GDT: Sabres @ Stars, Dec 31, 2024 - 8:00PM, MSG 📺, WGR550 📻 🎙

[bob_sauve28]

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't care what a 2nd round pick is doing for Buffalo in 2030. I want a veteran like zucker in that room as long as possible. 

2nd round picks are more likely to be asplund, Davidson, lamiuex, Bailey, weber

Not good asset management. Offer him a deal and if he declines trade him. Why keep a guy around who will be playing for another team next year? Don't really see a huge upside there.

Trade him, get the pick and sign a different vet next year if he won't sign. IBut first, I'd offer him a multi-year deal to see if he stays. He has been the really only effective player on the PP. How do we not try and keep him for next year? 

[HumanSlinky39]

4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

What if,  and stay with me,  we don't trade Zucker and let him continue to be a vet leader in the youngest team? Like we just don't sell at the deadline. 

If they're just going to flip him for more draft picks, hard pass. The last thing this team needs is MORE prospects. They should be thinking about extending him for the very reason you mention.

If we start flipping guys at the deadline for draft picks I'm gonna...well, piss and moan on a message board because that's all I have at my disposal.

[Weave]

10 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Not good asset management. Offer him a deal and if he declines trade him. Why keep a guy around who will be playing for another team next year? Don't really see a huge upside there.

Trade him, get the pick and sign a different vet next year if he won't sign. IBut first, I'd offer him a multi-year deal to see if he stays. He has been the really only effective player on the PP. How do we not try and keep him for next year? 

At some point winning now needs to take precedence over asset management, or the hamster wheel will just keep going around.

If a deadline deal for Zucker makes the team worse in the short run, I don’t need to move him at all.

[French Collection]

4 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Not happening unless they have to retain to get a deal done.  The object is save as much money as possible.  
 

Joki is going also to save additional money and make room for younger players.  Don’t want to block anyone.

Adam’s real goal is to field the youngest roster every year for a decade so he has a built in excuse for never succeeding in his job.  

I was joking. As if he will open the wallet, especially to go from a ‘29 to a ‘28 2nd rounder.

[bob_sauve28]

58 minutes ago, Weave said:

At some point winning now needs to take precedence over asset management, or the hamster wheel will just keep going around.

If a deadline deal for Zucker makes the team worse in the short run, I don’t need to move him at all.

Winning now is why I'd like him to stay, but if he doesn't want to sign an extension then I don't see why the regular rules of hockey gravity would fail to apply, of course you get as much for him as you can. I don't see just holding him for no good reason. That isn't prioritizing winning. 

[Weave]

29 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Winning now is why I'd like him to stay, but if he doesn't want to sign an extension then I don't see why the regular rules of hockey gravity would fail to apply, of course you get as much for him as you can. I don't see just holding him for no good reason. That isn't prioritizing winning. 

“No good reason” is where we differ.  Spending the last 2 months of the season prioritizing winning is a very good reason to me.  Pretty much the definition of prioritizing winning IMO. Worth the nothing we spent to obtain Zucker.

[LTS]

Just now, Weave said:

“No good reason” is where we differ.  Spending the last 2 months of the season prioritizing winning is a very good reason to me.  Pretty much the definition of prioritizing winning IMO. Worth the nothing we spent to obtain Zucker.

But what I said before holds true.  Zucker has to want to stay here, even just this season. If he wants to be traded and Adams retains him then this organization loses the last respectable thing it has going for it.

If there is one thing that is true, Buffalo has moved players to playoff teams or those who don't want to be part of the organization. At the very least this allows some lower in demand vets to sign UFA deals on a 1 year basis with the mindset of "If this is their year, I am in and if not, I'm going to a playoff team." You take that away and no vet except the most desperate to stay in the NHL will sign with Buffalo.

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, French Collection said:

I was joking. As if he will open the wallet, especially to go from a ‘29 to a ‘28 2nd rounder.

I understand, I’m just really annoyed that the best FA signing maybe ever in Sabres history who as LGR mentioned above is adding vet leadership we desperately need is already in trade rumors.  He needs to be re-signed.

[steveoat87]

4 hours ago, Archie Lee said:

I maintain that Dallas is the most easily replicated model for us, based on our roster. 

UPL is Oettinger. 

Dahlin is Heiskanen.  Samuelsson could be Lindell.  Power or Byram are Harley.  5-7 level D-men like Dumba, Lundkvist, Lyubushkin, and Brendan Smith, are very attainable for the Sabres.

Up front, the Stars don't have a true-elite-level forward. The two big differences, in my view, are:

1.) They have three under 24 aged forwards on their roster and have used four on the year. Comparably we have six and have used eight.  

