JohnC

Are you foreclosing the possibility that he might be an adequate backup?

My inquiry was on how he would be ranked in this year's draft after his college career. I was simply interested on how he would rank in this year's draft class. Your response was very informative. Thank you. Another question regarding Johnson. It seems his style of play in many ways matches the way Joki plays the position. Is that an accurate description?

For those who are draftniks, if Ryan Johnson was in this draft class would he be a lower first round or upper second round pick?

How good is Comrie? Candidly, I don't know. What was the expectation this year for Hill before the season started? He was their fourth listed goalie. It wasn't until there were a series of injuries that he got his opportunity to play. Prior to the season, if any GM had an opportunity to choose between Hill or Comrie, I suspect most of them would have chosen Comrie. Obviously, you can't control the circumstances. Comrie was plagued with injuries throughout the season. And to be fair, the team in front of the Vegas goalies from a defensive standpoint was stronger than for the Buffalo goalies by far. Even Jack has become a disciplined two-way player. Too often a negative narrative is ascribed to a player that is difficult alter. Mittelstadt is an example of that. His narrative went from being a soft and ineffective player to one of our best wall and versatile players who can play both the wing or center position. When he was moved up to the top line because of a Tage injury that line kept producing at a high rate. I'm not making any declarations about the trio of goalies that are on our roster. But I'm also not concluding that how they performed last year is how they will collectively perform next season. Is it a gamble to stick with this group? Yes. But it becomes a lesser gamble if the blueline is upgraded and the style of play tightens up, as it has with Vega.

Comrie was hurt for much of the season and never really got into a rhythm. Anderson was hurt and there wasn't much left in his tank. UPL showed some flashes but couldn't be counted on to be a consistent factor. Does he have more potential? I don't really know. Of the three goalies that included a short end of the season pressurized stint by Levi, I thought he was our best goalie. Does that short exhibition of competency translate into being the primary goalie next season? I don't know. You may consider it a mystical "how the GM sees it" issue but when all is said and done it is what he thinks that counts. And he will act based on how he sees it. There's nothing mystical about that.

I saw a picture of the arena filled to capacity with a raucous crowd. What a great snapshot! There are a few people who have argued that the Buffalo market was too small to sufficiently support a NHL team. What the Bandits (and the Bills) have shown is that having a well-run organization that is able to consistently produce a competitive and entertaining team, the fans will show up and the team will be enthusiastically supported.

How our goalie group is seen by the Sabre organization may be a lot different than how it is seen by the majority of the fans. As @Standing Room Smoking Cigspointed out, Vegas is playing for the Cup with Adin Hill as their goalie. He was their fourth goalie taking over for a long list of goalies who were hurt. Is Lehner's contract reflecting much value, especially compared to the production that Hill is giving the team? As @LGR4GMpointed out in a prior post, the Sabres, in their end of season run, did play a tighter style of game, and were effective doing so. I'm not arguing that our roster as it stands is complete. It's obvious that additions need to be made on the blueline. Considering our cap space and abundance of assets, draft picks and prospects, addressing that weakness is very achievable this offseason. I'm open to upgrading the goalie position. But I don't see it as dire as most others make it out to be. (And I'm not even sure that the GM does either.) Good team defense is as much about the play of the players in front of the goalie as it is about the goalie in the net. That is what Vegas is demonstrating.

An incisive insight. You are who you are and demonstrate it by the way you perform.

Is there an argument to be made that even with the tank years 7 or 8 years ago that culminated in the Jack draft, there was a pathway to some meaningful success after what was supposed to be strategic losing? What I'm basically asking is if the organization was run more astutely after the ignominiously decision to deliberately fail was there still an avenue to succeed in a reasonable period of time? Or is it simply that the approach that the organization took so contaminated and buried this franchise that it created a greater hole for this battered franchise to dig out of?

If you substitute Saros for Hellebuyck for the assets that you list, I would be on board. What was very telling for me is that Levi was thrown into the deep end at the end of the season playoff run. He acquitted himself very well. In fact, his performance sidelined UPL. The constant refrain is that KA will be taking a risk by going with what he has on the roster. That obvious answer is yes, he certainly is. Based on how he has operated I see him (my guess) is that he willing to take it.

