2023 NHL Draft June 28 and 29, Nashville, TN (Selections - 13, 39, 45, 86, 109, 141, 173, 205)

[Ace]

Black book has 19 A grades this year.

Bedard, Carlsson, Fantilli, Michkov, Simashev, Barlow, But, Smith, Perreault, Dvorsky, Leonard, Benson, Reinbacher, Wood, Honzek, Bonk, Danielson, Ritchie, Musty

Last year they had 24.

 

[Zman5778]

Black book has 19 A grades this year.

Bedard, Carlsson, Fantilli, Michkov, Simashev, Barlow, But, Smith, Perreault, Dvorsky, Leonard, Benson, Reinbacher, Wood, Honzek, Bonk, Danielson, Ritchie, Musty

Last year they had 24.

Were Savoie, Ostlund and Kulich all A grades last year?

 

[Ace]

Were Savoie, Ostlund and Kulich all A grades last year?

Savoie and Kulich were. Ostlund was a B. He had great rankings but was held down on their list by his frame. Basically if he develops physically he’s going to be great…if he doesn’t uh-oh

 

[Reddawg]

Were Savoie, Ostlund and Kulich all A grades last year?

In the 2022 Black Book, Savoie (9th ranked) and Kulich (21st ranked) were both A grades. Ostlund was ranked #41 as a B grade, three spots below Viktor Neuchev.

 

[RefsIdeas]

Some noteable BB ranks:

Simashev 5
Barlow 6
But 7
Perrault 9
Bonk 16
Hrabal 24
ASP 26
Sale 27
Cristall 41
Heidt 65

There's more but those stuck out to me

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

Only two defenseman get A grades, which is pretty crazy. This must be among the worst drafts for Dmen ever.

 

[brian_griffin]

@Ace

A few pages back, I think you said (I'm paraphrasing) that if you were GM and knew BUF was willing (more willing?) to trade prospects for developed young players, you'd have a different drafting philosophy than taking BPA.

I'll bite the hook. Without re-litigating (please - I know it's a message board and you can do what you wish) your issues with Adams/Karmanos/Granato preference for developing the current tranche of Sabres, and their concomitant reluctance to disrupt their hard-won esprit de corps in the post-Eichel era (March 2021 onward, or Nov. 2021 onward, take your pick), what specific differences does that drafting philosophy have for you?

I see anything other than BPA by your board as a catch-22.

If you draft BPA on your board, you're staying transparently true to "yourself", the organization, fans, etc., as you're "walking the walk" that goes with the talk. You are essentially buying lottery tickets, each with various odds of winning.

If you have a different philosophy, i.e., drafting players whom you think will be more attractive to other teams as future trade chips for whatever reasons, it seems riskier. Firstly, you'd have to guess what characteristics some subset of teams value in commonality (not all teams are in the market each year willing to trade established players for prospects). Secondly, you're still taking some chance (if even a lesser risk) those prospects develop to be a valued trade chip. It's perhaps analogous to buying lottery tickets of the specific games / powerballs / lottos your neighbor plays, then convincing the neighbor to take your newly-bought tickets in trade for a winning lotto ticket which was already drawn and partially paid out. If (a big if, and why I'm asking you to elaborate) that is your preferred method, It's perhaps akin to the peddler offering Jack magic beans for the milk cow (established player). Only these beans are shaped like cows and maybe one of them will grow into a cow.

 

[Ace]

 

[Ace]

@Ace

A few pages back, I think you said (I'm paraphrasing) that if you were GM and knew BUF was willing (more willing?) to trade prospects for developed young players, you'd have a different drafting philosophy than taking BPA.

I'll bite the hook. Without re-litigating (please - I know it's a message board and you can do what you wish) your issues with Adams/Karmanos/Granato preference for developing the current tranche of Sabres, and their concomitant reluctance to disrupt their hard-won esprit de corps in the post-Eichel era (March 2021 onward, or Nov. 2021 onward, take your pick), what specific differences does that drafting philosophy have for you?

I see anything other than BPA by your board as a catch-22.

If you draft BPA on your board, you're staying transparently true to "yourself", the organization, fans, etc., as you're "walking the walk" that goes with the talk. You are essentially buying lottery tickets, each with various odds of winning.

If you have a different philosophy, i.e., drafting players whom you think will be more attractive to other teams as future trade chips for whatever reasons, it seems riskier. Firstly, you'd have to guess what characteristics some subset of teams value in commonality (not all teams are in the market each year willing to trade established players for prospects). Secondly, you're still taking some chance (if even a lesser risk) those prospects develop to be a valued trade chip. It's perhaps analogous to buying lottery tickets of the specific games / powerballs / lottos your neighbor plays, then convincing the neighbor to take your newly-bought tickets in trade for a winning lotto ticket which was already drawn and partially paid out. If (a big if, and why I'm asking you to elaborate) that is your preferred method, It's perhaps akin to the peddler offering Jack magic beans for the milk cow (established player). Only these beans are shaped like cows and maybe one of them will grow into a cow.

I think you can learn from the league what is going to end up happening and account for it with your drafting and developing and gain a competitive advantage especially when it comes to player control and the cap.

look what happens to every team built on a ton of skill when they get to the playoffs. Tampa has the best regular season ever…gets swept by Columbus…and what do they do? They have to go out and acquire size and grit and all that stuff. They make three strait finals and win two cups. This year they traded an entire draft for one guy so they could try to keep up with Toronto…a team that failed being built on an overload of skill and went nuts trading assets for size and grit and all that stuff.

What do you envision happening to this team? They’ll make the playoffs, eventually. And when that run is over people will be shouting that we need size and grit and all that stuff. And we’re taking skill out anyway and making losing trades for an attempt at short term success.

My point is that we drafted 4 skill forwards who haven’t even made the league yet in the first round alone to go with the 10 skill forwards already here…most of which are young. If you can diversify your pipeline and develop the players you will need to compliment those players…you won’t have to overpay for guys as often.

If the BPA is always the same type of player you will lose value on them one way or another because they can’t all play here. So you’re either selling low so your bottom six has a guy…or you can just pick guys with different attributes and develop them to be those players. I vote for the latter for many, man reasons. Cost of acquisition. Cost of contract. Control over term. Control over development.

I have no faith in Adams and co turning the glut of skill into a full contending roster. In part because the cost of those players is at a ridiculous premium that everyone overpays. In part because they don’t actually do anything to meaningfully improve the team outside of the draft and players they have to sell because they won’t stay.

But this is more about rounds 2-7. This year specifically…I don’t like the small skill players at 13 to start with. And I have enough of them unless Michkov or Benson is available because I think they’re special. The rest? They’re another one for my pile of them. Probably, at best, third of then 5 first round smallish skill forwards in three drafts. Gotta build a team here. Don’t believe they’ll do it any other way that’s meaningful

 

[Der Jaeger]

Public service announcement for the NHL draft:

This isn't the NFL draft. Bedard, and maybe 2-3 other rookies might play this coming season.

Just because the Sabres have holes on their NHL roster, doesn't mean that anyone they draft will be of any help. The Sabres used to have a LHD issues, and tons on RHD, as an example. They drafted Dahlin, Samuelsson, Power, and Johnson, and now currently have a need for RHD.

Just pick BPA. It's better to get a redundant player who develops and can be traded, than someone who is over drafted and doesn't pan out. Isak Rosen is our case-in-point. Many on this board pooh-poohed that pick, and it was the correct pick. He's worth something in a trade now.

 

[Ace]

Public service announcement for the NHL draft:

This isn't the NFL draft. Bedard, and maybe 23-3 other rookies might play this coming season.

Just because the Sabres have holes on their NHL roster, doesn't mean that anyone they draft will be of any help. The Sabres used to have a LHD issues, and tons on RHD, as an example. They drafted Dahlin, Samuelsson, Power, and Johnson, and now currently have a need for RHD.

Just pick BPA. It's better to get a redundant player who develops and can be traded, than someone who is over drafted and doesn't pan out. Isak Rosen is our case-in-point. Many on this board pooh-poohed that pick, and it was the correct pick. He's worth something in a trade now.

As with all statements made as a cover all..nope.

Power and Dahlin are about to be here for the next decade. Their presence matters when talking about someone like ASP. It could be three years until we see ASP in the NHL. and that still means almost if not longer than his entire ELC AND RFA years will be spent on the same roster.

Nothing is ever as simple as this is the way it always is for every team always.

say they draft Perreault. Where does he rank organizationally at forward? Even with just players 22 and under? 7? 8?

say you break the precious BPA law to take the next player on your ranking and it’s Willander. Where does he rank at D? 3rd?

