The idea that they dont need another goalie is totally bonkers. I know im the doomer on this site but even the people who think im a clown for it agree with me. Both luukkonen and comrie were bottom 5 in almost every goaltending advanced stat out there. Even if you believe in luukkonen's potential despite the dual hip surgery limiting his mobility, the idea that a team thats missed the playoffs 13 years in a row can run it back with two goalies who were that bad last year is a ludicrous amount of risk to carry when you allegedly have such a stacked pool of talent and surplus to trade from. its just totally unserious.

Despite the constant cried for a "top-4" D-man and/or a G, these cries are mostly unjustified. KA took to the mic to make that clear as well. He's staying the course.

Further, our team is pretty damn good when Samuelsson is in the line-up. 33-18-4, or a .636, or a 104 point pace.

Now, Samuelsson would need to stay healthy all year and at this point, he looks like a player that will miss about 10-20 games a year, at least. So we need depth, but it doesn't necessarily need to be the "top-4" variety, although that would make us scary good and we have the assets to acquire one. I just don't think that is up KA's sleeve, as he won't mortgage the future to "win-now". Look for him to make a low-key D depth add or too. A UFA in the $4-6mm range would be a huge add, at the cost of no other assets than cap space. Some names to consider: Mayfield, Soucy, Dumba, Ceci, Myers...

There's plenty of routes BUF can go, but BUF is in the situation where doing little to nothing is way better than making changes for the sake of making changes and/or mortgaging the future.

5v5:
Sammy-Dahlin 39GF 31GA 55.71GF%
Power-Joker 38 38 50
Power-Boosh 5 4 55.56

That's not great, but definitely good, especially considering the record with Samuelsson in the line-up.

When Dahlin and/or Power is on the ice 5v5:

153GF 138GA

And these players are only going to be getting better.

When neither was on the ice?

44GF 66GA

So as much as BUF fans want another solid-top 4 guy, getting a (or 2) better 5-6-7 guy than Bryson(59GP), Clague(33), Fitzgerald (23), Stillman(18), Pilut(17),Davies (1), would probably make just as big of a difference...at a much cheaper cost. Joker and/or Boosh are more than capable of a top-4 role with the rising power of Power.

BUF just needs more D-depth. Whether it's a solid "top-4", or a solid "5-6-7", both will have a huge impact. The ccost to acquire a 5-6-7 i just much, much cheaper.

Most goalies around the league would have had similar numbers. The D hung them out to dry.

UPL + Levi: 17-11-4 + 5-2-0 = 22-6-4, or .615, or 101 points. They have already proven they can win. Sure, it's a small sample size. But KA has already come out and said he trusts his 3 goalies, and rightly so.

You're saying the D is a misnomer for how bad it was, but then youre saying the D hung out the goalies to dry. If thats the case, why are you measuring goaltending by wins and losses, a stat driven by TEAM success. The wins UPL has a Sabres, majority of them came when the team was on a shooting bender, scoring an unsustainable amount of goals per game. It's a recipe for disaster

That's just not true. UPL went 10-2-0 for a 12-game stretch, posting a .915 sv%.
Went 12-3 for a 15-game stretch posting a .909.

The real troubles were when we lost Sammy...and to a lesser extent Joker and/or Boosh.

Where did I ever say it was a "misnomer" (in the comments, haha), if you read further, my point was we are missing depth.

https://www.espn.com/nhl/player/gamelog/_/id/4233889/ukko-pekka-luukkonen

At no point did luukkonen post a 12 game stretch where head that save percentage. And again, how do you explain the poor underlying statistics, the ones that isolate for team context.

They won’t find goalie, they won’t make it to the playoffs, my prediction.

What?

Games 8-19: https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/l/luukkuk01/gamelog/2023#21-32-sum:gamelog

I actually watch the games and remember them, that helps me keep things in context. Underlying stats for goalies don't really mean that much to me. What exactly is a "high-danger" shot? I still don't know.

a shot that is highly dangerous

That actually works out to about a 912 sv%, not 915. Its also worth pointing out that a lot of the wins he picked up came in games where he was sub 900 in sv%

Wow. Very insightful, but that sounds subjective, not objective. You're talking about underlying numbers is a subjective way.

It has a function on the site that does the math for you. Click game 8 and then click game 19. The more you know

A lot? 7 of the 10 wins were above .900.

its derived from shot location. Just because you dont understand it, doesnt make it subjective.

I dont need it to do the math for me, its not all that complicated and I can work it out all by myself because im a big boy! lmao

So, for example a player in the crease jamming a puck into a golaie's pads is more high danger than a 3-1 from shot further away...?

A 75mph shot from up close counts the same as a 5mph shot from the same distance?

If you explained it better, then perhaps I would understand better.

I am not your teacher. It is not my job or my purpose to help you understand this. If you would like, there are resources out there to help. Thats how i learned. But im under no obligation to take time out of my day to teach you. Im already playing it fast and loose with the time wasting arguing about one of the worst goalies in the NHL. Anything after that is kind of a push.

Well, clearly you are wrong. 386SV 422SA = [jeopardy tunes]

SA SV
41 39
43 41
31 28
40 37
32 28
44 39
26 23
41 38
33 30
26 24
37 34
28 25

I think your math is off

= you don't know. You spent more time on that response than sharing any useful knowledge Thanks!

Its like the perfect zen koan example now that i think about it. No response I could give here would solve anything. I am so much better off not responding and subjecting myself to it.

2 simple questions. A simple yes or no is all that is needed:

When a player in the crease is jamming a puck into a golaie's pads is it more high danger than a 3-1 from shot further away...? Yes/No/ I don't know?

Does a 75mph shot from up close count the same as a 5mph shot from the same distance? Yes/No/I don't know?

Sounds like you need one though.

386/422 = .915

Not .912

Have a nice day You have given me plenty of insight into how your brain works.

3/10 = You think that's a lot, right?
7/10 = I think 7/10 is a lot.

We're just different. And you're doing some wacky math.

Bonus question:

Does a shot from 5 feet away that hits the spot where momma hides the cookies count the same as a shot from 5 feet away that hits the goalies logo? Yes/No/I don't know.

I was actually tallying up the save percentages, not the attempts, and then taking the average. I was also referring to his play in general, not the arbitrary streak. We are never going to agree on anything are we? why bother continuing? This isnt fun for me and actually makes me dislike the team, the fans and the game. Think its just healthier if I stop responding to you. I shouldnt have posted in the first place.