 20 or by the time he is 24?
3) Misa has potential to become elite at zone entries.  Is this the missing piece to the PP? Again, what's the timeline? Are we talking D+1 or D+4

Maybe these players fit the time-line for a core group of forwards that's will feature  Helenius and Bensons of the prospect pool?

You would have a bunch of forwards in the top 6 in early 20s paired with top 4 defenders in the mid 20s and (hopefully) a top end goalie in Levi 
whereas, Eichel had guys like Gorges, Beaulieu and Antipin playing with him

In theory, the next batch of prospects would be in a much better position to succeed than Eichel and Samson did 

 

 

 

 

[Mustache of God]

21 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Looks at Zach Benson and Konsta Helenius... 

Then looks at Misa and Martone...

Savoie, Östlund, and Kulich. 

FTR, I have no problem trading a first round pick, what are we getting in return? 

This team is simply throbbing for an actual defenseman. If you address that in the draft, it's going to take years for that player to grow enough to make an impact, so I'd rather see a move made to swap the pick for a ready to go D man or 2? I know good players like that don't grow on trees and most guys have NTCs, but the allure of a high pick might be able to help teams address their needs?

[xzy89c1]

Tage Thompson is not a great hockey player... Not good enough for 4 nations team.

[JP51]

I want no trades or movement or exchange of assets under this current incompetent.

[bunomatic]

34 minutes ago, xzy89c1 said:

Tage Thompson is not a great hockey player... Not good enough for 4 nations team.

I agree. A bigger version of vic Olofson. Nice shot on the PP but on an ineffective PP he’s useless. 

[JP51]

6 minutes ago, bunomatic said:

I agree. A bigger version of vic Olofson. Nice shot on the PP but on an ineffective PP he’s useless. 

I agree, another pet peeve of mine with this inept organization... "Oh we need to get bigger!!!" I have an idea, lets go get 6'5" or taller people like Power and Muel and Thompson etc... that literally refuse to physically engage.  When Benson is your toughest grittiest player at 165lbs... 

[inkman]

On 12/16/2024 at 8:50 AM, bob_sauve28 said:

Another year, another very high draft pick for the Farm Team known as the Buffalo Sabres. 

 

Tage Thompson is a great hockey player who's career is going to die here in Buffalo if he does not get a top player to play with. We need someone that can make the PP work and this is a big bargaining chip. 

Hang out a for sale sign and see if there are any takers, but I'm sure we will wait till season is over to make any deal, but I do not want another long term project on the team where we have to wait seven years for him to grow to a man. We have enough "prospects" already. 

Hey Paul Hamilton, it’s called a first round pick. There is only one “number 1 pick” in each draft.  It’s the first overall pick.  Everything else is just a first round pick.  Is this a Canadian thing?  

[DarthEbriate]

You don't trade away a top 5 pick (draft #6 after another team moves up in the lottery). That's a player you can immediately plug into your starting lineup. He's on an ELC which provides economical advantages compared to other teams. And he's effectively learning on the job. It's the efficient way to go.

[LGR4GM]

18 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:

As they sink down the standings, I will say probably not unless you get a real difference maker in return.  
 

things I would need answered if they fall into a position to draft one of the top 4

1) how close to a Jack Hughes clone is Hagens? 
2) how long will it take for Martone to develop into a top line power forward with a nose for the net?  Are we talking by the time he is 20 or by the time he is 24?
3) Misa has potential to become elite at zone entries.  Is this the missing piece to the PP? Again, what's the timeline? Are we talking D+1 or D+4

Maybe these players fit the time-line for a core group of forwards that's will feature  Helenius and Bensons of the prospect pool?

You would have a bunch of forwards in the top 6 in early 20s paired with top 4 defenders in the mid 20s and (hopefully) a top end goalie in Levi 
whereas, Eichel had guys like Gorges, Beaulieu and Antipin playing with him

In theory, the next batch of prospects would be in a much better position to succeed than Eichel and Samson did 

 

Hagens probably does college for a 2nd season.

Martone needs another JR year maybe... he's another one of these *should go to the AHL players

Misa same thing

All in all I would say you are looking at 3years post draft before these are top 6 players you can rely on and that is at the earliest. NHL players by and large need around 250 games and about the age of 24 before they hit their stride. These guys maybe at 22 with 200 games are ready to be go to players. It's why A. Benson is amazing, he won't even be 20 until May and B. Jack Quinn playing bad for 25 games doesn't worry me that much compared to what he showed before. 

To answer your question though, D+ 3-4 years. Tage, Quinn, and JJP could all still be here in 3 years as well. Personally don't think you can worry about what Martone or Misa is like in 3 years but you need to start winning now. As always, depends on the the picks worth. There are other assets you can trade before that pick that might get you something good.

