mjd1001

I posted this in another thread, but it applies to your post. I agree most of what you said. And yes, Krebs and Cozens can get better/get back on track, but something is very worrying: -As in my other post, optimism hit is peak around here on March 2, Sabres had just won 5 of 6, beat Vegas 7-2, and were above the .500 points per game mark. I'd honestly say that was the point of peak optimism and things went bad since then. In 17 games since then, Thompson scored 11 goals in those 17 games and 20 points, and has been a plus 11. BUT...Krebs and Cozens. Starting that stretch, the stretch that was going to determine whether you made the playoffs or not...They both played 18 games, both had 1 single goal each in those 18 games, and were both minus players.

I think it was the March 7nd game against Vegas (a 7-2 win) that optimism for this team possibly making a run at the playoffs hit a peak. They had just won their 5th in 6 games (wins over Carolina, Tampa, and Vegas of course), the only loss being a 1 goal loss to Florida in Florida, and they passed the .500 point percentage for the first time in a long time. Since then, things haven't gone well. Who exactly showed up and who didn't since then during the stretch to the playoffs, that obviously failed: -Tage showed up. 11 goals, 20 points, +11 in 17 games (53 goal, 96 point, +53 pace projected over 82 games) -Peterka, 9 goals in 18 games. -Tuch, 18 points in 18 games. Who didn't? Cozens. 1 goal. 5 points. -3. In 18 games. I get it, he's 23. But is risky to rely on Cozens as your #2 center next year.

What was I wrong about. Of course, if replying to what I said makes you feel better without telling me what is wrong...I guess good for you. I don't know if it fascinates or me more, or if its something else that when I make a comment about people swearing...all that stuff I said in my previous posts...that SO many come back at me and defend that behavior. Mind you, I'm not talking about criticizing the team and wanting them to be better...I get that...but so many people want to criticize me for pointing out the level of hatred and ill-wishing onto others that some have embraced.

Not even close, that isn't anywhere near what I was saying. But I guess you (and others) want to swear, say people are useless, wish for them to lose jobs...etc....THAT is ok, but its not me OK for me to say I agree with the concept of some of it, but don't like the level of hatred and swearing that is being used here? Yeah, take what I said to the level you did...lol, if that makes you feel better, because you are just wrong. Wanting more is expected. Saying you want changes, explaining why...yeah, that is totally expected. But as per my other posts right above, my comment was not about those things, my post is about the fact there is so much hatred and foul language and ill wishing here. If you people can't tell the difference, or you think its acceptable to feel that way because your hockey team is losing...wow.

Yes, but there is a difference between wanting better....and the level of hatred that some are filling up these threads with. See, that is my problem. If there is a binary choice of "joining the hate" or "don't come on a message board"...yeah, that is bad and that says, at the very least, something about the people who want to hate and spill vitriol and don't like it when people like me say its a bit over the top. Join the angry mob or go away! um...no thanks.

Wow, the name calling, complaining, vulgarity, becuase a HOCKEY team we follow is losing? Fire people! Swearing in comments (or wanting to) so ***** must be used, Players and the team 'sucks ass', guys are 'useless' or 'wastes of space'. Really? I think all of us want this team to win, but does being so negative, so full of hate and vitriol at a hockey team and needing to express it that way make all of you feel better?

Which means they are a lot better once you hit the first intermission, meaning the coaches are great at making adjustments. It can be argued either way. To me wins and losses, goals scored vs allowed across the entire game matter, when goals are scored vs allowed mean virtually nothing compared to the totals across the entire game.

3 points is what they will miss by

Agreed. Goalies recently seem to be paid less than other players, maybe its because they CAN be inconsistent year to year. But when you do have a quality starting level goalie, they are more important to your team than all but the very top stars on the rest of your roster. You think you have a guy, give him the market rate pay, especially when the market rate pay is right now more affordable for goalies than it is for other positions.

