Goaltending this season and Beyond

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 hour ago, The Ghost of Doohickie said:

I think the most likely thing to happen is that Adams signs Anderson for another year at a million $ and UPL plays next season in Buffalo.  Levi is signed and plays next year in Rochester.  I think Toker sticks around for another year as insurance in Rochester.

This is not a good solution.  This is the same problem for another season.  Anderson is to old to play 40 games and UPL is still completely unproven as a pro and can’t stay healthy.  How is this a solution?  How does this help the team take the next step forward? 

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

This is not a good solution.  This is the same problem for another season.  Anderson is to old to play 40 games and UPL is still completely unproven as a pro and can’t stay healthy.  How is this a solution?  How does this help the team take the next step forward? 

Here, we could have done this

 

[dudacek]

Here’s a list of non-UFA goalies who, for contract or roster reasons, might be available this summer, where long-term deals aren’t an issue:

• Jake Allen
• Mike Smith
• Ilya Samsonov
• Anton Khudobin 
• Anti Raanta
• Peter Mrazek
• Jonas Johansson
• Jonathan Quick
• Semyon Varlamov
• James Reimer
• Chris Driedger
• Jonathan Bernier
• Alexander Georgiev
• Matt Murray

Who would you target and how much would you pay?

 

[Taro T]

2 hours ago, woods-racer said:

Find a starting goalie for a 3rd round or lower pick that is on a maximum deal of 2 years that you will guarantee is better than UPL/Anderson. If you can't, neither can KA.

Seriously?

If one of us schmucks hanging out on a message board devoted to a losing hockey team's travails can't identify the useful goalie that can be made available at a reasonable cost & term then the man with a bevy of scouts in his employ who speaks to other GMs on a daily basis and is getting paid a very handsome sum to do just that can't possibly be expected to do so either?

Holy hyperbolicly bad take there batman.  😉

 

[thewookie1]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Here, we could have done this

 

Must not have been interested in him; after all he played here last year. Also he hasn't played in the NHL since 17-18 where he played 1 reg and 3 playoff games for the Avs

Edited February 12, 2022 by thewookie1

[thewookie1]

47 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Here’s a list of non-UFA goalies who, for contract or roster reasons, might be available this summer, where long-term deals aren’t an issue:

Who would you target and how much would you pay?

 

• Jake Allen - Hasn't worked well in MTL mostly, I'd give a 3rd
• Mike Smith - Too old and too streaky
• Ilya Samsonov - Has done nothing worth making a move on, hasn't looked solid in Wash
• Anton Khudobin - Cap Dump with Dell-like numbers
• Anti Raanta - I'd give a 3rd, he's injury prone but solid when healthy
• Peter Mrazek - Unless Toronto pays us, no thanks. Competent goalie but I'm not doing Toronto any favors with their cap situation
• Jonas Johansson - No thank you
• Jonathan Quick - A 3rd or 4th, he's old but has had a bit of a renaissance this year 
• Semyon Varlamov - Between his NTC and the likelihood he's a deadline deal somewhere I'd doubt we could get him (I'd certainly give another team's 2nd if we had one)
• James Reimer - a late 2nd or a 3rd
• Chris Driedger - has been a literal train wreck this year so no thank you. Likely a mirage from Florida's team
• Jonathan Bernier - a 4th at most
• Alexander Georgiev - not interested as his GAA has always hovered near 3
• Matt Murray - Never, the guy lacks a glove hand and is prone to Dell-like play

[woods-racer]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

Seriously?

If one of us schmucks hanging out on a message board devoted to a losing hockey team's travails can't identify the useful goalie that can be made available at a reasonable cost & term then the man with a bevy of scouts in his employ who speaks to other GMs on a daily basis and is getting paid a very handsome sum to do just that can't possibly be expected to do so either?

Holy hyperbolicly bad take there batman.  😉

 

If every post you have is *there are plenty of goalies out there that are better than what we have and don't cost much to get and KA is an idiot if he doesn't get one* but there is never a name of who that goalie is it's not hyperbole. 

