Jump to content

Carrying 3 goalies - Should they keep 3, send UPL down or move someone else?


GASabresIUFAN
 Share

Recommended Posts

The easiest thing for KA to do when Comrie finishes his rehab stint is to send UPL down, but is this the right thing to do?  It should be noted that only Det is currently carrying 3 goalies and waived Vrana (who cleared) to accommodate that situation.

There is only one primary reason to keep UPL up and that is he has arguably earned the job and isn’t that what KA has been preaching during this rebuild?   There is a secondary reason to keep him as well.  That is the schedule.  The Sabres have 4 games a week for the next 3 weeks.  With Anderson limited to a weekly appearance and the Sabres playing well it may be in the team’s best interest to keep all 3 goalies to weather the schedule storm, especially with many “winnable” games in the Jan schedule. 

The downside of such a decision is that someone else would have to be waived, traded or sent down when Comrie’s rehab stint ends in a week.  A similar second possible move might also have to happen when Jokiharju returns.  

Candidates

1) Waiver exempt players - JJP, Quinn, Samuelsson, Krebs, and Power.  Anyone see any of the kids being sent down?  I don’t either. Krebs was the most likely, but he has found a home with Z and KO.

2) Forward depth - The emergence of Krebs and Jost as the 3rd and 4th line centers have stapled Asplund (RFA) and Vinnie (UFA) to the bench.  Some here may be cheering for a Mitts or VO trade to open up a roster slot, but that is highly unlikely at this point in the season.

3) Defense Depth - With Joki out, Clague (RFA) has emerged as a reasonably solid piece, who like UPL has earned his job in the top 6.  Bryson has been our worst D, but is under team control with one more year on his contract (at 1.85) and then an RFA.  Fitz (RFA), is our only R had shot depth at D.  Pilut has already been waived.

4) Goalies - Could Anderson or Comrie eventually be traded?

So what is KA going to do?  My initial thought was that he sends UPL down unless he someone gets injured and we open a roster spot that way.  UPL still needs work on his game (glove side) but the compete level is now certainly NHL caliber.  

Then I looked at the schedule and the team getting closer to a playoff spot and think that moving out Vinnie or Asplund is not an unreasonable decision given our depth at forward.  I think both have some limited trade value.  Maybe KA can something for them rather then just waiving them and hoping for the best.  

The downside:  Who do you send out when Joki returns? I think we can afford to lose one of Vinnie or Asplund, but not both.  I really don’t want to see Bjork on a consistent basis again ever.  A 12-8-3 roster doesn’t work for me.  

Thoughts?

Edited by GASabresIUFAN
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we talked about this in the Comrie conditioning thread.   I will summarize my thoughts:  

1.  UPL deserves to stay up and play.  His play has earned NHL ice and if I were coach, I would ride a hot hand.  Play him.  Do  not send a hot goalie down to the AHL.  

2.  Comrie deserves a chance to play once his rehab in Roch is finished.  His record may be artificially down due to injuries on defense and forwards still figuring out the 200-foot game.   We signed him to a cap friendly contract with the understanding he would get a shot - I don't think he got the full look.  People are talking about trading him, but he has way more value to us in a three-man rotation.  Injuries are very possible with UPL and a 41-year-old backup.   Next year we will have to replace Andy.  Keep Comrie and UPL and then we do not have that problem and we do not have to rush Levi or Portillo (if either decide to sign).  

3.  Anderson is part of our team leadership glue, and he can also still play effectively in a limited roll.  We need guys like him to help settle this team down.  

We are in the playoff hunt.  Carrying three goalies is a luxury, one that we might need down the road.  

If a trade looks like a good thing at least wait until the deadline.  

We may have to take a forward off of the roster to carry another goalie, but you have to look at value to the team right now.  We want to win now.   Finally saying it - WE WANT TO WIN NOW. 

Edited by Pimlach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you send down a guy who is on a 7-1 run playing against tough teams as your number one goalie?

Of course not.

If forced to make the call, I waive my 14th forward — the pending UFA who has played just one game in the last 6 weeks and has no goals and 4 assists in his past 14.

But I'm with Inky. I expect they will use IR, or (the threat of?) an Anderson retirement to their advantage.

Whatever happens, it's not going to affect a player who's going to be here next year, or our chances in the playoff race.

