Prospect Info: G Topias Leinonen -- Selected 41st overall in 2022

[NotABadPeriod]

Couple of comments on this:

1.) Neither Levi nor Portillo was signed as of the draft last year. Going into the draft, UPL was the ONLY goalie that was "in the system" formally. It was pretty empty.

2.) There are two things that I always hold for drafts in general: don't draft for need and don't be afraid to take your guy when the time comes, even if the public views it as a reach. The Leinonen pick was most certainly the Sabres taking their guy when the time came.............and also drafted for need here. This, and then comment about Neuchev being ranked "in the low first/high second" by several Sabres scouts tells me that they had quite a few guys on their board ranked together. In this case, need should be the tie-breaker. Goalie was most definitely a need.

The logic for this pick was simple, to me. Going into the draft, goalie and defense were equally barren when it comes to signed guys. In net, we had two guys that could go UFA after the 22/23 season.......and on defense, we had Komarov and Novikov, though it wasn't sure when Novikov would come over (if ever). The Sabres had Leinonen bunched up with a number of other prospects.........but saw a HUGE gap between Leinonen and the next goalie (Forton admitted this). Therefore, they took the goalie.

Obviously not the most popular pick........but no one can say it was the "wrong" pick for another 3-4 years.

Slight correction: we did not have Komarov at the time, he was taken in a later round the same draft. When we took Leinonen, the only D-men prospects of note already in the system were Johnson and Novikov. Pilut was coming back and Fitzgerald was a fringe guy, but Laaksonen had stalled in his development, while Power/Samuelsson had graduated to the NHL.

 

[MarkusKetterer]

Some tough critics here. Using the stock market as a metaphor, some of you are salty over a million dollar speculative investment down 20 percent, when the entire fifty million dollar portfolio has doubled.

I’m not gonna blame Leinonen for where he was drafted, because they don’t have a choice on where they get drafted. I was on the Nick Malik train this draft (6th rounder by Tampa) but I’m not gonna hold it against the kid. Especially seeing he’s had injuries since then, so he hasn’t had a chance to showcase himself.

Besides goalies are someone you judge in D+7 year, assuming they straight up don’t retire.

 

[HogtownSabresfan]

This hit it spot on. So many better prospects in the 2nd round and there are lots of goalie prospects that you can draft as a project in rounds 4-6.

This

 

[MarkusKetterer]

This

Name them. You can do drafted AND undrafted

 

[HogtownSabresfan]

Name them. You can do drafted AND undrafted

You mean goalies drafted in later rounds? Obviously Hasek at #199, Ryan Miller at #138, Ullmark at #163, Roloson undrafted, Edwards at #89. Barrasso at #5 would be the exception.

Most of the time Sabres spent draft pick capital on goalies in first two rounds we had average results. I guess Biron was a decent return, plus having him around today is just pure bonus so I would call him a 100% worthwhile as a first rounder. Above average. Love him.

But Noronen was a clear bust (even as I remain convinced today he wasn't properly developed. LOL).

Jonas Enroth at #46 overall? I wouldn't call that a great pick but not 100% bust.

I've left Cal Peterson and Erik Portillo off list. But Peterson at #129 is an okay. Nobody said to pay him crazy money after one year. That's a Kings issue.

Throwing #41 overall at a goalie is hardly the end of the world. I agree with everybody who says that. So many other good picks made by Sabres. But I believe that was a slight misstep. all I'm saying.

 

[MarkusKetterer]

You mean goalies drafted in later rounds? Obviously Hasek at #199, Ryan Miller at #138, Ullmark at #163, Roloson undrafted, Edwards at #89. Barrasso at #5 would be the exception.

Most of the time Sabres spent draft pick capital on goalies in first two rounds we had average results. I guess Biron was a decent return, plus having him around today is just pure bonus so I would call him a 100% worthwhile as a first rounder. Above average. Love him.

But Noronen was a clear bust (even as I remain convinced today he wasn't properly developed. LOL).

Jonas Enroth at #46 overall? I wouldn't call that a great pick but not 100% bust.

I've left Cal Peterson and Erik Portillo off list. But Peterson at #129 is an okay. Nobody said to pay him crazy money after one year. That's a Kings issue.

Throwing #41 overall at a goalie is hardly the end of the world. I agree with everybody who says that. So many other good picks made by Sabres. But I believe that was a slight misstep. all I'm saying.

I meant since the Leinonen pick

 

[Fjordy]

I meant since the Leinonen pick

Murashov

I would easily take Warren/Casey/Luneau + Murashov instead of Leinonen + Lindgren.

