Nikita Zadorov: The Almost Dynasty and The Future Travesty Part 1; The Squabble

[Kcoyote3]

The biggest issue is that the offense is going to be expected to produce next season. But a team is downright awful without a good top 4. Look at the Sharks last year. Same forward line-up as two years prior, awful defense. Out of the playoffs.

Caps two years ago, injured defense, playing with 3 AHL guys, terrible depth. Out of the playoffs. This year, signed Orpik and Niskanen, in the playoffs with close to the same roster up front as two years prior, 1 minute away from the ECF.


Without a solid defense, the entire team suffers and it makes it impossible to succeed. No matter how many Kane's and ROR's are acquired. They sacrificed two top pairing guys in Myers and Zadorov (yes it's premature to say Zadorov is a top pairing guys, but I've watched him for a long time and I've seen him develop. He'll be there), without doing anything coming back to help the defense.

Sure you could say Bogosian will be just fine. But how in the world is that star first line going to catch passes when Josh Gorges is your #1 LD? When Bogosian has to work with Weber? It's just not going to work, and acquiring top pairing defensemen is hard. Like really, really hard. You develop them, and then you keep them. Myers is a guy you keep. Him with Zadorov and a slightly improved offense next year would have been magic.

Of course this is all just my opinion.

 

[Rebels57]

Kane - O'Reilly - Eichel
Moulson - Larsson - Ennis
McGinn - Girgensons - Reinhart
Foligno - Legwand - Gionta
Deslauriers

I'd like to see this to start the season.

Isn't Larsson a LW? Is he really a better option as a 2nd line center than Eichel or Reinhart?

 

[cgf]

Way too many GMs have squandered way too much time just stockpiling picks because they were scared of overpaying. The courage to use your great prospect wealth to acquire young cornerstones for your top prospects to slot in around is something too many GMs on rebuilding teams lack and why so many promising rebuilds stagnate. Murray's aggressiveness has been much more impressive than Edmonton's sitting on their hands. He's made the kind of big moves that turned the nordiques into a powerhouse in colorado; and I could not be happier for the Buffalo faithful.

And in all of those moves Zadorov was the only core guy they lost.

 

[McOvechking]

Trading away myers was a huge mistake. The rest of the moves are defendable.

 

[Havok89]

Isn't Larsson a LW? Is he really a better option as a 2nd line center than Eichel or Reinhart?

Larsson can play all three forward positions and had great success in between Moulson and Ennis to end last season. Girgensons and O'Reilly are also very versatile and can shift to wing and have success.

This scenario is just to start the season, remember. Let Eichel get a few games under his belt with less responsibility as a winger.

There will inevitably be injuries and Eichel will shift to center in a top six role.

 

[Rebels57]

The biggest issue is that the offense is going to be expected to produce next season. But a team is downright awful without a good top 4. Look at the Sharks last year. Same forward line-up as two years prior, awful defense. Out of the playoffs.

Caps two years ago, injured defense, playing with 3 AHL guys, terrible depth. Out of the playoffs. This year, signed Orpik and Niskanen, in the playoffs with close to the same roster up front as two years prior, 1 minute away from the ECF.


Without a solid defense, the entire team suffers and it makes it impossible to succeed. No matter how many Kane's and ROR's are acquired. They sacrificed two top pairing guys in Myers and Zadorov (yes it's premature to say Zadorov is a top pairing guys, but I've watched him for a long time and I've seen him develop. He'll be there), without doing anything coming back to help the defense.

Sure you could say Bogosian will be just fine. But how in the world is that star first line going to catch passes when Josh Gorges is your #1 LD? When Bogosian has to work with Weber? It's just not going to work, and acquiring top pairing defensemen is hard. Like really, really hard. You develop them, and then you keep them. Myers is a guy you keep. Him with Zadorov and a slightly improved offense next year would have been magic.
Of course this is all just my opinion.

To me you nailed it with this, ESPECIALLY with the depth at Center they already have.

They could have just used Ennis as their 1st line center in 2015-2016 with Eichel on line 2 and Girgensons on line 3 and by 2016-2017 they shift Ennis to wing and go Eichel-Reinhart-Girgensons down the middle. They would still have Zadorov on their defense and could have moved Grigorenko in a different trade for a top 4 defensemen or other asset.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

No they DID what Brian Burke did. They traded for proven commodities and sacrificed to do it before the team was ready.

