UFA Goaltenders This Year

[nfreeman]

MAF, who has 1 year left on his contract at $7MM, and who could be obtained cheaply in trade, plus Linus back on a show-me 2-year deal, is my ideal outcome.  

[gilbert11]

13 hours ago, North Buffalo said:

Rask probably unobtainable... Id grab Dubnyk or Smith

Smith is having a good season but, at his age, maybe on a 1 year contract.

[gilbert11]

4 hours ago, Thwomp! said:

For anyone mentioning Halak, the last time we acquired him he refused to report and play for the Sabres.   He dressed for one game and didn't play, and basically forced Murray to trade him to Washington for Neuvirth.  I'm sure he's not coming here now either.

Oh, really? I hadn’t heard that.  I thought it was part of the “end up with the worst goalie so we don’t win”. 

[kas23]

If we go with Ulmark, then the 2nd goalie is probably be more important than Ulmark himself. I get he’s a fan favorite, but we need to be realistic about his injury history. 

[Marvin]

9 hours ago, gilbert11 said:

Oh, really? I hadn’t heard that.  I thought it was part of the “end up with the worst goalie so we don’t win”. 

Yup.  If I were him, I'd be pretty insulted too if a team trying to lose traded for me for the explicit purpose of downgrading in goal.

[Hoss]

20 hours ago, Taro T said:

My preference is to sign Ullmark for term (5 years?) and to grab one of the guys that are older though likely perceived to be better for 2 years if they can or 3 years if they have to.  Rask would be top of that list.  Raanta fits the bill as well.

Not a fan of Andersson.  He's good, but just doesn't come up big in big moments.  Like that he's the Loafs goalie.  If it's good that he plays for a despised team, don't want him. 

You’re giving Ullmark FIVE years!? Ooooof

[Archie Lee]

Looking at the list, the only guy I would consider taking over Ullmark on a 3-5 year, 4-5 million deal is Grubauer.  The player who is missing from the list is Driedger from FLA, but his NHL sample size is pretty small.

If we don't get Ullmark signed by the expansion draft, then I would look for us to acquire a goalie from a team that has one too many (Montreal, Washington, Dallas, Minnesota, Pittsburgh).

With regards to the back-up position, I'm certainly not advocating for going with Tokarski in that role.  However, there are not many goalies on that list who would fit clearly in the back-up category who I am certain would be better than Tokarski.  Almost all in that category have risks attached (age, injury, inconsistency).

What we can't do next year is what we have done the past two years with Hutton.  If our back-up is not getting the job done, then the goalies who are 3rd and 4th on the organizational depth chart need to get an opportunity to play and grab the position. We can't just accept sub-NHL level goaltending.

In a way, it is too bad Hutton looks lost for the season.  I know he is well regarded in the locker room.  Though I don't think he is good enough at this point in his career, he certainly didn't get a lot of help from his teammates and coaches the past two seasons.  He perhaps deserves an opportunity to play a couple of games in front of the Sabres as they are performing now to at least show other teams he might be a UFA option.  

 

 

 

 

[PerreaultForever]

15 hours ago, Thwomp! said:

For anyone mentioning Halak, the last time we acquired him he refused to report and play for the Sabres.   He dressed for one game and didn't play, and basically forced Murray to trade him to Washington for Neuvirth.  I'm sure he's not coming here now either.

? I don't think this is true. maybe a rumour, but I don't remember ever reading or hearing this anywhere. 

Not that he'd come here anyway. He's near the end so not sure he's even worth considering. 

[Hoss]

20 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

? I don't think this is true. maybe a rumour, but I don't remember ever reading or hearing this anywhere. 

Not that he'd come here anyway. He's near the end so not sure he's even worth considering. 

I remember it being widely reported enough to the point where I believe it to be accurate.

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, Hoss said:

I remember it being widely reported enough to the point where I believe it to be accurate.

Me too.

[Thorner]

3 hours ago, kas23 said:

If we go with Ulmark, then the 2nd goalie is probably be more important than Ulmark himself. I get he’s a fan favorite, but we need to be realistic about his injury history. 

Same goes for McCabe

and jack 

[kas23]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Same goes for McCabe

and jack 

I agree with McCabe. Both him and Ulmark are completely replaceable. And I would place hardball with Ulmark because of this. Jack isn’t quite replaceable. 

[Norcal]

I'm going back to my original proposal for Ullmark 2×4.5. It gives both sides flexibility and there's still potential for a 5×5or higher later on. 

The deal gives the team a chance to grow together into a contender. 

If the team doesn't get better, he has a chance to get out by the deadline year two. 

If they are a playoff team, and he's the reason then reward him with the next contract and a raise. 

 

[dudacek]

44 minutes ago, kas23 said:

I agree with McCabe. Both him and Ulmark are completely replaceable. And I would place hardball with Ulmark because of this. Jack isn’t quite replaceable. 

I know you aren't alone in this, but I'm not sure how you are going to easily replace Ullmark.

[nfreeman]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

I know you aren't alone in this, but I'm not sure how you are going to easily replace Ullmark.

Trade a 3rd-rounder to VGK for MAF and sign Freddy Andersen to a FA contract.

[dudacek]

7 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Trade a 3rd-rounder to VGK for MAF and sign Freddy Andersen to a FA contract.

Freddy Andersen would likely cost as much as Linus and isn't as good.

Fleury costs $7 million and a 3rd rounder. Linus will cost maybe $5 million with no acquisition cost.

Fleury is 37 and will be one and done. Andersen is 31 and likely exiting his prime. Ullmark is 27 and entering his.

He is the only one of the 3 likely to anchor our crease for 5 years, or even 3.

