JohnC

I appreciate your succinctness but why do you say that?

The higher power was Krueger. The contract numbers and term indicated that the coach felt it was a priority to keep him. On the Zemgus road to a lucrative contract Krueger was driving the bus.

What you are saying about the contracts attached to the players in hindsight doesn't necessarily reflect the ability to sign the players in real time. As you noted the GM was right in reading the market for Kahun. On the other hand you are making the judgment that Thompson's contract was too rich for the player. That's not necessarily true. If he were given a one year contract and played well and scored beyond what your expectations are his next contract would be more than his current contract. The staff is making a judgment not only what he is as a player today but also what he projects to be for the next few years. Neither one of us at this point can prove whether the organization is right or wrong but these are the many judgments that going into assembling a roster in a cap system. Getting a perfect calibration between performance and the value of a contract for all the members of the roster is unattainable. No GM or organization is that prescient to get to that lofty standard. With respect to overpaying for Girgs I thought it was a little high but it is a reflection that this is a player that Krueger wanted. Krueger is in the process of reshaping the roster and changing its style of play. And as indicated by the size and term of the contract this is a player that Krueger values. My point is even considering that it was higher than most of us expected it wasn't significantly above his value to this team. And it should be noted his value is increased because of his added role of a member of the PK unit, a unit that the coach wants to upgrade. When free agency began the signing action in the league was fast and furious. Not all the players that were on our radar screen were willing to come here, or at least be their first or second or third preferences. When contacts are made between the organization and agents if there wasn't a quick decision then you had to move on to the next option so you wouldn't be left without options. When making an assessment of the contracts and individual value I think the fairest way to make a judgment is no to look at the contracts from an individual point of view but instead have a more overview approach. Taking that wider perspective I believe that this front office has done a good job. And that is not to say that more work can't be done before training camp starts.

You make an excellent point in how you rate him and what the cost would be for that caliber of player. The contract he wanted was too high for his value. And the contract that he garnered from Edmonton demonstrates that it was valued properly by us. I like Kahun a lot. I wished we could have kept him. But as you stated although he is a good third line winger he is at best a fringe second line player. And as you pointed out the Sabres had players who were good options that can replace him. Your analogy of a Shaq Lawson calculation was a terrific analogy in that it stresses the notion of wanting to keep a player up to a point but not beyond that point. In the Covid era of extreme revenue losses there is going to be a lot more hard nosed cost/benefit analysis regarding players and contracts. It applies to all teams. I think so far the Sabres are doing an excellent job in handling the challenges associated with this tough environment.

How so? The Sabres pegged his value correctly in this market. This was an excellent example of using a cost/benefit analysis to make a reasoned decision.

This was a terrific clip! You could feel the tension in the room when the participants were involved with Hall's agent. The MVP in that unexpected transaction is Krueger. He has added a presence and direction that is guiding the restructuring of this roster. What is impressive about KA is that although he is the boss in the hockey operations it is obvious that he is a collaborator and listener. There is no ego insecurity with him. He's a very detailed and organized guy with his to do list. I'm not sure if others caught it but right at the beginning of the clip KA commented that he has been getting texts from Staal encouraging the GM to keep working to get this team better. He seems more bought in than when he first got the news that he was traded.

I'm not even sure that the staff of the Sabres are sure what Mitts's prospects are. And he is in their system. It is still an open question for this young player who has not played up to expectations. Your post used the word definitely. That's not a word that I would consider apt here for an in or outside evaluator. With respect to your analogy of a non-committal recommendation that is my point. A non-committal recommendation is a non-committal recommendation. It is a vague and non-specific response that means "I don't know for sure" and "yet to be determined." What it doesn't mean is that it is a definite determination one way or the other. That was basically my point.

My response is directed to @Curt who seems confused with my response that Jankowski might not have a definite opinion on Mitts. An earlier post by kas indicated that Jankowski is definitely going to have an opinion on Mitts. I don't believe that is necessarily the case. Based on what the player has demonstrated so far the evaluators in Buffalo and outside the organization could just as likely have an inconclusive evaluation of him at this time. Hope this explanation clarifies the issue.

