I mostly agree
But bc (right now) we have so many extra NHLers...
i don’t think guys like Olofsson, Smith, and even Thompson should be considered for the opening night lineup unless they just look amazing in Camp

As far as out top LW candidates go...
I’d have to add Berglund to the mix, but he could obviously be out 3C as well

I’d be cool seeing E Rod get a shot to play with Eichel
He had a pretty decent season last year,
and they’ve obviously had chemistry in the past
Can’t hurt to play him there for 10 games or so & see how it goes

I think 3-5games is too short of a trial
Drives me crazy when a young kid has a bad game or 2 and then gets busted down to the 4th line
Gotta give them a chance to correct mistakes & see how they respond imo
- jdfitz77

I disagree there. If you're picking between a kid to play with Eichel - and I think sometimes people think of Olofsson as a kid when really he is only a year and a half younger than Girgensons - the coach needs to consider who is going to be better with Eichel 3 months into the season, not just the beginning. We need to think about upside and progress made vs the relative safety and low upside of playing Wilson with Eichel instead of someone else

I see Buffalo making a trade with NJ for LW Miles Wood. From Buffalo and played at Boston College. Last year for the Devils 76gp 19g 13a. Looks like the type of player Botts would want. Also, his dad Randy played here.

A player will be considered a prospect until he meets the following criteria:

If a prospect is a skater (forward, defenseman) and has played in 65 NHL games or more before the completion of the season of his 24th birthday; or, if a goaltender has played in 45 NHL games before the completion of the season of his 24th birthday, that player will be considered graduated to the NHL. Conversely, if a player completes the season of his 24th birthday without passing those milestones, then that player will no longer be considered a prospect by Hockey’s Future, regardless of the player’s status with his NHL club.

An NCAA player who signs his first contract at or above the age of 22 has three years to meet the above criteria (65/45), while those NCAA players that turn pro under the age of 22 will be subjected to the criteria above.

European players who sign their first NHL contract at or above the age of 22 have three seasons from the time they sign that contract to meet the above criteria. Those European players below the age of 22 that have signed a NHL contract will be subjected to the criteria in section one.

Section one is the meat of the criteria as it will govern the majority of players that vie for a NHL roster spot. Sections two and three are simply an acknowledgement that some prospects arrive on the scene a bit later than their peers, thus needing some time past their 24th birthday to develop into an NHL-caliber player.

The graduated list on team pages will consist of players who are considered graduated to the NHL. A skater prospect may sit on the graduated list until he has played 130 games in the NHL. A goalie prospect may sit on the graduated list until he has played 90 games in the NHL.

NOTE: These are general guidelines and should be followed the majority of the time but certain players may still be listed as prospects if circumstances warrant. Also, for players that are close to either the 65-game (skaters) or 45-game (goaltenders) benchmark but have also clearly "arrived" as NHL players, HF reserves the right to remove these players from consideration as prospects and instead consider these players graduated.


http://www.hockeysfuture.com/whatmakesaprospect/
- jochfr

Thank you for providing this definition, but this whole argument is a giant "who gives a poop" if you ask me.

Its a consolation prize. Who (frank)ing cares.

Tell me how the team is going to be, don't tell me how it's "prospects" may or may not look a few years from now if they are still here and part of our system and haven't been injured or become addicted to hookers and blow.

Thank you for providing this definition, but this whole argument is a giant "who gives a poop" if you ask me.

Its a consolation prize. Who (frank)ing cares.

Tell me how the team is going to be, don't tell me how it's "prospects" may or may not look a few years from now if they are still here and part of our system and haven't been injured or become addicted to hookers and blow.
- Der Kaiser

What about the drab and damp-looking uniforms?

What about the drab and damp-looking uniforms?
- jcragcrumple

I do NOT see them MOPE.

I can't take anything that's Sabres-associated seriously until I see an actual product on the ice. Not horribly contrasted and damp looking uniforms and a bunch of undisciplined idiots, but a well-dressed and entertaining game and an atmosphere that doesn't drag with paper fans and drunk morons who don't know how to root for a team whether it's losing or not. Obviously the losing has a lot to do with it but I don't like how a miserable on-ice attitude has been allowed to drag on this entire time.

