UPL's next contract

[GASabresIUFAN]

On 7/17/2024 at 7:31 AM, Pimlach said:

Reimer was signed two months after I posted my comment. 
 

Still, right now UPL is better than any option that we have, including Levi. We are in a 13 year drought, hanging on to your best goalie should be a priority.  

You could have said that about their best all-around forward.  I’m not saying they shouldn’t re-sign UPL. All I’m saying is that they are in a much better position to weather the loss if UPL isn’t re-signed than they were when Ullmark walked.  

There are two other truths here as well. UPL isn’t going anywhere.  He’ll either be re-signed through the arbitration process or an extension will be reached.  Second, UPL has one good pro season to his name and even last season had extended periods of lousy play.  He isn’t a proven NHL netminder.   Let’s not act as if he is Ullmark 2.0.  There is a very good chance that Levi outplays him next season.

[JohnC]

5 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

You could have said that about their best all-around forward.  I’m not saying they shouldn’t re-sign UPL. All I’m saying is that they are in a much better position to weather the loss if UPL isn’t re-signed than they were when Ullmark walked.  

There are two other truths here as well. UPL isn’t going anywhere.  He’ll either be re-signed through the arbitration process or an extension will be reached.  Second, UPL has one good pro season to his name and even last season had extended periods of lousy play.  He isn’t a proven NHL netminder.   Let’s not act as if he is Ullmark 2.0.  There is a very good chance that Levi outplays him next season.

You are right that the organization is in a better situation than before( Ullmark period) if they end up losing UPL. There will be more cushion to absorb such a loss. But there is a follow up position to take. Without question, the Sabres are now in a better situation if he remains with the team, even if Levi or Reimer prove to be credible goalies. This constant churning of players that we have invested in developing has had this franchise spinning its wheels. This cycle of futility will continue when you continue doing things that have kept you stuck as a franchise. If this team can get the level of goaltending that he provided us last year, this team could/should?? make the playoffs. (My opinion. )

[PromoTheRobot]

5 hours ago, JohnC said:

I understand your perspective. We are all familiar with it. But the calculation for determining success is simple and understandable: your record. If the GM was right on UPL, then that is to his credit. But being right in judging a player doesn't tell you much how he is doing overall.  Assembling a roster obviously is not an easy endeavor because of the multiplicity of factors that go into it, especially the limitations that the GM has to work with regarding resources. But being right on an individual player assessment is not a persuasive argument for judging someone on how well he is doing his job. 

I believe that the GM made the right decision in hiring Lindy. And I believe that he has had a good offseason in addressing the structural imbalance of his roster. Let's remember that the correction being made on the roster relates to the deficiency in the roster that he assembled the prior year. And it's inarguable that the correction that he seems to have made this offseason is a correction that he could have made last season.  

I wasn't arguing Adams record as a whole. But I am defending his decision to stick with UPL as it was correct. Giving Adams credit of any kind here is verboten, apparently. 

[PerreaultForever]

11 hours ago, thewookie1 said:

Who mind you looked much better this prospects camp and is still very early in his goalie journey.

Goalies are literally a shot in the dark; there isn't a surefire method to finding a prospect goalie.

Absolutely early and goalies are weird and he can still develop. No disagreement.

6 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Who you have apparently declared a bust already. Okay, sure. Carry on. 🙄 (Don't tell anyone but most GMs draft a goalie every year )

Nope. Not at all. My point is Adams drafted a goalie high in the draft because he did not believe he already had one.

Drafting goalies every year is fine. I'm a firm believer in drafting one every year in late rounds because they have different development paths (Levi 7th round as an example). Drafting one high up means you think you need one. The discussion was about whether or not Adams believed in UPL or just got lucky. 

[Taro T]

18 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

I wasn't arguing Adams record as a whole. But I am defending his decision to stick with UPL as it was correct. Giving Adams credit of any kind here is verboten, apparently. 

And he DID actually stick with UPL.  Yes, UPL was bumped down to 3rd on the depth chart, but he was not bumped down to Ra-cha-cha where he could've been lost for a $500 claiming fee.

[PerreaultForever]

6 minutes ago, Taro T said:

And he DID actually stick with UPL.  Yes, UPL was bumped down to 3rd on the depth chart, but he was not bumped down to Ra-cha-cha where he could've been lost for a $500 claiming fee.

Yes, because he had given himself no other option. But the question is did he ever have any faith in him? Evidence says he did not. We did not. I remember Adams saying glowing things about Levi from the minute he traded for him but I do not recall him ever gushing over UPL the same way prior to UPL's unexpected solid play materializing. 

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

Absolutely early and goalies are weird and he can still develop. No disagreement.

Nope. Not at all. My point is Adams drafted a goalie high in the draft because he did not believe he already had one.

