Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen signed 5x4.75mil

[LGR4GM]

18 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Sweet.

Hopefully there are no full NMCs in it, just in case down the road they decide they want to move him.

Guess this puts to rest the concerns that UPL didn't want to be here.

He has a 5 team ntc. 

 

 

[French Collection]

I’m not upset. I think they need him. Levi may beat him out at some point but maybe not. 
 

He could be the #1 for the next 5 years. He’s young enough to improve for the duration of that contract and I hope he does. I hope he avoids the goalie roller coaster ride and finds a groove.

I want Levi to become #1 but to have a real goalie duel wil be interesting.

[Taro T]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

He has a 5 team ntc. 

 

 

Pretty sure a 5 team NTC doesn't do much at all to tie the GM's hands.  And it's a sign of good faith that if the time to part ways arrives that they won't be sending him off to the NHLs (figurative) version of Siberia (so, no, @Thorny not expecting he'd end up in your neck of the woods without a NMC; was referring to the next Arizona whomever that may become 😉 ).  Looks like a deal that works for player and team.  Again, SWEET.

Danke for the update.

[Taro T]

21 minutes ago, French Collection said:

I’m not upset. I think they need him. Levi may beat him out at some point but maybe not. 
 

He could be the #1 for the next 5 years. He’s young enough to improve for the duration of that contract and I hope he does. I hope he avoids the goalie roller coaster ride and finds a groove.

I want Levi to become #1 but to have a real goalie duel wil be interesting.

Personally, want whichever of the 2 that reaches closer to his ceiling to be the LT #1.  For Levi thats Saros.  For UPL, wouldn't have believed it before watching him last season, but it's Vasilevskiy.  Either would be awesome should it work out.  And if somehow they ended up w/ both, well, seriously sweet.

Edit: And btw, am not saying either will necessarily get to their ceiling.  But those are what they look like.

Edited July 24 by Taro T

[dudacek]

33 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Guess this puts to rest the concerns that UPL didn't want to be here.

You know that is 6th long-term deal signed by a Sabre in less than 2 years.

Nobody ever talks about this when they say no one wants to be here.

Besides Eichel, who was the last homegrown Sabre to sign for 5 years or more with the Sabres? (Prior to this Adams run)

Vanek signed his big deal with Edmonton. Did Miller sign a big one?

Edited July 24 by dudacek

[Taro T]

9 minutes ago, dudacek said:

You know that is 6th long-term deal signed by a Sabre in less than 2 years.

Nobody ever talks about this when they say no one wants to be here.

Besides Eichel, who was the last homegrown Sabre to sign for 5 years or more with the Sabres? (Prior to this Adams run)

Vanek signed his big deal with Edmonton. Did Miller sign a big one?

Miller signed for 5 years back in '09.

[Rasmus_]

Glad he got rewarded for his hard work.  Just keep it up 6K!

[Taro T]

And Pominville signed for 5 years the previous year ('08).

[Porous Five Hole]

I don’t like this deal.  

Too long of a contract for one season of A) finally staying healthy for a full season, and B) finally getting a save percentage above league average (AHL & NHL combined for each season).  
 

He seems like a good dude and I want the Sabres to win, but I would not have done this deal.
I would have gone to arbitration for a one year deal this offseason & re-evaluate in 25-26 (while UPL is an RFA again and Levi has another season of experience).  

Hope I’m wrong I guess.  

[Mr Peabody]

59 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

He has a 5 team ntc. 

That’s equivalent to 6 since we’re not on it. 

[...]

1 hour ago, thewookie1 said:

Well what was your preference exactly?

I wanted 3/4 but 5 isn’t terrible at 4.75mil

I would have preferred three at most at that rate. He hasn't proved anything, yet. With all of these speculative contracts KA has been handing out it wouldn't surprise me if, one day, we learn KA has a gambling problem.

[pi2000]

fair deal

[LGR4GM]

I think 4 years is the correct term. I share others worries that UPL is a flash in the pan. 5 years is a year too long in my mind. 

Edited July 24 by LGR4GM

[...]

It's also five years of the farcical moniker "6K".

[PerreaultForever]

Reasonable deal. Term and money in a range where even if Levi passes him, with an increasing cap it won't be an albatross for back up money and is more likely tandem money. If he's spectacular he can still get a long term rest of his career deal and if he sucks we can manage it. I like it. 

5 team NTC is weird. Rarely see a list that small but whatever. 

