Friedman:Sabres are looking for Goaltending Help

[Doohicksie]

8 minutes ago, jad1 said:

So give up  playoff run this season and probably next for a goalie still in the AHL or college?

I'm sure the 5,000 fans who show up for thegames over the next two years would love that.

KA's plan is KA's plan.

[Weave]

3 minutes ago, Eleven said:

 

 

 

The key is to find the team's next Marty Biron while the next Ryan Miller is still developing.

We need at least a Marty Biron because there are no guarantees that one of the guys developing ever becomes another Marty Biron.

[mjd1001]

2 minutes ago, Eleven said:

 

 

 

The key is to find the team's next Marty Biron while the next Ryan Miller is still developing.

That is why it is too bad things happened they way they did with Ulmark.

Is getting paid $5 a year for 4 years probably too much for how he is playing? Maybe.  Is he playing great in Boston? No.  Would have have stayed with Buffalo if they matched the Boston offer? Maybe not.  BUT, the way he played with this team last year...and even this year with a GAA under 3 and a Save % around 910, he would have been a great fit for this team and probably have the Sabres close to a .500 club now.

[Taro T]

44 minutes ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

Especially when you feel the long term solution is already in your system.

They're having ~12,000 tickets go unsold & unused each game.  Even conservatively saying those seats would average $50/seat, that's ~$600k  over $300k per game of free money ownership, the league, & the NHLPA is missing out on.  If the purchasers of those seats dropped on average $25 in concessions & merchandise, that's ~$900k over $500k per game gross that's being pissed away.

You expect them to be OK with walking away from that much money for 3 more years hoping that one of the 3 can get it done at that point?

Fix the goaltending & get butts back in the seats.  Too late to get sellouts this year, but showing they'll fix this mess can garner a lot of good will & ticket sales next year.  It also would help to ensure none of the kids lose their "love of the game."

Edited December 3, 2021 by Taro T
Did the quick calc off 7k seats unused, not 12k- D'oh!

[Doohicksie]

Just now, mjd1001 said:

That is why it is too bad things happened they way they did with Ulmark.

Is getting paid $5 a year for 4 years probably too much for how he is playing? Maybe.  Is he playing great in Boston? No.  Would have have stayed with Buffalo if they matched the Boston offer? Maybe not.  BUT, the way he played with this team last year...and even this year with a GAA under 3 and a Save % around 910, he would have been a great fit for this team and probably have the Sabres close to a .500 club now.

Coulda woulda shoulda. 

My personal feeling is that Ullmark gave Kevyn the impression he would stay with the Sabres and there was a real probability he would, but that the Sabres for Ullmark was Plan B.  He wanted out and wanted to play on a good team.  Like I said, the mistake wasn't that KA moved on from Ullmark, the mistake is that he didn't get a draft pick for him at the deadline when Ullmark hadn't signed yet; that should have been the indicator he didn't want to stay.  Once the decision not to trade him was made, that mistake was in the books.  It would have been another mistake to overpay for Ullmark in terms of $ and term.

4 minutes ago, Taro T said:

They're having ~12,000 tickets go unsold & unused each game.  Even conservatively saying those seats would average $50/seat, that's over $300k per game of free money ownership, the league, & the NHLPA is missing out on.  If the purchasers of those seats dropped on average $25 in concessions & merchandise, that's over $500k per game gross that's being pissed away.

You expect them to be OK with walking away from that much money for 3 more years hoping that one of the 3 can get it done at that point?

Fix the goaltending & get butts back in the seats.  Too late to get sellouts this year, but showing they'll fix this mess can garner a lot of good will & ticket sales next year.  It also would help to ensure none of the kids lose their "love of the game."

It's more than a goalie that's keeping people away.

[Taro T]

6 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

That is why it is too bad things happened they way they did with Ulmark.

