Offseason Gameplan 2022 - Solving the goaltending system wide.

[LabattBlue]

2 hours ago, Radar said:

You can't magically produce a starting goalie. Who that meets that description do you have in mind. Not fantasy but realistic options. You don't fire a GM for something that's not there to begin with. Don't say we should have signed Ulmark for what Boston did please.

The Sabres org loves fans like you. 

[LGR4GM]

12 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

The Sabres org loves fans like you. 

[Norcal]

29 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

Kuemper is my grand slam signing but if they could sign Husso to pair with UPL as a Finnish Connection that would be solid too.

Husso has vastly outplayed Binnington but the Blues  are stuck with Binnington’s anchor contract. I think Husso sits 3rd in the league in goals saved above replacement. He is just coming into that age range that most goalies start to really find their game.

And no I don’t give a crap about the Hutton-Blues situation, totally different goalies and teams.

I like Husso

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

The lack of faith in UPL is surprising. 

Marty seems to agree with me.  He said UPL gets beat way to often on "clean shots" and "long range shots" and "that isn't going to change at the NHL level."  That doesn't bode well.  Marty was very clear that if we had a real starter we could bring UPL up and let him play 25 games and learn how to be an NHL goalie.

Edited April 11, 2022 by GASabresIUFAN

[LGR4GM]

16 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Marty seems to agree with me.  He said UPL gets beat way to often on "clean shots" and "long range shots" and "that isn't going to change at the NHL level."  That doesn't bode well.  Marty was very clear that if we had a real starter we could bring UPL up and let him play 25 games and learn how to be an NHL goalie.

I agree that UPL isn't going to be a great goalie. He's in that Ullmark level of meh

[kas23]

2 hours ago, Norcal said:

 

They should sign a couple SHL guys. 

I know one who can stop a few pucks. 

Maybe Portillo has some good recommendations. 

[Marvin]

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

The hosts start the show talking about the goalie situation. Marty starts off saying that since neither of the two college prospects went pro the organization needs to address the issue with greater urgency. 

https://www.audacy.com/wgr550/hosts/the-instigators

2 hours ago, Flashsabre said:

Kuemper is my grand slam signing but if they could sign Husso to pair with UPL as a Finnish Connection that would be solid too.

Husso has vastly outplayed Binnington but the Blues  are stuck with Binnington’s anchor contract. I think Husso sits 3rd in the league in goals saved above replacement. He is just coming into that age range that most goalies start to really find their game.

And no I don’t give a crap about the Hutton-Blues situation, totally different goalies and teams.

Wow.  Marty is less sanguine about the Sabres getting goaltending than I am.

If I am St. Louis, I don't let Husso go.  How they handle the roster after more-or-less duplicating Binnington's contract for Husso would be very interesting.  It would be a terrible allocation of salary, but I can't justify them losing Husso.

And did I hear Marty giving a thin justification for considering Carey Price?  I played that part three times and I still think that's a potentially valid interpretation.

[JohnC]

12 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

Wow.  Marty is less sanguine about the Sabres getting goaltending than I am.

If I am St. Louis, I don't let Husso go.  How they handle the roster after more-or-less duplicating Binnington's contract for Husso would be very interesting.  It would be a terrible allocation of salary, but I can't justify them losing Husso.

And did I hear Marty giving a thin justification for considering Carey Price?  I played that part three times and I still think that's a potentially valid interpretation.

The general point that I took away from that Instigator Show was that there really aren't that many good goalie options to address our void at the position. Yet, there are people who still argue that signing Ullmark would have been a bad decision. That makes no sense to me. If the GM would have signed him, or made arrangements for a reasonable replacement at the time, we would have had better goaltending this year and we wouldn't have to worry about giving up assets to shore up a weakness at the most important position in the game. We had an in-house solution and we let it walk out the door. 

