That isn't why he slipped. They just didn't think he was good enough. The next team didn't either.
- Slump Buster

Who was the next team?

He showed a lot of promise in juniors and deserved the time to develop in the minors. That's not hindsight.

Him and Josh Bloom are/were very similar players in their style. Two different GMs but one was afforded 3 years in Rochester and the other one was thrown away for no good reason.
- TheSabresTaco

Exactly - everyone drafted showed a ton of promise somewhere.

It's not crazy to say it out loud anymore, which is nice.
- Lunaion

It is cool

Once they start experiencing log jams, which really shouldn't happen under a well run team, they can bundle players for better ones or draft picks. I have zero concerns that this team, or any team really, will end up saying "well, we couldn't sign (Brandon Hagel) because, (frank), we're out of contracts"

Let's not pretend Botts had his back against a wall and simply couldn't sign Brandon Hagel. He made that conscience decision with no pressure.
- TheSabresTaco

It will be those types of prospects (later picks who need development time) who would be left unsigned.

Exactly - everyone drafted showed a ton of promise somewhere.
- Slump Buster

More so speaking of the D+ seasons and not the year they were drafted.

Hagel showed a lot at D+2 and Botterill buttfumbled it.

Who was the next team?
- sbroads24

I could swear that he was in camp with someone else (Montreal?) else after we didn't sign him.

It will be those types of prospects (later picks who need development time) who would be left unsigned.
- sbroads24

I'll have to agree to disagree. I can't fathom a team not taking a shot on a player simply because they're close to contracts. If they let a guy go, I firmly believe it's solely their evaluation and not some implication that they can't carry another guy.

No team ever has this problem. Even if teams go over, they figure it out well before the time limit, whenever that may be.

I could swear that he was in camp with someone else (Montreal?) else after we didn't sign him.
- Slump Buster

Minnesota I want to say on a PTO

Nah you're right it was to Montreal's training camp but he signed with Chicago after the junior season.

Once they start experiencing log jams, which really shouldn't happen under a well run team, they can bundle players for better ones or draft picks. I have zero concerns that this team, or any team really, will end up saying "well, we couldn't sign (Brandon Hagel) because, (frank), we're out of contracts"
- TheSabresTaco

We’re literally experiencing log jams now

We’re gonna have 3 healthy NHL quality goalies and they just had to waive a D man and will have to waive another one.

Decisions have to be made all the time.

They can make it easier on themselves by actually for once in three years making a move to help the now

I'll have to agree to disagree. I can't fathom a team not taking a shot on a player simply because they're close to contracts. If they let a guy go, I firmly believe it's solely their evaluation and not some implication that they can't carry another guy.

No team ever has this problem. Even if teams go over, they figure it out well before the time limit, whenever that may be.
- TheSabresTaco

https://theleafsnation.co...afs-real-contract-problem

It absolutely does happen and it can have a ripple effect on trades and AHL roster spots

We’re literally experiencing log jams now

We’re gonna have 3 healthy NHL quality goalies and they just had to waive a D man and will have to waive another one.

Decisions have to be made all the time.

They can make it easier on themselves by actually for once in three years making a move to help the now
- sbroads24

I don't want to shift the posts here so we can move on from the contract limit thing.

As far as log jams, yes they happen in-season, especially at goalie. Comrie was signed for 2 as an extended try out and Andy for the rest of the season.

Depending on their evaluation, they could ship one out or simply let UPL ride his waiver eligibility in Rochester.

It's nice that we're not pulling our hair out from horrendous goalie play at the moment, but I don't know what the right move is. Trading Andy is probably not happening, Comrie on a new deal, he's not moving, and you're not trading the current best, waiver eligible goalie. It's a tough spot to be in.

What if Comrie comes back and plays comparable or better than UPL? Or what if he's worse, what do they do? Do they carry 3 goalies? Their plan next year was clearly Comrie/UPL, but what did they decide on if UPL not only had to play extended time here, but also perform well?

