Starting goaltending: what do we really think about the situation in the crease?

[GoPuckYourself]

Unfortunately this could very well be Adams downfall, why he continues to neglect goaltending is beyond me. Just adding 2 good defensive defensmen isn't enough, there will be times when Levi struggles or let's hope not may get injured. UPL and Comrie weren't good enough, I'm not giving up on UPL either but if it's true we're now going for the playoffs why wouldn't we add a guy who's been there/done that? It makes 0 sense to me and Adams has to be coming up on the hot seat, this is year 3 of no playoffs right? The seat has to be getting real hot.

[JohnC]

4 hours ago, tom webster said:

We are probably not that far apart on the optimism scale but the thing that continues to undermine your logic is the general manager himself constantly telling us how close he was to a deal but apparently unable to close the deal. Logic says that if he’s in till the end that he’s not satisfied with the status quo, he’s just unable to do anything about it.

There is a good reason why he hasn't been able to consummate a deal for an upper tier defenseman and goalie: It has to do with the cost associated with the assets moving out and the talent and contract coming in. Do you doubt that he has been making the calls, as all GMs do, to bring in players? There are a lot of people who wanted to give up our #1 pick for a defenseman or a goalie. I'm not in that camp. I'm glad that the GM used the pick for the player he got in the draft. I like Hanifin. But I would prefer keeping our pick and picking up a lesser but still a good defenseman in Clifton. In general, I have no problem with the judgment that our GM has exercised in adding talent (mostly on the blueline) to the roster. 

[JohnC]

4 hours ago, Doohickie said:

That's one way to look at it. The other is to realize he's always looking to improve (as any competent GM should) but he won't make a trade for the sake doing something. He's exercising discipline, setting parameters that he sticks to. If it's outside those parameters he does not go forward. I'd rather see that than waiving draft capital around like a pirate in a brothel.

I'm glad that the GM kept the first-round pick and used it to take Benson. 

[The Jokeman]

19 minutes ago, GoPuckYourself said:

Unfortunately this could very well be Adams downfall, why he continues to neglect goaltending is beyond me. Just adding 2 good defensive defensmen isn't enough, there will be times when Levi struggles or let's hope not may get injured. UPL and Comrie weren't good enough, I'm not giving up on UPL either but if it's true we're now going for the playoffs why wouldn't we add a guy who's been there/done that? It makes 0 sense to me and Adams has to be coming up on the hot seat, this is year 3 of no playoffs right? The seat has to be getting real hot.

Limited supply TBH, I'd love to make a move for a more proven guy but GMKA loves holding on to his prospects/draft picks. 

[nfreeman]

From the Athletic's Winnipeg Jets writer (Murat Ates) yesterday:

 

Quote

 

the day’s biggest news was still about Connor Hellebuyck and Mark Scheifele: Kevin Cheveldayoff is talking about both players as if they’ll be back with the Jets next season.

...

Cheveldayoff referred to the idea of a Hellebuyck/Brossoit tandem multiple times. He also repeated the notion that he’s in contact with Hellebuyck and Scheifele’s camps and is open to signing them to extensions while acknowledging that he’s listening to offers on both players, too.

...

My takeaway from all of this? The trade market has been cold for Hellebuyck and Scheifele. They each provide strong value for their current contracts; we’re talking about a Vezina Trophy finalist and a 42-goal centre, after all. But their values decline without extensions in place, particularly with the league squeezed so tight to the cap this summer.

...

That said, I believe Cheveldayoff when he says he views Hellebuyck and Scheifele as key pieces, that he would be happy to start the season with them on the roster and that dialogue is ongoing. Certainly, it’s a nice bit of posturing to tell the trade market that Winnipeg is happy to keep its stars and could even re-sign them, but I’m hearing there’s more to it than that.

 

 

This leads me to a few conclusions:

- No one has yet offered Winnipeg something on the level of Kulich or Savoie -- i.e. a crown-jewel-level prospect -- for Helle without an extension as part of the deal.