You’ve already figured this out. You are excited about Rosen maybe having more value because he’s developing. and it’s still less value than the pick he was taken with. You’re excited about the potential to earn back part of the acquisition value. JUST USE THE ACQUISITION VALUE

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

Public service announcement for the NHL draft:

This isn't the NFL draft. Bedard, and maybe 23-3 other rookies might play this coming season.

Just because the Sabres have holes on their NHL roster, doesn't mean that anyone they draft will be of any help. The Sabres used to have a LHD issues, and tons on RHD, as an example. They drafted Dahlin, Samuelsson, Power, and Johnson, and now currently have a need for RHD.

Just pick BPA. It's better to get a redundant player who develops and can be traded, than someone who is over drafted and doesn't pan out. Isak Rosen is our case-in-point. Many on this board pooh-poohed that pick, and it was the correct pick. He's worth something in a trade now.

I don't see anyone really pushing for RHD here expect for you with Willander.

 

[Ace]

We’ve becomes so conditioned to removing the draft from everything else that it’s led to a bunch of fallacies.

1. That anyone knows who BPA is at almost any pick ever. Yeah Bedard is the safe BPA this year. Any pick after that? The idea that there is one guy who is it is a joke. No one knows.

2. That the draft shouldn’t have anything to do with organization building. It’s…the main way it’s done. See point one for the trade value. You tell me with a straight face that Rosen has more future value than the things that actually get overpaid for in trade. If you actually cared about the value of the pick you’d want to hit on 3 Tanner Jeannot’s not 3 Isak Rosen’s. Or 3 puck movie RHD. Doesnt even matter if they’re good. You’ll get your value.

3. Looking at the draft and ignoring fundamental truths like A. Players don’t move in this league and B. It costs a ton of these assets to acquire a good player when they do, cause all kinds of problems in discussing draft value. It’s all connected. And in our case…the 7th or 8th best young small skill forward in the system doesn’t hold the value of a player who offers our pipeline something it doesn’t have. And the funny part is…it doesn’t have the value to other teams either. Scarcity matters. And it should be factored in when you have drafted 21 forwards in three years.

 

[Der Jaeger]

As with all statements made as a cover all..nope.

Power and Dahlin are about to be here for the next decade. Their presence matters when talking about someone like ASP. It could be three years until we see ASP in the NHL. and that still means almost if not longer than his entire ELC AND RFA years will be spent on the same roster.

Nothing is ever as simple as this is the way it always is for every team always.

say they draft Perreault. Where does he rank organizationally at forward? Even with just players 22 and under? 7? 8?

say you break the precious BPA law to take the next player on your ranking and it’s Willander. Where does he rank at D? 3rd?

You’ve already figured this out. You are excited about Rosen maybe having more value because he’s developing. and it’s still less value than the pick he was taken with. You’re excited about the potential to earn back part of the acquisition value. JUST USE THE ACQUISITION VALUE

So, if Adams has players higher on his board than ASP, he should just ignore it and take the right handed defenseman.... because that's what he needs now? That's terrible asset management.

Prospects don't gain or lose value based on where they stand on some team's prospect board once drafted. And it certainly doesn't make any difference whether you break it down by position. That's just arguing your way to your point of view, with evidence that doesn't matter. If a prospect is good and developing, it doesn't matter what his internal to the organization rank is.

Rosen was picked 14. His development is worth that ranking. He'd fit into a trade for a 1st round pick or equivalent asset. That's a good pick. That's what good teams do.

You can go pick for need all day and see where that leads you. The Sabres have picked BPA for years under Adams, and caught flack from fans for picking Rosen and Quinn, especially. The "experts" on this board fried Adams for taking Quinn over Rossi. But it was the right move and has been the right move for the organization since Adams took over. There's no reason for Adams to deviate from what he's done, because it's worked.

 

[Irie]

Hypothetical:

The draft goes the way most mocks have been predicting, and all the high end centers are off the board, none of the D have yet been drafted, and the Caps offer #8 for Savoie. Do you make that trade?

It buys a little time for the forward logjam and gives you the high-end D prospect the team is lacking, but at a steep price.

 

[Diaspora]

You’ve already figured this out. You are excited about Rosen maybe having more value because he’s developing. and it’s still less value than the pick he was taken with. You’re excited about the potential to earn back part of the acquisition value. JUST USE THE ACQUISITION VALUE

This. In most cases, mid- and late-round picks are at peak value on the day of the draft. If you use the pick and you're very lucky, you might be able to get that same pick back four or five years later if it develops into a strong player. Just as often, it's a Risto, or Grigorenko or Nylander (Alex).