As you point out, based on how the GM has operated since assuming his position, his actions have corresponded with what he has repeatedly stated. He's very conscious of the contract cost and length that he is willing to assume. I simply don't believe that KA would be interested in a Hellebuyck or even a Gibson acquistion primarily because of their respective contract length and details $$$. KA has demonstrated that he is reluctant in giving up assets for players whose contracts don't fall within his cap structure. KA wouldn't even stretch his contract boundaries for Ullmark, a goalie he already had. He's mostly relying on bringing up players from within the system and using secondary deals to add players such as Spellman and Greenway. The people who argue that an acquisition of Hellebuyck or some other upper echelon goalie will make an immediate difference are right. I would be foolish to argue otherwise. But what it takes to make that high profile transaction come to fruition doesn't come close to falling within how he has operated over the past three years. Where I do see our GM willing to expend assets for is on our blueline. As it stands you and I have a distinct minority view that it is more likely than not that Levi,UPL and Comrie will be vying for the goalie spots and roles. I envision Levi being our primary goalie with UPL and Comrie competing for the backup spot.

What you are doing is extrapolating from one game in a long season and then making an unpersuasive conclusion. Sabres earned 91 points while Philly earned 75 pts this season. Our current roster is loaded with young players with more than half of them still have more upside to tap into. And on top of that our pipeline has a number of legitimate NHL players who should be ready in a year or so. From a development stage Philly is years behind us. You make the point that there is a dimension of our game that is lacking. That's like saying water is wet. Who isn't aware of that? We are all well aware that the blueline needs to be bolstered and the goalie position needs to be upgraded. Is Levi ready to assume a heavy load in his rookie year? I'm not sure. Will another goalie be added to the mix? Again, I'm not sure. But regardless, whether players are brought in or not to address our weaknesses, this team should be better simply through internal improvement. As @LGR4GMnoted, even with a recognized deficiency on the defensive end, this team still played well defensively for two months. And even if the GM decided to keep the status quo defensive lineup (which is unlikely), the team should be better through internal growth i.e., young players getting better. The Sabres improved by 16 points from the prior year. That's a substantial number. And this team was vying for a playoff spot right up to the second last game of the season. That's a dramatic change from the prior seasons. This season certainly can't be considered a complete success. But in general, I consider it to be a success. The trajectory is now up. Pointing out the flaws is easy to do. However, when you don't put them in the proper context, you are not giving a fair representation of the situation. That's what you are doing.

KA stated on WGR that the contract that Ullmark was asking for exceeded what his staff/analysts placed on the departed goalie. It wasn't so much setting a tone with other GMs and agents as it was adhering to one's own evaluations and having the fortitude to abide by them. I don't dispute the argument that you and others are making that Hellebuyck would be a difference maker for the Sabres. That's obvious to me. However, I do disagree with you that after a detailed in-house analysis that it would conclude that giving up substantial assets for a rental player would be the right course of action. I would be more inclined to a Hellebuyck deal if it were for UPL, a good prospect (not top three) and maybe second round pick. We'll just have to see how this offseason unfolds. Now that the Sabres are on the precipice of being a serious team it's a lot more fun to follow them. Just think where this team was a couple of years ago to where it is now! I don't want to come off speaking out of both sides of my mouth but whatever KA and his staff decides to do I will be comfortable with it. Based on their performance since they took over, they have earned the right to be given the benefit of the doubt in whatever they choose to do. I hope you are right.

I don't recall any analyst projecting Johnson to be a top dour caliber of player. If he becomes a good third or even fourth pairing player, I would be more than satisfied. Improving the lower half of the pairings is almost as important as adding a second pairing player to the unit. In general, the top half of our roster is in place. It's the lower half of the roster that needs to be unscrambled and solidified.

This is the type of deal that I would be excited for. All the pieces fall into place and the term is long enough to suit our goalie situation with Levi on board.

I'm not disputing the caliber of player that this goalie is. The sticking block for me is that he would be playing on a one-year deal. Hellebuyck's name in a trade proposal is going to frequently come up for a number of teams because Winnipeg is having a debate on whether to go through some version of rebuild or not. I'm also in the expanding camp of posters who believe that the Sabres are on the verge of being a serious team. However, instead of using valuable assets for a player with a one-year contract, I would rather use those dedicated assets to add a second pairing (and maybe another third pairing defenseman) to bolster our thin blueline unit. Anyone who has observed how KA has operated since he took over the reigns as a GM recognizes that he is very conscience of costs and benefits in every transaction he makes. The Ullmark contract saga and to a lesser extent the pursuit of Chycrun demonstrate that he is not willing to be forced to a short-term, expedient action at the expense of a longer term benefit. Needless to say, this is going to be an exciting offseason.

The Sabres improved by 16 points from the previous year. The younger players will be even better than they were last year. This team should be a playoff time even without the described trade for Helle. If he agreed to one more year on his current deal, I would be excited to make this deal. Without at least another year I would not be receptive to such a deal. I just don't see KA making the deal as it was proposed.