- It's pretty likely that no one is going to offer a crown-jewel-level prospect for Helle without an extension as part of the deal.

- It's pretty likely that no one is going to offer Helle a fat extension at this point.

- Chevy is doing what he needs to do in order to avoid losing all leverage in trade negotiations -- i.e. claim that he would like to keep Helle for next year -- and Helle is, so far, playing ball by not publicly demanding a trade.

- However, it's likely that the underlying facts have not changed -- i.e. the Jets are rebuilding and Helle isn't interested in sticking around for that.

- So, what is most likely happening is that Chevy is playing chicken with KA (and any other GM who is interested in trading for Helle) -- but it's pretty likely that Chevy is going to have to reduce his asking price to account for the limited demand for a good player who is only 1 year from UFA.

- KA knows this and is happy to wait until the price drops, even though doing so increases the risk of not bringing in a meaningful upgrade in net.

[GoPuckYourself]

49 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

Limited supply TBH, I'd love to make a move for a more proven guy but GMKA loves holding on to his prospects/draft picks. 

There was plenty

[tom webster]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

There is a good reason why he hasn't been able to consummate a deal for an upper tier defenseman and goalie: It has to do with the cost associated with the assets moving out and the talent and contract coming in. Do you doubt that he has been making the calls, as all GMs do, to bring in players? There are a lot of people who wanted to give up our #1 pick for a defenseman or a goalie. I'm not in that camp. I'm glad that the GM used the pick for the player he got in the draft. I like Hanifin. But I would prefer keeping our pick and picking up a lesser but still a good defenseman in Clifton. In general, I have no problem with the judgment that our GM has exercised in adding talent (mostly on the blueline) to the roster. 

Do I doubt? quite contrary, it’s my whole freakin point. You continuously imply that he is happy with roster and what he has all the while he’s trying his hardest to improve it and unable to complete the deal. 
Maybe, if he thinks every other GM is under valuing his offer, it’s he who is overvaluing his offer.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, tom webster said:

Do I doubt? quite contrary, it’s my whole freakin point. You continuously imply that he is happy with roster and what he has all the while he’s trying his hardest to improve it and unable to complete the deal. 
Maybe, if he thinks every other GM is under valuing his offer, it’s he who is overvaluing his offer.

Of course, he is trying to improve his roster, as is every GM in the league. He has made deals. Maybe not to your satisfaction but he has sealed the deal on a couple of defensive pickups. And that was his priority since the season concluded.  From a general standpoint, he is doing exactly what he said he was going to do i.e. focus on building from within. And that's exactly what he has done. 

GMs frequently talk with their fellow GMs during the season and offseason. A fraction of the feelers they put out end up coming to fruition. That's true for all GMs. You made the point that I'm implying that he is in general happy with his roster entering the offseason. Based on how he has performed I would say yes he is. There may be more tweaks to the roster but as it stands is as it stands. I'm more than comfortable with his approach. 

[Weave]

I think a goalie improvement over UPL/Comrie is outside of KAs price range.

I do think this has the potential to be revisited mid season or at the deadline, when acquisition costs are lower.  If we are in a position to be deadline buyers and the goaltending needs a bit of a push, I could def see KA getting a Helle at deadline rental prices.

[dudacek]

3 hours ago, Weave said:

I think a goalie improvement over UPL/Comrie is outside of KAs price range.

I do think this has the potential to be revisited mid season or at the deadline, when acquisition costs are lower.  If we are in a position to be deadline buyers and the goaltending needs a bit of a push, I could def see KA getting a Helle at deadline rental prices.

If we are in the race at the deadline are we going to need him?

Seems to me that means status quo worked.

[French Collection]

15 minutes ago, dudacek said:

If we are in the race at the deadline are we going to need him?

Seems to me that means status quo worked.

If there are goalie problems KA may have to make a move earlier that the deadline just to be able to get to the playoffs.

