Roster Speculation 2015-16 Pt. III

[B U F F A L O]

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.

I think right now there is a huge separation in Larsson and Grigorenko's games at the NHL level.

I think Grigorenko made strides at the end of the year. He certainly looked his best that he ever has at the NHL level, but hes not ready for full time NHL just yet. Larsson most definitely, 100% is -- in any role up and down the lineup. He can play on a scoring line with skilled players. He can play a defensive shut down role in the bottom 6.

He'll be a possession driver and solid defensively in either role. He can provide offense in either role as long as he has similarly skilled players not named Kaleta and McCormick.

 

[Orvald]

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.

He made great strides last summer, looked solid defensively. Who knows how much he can improve over the summer. If there is one player who should fear more about being send down its hodgson and not grigorenko.

 

[stokes84]

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

I don't recall Larsson creating much offense during his early call ups. Because he didn't.

 

[Vito_81]

Your idea of helping Hodgson get back on track is putting him with a kid still trying to establish he can handle the NHL? Thats not going to do much for either player.

It would make far more sense to put Hodgson with Larsson (if picking between Grigs and Larsson). He is better than Grigs in every aspect of the game. For some odd reason you put Larsson on a grind it out line.

My reasoning is that Larsson would work better on a line with Foligno and Deslauriers rather than Grigo.

You said it yourself that Larsson plays with an edge. Seems like a fit with Foligno and Des to me.

 

[Bps21*]

You need someone who is going to do Hodgson's work for him. That isn't Grigorenko. It shouldn't be Reinhart or Eichel either. It won't be Girgensons because that's the top line to start.

...

It's almost like Hodgson isn't worth keeping...

 

[Jame]

I don't recall Larsson creating much offense during his early call ups. Because he didn't.

I realize you didn't see it, let alone capable of recalling it

 

[Paxon]

I'd really like to keep Larsson and Grigorenko, making room by dumping Hodgson somehow. If we move Grigorenko in a ROR trade though then that's another matter.

 

[Bps21*]

Hey guys...when Larsson was playing short minutes on the 4th line he didn't create offense. All the fancy stats said that he would if put into a better position because what he did create...was possession. Then they had to put him in a better spot and...well...I won't spoil what happened next (but it's oddly similar to what anyone following the numbers said would happen).

Don't tell stokes.

 

[Moskau]

You said it yourself that Larsson plays with an edge. Seems like a fit with Foligno and Des to me.

On the 4th line. Why are we wasting Larsson on the 4th line?

 

[Paxon]

On the 4th line. Why are we wasting Larsson on the 4th line?

To start the year that wouldn't bother me. Larsson doesn't really need developmental minutes. That line would be heavy and hard with a bit of goal scoring ability.

 

[Moskau]

To start the year that wouldn't bother me. Larsson doesn't really need developmental minutes. That line would be heavy and hard with a bit of goal scoring ability.

Why not put Larsson on one of the top 2 lines where he will likely belong with next years roster?

 

[Paxon]

Why not put Larsson on one of the top 2 lines where he will likely belong with next years roster?

I'm certainly not against that either. I'm just saying if you have to fit him in on the 4th line it's not a disaster for him or the team. That'd be a strong 4th line. Seasons are long, guys get hurt, guys get called up. First forward injury with Larsson on the 4th line, I'd call up Schaller for the 4th line and bump Larsson into the top 6.

 

[Husko]

I don't see any dichotomy between Hodgson, Grigorenko, and Larsson. Hell, Reinhart too. Let the lot of them compete for scarce roster spots (namely 3rd line center and second line RW) and the losers can ride the pine (or in Reinhart's case go to rochester). There will be injuries, they can all get opportunities.

That said if a team wants Hodgson and will give us a decent asset (a third?) I think I'd take it because of the unique case of his contract and the high likelihood of him not having a longterm place on the team. The benefit of keeping him is really just increasing that trade value.

 

[Matt Ress]

If only Larsson shot righty...

 

[Matt Ress]

I'm certainly not against that either. I'm just saying if you have to fit him in on the 4th line it's not a disaster for him or the team. That'd be a strong 4th line. Seasons are long, guys get hurt, guys get called up. First forward injury with Larsson on the 4th line, I'd call up Schaller for the 4th line and bump Larsson into the top 6.

That's what makes the kid so valuable. He really isn't out of place anywhere in the lineup. A year ago I mocked his lack of production and even compared his career path to Luke Adam. Basically, career AHLer. It's still a bit unfortunate that Larsson really hasn't produced offensively outside of a top 6 six or even 1st line role but that's far from his complete game and is an effective NHLer. I think he'll ideally be a 3rd liner on a deep team.

I also think it's kind of easy and superficial to say that Grigs is so far away from reaching the same productivity as an effective player albeit in a completely different way. Perhaps he'll see some more time with other talented players to afford him an opportunity to prove his effectiveness.

 

[Onslow]

Larsson's spot is third line center. He'll be a darn good one too IMO.

If Reinhart is not ready at the start of the season, then the centers will be

Girg
Eichel
Larsson
Xxxx

Once Reinhart is ready, the centers will be

Eichel
Reinhart
Larsson
Xxxx

And Girg moves to top six winger, ready to fill in at each C position when injuries happen.

