Is Devon Levi Trying to Force His Way Home?

[tom webster]

7 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Then we have to question his talent evaluation skills.

I’m not sure he’s right but it’s not a slam dunk.

[GASabresIUFAN]

5 minutes ago, tom webster said:

I’m not sure he’s right but it’s not a slam dunk.

Look where the two teams that added them are in the standings. Colo is doing it with significant injuries and NJ has with us in the standings last year.  There are no sure things, but at some point this going for the cheapest opinion is simply is the wrong plan.

Edited December 24, 2022 by GASabresIUFAN

[Taro T]

17 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Look where the two teams that added them are in the standings. Colo is doing it with significant injuries and NJ has with us in the standings last year.  There are no sure things, but at some point this going for the cheapest opinion is simply is the wrong plan.

He isn't setting out to go w/ the cheapest option.  Murray wasn't particularly cheap.

Fully expect that if neither Comrie nor UPL show they can backstop a contending team that a new starter will be brought in this summer.  But unless he gets a deal he simply can't walk away from it isn't happening during this season.

[French Collection]

29 minutes ago, Taro T said:

He isn't setting out to go w/ the cheapest option.  Murray wasn't particularly cheap.

Fully expect that if neither Comrie nor UPL show they can backstop a contending team that a new starter will be brought in this summer.  But unless he gets a deal he simply can't walk away from it isn't happening during this season.

True on not really being cheap. Gibson was an expensive option too.

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, French Collection said:

True on not really being cheap. Gibson was an expensive option too.

Gibson was not cheap in $ from a cap standpoint, but was cheap to acquire asset wise and that is KA's primary concern.  Remember he had to get cap floor complaint.  Murray, a 3rd and a 7th went to Toronto with only future considerations going back to Ottawa in the Murray deal.  This is why KA was interested in adding guys like Murray and Gibson.  They would help him get cap complaint, add additional assets and if Bales could fix them, solid goaltending.  If KA would have had to give up a draft pick or even a hockey puck to acquire either goaltender he would have been out.  

Don't forget that KA has yet to trade an asset for a player once the teardown began.  Acquired players like Hagg, Tuch, Levi and Krebs were pieces of a teardown deal.  Other acquired players like Bishop, Boychuk and Butcher, KA was paid to take them (or their contract) from the other team.  All other new players were draft picks or UFAs.

He has yet to acquire a player using players, prospects or picks since the teardown where we acquire the "better" player. 

Edited December 24, 2022 by GASabresIUFAN

[LGR4GM]

6 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Gibson was not cheap in $ from a cap standpoint, but was cheap to acquire asset wise and that is KA's primary concern.  Remember he had to get cap floor complaint.  Murray, a 3rd and a 7th went to Toronto with only future considerations going back to Ottawa in the Murray deal.  This is why KA was interested in adding guys like Murray and Gibson.  They would help him get cap complaint, add additional assets and if Bales could fix them, solid goaltending.  If KA would have had to give up a draft pick or even a hockey puck to acquire either goaltender he would have been out.  

Don't forget that KA has yet to trade an asset for a player once the teardown began.  Acquired players like Hagg, Tuch, Levi and Krebs were pieces of a teardown deal.  Other acquired players like Bishop, Boychuk and Butcher, KA was paid to take them (or their contract) from the other team.  All other new players were draft picks or UFAs.

He has yet to acquire a player using players, prospects or picks since the teardown where we acquire the "better" player. 

And for that I'm thankful. 

I will say though he traded Eichel and Reinhart SO how accurate is this? Why "once the teardown began" as some strange cutoff. He hasn't traded young players or assets, but he also is only in year 2 and didn't have those assets until trading Reinhart and Eichel and Ristolainen. I'm saying your argument here is flawed.

[LGR4GM]

I want to add one thing. If adams has yet to trade an asset once the teardown began (i think you mean ended because to tear down he traded multiple assets), that means the teardown ended in November of 2021 with the Eichel trade. 

