JohnC

You seem to understand the gist of what I have been advocated for. With respect to your last group starting with Levi there are players such as Johnson and Portillo I wouldn't be reluctant to include in a deal. I consider Levi a keeper (a no touch player), Portillo not so. If I could get a second-line power forward who plays a muscular game like Tuch, I would be willing to use our large cap space and maybe the lowest first round or second round pick to get a player who offers immediate help and also is young enough to play for a number of years. Let's not forget that the Sabres played in an arena that was usually 2/3 empty for most of its games. It would be beneficial from a competitive and business standpoint that the front office/owners demonstrate to the fanbase (and @Thorny) some urgency to become a relevant team in this league. Anyone who interprets what I am advocating for as mortgaging the future doesn't understand what I have said in my many posts on this topic.

That's exactly what those two defenders are. What's starting to happen as this roster steadily gets built up is that players are not assigned roles beyond their talent level. Third line players are now less likely to be second-line players. It seems that our top two pairings are filled with players who although are young are top two caliber players.

We are basically going in the same direction. It's just my bus is a little faster than yours. This organization's biggest asset entering the offseason is its cap space. There are a number of teams that will be cap squeezed. There are potential good bargain deals to be had. 🍺

Bryson and Fitz are also part of the young core. They are lower pairing players and will never be primary players (top two p). But they are young players who are filling out this roster and still have room to get better. Without a doubt the depth of this roster is increasing, and it is being done by players within the system.

You missed the point that I was advocating for. How about a Tuck caliber player? You don't think that caliber of a player within a 24-26 age range wouldn't benefit this roster? It's adding players who fit within the same plan that has been established by the KA regime. It has absolutely nothing to do with a Hall and Staal like players.

I'm a little more positive in where this team is at the compete level than you seem to believe. Our young core is already in place with players such as Dahlin, Samuelsson, Power, Joki, Cozens and Mitts. Next year, it is likely that Quinn and Peterka will be added to that expanding young core. With veterans such as Skinner, Okposo and Tuch this roster is filling up. Is this a playoff roster? I can't say for sure. What I can comfortably say is if the Sabres can add a Tuch caliber player and a good goalie to this roster this offseason, this team should be able to contend for a lower rung playoff spot up to the end of the season. There is no question that the Sabres have accumulated enough draft assets and cap capacity to accomplish such an attainable upgrade this offseason without jeopardizing the long-term plan to restock the system. A half generation of mediocrity and irrelevance is enough. The fans deserve a greater display of urgency from this too flaccid franchise. It's time.

I agree with@SwampD and @Thorny that the future is now. This isn't a mutually exclusive issue. By being a little more flexible the organization can still be on the path of long-term success and also on the same path of being a serious team sooner rather than later. The Sabres can unquestionably accelerate the rebuild and still stay on the more strategic longer path of restocking the pipeline. If there isn't a greater sense of urgency coming out of this franchise and ownership when on most game- nights the building was 2/3 empty and eerily quiet, then when are you going to get it?! This franchise has a stock of extra high draft picks and a capacious amount of cap space. How about using some of that abundance to bring in an outside talent or two in order to win now and create a better environment for the young players who are the foundation for the present and future? Sustaining mediocrity doesn't have much appeal to the customers. If you don't believe then count all the empty seats in the building. Enough is enough!

The main reason I have been harking on this goalie issue is that I strongly believe that the Sabres are in a position to move up the ranks while some higher rung teams may be soon at their down cycle. (As you noted.) The last third of the season demonstrated that this team can be a competitive and entertaining team. I don't want to over exaggerate their good play during that interlude because it was done in a less stressful environment of playing games with no playoff implications. However, for anyone who watched most of those games, it was evident that when the players who were hurt returned to play, this was a qualitatively better team. I expect that with internal improvement and with the addition of some of our AHL prospects this roster should be even better. As you stated, the Ullmark issue is behind us. When the milk is spilled you can't put it back in the container. You just clean up the mess and move on. This roster is starting to organically take shape with the prospects moving up the ranks. It's imperative that the GM do what he has to do to upgrade the goalie position and give this team a chance to succeed in a meaningful way. If the GM does that I expect many of the 2/3 empty seats in the dormant arena will be filled with an aroused audience. It's time.

Did he draw a penalty for not wearing a helmet?

