Jump to content

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


GASabresIUFAN
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Porous Five Hole said:

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

1.7 might be hard for some teams to fit him in under the cap, but at the vet minimum he might have a better chance of going to a contender.  

  • Vomit 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

1.7 might be hard for some teams to fit him in under the cap, but at the vet minimum he might have a better chance of going to a contender.  

Whats he made like 6 million in his career?  I don't think he's going to throw money down the drain.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour 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?

Asplund can play C or W, greater versatility than VH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

Sure UPL is 6-1 over the past 30 days, but Anderson has a much better sv% and GAA over that span.

Send UPL down when Comrie is ready. 

So replace someone who is starting to play well with an unknown?  No chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was vocal that I thought they would send UPL down, but they probably can’t unless he really plays awful the next couple games. 
 

They’re not going to fake an injury to Anderson, nor send a defensemen down. 

The options come down to waiving Comrie or Hinostroza. I very much doubt the former, so I think they waive Hinostroza, even though they likely don’t want to. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Amerks8796 said:

I was vocal that I thought they would send UPL down, but they probably can’t unless he really plays awful the next couple games. 
 

They’re not going to fake an injury to Anderson, nor send a defensemen down. 

The options come down to waiving Comrie or Hinostroza. I very much doubt the former, so I think they waive Hinostroza, even though they likely don’t want to. 
 

I wouldn’t hate waiving Hiney but it seems like an opportune time with Kulich, Rosen and Rousek coming into their own, to move someone on the current roster.  The candidates include Mitts, Olofsson, Asplund, Hinestroza.  If I’m GMKA, I float their names out as available and see who bites.  Just take the highest draft pick and move on.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd keep all 3 and figure out which forward you want to waive. Or trade forward for someone with waiver eligibility and keep all 3. I hear LA has some nice young RHD handing around and might want a scoring winger... just saying. 

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

52 minutes ago, Drag0nDan said:

Whats he made like 6 million in his career?  I don't think he's going to throw money down the drain.  

He has made 7.2 for his career according to capfriendly. By the time a move is made, he’ll gave earned about 50% of this year’s 1.7.   
He very well could want the additional money, but he also might want an opportunity in another organization to try to earn a contract for next season.  I don’t think spending the rest of the year in Rochester is the best way to earn an NHL deal for next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

He has made 7.2 for his career according to capfriendly. By the time a move is made, he’ll gave earned about 50% of this year’s 1.7.   
He very well could want the additional money, but he also might want an opportunity in another organization to try to earn a contract for next season.  I don’t think spending the rest of the year in Rochester is the best way to earn an NHL deal for next season.

Assuming he clears waivers, he's likely the first call up if the team suffers a serious injury to a forward.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now... Counterpoint... of madness!

If you want to keep 3 goalies for a bit...

JJP and Quinn have combined for 1 goal in the last 11 games (22 combined gp) turning the team into a 1-line team. If the top line is off or the opponent has line to match them (see Ottawa), the team loses. The Kid Line is currently taking a nap, positive Corsi or not. Give Asplund and Hinostroza each a game before Comrie returns as a showcase. If you can get someone to give up a 4th for Asplund or maybe a 5th for Hino go for it. But if a slight reshuffle gives the bottom 9 a spark (particularly VO on the powerplay), JJP and Quinn are both waivers exempt and can immediately jump right back up to Buffalo if an injury hits, if someone is moved, or if UPL cools down.

Note 1: Having nearly every forward healthy all season is a good thing.

Note 2: Waive Bryson when Joker returns. Jokiharju does everything Bryson does, but better. Clague has supplanted Bryson in the lineup and Bryson's 1.8M salary is much more likely to clear waivers. And Fitz is a better replacement for the Boushh/Muel role than Bryson, in the event either of them blocks a shot and misses a spell.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I'd keep all 3 and figure out which forward you want to waive. Or trade forward for someone with waiver eligibility and keep all 3. I hear LA has some nice young RHD handing around and might want a scoring winger... just saying. 

If they trade with LA, I hope it is not Clarke coming to Buffalo.
I didn’t like his game in the OHL, he produced but seemed to be about himself more than the team. In the offensive zone he was always tapping or waving his stick that he was open. It was annoying because there were often 1 or 2 better options but he wanted the puck.

He was doing the same thing for Team Canada at this year’s WJs. He produces but on a team of all stars there are many options. I find him to be weak defensively, like many young D. He reminds me of Tony DeAngelo, with a bit less drama.

It is also odd that this was his first invite to Team Canada. He has been one of the top 3-4 RHD for a few years now and he wasn’t invited until this year. Last August they went with 7 LHD when he was pegged as one of the top Dmen in the CHL.

 

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

41 minutes ago, inkman said:

I wouldn’t hate waiving Hiney but it seems like an opportune time with Kulich, Rosen and Rousek coming into their own, to move someone on the current roster.  The candidates include Mitts, Olofsson, Asplund, Hinestroza.  If I’m GMKA, I float their names out as available and see who bites.  Just take the highest draft pick and move on.  

Really doubt they trade anyone that has been dressing regularly for a prospect or a pick at this point.

They still say & act like they believe in them as part of the future (or at least potentially part of the future).

They don't send that away in the 1st year they've been good in the last 12.  That isn't how these guys operate.

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

3 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Actually he won't as Asplund is still on roster if Vinnie is waived.