2.) They support their under 24 aged forwards with veterans who will take care of them and show them how to play and win in the NHL. 

The one other thing that separates us is coaching.  Ruff is ok/fine, but there were no contenders calling. If DeBoer was fired tomorrow, like Montgomery he would be hired by someone else within a week (if he wanted to be hired).  We are not likely getting an elite experienced coach to come here. We will need to settle for a Ruff-level veteran coach or take a chance on an assistant or AHL coach (I think Todd Nelson is an obvious choice for a coach who should get an opportunity).

A good GM working under a committed owner, could get us to Dallas-level within a year.

This is an interesting analysis.  We desperately need a Brandon-Beane type GM.  Kevin Adams is in way over his head -- yet the team could be salvaged with a few savvy moves.

[PerreaultForever]

10 hours ago, Kristian said:

Easiest position to build around, if you got the goalie, I suppose. So theres that.

Ya, that's what I was thinking. I've always believed you start there and build out myself, but the funny thing for the Sabres is this is an aspect that wasn't Adams' plan he just lucked into it. Levi was his plan. UPL was JBot's guy and KA had zero confidence in him as we saw with the 3 goalie system and his various goalie blundering moves. UPL just quietly seized the opportunity. Kind of like Ullmark really. If they ever trade UPL one day or don't pay him down the line he'll probably go somewhere and win a Vezina. 

[PerreaultForever]

8 hours ago, mjd1001 said:

I hope so. But at the end of last season, I thought the exact same thing. Then this year, UPL started out pretty badly.

Before 'bashing' his play below, let me say I think he is one of the 3 most important players on this team.  I think he can be a top 10 goalie in the league medium term. At the start of LAST year I think I was one of the very few on here who wanted Levi in the minors and UPL as the starter. I like him. I want him on this team and for him to continue to get the majority fo the starts.

But He has been pretty bad for most of the season though.  One could say that among many reasons, his sub-par play on many nights is one of the top 3 reasons the team is as far back in the standings as they are.

Last year he had a .910 save percentage with a 2.57 GAA. That was with a shaky start. Once he became the full time goalie, he played better than his full year numbers.  Many of us assumed now that he was the 'starter', he would continue the pace of last year right into this year.

  Some of the advanced numbers back up the 'eye test' (at least for me). Hes not facing a lot more overall shots this year per game than last year (27.2 vs 27.6 per game) or even if you want to break it down, 'high danger' chances (7.3 per game vs 7.2 per game). If anything the slight difference says he faced more high danger shots against last year.

What is different is how he is playing overall.  My personal "eye test" told me that in the couple weeks before the losing streak and even through the losing streak, there were a lot of goals he let in that my impression was, afte watching the replay..."The team in front of him really did NOT hang him out to dry, I just need my goalie to make that save".  And the numbers last year compared to this year:  Overall save percentage 12 points lower this year. High danger save percentage 52 points lower this year than last year. This year 10% less of his starts feature him having a save percentage above .900.

As mentioned above, I don't think he is getting hung out to dry by his forwards and D-men as much as last year.  If he would just be matching his overall numbers from last year, he would have allowed 8-10 less goals than last year.  With him facing slightly less 'high danger' shots this year, maybe that number should be 10-12 less. Sprinkle those 10-12 less goals around all the games this year, and this team likely has a few more wins.

So I understand the point you and others are making. He seems to be turning his game around.  I think he is capable of that and I expect that. Its just frustrating.  Even with all the issues this year (Tage and Dahlin injuries, Cozens taking a WHILE to come around, Quinn and Peterka pulling disappearing acts for large portions of the season), with all that, UPL having played as well this year as last year probably has them fighting for that last playoff spot right now.

I don't feel like getting into a big detailed thing but the big difference imo is rebound control and the way this team plays D that is a HUGE factor. 

[ska-T Palmtown]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I understand, I’m just really annoyed that the best FA signing maybe ever in Sabres history who as LGR mentioned above is adding vet leadership we desperately need is already in trade rumors.  He needs to be re-signed.

It is crazy annoying! We should have had a never ending rotation of Zuckers over the past 5 years. Instead we got status quo vets like Girgs and Okposo, a vet without enough in the tank for the craziness he stepped into with E Johnson, and the incessant drumbeat of "No Blockers!! No Blockers!!"

The one other vet we had around, Craig Anderson, did an admirable job of passing for a veteran backup and I would not be surprised if some of his savvy and veteran leadership helped UPL take the steps we have seen him take. Just imagine if we had that for JJP-Cozens-Quinn ... sigh. Some vets will do it just to be a part of mentoring the "next" kids. 

