Toggle sidebar

The Roster Thread, Summer 2024

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just going to bookmark this page for when things go exactly the way you know they’re going to go in three years.
 
Signing UPL for 4 or 5 years doesn’t really scare me in terms of it’s a guarantee he walks if we do that.

If Levi doesn’t end up what we want then we will re-sign UPL and move Levi. Pretty much simple as.
 
Jim Bob said:
Overpaying a guy due to a strong 1/2 of a season to a long term deal that the player fails to live up to would also be on brand for the Sabres.
Click to expand...
Goalies don't establish themselves until pretty close to UFA status, or even after. Sign him to include a few UFA years at a potential discount/overpay, or go another 1-2 years and get more of a track record, but don't walk a guy straight to his UFA deadline and out the door, like has happened too many times with other players. A 4-5 mil contract shouldn't be breaking the cap anyway.
 
The benchmark is Demko’s 5x5. Take $500k off for each year under 5. I’m ok with anything 3-5 years. There is risk either way (we could walk a good goalie to free agency in 3 years or be wondering how we are going to get out of the next 3-4 years of the deal). Split the difference and 4x4.5ish works for me.
 
Sabresfansince1980 said:
Goalies don't establish themselves until pretty close to UFA status, or even after. Sign him to include a few UFA years at a potential discount/overpay, or go another 1-2 years and get more of a track record, but don't walk a guy straight to his UFA deadline and out the door, like has happened too many times with other players. A 4-5 mil contract shouldn't be breaking the cap anyway.
Click to expand...
This is why the UPL deal is going to be a risky one whichever way Adams chooses to go.

If they go shorter term, the risk is that UPL is a solid NHL goalie and he walks sooner than the Sabres really want.

If they go longer term, the risk is that UPL's injuries and inconsistent play come back and he gets passed by Levi in short order. Then they are paying #1 money to a #2 goalie.

It is going to be fascinating to see which way Adams goes. My guess is that he goes shorter term.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oldgoalie, Krieger Bot and Fjordy
Jim Bob said:
This is why the UPL deal is going to be a risky one whichever way Adams chooses to go.

If they go shorter term, the risk is that UPL is a solid NHL goalie and he walks sooner than the Sabres really want.

If they go longer term, the risk is that UPL's injuries and inconsistent play come back and he gets passed by Levi in short order. Then they are paying #1 money to a #2 goalie.

It is going to be fascinating to see which way Adams goes. My guess is that he goes shorter term.
Click to expand...

This is pretty much correct. There are two bad scenarios you want to avoid:

1. You go short term and Levi doesn't pan out and UPL walks.
2. You go long term, Levi passes him quick, and you are stuck with an overpriced marginal NHL goalie

The correct route here is to, essentially, split the difference. You shouldn't go beyond 4 years, IMHO. If you sign him for 4 years, that will allow you to extend Levi on a 2 year deal next year and have a 1 year stagger period. You should be able to extend Levi easily as he's a 10.2 RFA and won't have Arb/RFA rights. The goal is to have a good goalie tandem under 10% of the cap, less if you can. You get UPL for 5M and Levi for 3M and they are splitting the starting load next in 25-26, thats about as ideal as you can get.

IMHO, 2 years is too short, 5 years is too long. 6 - 8 years would essentially be an unnecessary dice role given UPL's frequent injuries and only one season as a NHL starter under his belt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kevbeau, kirby11, BFLO and 1 other person
TehDoak said:
This is pretty much correct. There are two bad scenarios you want to avoid:

1. You go short term and Levi doesn't pan out and UPL walks.
2. You go long term, Levi passes him quick, and you are stuck with an overpriced marginal NHL goalie

The correct route here is to, essentially, split the difference. You shouldn't go beyond 4 years, IMHO. If you sign him for 4 years, that will allow you to extend Levi on a 2 year deal next year and have a 1 year stagger period. You should be able to extend Levi easily as he's a 10.2 RFA and won't have Arb/RFA rights. The goal is to have a good goalie tandem under 10% of the cap, less if you can. You get UPL for 5M and Levi for 3M and they are splitting the starting load next in 25-26, thats about as ideal as you can get.

IMHO, 2 years is too short, 5 years is too long. 6 - 8 years would essentially be an unnecessary dice role given UPL's frequent injuries and only one season as a NHL starter under his belt.
Click to expand...
I won't be shocked if they give him a one year deal and they have both Levi and UPL as RFAs next summer.

It isn't the smart move, but it is the easiest move.
 
3x$3.75m to 4x$4.25m seems reasonable for UPL. Would be nice to see the Sabres not pay a "Sabres tax" like 3x$5m or 4x$5.5m. Or overcommit with a 5-8 year contract on a 30 game sample size.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kevbeau and 1TuchAnd1NoTuch
Jim Bob said:
This is why the UPL deal is going to be a risky one whichever way Adams chooses to go.

If they go shorter term, the risk is that UPL is a solid NHL goalie and he walks sooner than the Sabres really want.

If they go longer term, the risk is that UPL's injuries and inconsistent play come back and he gets passed by Levi in short order. Then they are paying #1 money to a #2 goalie.

It is going to be fascinating to see which way Adams goes. My guess is that he goes shorter term.
Click to expand...
I’m more concerned about trade protection than length. A 4 or 5 year deal with little trade protection is much less risky than one with a lot of it. I don’t see a deal longer than that as a realistic possibility.