[Taro T]

3 minutes ago, woods-racer said:

If every post you have is *there are plenty of goalies out there that are better than what we have and don't cost much to get and KA is an idiot if he doesn't get one* but there is never a name of who that goalie is it's not hyperbole. 

And @dudacek provided a non-exhaustive listing of names, some of which do fit @JohnC's criteria.  So, yes, expecting that Adams CAN'T get something done because a single poster here doesn't provide you names of who KA should sign is hyperbolic and is providing him a ready made excuse to fail for a 3rd time to fix the most glaring hole on the roster he's responsible for.

[woods-racer]

19 minutes ago, Taro T said:

And @dudacek provided a non-exhaustive listing of names, some of which do fit @JohnC's criteria.  So, yes, expecting that Adams CAN'T get something done because a single poster here doesn't provide you names of who KA should sign is hyperbolic and is providing him a ready made excuse to fail for a 3rd time to fix the most glaring hole on the roster he's responsible for.

 

1 hour ago, thewookie1 said:

• Jake Allen - Hasn't worked well in MTL mostly, I'd give a 3rd
• Mike Smith - Too old and too streaky
• Ilya Samsonov - Has done nothing worth making a move on, hasn't looked solid in Wash
• Anton Khudobin - Cap Dump with Dell-like numbers
• Anti Raanta - I'd give a 3rd, he's injury prone but solid when healthy
• Peter Mrazek - Unless Toronto pays us, no thanks. Competent goalie but I'm not doing Toronto any favors with their cap situation
• Jonas Johansson - No thank you
• Jonathan Quick - A 3rd or 4th, he's old but has had a bit of a renaissance this year 
• Semyon Varlamov - Between his NTC and the likelihood he's a deadline deal somewhere I'd doubt we could get him (I'd certainly give another team's 2nd if we had one)
• James Reimer - a late 2nd or a 3rd
• Chris Driedger - has been a literal train wreck this year so no thank you. Likely a mirage from Florida's team
• Jonathan Bernier - a 4th at most
• Alexander Georgiev - not interested as his GAA has always hovered near 3
• Matt Murray - Never, the guy lacks a glove hand and is prone to Dell-like play

It's been hashed for 6 months.

It won't be easy and a lot of luck will need to happen or we give up a first to take chance. 

Edited February 12, 2022 by woods-racer

[Taro T]

19 minutes ago, woods-racer said:

 

It's been hashed for 6 months.

It won't be easy and a lot of luck will need to happen or we give up a first to take chance. 

Can agree w/ this.  (Though w/ the team Adams has assembled expecting just a little luck will be necessary to pull it off.  IF he really wants to bring an actual current NHL quality goalie in.)

🍻

[Sabres Fan in NS]

3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

This is not a good solution.  This is the same problem for another season.  Anderson is to old to play 40 games and UPL is still completely unproven as a pro and can’t stay healthy.  How is this a solution?  How does this help the team take the next step forward? 

I never said it was a solution to anything.

It's what I think will happen.

[JohnC]

26 minutes ago, woods-racer said:

 

It's been hashed for 6 months.

It won't be easy and a lot of luck will need to happen or we give up a first to take chance. 

The GM doesn't have to give up a first round pick in order to get a quality goalie in a trade. The Sabres have plenty of second and third round picks over the next two years that can be parlayed in a deal, along with a willingness to take on some salary for a goalie coming in. And it should be noted that the Sabres have plenty of cap space to work with and still have cap space after a deal. 

The game against Columbus was very winnable. Overall, you can't criticize the team's effort. The difference in this game between the Sabres and Columbus was the goalie play. If the issue isn't addressed in the offseason the same scenario will play out again. There is a reason why for every four seats on game day three of them are empty!

[JohnC]

15 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Can agree w/ this.  (Though w/ the team Adams has assembled expecting just a little luck will be necessary to pull it off.  IF he really wants to bring an actual current NHL quality goalie in.)

🍻

With respect to the highlighted section that is the issue. I'm not sure the GM does. My sense is that he is going to stay within his own pipeline and ride it out. I believe that it would be a mistake. 

[JohnC]

4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

So there's an expansion draft this year forcing a team to leave a goalie like nadeljkovic exposed unless they trade him?

You know who has a better sv% than Ullmark and isn't signed for another 3 years at 5mil in cap? Craig Anderson. 

He did have a call back, Craig Anderson. The guy who has played better than Ullmark this year. 

Craig Anderson has been on the shelf for most of the season. Whatever stats you are drawing from are inconclusive because of the miniscule sample size that applies to Anderson. 

[Taro T]

10 minutes ago, JohnC said:

With respect to the highlighted section that is the issue. I'm not sure the GM does. My sense is that he is going to stay within his own pipeline and ride it out. I believe that it would be a mistake. 

And that's the thing that's so frustrating about this seemingly endless debate which won't end until at least 1 of Portillo & Levi are ready for the big time or Adams actually brings in a goalie.  

He might have wanted to bring in a goalie that 1st year & he WAS close to a deal w/ reportedly 3 different teams when the rules got changed & the potential trading partners backed out.  But even the desire to get a goalie then isn't absolutely clear as Nedeljokivic was available for free but no claim was put in.

IMHO he did NOT want a real goalie this year as he wanted at least 1 more high draft pick this coming season.

He very well might not want one again next year to get 1 final really high pick before the Sabres reapply for entry back into the NHL the following year.  Have said it before & sure it gets old to hear (well, read technically 😉 ) as it gets tiresome to say, but next year Adams might once again be in a no lose situation in his own eyes.  If UPL & 1 of the college kids are ready a year (+?) early, then the kids win games & the Sabres are in the playoff chase at least, & if not then they're still in the lottery with 3 winning (Eichel quality or better)  tickets available.  Either way he wins.  But WE, the fans, only win next season if at least 1 goalie & likely needing 2 of them defy the odds & prove to be ready for prime time next year.

And, absolutely agree that planning to ride it out is a horrible plan.  Though it could work, the odds are stacked against it.

[Taro T]

37 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Craig Anderson has been on the shelf for most of the season. Whatever stats you are drawing from are inconclusive because of the miniscule sample size that applies to Anderson. 

Agree to a degree.  But would actually take a different tack on that comparison.  Because it was highly unlikely Anderson would be both available AND playing at a high level for the majority of this season, the play of his replacement should be factored into HIS effectiveness & results.  Looking at it that way, it's a no brainer which guy was the surer bet heading into the season & the better choice through the midpoint of the season & very likely the entire season.

Edited February 12, 2022 by Taro T

[Huckleberry]

1 hour ago, thewookie1 said:

• Jake Allen - Hasn't worked well in MTL mostly, I'd give a 3rd
• Mike Smith - Too old and too streaky
• Ilya Samsonov - Has done nothing worth making a move on, hasn't looked solid in Wash
• Anton Khudobin - Cap Dump with Dell-like numbers
• Anti Raanta - I'd give a 3rd, he's injury prone but solid when healthy
• Peter Mrazek - Unless Toronto pays us, no thanks. Competent goalie but I'm not doing Toronto any favors with their cap situation
• Jonas Johansson - No thank you
• Jonathan Quick - A 3rd or 4th, he's old but has had a bit of a renaissance this year 
• Semyon Varlamov - Between his NTC and the likelihood he's a deadline deal somewhere I'd doubt we could get him (I'd certainly give another team's 2nd if we had one)
• James Reimer - a late 2nd or a 3rd
• Chris Driedger - has been a literal train wreck this year so no thank you. Likely a mirage from Florida's team
• Jonathan Bernier - a 4th at most
• Alexander Georgiev - not interested as his GAA has always hovered near 3
• Matt Murray - Never, the guy lacks a glove hand and is prone to Dell-like play

Raanta gives me the Ullmark vibe / Good goalie but 1B option more with all the injuries.

