if you believe the organization as a whole can't evaluate the difference between a rock and a rooster, then sure i guess.
- TheSabresTaco

There is no evidence they can.

What current prospect (that was not a top five pick) are you willing to trade Cozens for?

The players drafted 6-15 in this years draft are not getting a good top six NHL player, and it does mean they are bad draft picks.

The reasoning is not much different than you not loaning me $1000 if I told you I pay you back $1000 in a year or two, but you would probably consider a loan if I said I'll pay you back $1500 in a year or two.

Until a prospect (other than generational first overall picks) play a season in the NHL there will some required interest charged when trading for an established NHL player.

Whether Savoie was a bad draft pick is a different matter, TBD.
- BuffaloHerd

good post.

and what makes savoie a "bad" draft pick anyway? What makes him a good one?

There is no evidence they can.
- washedup20

I beg to differ, but I understand your view of this franchise.

Good or bad pick is irrelevant - trading pick was more valuable to the core two years ago. The same core that is still in place and has shown little to any real improvements.

Desperately moving prospects to save his job is the issue, when the plan was to take the long term approach to building a team.

consider this. buium was universally mocked in the top 10.. probably 7 or 8. So what happened?

them moving down three spots, I have significant doubt they wanted him, or they'd take their chances on draft night. they talked up and down about how they'd land a player they like regardless because of how many players were in that tier.

and, they didnt give out the gratuitous "we never thought he'd fall to us" announcement
- TheSabresTaco

You don't think they liked anyone who could have slipped? Think it was just too much trade value to turn down....then they squandered it.

to clarify, i dont know if it was right or wrong to use savoie on mcleod. we will need to wait to find out. i trust the gamble based on what ive seen in mcleods game, but playing a different team and coach could make a big difference, good or bad.

to clarify, i dont know if it was right or wrong to use savoie on mcleod. we will need to wait to find out. i trust the gamble based on what ive seen in mcleods game, but playing a different team and coach could make a big difference, good or bad.
- TheSabresTaco

Was Skinner the best trade the organization made under Terry?

What NHL player acquired using prospects in a trade has worked out for the Sabres?

Tuch is clearly the most effective player, at the cost of losing Eichel though.

but what we need to ask ourselves is, why did his value decrease? why was kevyn willing to use him over everyone else, including 11 or 14?
- TheSabresTaco

Honestly, I think the big reason his stock decreased was due to the CHL age issue. He had 5pts in 6 AHL games. If he was there all season and produces even remotely close to that clip, we're hearing a better name come back in return. Or rather, his biggest draw back that lessened his value was a lack of pro games at his age, something he had no control over and wasn't due to a lack of ability.

As Cong points out, I'm not Savoie's biggest fan either. I just never saw a top line talent, game changer, like he was being touted to be. But I keep trying to remember this. In the end, I just don't like the player he got in return. I'm praying I'm dead wrong if that matters at all.

You don't think they liked anyone who could have slipped? Think it was just too much trade value to turn down....then they squandered it.
- Lunaion

i wont disagree with the squandering, even with the modest chances of a 2nd round pick being a long term NHL player, let alone an impactful one.

this study done in 2020 suggests about 17% to play 100 games

https://dobberprospects.c...draft-pick-probabilities/



So, to get the player they clearly wanted to start reforming the bottom 6, they played the odds. I don't agree with it (the price), but so be it. I won't lose sleep over it until we see what Cole Hutson can do.

Good or bad pick is irrelevant - trading pick was more valuable to the core two years ago. The same core that is still in place and has shown little to any real improvements.

Desperately moving prospects to save his job is the issue, when the plan was to take the long term approach to building a team.
- washedup20

Do you disagree with using prospects on players or do you disagree we should have ever used the picks in the first place

What about Zach? *sad face*
- DirtyDan

Thought Quinn was hurt and that's why lines were switching. Benson is where Quinn would be. Someone said something about a rumor or McLeod on the Wing. Maybe I misread

You don't think they liked anyone who could have slipped? Think it was just too much trade value to turn down....then they squandered it.
- Lunaion

I'm sure they did, ridiculous to think otherwise. What I mean to say is, I think they were plenty comfortable with a bevy of players expected to be available at both 11 and 14.

Was Skinner the best trade the organization made under Terry?

What NHL player acquired using prospects in a trade has worked out for the Sabres?

Tuch is clearly the most effective player, at the cost of losing Eichel though.
- washedup20

Under Terry? Good question. At time of acquisition.... Skinner and ROR are probably your best trades. Pominville wasn't too bad although I wish we still had Foligno. Tuch was good but Krebs Greenway and Ostlund have not raised that bar. Levi and Kulich for Reinhart could be ok. Johannson for Novikov has legs.