They should sign UPL to a contract that reflects what they think about UPL as a goalie now and his future. Levi shouldn’t matter to this decision. They can carry both. Levi’s ELC expires this coming season. They should be able to extend him with a reasonable 2 or 3yr bridge. Which kicks the can down the road another 3-4yrs before we might need to pay two goalies #1 money. If Levi supplants UPL in the next few years, it’s not a big deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BFLO
BFLO said:
3x$3.75m to 4x$4.25m seems reasonable for UPL. Would be nice to see the Sabres not pay a "Sabres tax" like 3x$5m or 4x$5.5m. Or overcommit with a 5-8 year contract on a 30 game sample size.
Click to expand...
I think Evolving Wild had a projection of 4x4.75mil. I can’t remember for certain though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BFLO
TehDoak said:
This is pretty much correct. There are two bad scenarios you want to avoid:

1. You go short term and Levi doesn't pan out and UPL walks.
2. You go long term, Levi passes him quick, and you are stuck with an overpriced marginal NHL goalie

The correct route here is to, essentially, split the difference. You shouldn't go beyond 4 years, IMHO. If you sign him for 4 years, that will allow you to extend Levi on a 2 year deal next year and have a 1 year stagger period. You should be able to extend Levi easily as he's a 10.2 RFA and won't have Arb/RFA rights. The goal is to have a good goalie tandem under 10% of the cap, less if you can. You get UPL for 5M and Levi for 3M and they are splitting the starting load next in 25-26, thats about as ideal as you can get.

IMHO, 2 years is too short, 5 years is too long. 6 - 8 years would essentially be an unnecessary dice role given UPL's frequent injuries and only one season as a NHL starter under his belt.
Click to expand...
I dont see it that way...

Give UPL a $4M or do 4 yr deal.

Year 1 Levi still in AHL MN singly
Year 2 Levi I'd on a 3 yet bridge contract for about $2M
Year 3 bridge
Prior to yr 4 you choose who you go with and sign them to an extension and trade other.
 
joshjull said:
I’m more concerned about trade protection than length. A 4 or 5 year deal with little trade protection is much less risky than one with a lot of it. I don’t see a deal longer than that as a realistic possibility.

They should sign UPL to a contract that reflects what they think about UPL as a goalie now and his future. Levi shouldn’t matter to this decision. They can carry both. Levi’s ELC expires this coming season. They should be able to extend him with a reasonable 2 or 3yr bridge. Which kicks the can down the road another 3-4yrs before we might need to pay two goalies #1 money. If Levi supplants UPL in the next few years, it’s not a big deal.
Click to expand...
Adams has not been giving out much trade protection to the guys he has locked up in this stage of the build.

Tage's deal gives him a 5 team no-trade list that kicks in on 7/1/24. Cozens gets a 5 team no-trade list that kicks in on 7/1/27. Power gets a 5 team no-trade list that kicks in on 7/1/29. Samuelsson didn't even get that as he has no trade protection at all with his long term deal.

Dahlin got a full NMC that kicks in on 7/1/25. But, that was a very different circumstance.

I doubt UPL is getting anything more than the 5 team no-trade list for the UFA years of an extension. If he gets that.
 
Irie said:
I personally am not super optimistic on there being a big change on the lack of details. A lot of those small intangibles are addressed by good assistants that have been there and done it themselves, and I still feel this staff has one of the weakest assistant coach lineups in the league when it comes to experience and what they bring in that department.

Getting a few guys like McKee or Peca to replace WIlford and Ellis should have been a top priority imo, but the "loyalty to nice guys" took priority over "doing what is best to build a winner". I don't think the team is better for it, unfortunately.
Click to expand...
If there was a loyalty to nice guys, Granato would still be here and the notion that the team picked the assistants without Ruff's blessing is rubbish considering he would have just retired by now.

I'm not happy about a lot of the team's moves over the last decade but we don't need to make up conspiracies to find mistakes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dingo44 and joshjull
Gras said:
You should put the way you know its going to go into words so it can be referenced in three years.
Click to expand...
"Dear diary,

Today on 5/30/24 I was once again proven right by the universe. if you're reading this now then you have no doubt collected all of the Infinity Stones and now have the power to go back in time and fix the Sabres...
 
DJN21 said:
"Dear diary,

Today on 5/30/24 I was once again proven right by the universe. if you're reading this now then you have no doubt collected all of the Infinity Stones and now have the power to go back in time and fix the Sabres...
Click to expand...
Out of 14,000,605 options, there is only one in which the Sabres make the playoffs.

source.gif
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: SECRET SQUIRREL, joshjull, Ehran and 1 other person
Matt Ress said:
If there was a loyalty to nice guys, Granato would still be here and the notion that the team picked the assistants without Ruff's blessing is rubbish considering he would have just retired by now.

I'm not happy about a lot of the team's moves over the last decade but we don't need to make up conspiracies to find mistakes.
Click to expand...
I agree, it’s just blind incompetence of management - they’re not loyal to anyone, just unqualified and inexperienced.
 
Matt Ress said:
If there was a loyalty to nice guys, Granato would still be here and the notion that the team picked the assistants without Ruff's blessing is rubbish considering he would have just retired by now.

I'm not happy about a lot of the team's moves over the last decade but we don't need to make up conspiracies to find mistakes.
Click to expand...
Do you honestly believe that Ruff's first choice for his assistant coaches were Wilford and Ellis? You don't believe there was any push from someone else within the organization to retain them?

I feel that believing that that is how it went down and Ruff chose them on his own because he felt they were the most qualified candidates is a much larger conspiracy theory than what I am assuming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BFLO and Doug Prishpreed
DJN21 said:
"Dear diary,

Today on 5/30/24 I was once again proven right by the universe. if you're reading this now then you have no doubt collected all of the Infinity Stones and now have the power to go back in time and fix the Sabres...
Click to expand...
In my day we had to gather all seven dragon balls uphill both ways and summon Shenron to fix the Sabres.
 
  • Love
Reactions: SECRET SQUIRREL
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom