JohnC

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.

And I'm making the same point.

Within this WGR link is an 18 minute segment with Marty Biron talking about the Sabre goaltending and the possible trade market. There are a number of options which include staying pat. My impression is that Marty isn't that enamored with Hart. At the end of the discussion Marty indicates he's more supportive of Comrie than UPL as a backup option. https://www.audacy.com/wgr550/authors/howard-and-jeremy-show

I would still say no to such a Power trade.

I'm not going to predict what his next contract will be but I'm much more confident than you are that a deal will be worked out. Coach Don G is a big advocate for Mitts. And what the player demonstrated last season was that he was versatile enough to play both the wing and center. In addition, he also showed that he could move up to the top line and keep it performing at a high level. Mitts is going to be a mainstay player and be here longer than you think.

No! Levi gave a glimpse of the type of goalie he could be when he played in the end of season playoff run. He was more than impressive. In comparison to what a Helly contract extension would require, retaining Levi would give the GM more options to add talent to the blueline.

Hellebucyk is one of the best goalies in the game. There's no question about that. Even after acknowledging his superior talent it would be a mistake to not only give up a valuable high first round pick, but an even bigger mistake to trade the emerging Krebs who took a quantum leap in development last season. The type of deal that you are proposing for a player who will be an UFA in a year goes against everything that the GM has espoused since he took over the reins. I just don't see a Hellebuyck deal coming to fruition mostly because of his contract status. If you proposed this deal for Saros who is locked up for two years, I would be more amenable to it but still reluctant because of the inclusion of Krebs.

No! If the proposal was Rousek, UPL and 45 for Hart I would be open to it. We should be able to come with a very good prospect with the 13th pick. Although I'm not adverse to giving up our first-round pick if it were part of a deal that brought back a goalie such as Saros. I've said this before that I believe that our GM would more likely work with the three goalies he already has on the roster, with Comrie and UPL competing for the backup. His attention is going to be more focused on upgrading the blueline this offseason. We shall see.

Giving up a first-round pick for Hart makes no sense to me. And I agree with the second part of your sentence indicating what you would give up for Hart. That would be more reasonable.

Great post! Impressive analysis from a variety of perspectives. One point that you made that struck a chord is that after watching a lot of hockey and different teams you can make a fair assessment as to which are the better teams and who are the best players by trusting your eyes. What you see and the impression you get, especially with a large enough sample size, reflects the reality on the ice.

If another defender is brought in, even a 4/5 defenseman, and you then include Johnson to the group shortly after, you can see the making of a good unit that also has some depth to it. Samuelsson should get better and Power, based on what he showed last season, should become an anchor defender who although very young will be one of the better defenders in the league. I like Joki more than most because I do see more upside to his game. But even if he is moved down to the third pairing the unit would be upgraded.

A couple of other posters, @Brawndo and @LGR4GM, stated that some evaluators consider him to have second pairing caliber of ability. Even if he turns out to be a third pairing player, that would be terrific. The next issue is how long will it take him to play in the NHL? Maybe next year or the year after.