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, Norcal said:

Too late man. He'll never win a chip as the guy imo

Is Ullmark a SC goalie? No. However, 95% of the goalies in the league don't fall in the elite status that help a team to win a SC. What I can say for sure is that he is a goalie that would have given this team a better chance to succeed than the goalies we had this year. And it should not be forgotten that when he was with the Sabres with a very pedestrian roster playing in front of him the team had a winning record. 

[Flashsabre]

29 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

Wow.  Marty is less sanguine about the Sabres getting goaltending than I am.

If I am St. Louis, I don't let Husso go.  How they handle the roster after more-or-less duplicating Binnington's contract for Husso would be very interesting.  It would be a terrible allocation of salary, but I can't justify them losing Husso.

And did I hear Marty giving a thin justification for considering Carey Price?  I played that part three times and I still think that's a potentially valid interpretation.

The thing with Price is mental and physical health. If he had 2 years left I would pull the trigger but at that length it is a tough sell unless Habs are retaining 50%!and asking for nothing back.

[Norcal]

48 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Is Ullmark a SC goalie? No. However, 95% of the goalies in the league don't fall in the elite status that help a team to win a SC. What I can say for sure is that he is a goalie that would have given this team a better chance to succeed than the goalies we had this year. And it should not be forgotten that when he was with the Sabres with a very pedestrian roster playing in front of him the team had a winning record. 

I respect your point of view and you always make your points abundantly clear but....

He chose to leave.

He is not coming back to lead this young Sabres team for the next few years so whether he had the numbers or could of if he was here is irrelevant. 

What goalie do you like now?

Who out there strikes your fancy? 

I'll throw my hat back into the Strauss Mann ring again.

A bit undersized but  respectable numbers in college at Michigan and the SHL this season. 

In 22 games he has a 2.19 gaa and .914 save %. Good for a 13-9 record.

He also played 2 games for USA in the Olympics posting a 1.85gaa .945sa%

Sign him! Rochester awaits. 

[Radar]

3 hours ago, LabattBlue said:

The Sabres org loves fans like you. 

Well take a bow for your wonderful example of what fans we should be.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Norcal said:

I respect your point of view and you always make your points abundantly clear but....

He chose to leave.

He is not coming back to lead this young Sabres team for the next few years so whether he had the numbers or could of if he was here is irrelevant. 

What goalie do you like now?

Who out there strikes your fancy? 

I'll throw my hat back into the Strauss Mann ring again.

A bit undersized but  respectable numbers in college at Michigan and the SHL this season. 

In 22 games he has a 2.19 gaa and .914 save %. Good for a 13-9 record.

He also played 2 games for USA in the Olympics posting a 1.85gaa .945sa%

Sign him! Rochester awaits. 

With respect to your comment that Ullmark decided to leave that doesn't fully reflect the situation at the time. When he got his Boston offer he made it known that the Sabres would have to pay a premium relative to the Boston offer in order to stay. Our GM said no. That is the backdrop to the current situation. And it shouldn't be forgotten that the Sabres were dramatically below the cap and their options for the position were limited when they told him no. 

I listened to the Instigator Show that focused on the goalie issue. Marty Biron listed a number of options to consider. He pointed out that the main problem is that many of the goalies that he would be interested in, even as stopgap goalies, are probably not attainable.  So answering your basic question about what goalie do I like: my answer is that I don't know? 

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

7 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I agree that UPL isn't going to be a great goalie. He's in that Ullmark level of meh

Then why do you believe that the lack of faith in him is surprising?  His career so far in the pros has been marked by injury and mediocre performance and the educated fans here know it.  

I’d be more surprised if they weren’t skeptical of UPL so far.

Imho to best develop UPL build a defense in Rochester and let UPL play behind the improved and earn his way up. 

[LGR4GM]

14 hours ago, JohnC said:

The general point that I took away from that Instigator Show was that there really aren't that many good goalie options to address our void at the position. Yet, there are people who still argue that signing Ullmark would have been a bad decision. That makes no sense to me. If the GM would have signed him, or made arrangements for a reasonable replacement at the time, we would have had better goaltending this year and we wouldn't have to worry about giving up assets to shore up a weakness at the most important position in the game. We had an in-house solution and we let it walk out the door. 