[mjd1001]

18 minutes ago, ska-T Palmtown said:

It is crazy annoying! We should have had a never ending rotation of Zuckers over the past 5 years. Instead we got status quo vets like Girgs and Okposo, a vet without enough in the tank for the craziness he stepped into with E Johnson, and the incessant drumbeat of "No Blockers!! No Blockers!!"

The one other vet we had around, Craig Anderson, did an admirable job of passing for a veteran backup and I would not be surprised if some of his savvy and veteran leadership helped UPL take the steps we have seen him take. Just imagine if we had that for JJP-Cozens-Quinn ... sigh. Some vets will do it just to be a part of mentoring the "next" kids. 

Agree.

Its not just not going after guys who are better like Zucker, it is they did bring in kinda-veteran guys, but they were 'cheaper' and often not that good:

Tyson Jost 102, Vinny Hinostroza 88, Riley Sheahan 55, Anders Bjork 74, John Hayden 55, Robert Haag 48, Colin Miller 137, Cody Eakin 115, Tobias Reider 44, Curtis Lazar 71, Matt Irwin 24, Drake Caggulia 29, Marcus Johansson 60, Jimmy Vesey 64, Michael Frolik 19.

Those are just some of the 'veterans' the team brought in since the Pandemic years, and how many games they played.  Not exactly a who's-who of quality veterans that they paid up for. More like token vets, many at the end of their career, that were brought in because they were inexpensive.

[LGR4GM]

6 hours ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Not good asset management. Offer him a deal and if he declines trade him. Why keep a guy around who will be playing for another team next year? Don't really see a huge upside there.

Trade him, get the pick and sign a different vet next year if he won't sign. IBut first, I'd offer him a multi-year deal to see if he stays. He has been the really only effective player on the PP. How do we not try and keep him for next year? 

Lol how has asset management worked out for Buffalo? 

Zucker works on this team. I'm not interested in trading him for a 2nd. Good way to continue the culture of losing its acceptable because of some mythical future. 

[SwampD]

35 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Lol how has asset management worked out for Buffalo? 

Zucker works on this team. I'm not interested in trading him for a 2nd. Good way to continue the culture of losing its acceptable because of some mythical future. 

KA: You can't spend now, because you won't be able to have sustained success in the future.

That future will never come, but at least he'll be ready for it.

So dumb.

[Pimlach]

15 hours ago, ska-T Palmtown said:

It is crazy annoying! We should have had a never ending rotation of Zuckers over the past 5 years. Instead we got status quo vets like Girgs and Okposo, a vet without enough in the tank for the craziness he stepped into with E Johnson, and the incessant drumbeat of "No Blockers!! No Blockers!!"

The one other vet we had around, Craig Anderson, did an admirable job of passing for a veteran backup and I would not be surprised if some of his savvy and veteran leadership helped UPL take the steps we have seen him take. Just imagine if we had that for JJP-Cozens-Quinn ... sigh. Some vets will do it just to be a part of mentoring the "next" kids. 

I am with you but it’s just not that easy.  You have to bring in the right vets and the young players have to be willing to learn.  

The Sabres never successfully did this for the old Eichel/Reinhart core and there are stories about that particular group of kids not listening to or respecting the vets that were brought in (guys like Gionta and Georges).  

Under Adams guys like Hall and Stahl just wanted a paycheck and then they got out come playoff time.   They were not the right vets.  Anderson was, but he was only good for 15-20 games, which got us the 3 goalie situation.  

Back to Zucker.  I want to try to keep him.  The reality is that his career is reaching its end and he wants a shot at the cup.  Adam’s will try to help him at the deadline if he can.  It’s the right way to treat a guy that gave you such a strong effort.  Maybe they can re-sign him as an UFA again for next season?  

Edited Thursday at 02:49 PM by Pimlach

[ska-T Palmtown]

5 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

I am with you but it’s just not that easy.  You have to bring in the right vets and the young players have to be willing to learn.  

The Sabres never successfully did this for the old Eichel/Reinhart core and there are stories about that particular group of kids not listening to or respecting the vets that were brought in (guys like Gionta and Georges).  

Under Adams guys like Hall and Stahl just wanted a paycheck and then they got out come playoff time.   They were not the right vets.  Anderson was, but he was only good for 15-20 games, which got us the 3 goalie situation.  

Back to Zucker.  I want to try to keep him.  The reality is that his career is reaching its end and he wants a shot at the cup.  Adam’s will try to help him at the deadline if he can.  It’s the right way to treat a guy that gave you such a strong effort.  Maybe they can re-sign him as an UFA again for next season?  

Absolutely. I think the team will be weaker next year without Zuck, unless we find another mother zucker like him?