 

[AaronPines]

No one else near that spot has distinguished themselves enough to be a clear cut obvious pick as of today. With 1 NHL game and 0 points between those 33 second round guys (and not a single one from anyone taken after Leinonen)— yeah I ordered the vanilla ice cream and you ordered the chocolate.
This thread feels like its going to be best as one of those wedding boxes that you tell the couple not to open until their fifth anniversary.

Until then, he's listed as one of their two goalies on their 2023-24 roster. Pelaajat Archive - JYP Jyväskylä And looks to be backing up 27 year old Vehvilainen, which means it seems likely for him to get at least some games when their season starts in August.

​

 

[RefsIdeas]

All of the following can be true:

- He was considered a reach by “experts”. Yes, you can find some that had him kinda-sorta close to 41, but in an aggregate he was not viewed that way.

- There were players picked behind him that (seemingly) had a better fit for us (Warren, Luneau) - the latter of which was thought of as a late 1st prospect and just won defenseman of the year in the Q

- He was considered (by some, not all) to be the best goalie prospect in the draft in a weak draft for goalies

- He did not have a good D+1 year.

- He was always going to be a project, and it’s tough to make any definitive conclusions after 1 year.

- Its absolutely not the end of the world if we whiff on one 2nd round pick

You can go back and find my comments on this pick at the time, and I didn’t like it at all. Nothing that he’s done so far has changed that for me. Some of the talent drafted behind him have gone on to have strong D+1 seasons, but it’s silly to take victory laps at this point when nobody has played an NHL game.

However, Evan Silva (for you fantasy football fans out there) brings up the phrase “predictably bad moves that turned out bad” on his podcast sometimes. In my opinion, those are always the worst types of moves. Is it the end of the world? No. Does this management team have a seemingly strong drafting track record thus far? Yes. But nobody is/should be immune from criticism. The very best GMs of all time have all made bad trades and poor draft choices. Just because they made that pick doesn’t mean they are a bad GM. But criticism can be warranted from time to time - trust me, it’s okay.

 

[HOOats]

All of the following can be true:

- He was considered a reach by “experts”. Yes, you can find some that had him kinda-sorta close to 41, but in an aggregate he was not viewed that way.

- There were players picked behind him that (seemingly) had a better fit for us (Warren, Luneau) - the latter of which was thought of as a late 1st prospect and just won defenseman of the year in the Q

- He was considered (by some, not all) to be the best goalie prospect in the draft in a weak draft for goalies

- He did not have a good D+1 year.

- He was always going to be a project, and it’s tough to make any definitive conclusions after 1 year.

- Its absolutely not the end of the world if we whiff on one 2nd round pick

You can go back and find my comments on this pick at the time, and I didn’t like it at all. Nothing that he’s done so far has changed that for me. Some of the talent drafted behind him have gone on to have strong D+1 seasons, but it’s silly to take victory laps at this point when nobody has played an NHL game.

However, Evan Silva (for you fantasy football fans out there) brings up the phrase “predictably bad moves that turned out bad” on his podcast sometimes. In my opinion, those are always the worst types of moves. Is it the end of the world? No. Does this management team have a seemingly strong drafting track record thus far? Yes. But nobody is/should be immune from criticism. The very best GMs of all time have all made bad trades and poor draft choices. Just because they made that pick doesn’t mean they are a bad GM. But criticism can be warranted from time to time - trust me, it’s okay.

Well laid out.

Only thing I'd add is the pro-KA crowd is much more rational and willing to criticize where warranted, as can be seen in this thread. It's the others who need the reminder - "praise can be warranted from time to time - trust me, it's ok."

 

[Gabrielor]

Topias Leinonen
C+
the value of the pick is wrong. The fact that he's still the best goalie prospect in the draft trumps for me that he was drafted 30 slots too high

It was always a bad value pick, but I'm not sweating it.

2019: None
2018: Mattias Samuelsson
2017: Marcus Davidsson
2016: Rasmus Asplund
2015: Brendan Guhle
2014: Brendan Lemieux, Eric Cornel, Vaclav Karabacek

All Murray and Botts did was whiff on 2nds. At least this *potential* whiff has 5-6 more years of development ahead.

 

[SundherDome]

Murashov

I would easily take Warren/Casey/Luneau + Murashov instead of Leinonen + Lindgren.

With how Lindgren is progressing, I'd take the latter. Murashov was ranked in the high 100's/low 200's and has questionable lateral speed, which for a smaller goalie would be a red flag to me.

Do you think in 2012 Ottawa would have preferred Vasilevski and Grzelcyk/Parayko as opposed to Ceci and Driedger?

The point is goalies are wildly erratic in development and if a team thinks they have a shot at the best one, who the f*** cares about where they are picked.

