Archie Lee

Absolutely. I also don’t think UPL’s bad year was solely related to what happened in front of him. He did not respond well to the combination of being the undisputed #1 goalie on a very bad defensive hockey team. I would not be opposed to acquiring an upgrade. On balance though, I still think there is more to like than dislike in his background, skill-set, and potential. Of the current in house options, I think he remains by far the most likely solution to the goaltending issue, in both the short and long term

Wasn’t last season the only season where UPL wasn’t trying to win a job or playing for a contract? It seems the sample size you are relying on for this conclusion that UPL got lazy and unfocused, is pretty small. I would argue that, as goalies go, UPL was/is, still pretty young. He had a lot of pressure on him last year to be the undisputed starter on a team with a playoff drought longer than a decade. The year prior, when he played really well, there wasn’t the same level of pressure. Levi had been anointed the 1 goalie and was given the label of “Special” by the GM. It was only when Levi, AND Comrie, faltered in 2023-24, that they fully turned to UPL. By then, he had become a bit of an afterthought. For a young player, I suspect that expectations are a big factor in the pressure you feel to perform well. UPL’s setback last year is, contextually, perhaps not much different than what we saw from Cozens, Quinn, Samuelsson, or Power. None were ready for what was being asked of them. When Ryan Miller was UPL’s age and going into his age 26 season, he had started 66 NHL games. The year prior he became a full time NHL player and started 48 games, on one of the league’s best teams. UPL is going into his age 26 year and has already started 155 games, all on a well below average NHL team by any defensive metric. I’m going to be a little more patient with UPL.

Having watched my son play minor hockey through U18, I’m comfortable saying that no player makes it to the NHL without having been exposed to multiple defensive systems and structures. So much of a team’s ability to play a consistent and repeatable and effective defensive system/structure at the highest level, comes down to the same things that it does at lower levels: the teaching and communication skills of the coaching staff and, above all, the head coach. I agree that our forwards were bad at defensive hockey. I don’t think it is because they are, as a collective, intellectually or temperamentally unsuited for playing a well-coached defensive structure.

Kadri has 4 years left on his contract. If things continue as projected, by year 4 the cap will be around $120 million. I don’t think his contract is even viewed as bad.

The “Sabresy” thing about this, is that 2 years ago Levi was gifted the starting spot. At that time if you had told fans that his next contract would be 2x$812k, and that he would headed to a 3rd year in the AHL, most would have laughed. There is, almost always, a “Sabresy” angle. Don’t limit yourself to contract term or AAV in your search.

There are probably a few fans like me on this one, who just see him as a decent goalie prospect who was probably taken a 1/2 rd early, and who think that patience is needed.

Why would anyone take that deal? Trading for Kadri would not automatically make the Sabres a playoff team. There are just no such guarantees. In the year that Vegas made their biggest swing of a trade (the Eichel deal), they missed the playoffs. But, that was/is no deterrence to them. Because Vegas does not see such trades as short-term thinking. They traded Nick Suzuki for Max Pacciorety. For a while Pacciorety was good for them, but that’s a bad trade. Nobody would say otherwise. But, so what? If your goal is to win championships, you take swings. If you make a bad deal, then you take another swing. If the Sabres traded Kulich as the centrepiece in a Kadri deal, they would have centre depth of Kadri, and Norris (27) and McLeod (26) and Krebs (24) and Thompson (28) who can play centre, and Östlund and Helenius, and their 1st rd picks going forward. If it doesn’t work out, you take another swing. The Sabres have somehow positioned themselves under Adams, where any such trade is viewed as giving up the future for a shot at the present. It doesn’t have to be that way.

I think you are right and they should start out with them together. I have no issue with it. And, as you say, they don’t have to be “line 1”. However, the stat that shows they were so good on the ice together, is very reminiscent of last year’s Quinn is one of the best 5v5 producers in the league stat, that was used to support he was ready for a breakout. Maybe this time it is true. That Quinn was being compared to McDavid and MacKinnon, was likely evidence that the sample size was far too small to give it any credence.

Fair enough. Adams has been willing to trade younger core players for similarly aged players, when the team is out of it at the deadline or when the player makes it clear he doesn’t want to be a Sabre. Of course, for all I know he is working the phones daily trying to move Quinn and Samuelsson and a prospect or two for more experienced players.

This is very close to what I would go with. I actually really like the roster, from a talent perspective and from the angle of potential for future success. Of that roster though, how many players would you say have most likely already played the best hockey of their careers, or the best that is expected of them? I would say 5 or 6. Tuch, Zucker, Greenway, Danforth, Lyon. Maybe Thompson. Now do the same with the teams that made the playoffs last year. You need to get down to Montreal and Ottawa to get close. That’s great if we are still primarily focused on building for the future, and we are just hoping that this is the year we sneak into WC2. But it’s still a roster built largely on hope. If we are really serious about playoffs, this is the year to better balance the roster.

I agree. I like all of those young players also. I’m not suggesting we dump them for futures. It’s time to move a younger player or two (or three) for a good veteran or two who can help us win now. This doesn’t have to be about sacrificing the future. A good GM can manage winning now while not forsaking the years to come.