Is getting paid $5 a year for 4 years probably too much for how he is playing? Maybe.  Is he playing great in Boston? No.  Would have have stayed with Buffalo if they matched the Boston offer? Maybe not.  BUT, the way he played with this team last year...and even this year with a GAA under 3 and a Save % around 910, he would have been a great fit for this team and probably have the Sabres close to a .500 club now.

Yep.  And it's why, with more cap room than the actual cap range courtesy of Boychuk's contract & nearly that much for at least the 2 following years, that the offer to Ullmark should've been what he signed for in Beantown.  THEY should've had to truly overpay, not the Sabres.

Pennywise, pound foolish.  Unless they really think a top 5 pick vs a top 12 pick will affect the franchise's future that much.  And if that's the case, the stealth tank is goal 1 & development is goal 2.  Which would stink if true.

[Doohicksie]

Just now, Taro T said:

Yep.  And it's why, with more cap room than the actual cap range courtesy of Boychuk's contract & nearly that much for at least the 2 following years, that the offer to Ullmark should've been what he signed for in Beantown.  THEY should've had to truly overpay, not the Sabres.

Ullmark didn't want to stay.  I'm pretty sure that's the case.  It doesn't matter what the Sabres would have offered, any decent offer from a playoff team meant he was gone.

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

Coulda woulda shoulda. 

My personal feeling is that Ullmark gave Kevyn the impression he would stay with the Sabres and there was a real probability he would, but that the Sabres for Ullmark was Plan B.  He wanted out and wanted to play on a good team.  Like I said, the mistake wasn't that KA moved on from Ullmark, the mistake is that he didn't get a draft pick for him at the deadline when Ullmark hadn't signed yet; that should have been the indicator he didn't want to stay.  Once the decision not to trade him was made, that mistake was in the books.  It would have been another mistake to overpay for Ullmark in terms of $ and term.

It's more than a goalie that's keeping people away.

It is.  But the Ullmark fiasco (lower case, not upper case 😉 ) was another straw on that overladen camel.  It certainly kept many away.  And, if they were getting good the level of goaltending they got from Ullmark last year, then this team would have 6-12 more points in the standings.  That would go a long way to getting more bodies in the building THIS year.

But there was either a miscalculation or the stealth tank was a bigger goal that we believed it to be.  Either way, a mistake was made.

 

[Taro T]

3 minutes ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

Ullmark didn't want to stay.  I'm pretty sure that's the case.  It doesn't matter what the Sabres would have offered, any decent offer from a playoff team meant he was gone.

So, you believe he lied to Adams when he said that he'd stay in Buffalo unless the deal they'd worked out was beaten?

Or, do you believe he wouldn't have agreed (w/ the same stipulation that he'd see if it would get topped) to the deal he made w/ the Bruins had Adams made that offer prior to FA opening?

Adams wanted him back.  Ullmark didn't pull a McCabe and say he was gone regardless.  So, while it might not have been his absolute 1st choice, he was absolutely willing to stay (again, unless he was lying) and having him stay would've definitely helped this year.

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, LabattBlue said:

I know some are empty net goals, but the Sabres have allowed 40 goals in their last 8 games.  The goalie position is drowning, and the Malcolm Subban life preserver has a hole in it.

But many of those goals stem from defensive breakdowns. If you don't acknowledge that then you can swap goalies every day and not improve.

Edited December 3, 2021 by PromoTheRobot

[nfreeman]

2 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

But many of those goals stem from defensive breakdowns. If you don't acknowledge that then you swap goalies every day and not improve.

You keep making this point.  Do you really not think the Sabres have a problem in net?

[Radar]

11 minutes ago, Taro T said:

So, you believe he lied to Adams when he said that he'd stay in Buffalo unless the deal they'd worked out was beaten?

Or, do you believe he wouldn't have agreed (w/ the same stipulation that he'd see if it would get topped) to the deal he made w/ the Bruins had Adams made that offer prior to FA opening?

