Prospect Info: Ryan Johnson, D, 2019 #31 overall: Signed, Rochester (AHL), Recalled 12/5/24

[joshjull]

Comparing taking chances on johnson who was kinda a 2nd round pick and Nylander and Mitts at 8th overral is apples to oranges. I've never laid claim to reaching on talent with our top 10 picks in this discussion. I mentioned the Johnson, Pysyk, Karabacek, Cornel, Bailey and Baptistes. Lets hone it in there.

Why would we hone in there when thats a bad faith argument.

You make the smart pick with your early first and find better value later on. I'm questioning the ability to do the finding talent later part.

You’re questioning there ability to find the talent later because you’re approaching this in bad faith.

For example the 2013 draft was a pretty good one for us. We drafted 4 NHLers; Risto, Zadorov, Compher and Cal Peterson. Even using your arbitrary parameters we still landed 3 NHLers outside the top ten. Yet you mentioned none of them and are focused on Bailey/Baptiste from that draft instead.

 

[StrompTroller]

Why would we hone in there when thats a bad faith argument.



You’re questioning there ability to find the talent later because you’re approaching this in bad faith.

For example the 2013 draft was a pretty good one for us. We drafted 4 NHLers; Risto, Zadorov, Compher and Cal Peterson. Even using your arbitrary parameters we still landed 3 NHLers outside the top ten. Yet you mentioned none of them and are focused on Bailey/Baptiste from that draft instead.

Pardon my response seeming to be a little all over the place I'm not as well versed at bolding and multi-quoting as others here so I'll just try to do my best...

First, this narrative that you've constructed that I'd "hate Johnson no matter what" has been derived mostly from your own conclusions. I said a few responses back that "if I wanted a Kucherov and got a brodin that would be fine and dandy" and also mentioned that i can hate the pick and still want the player to succeed. You keep banging this drum like I'm waiting to steal the kid's first born child for sacrifice. He wouldn't have been me pick then. He wouldn't be my pick now. I feel he is and was an inferior player compared to others on the draft board. I also don't value taking a defenseman in that spot on a team that was starved for offensive talent and at the time didnt have Hall/ Staal to boot. You can type paragraphs but you won't change my mind that it was a poor choice. That being said I hope Johnson succeeds because it'd mean the team did.

I'll briefly address your claims to the 2013 draft as such: we had 6 picks in the first 69. Cal Peterson means nothing to this team for all the obvious reasons and was a goalie taken late...that does not address my point about taking high end forwards with our picks. If you can hang your hat on getting Risto, Zadorov, and Compher to hit with 6 picks in in the first 69 then be my guest...and if you need to go back SEVEN years to find success in those early picks that only further proves my point to be honest...

You bring up Nylander (who was a garbage pick from day one regardless) and Mitts after the fact that I said my jaded views were related to picks outside of the top 10...I literally said that. When you're in the top 10 you trust your scouts and take the ranked players. Again in case it didn't settle in the first time I said it...comparing Johnson and my qualms with him as our pick relates to using our secondary pick on him. I'm not gonna debate comparing a pick in the 30's to a pick at 8, that's a pointless exercise.

I'm not sure what else you're looking to achieve here by arguing this topic with me. I firmly believe we passed on several higher end prospects (Kayliev being my favorite but others have brought up other similar names) and made a poor drafting decision...just as we seemingly have in several past drafts. That's my stance. Your "bad faith" argument that you keep referring to is irrelevant to me given my own non-professional hockey opinions on who we should have drafted to better stabilize this team moving forward. Cheers and my best wishes to you and yours, sorry again for a response that was not exactly as coherent as I'd like and maybe someday I learn how to fully utilize the tools of this site to better contribute to the conversations.

 

[Bfreezy40]

I wasn't so upset they passed on Kaliyev as they didn't grab Lavoie

Would have rather taken Nils Höglander.

 

[Dex]

Maybe we need two Ryan Johnson threads.

1. A thread to track and comment on his developmental progress and other news about him
2. A who would you prefer to have drafted instead of Ryan Johnson and how are those preferred players progressing thread

 

[OkimLom]

Maybe we need two Ryan Johnson threads.

1. A thread to track and comment on his developmental progress and other news about him
2. A who would you prefer to have drafted instead of Ryan Johnson and how are those preferred players progressing thread

Call it the Hindsight Thread, and just move the sort of talk you are talking about in #2 in there.