I think everyone is triggered because his last name starts with "Leino"

 

[RefsIdeas]

With how Lindgren is progressing, I'd take the latter. Murashov was ranked in the high 100's/low 200's and has questionable lateral speed, which for a smaller goalie would be a red flag to me.

Do you think in 2012 Ottawa would have preferred Vasilevski and Grzelcyk/Parayko as opposed to Ceci and Driedger?

The point is goalies are wildly erratic in development and if a team thinks they have a shot at the best one, who the f*** cares about where they are picked.

I think everyone is triggered because his last name starts with "Leino"

???????

 

[SundherDome]

???????

Care to provide context?

 

[Fjordy]

With how Lindgren is progressing, I'd take the latter. Murashov was ranked in the high 100's/low 200's and has questionable lateral speed, which for a smaller goalie would be a red flag to me.

Do you think in 2012 Ottawa would have preferred Vasilevski and Grzelcyk/Parayko as opposed to Ceci and Driedger?

The point is goalies are wildly erratic in development and if a team thinks they have a shot at the best one, who the f*** cares about where they are picked.

I think everyone is triggered because his last name starts with "Leino"

Well, I disagree with you, I think I know better who Murashov is and see his progress. He is not small and plays well. That confirms the eye test and its stats, which are much better than those of Leinonen. Warren/Luneau > Lindgren for me.

 

[RefsIdeas]

Care to provide context?

You think Lindgren is progressing well?

 

[SundherDome]

You think Lindgren is progressing well?

Yes

 

[SundherDome]

Well, I disagree with you, I think I know better who Murashov is and see his progress. He is not small and plays well. That confirms the eye test and its stats, which are much better than those of Leinonen. Warren/Luneau > Lindgren for me.

That's why we have a message board. Also, him being small is objectively true. The KHL website lists him at barely 6ft.

 

[Perry Tegula]

He's still huge and he still plays hockey.

 

[Fjordy]

That's why we have a message board. Also, him being small is objectively true. The KHL website lists him at barely 6ft.

I watch a lot of MHL games, including how Murashov plays, he is a good goalie and his development now looks much better than Leinonen's. On different sites, his height is written differently, he himself said that he has the same height as Shestyorkin, it seems. Maybe KHL just hasn't updated his height yet.

 

[Nikolajs Sillers]

That's why we have a message board. Also, him being small is objectively true. The KHL website lists him at barely 6ft.

Who?

 

[Ace]

He's still huge and he still plays hockey.

Does he though.

I went to bed after night 1 dreaming of adding Hutson to our incredible first round. They took a steaming dump on the table instead. He’s always hurt…and when he does play he’s trash. And we all knew at the time it was a terrible pick. He’s somehow failed to reach our already non-existent expectations.

 

[SundherDome]

Who?

Murashov

 

[HogtownSabresfan]

All of the following can be true:

- He was considered a reach by “experts”. Yes, you can find some that had him kinda-sorta close to 41, but in an aggregate he was not viewed that way.

- There were players picked behind him that (seemingly) had a better fit for us (Warren, Luneau) - the latter of which was thought of as a late 1st prospect and just won defenseman of the year in the Q

- He was considered (by some, not all) to be the best goalie prospect in the draft in a weak draft for goalies

- He did not have a good D+1 year.

- He was always going to be a project, and it’s tough to make any definitive conclusions after 1 year.

- Its absolutely not the end of the world if we whiff on one 2nd round pick

You can go back and find my comments on this pick at the time, and I didn’t like it at all. Nothing that he’s done so far has changed that for me. Some of the talent drafted behind him have gone on to have strong D+1 seasons, but it’s silly to take victory laps at this point when nobody has played an NHL game.

However, Evan Silva (for you fantasy football fans out there) brings up the phrase “predictably bad moves that turned out bad” on his podcast sometimes. In my opinion, those are always the worst types of moves. Is it the end of the world? No. Does this management team have a seemingly strong drafting track record thus far? Yes. But nobody is/should be immune from criticism. The very best GMs of all time have all made bad trades and poor draft choices. Just because they made that pick doesn’t mean they are a bad GM. But criticism can be warranted from time to time - trust me, it’s okay.

A very good summary on all counts. Love the term predictably bad moves that turned out bad.

 

[SundherDome]

I watch a lot of MHL games, including how Murashov plays, he is a good goalie and his development now looks much better than Leinonen's. On different sites, his height is written differently, he himself said that he has the same height as Shestyorkin, it seems. Maybe KHL just hasn't updated his height yet.

Iv never watched him play. I only brushed up on him via draft sites because of this conversation. This conversation is also helping my side. Murashov was projected as a 6th/7th/undrafted player, you really like him and so did the Penguins as they spent a 4th on him, while having a deep goaltending stable, thus emphasizing "if you love the player and are worried someone may take in between your next pick, take him"