JohnC

I'm more than comfortable with working with the three goalies we currently have on the roster. I'm projecting Levi to be our #1 goalie with Comrie and UPL competing for the backup spot. Comrie was hurt for much of the year and was never able to get in a good rhythm. He should be a credible backup. Clearly, the Sabres had major deficiencies on the blueline that became dramatically worse because of the lack of depth. Getting another top 4 caliber defenseman and another third pairing player added to the unit is need even more important than bringing in another goalie. Maybe sometime in the season Ryan Johnson will be brought up to add depth to the unit some time in the season. There is no question that our goaltending was not adequate enough. But what made the stoppers more vulnerable is the play of the blueline and also the lacking team defense. I'm not adverse of giving up a first-round pick for a top tier defenseman who has some term on his contract. What I'm adamantly against is giving up significant assets for a goalie such as Helly who is on a one year contract. That makes no sense to me. If you want to see better goalie play, then address the blueline and stress more the defensive responsibilities of the lines.

Don Granato has said it many times that Mitts was one of the best players in the 2021 training camp. As you noted, he then got hurt and wasn't the same player that year. The coach knows what he's capable of and the value he has to the team. It's surprising that now that a player is playing to his potential there are people who want to deal him off.

I usually agree with your takes. Not on this issue. I wouldn't give up our first-round pick for a goalie or defenseman who was a one-year rental. I don't understand the concern for handiness. Who gives a dam! Whether it is a blueliner or a forward the determining issue is who are the better players. Right handed, left handed or ambidextrous are not so relevant in today's modern hockey which is fast paced with players skating on all sides of the ice.

You don't have to be a hockey insider to recognize the disorder that the Sabres were immersed in. Abject organizational and ownership incompetence were known by all who were in the business or followed the sport. The knockout stench couldn't be missed. The negative perception had nothing to do with the players. That was evident by the fact that all the players who wanted out of the mess had many prospective suitors pursuing them via trade offers.

The perception of Buffalo not being an attractive place had absolutely nothing to do with Eichel or any player. It wasn't a secret to the hockey world that Buffalo was a dysfunctional franchise. The organization had a long history and deserved reputation of being ineptly and chaotically run. (As you well know.) Not only did players not want to come here but also half the team here wanted out. It was never difficult to understand why Eichel, and many of his teammates, wanted out. Because of the constant churning of staff and revolting incompetency, this franchise was stuck in the mud with little hope of getting out of it. So it shouldn't be surprising that there was a thick cloud of negativity associated with such a woebegone franchise. It had little to do with the players as it did with the operation. Since KA took over the operation that ugly and well-deserved malignant reputation has changed for the positive. It certainly wasn't a quick change in perception but without question it has been altered. Where once many players had Buffalo on their "do not play franchise list" that list has certainly shrunk. I'm not saying Buffalo is an appealing destination for everyone, but it is now a place where more players would consider coming here. Moving forward is better than moving backward or being miserably stuck.

I don't see pursuing a veteran center as being a priority on this offseason's wish list. It became less of a need since Krebs elevated his game and Mitts showed enough flexibility to also play center. For me, getting a second pairing defenseman is the top priority.

How is Eichel a factor in other players wanting to or not wanting to play in Buffalo? Player movement for a number of reasons is a part of the landscape in the pros (all sports) and now in the college game. The biggest factor in player movements revolve around the issue of the contracts $$.

There is another reason why Buffalo should be an appealing destination for many players: It's location. The proximity to Toronto and southern Ontario where many players and their families come from. Added to now being a very competitive team should also be attractive features for players on the move.

Now that he has signed a contract he will be told what to do. He gave up his right to vacillate when he signed on the dotted line. 😃

Is it safe to say that assume Ryan Johnson will at the camp?

As you rightly point out there are a variety of ways to build a team. What Vegas and Seattle have done (quickly accomplished) are related to the expansion system currently in place. What problem do you have with KA and how he has operated? Since taking over, a particular course has been set for the rebuild, and it is being followed. Look back when he took over and compare it to where this franchise is now. The team improved 16 pts from the previous year and was vying for a playoff spot up to the second last game in the season. So what problem do you have on how he is conducting his job?

There is another way of looking at the trade from each side's perspective. The Sabres were clearly in a rebuild mode while the Panthers were in a win now mode. You can't say that Florida lost the deal when the player/s (including Montour) they got from us were instrumental in them winning a number of playoff rounds that got them into the Stanley Cup Finals. And it is obvious how the trade will help us in the near future. The issue comes down to not outsmarting the other party but finding an acceptable deal that addresses each's needs. In my opinion, it was a win-win case for all the parties involved in the Vegas and Florida trades.

The Jack trade gets a lot of attention. However, it won't be surprising if when all is said and done the trading of Reinhart that brought back Levi and a first round pick turn out to be the most consequential deal from the dealt players. Overall, the GM handled the trading of the old core in a very masterful manner. For me, getting a first round pick for Risto was the biggest surprise in those deals.

If that's the case I stand corrected. I still believe that it is a little low. As I see it you are more in the right range.