How don't you understand that Ullmark isn't that good? 24th in sv% on the BRUINS. Yet I am supposed to believe he is such an upgrade over UPL that we should have overpaid in money and term to keep him. Counting Ullmark as an in house solution is like saying Nathan Peterman was an in house solution. 

8 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Then why do you believe that the lack of faith in him is surprising?  His career so far in the pros has been marked by injury and mediocre performance and the educated fans here know it.  

I’d be more surprised if they weren’t skeptical of UPL so far.

Imho to best develop UPL build a defense in Rochester and let UPL play behind the improved and earn his way up. 

Cuz of how this board usually works. Every prospect we have is the 2nd coming of Conor McDavid or Hasek. A great example is this board LOST ITS MIND for Metaj Pekar for a few years. 

[LGR4GM]

@JohnC let me simplify this. You believe that Ullmark represents a solution to our goaltending problem. I don't think Ullmark represents a solution to our goaltending problem. That's basically what all this boils down to. 

[SwampD]

I thought we traded Ullmark.

I don’t miss him and certainly don’t want him back.

I mean, I might be talked into it if it meant the return of MODO.

[jsb]

1. Ullmark was not worth 20M over 4 years with a No Move Clause to the Sabres
2. Boston on the other hand is in complete win now mode. They have 8 forwards currently 30 years of age or older
3. Bergeron's contract ends this year at the age of 36. The Bruins currently have 78M in salary set for next year. He's going to have to take a home town discount to remain with the team. Plus Pasternak's contract ends at the end of next year and he's not going to give the Bruins a Marchand or Bergeron discount. McAvoy's contract starts next year plus Swayman's contract will be due after next year. 
4. Boston needs to win now because their SC time is just about dried up.
5. Ullmark isn't terrible but he's no savior either. He played 4 years with the Sabres and averaged about 32 games a year mainly because he couldn't stay healthy. He wasn't worth that contract to KA and the Sabres brass. 5M AAV for a guy who plays 32 games a year, really??

[dudacek]

The lack of options in this thread that are available, affordable, short-term and “good guys” has basically resigned me to the likelihood that we will be looking at an Anderson/UPL duo next year with either Subban or Tokarski as insurance.

It’s a ***** option, but under the parameters Adams has drawn for himself, it might be the best one.

My preference would be to put the Florida pick + Portillo on the table for a veteran and see if we can scare up a better option (John Gibson). Or to dramatically overpay for Fleury or Kuemper short-term.

I doubt either materializes.

I think we remain in goalie purgatory until Levi saves us.

Edited April 12, 2022 by dudacek

[sabresparaavida]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

The lack of options in this thread that are available, affordable, short-term and “good guys” has basically resigned me to the likelihood that we will be looking at an Anderson/UPL duo next year with either Subban or Tokarski as insurance.

It’s a ***** option, but under the parameters Adams has drawn for himself, it might be the best one.

My preference would be to put the Florida pick + Portillo on the table for a veteran and see if we can scare up a better option (John Gibson). Or to dramatically overpay for Fleury or Kuemper short-term.

I doubt either materializes.

I think we remain in goalie purgatory until Levi saves us.

I do not want to go anywhere near John Gibson. His save percentages the last 3 years have been .904, .903, and .904, only slightly better than what we’ve got from Anderson and Tokarski this season. After this year he will have 5 years at 6.4 million in his age 29-34 seasons. He likely won’t be worth that contract, let alone giving up those assets for him.

[dudacek]

3 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

I do not want to go anywhere near John Gibson. His save percentages the last 3 years have been .904, .903, and .904, only slightly better than what we’ve got from Anderson and Tokarski this season. After this year he will have 5 years at 6.4 million in his age 29-34 seasons. He likely won’t be worth that contract, let alone giving up those assets for him.

Which is why I think he might be a good reclamation project because he’s talented, we have cap space and the purchase price might not be huge. Your mileage may vary.