Edited by dudacek
  • Like (+1) 2
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Comrie deserves a chance to play once his rehab in Roch is finished.  His record may be artificially down due to injuries on defense and forwards still figuring out the 200-foot game.   We signed him to a cap friendly contract with the understanding he would get a shot - I don't think he got the full look.  People are talking about trading him, but he has way more value to us in a three-man rotation.  Injuries are very possible with UPL and a 41-year-old backup.   Next year we will have to replace Andy.  Keep Comrie and UPL and then we do not have that problem and we do not have to rush Levi or Portillo (if either decide to sign).  

UPL and Comrie are likely the tandem next year. Comrie is signed for another year and he hasn’t had a proper look yet. He has stuff to learn from Andy as well.

As much as I like NHL calibre depth, I think Hinestroza needs to be waived. He is not part of the future roster.

When Joker returns, they gain a RHD, so Fitz can be waived.

I think it will be an interesting trade deadline, the Sabres will not be sellers. There may be a hockey trade to improve depth and certain positions but I can’t see a sell off of 3-4 guys.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dudacek said:

Do you send down a guy who is on a 7-1 run playing against tough teams as your number one goalie?

Of course not.

If forced to make the call, I waive my 14th forward — the pending UFA who has played just one game in the last 6 weeks and has no goals and 4 assists in his past 14.

But I'm with Inky. I expect they will use IR, or (the threat of?) an Anderson retirement to their advantage.

Whatever happens, it's not going to affect a player who's going to be here next year, or our chances in the playoff race.

Makes sense to me - he might even clear waivers.  9 teams have available cap to sign him without doing other stuff first, and one of them is buffalo (https://www.spotrac.com/nhl/cap/).  

If Krebs or Jost were hurt, asplund is first off the bench.  If it were olofsson or mitts, maybe it'd be Hino? 

Personally I'd like to get asplund off the bench in general, but as long as olofsson and mitts are here they're gonna play i think.  

5 minutes ago, French Collection said:

UPL and Comrie are likely the tandem next year. Comrie is signed for another year and he hasn’t had a proper look yet. He has stuff to learn from Andy as well.

As much as I like NHL calibre depth, I think Hinestroza needs to be waived. He is not part of the future roster.

When Joker returns, they gain a RHD, so Fitz can be waived.

I think it will be an interesting trade deadline, the Sabres will not be sellers. There may be a hockey trade to improve depth and certain positions but I can’t see a sell off of 3-4 guys.

Seems like no one has cap space too, so its going to be a limited market for rentals without moving stuff back.  That and everyone and their mother seems to have some level of NMC, NTC,M-NTC these days.  

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Do you send down a guy who is on a 7-1 run playing against tough teams as your number one goalie?

Of course not.

If forced to make the call, I waive my 14th forward — the pending UFA who has played just one game in the last 6 weeks and has no goals and 4 assists in his past 14.

But I'm with Inky. I expect they will use IR, or (the threat of?) an Anderson retirement to their advantage.

Whatever happens, it's not going to affect a player who's going to be here next year, or our chances in the playoff race.

Have been saying for a long time (well since UPL started to earn his spot) that the best move is to have Anderson "suffer" a soft tissue injury in practice and be put on IR.  (The team isn't anywhere close to the cap, so BF-LTIR isn't in play & possible cap circumvention isn't a league concern.)  That way, all 3 goalies remain Sabres & no skater is at risk of a waiver claim.  And there's no way a 41 year old professional athlete playing a contact sport like hockey DOESN'T already have aches he daily works through, so it wouldn't even be fibbing.

But also believe that Adams & Anderson are too honorable & straight up to go for that solution.

So, the next best choice is waiving Hinostroza & hoping he clears.  Considering how little he's played, & the cap situation of most of the teams at the top of the standings, & the tacit desire of teams at the bottom to continue losing, there's not much likelihood of him getting claimed.  Better players than him have cleared.

And, no hand wringing over Jokiharju coming back.  The 8th D-man goes down.  At present, that's clearly Fitzgerald.  Same rationale for why he'll likely clear too.

They can't send a guy who's playing as well as UPL is back down when he's come so far in a relatively short time frame.  They talk about giving players the ability to earn their spot in the lineup.  And also how much doing things the right way matters.  Well, this is one where the rubber meets the road.