You left out the option of I simply don't know.

There might be some interest for Mitts around the league but what is apparent is that he doesn't have much value as an asset. The obvious reason is that to date he hasn't shown much as a NHL prospect. The best strategy to apply to him or any asset for that matter is to try to maximize it. For that to happen why not just see how he performs in training camp? What if he comes into camp in impeccable shape and competes to the point that he earns his way on to the roster. If he plays well enough but there isn't room for him on the roster then play him in Rochester where he can get extensive playing time and hopefully there will be more progression in his play. If he shows well in training camp and exhibition games his value would increase in a prospective deal. If it is conclusively determined by this organization that he doesn't have a future here then deal him off for whatever you can get for him. You won't get much but you won't get much in return now anyway. Mitts is 21 yrs old. If you are going to make an error in evaluating him why not make the error after giving him more time to show what he is capable of. I can comfortably say that simply I don't know if Mitts will ever make it as a NHL player. If that is the case for our evaluators then it would be wise to be more patient with him. The Sabres' organization is not overloaded with prospects to casually dismiss any players in their system.

You have given a lot of material to digest. I'll address only two of them. With respect to Hall I'm not sure the organization believed that it was in the running for him. Hall made it well known that he wanted to go to a competitive team. Colorado was on his radar but they didn't offer enough money to entice him to go there. The Sabres offered more money on a one year deal than anyone else and the one year deal allowed him to maintain his UFA status after the year. And another selling point is that he had a relationship with Krueger which sealed the deal. The combination of money and Krueger worked in our favor. I'm not sure that Adams/Krueger expected to end up with Hall but as you noted they seemed to have fallback positions to address bringing in a top two line winger. They ended up with a premier top first line player. I believe that the organization was considering goalie upgrades with the expectation that Ullmark was going to be the starter. It just hasn't worked out for money and asset exchange reasons. I don't know how this issue is going to be addressed but I'm starting to think that when the season starts Ullmark/Hutton will be our tandem when training camp starts. As I said before we just have to wait and see.

Most people would agree with you that if a backup upgrade is available the organization would seize that opportunity. Originally, I thought it was going to be one of the first acts of new GM. When Krueger who is a precise wordsmith made the oblique comment that these are our goalies at this time I thought that it was a clear signal that a goalie change was going to quickly materialize. It didn't. You astutely noted that you felt that the organization was not going to overpay for a goalie. Although it currently may not be completely satisfied with the goalie situation it is satisfied to the point that it wasn't going to expend resources $$$$ to do so. At least at this time. The bigger issue for the organization is whether Ullmark is prepared to assume the workhorse load as a #1 goalie. I get the sense that they believe he is ready to assume that responsibility. If Hutton struggles early on as a backup their thinking is probably that he can be replaced more easily for another backup. Time will tell.

You are over analyzing this issue. People in the opinion business give their opinions. And if they change their opinions that shouldn't be surprising because people in the opinion business very often change their opinions. As far as a reluctance to not criticizing the owners that is the standard for all employees in their position. That's called common sense and job security.

Aromatic gratification. 🤡

Putting aside the stunning Hall signing your first listed transaction in the trade for Staal has has had major reverberations. The first positive is obvious in that we now have a genuine 2C. Flowing from that is that Skinner on the second line with him is in a better position to succeed. In addition, with the departure of Johansson the team is moving in the direction of reshaping the roster toward a more gritty and north/style of play. And in the player exchange for Staal the team saved some cap money. And because of the trade where we got our 2C the Sabres were able to keep their first round pick to draft a quality prospect. Not bad for a novice GM.

You make an excellent point that the timing isn't right because such a financial commitment doesn't match their rebuilding schedule . As you point out Ottawa is in a rebuild mode and their timetable to become a serious team is still another year or two down the road. However, you have to be impressed with the number of young talents that they are accumulating. I'm aware that hockey is a business as much for the players as it is for franchises. But it would be a difficult transition for a player to play on reliable cup contending and cup championship team to go to Ottawa. Tampa is one of the best run hockey operations. It is going to be interesting to see how they handle their onerous cap situation. There is a lot of tough personnel decisions that have to be faced.