He may have to add goalie depth at the deadline, especially if one of Comrie/UPL are claimed on waivers or traded.

[Porous Five Hole]

With the Sabres shoring up their D corps (I believe Clifton is capable of 4D with Power as a partner), I’m starting to warm to the concept of a Helle rental trade.  As some have estimated, a Vezina level goalie is approximately +10 points from what the stable of Sabres net-minders currently offer. There’s no science behind that, but it feels like it is accurate.

The deadline cost of a top tier rental (non-goalies such as Giroux and P Kane is a first, a pick (estimate a third), and a prospect.  However, those guys had trade protection, so the cost might be light.
Given the bone-dry market for goalie trades (unsure if that is because of need or availability), I would be willing to offer the deadline price and add a goalie to the offer. A fourth piece would be one of UPL or Comrie—likely UPL, but Comrie has a Jets history.  Since the Sabres have a huge pool of forward prospects, that’s a large sweetener of upside without damaging the Sabres pipeline.

It is four pieces their way & I’m here for it—if it is possible.
I love the potential trajectory of Levi, but Buffalo needs a bridge to him assuming full-time duty.  
 

A first, a third, one of Kulich/Östlund, and one of UPL/Comrie is a nice haul…and it makes the Sabres better immediately. And the Sabres prospect pool can certainly afford it. 

[Curt]

On 7/2/2023 at 8:05 PM, dudacek said:

Here’s the thing about proven starting goalies: there aren’t very many of them.

You want to know how many goalies have played 130 games over the past 3 years, which is only an average of 43 starts?

Just 13

You aren’t getting Vasilevskiy, Saros, Shesterkin, Sorokin and Oettinger.

And most of you don’t want Hellebuyck, Markstrom, Gibson, Binnington or Bobrovsky given their contracts.

I’d say Kuemper and Jarry are both too expensive, and unavailable.

And then there’s Fleury who has a no-movement clause and is apparently done with moving.

The Venn diagram of goalies who are proven, available and affordable is very small.

Just a note.  One of the three seasons in your sample here was only 56 games.

[Curt]

The problem with Gibson is that the simply hasn’t beeen a good goalie the past few years.  He has been outplayed by his backups 3 of the past 4 years.

I wouldn’t do a Hellybuck trade because of his contract situation.

If we are going to trade significant assets to acquire a goalie, why not go for Carter Hart who could form a solid duo with Levi, or flat out become the legit starter, for several seasons?

[The Jokeman]

18 minutes ago, Curt said:

The problem with Gibson is that the simply hasn’t beeen a good goalie the past few years.  He has been outplayed by his backups 3 of the past 4 years.

I wouldn’t do a Hellybuck trade because of his contract situation.

If we are going to trade significant assets to acquire a goalie, why not go for Carter Hart who could form a solid duo with Levi, or flat out become the legit starter, for several seasons?

It seems that Briere wants to get two 1sts to acquire Hart which most agree way too much.

[Curt]

8 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

It seems that Briere wants to get two 1sts to acquire Hart which most agree way too much.

Even if true, GMs ask for more than they are ultimately willing to take.

What if that two 1st equivalent package is Rosen, a 2nd, and UPL?

[LGR4GM]

17 hours ago, GoPuckYourself said:

There was plenty

Which goaltender that moved or signed did you want?

[LGR4GM]

8 hours ago, Porous Five Hole said:

With the Sabres shoring up their D corps (I believe Clifton is capable of 4D with Power as a partner), I’m starting to warm to the concept of a Helle rental trade.  As some have estimated, a Vezina level goalie is approximately +10 points from what the stable of Sabres net-minders currently offer. There’s no science behind that, but it feels like it is accurate.

The deadline cost of a top tier rental (non-goalies such as Giroux and P Kane is a first, a pick (estimate a third), and a prospect.  However, those guys had trade protection, so the cost might be light.
Given the bone-dry market for goalie trades (unsure if that is because of need or availability), I would be willing to offer the deadline price and add a goalie to the offer. A fourth piece would be one of UPL or Comrie—likely UPL, but Comrie has a Jets history.  Since the Sabres have a huge pool of forward prospects, that’s a large sweetener of upside without damaging the Sabres pipeline.