Edited by Taro T
  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Have been saying for a long time (well since UPL started to earn his spot) that the best move is to have Anderson "suffer" a soft tissue injury in practice and be put on IR.  (The team isn't anywhere close to the cap, so BF-LTIR isn't in play & possible cap circumvention isn't a league concern.)  That way, all 3 goalies remain Sabres & no skater is at risk of a waiver claim.  And there's no way a 41 year old professional athlete playing a contact sport like hockey DOESN'T already have aches he daily works through, so it wouldn't even be fibbing.

But also believe that Adams & Anderson are too honorable & straight up to go for that solution.

So, the next best choice is waiving Hinostroza & hoping he clears.  Considering how little he's played, & the cap situation of most of the teams at the top of the standings, & the tacit desire of teams at the bottom to continue losing, there's not much likelihood of him getting claimed.  Better players than him have cleared.

And, no hand wringing over Jokiharju coming back.  The 8th D-man goes down.  At present, that's clearly Fitzgerald.  Same rationale for why he'll likely clear too.

They can't send a guy who's playing as well as UPL is back down when he's come so far in a relatively short time frame.  They talk about giving players the ability to earn their spot in the lineup.  And also how much doing things the right way matters.  Well, this is one where the rubber meets the road.

At the end of the day - they claimed jost... who was not part of the plans earlier in the year.  He has essentially taken hinostrozas job, so he's become somewhat expendable.  

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • nfreeman changed the title to Carrying 3 goalies - Should they send one down and If so who goes?
3 minutes ago, Drag0nDan said:

At the end of the day - they claimed jost... who was not part of the plans earlier in the year.  He has essentially taken hinostrozas job, so he's become somewhat expendable.  

Yep.  Jost pushed Asplund, Hinostroza, & Sheahan all 1 block down the food chain.

Considering Rousek has earned a look, Sheahan's departure isn't a huge loss & could see them trying get a trade for Vinny (similar to how they traded Hagg) to allow him to not have to go through waivers.  Because once he goes down, between Rousek & Kulich getting a chance at some point if there are injuries, he may not get back up again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UPL has earned his spot and has won some key games for the team against top opponents (the Vegas win being a great example).  I like Vinnie, but I think that Asplund is more valuable.  The Sabres have more guys with Vinnie's skillset (smallish forwards with good speed and some scoring ability) than Asplund's (a solid defensive forward with some limited scoring ability) and Asplund is younger and cheaper.  So I think that you have to waive or release Vinnie, and on D, probably waive Fitzgerald when Joki returns.  I don't know if Fitz had to clear waivers to be sent down - but hopefully not.

While I hate for the Sabres to lose a decent player, isn't it nice to have first-world problems for a change?

Edited by msw2112
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 2
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I wonder if Vinnie will ask for a release like Sheahan did if management tells them he is going to be waived?

Doubt it, but maybe.

Could more likely see (as stated above) him preferring to get traded to a team that would let him play than getting waived.  They traded Hagg for, what, a 6th rounder.  Could see that or a "future considerations" trade as well.  He's been a good soldier for them and he is very well liked in the room.

Would hope he'd be OK w/ the demotion.  (He'd at least be playing.)  But could see how he might not be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

Doubt it, but maybe.

Could more likely see (as stated above) him preferring to get traded to a team that would let him play than getting waived.  They traded Hagg for, what, a 6th rounder.  Could see that or a "future considerations" trade as well.  He's been a good soldier for them and he is very well liked in the room.

Would hope he'd be OK w/ the demotion.  (He'd at least be playing.)  But could see how he might not be.

He is a UFA so he likely would accept either option ... trade or demotion.  There is a reasonably good chance he would be picked up, but rosters are pretty much set for all but the lowest of the low right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, msw2112 said:

UPL has earned his spot and has won some key games for the team against top opponents (the Vegas win being a great example).  I like Vinnie, but I think that Asplund is more valuable.  The Sabres have more guys with Vinnie's skillset (smallish forwards with good speed and some scoring ability) than Asplund's (a solid defensive forward with some limited scoring ability) and Asplund is younger and cheaper.  So I think that you have to waive or release Vinnie, and on D, probably waive Fitzgerald when Joki returns.  I don't know if Fitz had to clear waivers to be sent down - but hopefully not.

While I hate for the Sabres to lose a decent player, isn't it nice to have first-world problems for a change?