As I stated to @BrawndoI wouldn't be interested in giving up a first round pick plus additional assets for a probable one year player. It would be better to use those assets to acquire a second-pairing defenseman. If I got an agreement from him to add another year to his dea,l I would be more receptive to a Helly deal.

I would be against giving up a first round pick plus other assets for a one year rental. The assets that would be used for a one year player could be better utilized for a second pairing defenseman who would be on the team longer than one year.

Under DeDomincis's trade proposal is Helle given an extension or not? If not, I wouldn't make the deal. If yes, I would find the deal to be very appealing. Marty Biron talked about trading for Helle on his WGR radio show a week or so ago. Surprisingly, Marty was emphatic that if the Sabres had an opportunity to trade for the goalie, the Sabres should make the deal whether an extension was given or not. He argued that the Sabres are in a position to win now. He felt that the organization needed to seize the opportunity if given. He also conjectured that if Hellebuyck was on the market that Jersey would be a team very interested in securing his services.

As I said on prior posts on this topic KA was asked on WGR's Howard Simon Show about why the organization didn't sign the goalie. He said on the show that I listened to that he wasn't willing to go beyond the parameters of a contract that he and his staff established for him. He pointed out that under him the hockey operation was going to conduct itself with discipline even when it was difficult to do so. I have no problem or animosity toward Ullmark. He acted in his own best interest. There is no question that moving on to Boston turned out to be a good decision for him. As you well know pro sports is a business. And it goes both ways for players and management i.e. acting in one's best interest. Let me also add to this issue that if I were in KA's position, I would have signed him assuming it was (reasonably) outside of the financial boundaries that he and his staff established. The Sabres had the cap room and the positional need was obvious. However, although I disagreed with him at the time, I understood his reasoning and stance.

What you stated closely matches how I see this situation. The situation last offseason is different from this year's situation. My sense (guess) is that the GM is going to work with the trio he already has. I'm very aware that Levi had a short end of the season stint. However, while playing in a very pressurized environment, he acquitted himself very well. We'll have to see how this offseason unfolds to know for sure.

In no way have I suggested that Ullmark acted dishonorably or inappropriately. He was a entering his UFA year and he was going to use that status in his best interest. As I stated on more than a few occasions, KA was specifically asked about the Ullmark contract saga on WGR on the Howard Simon Show. (I'm not conjecturing because I specifically remembered what he said.) He said that at the end of the process that what Ullmark wanted was beyond the contract boundaries he and the staff established for him. Is there more to the story? No doubt. Did KA miscalculate and mishandle the negotiations? Maybe so. At first, I thought he did and then I softened my position on how he handled this case. It's not unusual that negotiations go off script and take unexpected twists and turns. You can only control your side of the bargaining and not the other side of it. I also remember on that WGR segment that he stated that the organization was going to be more analytical in evaluating players and value/contracts. He pointed out that sometimes it's difficult to adhere to your boundaries $$$ but he was determined to do so. I agree with you that with Ullmark we would have likely been in the playoffs this season. The harsh reality is that in pro sports the "what ifs" become good bar talk but don't reflect the actual vicissitudes of running a franchise.

Of course the GM wanted to sign Ullmark. Whose disputing that point? However, both points can be true that Ullmark preferred not to sign here and that the GM and organization weren't going to sign him beyond the contract boundaries they established for the player. There were reports that Ullmark would have signed back with the Sabres but only at a higher price than what he signed with Boston. The GM on WGR said that he wasn't willing to sign him at the unspecified price. Do I believe the GM? Yes.

1.) It's apparent that Ullmark wanted to move on. So I'm not blaming the GM for his moving on. KA stated on WGR when asked about not being able to sign him that at the end of the day he was not willing to go beyond the contract boundaries that he and his staff, including his analysts, were willing to pay. Those were his comments. 2.) It was reported that KA wanted Murray as his first preference goalie. The problem was that Murray's contract stipulated that Buffalo was on his no-trade team. He wasn't willing to alter it. 3.) It's not a surprise that Hellebuyck was linked to Buffalo last year. A large number of goalies in the league were linked to Buffalo because the Sabres were openly on the market. That was last year. The difference is this year Levi was added to the mix. You can speculate on what additional goalies the GM is going to bring in. I'm not criticizing you or anyone who has a different opinion on this issue. I believe that one of the three goalies already on the roster will be vying to be the starter. I believe it will be Levi, and if not, either Comrie or UPL. Again, last year was last year. And this year is a different situation. For those who believe Hellebuyck is going to be dealt for then is he going to be given an extension? And if not or if so, what do you think the GM would be willing to give give up for him?