Speculation: Roster Speculation: Part XVI (Off-Season Madness)

[joshjull]

I'm in agreement that we have the centers to be able to roll 3 lines and really spread teams out and win a ton of matchups on paper. However, I'm not sure if we have the wingers to have it yet. At this time I think we have 3 wingers(since Reinhart would be at center) that could allow us to do this.

I think you have(not in any order)

xxx-ROR-xxx
Girgensons-Eichel-xxx
Kane-Reinhart-Larsson

I think there's room to upgrade our top 6 if we did this.

For me a guy like Backes fits in with ROR or Eichel pretty well.

Foligno and Deslauiers are guys who could fit with maybe the Reinhart line in case of injuries.

Fair enough. Though I don't think we'll know until the offseason plays out and camp gets going.

 

[threeVo]

Think we can move up to the end of the 1st round using our 500 stockpiled 3rd rounders? Would really like getting a Clague or Niemelainen rather than wait to see who falls.

Would you if it was reversed (no you wouldn't). We would need to move our high 2nd plus a couple thirds at least to get there and that's the last few picks if we do.

You dont find nearly as much talent in round 3 as 1.

 

[Samsonite23]

Would you if it was reversed (no you wouldn't). We would need to move our high 2nd plus a couple thirds at least to get there and that's the last few picks if we do.

You dont find nearly as much talent in round 3 as 1.

I didn't mean we would only have to give up 1 extra pick. I would think it would take 2 3rds or a 3rd and a 4th.

I just wasn't sure if there was a dropoff toward the end of the 1st like there was in the 2014 draft. If that's the case, trading up isn't really an option from our position.

 

[Jim Bob]

Would you if it was reversed (no you wouldn't). We would need to move our high 2nd plus a couple thirds at least to get there and that's the last few picks if we do.

You dont find nearly as much talent in round 3 as 1.

If any team went by the Schuckers trade value chart, they would deal a late 1st (25th pick = 302pts & 30th pick = 265pts) for a pair of 3rds (61st pick = 175pts & 90th pick = 131pts).

But, I doubt you get a GM to do that deal.

If Chayka is into the Schuckers chart, then maybe Murray can offer 2 3rds for the Rangers 1st.

 

[Der Jaeger]

Watching McAvoy, I like what I'm seeing. Like a more aggressive (gambling?) McDonagh.

If a player is available at 8OA that Fletcher likes:

8OA
2nd 2016

-for-

15OA
Brodin

Use 15 on McAvoy.

 

[Djp]

Think we can move up to the end of the 1st round using our 500 stockpiled 3rd rounders? Would really like getting a Clague or Niemelainen rather than wait to see who falls.

Would you if it was reversed (no you wouldn't). We would need to move our high 2nd plus a couple thirds at least to get there and that's the last few picks if we do.

You dont find nearly as much talent in round 3 as 1.

I didn't mean we would only have to give up 1 extra pick. I would think it would take 2 3rds or a 3rd and a 4th.

I just wasn't sure if there was a dropoff toward the end of the 1st like there was in the 2014 draft. If that's the case, trading up isn't really an option from our position.

To get in the first round it would cost BUF 2nd and BUF 3rd just to get into the 27-30 range. adding an additional late 3rd might get them to 25 or 26.

 

[truthbluth]

To get in the first round it would cost BUF 2nd and BUF 3rd just to get into the 27-30 range. adding an additional late 3rd might get them to 25 or 26.

I agree with that price, and I'd pay it in a heartbeat in this draft to get to 25. I think there is a drop off right around there, and someone always slides.

 

[Jim Bob]

Watching McAvoy, I like what I'm seeing. Like a more aggressive (gambling?) McDonagh.

If a player is available at 8OA that Fletcher likes:

8OA
2nd 2016

-for-

15OA
Brodin

Use 15 on McAvoy.

I can't believe that Minnesota would view Brodin as a piece to use to move up from 15 to 8 in the draft.

 

[Der Jaeger]

I can't believe that Minnesota would view Brodin as a piece to use to move up from 15 to 8 in the draft.

All it takes is for Fletcher to really like a player at 8. Eg: he needs a young center, and he knows Logan Brown won't make it to 15. Buffalo could add to their 2016 2nd to make it work for Minnesota.... Package in some 3rds?