It would be fun to see how quickly we can catch up to the Roster Discussion Thread number.

 

[MarkusKetterer]

Looking at Botterill’s drafting, I’m actually surprised that the Sabres picked Cozens instead of Zegras. His selections were full of Europeans and college guys, so it’s a bit surprising that he picked a CHL guy.

 

[elchud]

Call it the Hindsight Thread, and just move the sort of talk you are talking about in #2 in there.

Meh. Hindsight is 2020. It's a new year!

Speaking about 20, there's about 20 1st/2nd/3rd round draft picks over the past 10 years that we can second guess. Silly to keep beating up RyJo and/or his selection, since he's gonna have an NHL career.

 

[jc17]

I wanted to answer this half of your post separately.

Its not process vs results. Its always just about results for a GM’s draft history. No one cares about a GM’s process or draft philosophy if they suck at drafting.


The issue I took with @DJN21 stance that started the back and forth the last few pages was when he said he would hate this pick no matter what. Even if Kaliyev flamed out and Johnson turned into Brodin he would still hate it. To me thats not a very rational stance to take and I said as much. Then he tried to make it about a draft philosophy and what Johnson symbolized about our last 10 years of drafting. That doesn’t make it any better for two reasons (1) It comes across as petulantly refusing to ever admit you were wrong about a player and (2) the theory doesn’t hold water.

I'm still not sure I agree. If you went to a roulette table with a friend, and they put their life savings on roulette Red #15 and won, you can still think it's a bad decision even though they won. Obviously an exaggerated example because 1) we don't know the odds on Johnson vs someone else, like we know the odds of a roulette wheel. But the point is you can still think something was a bad decision, even if it works out.

We did take a shot at two high ceiling players; Nylander and Mitts. One didn’t work out and the other hasn’t so far. The Nylander pick is exactly what you and DJ are talking about. Take the high skilled player over the safer one like the dmen available in that draft. If either of Nylander/Mitts had turned out we’re not having this discussion.

As he/she pointed out, this was specifically in regard to later picks than Nylander and Mitts. From 2000 to 2013 drafts, only 52% of picks in the 25-35 range have played at least 3 seasons worth of games. There's risk in every player. I don't feel we should blindly draft on upside, or take the highest scorer available, but I do think we should pull the trigger when there are guys who have showed something significant like debrincat's point total, Point's 2nd half and points relative to his team, and Kaliyev's goals. You might end up with Nic Petan, but I'm ok with that shot in a range where only about half the guys become regular NHLers.

 

[Dex]

Yup......We definitely need two threads.

 

[jc17]

Yup......We definitely need two threads.

It's not like there's a ton of discussion of the player that's being stifled. Sometimes threads shift to somewhat related topics, not sure why this is so problematic.

 

[StrompTroller]

I'm still not sure I agree. If you went to a roulette table with a friend, and they put their life savings on roulette Red #15 and won, you can still think it's a bad decision even though they won. Obviously an exaggerated example because 1) we don't know the odds on Johnson vs someone else, like we know the odds of a roulette wheel. But the point is you can still think something was a bad decision, even if it works out.



As he/she pointed out, this was specifically in regard to later picks than Nylander and Mitts. From 2000 to 2013 drafts, only 52% of picks in the 25-35 range have played at least 3 seasons worth of games. There's risk in every player. I don't feel we should blindly draft on upside, or take the highest scorer available, but I do think we should pull the trigger when there are guys who have showed something significant like debrincat's point total, Point's 2nd half and points relative to his team, and Kaliyev's goals. You might end up with Nic Petan, but I'm ok with that shot in a range where only about half the guys become regular NHLers.

He for the record lol

and there's no such thing as bad press...if anything this thread is just hyping Johnson up!!

 

[joshjull]

@DJN21 @jc17

I don’t think either of you fully appreciate how hard it is to draft NHL players outside of the top of the first round. As evidence by JC talking about our picks 25 to 35. The numbers you quoted for games played and what percentage played them are perfectly normal for those picks. Or DJ dismissing the 2013 draft. Its a very good draft year if a team finds 4 NHL players in one draft.

The linked article is by Scott Cullen where he breaks down 25 years of drafts (1990 to 2014). Article is from 2018. Statistically Speaking: NHL Draft Pick Values - TSN.ca

He assigns values to players.