You know what my position is on the Eichel issue so I'm not going to belabor that point. Standing back and reviewing the trade it was a good deal for both sides. Vegas took a calculated risk on acquiring an injured player who needed surgery. The player got the surgery he wanted. It resulted in an outcome that restored his health and career. Now he is one of the prime players on a team competing for the Cup championship. Good for him. This trade worked out wonderfully for Buffalo. Tuch is turning out to be an elite player and a leader on the team. Krebs is emerging from being a raw prospect to being a good NHL player. And he will get better. In addition, we used a first-round pick from the trade to get a high end prospect. On top of that, Greenway was acquired from one of the draft picks that we got in return. In many ways it was that Jack deal that re-centered this faltering franchise and stabilized it. What is often forgotten is that with Jack's departure other players' roles were changed and elevated. Tage, Cozens and Mitts to a lesser extent were given elevated roles that they embraced and thrived on. Another benefit to the Jack trade is that his large cap cost was redistributed to lock up the emerging players already on the team. There are a number of reasons why the Sabres are now on an upper trajectory. But it can't be denied that the Jack trade was the jolt that changed the course of this flailing franchise. Player movements are part of the pro sports and maybe even more so in college sports landscape. It's obvious why the Jack saga gets so much attention. Of all the players who left in the reshuffle the one player I would have loved to have kept is Montour.

You are way too high on your average salary. I would go a little higher than the amount that @dudacek listed at 4x4.4. @GASabresIUFAN's numbers are very realistic. My guess is between $5 to 6 M per year on a three or four year contract.

I would be excited with the deal that you proposed. From the goalie's contract status it would comfortably dovetail to fit the needs of the team and with Levi's developmental timetable. And with Saros sharing the next with Levi this team should be better than the team that barely missed out on the playoffs this past year.

Is there a NHL player that you can compare to Michkov?

I'm not sure that Washington would draft the Russian even if they had an opportunity to do so. Ovie is currently chasing the Gretzky goal record. That would be a factor why the organization would want to remain competitive and have a prospect who can contribute sooner. If Michkov were drafted the Capitals wouldn't have access to the player as soon as they would want. In contrast, the Sabres are in a better situation to wait on the player because they have a rich enough system to wait on him. And even if he decided to stay in Russia for a longer period of time, we would be in a better position to absorb such a loss of talent. Or another way of making this point is that our organization has enough prospects in the pipeline to allow it to take a gamble on this talented player.

I'm not worried about the pipeline because I'm more concerned about having NHL players who are now ready to help this team be a serious team. It took some time for Mitts to mature and develop. Now that he has reached a level of being a contributor it wouldn't in my opinion be wise to send him elsewhere. Just because it took him some time to physically mature and develop doesn't mean that he is going to revert as player. As far as using him in a deal to improve the blueline unit, the Sabres have other assets to use to trade for upgrades. Maybe later it would be a better time to use him in a trade deal, but I wouldn't do it right now.

Yes, he does have value to his team. That's an argument to keep him, not trade him. He has proven to be a versatile player who can play on the wing and center. He also has shown that he has the talent to move up to the top line and keep it playing at an exceptional level. Why would you want to deal this player that you developed and are now getting good production from?

Hasek may be a good example of what you are saying about a certain type of goalie being able to thrive even on a bad team. Marty Biron described it as goalies who are comfortable in chaotic situations compared to structured situations. My general point in my prior post is that with an upgraded blue line unit and a greater attention to defensive responsibilities the play of our netminders should be better, regardless of who is in net. As @LGR4GMhas pointed out on a couple of occasions the team demonstrated its ability to play a tighter style of game in the end of the season playoff run.

No matter whether a goalie's style of play is structured or more chaotic the goalie will benefit from better team defensive play. What's encouraging is that over the last 15-18 games the Sabres played a tighter game that resulted in an impressive run. Will the GM add another goalie to the mix? I don't know. Whether he does or does not, he still needs to upgrade the blueline unit. Considering what our cap situation is and the accumulation of assets the organization is in a good position to address that area of need.

I agree with you that the "reaction system" often doesn't capture the substance and tenor of the disagreement. Most often, I'm more interested in responses when there is a disagreement. You can get a perspective that challenges your view and make you reconsider your position. The goalie issue is a topic where it is not too difficult to understand and respect those who take a different position.

I'm a Marty fan not just for his knowledge of the mechanics of goaltending but his knowledge about the league in general. He has pointed out on a number of occasions that the stats of a goalie has a lot to do with the unit playing in front of him. That is why I have been more concerned about upgrading our blueline and team defense in general. As @LGR4GMpointed out in a couple of posts the team buckled down and played a tighter style of hockey in our end of the season run. That shows that they have the ability to do so. I don't know what the GM is going to do with the goalie position. As I've said before I'm more inclined to think that he won't be making the changes that a lot of members are hoping he will make. We shall see. I'm also confident that @Thornywill continue to boo my takes on this issue. 😄 Although I disagree with him, I do understand his well-reasoned position.