Adams wanted him back.  Ullmark didn't pull a McCabe and say he was gone regardless.  So, while it might not have been his absolute 1st choice, he was absolutely willing to stay (again, unless he was lying) and having him stay would've definitely helped this year.

I may be mistaken but I thought I had heard the Sabres were willing to offer same contract as Bruins and he chose to sign with them. Personally glad he did as I wouldn't have wanted them to sign him for that. Buffalo error was allowing it to get to UFA to begin with.

[mjd1001]

22 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

You keep making this point.  Do you really not think the Sabres have a problem in net?

Yeah, I agree. Sure, the D-unit has breakdowns, but if you have to pick the bigger issue it is goaltending.  I don't think anyone is arguing the D-unit doesn't have to get better it does....I don't get how people are excusing the goaltending by bringing up the D-unit everytime someone says there is a major issue with the goaltending.

[PromoTheRobot]

31 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

You keep making this point.  Do you really not think the Sabres have a problem in net?

The goaltending could be better for sure, but most of our goals result when we get stuck in our end unable to break out. Then it's cycle-cycle-cycle-GOAL. Then I read comments like the Sabres are getting passive in games, not trying to score. The reality is other team are pressing us and we can't get out of our own ends.

[PromoTheRobot]

12 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

Yeah, I agree. Sure, the D-unit has breakdowns, but if you have to pick the bigger issue it is goaltending.  I don't think anyone is arguing the D-unit doesn't have to get better it does....I don't get how people are excusing the goaltending by bringing up the D-unit everytime someone says there is a major issue with the goaltending.

Brian Gionta addresses this very topic on the latest After The Whistle. He thinks goaltending is less of an issue than what's happening in front of the goalie

Go to the 22:35 mark: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/after-the-whistle-with-andrew-peters-craig-rivet/id1590573108?l=es

[Taro T]

26 minutes ago, Radar said:

I may be mistaken but I thought I had heard the Sabres were willing to offer same contract as Bruins and he chose to sign with them. Personally glad he did as I wouldn't have wanted them to sign him for that. Buffalo error was allowing it to get to UFA to begin with.

Supposedly they were.  So, they WERE willing to go to that.  BUT that's not the deal they offered prior to FA opening.

Ullmark agreed that he would sign the Sabres offer IF it weren't beaten.  With that being the case, and w/ the Sabres being light years from the cap ceiling, and knowing in hindsight that the Sabres apparently were willing to go to the Bruins offer, THEN the Sabres should have made the Bruins offer prior to FA opening.

Then, presuming Ullmark makes the same offer to Adams for that deal that he made for the Sabres actual deal, the Bruins would have to beat that deal, & not the other way around.  Could they have & would they have?  Remember Swayman played fairly well for them & they still hope to somehow eventually get Rask back.  Maybe they still do, and it is what it is, but there's a very real chance nobody would've beat that offer.  (We know that, because that was the offer he signed.  If there were a better offer, he takes that instead.)

We can agree to disagree about whether he should've been signed at all; but considering they did want him & he was willing to come back & money shouldn't be an issue w/ the capspace they have & the way ownerships other assets have recently appreciated, they should've made a legit offer when they were in the driver's seat; not when they were put in the position of reacting to other offers.

[woods-racer]

18 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Brian Gionta addresses this very topic on the latest After The Whistle. He thinks goaltending is less of an issue than what's happening in front of the goalie

Go to the 22:35 mark: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/after-the-whistle-with-andrew-peters-craig-rivet/id1590573108?l=es

He's not saying goal tending is not an issue, a major issue at that, but team defense is just as horrific especially by our defensemen. He called it an easy scapegoat to blame the goalies.

[nfreeman]

@Taro T -- just to be clear, do you think the Sabres offered Ullmark $5MM x 3 years at the trade deadline and he turned it down, and the Sabres should've offered him $5MM x 4 years at that point?

 

[PromoTheRobot]

7 minutes ago, woods-racer said:

He's not saying goal tending is not an issue, a major issue at that, but team defense is just as horrific especially by our defensemen. He called it an easy scapegoat to blame the goalies.