Except one team had bluechip prospects in place and the other didn't.

 

[Namejs]

Putting Zadorov on the top pairing rendered all of that wall of text invalid in my eyes.

Ristolainen is now somehow getting too much icetime and there's apparently too much pressure on him, yet Zadorov would've been this elite top pairing guy. How does that make any sense at all?

Some very questionable assessments from someone who doesn't seem to be too knowledgeable about all the Sabres assets.

 

[Mr Positive]

The Myers trade was a screw up in hindsight, although one could say that maybe it helped Buffalo tank for Eichel since they gave up warm bodies for a Bogosian and more importantly Kane, a high end winger who could help them get better later but not help them win in the short term. Still, there is no doubt that the Sabres could really use the Myers we're seeing in Winnipeg right now.

I tend to think there must have been another way to rig trades to tank, but without giving up Myers. Truthfully, I just think that Murray was losing faith in him.

 

[lifeisruff]

So basically your arguement (if I have interpretted this correctly) is that by trading Myers and Zadorov, they have given up too much defense for forward help.

2 objections

1. I don't consider the gap between Myers and Bogosian to be significant at all. In fact, I don't consider it a given that Myers is better then Bogosian. They are different players, Myers is more dynamic and can wow you with his puck carrying, espeically for a guy his size. Bogosian is smarter and more physical in his own end.

2. I think you underate Mark Pysyk, I see a lot of Hjalmarsson in his game. I am quite comfortable with Risto, Bogo and Pysyk as our core defensemen (more so if they weren't all RD). Especially if Risto reaches the heights of players like Hedman, Pietrangelo etc. And of all the defensemen mentioned in this topic, he has the most likely chance of doing that.

Do we have hole on defense, yes, am I happy with Gorges, Weber, Donovan and Colaiacovo as our LD, dear god no.

But if we really wanted to fill that hole, we would have signed Sekera to a 7 year 42 million dollar deal and then we won't have a hole anymore.

 

[Dreakon13]

The Myers trade was a screw up in hindsight

How can we have hindsight in a trade where one of the biggest pieces hasn't played a game with their new team yet?

 

[Freudian]

A new GM will always have little loyalty to old players and old picks. Murray has shipped out a lot of the previous regime's players and prospects and gotten his own.

The desire to build their own team is just too strong for new GMs. Sometimes they are in such a hurry they are throwing out the baby with the bath water and sometimes, as with Yzerman in Tampa, they are making the right call.

It's going to be Murray's Sabres going forward and he has been very aggressive and willing to pay a high price to make it so.

 

[Stephen]

Agreed completely. Not sure how a rebuilding team builds so many assets up only to throw them all away and primarily end up with Bogosian, Lehner, Kane and O'Reilly as core pieces. Those guys weren't core members of successful teams, and are on inflated post ELC deals, and Murray basically accelerated his core timeline back to the 2008/2009 draft.

Also gave up on Tyler Myers, who looks like the best player from that time frame, and may just break out in Winnipeg.

Makes no sense.

 

[Havok89]

The Myers trade was a screw up in hindsight, although one could say that maybe it helped Buffalo tank for Eichel since they gave up warm bodies for a Bogosian and more importantly Kane, a high end winger who could help them get better later but not help them win in the short term. Still, there is no doubt that the Sabres could really use the Myers we're seeing in Winnipeg right now.

I tend to think there must have been another way to rig trades to tank, but without giving up Myers. Truthfully, I just think that Murray was losing faith in him.

Bogosian was arguably better in Buffalo last season than Myers was in Buffalo. Myers wasn't traded to ensure the "tank".

 

[Namejs]

Agreed completely. Not sure how a rebuilding team builds so many assets up only to throw them all away and primarily end up with Bogosian, Lehner, Kane and O'Reilly as core pieces. Those guys weren't core members of successful teams, and are on inflated post ELC deals, and Murray basically accelerated his core timeline back to the 2008/2009 draft.

Also gave up on Tyler Myers, who looks like the best player from that time frame, and may just break out in Winnipeg.

Makes no sense.

How many games of Tyler Myers have you seen?

 

[HydroF]

I generally disagree OP. If these were aging vets that were acquired to insulate the up and comers, and give the team the quick boost they are about to get, I would agree. However, the big acquisitions...