My sense is that Ullmark is going to be used a workhorse starting goalie even in a compressed schedule. If the season is configured within a bubble type of arrangement with less traveling that might make it easier for him to carry a heavy load. Will there be need to replace Hutton prior to the season or during the season based on performance? Maybe. My sense (opinion) is that the organization is going to start of with Ullmark as the #1 and Hutton as the #2. Of course it is subject to change. I'm sure the organization is aware that there needs to be a backup plan just in case.

We are talking past one another. The point I am making is that he has on a number of occasions stated that he didn't recommend changing the goalie situation with the tandem of Ullmark as the starter and Hutton as the backup. He felt that Hutton was overused as a backup. His position is that he is an acceptable backup if used more sparingly. Those are his thoughts. I'm not asking you to agree with him but what I am noting is what he has stated and recommended. Hopefully, this will clarify the issue.

Marty has repeatedly stated that he didn't believe it should be a priority for the team to change their goaltending staffing this offseason. He felt that Hutton was an acceptable backup if he wasn't overused. And he has repeatedly stated last season and this offseason the priority should be to upgrade the offense with more goal scorers. And that is exactly what the organization focused on this offseason. Rob Ray is smart enough to use the edit button in his head and avoid the trouble he knows he can get himself into.

He has for a long time repeatedly say that he doesn't believe that the Sabres should make a change in net. That is not to say that he hasn't ever said the opposite.

I agree with you that money can be (is) a factor in upgrading the backup position. But the issue is does the staff believe that Hutton can be a reliable backup if judiciously used? I think they do. Is it a gamble? Yes. But it seems to me (opinion) that the organization is comfortable with Ullmark as the dominant starter. Because of that I believe that they are willing to have Hutton as their backup. We shall see how this plays out. That's exactly what I said in my post.

I don't smell the taint that you are getting a sniff of. He is giving his opinion without any reservations. That's what people in the opinion business do. Rob Ray also works for the Sabres as an analyst and he isn't afraid to give his unfettered opinion on WGR. Habitual cynicism can be a contaminant.

I'm going to make a prediction that is going to rile you up and the rest of the smart gang that resides here. I'm not saying what I think is going to happen with the goalie position simply to be a contrarian. While the overwhelming sentiment is to replace Hutton as the backup I don't think that is what is going to happen. My sense of the situation is that the organization is going to stick with Hutton as the backup and rely on Ullmark as the heavy duty #1 goalie. Even with a compressed schedule I see Ullmark as being the workhorse goaltender with Hutton sparingly used as a starter, maybe once every three or four games. I have a lot of respect for Marty Biron's ability to evaluate goalies. He believes that Hutton has a tendency to fade when he gets overused. Marty also believes that worrying about Hutton's play is an overblown issue. It should also be noted that Hutton has a mentoring relationship with Ullmark and is very supportive of him. They clearly work will together. Assuming Hutton's eye issue is resolved I trust Biron's judgment on this issue.

If he gets back to his standard and is able to do it on a second line without Jack then I would be ecstatic. He had plenty of scoring opportunities last year but he seemed to repeatedly hit the pipes or miss the the gaping holes that were staring him in the face. The more he missed the more frustrated he got and pressed even more. Hitting on some of those opportunities will help loosen him up more. With him we need more bang for the $$$$$!

The one player I will be keying on is Skinner. If he can get on track with Staal as his center and whoever is designated as the opposite winger it would provide a major offensive boost. The one concern I have is that I got the impression that Skinner is not a Krueger guy. The only time I saw Krueger get testy is when he was asked about Skinner and why he wasn't playing on the Jack line. Krueger is a coach who demands responsible end to end play. And Skinner has a tendency at times to float. And that is a tendency that the coach is intolerant of. There needs to be more accommodation between the player and coach. If Skinner can return to his goal scoring form (30 goals) this team will be elevated. He's simply too good of a shooter to not fully utilize.