Which is what I've been saying. There's a tendency to look only at the end result and not the breakdowns leading to it.

[jsb]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

You keep making this point.  Do you really not think the Sabres have a problem in net?

I don't think anyone is saying we don't have an issue with our GKs, I think what he was trying to say is that is not the only problem on this team. The defensive awareness on this team especially on the backend is almost as bad and is a contributing factor on what's going on. Having said that, I don't think winning this year was anywhere near the top priority of this organization. It was not only developing their new core that was already here or in some developing league (AHL-NCAA-Overseas). Developing and restocking the depth of this team going forward.

One of our biggest issues even when we were a fringe playoff team when healthy but when the inevitable injuries occur we had no-one that was near NHL ready to step in and the wheels fell off. This team needs to develop depth in the organization as well as any one position including the GK. They need IMO to stay the course and after this year, reprioritize what they've seen this year, who's ready to step up and what additions they need to move forward that isn't a quick fix but is in the long term good of the organization. 

If things go as planned, next year is when some type of winning expectations can be put on the club but right now, that's just fools gold, this is not a playoff team or even near good enough to become one this year.

Edited December 3, 2021 by jsb

[SabresVet]

2 hours ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

KA's plan is KA's plan.

The plan for rebuilding is not permanently fixed in place.  It's safe to say that in 2 off-seasons he's not handled the goaltending situation well. KA is banking on UPL being their guy, but there's no current backup plan save for journeymen types.  I also don't expect to announce the plan at all positions, but need to see some results from a guy who hasn't served in a front office before I start blindly accepting that there is a good plan.  Besides, every team has a plan...and to get into the playoffs yours has to be better than your opponents.    

2 hours ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

Ullmark didn't want to stay.  I'm pretty sure that's the case.  It doesn't matter what the Sabres would have offered, any decent offer from a playoff team meant he was gone.

This is the common Buffalo battered fan syndrome refrain.  No one wants to play here, ergo, we shouldn't expect much.

Of course, with competent leadership like the Bills have you can expect to improve.  Doesn't guarantee a championship, but I'm tired of this being the response when the team isn't playing well.  

 

Edited December 3, 2021 by SabresVet

[PromoTheRobot]

49 minutes ago, SabresVet said:

The plan for rebuilding is not permanently fixed in place.  It's safe to say that in 2 off-seasons he's not handled the goaltending situation well. KA is banking on UPL being their guy, but there's no current backup plan save for journeymen types.  I also don't expect to announce the plan at all positions, but need to see some results from a guy who hasn't served in a front office before I start blindly accepting that there is a good plan.  Besides, every team has a plan...and to get into the playoffs yours has to be better than your opponents.    

This is the common Buffalo battered fan syndrome refrain.  No one wants to play here, ergo, we shouldn't expect much.

Of course, with competent leadership like the Bills have you can expect to improve.  Doesn't guarantee a championship, but I'm tired of this being the response when the team isn't playing well.  

 

How many years (or weeks) does Adams get to fix things? Everyone says they are patient but are they really? For a season with zero expectations there are sure a lot of them.

[PromoTheRobot]

So Anderson is month-to-month?? What happened? There may well be another goalie deal coming.

 

[jad1]

22 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

How many years (or weeks) does Adams get to fix things? Everyone says they are patient but are they really? For a season with zero expectations there are sure a lot of them.

Who agreed to a season with zero expectations?   

The NHL is a pretty brutal league.  Franchises with zero expectations usually get chewed up and spit out.

[thewookie1]

45 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

So Anderson is month-to-month?? What happened? There may well be another goalie deal coming.

 

Guessing the concussion rumor might be true in that case. If Tokarski actually has COVID and isn’t just a contact then he could be out a couple weeks as well. I’d hope Adams will go get Holtby from Dallas if he’s available for a reasonable price because I never wish to see Dell play another game here.