Its not to protect Bjork, its to acquire assets for a player who is marginal at best at ES in the NHLTrade Olofsson to protect a marginal NHL player like Bjork. LOL.
Its not to protect Bjork, its to acquire assets for a player who is marginal at best at ES in the NHLTrade Olofsson to protect a marginal NHL player like Bjork. LOL.
Its not to protect Bjork, its to acquire assets for a player who is marginal at best at ES in the NHL
Buffalo Sabres protected list: Who's staying and who could be picked in the Seattle Kraken expansion draft?
If that is the path the Sabres go down, it would seem like Seattle would be picking between Asplund, Girgensons, Borgen, and Miller.
That's not that bad.
Why would it be for scraps? If he's such a good PP specialist, he should have some value, right?If he's a marginal ES, I'm not sure what that says about everyone else on team? Olofsson has scored on PP every where he has gone, not just Buffalo with Eichel. He just scored three at IIHF. He scored 6 even strength goals this year. He scored 9 in his rookie year. You want to trade one of the best scorers on one of the worst scoring teams in the NHL. For what? More scraps? What asset do you think you are getting? More quantity over quality.
Yeah. I wouldn't be actively shopping VO - but he's hardly untouchable.
If I'm GM I'm at least doing due diligence by exploring his value around the rest of the league.
I like Olofsson don’t get me wrong. I just think its a sell high trade on a player who has warts that the Sabres could help themselves taking advantage of a team that sees his flashy goals and shot while ignoring his short comingsDue diligence is one thing. Of course. But trade the guy with the best shot on the team? His two-way game has been up and down but the guy has all of 116 NHL games. He actually looked much better in 2019-20 for a large stretch. The idea he can only produce with Eichel is fiction. He turned the corner in Sweden league, continued in Rochester, scored in Buffalo. The PP looked slightly broken after Eichel went down and never truly adjusted to his loss. Late in year Casey seemed to take charge a bit and Dahlin too.
I like Olofsson don’t get me wrong. I just think its a sell high trade on a player who has warts that the Sabres could help themselves taking advantage of a team that sees his flashy goals and shot while ignoring his short comings
The guy has all of 118 NHL games. You cannot teach talent and that shot is something to behold. I wouldn't trade Olofsson for anything less than Grade A prospect or a first rounder in top 20. And even then? Let's suck forever. It's way easier to get a coach to fix his game than trade for someone with less talent. Sure if he's part of some big time deal with Lafreniere or Byfield (not straight up obviously), my ears are open. But what this team doesn't need is LESS talent. That's for sure.
The guy has all of 118 NHL games. You cannot teach talent and that shot is something to behold. I wouldn't trade Olofsson for anything less than Grade A prospect or a first rounder in top 20. And even then? Let's suck forever. It's way easier to get a coach to fix his game than trade for someone with less talent. Sure if he's part of some big time deal with Lafreniere or Byfield (not straight up obviously), my ears are open. But what this team doesn't need is LESS talent. That's for sure.
Have you watched the playoffs? There's no power plays unless someone flips the puck over the glass, and I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've said "what a snipe" after a goal was scored. There's just not enough time and space for someone like VO to be a difference maker.
I'm not just going to give him away, but if there's another team that values VO's shot and we can change the dynamic of our top 9, I'm pulling the trigger immediately.
Yeah, he's the problem after 1.25 seasons. Nice take. He's made some great 5-on-5 plays too. He was almost an even player plus/minus on a crap 2019-20 team. Set back on a disaster team in 2020-21. If you can get more talent for him, sure. But you don't trade him for some 3rd line grinder. Oloffson is so clearly a late bloomer. He's still learning parts of the game. We have him at $3 M for two years. And the last time I checked we hadn't made the playoffs in a decade. Maybe, we make them, then we'll worry about lack of PP time for #68.
A simple, "No, I haven't watched the playoffs and don't understand how the league is evolving" would have sufficed.
Well Tampa Bay just destroyed Carolina on the PP so you must be watching a different playoffs than me. The winning goal was on the PP in Game 5. They scored three in Game 4 game that ended 6-4. Their only goals in a 3-2 OT loss were on the PP. But sure.
The Islanders have scored 9 of their 37 goals on the PP in the playoffs. The Bruins have scored 10 of their 31 goals on the PP. Game one of their series had three PP goals, Game 2 had three. Three and four it wasn't a factor. And then Game 5 Islanders scored 3 PP goals and the Bruins coach is losing his mind over it.
We mostly hate the Leafs here and anybody who watched the series know their PP wasn't nearly as deadly and why they lost.
Just what playoffs are you watching?
A simple, "No, I haven't watched the playoffs and don't understand how the league is evolving" would have sufficed.
Besides, who said VO is the problem? He'd be an awesome complimentary piece on any of these playoffs teams, it's the reason he holds value.
I care about one thing, improving the Sabres, and I think VO is one of the most logical assets we can use to do so (full credit to @jc17 for being one of the 1st ones to come around on this idea over a year ago). If you think this player type is a critical piece to roster construction, then fine, agree to disagree.
You could see how the opponent's PK basically played a triangle + 1 so they could have the wing slot on the left stay shaded towards Oloffson as they didn't respect any other shots. VO didn't help matters much by staying virtually stagnant in his preferred shooting slot, but he was definitely game planned for.Either way, this doesn't resolve olofsson's lack of production without jack. The only arguments that support him here, and are probably both valid to a degree, is that maybe his shot gets him more attention and can open things up for other players or that he still has room to improve.
Either way, this doesn't resolve olofsson's lack of production without jack. The only arguments that support him here, and are probably both valid to a degree, is that maybe his shot gets him more attention and can open things up for other players or that he still has room to improve.
Sometimes things don't need a whole lot of text to prove a point. I remember Steve Bernier coming to Buffalo and looking like a stud the first few games. There's a reason Bjork was given up. No need to attach ourselves to him.The inflation of Bjork’s value baffles me.
Victor will be protected...this is a silly conversation.
I think no Krueger should help, but he didn't really improve much after Krueger left. He was still like 8th in points/60 without krueger, playing the majority of minutes with Reinhart. I don't remember long stretches of 5v5 competence. I remember flashes, but nothing sustained.It's a pretty small sample and indications are at every level he could play -- without Jack Eichel. He scored 30 in Rochester. He just scored three in seven games at world championships. The goal with him should really just be competent 5-on-5. He did that in year one with Krueger for large stretches. He's lethal on the PP unless he's being overplayed for that shot. That's what happened after Eichel went down and our horrible coaching did nothing to adjust until Casey Mittelstaedt took off down stretch and forced penalty killers to think of someone else. (I don't even count Reinhart. He's got better passing instincts but his PP move is deflections.)
Basically, I need a top 6 for Oloffson who can score goals and I don't know where I'm getting that.
No one, at the time of your post, was saying he should go unprotected. It's always been a conversation on if he is an asset we could use to upgrade.Victor will be protected...this is a silly conversation.
The inflation of Bjork’s value baffles me.