JohnC

What does a pessimist look like?

Rumor: Kane to Edmonton. I saw a scroll on ESPN suggesting that Kane could end up in Edmonton. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-LKAEhVDRY

We don't always agree but on the goalie issue we are in accord. I'm just hoping that the GM comes up with a reasonable addition to the backstop position, even if it is for the short-term. I do believe that for the most part Lance's thoughts reflect the GM's line of thought.

I'm not attempting to over-inflate Joki's talents. He may be a border-line second or good third pairing player. The issue becomes is the GM willing to pay for a second-pairing caliber of player to play with Power? And is that type of player available? I consider Joki more of a subordinate type of defenseman who doesn't lead the pairing but allows the primary player to dominate the play with his more expansive talent. He does that. And let me add that I still think there is more upside to his game to draw from. What I'm never going to complain about is a player moved down the ranks because of a better player is found. That in itself reflects a roster getting better and progress in general.

When you have been diminished by someone and then elevated by someone else, you become determined to repay that exhibition of confidence in you. Good people skills and a talent to manage people is something you have or don't. KA has it. A good leader who earns the trust of his workers gets paid in spades by better performances.

The transactions he suggests are all doable. I'm in the minority here but I thought that Joki worked well with Power. I foresee a veteran defenseman being added to the mix, but it is more likely a third pairing type player. As I said in a prior post it seems that Lysowski is aligned with the GM's thinking.

Within this WGR link is an interview with KA. It's approx. 17 mins. long. What he has said when he took over is what he is saying now. He has a plan and is not deviating from it. KA is clear and consistent. What he says he is going to do is what he is doing. https://www.audacy.com/wgr550/authors/howard-and-jeremy-show

Attached is a link from the Buffalo News where Lance Lysowski plays a GM for a day. Most of his views fall within the framework of continuing to build from within. And his goalie thoughts are moderate and don't include any high end goalies. How he approaches the roster is the same as many here advocate for. I thought his views were moderate and modest. It seems that he is very attuned to what the GM is doing. https://buffalonews.com/sports/sabres/sabres-gm-for-the-day-plotting-a-course-for-a-tricky-offseason/article_9fca37ba-ff97-11ec-8140-0f3e18cdc487.html#tracking-source=home-top-story

Your observation about the prior GMs having the requisite hockey experience but not the people/management skills for the position is very perceptive. The one area where KA doesn't get the credit he deserves is the impressive way he has in a short timeframe rebuilt the organization with a quality staff, starting with Karmonos. All the parts of the hockey operation from the scouting staff, analytical department and coaching staffs throughout the system are working in unison. Every segment of the operation from high and low gives input and are listened to. There is a collaboration and cohesion that was lacking with the prior regimes.

The complaint that I have voiced before is whether Ullmark or any other goalie was signed for whatever term or AAV that doesn't mean that the goalie couldn't be moved before the end of the contract if another goalie moved up the ranks. It happens all the time in this league. Why leave this team vulnerable or put yourself in situation where the options become limited because of a contract consideration that wasn't outlandish? As you point out in the Gibson example, the team would have the option to trade the goalie if the changing circumstances dictated a change of course. And if you also consider our bottom level cap situation, the worry about cost and term becomes even less persuasive. It just seems to me that the GM put himself in a vulnerable situation because he was trying to have the market bend to what he wanted to do when he simply didn't have the ability to control the fluid market. The moral of the story is when you paint yourself in a corner then don't complain that you are boxed in.

You are certainly more attuned to what's going on the inside more than I am. (Always appreciate your insights and commentary.) But I am very skeptical that the GM was seriously interested in procuring a goalie with such long term. However, putting aside the Gibson speculation I hope that the GM will demonstrate the urgency that you see in the Gibson scenario that I haven't seen over the past two years. The GM has done a marvelous job in assembling a lot of young talent that has a lot of room to grow. That's a good situation to be in. But he will be undercutting this young roster unless he supports it with good/competent netminding.

One of the wisest things the newly installed GM did was hire an experienced hockey executive to be his right-hand man. That is a testament to him being secure in himself and being willing to surround himself with experienced and quality staff. One issue he doesn't have is an ego problem. Krueger had plenty of authority during his tenure but that is not something he would have done. As I said in prior posts and as you just underscored, he assembled a top tier staff where everyone is heard and everyone is pulling in the same direction. KA is more of a listener than a talker. And he is more of a collaborator than hierarchical, top- down executive. Without question here is now an organizational coherency and ethos that didn't exist within this organization for a long time.

