Roster Speculation 2015-16 Pt. III

[Jame]

Quite an overstatement. Better hands? Nope. Better passer? Nope. Better shot? Nope. Better offensive creativity? Nope? Better in the faceoff circle? Nope!

Larsson is definitely better in almost all of those categories, Grigo hasn't translated his skills to this level yet, and may never.

There's a big difference between raw talent (where grigo comes with more offensive talent), and actually translating that on the ice and the top level.

Larsson is significantly better right now, it's not debatable

 

[26CornerBlitz]

Larsson in the NHL is better offensively and defensively (not even close) and plays with and nasty edge. Or am I wrong? What Grigs might become down the line is not what he is now. Putting him with Hodgson next season in the hope it gets Hodgson going would be daft and frankly unfair to Grigs (and Hodgson for that matter).

Neither one is established at the NHL level. Larsson finally showed something in his last stint to close the season. Prior to that, he did little and then whined about how he was used after being returned to the Amerks. Grigorenko still projects better than he does from an offensive perspective. Murray even projects Larsson as a "bottom six" role player.

 

[Jame]

Neither one is established at the NHL level. Larsson finally showed something in his last stint to close the season. Prior to that, he did little.

How often does this have to be demonstrated completely false?

 

[zenthusiast]

How often does this have to be demonstrated completely false?

things jame literally believes . t x t

 

[26CornerBlitz]

How often does this have to be demonstrated completely false?

What's false about the lack of offensive production in the NHL before his last call up from the Amerks?

 

[Jame]

What's false about the lack of offensive production in the NHL before his last call up from the Amerks?

It completely ignores the dominant defensive play and the driving of possession he put on tape and in the stats the previous year in the NHL, and the consistent offensive production he was putting up in Tochester this year

His analytics over 2 seasons don't lie. Those numbers are t "doing little", it's no surprise that the same people who were going "wow" at the end of the year, were the same who ignored the data from last season.

 

[joshjull]

More established. I would think he would be a more attractive option to a greater number of teams than Grigorenko would be at this time. At the same time Grigorenko has more upside and we're in position to be patient with his development.

If you're talking about trading Larsson because more teams would be interested. Then you're talking about a trade specifically to move Larsson and we would be shopping him around for that purpose. Thats not what I was talking about. I was talking about a package to acquire a player that fills a need.

As for Grigs having the higher upside, I respectfully say its not that simple. They are different types of players. Offensively I agree Grigs has the skill set to be more productive. But Larsson is light years better defensively and is an annoying player to play against. He also has offensive skill. He would be a perfect middle 6 two way center and is far more likely of the two to reach his potential

Grigs ceiling is that of a top 6 offensive center. He has a long way to go to reach that ceiling and is less likely of the two to reach their upside. I would also add its very hard to imagine Grigs getting that chance here with the other options in the system.

 

[joshjull]

Neither one is established at the NHL level. Larsson finally showed something in his last stint to close the season. Prior to that, he did little and then whined about how he was used after being returned to the Amerks. Grigorenko still projects better than he does from an offensive perspective. Murray even projects Larsson as a "bottom six" role player.

I believe he actually said secondary or second tier player. With Eichel and Reinhart he probably will be a 3rd line center here.

I find it funny you mention any comments Murray's made about the future. You know who I've never heard him mention as part of it? Grigs. You know who else has talked in a lot of interviews about all the young talented pieces he has to work with and never mentioned Grigs as one of them? Byslma. He did frequently mention Eichel, Girgs, Reinhart, and even touched on Larsson in one and how he is viewed quite highly around the league.


I haven't heard every single interview by both men. But I don't recall Grigs being mentioned as part of the future going forward or as a key piece to build around. Yet on here some seem to think he has a chance to turn into a top 6 center here. They are usually fuzzy about how thats exactly going to happen outside of saying he has time to develop.

None of that means Grigs has to be traded or is going to be btw.

 

[Beerz]

If you're talking about trading Larsson because more teams would be interested. Then you're talking about a trade specifically to move Larsson and we would be shopping him around for that purpose. Thats not what I was talking about. I was talking about a package to acquire a player that fills a need.

As for Grigs having the higher upside, I respectfully say its not that simple. They are different types of players. Offensively I agree Grigs has the skill set to be more productive. But Larsson is light years better defensively and is an annoying player to play against. He also has offensive skill. He would be a perfect middle 6 two way center and is far more likely of the two to reach his potential

Grigs ceiling is that of a top 6 offensive center. He has a long way to go to reach that ceiling and is less likely of the two to reach their upside. I would also add its very hard to imagine Grigs getting that chance here with the other options in the system.

No. I was talking about a trade to acquire a player to fill a need. If we targeted a player I believe they would be more apt to ask for Larsson in return as opposed to Grigorenko at this time for reasons I stated. Of course it depends on the team but I see more teams looking at Larsson considering he's further ahead and Grigs waiver status.