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

I just think Girgensons would be at his best down the middle anchoring a shut down 3rd line with the capability of providing offense.

Girgensons will be a far better 3C then Larsson.Girgensons can pot 20-20 as the 3C.Larsson will not.Let's acquire natural RWers and keep Girgs at center.If Larsson is truly that good then use him as a centerpiece in a deal for a top 6 winger.I do like Larsson but he's too good for the 4th line but not as good as Girgs.

 

[Bps21*]

Reinhart by his very nature will be the guy facing the league's best offensive lines down the line. I think Girgensons has more value then backup shutdown line duties.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[TehDoak]

Re: Girgensons (and Reinhart for that matter)

Really depends on what we do with Eichel to start.

Does Eichel take top line minutes out the gate? Do we shelter him a bit with second line minutes? Is it even possible we start Eichel on the RW

While I think the summer signings/trades may shed a light on the thought process, in the end, I don't think we'll have a solid idea of who is playing where until camp winds down in late September.

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

Re: Girgensons (and Reinhart for that matter)

Really depends on what we do with Eichel to start.

Does Eichel take top line minutes out the gate? Do we shelter him a bit with second line minutes? Is it even possible we start Eichel on the RW

While I think the summer signings/trades may shed a light on the thought process, in the end, I don't think we'll have a solid idea of who is playing where until camp winds down in late September.

barring a ROR trade or something of that caliber, you play Eichel as the 1b, in games he plays well you put more on his plate, in games that hes not you lean more towards Girgensons/Larsson

he's a special talent and while I dont expect a 50+ point rookie season, it wouldnt shock me and it wouldnt shock me if he was the uncontested 1c by the end of the season

 

[Uberpecker]

On the 4th line. Why are we wasting Larsson on the 4th line?

If it would allow us to keep Grigo in the line-up and give him sheltered minutes, thereby letting him develop further instead of letting him go for peanuts, i'm all for it.
What's wrong with having a kick-ass bottom 6 with Larsson being a key part of it?

I'm thinking of Shaw in Chicago as rolemodel or even Pavelski or Filpulla who played bottom 6 shut-down roles before moving up the depth chart.

And with injuries and whatnot Larsson will find himself in the top 6 again in no time anyway, just like he did this season.

 

[Jim Bob]

Why not put Larsson on one of the top 2 lines where he will likely belong with next years roster?

Ahead of Eichel, Girgensons, and maybe Reinhart?

I doubt he earns that kind of spot in the lineup.

 

[TehDoak]

Ahead of Eichel, Girgensons, and maybe Reinhart?

I doubt he earns that kind of spot in the lineup.

I think there's some muddled thoughts in terms of "1st line, 2nd line, 3rd line"

Bylsma ****ing loved Staal. Staal played 19:30+ ice time a game (Crosby and Malkin both got 20+ minutes a game) from when Bylsma started as head coach.

Gotta think Girgensons is going to take that defensive heavy lifting duty over almost immediately unless we decide to get someone via UFA.

I think what we're going to see is a top heavy offensive line (Kane-Eichel-Ennis), a defensive heavy lifting line (Foligno-Girgesons-Gio/UFA/Trade), and a secondary scoring line with Moulson-Grigerenko/Larsson-UFA/Hodgson/Gionta/etc on it.

 

[Sabretip]

I think there's some muddled thoughts in terms of "1st line, 2nd line, 3rd line"

Bylsma ****ing loved Staal. Staal played 19:30+ ice time a game (Crosby and Malkin both got 20+ minutes a game) from when Bylsma started as head coach.

Gotta think Girgensons is going to take that defensive heavy lifting duty over almost immediately unless we decide to get someone via UFA.

I think what we're going to see is a top heavy offensive line (Kane-Eichel-Ennis), a defensive heavy lifting line (Foligno-Girgesons-Gio/UFA/Trade), and a secondary scoring line with Moulson-Grigerenko/Larsson-UFA/Hodgson/Gionta/etc on it.

I see the more traditional approach with top 2 lines being scoring lines and the 3rd line being the 2-way, checking line. Reinhart's been lauded as being intelligent defensively and good on faceoffs but to spend time on 3rd line would waste the offensive creativity he has over Larsson or Girgensons. Finding a playmaker to get Moulson back on track is important IMO - Ennis alone can't do it and Girgensons as a # 1/#2 center is demanding more than he's really qualified for. While Z has some nice speed and 1-on-1 skills, he lacks the vision to construct a play or find open teammates through a crowd and he's not the best finisher either.

So, if the ROR dream comes true, I'd lobby for:
Kane-Eichel-O'Reilly
Moulson-Reinhart-Ennis
Girgensons-Larsson-Gionta

If Sabres don't add O'Reilly or a top 6 winger:
Kane-Eichel-Girgensons
Moulson-Reinhart-Ennis
Foligno-Larsson-Gionta

To those who think 3 young centers 22 or younger is recipe for disaster, I'd counter that they're surrounded on each line by established veteran support and no one is expecting the Sabres to not take some lumps on the learning curve next season. I think Reinhart will prove to be ready as will Eichel - and Larsson's already shown he is.