Edited April 24, 2021 by dudacek

[kas23]

12 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I know you aren't alone in this, but I'm not sure how you are going to easily replace Ullmark.

No doubt he’s very good, but the guy has trouble staying on the ice. We need someone of his caliber (or even slightly lower) who can actually be available to play. I just think sinking money into him long-term at a high-ish number will be regrettable. We already have enough of those types of contracts. 

Edited April 24, 2021 by kas23

[nfreeman]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Freddy Andersen would likely cost as much as Linus and isn't as good.

Fleury costs $7 million and a 3rd rounder. Linus will cost maybe $5 million with no acquisition cost.

Fleury is 37 and will be one and done. Andersen is 31 and likely exiting his prime. Ullmark is 27 and entering his.

He is the only one of the 3 likely to anchor our crease for 5 years, or even 3.

All of this is fair, but they absolutely need 2 goalies next year (one of which can be Ullmark), and MAF is exactly what the doctor ordered for this team, on and off the ice.  That is well worth a 3rd-rounder and first bite at the apple for a short-term extension with MAF.

As for Ullmark vs Andersen, they are pretty close in ability IMHO and...

 

1 minute ago, kas23 said:

No doubt he’s very good, but the guy has trouble staying on the ice. We need someone of his caliber (or even slightly lower) who can actually be available to play.

 

...so I am pretty unsure about giving Ullmark a 5-year deal, which is what it might take to keep him.

 

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, nfreeman said:

...so I am pretty unsure about giving Ullmark a 5-year deal, which is what it might take to keep him.

 

Where do you think Ullmark will get a better offer than what the Sabres will want to match, and how much will it be?

[Hoss]

17 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Freddy Andersen would likely cost as much as Linus and isn't as good.

Fleury costs $7 million and a 3rd rounder. Linus will cost maybe $5 million with no acquisition cost.

Fleury is 37 and will be one and done. Andersen is 31 and likely exiting his prime. Ullmark is 27 and entering his.

He is the only one of the 3 likely to anchor our crease for 5 years, or even 3.

I’m legitimately curious when Linus Ullmark became anybody’s long-term answer in net. Solid not great numbers for two years on a bad team and has battled injuries all year. Enroth’s numbers were just as good for a stretch. I’m not signing Ullmark to more than two years.

[JohnC]

5 minutes ago, Hoss said:

I’m legitimately curious when Linus Ullmark became anybody’s long-term answer in net. Solid not great numbers for two years on a bad team and has battled injuries all year. Enroth’s numbers were just as good for a stretch. I’m not signing Ullmark to more than two years.

If that's the length of term you are willing to sign him for then he will be playing somewhere else. There are no guarantees about the level of play for most players but what is encouraging about Ullmark is that he has steadily gotten better. The goalie position is tough to evaluate. One year a goalie looks like a Vezina caliber of goalie, and the next year the player can play like a beer league bum. 

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

...so I am pretty unsure about giving Ullmark a 5-year deal, which is what it might take to keep him.

That's my feeling too. Not sure if he's the guy you want to commit to as #1, especially with the frequent injuries. 

Maybe there's a deal to be made with Florida? They have too many goalies. Adams needs to get creative if the free agents out there don't want to be Sabres. 

[dudacek]

55 minutes ago, Hoss said:

I’m legitimately curious when Linus Ullmark became anybody’s long-term answer in net. Solid not great numbers for two years on a bad team and has battled injuries all year. Enroth’s numbers were just as good for a stretch. I’m not signing Ullmark to more than two years.

Since Jan. 1, 2020 he has gone 15-9-3 with a .921 S% and a 2.47 GAA (both in the top half of the league among starters) on this team. Numbers wise you can find maybe a half-dozen goalies who are clearly superior over that stretch

http://www.nhl.com/stats/goalies?reportType=game&dateFrom=2020-01-01&dateTo=2021-04-24&gameType=2&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,1&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,20&sort=savePct&page=0&pageSize=50

He has been remarkably consistent, allowing over 3 goals just twice in that stretch, again on this team, and by the eye test keeps us in every game.

https://www.espn.com/nhl/player/gamelog/_/id/3069285/linus-ullmark

He has improved every single season as a pro, following the development path a majority of good starters take to emerge at a time most of them emerge.

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=152794

He may be the best shootout goalie in the NHL.

Plus he seems to be a good human being, a reliable teammate.

I get the injury concern. I don't get the sense there are other goalies out there who are as skilled and at an equivalent point in their careers that can be easily acquired.

We've been in goalie purgatory for years as we've waited for someone like Linus to develop. Letting him walk as he is emerging would be so Buffalo.

Edited April 24, 2021 by dudacek

[nfreeman]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Where do you think Ullmark will get a better offer than what the Sabres will want to match, and how much will it be?

Good question.  In light of the league wide cap situation and Sabres stink, it’s quite possible no one gives him as much as $4.5MM x 3 years — although I wouldn’t be a-tall surprised if someone does.  I’d also be fine with the Sabres giving him that deal.  I am doubtful about more term than that though.  And I absolutely have to have another guy like MAF or Andersen or Raanta here even if Linus re-signs.  

[Thorner]

18 hours ago, Hoss said:

I’m legitimately curious when Linus Ullmark became anybody’s long-term answer in net. Solid not great numbers for two years on a bad team and has battled injuries all year. Enroth’s numbers were just as good for a stretch. I’m not signing Ullmark to more than two years.

The injury concern is indeed MASSIVE.

Linus only works as a starter if he has a really good backup behind him. Otherwise it's willful ignorance of the likelihood Ullmark goes down, particularly when you need 2 good goalies anyways. Ullmark can be our 1, but he absolutely needs the backing of a borderline 1A.