JohnC

I realize you have a purer approach to evaluating players that relies on the single issue of talent. However, my point is that every franchise doesn't take that idealistic view because there is a significant financial consideration that relates to the ratio between cost and production. In a cap sport that relationship becomes even more prominent on the business side of the hockey sport. To put it simply: talent and cost are inextricably linked. You can't look at either side of the equation in isolation.

Do you believe that Mikheyeve would go for a one or two year deal? I don't.

I'm not diminishing Mikheyeve as a player and his potential. He would be an intriguing addition. However, it just seems to me that if the Sabres are going to exceed salary boundaries, I would rather it be done for a defenseman and goalie. And the next critical issue for a player such as Mikheyev is how lengthy of a contract is he going to want? Our roster is starting to take shape. Especially for the short term our biggest deficiency is in goal and the need for another second or third pairing defenseman.

Determining value is an important element in making personnel decisions. Vinnie H has more value (bang for the buck) than Mikheyev has to offer. When the question is asked about what is his worth--- it is the relationship between the production and cost. Considering what he can be signed for Hinostroza would be more valued than the Toronto player.

Vinnie Hinostroza would be a better value player.

In post game and interviews in general he was very thoughtful and insightful. He wasn't the type of athlete who responded with meaningless cliches. With clarity and brevity he substantively said more than those who spewed a quantity of inane verbiage. Very often Buffalo fans resent players who leave. He's not one of them. Even when he left most fans wanted him to succeed with his new team and wished him the best.

For the sake of discussion if the scouting department viewed Miro as a top 5-8 caliber prospect when healthy would you take Ohgren at 16 instead of Miro? However you answer I won't say you are wrong. It's a judgment call where it will take a couple to few years before a definitive answer can be made. I would take this modest risk.

I'm stating the obvious but there are so many tough judgments that are made in the draft room. What appears to be a brilliant selection on draft day can turn out to be a wasted pick a few years down the road. And what appears to be an odd pick on draft day can turn out to be an inspiring pick a few years down the road. After reading a number of posts from our adroit draftniks here I would be supportive if the Sabres used their second first round pick on him. His selection would be a modest risk with a potential major upside.

If the Sabres have a conviction about his talent and health, they should take him sooner with their second first round pick. As @Brawndo smartly points out there are teams with an already robust roster that are in a position to gamble on a talent. If it doesn't work out it wouldn't be much of a setback because they have an abundance of talent to absorb the gamble.

I was taken a little aback by LGR's post that stated the obvious. But that's all right. We all have our little quirks (including me) that sometimes intrude on the substance of the discussion. Sometimes the best way to handle such situation is to let it pass by into the ether. Getting back to Miroshnichenko, come draft day it is going to be interesting to see which team will be willing to take a gamble on a player who was considered a top tier prospect until he had to deal with a serious medical problem. Because the Sabres have three first round picks we are in a better position to take a gamble on him than many other teams. Getting a player who plays a physical game will be a good add for a team that is more oriented toward speed and finesse.

I agree with you that using size as a primary influence in drafting a player would be a mistake. But in this case considering how he plays and where he would have been ranked if not for his medical history his size and style of play is certainly a plus factor for the Sabres when considering him.

I'm in accord with your judgment. The Sabres have an abundance of draft capital. We are in a position to take a modest gamble.

Thanks for the summary. After reading it I thought that this is the type of player that would have been worthy of our first pick because of his size and rugged style of play. A player with his profile would be a great addition to the system. Based on how you describe him I wouldn't be against using our second first round pick on him.

I would appreciate it if the draftniks here would give their opinion on where Ivan Mirochnichenko would be ranked on the draft board if he didn't have a prior health issue? And what pro player does he resemble? Appreciate your thoughts.

I'm going to put aside the Ullmark issue and look at where this team is at now. There is no question that the Sabres are assembling a new young core and have expanded their talent base. Is the last third of the season a reflection of a team of young players maturing and becoming a competitive team? Or is it a mirage of an inflated record based on games played with little pressure due to them having no playoff implication? I lean toward the positive view but candidly can't say for sure. Anyone who watched most of the Sabre games noticed a qualitatively improvement during that last third portion of the season. Once the team got healthy and the roster was in tact with few fill-in players this team was able to consistently play well. Even when they didn't win there were very few occasions where you can say it was out-matched. I strongly believe that with the improvement of young players on the roster and with the additions of players such as Power, Quinn and JJ, this roster is starting to congeal and grow together. What's missing is a stable goaltending situation. That's the priority that the GM has to get right this offseason. Even if it is only a temporary solution, the goalie/s brought in has to be at a level that will give this upgraded roster a chance to be in the mix of a playoff race up to the end of the season. I don't believe that this team is far away. However I do believe if the GM doesn't seriously address the most important position in the game this offseason he will be sabotaging the good work he has already done. That would be such a shame.