Ted Nolan wouldn't have been such a bad last few years and we still would have finished last. For a guy who loves his "Sabres Alumni", Terry Pegula sure has run through quite a few of them since he's bought the team.

It's no excuse for lazy management this last several years, in any case. The marketing is stale, the presentation is old, the tone is flat and the environment is empty of any kind of emotion. It's all just a ho-hum attitude from the top down, and the fanbase isn't free of this criticism, either. The players live like the populace does in Buffalo.

Criticize Jack and Sam for supposedly being drinkers who stay up until the sun comes up on game days and still show up to work, yeah, how dare they. They aren't Jim-Kellying around town or driving into buildings and literally every single player ever does that when they're young and grinding the schedule.

I do see them go through the motions but I do NOT see them mope. I have seen a few players mope and be invisible leaders in a confused locker-room that's clearly hostile because they don't have a healthy work environment.

It's still a (frank)ing poop-show and until it actually appears as a consistent and entertaining on-ice product, then there's no point in repeating the same things Ad nauseam and taking blog discussion so seriously that it interferes with your everyday life.

If I were Housley, I'd frame training camp as a 3-way battle for Eichel's LW between Erod, Nylander and Olofsson

I like Sheary with Mitts because he gives mitts some speed and proven goalscoring.

So say Reinhart is with Eichel, and the second line is Sheary, Mitts and Okposo, give Erod, Nylander and Olofsson practice time with Eichel, and give each at least a half of a preseason game.

Best man wins, and ride it out for at least 3-5 games to start the year. One of those guys offers higher potential than Wilson or Girgensons there. I'm so sick of people coaching scared. Take a chance on a younger guy being good
- jcragcrumple

Not a bad thought at all and totally agree about the "safe coaching". I would remove Olofsson from that list though, it isn't that I don't think he's good, he's one of the more exciting prospects we have I believe, but I don't want him to adapt to the NA game, on the 1st line, in the NHL. I think that's rushing him a bit too much and, as we've seen in the past, rushing prospects doesn't turn out.

Still think Sheary is Eichel's guy, with E-Rod as Mitts' guy, but this is interesting. I think experimenting in preseason and camp is an absolute must either way.

I don’t think a rookie is a prospect
Again, to me, a prospect means a guy that isn’t here yet
So sure, as of TODAY, technically Dahlin & Mittelstadt are both prospects
But in reality, since we all know they’ll be Sabres this year, they shouldn’t be listed that way
Same for a guy like Svechnikov in Carolina, etc

There’s a difference between being a “prospect” and a young player
- jdfitz77

Honestly, I think that's ridiculous as the prospect rankings always show players who haven't played in the NHL yet. Mitts, I guess, you can argue because he played a handful of games, but to not include Svech or Dahlin is pretty much making it harder for teams drafting top3 to be at the top of these rankings. You're essentially subtracting the first round selections of those teams, yet leaving the ones taken that will take longer to develop and play.

Much respect as always fitz, just think you're off on this one. Either way, I think that we're at the top for a reason...we do have a strong young core. Who are you most excited for outside of Mitts and Dahlin?

I can't take anything that's Sabres-associated seriously until I see an actual product on the ice. Not horribly contrasted and damp looking uniforms and a bunch of undisciplined idiots, but a well-dressed and entertaining game and an atmosphere that doesn't drag with paper fans and drunk morons who don't know how to root for a team whether it's losing or not. Obviously the losing has a lot to do with it but I don't like how a miserable on-ice attitude has been allowed to drag on this entire time.

Ted Nolan wouldn't have been such a bad last few years and we still would have finished last. For a guy who loves his "Sabres Alumni", Terry Pegula sure has run through quite a few of them since he's bought the team.

It's no excuse for lazy management this last several years, in any case. The marketing is stale, the presentation is old, the tone is flat and the environment is empty of any kind of emotion. It's all just a ho-hum attitude from the top down, and the fanbase isn't free of this criticism, either. The players live like the populace does in Buffalo.