Getting ROR for what amounts to be Zadorov and Compher was good value. Getting Thompson and Johnson for him has generally worked out thus far.

Was Skinner the best trade the organization made under Terry?

What NHL player acquired using prospects in a trade has worked out for the Sabres?

Tuch is clearly the most effective player, at the cost of losing Eichel though.
- washedup20

In hindsight, paying Guhle and Tracey for Montour was a hell of a trade for us. We just squandered it.

Because if said player had any experience, their value would rise. I think even 1 year in the AHL, which he likely gets NHL games, but even with that I think you can get a lot more.
- QuinnFan

I agree and I typically don't like trading prospects until you know what they are. I just accepted that to fill the 3rd line center position we needed to trade a good prospect and for me some of our other prospects might be a better fit (rather it be Savoie than Wahlberg). If they didn't trade one of our top five prospects, then we likely getting Zemgus 2.0 for a 3rd line center. Edmon. gambling on what Savoie becomes and Sabres taking a chance on how McLeod works out for us.

Do you disagree with using prospects on players or do you disagree we should have ever used the picks in the first place
- TheSabresTaco

The picks needed to be dealt to improve the NHL roster two years ago, waiting 2 years alone lowers the value.

Is it reasonable to say that Adams still doesn't know what he has on the roster due to the losing and consistent failures?

Even with the moves made this season, hope is all this organization has.

Under Terry? Good question. At time of acquisition.... Skinner and ROR are probably your best trades. Pominville wasn't too bad although I wish we still had Foligno. Tuch was good but Krebs Greenway and Ostlund have not raised that bar. Levi and Kulich for Reinhart could be ok. Johannson for Novikov has legs.

Getting ROR for what amounts to be Zadorov and Compher was good value. Getting Thompson and Johnson for him has generally worked out thus far.
- TheSabresTaco

I forgot about Ror, touché.

how would people feel if we traded down 3 spots for malenstyn? better or worse? keep in mind, do not use hindsight of how the draft fell, and how scouts believed the tier between around 7-20 was more or less the same abled player.
- TheSabresTaco

I think Adams screwed up with that trade back, so I don't consider it a free pick either way.

In hindsight, paying Guhle and Tracey for Montour was a hell of a trade for us. We just squandered it.
- QuinnFan

I'm sure they did, ridiculous to think otherwise. What I mean to say is, I think they were plenty comfortable with a bevy of players expected to be available at both 11 and 14.
- TheSabresTaco

What we'll never know is if they were happy with the way it played out. I'd bet they had a different plan for a 2nd when they made the trade.

Honestly, I think the big reason his stock decreased was due to the CHL age issue. He had 5pts in 6 AHL games. If he was there all season and produces even remotely close to that clip, we're hearing a better name come back in return. Or rather, his biggest draw back that lessened his value was a lack of pro games at his age, something he had no control over and wasn't due to a lack of ability.

As Cong points out, I'm not Savoie's biggest fan either. I just never saw a top line talent, game changer, like he was being touted to be. But I keep trying to remember this. In the end, I just don't like the player he got in return. I'm praying I'm dead wrong if that matters at all.
- QuinnFan

So it's less about losing matt savoie and more about gaining ryan mcleod. That's fair.

I also refuse to believe that savoie's value was down simply because he didn't have the opportunity to play in rochester. that would be smooth brain management. there are plenty of players who get stuck in junior for D+2 who aren't shipped away. I just think there was a lot more going on than 'well he put up a lot of points as a 19/20 yo'.

I would think it comes down to his injury history, which is becoming extensive, the fact a top 10 pick didnt make his D+1 WJC team, his size and how effective he is perceived to be once he has to play against NHL players.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/25/fbi-director-trump-shooting
- homiedclown

Nothing but a flesh wound.

In hindsight, paying Guhle and Tracey for Montour was a hell of a trade for us. We just squandered it.
- QuinnFan

ah yes, the last remnants of evander kane. good pull

Damn that video of Kim Pegula today really hits the feels.

I agree and I typically don't like trading prospects until you know what they are. I just accepted that to fill the 3rd line center position we needed to trade a good prospect and for me some of our other prospects might be a better fit (rather it be Savoie than Wahlberg). If they didn't trade one of our top five prospects, then we likely getting Zemgus 2.0 for a 3rd line center. Edmon. gambling on what Savoie becomes and Sabres taking a chance on how McLeod works out for us.
- BuffaloHerd

Fair enough. Think I'd log this under the, "we needed a 3C no matter what", category. It's true. Can't argue.