TSN: Off-Season Game Plan: Buffalo Sabres

[Matt Ress]

I guess that's a position you can take. Just seems quite shortsighted, in my opinion.

Hmm. I think short sighted would be to assume that a non elite, rookie defenseman will fix your blue line in the near future. It's based on decades of defensive NHL development.

 

[Jame]

Hmm. I think short sighted would be to assume that a non elite, rookie defenseman will fix your blue line in the near future. It's based on decades of defensive NHL development.

Speaking of short sighted... The devaluing of the top D in this draft is far and away the most short sighted narrative of the year

 

[Matt Ress]

Speaking of short sighted... The devaluing of the top D in this draft is far and away the most short sighted narrative of the year

I was arguing that none would make an immediate jump and positive impact. My opinion. How would yours differ?

 

[Ace]

And yet it's not a narrative so much as a consensus among drafts analysts as they continue their fall.

It wasn't born here...and nothing here is causing it.

A middling crop of top D is causing it. Like how not every year is a great 1 overall...this isn't a great top D year. No matter how much you NEED it to be.

You can't wish Chychrun into being Ekblad comparable.

 

[Zman5778]

I was arguing that none would make an immediate jump and positive impact.

Why would they need to? Chych or Olli may or may not be contributors this year, but both are probably only 1 year away.

Our Cup window isn't open this year, it might start cracking open next year. By the time we're ready to contend for a Cup, the guy we take this year at 8 could be a key contributor on an ELC. He doesn't NEED to be an immediate guy.

 

[Zman5778]

You can't wish Chychrun into being Ekblad comparable.

No one is. If you looked around, most compare him to a Phaneuf or a Bouwmeester or at worst a Bogosian.

No one is comparing him to Ekblad.


And again -- I'd LOVE to hear why you think Chych or Olli aren't worth pick #8 this year....in hockey terms

 

[Jame]

I was arguing that none would make an immediate jump and positive impact. My opinion. How would yours differ?

Regardless of crystal ball predictions of readiness (personally, the only measure of readiness that can be gleaned from amateur player is physical readiness), you don't pass on high end talent that meets critical needs.

The whole Chychrun falling narrative, being interpreted as an indictment of his talent level is garbage.

 

[Zman5778]

The whole Chychrun falling narrative, being interpreted as an indictment of his talent level is garbage.

Frankly, I attribute the D falling narrative as more a narrative of forwards rising and the whole "You don't take Dmen high in the draft" attitude that seems to have gone around lately (ie, Jones slipping to 4 and Hanifin falling to 5).

 

[Husko]

Hmm. I think short sighted would be to assume that a non elite, rookie defenseman will fix your blue line in the near future. It's based on decades of defensive NHL development.

Argument A: You should draft a forward because he will make an impact faster.
Argument B: I don't care, I want the player that will help us more 5 years from now.

One of those is shortsighted, one is... whatever the opposite of shortsighted is.

 

[SECRET SQUIRREL]

Comparing Chycrun to Ekblad is disingenuous anyways, we're picking 8th here, not debating taking him over Matthews for Christ sake.

 

[Jame]

Frankly, I attribute the D falling narrative as more a narrative of forwards rising and the whole "You don't take Dmen high in the draft" attitude that seems to have gone around lately (ie, Jones slipping to 4 and Hanifin falling to 5).

Agreed

 

[Myllz]

What's the difference? Where do I start? I'm all about upgrading the D but 8 is a decent pick. You can get a good player there in either zone. The difference is the timeline. You're more likely to have a forward make an impact quicker than a defenseman. In the past couple drafts, the top d man made an immediate jump to the NHL. That high end d talent just isn't available this year. It'll be a forgotten pick while we're hoping to contend, that d man will be hoping to have a strong campaign in 6 months in Rochester.

You went from where do I start to one item. Okay.

Like I said before, you're unlikely to have a forward be any sort of impact in the upcoming season just like a defenseman. That means you're looking at 2017-2018 for any sort of significant input from your draftee, forward or defenseman. You can argue that a forward might be more ready in that season than a defenseman, which is fine, but let's not pretend like the defenseman you get at #8 is going to miss the contending window. "It'll be a forgotten pick when we're hoping to contend" is outright laughable unless you think this teams window is the next two seasons.

 

[tsujimoto74]

Argument A: You should draft a forward because he will make an impact faster.
Argument B: I don't care, I want the player that will help us more 5 years from now.

One of those is shortsighted, one is... whatever the opposite of shortsighted is.

The thing that kills me in this argument is: what forward at 8 is stepping into the NHL next year? Nobody. Any prospect we pick at 8 is going to be at least a year away, D or not.

 

[Zman5778]

The thing that kills me in this argument is: what forward at 8 is stepping into the NHL next year? Nobody. Any prospect we pick at 8 is going to be at least a year away, D or not.

Aside from the Big 3 and Tkachuk, I'm not sure that any forward is only 1 year away.

I think it's entirely plausible that Chych and Olli are regular NHLers before any forward not named Matthews, Laine, Pujularvi or Tkachuk.

 

[Husko]

Chyrchrun isn't Eklbad. But he could be Hanifin. Highly touted beginning of his draft season. Has a good year, but still falls down the rankings and gets passed by several forwards. Goes lower than initially expected. And after one year in the NHL... looks like a future #1 D.

 

[OkimLom]

And yet it's not a narrative so much as a consensus among drafts analysts as they continue their fall.

It wasn't born here...and nothing here is causing it.

A middling crop of top D is causing it. Like how not every year is a great 1 overall...this isn't a great top D year. No matter how much you NEED it to be.

You can't wish Chychrun into being Ekblad comparable.