We are all like that at times. With me its Krebs and Cousins (although I think they, especially cousins, is finally playing better.) The team isn't in the playoffs. Its been a while. Yeah, no one likes that, but making changes, changing players, changing coaches, that isn't always the answer. It may be the answer at times, it may make us feel better because "something is being done" but often times, that terrible word (patience) is what you need just a little more of.

I'm not sure why we say the Flyers are inferior enough on paper than the Sabre that its an issue. Philly has 8 of their top 10 scoring forwards as former first round picks, 2 of them in the top 10. They have really no rookies or first year players, but they have a good mix of guys in their early 20's, late 20's and guys in their 30s. Their top 2 D-men are also former first round picks, and they have a really good mix of veterans back there that actuall are still productive. The Sabres have a few more top 10 picks than the Flyers, but that Philly team is under-rated in terms of talent, and they are older/have a better mix of veterans than the Sabres do. In terms of 'talent and pedigree' they really aren't lacking guys with skill, and 'on paper' they are a more experienced team than Buffalo. Last year I looked at Philly's roster and thought they were in trouble, but when I look at who they have...sure no 'elite' talent, first or 2nd overall picks, but on paper they do have a lot of talent, it may even be one of the 'better constructed' rosters out there.

He wasn't that bad. It really was when the calendar changed to 2024 he really heated up. The 'half season' of production starting January 1st to now: 32 starts, .921 save percentage, 2.25 gaa The 'bad' half season before that: 15 starts, .892 save percentage, 3.13 gaa Comrie? .864 save percentage, 3.91 gaa, and 1 win in 9 starts. Even the 'bad' UPL was no where near, not even close to as bad as Comrie has been this year.

I saw Gretzky as a kid..and Jagr, and Ovi, Lindros (for his short prime) and McDavid and Matthews. For me, no one was more terrifying, more unstoppable than Mario Lemieux in his prime. In my hockey lifetime, 2 guys were head and shoulders above that entire list. Lemieux and Hasek. When they were on, the closest things to a literal hockey interpretation of an irresistible force and an immovable object. Back to the original point though..when you take into consideration pure observable talent, longevity, production at the peak of their career....I believe Ovi is the best pure goal scorer I have ever seen.

I'm going to repeat what stands out to me, this defense group, top to bottom is a lot better than many give credit to WHEN the forwards support them in their own end just at an average level. Everyone on the D-group looks bad when the forwards would float near the blue line, lost 70% of loose puck battles in the D-zone or just vacate entire areas of the ice. Since the first of the year, something happened where the forwards got a lot better in their own zone, and guess what? The defense looks a LOT better. Not perfect, not the best group in the league, but from Dahlin at the top of the lineup to the bottom, including guys like Bryson and Clifton, they all look like real NHL quality guys back there. Does that mean that Bryson and Clifton will never make mistakes again costing the team goals? No, but to me it means they are true, quality 3rd pair guys that can function on a winning team, not borderline AHL guys that are only playing because there is no better option. For the last 2 years in the Eastern conference, every single team that had a positive goal differential for the year made the playoffs (16 teams were positive, all 16 made the playoffs) and every single team that had a negative goal differential missed the playoffs (16 for 16 there too). Sabres now have a positive goal differential for the year.

I really do think you are looking at $4.5m for 3 or 4 years. If I had to guess I think that is the asking price. For those who say you don't go over $4m....if he refuses to sign a multi-year deal unless you bumped it up to the $4.5-5m range...what do you do? Look to move him? Let him go to arbitration where every once in a while you get some crazy numbers? I think Samsanov went to arbitraion in Toronto last year if I'm not mistaken. His numbers were slightly better overall, but not as good as the run UPL is on. The 3.6m he got in arbitration, I guess that would be equivilant to $3.8-$4 with a higher projected cap, so many an arbitration award wouldn't be that bad for one year. But then if he has another good year, the price goes WAY up the following year.