[thewookie1]

9 hours ago, Taro T said:

And that's the thing that's so frustrating about this seemingly endless debate which won't end until at least 1 of Portillo & Levi are ready for the big time or Adams actually brings in a goalie.  

He might have wanted to bring in a goalie that 1st year & he WAS close to a deal w/ reportedly 3 different teams when the rules got changed & the potential trading partners backed out.  But even the desire to get a goalie then isn't absolutely clear as Nedeljokivic was available for free but no claim was put in.

IMHO he did NOT want a real goalie this year as he wanted at least 1 more high draft pick this coming season.

He very well might not want one again next year to get 1 final really high pick before the Sabres reapply for entry back into the NHL the following year.  Have said it before & sure it gets old to hear (well, read technically 😉 ) as it gets tiresome to say, but next year Adams might once again be in a no lose situation in his own eyes.  If UPL & 1 of the college kids are ready a year (+?) early, then the kids win games & the Sabres are in the playoff chase at least, & if not then they're still in the lottery with 3 winning (Eichel quality or better)  tickets available.  Either way he wins.  But WE, the fans, only win next season if at least 1 goalie & likely needing 2 of them defy the odds & prove to be ready for prime time next year.

And, absolutely agree that planning to ride it out is a horrible plan.  Though it could work, the odds are stacked against it.

Nedeljokivic came out of left field last year and no team put a claim on him. So I’m not going to hold that against Adams like some kind of damning statement. If he had been picked up by someone and then did well I’d be more critical but all 30 teams ignored Ned effectively. It’s akin to crucifying your scouts every time they miss any player drafted after your team’s picks. It’s not like Spencer Knight was waived and we sat on our hands. Not to mention, how often are vet goalies waived prior to the season to make room for a random other goalie? Teams rarely if ever do that; probably some sort of pseudo-code of ethics or something.

 

I do believe Adams wants a better goalie but has effectively put it as a “luxury” versus an immediate requirement. Colorado had a requirement and as such dealt a 1st to Arizona when their goalie suddenly jumped ship. Buffalo chose to go after cheap potential instead, after their likely starter jumped ship. It was both a difference in situation and general value. In the end Adams doesn’t want to scare away Portillo or Levi from signing while keeping the years on contracts short.
 

[LGR4GM]

20 hours ago, JohnC said:

Craig Anderson has been on the shelf for most of the season. Whatever stats you are drawing from are inconclusive because of the miniscule sample size that applies to Anderson. 

But again, Anderson is not signed for another 3 seasons. 

The problem is we needed a goal for this season and next season but we need to rotate the kids in next season to see who we have. We're in this weird in between area. 

Edited February 13, 2022 by LGR4GM

[JohnC]

43 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

But again, Anderson is not signed for another 3 seasons. 

The problem is we needed a goal for this season and next season but we need to rotate the kids in next season to see who we have. We're in this weird in between area. 

But again, again,and again! We didn't need to sign a goalie for three seasons and have an upgrade in net. There were better options. And even if Ullmark would have been signed for an extended term he could have been traded before his contract was concluded. With a little imagination and creativity the GM could have had better options in net. When you reach for excuses you will continue being stuck in the mud of mediocrity. Our goalie situation didn't have to be at this level this season. 

[JohnC]

20 hours ago, Taro T said:

Agree to a degree.  But would actually take a different tack on that comparison.  Because it was highly unlikely Anderson would be both available AND playing at a high level for the majority of this season, the play of his replacement should be factored into HIS effectiveness & results.  Looking at it that way, it's a no brainer which guy was the surer bet heading into the season & the better choice through the midpoint of the season & very likely the entire season.

