Johan Larsson contract (RFA)

[Jame]

Trade Bait.

I would agree in the sense that almost everyone not named Risto, Girgs, Reinhart, 2015 1st is potential trade bait.

But in terms of Murray, and his player preferences/the team he's stated he wants to build... Larsson is a very good fit.

Larsson plays a hard, puck dominant, 2 way game. While we are all excited about the depth of higher end "skill" players (Reinhart, Kane, Ennis, 2015 1st), there is still a deep need for the "glue" guys. Outside of Girgensons, there really aren't any others in the near term in the pipeline save for Compher.

Sure, Larsson is trade bait if we are acquiring O'reilly for that role. Or someone else to fill it... but until then, and until our youth develops into bigger roles, Larsson is turning into a perfect bridge player. He's proving he can be a top 6 center on a terrible team, but his skills clearly indicate that he can move around and down the lineup as needed through the rebuild.

 

[Matt Ress]

I would agree in the sense that almost everyone not named Risto, Girgs, Reinhart, 2015 1st is potential trade bait.

But in terms of Murray, and his player preferences/the team he's stated he wants to build... Larsson is a very good fit.

Larsson plays a hard, puck dominant, 2 way game. While we are all excited about the depth of higher end "skill" players (Reinhart, Kane, Ennis, 2015 1st), there is still a deep need for the "glue" guys. Outside of Girgensons, there really aren't any others in the near term in the pipeline save for Compher.

Sure, Larsson is trade bait if we are acquiring O'reilly for that role. Or someone else to fill it... but until then, and until our youth develops into bigger roles, Larsson is turning into a perfect bridge player. He's proving he can be a top 6 center on a terrible team, but his skills clearly indicate that he can move around and down the lineup as needed through the rebuild.

I'm not as high on Johan but I would be really surprised to see him moved unless he was a pivotal piece in a big trade.

 

[Beerz]

I would agree in the sense that almost everyone not named Risto, Girgs, Reinhart, 2015 1st is potential trade bait.

But in terms of Murray, and his player preferences/the team he's stated he wants to build... Larsson is a very good fit.

Larsson plays a hard, puck dominant, 2 way game. While we are all excited about the depth of higher end "skill" players (Reinhart, Kane, Ennis, 2015 1st), there is still a deep need for the "glue" guys. Outside of Girgensons, there really aren't any others in the near term in the pipeline save for Compher.

Sure, Larsson is trade bait if we are acquiring O'reilly for that role. Or someone else to fill it... but until then, and until our youth develops into bigger roles, Larsson is turning into a perfect bridge player. He's proving he can be a top 6 center on a terrible team, but his skills clearly indicate that he can move around and down the lineup as needed through the rebuild.

Yup He can. Didn't sound like Murray was too high on him in the interview yesterday tho.

I

 

[joshjull]

Contract wise I'm expecting QO for one year or maybe a bit more per year for 2 years. He has no leverage.

 

[Jame]

Yup He can. Didn't sound like Murray was too high on him in the interview yesterday tho.

I

I missed it. Link please?

 

[Jame]

If you were forced to keep both Girgensons and Larsson in top 6 roles, but only one could stay at center, which one would you move to wing?

 

[cybresabre]

Yup He can. Didn't sound like Murray was too high on him in the interview yesterday tho.

So he wasn't pumping up his trade value, but was trying to set him up for a nice reasonable contract. Excellent.

I missed it. Link please?

http://media.wgr550.com/a/103826544/4-1-sabres-gm-tim-murray.htm?q=tim+murray

The computer-generated chat transcript is a word salad disaster, but it's kinda funny, so I'll post it anyway.
[spoil]Is a huge fan of your hands and Johan was caught maybe chicken and a deal that most. Non start kids get caught it so you know there the first stop for suck it up because of injury. Their top six forward. In Rochester producing. And they get called up and and and they get stuck on a third or fourth line and and that's not his fault and that's certainly an optical fault that's just the way it is and it takes a lot of a lot of guts or or quite a few injuries. To get a life guy like that on your. Your top six or your first or second power play and it takes time. And you know if you really like the guy you stick with them. You try to send the right message. Each and every time you send them down witches. Not always gonna get through because right at that moment they're extremely disappointed. So they may not be listening to everything have to say the disorder going down but. We see a lot of kids that. You don't make the National Hockey League it as a regular 2425. They didn't lose their talent up and then get it back up to that point especially Alec him second round pick. It's opportunity. It's timing is. There's a lot of things are going to and we do see. We UC players that. Get that five or six Schatz is over two years and then disappear because it didn't work out for them. And a lot of at a circus that's a lot of that is the intestinal fortitude you know. How like he. Sticking with this I've been called up eight times to hear them on the fourth line with her heart things. As an organization you can all you can try to do is tell them what. What good can happen here if you stick with it but. It's hard and I realize it's hard for kids to stick with that and but we see we we use we do see some always go back to Europe but we see a lot of guys. You know other guys playing now you know who worded ruffle come in come from from Philadelphia for example and different different examples of a lot. And once they do get their chance they. Finally sees it and then it's hard to send down and and they become modified and so forth but it's a hard process if you're not. You know. Wanted to. Pop and decks that gets all the opportunities which we try to give them right when your role player trying to get. You know that role where rolled into it to a federal it's it's a grind there's no question he's playing in the top six now on this team there's still project. That's more of a role player in the NH LQ what I think I think he does but I think that's what you do we. We sent him down there and and and you'd you'd ever tell your coach we're your one flavor use. Your your message to the coaches we think this guy down here he plays the top six rolled down here. And and gets lots of ice climbing in and tough match ups and power play that that will help him become a good role player the next level and mar Vista that same example you know I I talked to Merck put it down there and I asked the push himself from bush himself and you that transition offense and defense that you might not be that the next level but that'll help you become the next level what you're going to become. And that's all part of playing cop at a lower level and it allows you it allows you to. Fit into the role that you're going to fit in at the NHL level. Much easier.[/spoil]

 

[Husko]

If you were forced to keep both Girgensons and Larsson in top 6 roles, but only one could stay at center, which one would you move to wing?