Ok, last time they played was back in November, these are different teams now. Back then, Sabres lost 5-1. Eric Johnson had 17 minutes of ice time. Samuelsson played but got hurt during the game. Rousek, Biro, Okposo, and Mitts played (all of them had 14 minutes or more of ice time), and Quinn did not play. UPL started, allowed 5 goals on just 17 shots, a 0.737 save percentage for the game. Of course, the Sabres did beat the Flyers just a few days before that game 5-2, a game UPL stopped 30 of 32 shots and Brandon Biro had 2 goals. It seems to me this is the type of team the Sabres don't match up well against (not as talented, but harder working). I feel pretty good about this one tonight though, I think this is another win for the Sabres.

I agree. But this is the reason why a 3 year deal with him make just so much sense. Even if you beleilve in Levi, there is nothing wrong with Levi being a backup, or them coming close to splitting starts. Lets say you pay UPL for 3-4 years, and he is who he is (average to above average at least) AND Levi comes on strong and becomes very good to great....what do you do with UPL? you now have a VERY good backup...OR a very, VERY good trade piece.

Maybe I got wordy and didn't choose my words well, but I think we do agree. I'm saying that you do sign him, you do not quibble over a little money, that he is that important to the team that you just get it done.

I agree that is likely and probably make sense. If he is demanding $4.5-$5, and him and his agent don't move off of that, I'm not sure at some point I don't try to make a deal. I think fair value for him is probably $4m or a bit more based on his age, pedigree, and recent peformance, as well as comparables. With this team needing a little stability in goal, I'm just not sure I play hardball over an extra $0.5-1M per year at a position that is so important to this team now and you likely will not mave many other options. I think that number would be a bit high and he'd take it for sure. I'm all for slightly overpaying him, and even I think that is high..

I think I look at him more positively because I think his positives outweigh his negatives, and I think many of his negatives are a result of those around him. However, I can see and understand some of your points. "Clean up" is a good word, as I think he is capable of doing those things. We have to remember, Dahlin is still so young and inexperienced. When you look at D-men that are 2-way guys (known for both their offensive play as well as their defensive/physical play), You look at Hedman (33 years old, 1207 career games), Josh Morrissey (29 years old, 614 games) Adam Fox (26 years old, 381 games), Roman Josi (33 years old, 988 games), Charlie McAvoy(26 years old, 530 games played). Dahlin is still only 23 years old, has 430 games but none of those are playoff games and most of them were with a losing team. He still is young and learning, D-men take a while to fully develop so I'm still very hopeful with him. When you look at all of those guys I listed none of them (not even Hedman) were considered as good as they are when they were 23 years old.

I posted this a couple months ago, regarding comparables......and this was when he was just starting to play better, he has a longer stretch of good play since this was posted....UPL will likely have 45-50 career wins at the end of this year with 5 or more shutouts. Also keep in mind the goalies listed below were signed with a lower cap. I would expect any of those deals if signed this year would be 5% higher with the cap going up since then. UPL was drafted in the 2nd round in 2017....so..I thought I'd look up what other goalies were drafted in the year or two before him (that might be on their 2nd contract now), how successful they have been and what they got paid at a similar point in their career: -Connor Ingram (3rd rounder, 2016). Waiver pickup. 3 yr, $5.85m contract. (1.95 per year) 7 career wins upon signing -Philp Gustavsson (2nd rounder, 2016). 3 yr, $11.25m contract. (3.75 per year) 32 wins upon signing -Carter Hart (2nd round, 2016). 3 yr, $11.9m contract. (3.97 per year) 49 career wins upon signing -MacKenzie Blackwood (2nd round, 2015). 3 yr, $8.4m contact (2.8 per year) 24 career wins upon signing -Ilya Samsonov (late 1st round, 2015). 1yr, $3.5m contact. (3.5 per year) 79 career wins upon signing