The repercussion for not signing Ullmark or signing another capable goalie last year is that the Sabres are in the same precarious netminding situation entering the next season. The argument that many here are making is that if Ullmark would have been signed at the price that he wanted it would have straightjacketed this organization from a cap standpoint in a few years. Their cap arithmetic doesn't add up. The signing of Ullmark or any other reasonable option at position would have no negative influence on the cap last year, this year or the foreseeable future. What the money Cassandras fail to mention is the difference in pay between signing Ullmark and an Ullmark caliber of goalie would be negligible. As you point out the youngsters are showing that they are ready to compete in this league. Having capable goaltending is a necessity to be at that competitive level. The GM undercut their efforts by not adequately addressing the most important position in the game. The GM has stated that this offseason it is a priority to address the position. And it will also be priority for half of the teams in the league. It won't be surprising that the difference in paying an Ullmark sized contract for him or another option will not be much different. Considering what our cap situation is It makes no sense to quibble over pennies when you have many dollars in your wallet!

Does that mean that you want to pinch his cheeks and mess up his hair?

With respect to the goaltending position what about next season? It's universally understood that last season had little to do with contending. The primary consideration was player development. The staff was candid about what their priority was. From that standpoint the season was a resounding success. Next year, this team will be at a different stage, a higher level. It's not inconceivable that this team could be competing for a lower rung playoff spot. That's not going to happen if the goalie position isn't solidified. Last year, the Sabres played in an arena that was usually 2/3 empty. This franchise has to soon demonstrate to this much diminished and apathetic fan base that the owner and organization are serious in competing to assemble a serious team. I don't know what goalies the staff is going to bring in this offseason. What is very likely is that the goalie/s that they do bring in (if that is the case) will not have contracts that are substantially less than if they kept Ullmark or brought in a goalie in his strata. I'm not suggesting that the organization should act out of desperation. What I can say for sure is that if the position isn't seriously addressed the fan base will continue to fade. Ask yourself: What would @Thornybe advocating for regarding the goalie position? I'm confident his position would lean toward being aggressive rather than being passive. He's a voice that needs to be listened to.

Krebs wants you to vote for him.

No it is not! It is only one additional year on the term and I believe $1 M per year more in salary. The Sabres had to essentially purchase a contract to meet the cap floor this past season. So if you factor in that contract and salary for Anderson, the Ullmark contract would have not been a financial factor this year or later years. For the sake of argument if the Sabres eventually get a better option in net than Ullmark, there is the option of trading him. Assuming he plays at a decent level there is a market for goalies. So you are not stuck for the full term if you decide to move on from the player. For those who consider the prospective Ullmark Buffalo contract so onerous, what do you think the cost will be for a solid goalie this offseason? In my opinion the Ullmark situation was handled with little foresight.

The criticism I have of the organization is not that it didn't re-sign him. It is that this organization didn't have an adequate fallback position for this UFA player if a deal couldn't be worked out. When you are dealing with the most important position on the ice you have to protect yourself just in case the player decides to move on. I'm confident that if the Bills had a qb who was in an UFA year, they would have made moves in advance to give them the best option that could get if the player decided to bolt. With respect to the Ullmark situation there is a context here that needs to be considered. Even if Ullmark required a premium in another year in term and more money compared to what Boston offered, considering our floor cap situation the Ullmark contract would have had no impingement on our current cap situation or future cap situation.

I consider you a realist with respect to how the Sabres are managing the franchise. I agree with you that a strong argument can be made justifying spending to the cap (as you noted). Based on how this franchise has recently been run there is not a scintilla of a chance that the Sabres will come close to the cap. The greater challenge is going to be meeting the cap floor than it will be to spend money beyond anywhere near the cap ceiling. The below link shows that the Sabres had an operating income at minus $40 M. You have to consider the covid situation when factoring in the financial picture. The primary point that I'm making and sticking with is that money considerations are a major factor in how this team operates for the next couple of years. I agree with you that by judiciously increasing spending it will bring back greater return on investment by increasing attendance revenue but I'm skeptical that for the near future that it will happen. https://www.statista.com/statistics/374838/buffalo-sabres-operating-income/

My understanding is that what @Taro T stated is accurate. The Sabres were willing to match the Boston offer but Ullmark wanted a year longer term and a higher average salary from Buffalo in order to stay with Buffalo. The GM declined. The GM candidly talked about the Ullmark negotiations on WGR. He said that the organization set a value on the player and were not willing to go beyond it. He pointed out in that radio segment that is how the organization was going to handle personnel decisions i.e. place a value on a player and have the discipline to stay with it.