That's the point. We are in a situation that we need not have been in if some foresight was used. Are we going to get a significant better goalie than Ullmark or sign a similar type player for much less than what we could have signed Ullmark for?

You are missing the point about the Boychuk contract. The money in the contract for the phantom player could have been applied to Ullmark. That's why it is brought up.

This link gives the sequence but doesn't give the amount that Ullmark was willing to sign with Buffalo after getting an offer from Buffalo. At the time I recall from WGR reporting (multiple accounts) that the term was for an extra year compared to Boston's offer and an extra$1 M higher per year. The GM was on WGR and said that he set a price and he wasn't going beyond it. I'll repeat again that the hideous mistake the GM made was not that he didn't sign Ullmark as it was not having an adequate fallback position when he was dealing with an UFA player. https://buffalonews.com/sports/sabres/sabres-sign-goalies-craig-anderson-aaron-dell-after-linus-ullmark-bolts-for-boston/article_d471b83c-efe2-11eb-b6fd-df810ca74d14.html

Responding to the highlighted sentence: They didn't sign a better or even comparable goalie. That's the point of contention!

What infuriates me is the argument made by some that his asking price was too high and his term was too long. That makes absolutely no sense. He was asking for $1M more per year and an extra year term from the Sabres. That extra million per year for a team that had to be enterprising to get to the cap floor is like arguing over a penny for an item that you need when you have a $100 in your pocket. The difference between what he and the GM wanted was inconsequential. And I get doubly infuriated over the argument that the term was too long. It was one year longer than what the GM wanted to give. The solution for the GM was simple. If he didn't want to keep him for the full length of the term then trade him after two or three years. There is market for a goalie of his caliber. This goalie issue goes beyond Ullmark. The GM allowed to put himself and team in a vulnerable position because he didn't have a reasonable option if he couldn't get a deal done with the goalie. That's the major and inexcusable mistake he made in this affair.

No one will claim that Ullmark is a top tier goalie. Clearly, he isn't. Acknowledging that (the obvious) he would have been our best goalie who gave us the best chance to win. At best he is a mid-tier starter. We didn't have that caliber of goalie last year and currently we don't have that caliber of goalie on our roster. Now the Sabres are in a situation that it will be competing with nearly half the teams in the league for a goalie who is likely to be an Ullmark caliber of player. And it is likely that the cost to acquire that level of player will be in the same range that Ullmark could have been signed for.

You are dam right that I am. The Sabres are in a vulnerable situation with their goaltending staffing. If the GM was not going to sign Ullmark for the contract he wanted, he should have had a reasonable option to fall back on. He didn't have it. This roster is starting to take shape. Unless a reasonable option is found in net this offseason it will undercut the progress that this team has made by adding and developing its talent. When you shoot yourself in the foot you shouldn't expect to do well in a race. We are in a bad situation because we put ourselves there. The gruesome irony will be if the GM signs an Ullmark caliber goalie for the approximate amount of money that he wasn't willing to give to Ullmark. What makes this situation even more hideous is that the GM bought a contract in order to get to the cap floor. That money could have been directed toward signing Ullmark or another acceptable option for the most important position in the game. Stupid is stupid!

The Sabres are starting to assemble a roster that should be able to move up the ranks even with bad goaltending. That's why not seriously addressing the position this offseason makes little sense. As you well know because you are a paying customer in a mostly empty building not doing what he has to do makes little sense from a competitive and business standpoint. Overall, I have liked the way KA has handled his responsibilities. However, I am very troubled by how he has managed the goalie situation. He has to get serious in addressing this position this offseason.

Not signing Ullmark to the contract he wanted from us was a major blunder. It would have bought the organization time for the organization to figure out if UPL was ready for NHL play. Even if UPL demonstrates that he can play in the league that is far from assuming that he could currently handle the responsibility of being a primary goalie. Considering that the organization had a gargantuan amount of cap space and that it had to buy a contract just to be able to meet the cap floor requirement, KA's decision at the time and in hindsight made no sense to me.

Jack wasn't with the team last year. Yet when there is talk about a toxic room his name is constantly brought up. The person who was most responsible for de-contaminating the room was Don Granato. Soon after replacing the prior overwhelmed and befuddled Krueger, the room started to breathe and have some order to it. Another major factor for a better atmosphere is there simply was more developed talent than before. When the room genuinely believes that it can compete with anyone there is clearly a more positive environment. I don't really care if Okposo or Tuch are the official captains. You don't have to be the designated captain to provided leadership. That's what counts!