I agree wholeheartedly with you. There were better options to upgrade the most important position in hockey. Some people are attempting to mischaracterize my comments on this topic making it appear that I am shooting for the moon here. That's not the point of my comments. My desire was to simply get a competent goalie in place if Ullmark departed.  It was well known that Ullmark was entering his UFA year. A reasonable fallback position should have been in the plans entering last offseason. If the market was barren then one option would have been to pay the premium price and term that Ullmark wanted in order to stay. And then when our goalie situation stabilized he could have been traded before the conclusion of his contract. That's how other organizations do it. 

The focus of my attention is not this season. The situation we are in is the situation we are in. Lamenting does not change the situation. My focus is on how the GM handles the issue next season. I'm worried about the GM's status quo mind-set. 

[LGR4GM]

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

But again, again,and again! We didn't need to sign a goalie for three seasons and have an upgrade in net. There were better options. And even if Ullmark would have been signed for an extended term he could have been traded before his contract was concluded. With a little imagination and creativity the GM could have had better options in net. When you reach for excuses you will continue being stuck in the mud of mediocrity. Our goalie situation didn't have to be at this level this season. 

What options? 

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

I agree wholeheartedly with you. There were better options to upgrade the most important position in hockey. Some people are attempting to mischaracterize my comments on this topic making it appear that I am shooting for the moon here. That's not the point of my comments. My desire was to simply get a competent goalie in place if Ullmark departed.  It was well known that Ullmark was entering his UFA year. A reasonable fallback position should have been in the plans entering last offseason. If the market was barren then one option would have been to pay the premium price and term that Ullmark wanted in order to stay. And then when our goalie situation stabilized he could have been traded before the conclusion of his contract. That's how other organizations do it. 

The focus of my attention is not this season. The situation we are in is the situation we are in. Lamenting does not change the situation. My focus is on how the GM handles the issue next season. I'm worried about the GM's status quo mind-set. 

We did, he just won a game today for the Sabres. 

[Thorny]

On 2/11/2022 at 1:57 PM, GASabresIUFAN said:

Why do you and others always default to the UFA market?  Last I looked, we have a serious excess cap availability and 16 teams that need to free up cap space this off-season.  There will be good goalies available in trade.  

Seriously. 

Pay the price required for a goalie in the trade market. Look to the talk about “maybe we lose the Eichel trade but the team wins” etc etc - I don’t care if we “lose” the deal if the net result is a vastly improved team b/c we address goaltending.

Losing a bit in a deal is preferable to the team itself losing a lot 

[thewookie1]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Seriously. 

Pay the price required for a goalie in the trade market. Look to the talk about “maybe we lose the Eichel trade but the team wins” etc etc - I don’t care if we “lose” the deal if the net result is a vastly improved team b/c we address goaltending.

Losing a bit in a deal is preferable to the team itself losing a lot 

The problem is goalies tend to be a shot in the dark. You could trade a 4th for a guy and have him turn into a star. Or you could be stupid and trade a 1st and have them turn into Aaron Dell 2.0  Goalies are such a risky venture in trades

[Thorny]

On 2/11/2022 at 7:27 PM, JohnC said:

Anderson didn't start and we lost. He's been out of action for most of the season due to injury. When you get a 40 yr old goalie who was expected to be the secondary goalie and put him in position to be your primary goalie you are putting the team in a precarious position. And that is exactly how it played out this season. 

Right. I’ve yet to see anyone use the Anderson argument in good faith. If it truly was a reasonable move from KA to address the goaltending, and his lack of availability amounts to randomness, then whoever is saying that should have no problem suiting Anderson up as our starter next year, game 1

But I don’t see anyone saying that 

Just now, thewookie1 said:

The problem is goalies tend to be a shot in the dark. You could trade a 4th for a guy and have him turn into a star. Or you could be stupid and trade a 1st and have them turn into Aaron Dell 2.0  Goalies are such a risky venture in trades

There’s some risk there, some uncertainty. 

Personally I prefer that uncertainty to the certainty we’ll struggle without a move.