Criticize Jack and Sam for supposedly being drinkers who stay up until the sun comes up on game days and still show up to work, yeah, how dare they. They aren't Jim-Kellying around town or driving into buildings and literally every single player ever does that when they're young and grinding the schedule.

I do see them go through the motions but I do NOT see them mope. I have seen a few players mope and be invisible leaders in a confused locker-room that's clearly hostile because they don't have a healthy work environment.

It's still a (frank)ing poop-show and until it actually appears as a consistent and entertaining on-ice product, then there's no point in repeating the same things Ad nauseam and taking blog discussion so seriously that it interferes with your everyday life.
- Der Kaiser

Great well composed thoughts.

I just think that most players drink when they are young. Not every single player. Most drink, but to what degree is the important part. Does it affect their job performance?

Seams like were are getting away from the good ole Canadian hockey drinker prospect.

Swedes are in, chl players out with the new regime

I don’t think a rookie is a prospect
Again, to me, a prospect means a guy that isn’t here yet
So sure, as of TODAY, technically Dahlin & Mittelstadt are both prospects
But in reality, since we all know they’ll be Sabres this year, they shouldn’t be listed that way
Same for a guy like Svechnikov in Carolina, etc

There’s a difference between being a “prospect” and a young player
- jdfitz77

The guy laid out his criteria and wrote a solid article. There's really no reason to criticize the criteria.

If you want to make up your own criteria, then you have to reconcile not including 18 year olds with 0 professional games and including a 24 year olds with 100+ professional games.

Great well composed thoughts.

I just think that most players drink when they are young. Not every single player. Most drink, but to what degree is the important part. Does it affect their job performance?

Seams like were are getting away from the good ole Canadian hockey drinker prospect.

Swedes are in, chl players out with the new regime
- Boss34

The author of those thoughts is a certifiable maniac

I disagree there. If you're picking between a kid to play with Eichel - and I think sometimes people think of Olofsson as a kid when really he is only a year and a half younger than Girgensons - the coach needs to consider who is going to be better with Eichel 3 months into the season, not just the beginning. We need to think about upside and progress made vs the relative safety and low upside of playing Wilson with Eichel instead of someone else
- jcragcrumple

It's a giant red flag to me that Olofsson is often referred to as a power play specialist. Curious to see him in camp, but thinking he's ready to play on the top line feels like wishful thinking.

I wish the SHL provided better stats. I saw that 5 of his first 12 goals were on the PP, but haven't found totals. Would love to see ice time stats as well. I'm not even sure he was on their top line.

Some time in Rochester just seems prudent.

It's a giant red flag to me that Olofsson is often referred to as a power play specialist. Curious to see him in camp, but thinking he's ready to play on the top line feels like wishful thinking.

I wish the SHL provided better stats. I saw that 5 of his first 12 goals were on the PP, but haven't found totals. Would love to see ice time stats as well. I'm not even sure he was on their top line.

Some time in Rochester just seems prudent.
- Lunaion

I'd rather take a chance with him or Nylander than feed Sobotka, Wilson or Girgensons top-6 minutes

I'd rather take a chance with him or Nylander than feed Sobotka, Wilson or Girgensons top-6 minutes
- jcragcrumple

Give the kids a shot out of camp, if they don't earn the spot for opening night send them to ROC to get a little fire in their belly and then hand the keys over to the youngins on or before Dec 1.

My 2 cents ([TM] HomieDClown.)

I'd rather take a chance with him or Nylander than feed Sobotka, Wilson or Girgensons top-6 minutes
- jcragcrumple

I think it's Sheary. Berglund or Sobotka with Mitts. Nylander and Smith have a fair opportunity. Everyone else is a longshot.

She always wanted a man in her life.
- 51_Killer

OH MY

Give the kids a shot out of camp, if they don't earn the spot for opening night send them to ROC to get a little fire in their belly and then hand the keys over to the youngins on or before Dec 1.