As for Grigs getting the chance here given the other options...that is completely irrelevant to me at this time. We can always trade him further down the line if that becomes an issue. Right now it's really not enough of an issue to just trade him because you don't see room at this particular time.

 

[Lumpjaw]

Should Murray make a call to Vancouver? Eddie Lack being shopped for a 2nd rounder according to reports:

http://blogs.theprovince.com/2015/0...d-pick/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

[yahhockey]

Murray may look at a young goalie that could stick around for awhile and possibly a younger player from a cap-strapped team (RFA or not). In the big picture I'm not sure he's itching to facilitate another trade involving multiple players or notable players. Why not give the team some stability and time to learn Bylsma's system. If certain players don't step up to the challenge then we can worry about dumping them and looking outside the organization to fill holes. We're not winning a Cup next year so why not pump the brakes and let our 13 (?) players 25 and younger learn, develop, mature and grow to hopefully show what type of NHL player, if any, they may become.

Maybe Martin Jones or Robin Lehner over Lack? FWIW Lack may be relatively new to the NHL but he is already 27 years old. Age is only a number but when does our window open and could he still be a competent goalie at that point? The players in front of him weren't great but he did allow 10 goals on 88 shots in his playoff debut.

 

[Beerz]

Should Murray make a call to Vancouver? Eddie Lack being shopped for a 2nd rounder according to reports:

http://blogs.theprovince.com/2015/0...d-pick/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

I hope we could do better. Not a fan.

 

[joshjull]

No. I was talking about a trade to acquire a player to fill a need. If we targeted a player I believe they would be more apt to ask for Larsson in return as opposed to Grigorenko at this time for reasons I stated. Of course it depends on the team but I see more teams looking at Larsson considering he's further ahead and Grigs waiver status.

Thats certainly possible. Obviously it would depend on that team's needs.

As for Grigs getting the chance here given the other options...that is completely irrelevant to me at this time. We can always trade him further down the line if that becomes an issue. Right now it's really not enough of an issue to just trade him because you don't see room at this particular time.

I've never said this and its tiresome to see it repeatedly asserted I did. I said he is more likely to be included in package. Or to put it another way, Grigs is one of the young prospects I imagine Murray is willing to part with to make a trade happen. But I haven't said he has to be traded or that the team should look to trade him away just to get rid of him.

 

[Beerz]

Thats certainly possible. Obviously it would depend on that team's needs.



I've never said this and its tiresome to see it repeatedly asserted I did. I said he is more likely to be included in package. Or to put it another way, Grigs is one of the young prospects I imagine Murray is willing to part with to make a trade happen. But I haven't said he has to be traded or that the team should look to trade him away just to get rid of him.

Fair enough.

It's a tiresome argument. I'd rather just wait 'n see how things play out.

 

[joshjull]

Murray may look at a young goalie that could stick around for awhile and possibly a younger player from a cap-strapped team (RFA or not). In the big picture I'm not sure he's itching to facilitate another trade involving multiple players or notable players. Why not give the team some stability and time to learn Bylsma's system. If certain players don't step up to the challenge then we can worry about dumping them and looking outside the organization to fill holes. We're not winning a Cup next year so why not pump the brakes and let our 13 (?) players 25 and younger learn, develop, mature and grow to hopefully show what type of NHL player, if any, they may become.

I'm very curious to see how he handles the goalie situation. There are a lot of options via trade or free agency.

 

[Zman5778]

Should Murray make a call to Vancouver? Eddie Lack being shopped for a 2nd rounder according to reports:

http://blogs.theprovince.com/2015/0...d-pick/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

I think I'd do it for 51. He certainly looked good in spurts behind a rather porous Vancouver D.

 

[Onslow]

Neither one is established at the NHL level. Larsson finally showed something in his last stint to close the season. Prior to that, he did little and then whined about how he was used after being returned to the Amerks. Grigorenko still projects better than he does from an offensive perspective. Murray even projects Larsson as a "bottom six" role player.

Perfect. He's an ideal third line center for this team.

 

[sabres4ever]

It seems on the surface that Bylsma is not a fan of blocking shots, so, I think our goalie choice may have to be looked at more closely for the immediate filling. With a good D, even average goalies can look good, but if we allow near as many shots as we did the past two years, it could get ugly.

 

[Orvald]

It completely ignores the dominant defensive play and the driving of possession he put on tape and in the stats the previous year in the NHL, and the consistent offensive production he was putting up in Tochester this year

His analytics over 2 seasons don't lie. Those numbers are t "doing little", it's no surprise that the same people who were going "wow" at the end of the year, were the same who ignored the data from last season.

For a moment i thought you were describing Grigorenko.
lets be fair, both him and larsson showed to be sound on the defensive end during their call ups. And both should be on the verge to be showing some offense next year as well. I'm excited and they will make for an excellent 3rd line.