I was thinking about Foligno in Chicago when I talked about vets coming in to help. By all accounts Bedard follows him around like a puppy dog - and Foligno had to know they were not going to win in the window he signed for.

[LTS]

15 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Lol how has asset management worked out for Buffalo? 

Zucker works on this team. I'm not interested in trading him for a 2nd. Good way to continue the culture of losing its acceptable because of some mythical future. 

So, if he wanted to be traded you're suggestion is to ignore that and keep him for the whole season?

IF I am interpreting that correctly, then what kind of player does Zucker become when he's told "To Bad, So Sad" and forcefully kept on the roster? I don't think he becomes the leader and vet presence the locker room needs. I think he becomes the poster child for how this organization treats players and it sows even more discontent into the locker room.  He's certainly not going to re-sign after that.

The absolute most likely solution is this that they ask Zucker his preference. If it's a trade then they will ask if he's open to re-signing next year if they move him. They will then review potential teams who are interested with him and let him choose from a list of trades the Sabres find acceptable.

This puts the player where he wants to go (within a subset of trades that are beneficial for the Sabres) and then hopefully he'll come back next year.

 

[Thorner]

On 12/31/2024 at 11:49 PM, SwampD said:

Name calling and implying that someone is stupid,… good stuff.

So, what’s your timeline? If you are so positive, when should we expect playoffs? Or do we even have a right to expect them? 

The answer here is only ever “it’ll take more time” 

the quiet part out loud is they don’t actually care about them 

Edited Friday at 03:47 AM by Thorner

[Spoonman]

On 12/31/2024 at 10:16 AM, Doohicksie said:

@Spoonman's got a girl.  He's been abandoning his friends over her.  Can you believe it?  She kinda looks like Taylor Swift so I can't be too upset.

@Doohicksie  She does too have me wrapped around her little finger! 🥴

[LGR4GM]

22 hours ago, LTS said:

So, if he wanted to be traded you're suggestion is to ignore that and keep him for the whole season?

IF I am interpreting that correctly, then what kind of player does Zucker become when he's told "To Bad, So Sad" and forcefully kept on the roster? I don't think he becomes the leader and vet presence the locker room needs. I think he becomes the poster child for how this organization treats players and it sows even more discontent into the locker room.  He's certainly not going to re-sign after that.

The absolute most likely solution is this that they ask Zucker his preference. If it's a trade then they will ask if he's open to re-signing next year if they move him. They will then review potential teams who are interested with him and let him choose from a list of trades the Sabres find acceptable.

This puts the player where he wants to go (within a subset of trades that are beneficial for the Sabres) and then hopefully he'll come back next year.

Hows that working for us? Don't see vets lining up to come to Buffalo so they can play on a team for 2/3 of the year with the hopes of getting treated right when the team sucks. 

To the bold, holy ***** *****. If this is how this organization runs then just fold the team. Seriously if the Sabres go to Zucker and he says "yes trade me to a playoffs team" and Buffalo then lets him pick between offers... burn it down. Legitimately burn the arena, salt the earth on which it sits. Let it be a permanent memorial to the futility of man. 

[Doohicksie]

43 minutes ago, Spoonman said:

@Doohicksie  She does too have me wrapped around her little finger! 🥴

Twitterpated.

[LTS]

4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Hows that working for us? Don't see vets lining up to come to Buffalo so they can play on a team for 2/3 of the year with the hopes of getting treated right when the team sucks. 

To the bold, holy ***** *****. If this is how this organization runs then just fold the team. Seriously if the Sabres go to Zucker and he says "yes trade me to a playoffs team" and Buffalo then lets him pick between offers... burn it down. Legitimately burn the arena, salt the earth on which it sits. Let it be a permanent memorial to the futility of man. 

Holy cow what a reaction here.

First and foremost let's acknowledge the most obvious thing, nothing is working for the Sabres.

Now, if the organization burns Zucker by not trading him then there will be zero hope of any meaningul vet wanting to be here as well as all existing players not wanting to be here. So you tell me how retaining Zucker against his desires helps this team?  You didn't address that, you just went for the attack. So I will wait. As I said, piss off Zucker and not only will he corrupt your locker room but it'll piss off every other player in there and every player around the league.

So you tell me how that's a better outcome than trading him. 

Now, as to your second paragraph. Teams do go to players and ask them if they have a preference on where they want to go. They aren't going to present the details of the trade but if there were two trade options that the Sabres were willing to make and the weighted them the same there is zero harm in accommodating the players preferred location. It builds good will with the club.

You mentioned elsewhere that you could run the team better but if you engaged in the actions you are proposing I doubt you'd have anyone who wanted to work with you, management or players. Good luck.