Prospect Info: Mikhail Grigorenko (2012, 12th) – '14-15: Rochester #25 (AHL) – Part 3: Reassigned

[Jame]

Hold on. Grigs is supposed to be better than Reinhart because he's two years out from his draft?

Which of these 20yo 7th-16ths were better than their 18yo top-3 counterparts? I count maybe 1-2.

2013: Mac, Barkov
2011: Scheifele, Couturier, Baertschi, JT Miller, Armia

2012: Yak, Galchenyuk
2010: Skinner, Burmi, Granlund, Schwartz, Tarasenko

2011: Nuge, Landeskog
2009: Kadri, Glennie, MPS, Kassian, Holland

2010: Hall, Seguin
2008: Boedker, Bailey, Hodgson, Beach, Boychuk

2009: Tavares, Duchene
2007: Voracek, Hamill, Couture, Sutter, Eller, Gillies

2008: Stamkos
2006: Brassard, Okposo, Mueller, Sheppard, Frolik, Little, Tlusty

Now I'd like to figure out what the fact that Grigo has indeed been better than Reinhart means. Grigo being underdrafted? Grigo developing very well over 2 years? 2014 an especially weak class? 2012 one of the stronger drafts in a decade?

you just made the argument for Reinhart going right to the NHL, and Grigorenko needing some AHL seasoning... and didn't even realize it...

oh and the bolded are pretty funny statements

 

[stokes84]

Wow, your argument is changing before our eyes!

Explain. Pretty sure I'm arguing that Grigs belongs on the team because he is better than the guy who made it.

 

[stokes84]

I sure hope this decision doesn't impact our ability to beat the Kings in game 7 this year.

There is an obligation for a professional sports team to field the best team possible, isn't there?

 

[enthusiast]

Man that list is upsetting. Almost every other top-2 there I'd rank ahead of Ekblad/Reinhart

 

[joshjull]

any and all other players on the bubble. I suppose junior players have the same standard but in the Sabres' case I think that would have only realistically been Zads against McCabe


also lol at how that was pretty much the opposite

I think you're looking at it backwards. They get that 9 game chance because players that are drafted that high are the ones most likely to earn that extra look. Whereas you are saying they get the look simply because they were drafted high. Or am I mistaken that this is your stance?

 

[Kublakhan]

It's known I've never been a huge fan of Grigs, But I do think he showed enough this pre-season to earn another shot..

 

[Jame]

I've never seen a team field a less competitive team then it is capable of and so many be ok with it.

you're on fire.

 

[Jame]

you can tie Stokes opinion on this whole thing to his avatar

 

[enthusiast]

I think you're looking at it backwards. They get that 9 game chance because players that are drafted that high are the ones most likely to earn that extra look. Whereas you are saying they get the look simply because they were drafted high. Or am I mistaken that this is your stance?

I'm saying it's practically assured independent of performance because it's functionally 9 games more of preseason vs trouncing junior

 

[SabresBillsBuffalo]

Grigs will be up in 9 when Reinhart gets tossed around like a ragdoll.

I don't see why anyone wouldn't be okay with that. Kid gets some NHL experience then goes down. Worked pretty well with Scheifele and Heubeardeu.

Grigs will be up shortly. Don't stress about it.

 

[ZZamboni]

My god, the drama typed over this have gone off the rails.


Does anyone not like Reinhart?

Does anyone not like Grigorenko?

Does anyone not like Murray?

Does anyone believe giving Reinhart an extra 9 game look will destroy, hurt, or stunt his development?

Does anyone believe sending Grigorenko to Rochester to be a top line player and develop more will destroy, hurt or stunt his development?

Does anyone believe Grig won't get more than 3 or 4 NHL games all season long?

Does anyone believe a silly little Facebook post says way more than "disappointed" and/or "surprised"?

Does anyone believe he won't try his hardest because he feels "shafted"? Any if so, doesn't that say all we need to know as fans in regards to if he belongs in the NHL?

Facts vs. made up "what if's" are driving some drama filled opinions. It's odd.

 

[Paxon]

There is an obligation for a professional sports team to field the best team possible, isn't there?

We all talk constantly about decisions that are based around the future at the expense of the present. That's exactly where almost every single person on this board sees where this team is, including yourself. That's even accepting that they think Grigorenko would be better than Reinhart over the next month, which isn't a given by any means.

 

[stokes84]

Grigs will be up in 9 when Reinhart gets tossed around like a ragdoll.

I don't see why anyone wouldn't be okay with that. Kid gets some NHL experience then goes down. Worked pretty well with Scheifele and Heubeardeu.

Grigs will be up shortly. Don't stress about it.

The difference between the kids you are talking about is that they didn't have other highly touted players clearly outperforming them.

If Reinhart's competition was Brian Flynn, everyone would be fine with it.

 

[Jame]

My god, the drama typed over this have gone off the rails.


Does anyone not like Reinhart?

Does anyone not like Grigorenko?

stokes hates reinhart
hooats loves grigo

stokes and hoats

 

[enthusiast]

I hate the sabres tbh


go panthers

 

[vcv]

There is an obligation for a professional sports team to field the best team possible, isn't there?

There is an obligation for a professional sports team to do everything in their power to win as many championships as they can. Sometimes that means discarding short term gains for long term gains.

Scenario A: Make moves to increase your chance to win championship from 100:1 to 60:1 this year. Keep hovering around those odds for a few years.
Scenario B: Make moves that decrease your chance to win championship from 100:1 to 250:1 this year. Use long term development plan to increase those odds to 60:1 in 2 years, 25:1 in 3 and 10:1 in 4.

Which path do you choose?

 

[Sansbacon]

I hate the sabres tbh


go panthers

Wrong forum.

 

[enthusiast]

 

[stokes84]

We all talk constantly about decisions that are based around the future at the expense of the present. That's exactly where almost every single person on this board sees where this team is, including yourself. That's even accepting that they think Grigorenko would be better than Reinhart over the next month, which isn't a given by any means.

This is true, but this is the first example of them actually not playing the best team that they could. Maybe it's a minor issue that is easily spun, but it's worth thinking. For all of the tank talk, they never purposely dressed worse players before, or made move that weren't what any normal team would make.

 

[stokes84]

stokes hates reinhart
hooats loves grigo

stokes and hoats

I love Reinhart. Grigorenko is just better right now. By a lot.

 

[Jame]

This is true, but this is the first example of them actually not playing the best team that they could. Maybe it's a minor issue that is easily spun, but it's worth thinking. For all of the tank talk, they never purposely dressed worse players before, or made move that weren't what any normal team would make.

so last year when Nolan took over, you think Ellis and Omark and D'agostini etc were better than Grigorenko?

to be clear... 8 months ago Matt Ellis was a better hockey player than Grigorenko... that's what you are telling us.

i cant believe you can make that statement with a straight face... it's a great example of being totally blinded by emotion

 

[dotcommunism]

I sure hope this decision doesn't impact our ability to beat the Kings in game 7 this year.

Excuse me, but the Sabres and Kings play each other in the Sabres' eighth game this year

 

[Jame]

I love Reinhart. Grigorenko is just better right now. By a lot.

you keep saying that, and I keep laughing...

 

[stokes84]

so last year when Nolan took over, you think Ellis and Omark and D'agostini etc were better than Grigorenko?

Yeah, they were better NHL players. Grigorenko was in way over his head last year and not at all an NHL player. Omark, no, but he was only here for 10 games or so.

 

[ZZamboni]

John Scott was better
Konopka was better