[#freejame]

It’s certainly not a prove it deal. 

[Turbo44]

40 minutes ago, Porous Five Hole said:

I don’t like this deal.  

Too long of a contract for one season of A) finally staying healthy for a full season, and B) finally getting a save percentage above league average (AHL & NHL combined for each season).  
 

He seems like a good dude and I want the Sabres to win, but I would not have done this deal.
I would have gone to arbitration for a one year deal this offseason & re-evaluate in 25-26 (while UPL is an RFA again and Levi has another season of experience).  

Hope I’m wrong I guess.  

Fair analysis

[GASabresIUFAN]

This is a stupid contract for a goalie with only 1 good pro season (AHL & NHL) to his credit.  5 years makes no sense, especially if Levi is your long-term franchise goalie.  This contract will not be easy to trade if (when?) UPL regresses.

 

[klos1963]

3 hours ago, RochesterExpat said:

Contract is fine. If he doesn't work out, we can unload it without too much pain, but if he pans out then it's a fair value.

If he doesn't work out, why would another team want him?

11 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

This is a stupid contract for a goalie with only 1 good pro season (AHL & NHL) to his credit.  5 years makes no sense, especially if Levi is your long-term franchise goalie.  This contract will not be easy to trade if (when?) UPL regresses.

 

Levi is a minor league goalie right now. He's not the long term goalie as of now. UPL earned this, he's been a top prospect for a few years now.

[Carmel Corn]

If this is still reasonably accurate, then $4.75 per year is roughly 20th in the league as far as AAV.  Seems reasonable to me for a 25 year old with his prime years ahead.

https://frontofficesports.com/the-25-highest-paid-nhl-goaltenders/

[klos1963]

57 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Reasonable deal. Term and money in a range where even if Levi passes him, with an increasing cap it won't be an albatross for back up money and is more likely tandem money. If he's spectacular he can still get a long term rest of his career deal and if he sucks we can manage it. I like it. 

5 team NTC is weird. Rarely see a list that small but whatever. 

Because Buffalo is usually on that list.

[mphs mike]

I like this deal and the fact that the NTC doesn’t kick in for two years

[GASabresIUFAN]

3 hours ago, klos1963 said:

he's been a top prospect for a few years now.

No he hasn't and Levi is the NHL backup heading into training camp.

Here are UPL's pro save%

19/20 AHL .874 (10 games), He spent most of the season in the ECHL .912 (23 games)

20/21 AHL .888  (14 games)

21/22  AHL .900 (35 games)

22/23 NHL .892 (33 games)

23/24 NHL .910 (54 games)

Outside of last season, UPL's record of accomplishment in pro hockey is mediocre at best.  These are not the stats of a "top prospect."  The best thing someone can say is that UPL has steadily improved. 

Compare to Ullmark.  Linus' in 3 AHL seasons had save % of .902, .909, and .923.  His save % in Buffalo .912 over 117 games.  Those are top prospect numbers.  

We have no idea if this guy is a long-term franchise goalie.  

 

Edited July 25 by GASabresIUFAN

[JohnC]

35 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

This is a stupid contract for a goalie with only 1 good pro season (AHL & NHL) to his credit.  5 years makes no sense, especially if Levi is your long-term franchise goalie.  This contract will not be easy to trade if (when?) UPL regresses.

 

If any player regresses, regardless of position, it becomes more challenging to move the player. UPL's contract is reasonable. Maybe it is a year longer than many would have preferred, so what! It still falls within the boundary of being reasonable. As you well know, goalies regularly get moved before their contracts expire. So I don't understand why there is so much lamenting. 

It just seems that it has gotten to the weird point where people complain when a player hasn't gotten signed, and then when a deal is worked out, there are complaints about the size and length of a contract. I guess you can call it: reflexive cynicism, a byproduct of a legacy of losing. 

[thewookie1]

2 hours ago, Porous Five Hole said:

I don’t like this deal.  

Too long of a contract for one season of A) finally staying healthy for a full season, and B) finally getting a save percentage above league average (AHL & NHL combined for each season).  
 

He seems like a good dude and I want the Sabres to win, but I would not have done this deal.
I would have gone to arbitration for a one year deal this offseason & re-evaluate in 25-26 (while UPL is an RFA again and Levi has another season of experience).  

Hope I’m wrong I guess.  

Arbitration is rarely a wise decision; it can very easily burn bridges. Plus 1 year deals rarely work out for us