 

[Jim Bob]

All it takes is for Fletcher to really like a player at 8. Eg: he needs a young center, and he knows Logan Brown won't make it to 15. Buffalo could add to their 2016 2nd to make it work for Minnesota.... Package in some 3rds?

Would Murray trade 8 + Risto to move up to 4 or even 3?

The Wild want a center that can step in and play on their second line next season if they are giving up Brodin. They aren't getting that guy with the 8th pick.

 

[FearTheBeard]

Watching McAvoy, I like what I'm seeing. Like a more aggressive (gambling?) McDonagh.

If a player is available at 8OA that Fletcher likes:

8OA
2nd 2016

-for-

15OA
Brodin

Use 15 on McAvoy.

lol come on

 

[Der Jaeger]

Would Murray trade 8 + Risto to move up to 4 or even 3?

The Wild want a center that can step in and play on their second line next season if they are giving up Brodin. They aren't getting that guy with the 8th pick.

Good point, though I don't hold Brodin in the same esteem as Ristolainen. And it's a seven position move up. I'm basing the deal off Brodin for 8OA and a 2017 2nd. Which some Wild fans won't do but agree is fair value.

 

[Rowley Birkin]

Bored.... thinking about the draft falling a particular way that makes trades the way to go. What if all three defenseman are gone by 8?

TOR- Matthews
WPG- Laine
CLB- Puljujarvi
EDM- Chychrun
VAN- Juolevi
CAL- Tkachuk
ARZ- Sergachev
BUF

PLD is left on the board. 8OA straight up for Brodin. 2017 1st, Bailey to Anaheim for Fowler.

Doubt PLD is left at 8 but I make those two trades pretty easily even if he is. I feel it could take more in both deals (definitely the Fowler one)... these moves instantly fix the D for years to come (assuming Fowler can be resigned) while barely touching the current roster or farm (I rate Bailey's potential.. but in the scheme of things...).

I honestly question the sanity of anyone who doesn't make these moves from Sabres pov.

I don't think you understood the point I was making. I wasn't talking about abandoning the two defensive lines. I very clearly stated that with ROR and Reinhart as 2 of the top 3 centers , we would still have two strong defensive lines. That would give us the best of both worlds. That being 3 lines that could score while still having the two defensive lines. A better arrangement than what the Pens have which is simply three scoring lines.

Have posters forgotten the defensive chops Reinhart has and what he projects to be on that front? When combined with his offensive skill, he could do some series damage in that 3rd line center spot. Nothing Larsson or Girgs could do. I'm talking about a 3rd line that can handle its current defensive role while also being able to produce offense at a high rate. It would take a lot of pressure off the top two lines offensively.

Its about winning matchups for me.

I might have slightly misunderstood - but I still stand by my original point

For me the facts are as follows:
- Larsson works at C.
- Reinhart works at wing... maybe as much at C maybe not so much. On the evidence of last season nobody truly knows yet.
- Larsson is wasted either playing wing or a diminished role at C.
- Reinhart is wasted not playing a premier role (ie big minutes/situations) as with ROR / Eichel.
- The wing depth isn't there to roll three 'top' lines in this way - & likely never will be due to the salary cap / structuring of successful teams. This isn't really an issue to me as I see the vast majority of wingers as interchangeable / complimentary players....

I don't think we need to split talent so drastically across 3 lines to win matcups

Exactly what I'm thinking. Nullify other teams best players with the ROR/Larsson lines then let Eichel do his thing. ROR line in particular should still provide offensively too. The only question for me in this scenario is does Reinhart play more with Jack or ROR ? That could be determined by who develops, who doesn't, who comes & who leaves.

As for Ennis... I honestly see him as being Tim Connolly circa ten years ago.

 

[LottoPlease]

As for Ennis... I honestly see him as being Tim Connolly circa ten years ago.

waiting on a career-ending series of concussions

 

[joshjull]

I might have slightly misunderstood - but I still stand by my original point

I posted that I wanted a setup with Reinhart as the 3rd line center. I said its the best of both worlds because we would still have 2 of our top 3 centers as strong defensive centers but we'd also have more offensive punch from the 3rd line. You initially disagreed (your original point) because you want 2 of our top 3 centers as strong defensive centers. Thats a tad confusing

- Larsson works at C.
- Larsson is wasted either playing wing or a diminished role at C.