The only 2 D on the Sabres that don't have to clear waivers to be sent down are logging close to 30 minutes per game.  Whomever goes down will need to clear waivers.

Just don't see that being too difficult for the D-man that eventually goes down nor the F who's demotion is imminent.  And if either or both do get claimed, like you said, it's nice to finally be the sort of team again where that's an issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • GASabresIUFAN changed the title to Carrying 3 goalies - Should they one down or keep 3 and move someone else?
1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

We may have to take a forward off of the roster to carry another goalie, but you have to look at value to the team right now.  We want to win now.   Finally saying it - WE WANT TO WIN NOW. 

 

I like a lot of your post, but to this point, the last few weeks we have basically been a one line team. I don't think that is sustainable and it needs to change. But....if we have to carry three to figure this goalie thing out, I am not sure it will have a major impact in the short term. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

I think we talked about this in the Comrie conditioning thread.   I will summarize my thoughts:  

1.  UPL deserves to stay up and play.  His play has earned NHL ice and if I were coach, I would ride a hot hand.  Play him.  Do  not send a hot goalie down to the AHL.  

2.  Comrie deserves a chance to play once his rehab in Roch is finished.  His record may be artificially down due to injuries on defense and forwards still figuring out the 200-foot game.   We signed him to a cap friendly contract with the understanding he would get a shot - I don't think he got the full look.  People are talking about trading him, but he has way more value to us in a three-man rotation.  Injuries are very possible with UPL and a 41-year-old backup.   Next year we will have to replace Andy.  Keep Comrie and UPL and then we do not have that problem and we do not have to rush Levi or Portillo (if either decide to sign).  

3.  Anderson is part of our team leadership glue, and he can also still play effectively in a limited roll.  We need guys like him to help settle this team down.  

We are in the playoff hunt.  Carrying three goalies is a luxury, one that we might need down the road.  

If a trade looks like a good thing at least wait until the deadline.  

We may have to take a forward off of the roster to carry another goalie, but you have to look at value to the team right now.  We want to win now.   Finally saying it - WE WANT TO WIN NOW. 

Comrie has sucked. I'm sorry. No excuses for him.  He has pretty much allowed 1-2 non-NHL goals in every game other than the first game this year.  I was all about him getting his chance here after putting up great metrics last year in limited time, but he has been awful mostly. I don't care who the competition is, you can't allow weak goals from barely inside the blueline with absolutely nobody in front of you where you simply get beat cleanly. Sabres cannot afford to be put in a situation where they start losing games 7-6 or 6-5 or 5-4 again every night because he can't stop a beach ball from way out.

 

And why the hate for Anderson? He has been the most consistently good goalie the Sabres have had this year REGARDLESS of who he was playing and backed by the metrics.

Edited by matter2003
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, inkman said:

I expect the Sabres to get real creative with the LTIR.  

Maybe not LTIR, because is primarily for significant injuries, but they could easily use the IR to rest guys with nagging injuries for a week.  For example Bush has been playing through a few injuries, maybe it’s time to rest him for a week or two to get healthy.  Anyone have any idea when Joki is scheduled to return?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I wonder if Vinnie will ask for a release like Sheahan did if management tells them he is going to be waived?

 No chance of this.
 

Sheahan was on a two way contract, meaning he got paid a fraction of his NHL salary to play in ROC. 

Vinny is on a one way deal, so he gets paid 1.7M regardless of where he plays.  

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Porous Five Hole said:

 No chance of this.
 

Sheahan was on a two way contract, meaning he got paid a fraction of his NHL salary to play in ROC. 

Vinny is on a one way deal, so he gets paid 1.7M regardless of where he plays.  

That might be true if the money is more important to Vinnie than playing in the NHL.  If Vinnie and his agent think someone will pick him up, he may just forgo the money.  Admittedly Sheahan thought he'd be better off, but he's now in Switzerland (with 0 pts in 6 games so far).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GASabresIUFAN said:

That might be true if the money is more important to Vinnie than playing in the NHL.  If Vinnie and his agent think someone will pick him up, he may just forgo the money.  Admittedly Sheahan thought he'd be better off, but he's now in Switzerland (with 0 pts in 6 games so far).

But that’s what waivers are for. There’s literally no reason for Vinny to terminate his contract. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • GASabresIUFAN changed the title to Carrying 3 goalies - Should they keep 3, send UPL down or move someone else?

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...