[Flashsabre]

I think Schaefer might be the  best of the crop. See how he is at the WJC but at the Prospects Challenge he was hands down the best player, dominating in all 3 zones. Now Hagens didn’t play in that Challenge so WJC will be interesting to watch.

I would take him and trade Power and Byram for offensive help.

Edited Tuesday at 03:37 PM by Flashsabre

[LGR4GM]

8 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

You don't trade away a top 5 pick (draft #6 after another team moves up in the lottery). That's a player you can immediately plug into your starting lineup. He's on an ELC which provides economical advantages compared to other teams. And he's effectively learning on the job. It's the efficient way to go.

I think Martone and Misa could/might step into an NHL lineup next year. Hagens I would leave in college 1 more year, not because he isn't good but because he is smaller and can continue to learn/grow at that level. Misa and Martone are destroying the CHL now so leaving them might give you less development. Schaefer I would also leave in the jrs but that's because he is going to be draft eligible by a measly 10 days, so that gives you growing time. 

however, Martone and Misa should not be relied on to be otherworldly next year. They should be slotted in a sheltered 3rd line role. Misa with McLeod and Greenway would be a great starting point for example. 

Really quick for the size worriers out there...

Michael Misa is 6'1" 184lbs (C/LW)

Porter Martone is 6'3" 208lbs (RW)

James Hagens is 5'10.5" 177lbs (C)

Matthew Schaefer is 6'2" 183lbs (LHD)

And Misa, Martone, and Schaefer all have physical sides to their games. Not Brady Tkachuk but Zach Benson would approve. My favorite at this time is Misa because his engine revs high and I think we need more high rev guys. 

4 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

I think Schaefer is the best of the crop. See how he is at the WJC but at the Prospects Challenge he was hands down the best player, dominating in all 3 zones. Now Hagens didn’t play in that Challenge so WJC will be interesting to watch.

I would take him and trade Power and Byram for offensive help.

Sadly, Misa was left off of Canada's WJC roster. If you take Schaefer, it makes Power or Byram expendable. In fact, I prefer Schaefer's style to Power's and Schaefer is 10 days shy of being 2026 eligible which is noteworthy. 

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, Mustache of God said:

This team is simply throbbing for an actual defenseman. If you address that in the draft, it's going to take years for that player to grow enough to make an impact, so I'd rather see a move made to swap the pick for a ready to go D man or 2? I know good players like that don't grow on trees and most guys have NTCs, but the allure of a high pick might be able to help teams address their needs?

2nd round picks get used all the time to take more defensive minded defenders. Both at the draft and in trades. Whitecloud is a guy that has been tossed out a lot as the perfect option but Adams would have to have the stones to do it. 

[Crusader1969]

28 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I think Martone and Misa could/might step into an NHL lineup next year. Hagens I would leave in college 1 more year, not because he isn't good but because he is smaller and can continue to learn/grow at that level. Misa and Martone are destroying the CHL now so leaving them might give you less development. Schaefer I would also leave in the jrs but that's because he is going to be draft eligible by a measly 10 days, so that gives you growing time. 

however, Martone and Misa should not be relied on to be otherworldly next year. They should be slotted in a sheltered 3rd line role. Misa with McLeod and Greenway would be a great starting point for example. 

Really quick for the size worriers out there...

Michael Misa is 6'1" 184lbs (C/LW)

Porter Martone is 6'3" 208lbs (RW)

James Hagens is 5'10.5" 177lbs (C)

Matthew Schaefer is 6'2" 183lbs (LHD)

And Misa, Martone, and Schaefer all have physical sides to their games. Not Brady Tkachuk but Zach Benson would approve. My favorite at this time is Misa because his engine revs high and I think we need more high rev guys. 

Sadly, Misa was left off of Canada's WJC roster. If you take Schaefer, it makes Power or Byram expendable. In fact, I prefer Schaefer's style to Power's and Schaefer is 10 days shy of being 2026 eligible which is noteworthy. 

One thing that stuck out to me reading about the draft is that Misa is elite at zone entries.  Sounds exactly what the Sabres need for their PP 

I guess my question would be , could he be your 3rd line centre and be on the top PP by next season? 

[LGR4GM]

57 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

One thing that stuck out to me reading about the draft is that Misa is elite at zone entries.  Sounds exactly what the Sabres need for their PP 

I guess my question would be , could he be your 3rd line centre and be on the top PP by next season? 

Maybe, but that's asking a lot.