ROR age 24
Kane age 23
Bogosian age 24
Lehner age 23

They gave up quite a lot in futures between the draft picks and prospects, but the pieces they got are young guys who have proven they have a strong future in the league and are easily young enough to grow with this team over the long term (potential contract issus aside).

The price paid may have been a little off on some of the moves, but overall they did appear to go after the guys that fit in with the whole rebuilding process, and a lot of what was given up was unproven commodities.

 

[Havok89]

Agreed completely. Not sure how a rebuilding team builds so many assets up only to throw them all away and primarily end up with Bogosian, Lehner, Kane and O'Reilly as core pieces. Those guys weren't core members of successful teams, and are on inflated post ELC deals, and Murray basically accelerated his core timeline back to the 2008/2009 draft.

Also gave up on Tyler Myers, who looks like the best player from that time frame, and may just break out in Winnipeg.

Makes no sense.

"Builds so many assets up only to throw them away"

So trading Myers, Zadorov, and a lot of hope for proven commodities such as Kane, O'Reilly, and Bogosian is throwing away assets?

You do realize we made those trades without trading any of our young core players? Eichel, Reinhart, Ristolainen, and Girgensons are still here.

 

[Rebels57]

Honestly, the biggest issue I have is with the Lehner trade. There were plenty of other goalies acquired in trades for far less and UFAs that are just as good. There were far too many quality players in this draft to give up that pick. They could have ended up with Travis Konecny, Colin White or Brock Boeser amongst other prospects, with that 21st overall pick.

Imagine Konecny or Boeser on either Eichel or Reinharts RW..

 

[Kcoyote3]

Putting Zadorov on the top pairing rendered all of that wall of text invalid in my eyes.

Ristolainen is now somehow getting too much icetime and there's apparently too much pressure on him, yet Zadorov would've been this elite top pairing guy. How does that make any sense at all?

Some very questionable assessments from someone who doesn't seem to be too knowledgeable about all the Sabres assets.

I've watched Zadorov in London many, many times. Mainly because on Chris Tierney, but I loved what I saw from Zadorov.

Alright how about a different scenario.

You're the Chicago Blackhawks in the offseason of 2006-2007. You've got Kane and Toews coming up after you have essentially finished terribly. You've got a solid Duncan Keith, a solid Brent Seabrook, and Dustin Byfuglien kicking around.

Now Keith has been good, he's produced at 30 points this year but he put up only 2 goals. He's older at 23 than Toews and Kane coming in at 18 and 19. Seabrook regressed this year. He's 21 and put up 24 points in 81 games after putting up 31 in 69 the year before. He's got promise but that regression is scary.

But then you look at your forward depth and it is atrocious. You have Havlat who only played 18 games for Ottawa the year before, missed 30 games this season and somehow still led the team in scoring with 57. He's a great talent, but he's often injured. Then you've got a team full of second or third line players. Vrbata put up 41 points over the full season, Tuumo Ruutu has 38 points and he's your 4th highest scorer. Jeff Hamilton is third at 39 points. Smolinski is there with 37 points. All older, middling guys.

Your offensive depth is next to nothing after Marty Havlat. You have two great young talents coming in but you're unsure whether they're going to be able to produce with the players around them.

So do you sacrifice Byfuglien or Keith and Seabrook for a chance to get a more proven offense for Toews and Kane?

If you do that, you don't win three Stanley Cups within 8 years later.

 

[BLONG7]

No they DID what Brian Burke did. They traded for proven commodities and sacrificed to do it before the team was ready.

Not even close..........let's see how the next season or two go for the Sabres...I really think they will be in the playoffs, this year or next, I like what they have done.

 

[lifeisruff]

No they DID what Brian Burke did. They traded for proven commodities and sacrificed to do it before the team was ready.

This isn't anything near what Burke did, of the futures that the Sabres gave up, none were drafted higher then 12th (Myers), Armia and Zadorov were mid teens (and Armia at 22 hasn't established himself as a NHLer yet), and everything was either a late first or lower, or a player drafted in the late first or lower.

Imagine how different the Kesell trade would have been if the Bruins drafted merely 3 spots lower, at say 5th (Nino Niederreiter) instead of 2nd

The problem with the Kessell trade wasn't that they traded away a future first, it's that they traded away a future first and then proceeded to be one of the worst teams in the NHL that year.