Your post though supports my earlier one: I’m not sure that there are any goalies out there who check the boxes of affordable, available, short-term and good. It’s pick your wart.

[nfreeman]

I think I would throw a huge offer -- maybe $10MM per year -- at MAF for 2 years.  He is exactly what they need, they have a ton of cap space and a check like that might get him in the door.  He turns 38 in November and his expiring contract is at $7MM per year, btw.

[Eleven]

13 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

I think I would throw a huge offer -- maybe $10MM per year -- at MAF for 2 years.  He is exactly what they need, they have a ton of cap space and a check like that might get him in the door.  He turns 38 in November and his expiring contract is at $7MM per year, btw.

This isn't a bad idea.  In fact, the more I mull it over, this seems like the most reasonable solution.

Edited April 12, 2022 by Eleven

[Marvin]

54 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

@JohnC let me simplify this. You believe that Ullmark represents a solution to our goaltending problem. I don't think Ullmark represents a solution to our goaltending problem. That's basically what all this boils down to. 

Ullmark probably was not the solution over the long haul in Buffalo.  But, like Marty Biron and Mika Noronen in 2003-4, he would have helped tide us over until someone better emerges.  Had he been signed to a 4 year deal after the stoppage at probably $4M, he'd have 2 years left after this season.   IMHO, that is preferable to what we have now.  YMMV.  It would give UPL more time to grow and tide us over until, we hope, one of Portillo or Levi emerges in Buffalo.

Question: do you think Ukka Pekka-Lukkonen is even a short term answer in net as part of a 1A-1B scenario?  Because until he's clearly one of the top 2, I don't.  Currently, he's clearly inferior to Anderson and he could not beat a AAAA goalie like Tokarski coming out of camp.  That is very concerning.  And Marty Biron being even more pessimistic than I am gives me pause.

For those who think UPL can be the short term answer starting next season, please give me your reasons.  My reason to have hope for UPL is that he was Ullmark-like in the NHL and he still has room to grow, so he might get better than that.  But until he's out-playing Dell in Rochester, I don't have enough evidence to expect that.

[LGR4GM]

54 minutes ago, dudacek said:

The lack of options in this thread that are available, affordable, short-term and “good guys” has basically resigned me to the likelihood that we will be looking at an Anderson/UPL duo next year with either Subban or Tokarski as insurance.

It’s a ***** option, but under the parameters Adams has drawn for himself, it might be the best one.

My preference would be to put the Florida pick + Portillo on the table for a veteran and see if we can scare up a better option (John Gibson). Or to dramatically overpay for Fleury or Kuemper short-term.

I doubt either materializes.

I think we remain in goalie purgatory until Levi saves us.

I'm sorry, are you saying we should trade Portillo and the Florida 1st for John Gibson?

15 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

Ullmark probably was not the solution over the long haul in Buffalo.  But, like Marty Biron and Mika Noronen in 2003-4, he would have helped tide us over until someone better emerges.  Had he been signed to a 4 year deal after the stoppage at probably $4M, he'd have 2 years left after this season.   IMHO, that is preferable to what we have now.  YMMV.  It would give UPL more time to grow and tide us over until, we hope, one of Portillo or Levi emerges in Buffalo.

Question: do you think Ukka Pekka-Lukkonen is even a short term answer in net as part of a 1A-1B scenario?  Because until he's clearly one of the top 2, I don't.  Currently, he's clearly inferior to Anderson and he could not beat a AAAA goalie like Tokarski coming out of camp.  That is very concerning.  And Marty Biron being even more pessimistic than I am gives me pause.

For those who think UPL can be the short term answer starting next season, please give me your reasons.  My reason to have hope for UPL is that he was Ullmark-like in the NHL and he still has room to grow, so he might get better than that.  But until he's out-playing Dell in Rochester, I don't have enough evidence to expect that.

Feel like you undercut your own argument at the end. UPL isn't good yet you argue that UPL is Ullmark like and we should have signed Ullmark. 

What if, both aren't that good?