Some people take it personally when the numbers get crunched. What does it all mean? Little to nothing at all. At least in this exercise.

Your view on this goalie issue is aligned with mine. I'm usually aligned with @dudacek on most issues with the exception of his view that KA was proven right by not adequately addressing the backstop position last year. It's not a stretch to believe that if the GM expanded his contract boundaries a little more to sign Ullmark or had a better option if Ullmark couldn't be signed that this team could have earned at least 10 points more in the standing. That's not a trivial increase for a team that had sunken to the bottom. An 84-point season is better to build on than a 74-point season. And that higher baseline certainly would have offered more optimism to a fading fanbase. Overall, I'm happy with how he has guided the rebuilding of this franchise. He not only has restocked the system through trades and astute drafting but more importantly he has rebuilt and restructured the organization. It is now working in a collaborative and cohesive manner. That in itself may be his most important accomplishment. However, his seemingly lack of urgency to address the most important position on the ice has me perplexed. This has been going on for more than two years. That's simply too long to have such a void at that critical position.

We are talking past one another. I agree with you that if our goaltending isn't upgraded we won't contend for anything. I believe that with improved goaltending this team will be in the playoff race for a full season. That's the source of my frustration.

That's the point of disagreement. I'm not a homer and try to be objective. I strongly believe that if this team has a season full of competent netminding, it could/should be vying for a low rung playoff spot. There is no question that the young players have plenty of room to grow. But I believe that GM has assembled enough talent to be in a season-long hunt for a playoff spot. That in itself would be significant progress.

What you just clearly and concisely stated is the viewpoint of a majority of people. I know I will get a lot of flack back but the GM should have signed Ullmark last year, even if it required him stretching his contract boundaries more than he wanted. In my opinion this team would now be in a better position to succeed sooner rather than later.

This is a Buffalo News column written by Mike Harrington. He discusses the GM's approach to the goalie search, and he also discusses how much the GM places on importance of having players who want to be here and his timeline that influences his decisions. The general thrust of the article parallels what has been said here on these topics. https://buffalonews.com/sports/sabres/mike-harrington-kevyn-adams-doesnt-have-sabres-new-goalie-yet-but-hell-get-one-on/article_be10dc60-fef2-11ec-987d-7bec8413c71d.html

Many of the prospects who get drafted go on to play college hockey for a year or so. Some decide to stay longer. The GM is not a clairvoyant and knows in advance which player is going to stay for four years. Most first round selections don't stay that long. The GM can't control the decisions that his draft selectees make. The bottom line is the prospect was selected in the range of his rankings. You can't fault the GM if the player decided to stay in college until he can become an unrestricted player. And it should be noted that if he does stay in college, he still can decide to sign with Buffalo, and there is also a chance that he decides to start his pro career this year. In this case you can't fault the GM for something he can't control.

Whomever the GM adds to the position will disappoint most of the followers of this team. It seems that his mind-set regarding this position is not the same mind-set of the majority. I would love to be proved wrong but am not counting on it.

Our views on the goalie situation are similar. I just think that KA could better address the goalie position for the present without hurting his position for the longer term with Levi or UPL as our future and long-term goalies. I've felt since the trade with Florida in the Reinhart deal that he targeted him as legitimate long-term starter for us. Levi's performance in college has supported his high evaluation of him. One of the primary reasons with my frustration with how the GM has not seriously addressed the goalie position is that he has done a good job of adding a collection of young players to the point where there is enough raw material to stock to top two lines. That's quite an achievement in his short tenure. I just think that this team has the capability to compete for a lower playoff spot. What's missing is adequate goaltending. Where I slightly disagree with you is that I doubt that he is even interested in pursuing a Bonafide #1 goalie this offseason. That isn't to say that he won't bring in another goalie but it won't be the caliber of a #1 player.

His head is too big for his hat. Or hat is too small for his appropriate sized head.

I agree with the general tenor of your response. Almost everyone does. There is no question that our goaltending is deficient. And likely will be entering the season. There were a couple of opportunities that vanished when the players exercised their no-trade clause. The GM has no choice other than to move down to the unappealing options. My suspicion is that the GM is more invested in UPL now as an option than most of us are. I still am inclined to believe that the GM will acquire a goalie in a trade that most of us will not be impressed by.

The second and third tier goalies in our possession have a history of fragility. We need another. In our pursuit of mediocrity at that position more is better than less. It is attainable.

I still believe that KA will add another goalie to the mix. There are still second and third tier goalies that can be procured via trade for a low price. The GM is looking for a discounted bargain.