JohnC

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?

I agree with you that if Ullmark is dealt it would be strange. If you are making a bet it isn't financially wise (even for a degenerate gambler) to place a bet on something weird happening, even if the stupendous odds could give you a glorious windfall if you hit the jackpot. That's just me and my tight wallet perspective on this issue.

When you have a player who is so instrumental to your team's success you look elsewhere to make cuts. From a productivity to salary standpoint he should be considered a good value. I just don't see him being moved under any circumstances, at least right now.

Why would Boston want to move Ullmark? If they are under severe cap pressures, they would make the necessary adjustments elsewhere. Moving Ullmark makes no sense at all, especially after the season he just had.

If Ryan Johnson were in this year's draft, where would you rate him on your board?

You ask terrific questions. They get at the heart of the main issue that will determine success next season and beyond. As I said in prior posts, I expect Levi to be our primary goalie, playing around half of the games. With respect to Comrie, I'm not convinced that his less than impressive stats reflect how well he can play. He was hurt for much of the season. I would be reluctant to make him our primary netminder but not afraid to give him extensive playing time as a backup. As far as UPL, he's shown flashes of play that are encouraging, and also lapses that are discouraging. He's still young with room to grow. These three goalies are going to compete against one another to earn their spots and roles. And that is how it should be. You ask if I am comfortable with the current assemblage of goalies on hand. No, I'm not. Candidly, I'm queasy about the situation. There are too many assumptions involved within the group to make me comfortable. The obvious follow-up question is: What would you be willing to do about it? I don't believe that our GM (or even I) would be willing to give up major assets to bring in (if even available) an ace goalie. The reason is that the organization is betting on Levi to be our mainstay goalie right now. I believe it should be more of a priority to improve the blueline. In that way you put the goalies in a better position to succeed. In my mind it is more doable and cost-effective to add talent to the defensive corps than to the goalie position.

It was @PromoTheRobot. I intended to respond directly to his post but I made a mistake in how it was submitted. That's on me. And I want it to be known that he is one of my favorite people on this site. There isn't anyone more dedicated in following this team. He travels all over the place and puts his money on the line to support the team. Sometimes he doesn't understand why his ardent support for this team isn't shared by others.

As you are indicating, this is going to be an intriguing offseason. If the GM can fortify the blueline, and with internal improvement of players such as Quinn, JJ, Krebs, Power, and to a lesser degree Stillman and Greenway, this team should be ready to compete with even the upper tier teams. Where I differ from most of the crowd here is that I don't believe that our GM will be bringing in outside help for the goalie position. My sense (opinion) is that the trio he has on hand will be competing to establish their roles. I expect Levi to be our primary goalie when the season starts.

Are you sure it wasn't an Eichel thread? ☠️

I would like to get your thoughts or anyone else's on this two-option proposal: 1.) Adding two 4/5 defensemen to the unit this offseason for little cost or 2.) adding one 3/4 defenseman to the unit that would require a #1 round pick plus a high-end prospect such as Savoie, Kulich or Rosen. I lean toward first option although very open to option two.

Why doesn't he seem like a competitor to you? Do you think the GM would have signed him to a deal if he had any concerns about his competitiveness? The prospect simply wasn't ready to sign when he finished his college season. Maybe he needed a break before making a decision that will set the course in his hockey career? So what's the big deal if there was a delay in getting him under contract? The GM is getting the hockey work done in a very systematic and businesslike manner. No more turmoil and dysfunction in the operation. The focus is on team and how to get better. There is a stability here that hasn't existed in a long time. The GM is doing a terrific job.

I haven't watched any of the games in this tournament. By all reports JJ has played well for Germany. I'm really excited about the Quinn/Cozens/JJ line next season.

The Sabres were bad for nearly a generation. As you well know that is the primary reason for the lack of fan support. When an upcoming generation of fans have little allegiance to a failed franchise, you are not going to instantly get them back. Last season, it was evident that the fans were starting to come back in larger numbers. It takes time to win back credibility when it has been lost. It is evident to all that you are an alpha fan. Good for you! You should be saluted. But don't expect others, especially the younger crowd, to have that same unwavering enthusiasm that you have for this team, at least for now. Because of the systemic dysfunction of this organization, this franchise lost the trust of a significant portion of the fanbase. It's now steadily earning it back. You should put the blame on this suppressed market where it mostly belongs. The organization failed the fanbase; the fanbase didn't fail the organization. The fans were the abused party in this sad saga. So they invested their entertainment dollars elsewhere. That shouldn't be surprising even to an alpha fan.

I don't know what Johnson's intentions are. I'm hoping that he will sign with the Sabres. I think that you hit on the reason why he hasn't made a decision to sign: He simply needs time away from playing big time college hockey and going to school. He needs to decompress from the pressurized world of hockey, school and being a pro prospect that he has been immersed in for so long. He will ultimately have to make a decision on what is in his own best interest. Fortunately, the Sabres are in a position where whatever he decides to do will have little impact on this franchise. This franchise has accumulated enough talent to absorb such a perceived setback. If he doesn't join our system it will simply give another player a better opportunity to play. What's interesting is that more than a few hockey analysts who are not affiliated with the Sabres have all said the same thing: That Buffalo would be a good situation for him from a positional need and being part of an emerging franchise. We shall see. I just got the latest news. I'm late to the party.

It really wasn't in KA's or Hall's interest to sign a longer-term deal. As you point out, KA was reluctant to give longer term deals because he had in mind of remaking this roster. So he didn't want to get stuck with players that he might not have a longer term interest in. And as @PerreaultForever points out that Hall wanted to restore his player credibility that would have made him more marketable when he became a free agent. I've stated this before, that it's my opinion that KA wanted from the start to remake this roster with players that he felt were committed to process of rebuilding the roster. He knew which players would be invested in that challenging journey and which would not. However, when he took over, he didn't have the consent from the owner to implement his rebuilding plan. Krueger at that time had a lot of authority. And he wanted to bring in players to help support Jack and give this team a better chance to win right away. In my view KA, was wise enough to be strategically patient and let the Krueger and owner plan to take the short-term route to be competitive as soon as possible play out. Needless to say, it didn't work out. And it was at this point that KA got the owner's consent to implement his plan. It was at this point where he adroitly started to make deals to utilize the trade assets he had and work with the assets that he wanted to keep.