Doohicksie

Your best post ever, @Andrew Amerk

I'm going to add to the predictions: Comrie will turn out to be the best goalie the Sabres have had since Hasek. Deep run in '23, Cup in '24.

Ullmark's salary wasn't the issue. It was the TERM. And lecturing me is just as insulting.

I don't see why both can't be true. Kevyn clearly screwed up that situation. I think it became a learning opportunity for him. He should have recognized the real possibility that Ullmark might leave he should have had a better backup plan. If Ullmark wasn't signed by the deadline he should have been traded for assets. He could have still been a "good guy" by informing Ullmark that he would be traded if he wasn't signed by the deadline. Kevyn likely would have gotten a significant return from a playoff team seeking to acquire goalie depth for their playoff run. Did Ullmark want to stay in Buffalo? I think it was a decision he weighed, and was informed by his agent. I think the major factor from his point of view was that the Sabres hadn't been to the playoffs for a long time and he wanted a playoff team. If it's true that he wanted the Sabres to pay a premium in money or term, that was probably the leverage. I think Adams was right in not biting at that.

Yes, the point of obtaining Bishop's contract was to have relatively cheap insurance (I believe it's about $750k to get $5 million in cap dollars) to make sure the Sabres don't dip below the cap floor as they make roster moves during the season... assuming Bishop's contract is on LTIR and insurance pays 75%. But because he will be on LTIR it doesn't prevent Bishop's salary to affect the Sabres if they approach the salary cap. It's basically a non-move player-wise; just a financial transaction. Bishop is this year's Johnny Boychuk. And the reason Kevyn is doing these kinds of deals is to ensure he doesn't have long term salary liabilities that will affect cap compliance when he has to start paying players coming off ELCs. RE Ullmark: If Kevyn had signed him, he'd still be paying him $5M for 3 more years... and rumor was that to stay in Buffalo he was demanding more $ or term. And Ullmark is about the same (marginally better) than Swayman who's only making $1M per year. If Comrie comes close to matching his SV% he had with WPG he'll be a steal compared to Ullmark. The way I see that situation is that yes, Kevyn f'ed up by trusting a deal would get done. The mistake he made was not trading him at the end of the season at the deadline prior to Ullmark reaching UFA. And yes, in the absence of a contract with Ullmark he should have gone through the off-season with the assumption that he would have to be replaced. Instead he waited, believing Ullmark would sign with the Sabres, and had no backup plan. Yes he messed up. But given that, it's also hard to blame him for the injuries that affected Sabres goaltending the last two seasons. We'll see how Comrie works out but I wouldn't be surprised if this forum will be looking back at the acquisition a year from now and calling it a home run, as good a move as the Eichel trade.

Ya, so why overpay Ullmark when you can buy up Bishop's contract and dump some of your money on him instead. Sure, makes perfect sense. You are either being obtuse or you are incredibly ignorant of what Kevyn is doing to prevent cap trouble down the road.

I don't see how that is any more relevant that wishing that the Sabres had won the lottery and picked McJesus. It's all coulda-woulda-shoulda.

I think this is a case of following the analytics. The whole point of having a strong analytics department is to bring in players that conventional scouting misses. You're right in that the proof is in the pudding but when we applauded the staffing of key analytics positions, this is what we were signing up for.

Oh crap, of course. We already got our UM Dman when Power signed last year. Brain fart.

I don't care if a Sabres staffer is a previous Sabre or not. I want the right person for the job out of those available. A preference toward ex-Sabres is sentimental hogwash.

I think in the Pegulas' case, it's not paranoia. They went with leadership choices that were league darlings. They failed. Wanting to pick their own GM under those circumstances isn't paranoia, it's the voice of experience.

With the turmoil at UM, we might see Portillo and Johnson after all, and sooner rather than later. If we had Portillo in the org (i.e., signed) the picture would be considerably different.

Maybe I'm one of the jerks. 😇 Actually the reason is that I've lived more than 1000 miles from Buffalo for most of my adult life. I have reconnected with people from my class on FB. It's funny the people I hang with now are decidedly not the same ones I did in high school. I might get around to it some time, but maybe the 50th is the one to go for.... We'll be retired by then.

My 40th was two years ago. I haven't been to a reunion yet.

Maybe it is enough. Wait and see.

But no top team has signed him to a long term deal. Maybe there's not one coming.

Responsible riders are the majority. It's just that the dooshbags stand out.

I would have liked to see Kevyn sign Klingberg for what the Ducks did but we don't know if KA tried to sign him or if he was interested in playing in Buffalo.

But not this year. The Ducks signed him for one season.

I tripped across a piece that says the Sabres tried to trade up to 8 to get Marco Kasper. I assume it would have been 9 + a sweetener for 8. Yzerman didn't bite. The article cites Kasper's dad as a source. https://detroitsportsnation.com/red-wings-gm-steve-yzerman-reportedly-turned-down-nhl-draft-trade-offer/wgbrady/nhl/detroit-red-wings-news/07/29/2022/285412/

You forgot to mention the option of having your buddy and former teammate who's now a member of the media make up some BS competitive offer to light a fire under your trade partner.

It kind of *does* make you feel better about how Kevyn handled the Eichel trade though, innit? There is nothing clear about the spelling of that name.

But what if they're not signed and CGY is in a playoff spot? I've seen that reported, but never as a direct quote. It was always an "insider take" when I saw it.

Responding to @GASabresIUFAN's post. (see the post above the one you quoted)

Doesn't deserve its own thread so I'll stash it here.