I think Comrie gets 2 more games until a move needs to be made. It's probably UPL to Rochester, but it's a decision that carries questions.

https://theleafsnation.com/news/amp/the-toronto-maple-leafs-real-contract-problem

It absolutely does happen and it can have a ripple effect on trades and AHL roster spots
- sbroads24

yes it happens, but outside of fans thinking it's a problem, similar to fans thinking the cap is real in the NFL, GMs can make these things go away, with nothing more than slight impacts to their AHL squads.

I don't want to shift the posts here so we can move on from the contract limit thing.

As far as log jams, yes they happen in-season, especially at goalie. Comrie was signed for 2 as an extended try out and Andy for the rest of the season.

Depending on their evaluation, they could ship one out or simply let UPL ride his waiver eligibility in Rochester.

It's nice that we're not pulling our hair out from horrendous goalie play at the moment, but I don't know what the right move is. Trading Andy is probably not happening, Comrie on a new deal, he's not moving, and you're not trading the current best, waiver eligible goalie. It's a tough spot to be in.

What if Comrie comes back and plays comparable or better than UPL? Or what if he's worse, what do they do? Do they carry 3 goalies? Their plan next year was clearly Comrie/UPL, but what did they decide on if UPL not only had to play extended time here, but also perform well?

I think Comrie gets 2 more games until a move needs to be made. It's probably UPL to Rochester, but it's a decision that carries questions.
- TheSabresTaco

Id go nuts

I don’t think they should even consider it. It’s UPL’s net now

We’re literally experiencing log jams now

We’re gonna have 3 healthy NHL quality goalies and they just had to waive a D man and will have to waive another one.

Decisions have to be made all the time.

They can make it easier on themselves by actually for once in three years making a move to help the now
- sbroads24

Having warm bodies in every area does not mean there is a logjam. Actually, I think we are in a bit of a lull right now. There are probably 3 - 5 spots on the big league roster that are questionable and at least as many in Roch.

Id go nuts

I don’t think they should even consider it. It’s UPL’s net now
- sbroads24

I reckon you best prepare for it.

I reckon you best prepare for it.
- TheSabresTaco

If they refuse to waive Fitzgerald or Hinostroza and just do the easy thing, that also hurt their chances at winning hockey games, in no way shape or form should this management group be taken seriously

Having warm bodies in every area does not mean there is a logjam. Actually, I think we are in a bit of a lull right now. There are probably 3 - 5 spots on the big league roster that are questionable and at least as many in Roch.
- Slump Buster

Mitts, VO, Girgs, Okposo as your bottom 6 wingers (making more than your top 6) is a huge logjam. None of them should be in their long term plans and are clogging their lineup.

Anderson is in a similar boat. Playing fine, but getting in the way of the future.

I reckon you best prepare for it.
- TheSabresTaco

Waiving Comrie would be an insane risk to take.

They put themselves in a strange situation.

Sabres have almost Scored as many goals in half a season as it took for a whole seasons in the tank years.

Waiving Comrie would be an insane risk to take.

They put themselves in a strange situation.
- Lunaion

They won't do that.

Waiving Comrie would be an insane risk to take.

They put themselves in a strange situation.
- Lunaion

Of course they did.

“Needed” Anderson to play 15-20 games this year instead of just finding someone else who could play more or letting UPL have the #2.

I'll say 8x9.8
- TheSabresTaco

I’d offer the same deal as Makar.

6x9.

I’d offer the same deal as Makar.

6x9.
- ImThatGuy

For who ?

If I’m the Sabres I try and extend him but if I’m Power I don’t even talk about it this year.

I’d expect him to make a jump next season and be pretty damn elite
- sbroads24

Completely agree, although someone on the Sabres staff, most likely KA, talked both samuelsson and tage to take the money and extend....

Those 2 contracts are so underrated right now