 

[Man of Principles]

It completely ignores the dominant defensive play and the driving of possession he put on tape and in the stats the previous year in the NHL, and the consistent offensive production he was putting up in Tochester this year

His analytics over 2 seasons don't lie. Those numbers are t "doing little", it's no surprise that the same people who were going "wow" at the end of the year, were the same who ignored the data from last season.

Agree. I'll take Larsson's all-around play on my 3rd line over Grigorenko for sure. His game is much more suited for the role. Legitimate shutdown centers are really tough to find.

Switching gears..I still think Grigorenko will be a good player, or at least decent like a Sam Gagner or David Desharnais in terms of talent. My guess is he's packaged with 21. Not necessarily for ROR. There are other young players who fit Murray's specs around the league.

 

[Sabretip]

And by future you mean next 2 years while he is in his peak? He's 28 already.

Could also snag more of a stopgap option in Beauchemin or Oduya and hope nag a longterm solution for the left side next year, or the year after that.

Let's trade everything for 29 year old defensemen.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-no-last-stand-for-blackhawks/

I think the Bylsma-Murray agreement cited in Friedman's report, coupled with Murray's repeated position about targeting young players (22-24) with some NHL experience who are ready to take on more responsibility, tell us all we need to know when it comes to free agency and/or trade acquisitions. It's why I don't see them chasing Sekera or Niemi in free agency nor Talbot or Anderson in trades. Committing to older players for their on-ice contributions might make sense for teams that are currently close to contending but not for a young team who's shaping a core set up to win in 2-3 years. Murray added his older veterans last summer to provide the off-ice leadership and role models - I don't think he will add any more just for that, other than perhaps as depth players or for Rochester.

I also don't think trading away Grigs (or any other youngster) specifically to free up a rester spot was ever going to happen.

Agreed....

Sure. That's what he said in the WGR interview after the Babcock chase. It's on the table. He could also be one of the players they continue to move forward with.

Actually, he said it as far back as last summer and again after the Kane-Myers trade.

Sure he could be. But my point was that quote doesn't mean he is in a better position to stick around. The plan Murray has laid out frequently over the last several months has never changed. So I don't see how stating it again changes Grigs' chances of sticking around.

I think you're dead-on with the appraisal about Grigorenko - he's an asset that Murray can use to improve in other areas and plays a position that the Sabres will have a lot of depth in after Eichel is drafted.

Another interesting name is Seabrook. One year left on his contract, a big contract that would open space if they moved him, they may not want to re-sign him longterm at 30 years old, and most importantly they could probably get a ransom if they were to trade him.

I see zero chance of that happening - Chicago will move other parts if they have to in order to keep Seabrook. He and Keith are their anchors on defense - and Seabrook is a year younger than Keith. No one's expecting Keith to be traded because of his big contract or his age. There are more obvious cap casualties (i.e. Oduya) that the Hawks can look at.

Murray will make the one big trade we all expect but I don't expect him to get nearly as crazy about shaping the roster this off-season as some people are saying (hoping).

I imagine we add one player via trade, one roster player via free agency, one player similar to Strachan who should split AHL/NHL time, and the rest of the roster will largely be the same except with Eichel and Kane. Our call ups also wont be Zac Dalpe caliber players this season and they'll have line mates they can succeed with.

I expect the same although I think the roster additions will be both via trade - one splashy one such as the kind everyone hopes for (ROR) and the second using multiple draft picks to land the goalie the Sabres need. I can see Murray waiting 1-2 weeks into free agency to pick up some depth/role player for the 4th line or Rochester.

My hope is Johnson's in the AHL or traded.

I'd like Lindback given the back-up job.

I echo those two sentiments

 

[Bps21*]

I feel like Grigorenko gets credit if he just manages to not fall down by some people. He didn't play in the same universe as Larsson the final quarter of the season. Larsson looked like a guy who plays a role on this team now. Grigorenko looked like a guy who needs another year down...and that probably means he'll be moved.

 

[stokes84]

I feel like Grigorenko gets credit if he just manages to not fall down by some people. He didn't play in the same universe as Larsson the final quarter of the season. Larsson looked like a guy who plays a role on this team now. Grigorenko looked like a guy who needs another year down...and that probably means he'll be moved.

Disagree. Grigorenko came on really strong as well at the end of the year. He was creating a lot of offense and getting a lot of chances, even if he wasn't always burying them. There isn't a ton of separation.

 

[Jacob582]

I'm very curious to see how he handles the goalie situation. There are a lot of options via trade or free agency.

Lindback
Enroth
Neuvirth
Ramo
Fasth
Dubnyk
Niemi
Lack
Lehner/Anderson
Talbot
Crawford
Jones
Ward
Raanta
?

 

[Jame]

Disagree. Grigorenko came on really strong as well at the end of the year. He was creating a lot of offense and getting a lot of chances, even if he wasn't always burying them. There isn't a ton of separation.

It's really hilarious that you see Grigorenko's final call up as "coming on strong@, yet have argued against the quality of Larsson's 13/14 season

It really highlights the disconnect