This is year two of this argument. That the Sabres are not a group of kids on ELCs who nobody should have expectations for. You are right. They are not kids. But it remains that they will be one of the 2-4 youngest teams in the league. There is no question that they could all be transplanted to a playoff or contending team and play a meaningful role; in some cases they could play the very role on a contender that is expected of them with the Sabres. But collectively they lack age, leadership, and experience. Maybe this is the year where they reach a critical mass of key players reaching a point where skill overcomes collective youth and from here they are on their way. Maybe.

Yes. I’m referring to players who Adams would consider core players. And you are right, he traded Eichel, Reinhart, and Peterka. Now, which of those players did he decide to trade with the goal of being better in the moment?

Because they don’t tie themselves to waiting for players like Quinn and Samuelsson and Power to earn their roster spots and contracts. They trade them for players who are good now. And then they dump those players when someone better is available.

Sorry, I guess I didn’t make my point very well. You’ve made it better. Yes, they could have easily kept Peterka (or added Marner, or Ehlers, or Gavrikov, or all of them), from a cap perspective, but not without moving out other pieces. They could have traded Quinn or Greenway or Samuelsson. But they weren’t going to do that. I’m not defending Adams as a victim of the cap. There was no way to keep all the RFA’s AND enhance the line-up with additions, unless Adams was willing to move out players more meaningful to him than Clifton and Lafferty. Even now they could add a Peterka level contract or higher, but not without Adams having the courage to trade a more core piece. He continues to be the author of his own demise.

And, as was stated through the first half of the off-season, their cap situation was such that they couldn’t keep everyone and re-sign their RFA’s. Even with dumping Lafferty and Clifton, they didn’t have space to extend Peterka unless he was willing to take a bridge at a lower AAV. It is some kind of work to be the youngest team in the league, finish 7th from the bottom with 79 points, AND be in cap trouble.

Exactly…on every point.

If Adams hadn’t done that, we would have been so screwed if Byram had received an $11 million offer-sheet.

Move out Quinn and they have over $8 million in space to add a legit veteran top-6 forward.

UPL has to be better. He can’t let his confidence and technique slip so easily if he wants to be a good NHL goalie. But… When Ruff got to Dallas, his goalie was Kari Lehtonen. Lehtonen’s career save % was .912. Without Ruff it was .914. With Ruff .908. One season post-Ruff .912. (Note: league wide, save %’s were higher then). When Ruff got to Jersey, his goalie was Mackenzie Blackwood. Career save % .906. Without Ruff .909. With Ruff .889. Post-Ruff .905. UPL career .898. Without Ruff .904. With Ruff .887. Maybe a coincidence. But we might need to see UPL with a different coach and/or team to know how good he is.

I agree with your point that these are not kids. It remains for me though, that they are collectively young and inexperienced. Individually, any of them could fit in and play their role on a playoff/contending team. What is unclear is if they are talented enough to overcome* their collective youth and inexperience. *They also will likely need to overcome that they will not be playing within a sound, easily repeatable, defensive structure. I acknowledge that Ruff knows more about coaching hockey than I could learn in a dozen lifetimes, and also that he has not been blessed with having the most talented teams to coach since he left Buffalo. But it is undeniable that his teams have been bad defensively on a pretty consistent basis. Our D will not be playing in a system that demands structure and accountability and that is repeatable night after night, like the systems of a Cassidy, DeBoer, Maurice, or Brind’Amour.

Seems like a supremely talented individual who needs an organization that gives him the right linemates and puts him in a position to be successful doing what he does well.

Since Lindy Ruff was fired as Sabre head coach in 2012, here is where his teams have finished in expected goals against all situations and goals against above expected all situations (source is MoneyPuck, the 1st # is expected goals against and the 2nd # is goals against above expected; 1 is the best, 30-32 is the worst). 2013-14 Dallas: 25 / 7 2014-15 Dallas: 23 / 29 2015-16 Dallas: 20 / 23 2016-17 Dallas: 29 / 20 2020-21 Jersey: 27 / 27 2021-22 Jersey: 15 / 31 2022-23 Jersey: 3 / 14 2023-24 Jersey: 23 / 27 2024-25 Buffalo: 28 / 25 Averages: 21st in expected goals against and 22nd in goals against above expected. This is the guy that Pegula and Adams were so sure would bring structure and defensive focus to a group of young players craving to be held accountable, that they eschewed an actual coaching search and just hired him. We are learning, I think, that there is more to defense, structure, and accountability than just yelling at players to manage the puck better. The good news, I guess, is that that there are two big outliers. We can hope that some combination of our goalies does for the Sabres what the Dallas goalies did in 2013-14 and they far out-play the defense in front of them. Or, we can hope that we somehow just play most of the season in the other team's end, like Jersey did in 22-23. Goaltending absolutely needs to be better. Under Ruff, goalies typically need to have near heroic performances to overcome what happens in front of them.

It is interesting. There are two approaches one could take to these details, both quite reasonable. 1.) We are sleeping a bit on Doan. He is far from a throw-in. He has the potential to be a force in the middle-six as soon as this year and may have much higher upside than fans are generally crediting for. And/Or 2.) We are probably higher on Kulich than the rest of the league is. The idea that he is a near untouchable piece is a bit absurd. The way to get better is to do what Utah did and trade two pretty good players with upside for a player who has already figured it out. We should have packaged Kulich in a deal for the better player, rather than deal the better player for a couple of guys with upside.

The Sabres could be better next year than they were this past year, for many reasons. It’s not likely they will be better because they got rid of Peterka.