North Buffalo Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 3 minutes ago, GoPuckYourself said: I just need more than a half of a seasons production, he was Comrie-bad before this resurgence. Agree but something has appeared to click... seems more flexible and more in control when he slides plus reading plays better and not flopping forward like he used to do... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashsabre Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 5 minutes ago, GoPuckYourself said: I just need more than a half of a seasons production, he was Comrie-bad before this resurgence. No he wasn’t. He was a goalie struggling to come back from double hip surgery. He has always been a talented goalie. 24 is the beginning of the maturity curve for goalies. UPL-Levi should be the long term plan starting next season. Bridge him for 2 year and see where Levi is then and make a decision at that point. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoPuckYourself Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 18 minutes ago, Flashsabre said: No he wasn’t. He was a goalie struggling to come back from double hip surgery. He has always been a talented goalie. 24 is the beginning of the maturity curve for goalies. UPL-Levi should be the long term plan starting next season. Bridge him for 2 year and see where Levi is then and make a decision at that point. If that's your opinion that's fine but he was really bad and even hard to watch up until Jan, most here were looking to move on including myself. A bridge deal is definitely what he should get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7+6=13 Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 39 minutes ago, GoPuckYourself said: I just need more than a half of a seasons production, he was Comrie-bad before this resurgence. I think the difference is Comrie will be 29 in July and UPL turned 25 last Month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerreaultForever Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 5 hours ago, 7+6=13 said: My guess is he meant 6-7 mil total for 3 years. That makes much more sense. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjd1001 Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 3 hours ago, GoPuckYourself said: I just need more than a half of a seasons production, he was Comrie-bad before this resurgence. He wasn't that bad. It really was when the calendar changed to 2024 he really heated up. The 'half season' of production starting January 1st to now: 32 starts, .921 save percentage, 2.25 gaa The 'bad' half season before that: 15 starts, .892 save percentage, 3.13 gaa Comrie? .864 save percentage, 3.91 gaa, and 1 win in 9 starts. Even the 'bad' UPL was no where near, not even close to as bad as Comrie has been this year. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TageMVP Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 Don't repeat Ullmark mistake Or whatever that was Sign him 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorcus Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 If I understand RFA compensation correctly, I think the answer to this will be 4.3 million to 4.5 million for 2 to 4 years. By offering 4.3 M any offer sheet over that would have to give us a 1st and a 3rd round pick in the draft. There are only 16 teams that are able to do that, (unless they trade for a pick). Half of those are lottery picks so they won't do it. A few others are set in goal so they don't need him. A few other teams are on the fence of being a lottery pick. There are a couple of teams that could try it. Philly and the Oilers would seem the most logical of the eligible teams but Swayman is also an RFA so if you are going to pull that lever would you not go after him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalonill Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 5 hours ago, TageMVP said: Don't repeat Ullmark mistake Or whatever that was Sign him Goalies are weird I wouldn’t sign him long-term maybe 2-3 years Who knows what he's going to be next year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Train Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 I find it funny that the above thoughts are 2-3 year bridge $. Yet they give underachieving/turnover prone Power a huge deal way too early. UPL is our MVP. Yes, use caution on overpaying anyone but he's the only one trying many nights. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Lee Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 UPL is currently on a bridge deal. He is two seasons away from being a UFA (he will turn 27 in March 2026). He is also arbitration eligible. The only bridge that is left is a one year deal. A two year deal walks him to UFA status. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjd1001 Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 1 hour ago, Night Train said: I find it funny that the above thoughts are 2-3 year bridge $. Yet they give underachieving/turnover prone Power a huge deal way too early. UPL is our MVP. Yes, use caution on overpaying anyone but he's the only one trying many nights. Agreed. Goalies recently seem to be paid less than other players, maybe its because they CAN be inconsistent year to year. But when you do have a quality starting level goalie, they are more important to your team than all but the very top stars on the rest of your roster. You think you have a guy, give him the market rate pay, especially when the market rate pay is right now more affordable for goalies than it is for other positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashsabre Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 For a team that hasn’t found a goalie since Ryan Miller just get UPL under contract. 3-4 year deal at reasonable money. Adams has proven zero ability to identify and secure decent goaltending from outside the organization. UPL has proven he can carry the team as a number one for an extended period of time. Levi has not yet. So don’t put all the eggs in the Levi basket. We saw how that worked out this season. And I’m as high on Levi as anyone but this is not the time to get cute or smart at the goaltending position. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalonill Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 2 hours ago, Night Train said: I find it funny that the above thoughts are 2-3 year bridge $. Yet they give underachieving/turnover prone Power a huge deal way too early. UPL is our MVP. Yes, use caution on overpaying anyone but he's the only one trying many nights. How about you wait to give him a long-term deal and see how he does in a new system next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoPuckYourself Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 (edited) I don't think some are understanding, I by no means think negatively of UPL but we've just rewarded TNT, Owen Power, Dylan Cozens, Mattias Samuelsson, Rasmus Dahlin, all of which took a step backwards this past season so all I'm saying is proceed with caution. Giving a long term extention here for half a season of production in a contract year can be just as detrimental if not worse than giving the above players deals imo. I'm not saying don't give UPL a contract but I think a 2-3 year (prove you can do this full time from here on out, 4.5M per season tops) deal is the way to go. Edited April 6 by GoPuckYourself Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 6 hours ago, Jorcus said: If I understand RFA compensation correctly, I think the answer to this will be 4.3 million to 4.5 million for 2 to 4 years. By offering 4.3 M any offer sheet over that would have to give us a 1st and a 3rd round pick in the draft. There are only 16 teams that are able to do that, (unless they trade for a pick). Half of those are lottery picks so they won't do it. A few others are set in goal so they don't need him. A few other teams are on the fence of being a lottery pick. There are a couple of teams that could try it. Philly and the Oilers would seem the most logical of the eligible teams but Swayman is also an RFA so if you are going to pull that lever would you not go after him? Compensation isn’t tied into what Buffalo offers. The only thing required of them is a qualifying offer, which would be a one year deal with a 5% raise over his previous contract. That’s all it takes for him to be restricted. The compensation stuff you’re mentioning he nothing to do with what Buffalo offers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthEbriate Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 I don’t mess around. Sign him to a an unproven (no playoffs yet) starter’s salary that carries through Levi’s bridge deal. 4 by $3.75-4.5. Levi won’t cost more than 3 until the end of that and 8M combined for a potential 1A/1B pair is fine. And either is movable if the other becomes Hasek. I’m wary of, but resigned to, them being the tandem next season instead of a playoff-tested vet backup and more seasoning for Levi. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted April 6 Author Report Share Posted April 6 8 hours ago, Night Train said: I find it funny that the above thoughts are 2-3 year bridge $. Yet they give underachieving/turnover prone Power a huge deal way too early. UPL is our MVP. Yes, use caution on overpaying anyone but he's the only one trying many nights. They shouldn't have signed power or Samuelsson to those long deals. It was based on nothing but feelings. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believer Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 1 hour ago, LGR4GM said: They shouldn't have signed power or Samuelsson to those long deals. It was based on nothing but feelings. Agree 100%… Question is whose feelings?… Pegula interference or Adams incompetence… 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerreaultForever Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 1 hour ago, LGR4GM said: They shouldn't have signed power or Samuelsson to those long deals. It was based on nothing but feelings. I agree about Power, but I think everyone (including you) was onboard with the Samuelsson deal and he looked like a solid pairing partner for Dahlin and/or a solid defensive D man. Nobody knew he was made of glass at the time so I can't fault Adams on that one. It was a solid contract for what we thought we had. We get the benefit of hindsight, GM's don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted April 7 Author Report Share Posted April 7 53 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said: I agree about Power, but I think everyone (including you) was onboard with the Samuelsson deal and he looked like a solid pairing partner for Dahlin and/or a solid defensive D man. Nobody knew he was made of glass at the time so I can't fault Adams on that one. It was a solid contract for what we thought we had. We get the benefit of hindsight, GM's don't. I was lukewarm to it at best. My posts from the Samuelsson contract thread. On 10/12/2022 at 1:44 PM, LGR4GM said: Interesting. On 10/12/2022 at 5:16 PM, LGR4GM said: It's a risky deal. If Muel is a top pair shutdown guy that other teams avoid (he's a physical animal) then it will be worth it. They must like what they see up to now. The avg seems a little high right now, we'll see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Very few goalies are consistently upper tier, so I generally don't believe in long-term commitments to them -- especially for a guy who didn't look like an NHL goalie until garbage time in another lost season. I'd be OK with a 3-year deal for UPL, but I wouldn't want to go longer than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerreaultForever Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 2 hours ago, LGR4GM said: I was lukewarm to it at best. My posts from the Samuelsson contract thread. "a little high" isn't exactly against it. Most Buffalo contracts are "a little high". They don't get discounts from people who want to be here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billznut Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 My guess is UPL will want 5x5 Sabres would prefer 3x3 Most likely it’ll end up somewhere in the middle. I’ll say 4x4.25 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted April 7 Author Report Share Posted April 7 9 hours ago, Billznut said: My guess is UPL will want 5x5 Sabres would prefer 3x3 Most likely it’ll end up somewhere in the middle. I’ll say 4x4.25 I'd be really happy with 3x 3.5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.