Where do you have these 3 D going then? Where do you have them ranked?

Just to let you know in 5 major draft publications(ISS, NHL Central scouting, hockeyprospect.com, McKeen, Hockey's Future) ranked Chychrun as high as 4(2x)and as low as 10. The other two he's ranked 8 & 9. Average ranking: 7th

Juolevi: as high as #5(2x) and low as 12
Average: 8th(rounded up)

Sergachyov: as high as 8(3x) and low as 10.
Average: 9th rounded up...

 

[Matt Ress]

You went from where do I start to one item. Okay.

Like I said before, you're unlikely to have a forward be any sort of impact in the upcoming season just like a defenseman. That means you're looking at 2017-2018 for any sort of significant input from your draftee, forward or defenseman. You can argue that a forward might be more ready in that season than a defenseman, which is fine, but let's not pretend like the defenseman you get at #8 is going to miss the contending window. "It'll be a forgotten pick when we're hoping to contend" is outright laughable unless you think this teams window is the next two seasons.

I said"where do I start" because I wasn't sure if I needed to include all of that stuff about sticks and being used. Perhaps I should have but I didn't want it to degrade to a 5th grade argument, which it has so I have no more inclination.

 

[EichHart]

Where do you have these 3 D going then? Where do you have them ranked?

Just to let you know in 5 major draft publications(ISS, NHL Central scouting, hockeyprospect.com, McKeen, Hockey's Future) ranked Chychrun as high as 4(2x)and as low as 10. The other two he's ranked 8 & 9. Average ranking: 7th

Juolevi: as high as #5(2x) and low as 12
Average: 8th(rounded up)

Sergachyov: as high as 8(3x) and low as 10.
Average: 9th rounded up...

Yeah, this is the part I'm confused by. It's not like Kylington last year that went from top 10 to the 3rd round. All of these 3 are rated right around where Keller is. I think Keller/Brown are on par with the top 3 Dman and due to organizational need take one of those 3. How much better will Keller be than Ennis is? Marginal at best? Brown is an interesting prospect that I wouldn't be terribly mad as the speed he possesses at that size would be great to have. If Nylander falls I would definitely take him over the top 3 dman, and there is no way PLD or Tkachuk fall to 8.

 

[Ace]

Where do you have these 3 D going then? Where do you have them ranked?

Just to let you know in 5 major draft publications(ISS, NHL Central scouting, hockeyprospect.com, McKeen, Hockey's Future) ranked Chychrun as high as 4(2x)and as low as 10. The other two he's ranked 8 & 9. Average ranking: 7th

Juolevi: as high as #5(2x) and low as 12
Average: 8th(rounded up)

Sergachyov: as high as 8(3x) and low as 10.
Average: 9th rounded up...

I have 9 forwards (Matthews, Laine, Puljujarvi, Tkachuk, Keller, Dubios, Brown, Nylander, Jost) followed by Sergachev and Juolevi.

and I reject the need argument completely as long as the lw spot on our franchise players line is a blank space. I don't need to pray that guys I don't see as likely top pair become that when I have a chance to add top skill to the thing that's going to make us great.

Chychrun is farther back.

Hoping the teams drafting ahead of us take the D. theres enough bad organizations in that list to give me hope. Vancouver for sure is stupid.

 

[Husko]

I have 9 forwards followed by Juolevi and Sergachev.

and I reject the need argument completely as long as the lw spot on our franchise players line is a blank space.

So, when you say "consensus among draft analysts," you realize every single damn "draft analyst" has Chyrchrun significantly higher than you do, right?

Again, no problem with anyone bucking the consensus, but when you accuse others of doing it, just realize you're the one departing from "consensus."

Why don't you just admit that you're not actually a BPA crusader? You just value forwards much more than defensemen. I disagree with that approach, but its a logically coherent one, and you would take a lot less flack and also be a lot more intellectually honest if you just admit that is your enterprise.

 

[Zman5778]

and I reject the need argument completely as long as the lw spot on our franchise players line is a blank space.

Nice way to contradict yourself in one sentence.

D is a need. LW is a need.

So basically you're rejecting the D need argument in favor of an argument you accept.

 

[Jame]

And yet it's not a narrative so much as a consensus among drafts analysts as they continue their fall.

It wasn't born here...and nothing here is causing it.

A middling crop of top D is causing it. Like how not every year is a great 1 overall...this isn't a great top D year. No matter how much you NEED it to be.

You can't wish Chychrun into being Ekblad comparable.

ISS has Chychrun 8th and Keller 12th. In fact, ISS has all 3 defensemen rated ahead of Keller.

 

[Matt Ress]

Regardless of crystal ball predictions of readiness (personally, the only measure of readiness that can be gleaned from amateur player is physical readiness), you don't pass on high end talent that meets critical needs.

The whole Chychrun falling narrative, being interpreted as an indictment of his talent level is garbage.

I don't disagree. My initial question was about timeliness. The players available, I believe, will be weighed, to some degree, against their readiness. I like Chyk a lot actually but he still may likely take a couple years. We all know d men take longer to develop. That's my premise. Some folks that don't understand are just some folks that don't understand. If LHD is not addressed by then, we have bigger problems.

 

[Ace]

Nice way to contradict yourself in one sentence.

D is a need. LW is a need.

So basically you're rejecting the D need argument in favor of an argument you accept.

It's not a contradiction that reaching because we "need" a d is ridiculous when we need more than a d guy. It's common sense. It's take the best player available. And it's not one of these d

 

[Matt Ress]

The thing that kills me in this argument is: what forward at 8 is stepping into the NHL next year? Nobody. Any prospect we pick at 8 is going to be at least a year away, D or not.

That's not necessarily true and much less likely.