Now that we have a solid young core in place, trading picks for known quantities on draft day will be the better risk/value proposition.

 

[Old Navy Goat]

Hypothetically I'd move Savoie for 8, draft Reinbacher in that slot then use 13 on Danielson to replace Savoie.

I know Savoie is more dynamic but you don't lead your team by a large margin as a 17yo without having serious skill, also helps when players like Bedard sing his praises for being the hardest player to play against

 

[RefsIdeas]

Hypothetically I'd move Savoie for 8, draft Reinbacher in that slot then use 13 on Danielson to replace Savoie.

I know Savoie is more dynamic but you don't lead your team by a large margin as a 17yo without having serious skill, also helps when players like Bedard sing his praises for being the hardest player to play against

0 chance Savoie is worth 8 in this draft. He went 9 last year and this class is much better.

 

[Der Jaeger]

No chance Savoie is moved. He's out developed his draft status and is a huge part of the Sabres future.

 

[CaliSabresfan24]

Hypothetically I'd move Savoie for 8, draft Reinbacher in that slot then use 13 on Danielson to replace Savoie.

I know Savoie is more dynamic but you don't lead your team by a large margin as a 17yo without having serious skill, also helps when players like Bedard sing his praises for being the hardest player to play against

I would love to trade up to snag Reinbacher but not for the cost of Savoie. I do wonder what Adams would pay to trade up and who he is targeting in the draft.

 

[toddkaz]

No chance Savoie is moved. He's out developed his draft status and is a huge part of the Sabres future.

I think it was just a hypothetical.

 

[Ehran]

Hypothetical:

The draft goes the way most mocks have been predicting, and all the high end centers are off the board, none of the D have yet been drafted, and the Caps offer #8 for Savoie. Do you make that trade?

It buys a little time for the forward logjam and gives you the high-end D prospect the team is lacking, but at a steep price.

I don't.

Savoie has spent a year along the development path and from all indications is developing quite nicely. He, after a year of development, appears to be a top-6 forward.

Whomever you draft at #8 is at least 1 year behind Savoie in the development cycle. Some may not consider that a lot, but it's definitely something.

Also, I don't think the Sabres are lacking a "high-end" D prospect. With Dahlin and Power generally slated to be around for quite a few years, the Sabres don't need "high-end". They need defensive minded, or solid 2-way Defensemen to round out the roster. A player like ASP to me would be a waste of talent on this team. His skillset would be redundant. Another player like Samualsson, who works well and sort of allows Dahlin to max out his skills is more in line with what they need, IMO.

 

[Irie]

0 chance Savoie is worth 8 in this draft. He went 9 last year and this class is much better.

So you don't believe Savoie has value close to Dvorsky, Moore, Sale, Barlow, Danielson Wood, Etc.?

Because if you aren't taking a D, those are the likely options.

I think Savoie stacks up well against any of those likely top available F prospects at #8. With a good D+1 season and no more head injuries, his value is higher than it was last year, and the risk associated with picking him has definitely dissipated imo.

 

[SabresNorth]

Black book has 19 A grades this year.

Bedard, Carlsson, Fantilli, Michkov, Simashev, Barlow, But, Smith, Perreault, Dvorsky, Leonard, Benson, Reinbacher, Wood, Honzek, Bonk, Danielson, Ritchie, Musty

Last year they had 24.

Interesting to see honzek with an A grade. I don't hear a lot of talk about him.

I ran into a western league scout awhile ago and the names he mentioned: Benson (he expected to be a top 10 pick). Danielson, Honzek, Yager were guys he thought would be in mid first round.

Never mentioned heidt or cristall but was a short conversation so could have just skipped past them.

 

[MarkusKetterer]

Interesting to see honzek with an A grade. I don't hear a lot of talk about him.

I ran into a western league scout awhile ago and the names he mentioned: Benson (he expected to be a top 10 pick). Danielson, Honzek, Yager were guys he thought would be in mid first round.

Never mentioned heidt or cristall but was a short conversation so could have just skipped past them.

I had him as an option with the (now traded) Vegas 2nd way back in September. I’m glad to see him rated higher than that. I don’t see him as worth 13th, but 19th-23rd area.