Larsson

 

[mikemcburn]

Larsson

Really? I've just got this sweet image of Girgensens playing the power forward wing role to an ace. Also, if I had to pick which of them was the better play-maker and gave stronger d-zone coverage, the edge would go to Larsson. Which one is the stronger skater?

 

[Jame]

Ennis w/o Larsson = .54 pts per game
Ennis w/ Larsson = .72 pts per game

2013-14 (in a defensive role)
#1 in GA per 60 (1.25)
#1 in GA/GF differential
#1 Corsi & Corsi Relative
#5 in +/- QOC
#1 in Corsi QOC

2014-15 (moved into an offensive role)
#1 in GA per 60 (1.68 nearly a full goal better than #2 Foligno 2.52
#2 in GF per 60
#1 in GF/GA differential (+0.50, a full goal better than #2 Gionta -0.50)
#1 in Corsi and Corsi Relative

 

[Matt Ress]

Will there be debate on whether or not to debate? Lol more at 11

 

[1972]

Anton Lander is a good comparable, and he just signed for less a a million per season on a two year deal.

 

[1TuchAnd1NoTuch]

If you were forced to keep both Girgensons and Larsson in top 6 roles, but only one could stay at center, which one would you move to wing?

Girgs

 

[Matt Ress]

If you were forced to keep both Girgensons and Larsson in top 6 roles, but only one could stay at center, which one would you move to wing?

Hypothetically on the same line? Or definitely not on the same line?

 

[Jame]

Hypothetically on the same line? Or definitely not on the same line?

I'm not sure. either could work

 

[Husko]

It's so clear Larsson is going to be the new Hecht it's not even funny. The same people that hated Hecht will also hate Larsson

 

[Matt Ress]

I'm not sure. either could work

The more I think about it, the more I'd want Girg on the wing and Larrson in the middle. They're game is kinda similar though so I think they'd be on different lines. Ideally both wings but that's moot I guess.

 

[Jame]

The more I think about it, the more I'd want Girg on the wing and Larrson in the middle. They're game is kinda similar though so I think they'd be on different lines. Ideally both wings but that's moot I guess.

I'd keep Larsson in the middle going forward (until the obvious candidates force him out). Initially, I had the same feeling about Girgensons (staying at center short term), but Larsson's emergence gives us more options.

 

[Correct]

To the contrary, Murray said he views him as a bottom six role player.

I think if his ceiling is a bottom six role player, we're going to have one hell of a hockey team ahead of him.

He's going to be a great player. Reminds me of Hecht on the Drury line.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

I think if his ceiling is a bottom six role player, we're going to have one hell of a hockey team ahead of him.

He's going to be a great player. Reminds me of Hecht on the Drury line.

I think great is beyond where he'll eventually settle in. It would be nice to see him consistently perform as a Sobotka type of player.

 

[Jame]

It's so clear Larsson is going to be the new Hecht it's not even funny. The same people that hated Hecht will also hate Larsson

How could anyone hate Hecht?

It's a solid comparison. There's some Sammy Pahlsson in his game, and some Mikko Koivu as well.

It's pretty impressive that Larsson went from the best 2 way forward in the system, to the best 2 way forward on the Sabres in the same season.

 

[B U F F A L O]

How could anyone hate Hecht?

It's a solid comparison. There's some Sammy Pahlsson in his game, and some Mikko Koivu as well.

It's pretty impressive that Larsson went from the best 2 way forward in the system, to the best 2 way forward on the Sabres in the same season.

I wasnt a big fan of Hecht. Those awful T-blades. How slow he always looked on the ice. The behind the goal line goals ALL the time... but I agree with the comparison. I think thats a role Larsson ends up filling. I think Larsson is a slightly better and different style of hockey player than Hecht though.

 

[Jame]

I wasnt a big fan of Hecht. Those awful T-blades. How slow he always looked on the ice. The behind the goal line goals ALL the time... but I agree with the comparison. I think thats a role Larsson ends up filling. I think Larsson is a slightly better and different style of hockey player than Hecht though.

There are similarities in their in zone possession games and functional hockey strength.

Larsson's much more of an aggressive and gritty player.

At it's most basic though, you are never going to be at a disadvantage when they are on the ice. You can never have enough of that.

 

[Husko]

How could anyone hate Hecht?

It's a solid comparison. There's some Sammy Pahlsson in his game, and some Mikko Koivu as well.

It's pretty impressive that Larsson went from the best 2 way forward in the system, to the best 2 way forward on the Sabres in the same season.

You're kidding, right?

Do you not remember the posters calling for him to be traded, cut, reduced to 4th line, etc. etc.?

Was there ever a line Hecht was on that wasn't effective?

 

[Jame]

You're kidding, right?

Do you not remember the posters calling for him to be traded, cut, reduced to 4th line, etc. etc.?

Was there ever a line Hecht was on that wasn't effective?

Yes, Of course i remember. It drove me bonkers.