My 2 cents (
- Der Kaiser[TM] HomieDClown.)

I think it's Sheary. Berglund or Sobotka with Mitts. Nylander and Smith have a fair opportunity. Everyone else is a longshot.
- Lunaion

I'd rather have him at 3C.

Sobotka's career high in goals is 10. That's the wrong answer imo

I'd rather have him at 3C.

Sobotka's career high in goals is 10. That's the wrong answer imo
- jcragcrumple

They're both solid 2 way players, the kind of guys they need with Mitts. If I had to pick, it's Berglund at LW and Sobotka at 3C.

OH MY
- homiedclown

" Punch him in the face ED"

A player will be considered a prospect until he meets the following criteria:

If a prospect is a skater (forward, defenseman) and has played in 65 NHL games or more before the completion of the season of his 24th birthday; or, if a goaltender has played in 45 NHL games before the completion of the season of his 24th birthday, that player will be considered graduated to the NHL. Conversely, if a player completes the season of his 24th birthday without passing those milestones, then that player will no longer be considered a prospect by Hockey’s Future, regardless of the player’s status with his NHL club.

An NCAA player who signs his first contract at or above the age of 22 has three years to meet the above criteria (65/45), while those NCAA players that turn pro under the age of 22 will be subjected to the criteria above.

European players who sign their first NHL contract at or above the age of 22 have three seasons from the time they sign that contract to meet the above criteria. Those European players below the age of 22 that have signed a NHL contract will be subjected to the criteria in section one.

Section one is the meat of the criteria as it will govern the majority of players that vie for a NHL roster spot. Sections two and three are simply an acknowledgement that some prospects arrive on the scene a bit later than their peers, thus needing some time past their 24th birthday to develop into an NHL-caliber player.

The graduated list on team pages will consist of players who are considered graduated to the NHL. A skater prospect may sit on the graduated list until he has played 130 games in the NHL. A goalie prospect may sit on the graduated list until he has played 90 games in the NHL.

NOTE: These are general guidelines and should be followed the majority of the time but certain players may still be listed as prospects if circumstances warrant. Also, for players that are close to either the 65-game (skaters) or 45-game (goaltenders) benchmark but have also clearly "arrived" as NHL players, HF reserves the right to remove these players from consideration as prospects and instead consider these players graduated.


http://www.hockeysfuture.com/whatmakesaprospect/
- jochfr

That’s Hockey’s Future’s definition of a prospect

I clearly laid out why mine is different

Calling someone a “prospect” when they’re on your roster doesn’t make much sense to me

Going by their definition,
Dahlin & Mittelstadt will be prospects for 3/4 of the season & then all of the sudden not
That 65 game number seems more appropriate for guys like Bailey, Baptiste, etc who have been up & down from Buffalo & Rochester

I disagree there. If you're picking between a kid to play with Eichel - and I think sometimes people think of Olofsson as a kid when really he is only a year and a half younger than Girgensons - the coach needs to consider who is going to be better with Eichel 3 months into the season, not just the beginning. We need to think about upside and progress made vs the relative safety and low upside of playing Wilson with Eichel instead of someone else
- jcragcrumple

If we didn’t have all the extra forwards,
I’d agree
I’m mostly talking about the numbers game that’s involved with our roster right now

I see Buffalo making a trade with NJ for LW Miles Wood. From Buffalo and played at Boston College. Last year for the Devils 76gp 19g 13a. Looks like the type of player Botts would want. Also, his dad Randy played here.
- adambuffalo

I like him too
Fast skating, kinda scrappy and (for Sbroads) scores almost all his goals 5v5

If we didn’t have all the extra forwards,
I’d agree
I’m mostly talking about the numbers game that’s involved with our roster right now
- jdfitz77

I would waive or trade anyone necessary to ice the best team possible. If O'Regan, Pu and Nylander are better than Girgensons, Larsson and Bailey, then you waive those guys. You can't tell your guys you're trying to win when they know you're not playing the best players

" Punch him in the face ED"
- SABRES 89

No half steps, Walter.