 

[Havok89]

I've watched Zadorov in London many, many times. Mainly because on Chris Tierney, but I loved what I saw from Zadorov.

Alright how about a different scenario.

You're the Chicago Blackhawks in the offseason of 2006-2007. You've got Kane and Toews coming up after you have essentially finished terribly. You've got a solid Duncan Keith, a solid Brent Seabrook, and Dustin Byfuglien kicking around.

Now Keith has been good, he's produced at 30 points this year but he put up only 2 goals. He's older at 23 than Toews and Kane coming in at 18 and 19. Seabrook regressed this year. He's 21 and put up 24 points in 81 games after putting up 31 in 69 the year before. He's got promise but that regression is scary.

But then you look at your forward depth and it is atrocious. You have Havlat who only played 18 games for Ottawa the year before, missed 30 games this season and somehow still led the team in scoring with 57. He's a great talent, but he's often injured. Then you've got a team full of second or third line players. Vrbata put up 41 points over the full season, Tuumo Ruutu has 38 points and he's your 4th highest scorer. Jeff Hamilton is third at 39 points. Smolinski is there with 37 points. All older, middling guys.

Your offensive depth is next to nothing after Marty Havlat. You have two great young talents coming in but you're unsure whether they're going to be able to produce with the players around them.

So do you sacrifice Byfuglien or Keith and Seabrook for a chance to get a more proven offense for Toews and Kane?

If you do that, you don't win three Stanley Cups within 8 years later.

There's no guarantee Zadorov becomes that? Zadorov is dynamic with great physical tools, but the kid has to have a lot go right to become anything like Seabrook.

In London, he was a 6'5" 215 lb manchild playing against kids in his post draft season. His skating and size transitioned very well into the NHL but his decision making and hockey IQ are his downfall.

 

[Kcoyote3]

This isn't anything near what Burke did, of the futures that the Sabres gave up, none were drafted higher then 12th (Myers), Armia and Zadorov were mid teens (and Armia at 22 hasn't established himself as a NHLer yet), and everything was either a late first or lower, or a player drafted in the late first or lower.

Imagine how different the Kesell trade would have been if the Bruins drafted merely 3 spots lower, at say 5th (Nino Niederreiter) instead of 2nd

The problem with the Kessell trade wasn't that they traded away a future first, it's that they traded away a future first and then proceeded to be one of the worst teams in the NHL that year.

I don't want to get into a discussion about Kessel. He's discussed to death everywhere on this site. I realize the deals are different. But the premise is what I was hoping everyone would understand. They didn't stay the course and draft Tyler Seguin and Dougie Hamilton. They tried to rebuild through giving up futures to help them out up front. That's all I'm saying. That's what the Sabres did.

 

[tigervixxxen]

I can understand why Buffalo did what they did but I agree with some of the points OP brings up. The plan of stockpiling assets to then turn into more proven pieces is a good one. Buffalo can't put out an entire roster of 20 year olds. However I agree with the point that they took too much away from their defense. Maybe they were counting on landing a FA, maybe they'll still get one to sign and that could make it look a bit different. I also never understood why they wanted O'Reilly so badly. He's a player any team should want, its not about him specifically. He's not a 1C type of player (for the short term) and then they've also basically rendered Sam Reinhart redundant. I know they couldn't have rolled with Eichel/Reinhart as two rookie centers, they needed to bring in someone proven but they've paid quite a price to do so. O'Reilly is a great player and does a lot of little things right, impacts the game for 200 feet but he does not create his own offense. its a lot like Stastny, he's a great player but perceptions and expectations don't match reality sometimes, especially for players from teams folks aren't very familiar with. I do applaud a team making moves to build how they want so we'll see how it goes.

 

[gallagt01]

The Sabres were criticized all season long for tanking and not making an effort to improve. Now that they're making moves to improve, they're once again being criticized. Got it.

Kane and O'Reilly, the two main forwards they acquired via trade, are under 25 and the prospects they gave up are wildcards and unlikely to be better than the proven NHLers they traded them for.

Buffalo never intended to let all the prospects they drafted develop in Buffalo. They used them to collect proven young talent and will use that talent to insulate the other young core pieces they drafted in Eichel and Reinhart. It's a great way to rebuild.

Whether or not Kane and O'Reilly were the right pieces to target remains to be seen, but they certainly slide into this rebuild both short- and long-term.