Depends on whether they need to plug an offensive or defensive F into the lineup.  Defensive, Asplund plays & Vinny is 13th.  Offensive, Rousek gets a shot & Asplund stays 13.

Either way, Vinny doesn't play but he might be back up.

4 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

And now... Counterpoint... of madness!

If you want to keep 3 goalies for a bit...

JJP and Quinn have combined for 1 goal in the last 11 games (22 combined gp) turning the team into a 1-line team. If the top line is off or the opponent has line to match them (see Ottawa), the team loses. The Kid Line is currently taking a nap, positive Corsi or not. Give Asplund and Hinostroza each a game before Comrie returns as a showcase. If you can get someone to give up a 4th for Asplund or maybe a 5th for Hino go for it. But if a slight reshuffle gives the bottom 9 a spark (particularly VO on the powerplay), JJP and Quinn are both waivers exempt and can immediately jump right back up to Buffalo if an injury hits, if someone is moved, or if UPL cools down.

Note 1: Having nearly every forward healthy all season is a good thing.

Note 2: Waive Bryson when Joker returns. Jokiharju does everything Bryson does, but better. Clague has supplanted Bryson in the lineup and Bryson's 1.8M salary is much more likely to clear waivers. And Fitz is a better replacement for the Boushh/Muel role than Bryson, in the event either of them blocks a shot and misses a spell.

They aren't benching the kids, and they aren't taking a 4 for Asplund.  A 5 for Hinostroza, maybe.  (Probably?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Taro T said:

Depends on whether they need to plug an offensive or defensive F into the lineup.  Defensive, Asplund plays & Vinny is 13th.  Offensive, Rousek gets a shot & Asplund stays 13.

Either way, Vinny doesn't play but he might be back up.

If Vinnie goes down, I honestly doubt he'll ever return.  At this point in the season they are going to want to get a look at Weissbach, Biro and Rousek if injuries strike.  They also like Murray's game.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

They aren't benching the kids, and they aren't taking a 4 for Asplund.  A 5 for Hinostroza, maybe.  (Probably?)

Agreed. Both Kevyn and Donny have shown a clear pattern of giving young players the room to struggle in order to get better. They will struggle until they improve. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Taro T said:

They aren't benching the kids, and they aren't taking a 4 for Asplund.  A 5 for Hinostroza, maybe.  (Probably?)

I agree. But the only GMs who'd trade anything for Asplund are folks who love his defensive metrics (like Seattle or Carolina) and they already have several guys who fit that bill because they've drafted them already or they have a player with higher offensive upside. Maybe you luck into a GMTM-must-have-rage where you get an on-the-cusp top-4 D (McNabb) and two 2nds for the pair of them, but that seems a bit of a reach.

Players like Jost go through waivers; there's no need for anyone to offer anything over a 6th round pick for a Hino.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

imo this is not a hard decision. UPL is our starter at the moment. You waive Vinnie and I doubt he gets picked up but if he does so what? 

The reason to keep Hinostroza is the same reason he was re-signed. He's the veteran off the bench with speed (and a sneakily decent shot) that can play on any wing in the lineup without disrupting the other lines in the event of a 2-3 game injury. The only guys he can't fully replace (in the very short term) are Tuch or Girgs because although he has the speed, he doesn't have their size to move people off pucks or outmuscle folks on the boards. Asplund doesn't provide that same flexibility and everyone in Rochester is an unknown at this point except Murray who doesn't have the wheels.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mango said:

 

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. 

Sure, we need to get more balanced scoring.   We have 14 forwards on the roster and we dress 12.  I would rather drop or trade a forward than send UPL down or trade Comrie.  We have forward help in Rochester and we have a bunch of forward prospects coming. 

If a goalie gets hurt, even for a few weeks, having 3 would be very helpful.  

Edited by Pimlach
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, matter2003 said:

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.

You don't like Comrie.  Fine.   He did not impress in his 11 games, I agree, but I do not think 11 games is enough to make a complete evaluation.  Especially with all the injuries on defense and the Sabres poor overall team play in the defensive zone.   

Good luck signing another goalie next off season (when Anderson retires) if this is what you call giving a player a shot.   It isn't a legit shot and players see what's happening and they talk.    You probably would have traded Tage a few years back because his stats were not good either.   Look deeper.   

In addition, you might need to re-read my post.  There is no "hate" for Anderson from me.  In fact, just the opposite.  Read Paragraph 3 again, your comprehension is way off.  

 

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

1 hour ago, DarthEbriate said:

The reason to keep Hinostroza is the same reason he was re-signed. He's the veteran off the bench with speed (and a sneakily decent shot) that can play on any wing in the lineup without disrupting the other lines in the event of a 2-3 game injury. The only guys he can't fully replace (in the very short term) are Tuch or Girgs because although he has the speed, he doesn't have their size to move people off pucks or outmuscle folks on the boards. Asplund doesn't provide that same flexibility and everyone in Rochester is an unknown at this point except Murray who doesn't have the wheels.

I understand, but he's not that important. Jost took away any shot he had of a full time job. Only chance we need him is if we had multiple long term injuries to top players and if that happened we won't make the playoffs anyway. imo you rotate the various kids you have in Rochester instead of him and you still have Murray and Bjork for bottom end. We still own Bjork right? I think. 

Oh, and Boston would trade us Craig Smith for a bag of pucks in a heartbeat if we REALLY needed a body. Go with the kids. 

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...