10 - Generational
9 - Elite Player
8 - First Line, Top Pair D
7 - Top Six Forward, Top Four D
6 - Top Nine Forward, Top Six D
5 - NHL Regular, 350+ NHL games
4 - 200+ NHL games
3 - 50-200 NHL games
2 - under 50 NHL games
1 - 10 or fewer NHL games

Then lists average rating for each pick, chances at top 6 forward/top 4 dman/#1 goalie, etc

31st overall has a score of 2.6

If Ryan Johnson becomes a top 6 dman with those odds. Then that was a good pick. If he becomes a top 4 dman its becomes a great pick. You guys seem to think there is some secret formula to beat those odds. There isn’t. Its mostly luck and I know people hate to hear that.


The above chart is also why missing on guys like Nylander and Mitts (so far) hurts FAR more than not getting lucky later in the draft. Those picks are the ones that are supposed to work out and when they miss its extremely hard to make up for that elsewhere in the draft.

To DJ’s love of Tampa all I can say is the biggest difference between them and us isn’t the draft. Its the fact that they are better than us in every single facet of running a NHL franchise. The draft barely matters in the comparison.

EDIT: on a funny note. After the complaints about our back and forth. Not one post in this thread after we stopped Monday. Lol

 

[Bendium]

I see looking at the above chart that the Sabres have single handedly dragged down the stats of the 8th pick.

 

[jc17]

@DJN21 @jc17

The linked article is by Scott Cullen where he breaks down 25 years of drafts (1990 to 2014). Article is from 2018. Statistically Speaking: NHL Draft Pick Values - TSN.ca

He assigns values to players.

10 - Generational
9 - Elite Player
8 - First Line, Top Pair D
7 - Top Six Forward, Top Four D
6 - Top Nine Forward, Top Six D
5 - NHL Regular, 350+ NHL games
4 - 200+ NHL games
3 - 50-200 NHL games
2 - under 50 NHL games
1 - 10 or fewer NHL games

Then lists average rating for each pick, chances at top 6 forward/top 4 dman/#1 goalie, etc


31st overall has a score of 2.6

If Ryan Johnson becomes a top 6 dman with those odds. Then that was a good pick. If he becomes a top 4 dman its becomes a great pick. You guys seem to think there is some secret formula to beat those odds. There isn’t. Its mostly luck and I know people hate to hear that.


The above chart is also why missing on guys like Nylander and Mitts (so far) hurts FAR more than not getting lucky later in the draft. Those picks are the ones that are supposed to work out and when they miss its extremely hard to make up for that elsewhere in the draft.

EDIT: on a funny note. After the complaints about our back and forth. Not one post in this thread after we stopped Monday. Lol

What value score do you think goal scorers in Kaliyev's range average? That's the point I'm trying to make, that a guy scoring that much is probably on average good value in that range. The laziness, inflated scoring, high PP scoring, are all warning signs as to why he might not work out, but I still think its usually worth a shot.

Here are the comparable junior draft year goal scorers:

Far from flawless, but do they have a higher rate of success than the average 31st pick? I say yes.

On another note, I really don't see the Nylander/Mitts argument. This is all about late firsts. I was fairly indifferent to Nylander at the time of the pick and actively argued against the Mitts pick so I don't want to give the perception those are guys I would beat the drum for at 8

 

[Dirty Dog]

Yes, anyone that has no brainer studs for the end of the first round shows they are starting off with a wrong premise

 

[StrompTroller]

To DJ’s love of Tampa all I can say is the biggest difference between them and us isn’t the draft. Its the fact that they are better than us in every single facet of running a NHL franchise. The draft barely matters in the comparison.

This is just nonsense. Yes they are run better than us but having a competent and risk taking GM and a smart scouting staff literally built that team into a winner. You cant possibly seperate the two things...good teams and their drafting in the NHL. Thats what separates the NHL and NFL, NBA, MLB is that in a hard salary cap world the teams that are successful have drafted their players that made them winners. To your Tampa reference:
Stamkos, Kucherov, Point, Cirelli, Hedman, Johnson, Gourde, etc etc etc were drafted and developed by them.
For the sake of this excersize lets say:

Eichel=Stamkos
Dahlin=Hedman

it's the later round drafting (or past top 8 as you seem fixated on) of guys like Kucherov, Point, Cirelli that are seperating them from us. You wanna turn things around get a GM and scouting department that isn't terrified of Russian players for some weird reason.