Why do I mention this? Well that means he's only had 2 times to trade, deadline 2022, and the 2022 offseason. Now the premise is he isn't in a win mode, yet in 2022 he deliberately and purposefully kept together a roster that was playing well and didn't trade ufas. That momentum in fact did carry over to the start of 2022 season.

So that actually means the only time he could have traded was this offseason where we know he tried to. 

 

[LGR4GM]

9 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

He has yet to acquire a player using players, prospects or picks since the teardown where we acquire the "better" player. 

I mean if you don't count the risto trade where we definitely got the better player. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

Actually in his entire tenure he has only made 1 “hockey” trade (Staal for Johansson) and has never traded a pick(s) or prospect(s) or mix to assets to acquire an NHL player.  He has also yet to sign a player to a contract longer than 2 years.  

While I agree with many of these moves, it’s hard to bring talent in known areas on need without using all the arrows in the quiver.  These areas have been obvious (goaltending and defense) for 2 offseasons, 2 deadlines and 1 1/2 seasons.    

[LGR4GM]

23 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Actually in his entire tenure he has only made 1 “hockey” trade (Staal for Johansson) and has never traded a pick(s) or prospect(s) or mix to assets to acquire an NHL player.  He has also yet to sign a player to a contract longer than 2 years.  

While I agree with many of these moves, it’s hard to bring talent in known areas on need without using all the arrows in the quiver.  These areas have been obvious (goaltending and defense) for 2 offseasons, 2 deadlines and 1 1/2 seasons.    

I mean, if you don't count Thompson or Samuelsson then yes. 

[LGR4GM]

24 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

While I agree with many of these moves, it’s hard to bring talent in known areas on need without using all the arrows in the quiver.  These areas have been obvious (goaltending and defense) for 2 offseasons, 2 deadlines and 1 1/2 seasons.    

That isn't the timeline though. He spent 2021 offseason tearing down the roster. The 2021 trade deadline the team was in an 18 game losing streak and he fired the worst nhl coach of the decade. 

My issue is the lack of acknowledgment of the context. 

[Archie Lee]

12 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Look where the two teams that added them are in the standings. Colo is doing it with significant injuries and NJ has with us in the standings last year.  There are no sure things, but at some point this going for the cheapest opinion is simply is the wrong plan.

Comrie was good to start the year and then struggled.  Luukkonen started poorly but has been better lately.  Their respective #'s on the year are not good, but theyr are better than Vanecek's December #'s (.869 in 6 starts). The sample sizes from this year are too small to draw conclusions on any of the goalies you have referenced.

The plan is absolutely to go with Comrie/Anderson this year and Comrie/UPL next year. I don't think that means that a change in the plan can't occur, should Comrie or UPL not live up to expectations.  Looking at their #'s to this point in the season you can argue they have not met expectations.  There are 50 games left though.  Also, the team is starting to play better and that may play a factor in the #'s the goalies post from here.

 

[MBD]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Actually in his entire tenure he has only made 1 “hockey” trade (Staal for Johansson) and has never traded a pick(s) or prospect(s) or mix to assets to acquire an NHL player.  He has also yet to sign a player to a contract longer than 2 years.  

While I agree with many of these moves, it’s hard to bring talent in known areas on need without using all the arrows in the quiver.  These areas have been obvious (goaltending and defense) for 2 offseasons, 2 deadlines and 1 1/2 seasons.    

What am I missing here?  What did he get for Eichel?

[K-9]

There is a time to trade young assets for proven veteran talent and a time not to. Look no further than GMTM for an example of the time not to. The time to do it is when adding those good veteran players puts you over the top and turns you into a perennial contender. And that doesn’t happen until you have a young, solid core of good players to add them to. I submit that the Sabres are nearly there given what we have seen so far this season.
 

Sometime soon we are gonna be thanking KA for being patient, stockpiling assets, and doing it the right way. 

