Let's review what we do know, so you can see where my line of thought is coming from.
1. Murray has stated a rebuild need not take 4 years.
Agree. The rebuild end when Murray drafts the next center in 2015. Then the prospect development and prospect pipeline maintenance phase begins.
2. The collection of assets through the trades and drafts have brought a wealth of potential to the Sabres talent pile line. From high school on up to the big clubs roster itself you will see youth doing what youth does, develop. And that development is on going.
No argument here.
3. The amount of talent amassed far out numbers the amount of available slots with the big club, some will end up no more than AHL roster talent, but as the next draft approaches it is more than obvious the Buffalo Sabres have some very good NHL caliber talent through out it's organizational depth, from juniors on. Not all will be with the big club in the end.
Agree that some prospects won't make it. I think organizational depth will account for some. Lack of development will account for more. Just because they are in the system doesn't mean they'll pan out as NHL pros.
4. The 12 to 14 month window I am looking at is based on the talent that was garnered early on in the tear down process, many of those players are coming in to their own in the AHL and/or the big club. I don't believe it's unreasonable for Nolan to see who has hunger and who doesn't for those players that have had time to develop in the pro's for a bit. Remember, there is more youth continuing to develop and grow, both in age as well as experience within the game itself.
The tear down started with the Gaustad trade. So were talking about Girgensons, Grigorenko, etc by you're timeline. Which I don't agree with, since some players take longer to develop. There's a group on the Sabres trying to prove themselves (Girgensons, Ennis, Myers, Hodgson, Foligno, etc) and players trying to make the team (Pysyk, Grigorenko, Armia, Larsson, Ristolainen, etc). And there are those players still working through the development process (Zadarov, McCabe, Carrier, Fasching, Compher, etc).
Those players are spread out enough that one group isn't directly pushing another out..... And because there is room on the Sabres for most of them. Eg: Armia's development isn't forcing Ennis onto the trade block. Murray won't reach that point for a few years, when he'll know what he's got from most of the prospects.
5. Which brings me to Larsson, I personally see nothing special he brings to the club that dictates he has shown the hunger I speak of. He does "Ok" in the AHL, but I'll error on the side of caution and say "Ok" doesn't get it done with this organization knowing what we know on the amassed talent that is progressing.
How are you grading "hunger?" Does he look lazy on the ice to you? From all accounts (coaching, management), Larsson is driven.
6. Does he fill a need? For now, sure. I would imagine that 12 to 14 month window I speak on is plenty of time for Murray/Nolan and company to assess whether he has progressed further or whether he's not going to cut it on an NHL roster.
You can say this exact statement about almost anyone on the roster and in the pipeline.
7. Is Larsson a unique talent? Not at all, but, he has the ability to be added to a trade package that may push a deal through and bring in something we do need. It's plausible if he doesn't quite make the grade for the Sabres roster, another team could see him as an addition to their AHL roster and he may want to move on if he can't crack the line up here.
Are you already grading Larsson as a career AHL forward?
As I said early on, it's not that I'm stating he should or will get moved, but Larsson is on the bubble as far as I can tell given his amount of time to show something. Let's see how he does this season, either in the A or with the big club, but if a trade is there where he's a component, I don't hesitate if I'm Murray. So far, as I said, from what I've seen, there are players coming up that may show more hunger than what I've seen from Larsson so far.
There are plenty of players from the 2010 draft that haven't reached full potential or shown a lot at the NHL level. Larsson was a second rounder, who probably should have been in the NHL all last year, but was sent down to work on the offensive aspects of his game. From a defensive and possession aspect, he was an NHLer last year. BTW, same thing happened with Pysyk, another 2010 draftee.
Of course, this is just an opinion of mine, but hey, like I said, some players we've collected are getting moved most likely, there is no logical reason to hang on to every player we've collected if it is in an attempt to better the team over all and that is what I see Murray and Co. doing, attempting to better the team over all.
No argument. But your argument and moving Larsson aren't coupled. Everything you wrote can include Larsson. I bet it will.
