Jacob582
Registered User
- Oct 16, 2012
- 10,249
- 3,871
Player Discussion Buffalo Pickers - The Search For Serviceable Defensemen, Summer of '23 Edition
- Thread starter Chainshot
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud is doing server maintenance Thurdsay 13th at 9 AM GMT. Downtime is to be expected during the process. Server changes were implemented recently to cope with the traffic surge last week. This seems to be affecting the user login, so please anyone experiencing this, log out and clear the browser cache. We expect to have this issue solved once the maintenance is complete.
- Status
joshjull
Registered User
Do we need one?
I'm assuming he was originally included to make the salary work for St Louis - since they would be taking on over 13m long term in Hayes/Sanheim...
Zman5778
Moderator
Did Philly actually WANT Krug though? I was under the impression that he was included merely for salary cap purposes.........
Jacob582
Registered User
- Oct 16, 2012
- 10,249
- 3,871
Yes. Philly can't keep trading their D away without getting someone back. They need someone to play that position. They want someone that can run their PP.
Zman5778
Moderator
But if they're really rebuilding......I'm sure a guy like Andrae can run their PP just fine.
I don't think they NEED Krug.
Fjordsen
Soul Dancing in the Dark
- Jun 20, 2018
- 20,548
- 11,445
Zman5778
Moderator
They have Risto
I completely forgot about him. Yeah, he can run a PP just fine.
MarkusKetterer
Shoulda got one game in
There has been talk of moving DeAngelo, but until they do, I think he is Philly's #1 PPQB.
Not sure Sanheim was getting much(or any) in the way of PP time under Torts when TDA was in the lineup.
But they probably need to add a legitimate 5-on-5 NHL defender if Sanheim is moved.
HOOats
born Ruffian
Doug Prishpreed
Registered User
Zman5778
Moderator
Caleb Jones kinda strikes me as the Tyson Jost of defensemen -- utterly average at pretty much everything. Good/exceptional at nothing, but also bad at nothing.
Would fit a 6/7 role somewhere. Not sure if he's a fit here though, given how many 6/7 types we've got.
HOOats
born Ruffian
Same (and I wish every card source would list handedness). But maybe he could replace Bryson as our depth lefty.
Zman5778
Moderator
Bryson is more than likely better defensively than Caleb Jones.......but Jones won't throw major brain cramps once he gets past center ice though.
HOOats
born Ruffian
Not sure how Bryson's D would have looked in 20 min/G on the worst team in the league. In a lesser role on our bottom pair, I'd think Jones would be an upgrade overall.
Fjordsen
Soul Dancing in the Dark
- Jun 20, 2018
- 20,548
- 11,445
Decided to put this here as i think it's the most logical place & didn't want to start a new thread :
With the Benson pick yesterday - we now have even more of a need to make a forward for defence 'prospect for prospect' trade. It doesn't need to be made right now - but there is a woefully huge inbalance in the pipeline. Of course, Adams could use all remaining picks later today on D - but i doubt he will. And even if he did - the top end is still completely forward heavy.
Any obvious teams out there with an abundance of defensive prospects who stand out as a potential partner?
With the Benson pick yesterday - we now have even more of a need to make a forward for defence 'prospect for prospect' trade. It doesn't need to be made right now - but there is a woefully huge inbalance in the pipeline. Of course, Adams could use all remaining picks later today on D - but i doubt he will. And even if he did - the top end is still completely forward heavy.
Any obvious teams out there with an abundance of defensive prospects who stand out as a potential partner?
Fjordsen
Soul Dancing in the Dark
- Jun 20, 2018
- 20,548
- 11,445
- Jun 15, 2010
- 1,189
- 1,337
I dont think anyone is trading good d prospects, personally.
This draft is another in an endless string of lessons. Acquiring a good, young top 4 defenseman is very hard to do. You have to be in position to draft them, or be willing to give up valuable assets or scary contracts. There's very few shortcuts.
This draft is another in an endless string of lessons. Acquiring a good, young top 4 defenseman is very hard to do. You have to be in position to draft them, or be willing to give up valuable assets or scary contracts. There's very few shortcuts.
joshjull
Registered User
It is and luckily we have 3 of them.
Dahlicious
Registered User
I fully expect him to be a Sabre. It’s a low risk play with a former Donnie Meatballs player.
Right. I'm not expecting Columbus to suddenly trade David Jiricek to us.
But a team with the opposite pipeline of what we have - ie weak at forward but deep on defence - might be interested in a 'hockey' deal to balance things out? Given that we'd likely be moving a winger, we'd probably need to give up a slightly 'better' prospect - but it still makes sense if that guy is further down on our list than he would be anywhere else.
We're extremely fortunate to have won the lotteries for Dahlin & Power. I will say that louder than anyone.
But we comfortably have the assets to make it four instead of three & complete the set.
I think we may be underestimating the differing value between nearly NHL ready D with top 4 potential and nearly NHL ready wingers with top 6 potential here.
There is so much more development time put into D, and so many D prospects fail to develop enough to make the transition to the NHL, that the cost to acquire a nearly ready D prospect with top four potential is sky-high. Whereas wingers without size are dime a dozen. Even those with top six potential still have relatively little value until they are producing in the league- comparatively speaking.
Sabres have drafted a lot of "smallish" forwards, which are the easiest prospects to project their floors and ceilings in the draft (which is not saying it is easy, just that it is typically easier to foresee what a 5'10" winger will eventually be vs a 6'5" winger at the age of 17. D and Goalies are even harder to predict.
So the team has drafted "safe" more often than not, but that means that the value of the prospect pool is not as high as it would be had they drafted larger forwards, defensemen or goalies that were all progressing nearly as well as the current crop of small forwards.
What this means is that I think Adams will have to pay a substantial premium in assets to revamp the prospect pool from a gang of smallish forwards to a better balance of prospects that either has more size or is more positionally diverse.
I think you make valid points. I don't think Adams needs to 'revamp' the prospect pool - just needs to swing one move to balance things out at the top end.
I've acknowledged that you probably have to take a 'lesser' guy because of positional value - but that's fine. We don't need a guy who projects to be an all situations #1- but someone with realistic potential to be a solid top 4 / great bottom pair player.
- Status