Drafting goalies every year is fine. I'm a firm believer in drafting one every year in late rounds because they have different development paths (Levi 7th round as an example). Drafting one high up means you think you need one. The discussion was about whether or not Adams believed in UPL or just got lucky. 

Your opinion. Absolutely no evidence that was the case. Like I said, It's GM SOP is to draft a goalie almost every year.

Edited July 18 by PromoTheRobot

[JohnC]

2 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

I wasn't arguing Adams record as a whole. But I am defending his decision to stick with UPL as it was correct. Giving Adams credit of any kind here is verboten, apparently. 

There certainly was a determined faction that wanted to jettison UPL before the season started last year. However, the majority of criticism towards KA relating to the goalie position is that he did not have an adequate backup plan if UPL proved not to be ready. That specific criticism was warranted. 

The goalie position is tough to evaluate year to year. One year a goalie looks like a future star. The next year, that former star becomes a flameout. I have said it a number of times (and so has @Taro T) that if UPL plays at the same level that he did last year, the Sabres should be playoff participants. It should also be noted that over the past few years this cautious GM has put together a good assemblage of blueline players. I'm aware that some critics want more muscle added to the group, but in general it is a talented young bunch. We shall see. 

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Your opinion. Absolutely no evidence that was the case. Like I said, It's GM SOP is to draft a goalie almost every year.

That's not actually true. It's an idea I definitely believe in, but it's not a real thing. Look over the draft picks and show me how every GM drafted a goalie. 

You most definitely do not use top end picks on goalies unless you are truly in need or the player is exceptional. That's not opinion, that's fact. 

[PerreaultForever]

Just looked it up for you, 20 teams drafted goalies in 2024. None in round 1, 5 in round 2, 3 in round 3, the rest all later throw a dart at a board and see picks. 

Of the round 2 and 3 teams, all being teams with goaltending issues or no clear #1 starter. 

All of which helps prove my point. 

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

That's not actually true. It's an idea I definitely believe in, but it's not a real thing. Look over the draft picks and show me how every GM drafted a goalie. 

You most definitely do not use top end picks on goalies unless you are truly in need or the player is exceptional. That's not opinion, that's fact. 

Where do you come up with these rules? You scout players and pick them where you think you can get them.

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

Just looked it up for you, 20 teams drafted goalies in 2024. None in round 1, 5 in round 2, 3 in round 3, the rest all later throw a dart at a board and see picks. 

Of the round 2 and 3 teams, all being teams with goaltending issues or no clear #1 starter. 

All of which helps prove my point. 

It "proves" nothing. 

You might have a #1 but you see a chance to grab a guy who could become a #1 in three years. So you don't draft him because rules?

Example: In 2023 the Ducks have John Gibson but draft goalie Damian Clara with the 28th pick of Rd.2. (#60)  By the way Clara was the FOURTH goalie taken in Round 2.

Edited July 19 by PromoTheRobot

[PerreaultForever]

52 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Where do you come up with these rules? You scout players and pick them where you think you can get them.

It's not a "rule" it's just the way it is. Mostly goalies aren't drafted early because they are too unpredictable and their development paths are longer. Only the exceptional ones break from that pattern. That's just the way it's been for all of the 50 plus years I've watched hockey. 

52 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

It "proves" nothing. 

You might have a #1 but you see a chance to grab a guy who could become a #1 in three years. So you don't draft him because rules?

Example: In 2023 the Ducks have John Gibson but draft goalie Damian Clara with the 28th pick of Rd.2. (#60)  By the way Clara was the FOURTH goalie taken in Round 2.

Okay this is going nowhere so even for summer bs it's time to end it. You think Adams had it all planned out and didn't just get lucky with UPL. Okay, that's your view. Good for you. 

[PromoTheRobot]

13 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

It's not a "rule" it's just the way it is. Mostly goalies aren't drafted early because they are too unpredictable and their development paths are longer. Only the exceptional ones break from that pattern. That's just the way it's been for all of the 50 plus years I've watched hockey. 

Okay this is going nowhere so even for summer bs it's time to end it. You think Adams had it all planned out and didn't just get lucky with UPL. Okay, that's your view. Good for you. 

He had faith UPL would work out and stuck with him. Any other team's GM and you'd be giving him a tongue bath for it.

[sabresparaavida]

59 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

It "proves" nothing. 

You might have a #1 but you see a chance to grab a guy who could become a #1 in three years. So you don't draft him because rules?

Example: In 2023 the Ducks have John Gibson but draft goalie Damian Clara with the 28th pick of Rd.2. (#60)  By the way Clara was the FOURTH goalie taken in Round 2.

While I don’t disagree with your point, you picked a poor example. In 2023, John Gibson was 30 years old, and hadn’t had a save percentage above .904 since 2018-2019, not exactly #1 goaltender material. But yes, even if you have a good goalie, if there’s a goalie at the top of your board, you should take them. Odds are it’ll take 5 years before they’re NHL ready and by that time your good goalie could be terrible, declining, or you might have too many good goalies which is a good problem to have. Most goalies should be eased into the league anyway, so a cheap quality backup is beneficial anyways. 
 