I think you need him here next year, and hopfully a bit beyond, so like everything else, you negotiate and see what he and his agent think is market is. The Sabres aren't up against the cap now, so I don't cheap out on a deal. It would be different if he wanted 7 years for 56 million....that isn't happening, so I'm willing to overpay (if needed) on a short to medium term deal in order to keep him here. I know some will say don't overpay him, he's only been good for half of a season. I get that, but to me, you can't risk not having him here next year or trading him because he demands a contract that you can easily fit under the cap. You gave Clifton 3.3 million for 3 years, and even if he never played again that contract isn't going to sink your cap or your team. You gave Samuelsson 4.3 million long term. UPL has potentially (and LIKELY) much more value to the team than any of them. So yeah, get the best deal you can, but don't cheap out and risk him going to arbitration (possibly getting more than you would give him in a medium term deal) and eventually him wanting out.

I, like many, grew up less than 10 miles from the Canadian Border. After leaving Western NY after college, for the last decade or so I'm back and I can walk down the street now and see Canada. Saturday nights were Hockey Night in Canada on TV...and a lot of time growing up was spent watching CBC and CBLT. I'm no stranger to Canada or Canadian televsion. But, I found that 'Canadian televsion comedy' was something I just didn't always like. John Candy, in more 'american' movies was great. Jim Carrey, Ryan Reynolds, Seth Rogen, Dan Akroyd....we all know the list of many others, I like a lot of their stuff, but the stuff I usually like is the 'american-ized/usa based' stuff. A lot of the Stuff out of Canada though...SCTV, Kids in the Hall, Degrassi, Trailer Park Boys, Schitts Creek...I don't know, I can't seem to get into any of it. Super Dave, Strange brew (as a kid) and Kim's Convenience are just a few I liked. But the rest, I don't know, I just could never get into the stuff out of Canada.

My opinion has always been the ultimate solution is for the NHL to fine players for anything dangerous. Anything that can cause an escalation, anything that could justify a fight, you fine. If the refs don't see it, but its on camera (and EVERYTHIGN is on camera) you fine it. The whole thing of 'its a physical game its going to happen' doesn't hold for me because the NFL is a lot more physical, and you don't see fights much in the NFL you don't see people taking out other players from behind every single game...not nearly as much as you would think. Why? the NFL fines that stuff. Again, the players union doesn't want it, but start fining guys for all the cheap stuff, whether it leads to an injury or not, and it'll go way down. I just personally don't like the cheap stuff at all.

True, if I look at them so far: -Tage. Think it should still be a good deal. I do think he is still playing hurt, even with that he is likely to score 30. Over the last 3 years, including this 'bad' year, he has 112 goals in 221 games (almost a 42 goal per 82 rate) What is the 'market rate' for a guy who has the potential to get 50, his bad year is about 30, has a 3 year average of close to 40...and is 26 years old? I think this is a really good extension. -Cozens. Well, he only has 1 really good year. Hes likely to be in the high teens this year in goals, and he has improved to me in his own end and has not become a pretty decent (not GOOD but decent) 2-way forward. If he gives you 15-20 goals per year, not an awful deal but probably not a good one. He gives you 30 or more like he did last year and its a good deal. Someplace in between (low to mid 20's) and its probably a wash between a good or bad deal. -Dahlin. He's the best player on the team. I think he is under-rated by many posters on this board. He is a top 10 Dman in the league right now, and has potential to be a Norris trophy winner. Your paying a lot, but you locked up a 23 year old elite level D-man long term. I think its a good deal. -Samuelsson. Probably not a good deal. Just simply becuase he is not durable. One injury is nothing, a couple still may not be a trend, but with how many times he has gotten hurt it is a trend. You aren't paying him a ton so its probaly a bad deal (at this piont) but its not sinking the franchise. -Power. This is really a toss up. At the moment he is not worth next years salary, probably won't be worth it next year, but at any time he is capable of become a very good-to-great D-man and being worth it. Its just going to take a while.