[Thorner]

If we are penciling first round draft picks into meaningful spots in the lineup we are no better than Adams and Terry 

Well, other than the fact they are being PAID to eff up

[Crusader1969]

15 minutes ago, Thorner said:

If we are penciling first round draft picks into meaningful spots in the lineup we are no better than Adams and Terry 

Well, other than the fact they are being PAID to eff up

First overall picks.  
it's like guys like Bédard and Celibrini don't exist 

 

 

 

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

First overall picks.  
it's like guys like Bédard and Celibrini don't exist 

 

 

 

Yes, consensus first overall phenom Michael Misa

[Crusader1969]

57 minutes ago, Thorner said:

Yes, consensus first overall phenom Michael Misa

Yes sounds like a terrible year.
Kinda like the year Samson, Ekblad, Draisaitl and Bennett rounded out the top 4.   Would hate to have any of those guys on my team now 

[Thorner]

Just now, Crusader1969 said:

Yes sounds like a terrible year.
Kinda like the year Samson, Ekblad, Draisaitl and Bennett rounded out the top 4.   Would hate to have any of those guys on my team now 

People were saying Reinhart was a bust 3 years into his career, and he didn’t play in the nhl his first post draft year 

obviously we were wrong in saying that, but it doesn’t change the fact it was said because we wanted the production then, that would only come in time. Even with guys like Reinhart it’s usually years away from making a meaningful standings impact

i understand it’s my bias, but im always very forward about it: I just can’t place value on “the future” anymore. It is VERY unlikely the pick has a meaningful on-team impact in any sort of immediate fashion, to me it’s exceptionally more valuable to convert the pick into a now asset if possible 

you don’t have to agree with it, but I’m comfortable sitting firmly on a “it’s about THIS season RIGHT NOW” mantra to a T, to a fault, when it’s been going on 14 years 

[Crusader1969]

1 hour ago, Thorner said:

Yes, consensus first overall phenom Michael Misa

In all seriousness, you need to know the return before just saying "yes" trade the pick.  At this point, there is no way the Sabres trade the pick without some type of protection.  But don't worry, the pick is still valuable 

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Crusader1969 said:

In all seriousness, you need to know the return before just saying "yes" trade the pick.  At this point, there is no way the Sabres trade the pick without some type of protection.  But don't worry, the pick is still valuable 

Of course you look at the return. My point is that, if we get the same relative return for that pick as we do any other asset we are dealing, I move the pick 

It’s as much on the table as any asset, a reasonable return is always implied 

[Crusader1969]

1 minute ago, Thorner said:

People were saying Reinhart was a bust 3 years into his career, and he didn’t play in the nhl his first post draft year 

obviously we were wrong in saying that, but it doesn’t change the fact it was said because we wanted the production then, that would only come in time. Even with guys like Reinhart it’s usually years away from making a meaningful standings impact

i understand it’s my bias, but im always very forward about it: I just can’t place value on “the future” anymore. It is VERY unlikely the pick has a meaningful on-team impact in any sort of immediate fashion, to me it’s exceptionally more valuable to convert the pick into a now asset if possible 

you don’t have to agree with it, but I’m comfortable sitting firmly on a “it’s about THIS season RIGHT NOW” mantra to a T, to a fault, when it’s been going on 14 years 

I mostly agree with you.   I was very vocal about trading the pick for a top 4 dman throughout summer and up to this point.   I'm still in the trade the pick camp , cause it will be protected.  If they happen to get into the bottom 4 , they will still get the pick
 

12 minutes ago, Thorner said:

Of course you look at the return. My point is that, if we get the same relative return for that pick as we do any other asset we are dealing, I move the pick 

It’s as much on the table as any asset, a reasonable return is always implied 

Agree.  Especially if it's a top 4 dman to replace Joker.  

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, Thorner said:

People were saying Reinhart was a bust 3 years into his career, and he didn’t play in the nhl his first post draft year 

obviously we were wrong in saying that, but it doesn’t change the fact it was said because we wanted the production then, that would only come in time. Even with guys like Reinhart it’s usually years away from making a meaningful standings impact

i understand it’s my bias, but im always very forward about it: I just can’t place value on “the future” anymore. It is VERY unlikely the pick has a meaningful on-team impact in any sort of immediate fashion, to me it’s exceptionally more valuable to convert the pick into a now asset if possible 

you don’t have to agree with it, but I’m comfortable sitting firmly on a “it’s about THIS season RIGHT NOW” mantra to a T, to a fault, when it’s been going on 14 years 

We? 

No, I was exactly right about Samson. He's fine af

[Thorner]

17 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

We? 

No, I was exactly right about Samson. He's fine af

No I used we so I’d be included, I made the mistake of essentially writing him off