How would Larsson be wasted used in a Kruger type of role? He would play more minutes than a typical 4th liner.

- Reinhart works at wing... maybe as much at C maybe not so much. On the evidence of last season nobody truly knows yet.

Which is all the more reason he should get a shot at center. I know our GM wants to see it.

- Reinhart is wasted not playing a premier role (ie big minutes/situations) as with ROR / Eichel.

He would be in the same role Getzlaf had on the Cup winning Ducks and Giroux had when the Flyers made it to the Cups Finals.

- The wing depth isn't there to roll three 'top' lines in this way - & likely never will be due to the salary cap / structuring of successful teams. This isn't really an issue to me as I see the vast majority of wingers as interchangeable / complimentary players....

I never said anything about 3 "top" lines. I'm basically arguing for a more offensively potent version of the line structure we currently have. That being two strong defensive lines and a scoring line. A setup you have said more than a few times you like and want kept.

Your point about the wingers basically supports my argument about having three strong centers. Its allows us to have interchangeable wingers moving up and down those 3 lines since the centers are the driving forces of their lines.

Exactly what I'm thinking. Nullify other teams best players with the ROR/Larsson lines then let Eichel do his thing. ROR line in particular should still provide offensively too. The only question for me in this scenario is does Reinhart play more with Jack or ROR ? That could be determined by who develops, who doesn't, who comes & who leaves.

ROR had a GF% of 42.7% and Eichel's was 43.8%. They lost their matchups for the season by a decent margin. Our 3rd line whether centered by Girgs or Larsson won their matchup. But it was such a low scoring line that it did little to help overcome the top two lines losing their matchups


By having an offensively inept 3rd line and hoping ROR's line can improve to at least hold serve. We would be putting enormous pressure on Eichel and his line to do some big time lifting offensively. He would basically have to be Kane to ROR's Toews. And thats with ROR just holding serve.

The lineup I'm envisioning is one where a 3rd line centered by Reinhart would be the secondary defensive AND offensive line. One that can take advantage of matchups offensively. It would take a ton of pressure off the top 2 lines offensively. The hope is it develops to the point that it makes teams struggle to matchup against them and Eichel's line. Something I don't see happening with Larsson or Girgs centering the 3rd line. It would also help get ROR's ice time down into a less demanding range.

 

[AustonsNostrils]

FWIW Mathew Coller was asked about Brodin as a trade target - replied 'he's not that good'

 

[1972]

FWIW Mathew Coller was asked about Brodin as a trade target - replied 'he's not that good'

He isn't that good, i don't know why so many think he is.

 

[Jim Bob]

Doubt PLD is left at 8 but I make those two trades pretty easily even if he is. I feel it could take more in both deals (definitely the Fowler one)... these moves instantly fix the D for years to come (assuming Fowler can be resigned) while barely touching the current roster or farm (I rate Bailey's potential.. but in the scheme of things...).

I honestly question the sanity of anyone who doesn't make these moves from Sabres pov.

I doubt Anaheim moves Fowler for a winger that spent most of this season in the AHL and a 2017 1st.

Given Anaheim's RFAs and cap/budget issues, I can't see Fowler and his reasonable cap hit being what gets moved out.

And I like Dubois over Brodin. Dubois would give the Sabres another top 6 Swiss Army knife forward to add to the mix and he's exempt from the potential expansion draft.

 

[Sabre Dance]

After a few weeks of thinking about it I think we should focus on older LHDs. Draft and develop our future Ristolainen pair.

 

[Chainshot]

If they are talking to Minnesota, I'd rather they push on Scandella than Brodin.

 

[The Red Helmet]

If we trade Justin Bailey, we are going to regret it in a couple years.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[Husko]

If we trade Justin Bailey, we are going to regret it in a couple years.

Eh, I like Bailey, but second line scoring wingers are exactly the type of player that should be replaceable on good teams with stand out centers

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[tsujimoto74]

Eh, I like Bailey, but second line scoring wingers are exactly the type of player that should be replaceable on good teams with stand out centers

Yes and no. It's too soon to know who, if anyone, Bailey has chemistry with on our roster, but look at how tough a time Pittsburgh has had finding wingers for Sid. Just because he's great doesn't mean any winger will do. Bailey's got an intriguing mix of size, speed, and skill. He's right there with Fasching for me in terms of prospects I'd really rather wait and see on.