[Zamboni]

30 minutes ago, K-9 said:

There is a time to trade young assets for proven veteran talent and a time not to. Look no further than GMTM for an example of the time not to. The time to do it is when adding those good veteran players puts you over the top and turns you into a perennial contender. And that doesn’t happen until you have a young, solid core of good players to add them to. I submit that the Sabres are nearly there given what we have seen so far this season.
 

Sometime soon we are gonna be thanking KA for being patient, stockpiling assets, and doing it the right way. 

I agree with a lot of this.

Regarding thanking KA… Some will. Some won’t. Some never will admit it. 

[Mr. Allen]

How does this always happen here?  
This thread is about Levi possibly trying to get out of Sabres organization and it turns into something completely different by the “usuals”. 

[dudacek]

Here are the current numbers for goalies who were available, with last year in brackets:

• Murray .925 (.906)
• Georgiev .925 (.898)
• Lankinen .925 (.891)
• Samsonov .924 (.896)
• Anderson .922 (.897)
• Kuemper .916 (.921)
• Lindgren .913 (.958)
• Husso .912 (.919)
• Talbot .911 (.911)
• Copley .910 (.878)
• Vanecek .909 (.908)
• Hill .903 (.906)
• Rittich .906 (.886)
• Luukkonen .891 (.917)
• Jones .888 (.900)
• Comrie .887 (.920)
• Blackwood .882 (.892)
• Campbell .876 (.914)
• Mrazek .874 (.888)
• Petersen .868 (.895)

A few things stand out to me:

There was literally one goalie available (Kuemper) who was coming off a good year and had a proven track record as a #1.

The best choice statistically so far was quite literally Adams’ first choice (Murray)

There is not a single player on that list worth investing significant cap space or assets to acquire.

We are 30 games into the #s and a lot of them will change, both this year and beyond. Aside from a dozen or so who rarely come on the market (and still can slump, like Markstrom and Demko) goalies seem to be a fickle, capricious lot.

If you knew prior to this year that  Lankinen would be good, Copley fine and Petersen downright awful, you should probably be working for an NHL team

Certainly Georgiev or Husso look like they may have been better paths for the Sabres as of this morning, but in terms of risk/reward in the off-season it’s pretty easy to justify what Adams did. 

It will be interesting to see if Comrie is able to close the gap at all when he returns, or if Levi (who isn’t going anywhere) and/or UPL can arrive in time to justify his plan.

Edited December 24, 2022 by dudacek

[Taro T]

6 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Here are the current numbers for goalies who were available, with last year in brackets:

• Murray .925 (.906)
• Georgiev .925 (.898)
• Lankinen .925 (.891)
• Samsonov .924 (.896)
• Anderson .922 (.897)
• Kuemper .916 (.921)
• Lindgren .913 (.958)
• Husso .912 (.919)
• Talbot .911 (.911)
• Copley .910 (.878)
• Vanecek .909 (.908)
• Hill .903 (.906)
• Rittich .906 (.886)
• Luukkonen .891 (.917)
• Jones .888 (.900)
• Comrie .887 (.920)
• Blackwood .882 (.892)
• Campbell .876 (.914)
• Mrazek .874 (.888)
• Petersen .868 (.895)

A few things stand out to me:

There was literally one goalie available (Kuemper) who was coming off a good year and had a proven track record as a #1.

The best choice statistically so far was quite literally Adams’ first choice (Murray)

There is not a single player on that list worth investing significant cap space or assets to acquire.

We are 30 games into the #s and a lot of them will change, both this year and beyond. Aside from a dozen or so who rarely come on the market (and still can slump, like Markstrom and Demko) goalies seem to be a fickle, capricious lot.

If you knew prior to this year that  Lankinen would be good, Copley fine and Petersen downright awful, you should probably be working for an NHL team

Certainly Georgiev or Husso look like they may have been better paths for the Sabres as of this morning, but in terms of risk/reward it’s pretty easy to justify what Adams did. 

It will be interesting to see if Comrie is able to close the gap at all when he returns, or if Levi (who isn’t going anywhere) and/or UPL can arrive in time to justify his plan.

Good post.

Still expect there's a good chance Comrie turns it around when he gets back.  If he doesn't and UPL can't continue his unlikely play of the last 2 games fully expect Adams to be in the goalie market this offseason regardless of Levi & Portillo's decisions.

And fully expect whomever they bring in to be a bit of a head scratcher (like targeting Murray was) but between Bales & the analytics team am hopeful they get it right even though the track record under Adams to date leaves a lot to be desired.

[Brawndo]

22 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Hell this past off-season, he could have traded for Georgiev and Vanacek who were available RFAs and instead he went the cheaper route and signed Comrie.  Had I been in charge I might have taken a flier on Vanacek and Comrie and let them battle it out for the No. 1 job.   Both guys were mentioned in last off-season's thread as available.  Both have proven to be substantial upgrades over what we have.  

The price for Georgiev was a 2nd, a 6th both in 2022 and a 3rd in 2023.  Not exactly a huge sum.  Vanecek went for a similar price, a 2nd and a 3rd in 2022.  We could have easily afforded these prices and it wouldn't have affected our pipeline much as all.  We basically would have parted with the pick we used on Leinonen (who won't help us for at least 5 years) and other even less valuable pieces.  

 

22 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Considering Vanecek and Georgiev were younger and cheaper, maybe he should have taken a chance on them instead of Murray and Gibson.  They also didn't have NMC/NTC and would have had no choice but to come here.  

All this team needs is consistent average NHL goaltending to succeed, much like the Devils.  I honestly don't see why KA has such trouble even acquiring an average goaltender who can suit up 40-50 games.

You are making the assumption that the same deal was on the table for the Sabres to make. 
 

Yes both players would have had zero choice to come to Buffalo had a deal been completed, however both players were in their final season of RFA Eligibility and could have taken His qualifying offer in Georgiev’s Case or Arbitration Award in Vanecek’s Case and walked to UFA Status this Summer. 

Buffalo still populates a lot of players no thanks list and I’m sure both goalies and their agents were told of all interested teams. 
 

Since both teams got acceptable trade offers from Colorado and New Jersey and both players signed three year extensions, why potentially upset the player or more importantly their agent by sending them to a team they maybe do not want to play for. 

 

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, Brawndo said:

 

You are making the assumption that the same deal was on the table for the Sabres to make. 
 

Yes both players would have had zero choice to come to Buffalo had a deal been completed, however both players were in their final season of RFA Eligibility and could have taken His qualifying offer in Georgiev’s Case or Arbitration Award in Vanecek’s Case and walked to UFA Status this Summer. 

Buffalo still populates a lot of players no thanks list and I’m sure both goalies and their agents were told of all interested teams. 
 

Since both teams got acceptable trade offers from Colorado and New Jersey and both players signed three year extensions, why potentially upset the player or more importantly their agent by sending them to a team they maybe do not want to play for. 

 

 

Your assuming KA inquired about both and there is zero evidence he called on either player.  I believe it’s more likely than not that he didn’t even inquire about either because he is loath to part with any assets.

[Brawndo]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Your assuming KA inquired about both and there is zero evidence he called on either player.  I believe it’s more likely than not that he didn’t even inquire about either because he is loath to part with any assets.

I would not be too sure about that 

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Your assuming KA inquired about both and there is zero evidence he called on either player.  I believe it’s more likely than not that he didn’t even inquire about either because he is loath to part with any assets.

And right here is why your arguments aren't logical.  You start from the most false premise possible, that an NHL gm isn't even inquiring about players he knows are available. 

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Your assuming KA inquired about both and there is zero evidence he called on either player.  I believe it’s more likely than not that he didn’t even inquire about either because he is loath to part with any assets.

We "know" J-bot never inquired about anyone that couldn't be had without an overpay of a 3rd rounder 😉, but we have evidence that Adams has tried to do better.  Would be shocked if he didn't ask about both.