Anywho I don's see us meeting eye to eye on this which is totally fine. And I loved your last comment about the thread dying anyways hahaha. Cheers brother.

 

[Djp]

@DJN21 @jc17

I don’t think either of you fully appreciate how hard it is to draft NHL players outside of the top of the first round. As evidence by JC talking about our picks 25 to 35. The numbers you quoted for games played and what percentage played them are perfectly normal for those picks. Or DJ dismissing the 2013 draft. Its a very good draft year if a team finds 4 NHL players in one draft.

The linked article is by Scott Cullen where he breaks down 25 years of drafts (1990 to 2014). Article is from 2018. Statistically Speaking: NHL Draft Pick Values - TSN.ca

He assigns values to players.

10 - Generational
9 - Elite Player
8 - First Line, Top Pair D
7 - Top Six Forward, Top Four D
6 - Top Nine Forward, Top Six D
5 - NHL Regular, 350+ NHL games
4 - 200+ NHL games
3 - 50-200 NHL games
2 - under 50 NHL games
1 - 10 or fewer NHL games

Then lists average rating for each pick, chances at top 6 forward/top 4 dman/#1 goalie, etc

View attachment 398248

31st overall has a score of 2.6

If Ryan Johnson becomes a top 6 dman with those odds. Then that was a good pick. If he becomes a top 4 dman its becomes a great pick. You guys seem to think there is some secret formula to beat those odds. There isn’t. Its mostly luck and I know people hate to hear that.


The above chart is also why missing on guys like Nylander and Mitts (so far) hurts FAR more than not getting lucky later in the draft. Those picks are the ones that are supposed to work out and when they miss its extremely hard to make up for that elsewhere in the draft.

To DJ’s love of Tampa all I can say is the biggest difference between them and us isn’t the draft. Its the fact that they are better than us in every single facet of running a NHL franchise. The draft barely matters in the comparison.

EDIT: on a funny note. After the complaints about our back and forth. Not one post in this thread after we stopped Monday. Lol

I agree with ehat you are saying. I’ve talked about the expected success level of players drafted where but not so much focused on pick 32 vs 32 but in general ranges.

the likelihood of success drops considerably once you are late in the 1st round.

in late 1st-early 2nd you have a better chance of hitting on a Dman than a F. F drafted here are usually bottom 6 players with some of them good enough to play with your top line players. D drafted here are more likely to make it to equivalent top 4 on D.

ive evaluated draft factoring in player production relative to where drafted. So using a top 10 pick on a player who might pkay 500+ nhl games but isn’t a top 6 player is a negative while picking the same pkayers 24+ is a big positive.

many of the cup winning teams have had multiple top 10 picks.

The complaining about low 1st-mid 2nd draft (20-50) failings is the reason is a fallacy. Buffalo has done fine here.

2008 Ennis Adam
2010 Pysyk
2012 McCabe
2013 compher Hurley
2014 Lemieux cornel karabacek
2016 Asplund
2017 Davidsson
2018 Samuelson
2019 Johnson
2020 Peterka

many have the Shinny High Impact Toy Syndrome where they think the next player drafted here will be superstars because they see the success but ignore the many misses.

 

[StrompTroller]

I agree with ehat you are saying. I’ve talked about the expected success level of players drafted where but not so much focused on pick 32 vs 32 but in general ranges.

the likelihood of success drops considerably once you are late in the 1st round.

in late 1st-early 2nd you have a better chance of hitting on a Dman than a F. F drafted here are usually bottom 6 players with some of them good enough to play with your top line players. D drafted here are more likely to make it to equivalent top 4 on D.

ive evaluated draft factoring in player production relative to where drafted. So using a top 10 pick on a player who might pkay 500+ nhl games but isn’t a top 6 player is a negative while picking the same pkayers 24+ is a big positive.

many of the cup winning teams have had multiple top 10 picks.

The complaining about low 1st-mid 2nd draft (20-50) failings is the reason is a fallacy. Buffalo has done fine here.

2008 Ennis Adam
2010 Pysyk
2012 McCabe
2013 compher Hurley
2014 Lemieux cornel karabacek
2016 Asplund
2017 Davidsson
2018 Samuelson
2019 Johnson
2020 Peterka

many have the Shinny High Impact Toy Syndrome where they think the next player drafted here will be superstars because they see the success but ignore the many misses.