It is four pieces their way & I’m here for it—if it is possible.
I love the potential trajectory of Levi, but Buffalo needs a bridge to him assuming full-time duty.  
 

A first, a third, one of Kulich/Östlund, and one of UPL/Comrie is a nice haul…and it makes the Sabres better immediately. And the Sabres prospect pool can certainly afford it. 

Good God no. 

It's like a 1st in 2024, Comrie, and something else like a B or C prospect. 

[JohnC]

The attached link is an article by Mike Harrington of the Buffalo News listing the goalie options. After he goes through most of the options it becomes apparent that for a variety of reasons (some of them due to contracts) that taking a status quo approach is the best approach for now. And in this article it becomes clear that the GM is invested in Levi as his primary goalie. The young goalie's end of season play solidified his standing with the GM. 

 

https://buffalonews.com/sports/columns/sabres-goaltending-mike-harrington/article_aa571c14-19a6-11ee-9cdb-4319459758a2.html#tracking-source=home-top-story

 

 

[The Jokeman]

1 hour ago, Curt said:

Even if true, GMs ask for more than they are ultimately willing to take.

What if that two 1st equivalent package is Rosen, a 2nd, and UPL?

I mentioned in an early thread I'd move Comrie, a Russian prospect and a 2nd or 3rd to get it done. 

[Curt]

8 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

I mentioned in an early thread I'd move Comrie, a Russian prospect and a 2nd or 3rd to get it done. 

Probably not enough, but who knows.

[The Jokeman]

1 minute ago, Curt said:

Probably not enough, but who knows.

True, if were able to sign Hart to a bridge deal for 2-3 more seasons than I'd upgrade the pick to 1st. 

[Curt]

1 minute ago, The Jokeman said:

True, if were able to sign Hart to a bridge deal for 2-3 more seasons than I'd upgrade the pick to 1st. 

Well, he is going to be an RFA, so it’s not like he can just walk in one year.

[The Jokeman]

Just now, Curt said:

Well, he is going to be an RFA, so it’s not like he can just walk in one year.

Agreed but I want him around here for 3-4 seasons, as think Levi won't be ready this year to take the job and prefer an even split next year at most. 

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Curt said:

The problem with Gibson is that the simply hasn’t beeen a good goalie the past few years.  He has been outplayed by his backups 3 of the past 4 years.

I wouldn’t do a Hellybuck trade because of his contract situation.

If we are going to trade significant assets to acquire a goalie, why not go for Carter Hart who could form a solid duo with Levi, or flat out become the legit starter, for several seasons?

 

1 hour ago, The Jokeman said:

It seems that Briere wants to get two 1sts to acquire Hart which most agree way too much.

I’ve come to realize there is one factor we’ve been overlooking in the goalie conversation:

The value of the acquired goalie at the end of next year or the year after.

Hart is in the final season of his contract next year, then he becomes an RFA with arbitration rights.

If we traded Rosen and next year’s first for Hart to split the crease a number of things could happen:

• Hart outplays Levi and we have to decide whether to re-sign Hart as our #1 or trade him, likely for a similar or better return for what we paid.
• Levi outplays Hart and we have to decide whether to re-sign Hart as our #2 or trade him, likely for a similar or worse return for what we paid.
• Levi and Hart split the duties as most hope and we flip Hart for a similar value than what we paid.

Yes, a 4th option is Hart sucks and we have no chance to recoup value. But that is the same risk with any goalie we acquire.   It is less likely with Hart than many others. And if it happens, we can qualify Hart and try to rehabilitate his value.

Basically, the plan would provide a good safety net for Levi while mitigating loss of asset value in a way you couldn’t with pending UFA Hellebuyck.

You could apply a similar thought process to the other options and you might find one you like better.