Panarin was not going to sign another contract with Chicago. My understanding is that he wanted to go to NY to play. So he was dealt. He eventually ended up in NY. This was a case where contract considerations and approaching free agency status drove the decision on this player. The Sabres were in a similar situation with Reinhart, Montour and Risto. You get what you can get and then move on. It's a tough and complicating part of the business that all organization have to deal with.

Whether the cap is increased or not I don't believe the Sabres are going to significantly increase their payroll. The owners are, at least for the short-term, dealing with a challenging cash/flow situation. It's going to be a challenge to meet the cap floor let alone consider increasing payroll to add any impact players. I'm not criticizing how money is currently being spent because keeping the payroll low is the right business decision considering where this team is with its young roster. In my view, the best business and financial strategy is to assemble a playoff contending team so that the diminished fanbase because more invested in the product.

I'm aware you addressed your question to @GASabresIUFAN but if you would allow me to intrude and answer the question I would say definitely yes. Is a 5 year deal significantly different than a 4 year deal? I would say no, especially for an organization that didn't have much of a backup option. How many years away is UPL from being a #1 goalie, assuming he will be? How many years away is Levi away from being a starting goalie in this league, assuming he will continue on the upward projection? Just because you sign Ullmark to a five year deal that doesn't mean that you can't deal him after a couple to three years later if a better option is found. If he is an average starter (which I consider him to be) there would be a market for him.

There is a saying that I always found to be wise: Don't let perfect be the enemy of the good. I strongly believe (not provable) that if Ullmark would have been our #1 goalie last year the Sabres would have earned at least ten more points. That's not a trivial amount for an impact of one player. The full impact of not signing Ullmark can not be determined until we know how the GM addresses the position this offseason. If he finds a superior goalie, then the impact was minimal. If the GM doesn't come away with a dependable goalie this year then the negative impact would have had a lingering effect beyond the one season.

You watch AHL games while I don't. So it would be unfair for me to comment about the Rochester goalies. But after reading your observations about UPL and his deficiencies, what is the appeal of him as a NHL prospect? It is often mentioned that when he is on his game he can be stellar. But it is his lapses and lack of consistency that bother me. Even in the games he played in Buffalo there were extended spells in which he was tremendous. And then there would be that inexplicable long-distant shot with little obstruction in front of him where he would whiff. Giving up those types of goals are crushing and dispiriting! It just seems that the GM is invested in UPL as a Sabre goalie next year. If the GM doesn't bring in one or two more experienced NHL goalies next season, he is taking a big risk in undercutting a team that seems to be moving in the right direction.

Fleury is certainly better than Ullmark. That isn't the issue. The issue is whether he would sign with Buffalo. And that is unlikely. Fleury has had a stellar career. He is at the end of his career where he most likely would be signing short-term deals. If he has options to sign with a number of teams it will be with a team that gives him a chance to be on a cup contending team. The Sabres are not at that competitive juncture yet. Our GM was not willing to give Ullmark a contract that he was willing to sign. The irony is that he will now have to go out and sign an Ullmark caliber goalie for the market price that was in the range that he refused to give to the departed goalie. That was a gaffe that has come back to plague this team. There will be some good goalies available on the market for a variety of reasons, most notably cap reasons. But the problem is that on the other side of the equation there will be a number of teams needing goalies. It's a tough market for a critical position. Make no mistake what I'm saying here. I'm aware of the caliber of goalie Ullmark is. He is at best a mid-tier or even a little lower starting goaltender. That is better than what we currently have.

I've never said that their GM is a genius. However, there is a cycle when a team is ready to compete for a cup as compared to a team like the Sabres who are still in a preliminary stage as a serious cup contender. The big challenge for all GMs is not so much giving out high annual salaries as it is the length of contracts. To retain or acquire top tier players organizations are not only required to pay high annual salaries but also give them long term deals. Those same issues happened when Skinner's contract was up after we acquired him from Carolina. When you have players such as Marner and Mathews you have to pay them the premium going rate for annual salaries and the required long term deals. And the same issue happened when the organization decided to sign Tavares as a free agent. A lot of tough decisions need to be made. In a few years the Sabres will also be facing the same tough decisions when our talented young players are entering their second contracts.

Their roster was loaded with talent. They dealt a high cost player and a draft pick to keep their best players. When you have a loaded roster you have to make tough decisions and do what you have to do to keep the players that you want to. It's a problem that talent laden teams have to contend with. I would rather be in that situation than have a roster full of budget players that don't get you anywhere meaningful.