7 guys listed haven't played an NHL game and you make a case that ennis is the only player on that list to be an actual positive contribution to any team let alone ours.

 

[Djp]

7 guys listed haven't played an NHL game and you make a case that ennis is the only player on that list to be an actual positive contribution to any team let alone ours.

a grass is greener house of cards...

 

[DolanPlsGoSabres]

7 guys listed haven't played an NHL game and you make a case that ennis is the only player on that list to be an actual positive contribution to any team let alone ours.

Right. Compher, Pysyk, Lemieux.

 

[joshjull]

What value score do you think goal scorers in Kaliyev's range average? That's the point I'm trying to make, that a guy scoring that much is probably on average good value in that range. The laziness, inflated scoring, high PP scoring, are all warning signs as to why he might not work out, but I still think its usually worth a shot.

Here are the comparable junior draft year goal scorers:
View attachment 398320

Far from flawless, but do they have a higher rate of success than the average 31st pick? I say yes.

You’re in your head/overthinking this if you think the bolded makes sense. Of course a group of players where the majority were drafted in the top 10 have a better chance than players drafted at 31. They also have nothing to do with Kaliyev because he wasn’t drafted where they were. Nor does it make sense grouping him with them in relation to the article I posted. Since it’s about what players do in their careers in each of the draft spots.

You called your draft philosophy of only focusing in on high scoring players from Canadian juniors as “simplistic”. It’s also incredibly limiting and a poor approach. Its ignoring US high schools, prep schools, USHL, College, other lower junior leagues, USNDTP, Russia and the rest of Europe.

It would be quite easy to find a lot more players than just Debrincat and Point from those leagues/areas to support the idea it would be a bad idea to focus where you suggest. Boston alone has two from Europe (Pasta/Krecji). Even Bergeron/Marchand don’t quite fit the description. Those would all be players you wouldn’t draft with your approach.

There isn’t a secret formula to ensuring a team lands a keeper in the 2nd round or beyond. Teams should just cast a wide net and be open to drafting all positions. You seem singularly focused on forwards.

On another note, I really don't see the Nylander/Mitts argument. This is all about late firsts. I was fairly indifferent to Nylander at the time of the pick and actively argued against the Mitts pick so I don't want to give the perception those are guys I would beat the drum for at 8

That should be self explanatory based on the info I linked in my previous post. You’re too hung up on individual players. The point is about what teams should expect from 8th overall picks. Teams can’t afford to get picks that high and not hit with them. Statistically not hitting on those picks is low probability outcome. But its not remotely shocking to miss at the end of the first and beyond.


Bringing this back to Johnson. If he pans out and becomes a top 6 dman it was a successful pick. That doesn't change if Kaliyev pans out as well. It just means we can debate which would have been the better pick of the two. And they may turn out to be Kaliyev.

 

[Dex]

Ryan Johnson scored his first collegiate goal - an empty netter to seal a 4-2 win vs Michigan

Leading 3-2 with the Wolverines’ net empty, LaFontaine made a point blank save and the puck went to Johnson below the goal line. The first round pick of the Buffalo Sabres sent the puck the length of the rink into the net, prompting a huge celebration among his teammates.

“That’s not how I envisioned it, but I’ll take it. It felt so nice,” said Johnson, whose father Craig was a Gophers standout in the early 1990s. “They were kind of hemming us in and I felt that icing would relieve the pressure, so I tried to make a little move and throw it toward the net and it kind of curved in.”​

 

[Dex]

Minnesota won the Big 10 championship game yesterday 6-4 over Wisconsin. Johnson was on the ice at the end of the game with Minnesota having a one goal lead and the Badgers goal empty. Johnson made a nice play on a faceoff in their own end and picked up an assist on the game clinching EN goal

Johnson also had an assist on the game tying third period goal in the semifinal game vs Michigan. Minnesota won that game 3-2 on OT

 

[Rastin]

I'm still very excited about Johnson. He'll be a slow developer so we probably won't see him in the NHL for at least 2 years but his skating, poise and vision make him a very exciting prospect. Happy to see him starting to have more success at the NCAA level.

 

[UnleashRasmus]

I still don't hate this pick, of anything in the Ryan O'Reilly trade that has some upside it's Johnson. It surely isn't Thompson.