A somewhat better example would be Nashville in 2020, who picked Askarov at 11 overall despite having a 25 year old Saros whose lowest save percentage the last 4 years was a .914. Though with that example there is a counterargument that the next 2 picks after Askarov were Lundell and Jarvis, who would make the Predators a better team now. 

[ska-T Palmtown]

22 hours ago, Pimlach said:

They know something about them sure, but the devil is in the details.  Whether your hiring the next CEO for Boeing (a critical position that is opening up by year end) or a sports coach, it comes down to vision, details, criteria, and honest unbiased thought.

[dudacek]

Adams' feelings about UPL aside, I think you guys are forgetting the context in June of 2022 with the Leinonen pick.

The Sabres had drafted just one goalie in the previous 4 drafts and only two in the past 7.

They had the rights to 2 college goalies, but there was some uncertainty as to whether either of them (Levi, Portillo) was going to sign.

Their NHL goalies the previous year were UFAs Craig Anderson, Dustin Tokarski and Aaron Dell

And UPL was literally the only goalie in the system.

He might have been a ***** pick, but the concept of him had become a necessity because of years of ***** management.

Edited July 19 by dudacek

[PromoTheRobot]

15 hours ago, sabresparaavida said:

While I don’t disagree with your point, you picked a poor example. In 2023, John Gibson was 30 years old, and hadn’t had a save percentage above .904 since 2018-2019, not exactly #1 goaltender material. But yes, even if you have a good goalie, if there’s a goalie at the top of your board, you should take them. Odds are it’ll take 5 years before they’re NHL ready and by that time your good goalie could be terrible, declining, or you might have too many good goalies which is a good problem to have. Most goalies should be eased into the league anyway, so a cheap quality backup is beneficial anyways. 
 

A somewhat better example would be Nashville in 2020, who picked Askarov at 11 overall despite having a 25 year old Saros whose lowest save percentage the last 4 years was a .914. Though with that example there is a counterargument that the next 2 picks after Askarov were Lundell and Jarvis, who would make the Predators a better team now. 

And yet we were all saying the Sabres should trade for him.

[sabresparaavida]

1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:

And yet we were all saying the Sabres should trade for him.

Don’t include me in that group, I’ve been saying he’s a cap dump for years now. Would have to pay me pretty well to consider taking Gibson. 

[Pimlach]

5 hours ago, ska-T Chitown said:

Edited July 19 by Pimlach

[LGR4GM]

5 hours ago, dudacek said:

Adams' feelings about UPL aside, I think you guys are forgetting the context in June of 2022 with the Leinonen pick.

The Sabres had drafted just one goalie in the previous 4 drafts and only two in the past 7.

They had the rights to 2 college goalies, but there was some uncertainty as to whether either of them (Levi, Portillo) was going to sign.

Their NHL goalies the previous year were UFAs Craig Anderson, Dustin Tokarski and Aaron Dell

And UPL was literally the only goalie in the system.

He might have been a ***** pick, but the concept of him had become a necessity because of years of ***** management.

Then why didn't they draft Cossa instead of Rosen in 2021? 

Cossa was highly regarded in his draft year. 

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Then why didn't they draft Cossa instead of Rosen in 2021? 

Cossa was highly regarded in his draft year. 

Because they'd gotten their prospect goalie for THAT year in the Reinhart trade.

Would also have rather had them choose a goalie with that pick they used on Rosen and expected at the time that they would use it on 1 of the 2 1st round talents still available, but pretty sure they probably feared they'd scare Portillo away if they brought in two prospects in the same off-season.

(Not commenting on whether it was a good decision or not; merely taking a stab at the "why" of it.)

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Then why didn't they draft Cossa instead of Rosen in 2021? 

Cossa was highly regarded in his draft year. 

 

6 hours ago, dudacek said:

He might have been a ***** pick, but the concept of him had become a necessity because of years of ***** management.

🤷‍♂️

[Brawndo]

12 hours ago, dudacek said:

Adams' feelings about UPL aside, I think you guys are forgetting the context in June of 2022 with the Leinonen pick.

The Sabres had drafted just one goalie in the previous 4 drafts and only two in the past 7.

They had the rights to 2 college goalies, but there was some uncertainty as to whether either of them (Levi, Portillo) was going to sign.

Their NHL goalies the previous year were UFAs Craig Anderson, Dustin Tokarski and Aaron Dell

And UPL was literally the only goalie in the system.

He might have been a ***** pick, but the concept of him had become a necessity because of years of ***** management.

The consensus amongst the scouts and the analytics department was to take Luca Del Bel Belluz. 
There was some shock when the pick was announced. 

[PerreaultForever]

9 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

And yet we were all saying the Sabres should trade for him.

When all we had was Anderson.