nfreeman

Well, it's very much in the Sabres' interests for Kane to play well, as this would increase the likelihood of him re-signing with SJ. Yes, it's disputable, and precisely because we have no idea what exactly constitutes "comparable." We have no idea how liked or disliked Kane was by his teammates and/or coaches in Buffalo -- although there's a fair amount of evidence to suggest he was disliked by his teammates in Winnipeg. It's also quite possible that his coaches in Buffalo didn't love him in light of the skipping practice incident plus reported last-on-first-off habits. Do we know whether a white player with pre-existing baggage has gotten arrested for assaulting a woman the day before his team, with a relatively new owner, hosted the NHL draft in their expensive new downtown development? And then followed it up with a 2nd similar legal scrape a few months later? And then sought a huge new contract the following year? This is what I meant about jumping to the racism conclusion. These facts, and what we know and don't know, matter critically.

Good thread! I think he's gonna be good.

Awesome.

I sure hope so. It takes more than talent and temper tantrums after losses though -- you need a guy who burns to win, who busts his butt whenever he's on the ice and who knows that it only works by taking practice, preparation and fitness very seriously.

I completely agree with the bolded. ROR was supposed to provide this and it's now clear IMHO that he just isn't that guy. I'm not sure who on the roster might fit the bill.

Interesting, and quite possible. OTOH, it also seems quite possible to me that they were good and PO'd about Kane getting arrested right before the Sabres hosted the draft -- thus casting a pall on and overshadowing their organization, new harborside, etc. -- which was compounded by his 2nd similar legal scrape later that summer. Maybe they told JBott "you can unload him whenever you think we can get the best return, but there is NFW that we are giving him a $30MM+ extension." Or maybe, as JBott said yesterday, they stayed out of it completely. I haven't seen any reports suggesting they were involved in any way.

Very nice. I too wish him well.

The point is that those items do affect winning and losing -- if a guy is a jerk in the locker room, or a bad influence on other players, or causing distractions due to off-ice matters -- there can be a very real effect on team performance. Well, I suppose it can be, but why do we have to assume that it is? My issue on all of these matters is that I think it's profoundly destructive to just assume that people act in a racist manner. I think the default assumption should be that people act in good faith unless there's a specific reason to think otherwise. As you say, it's difficult to know when racism has occurred -- but if the default assumption is that it has occurred, all that happens is that everyone suspects each other all the time, people throw the accusation around like it's a nickel, the accused resent it, and things get worse, not better.

But the point is that there is zero evidence. Do you think the outcome itself is evidence?

So because some d-bag fans yelled a slur at a black player, that means that 30 NHL GMs decided that black players are worth less in trade than white players? Really? Again: these GMs are paid to win, and get canned when they don't. Black players are traded for high yields, and are signed to fat contracts, quite frequently. THIS black player has had multiple issues with multiple teams, as well as multiple legal scrapes involving assaults on women, and we are now in the middle of a major societal upheaval centered around that very issue. The starting point should be that race is irrelevant unless there is evidence to the contrary.

Ah yes. The old "I didn't say 'speculate that' -- I said 'speculate whether'" compounding. It really takes the original trolling up a notch.

I think it was the bolded. The Sabres are a terrible team. What playoff team was going to look at their lesser players (which their UFAs undoubtedly were other than Kane) and say "I want that guy"? I posted this elsewhere, but it's relevant here: Travis Yost of TSN was on with Schopp on Friday and said there was no interest around the NHL in Lehner. Lehner stinks, but he is a starting goalie. If no one wanted him, it's pretty GD likely that there was also no demand for Gorges, Pouliot or the rest of the dreck. You have absolutely no way of knowing any of this -- and the available evidence -- i.e. what actually happened -- squarely contradicts your position. Even if JBott's initial asking price was higher -- that is just negotiating tactics. Obviously the price dropped and ended up where it was. No NHL GM is going to say "How dare he ask for that much last month. Just for that, I'm not going to trade for Kane now even though the price is lower."

There is zero evidence in the piece you linked that the Sabres could've gotten more for Kane.

It’s just much easier for a troll to accuse people of racism than it is to put the time into real thought and analysis. “Different outcomes for black person A and white person B? It must be racism!” Weak.

I generally agree with this. However, I don't think we can discount the possibility that Kane has certain qualities that made the Sabres not interested in keeping him under any circumstances. If that was the case, then their only choice was to trade him for the best return they could get. Interesting. I thought it meant that if they finish out of the playoffs next year and are in the lottery then the Sabres don't get it. But your alternative makes more sense (and is better for the Sabres).

1 -- Your response is quite fair, but at the same time there are 6 of these guys, 2 of whom were JBott's pickups (CJ and DOR) and 1 of whom is a former lottery pick. With luck 1 of them could become a good NHL player. 2 -- Guhle was drafted in 2015, so his career seems to be following the normal trajectory -- 2 post-draft years in juniors and 1 in the A. It seems like he's highly thought of in the organization. 3 -- I agree that counting on a rookie to carry the mail throughout a season is unrealistic. This is just one of the irons in the fire though. 4 -- Similarly, I agree that counting on a true rookie in his draft year is unrealistic. Again, this is just one of the irons. 5 -- The law of averages (hopefully!) says Bogo will stay healthy sooner or later. 6 -- It's possible McCabe's shoulder injury held him back this year. We'll see. He's shown plenty of potential but next year is an important one for him. 7 -- There seems to be a good amount of optimism on Reino. 8 -- I understand your skepticism about JBott's endorsement of ROR, but I too expect him to be here. 9 -- I don't think the Sabres will get JT or one of the top 3 or 4 UFAs, but I do expect them to bring in an quality player. Yes indeed -- I should've included him in the "out of the gate, not just garbage time" list. And I think he's more likely than Reino to play well out of the gate.

Why does this bother you? Do you not think more changes are needed?

IMHO, to be competitive and in the playoff bubble neighborhood, they need good goaltending, plus some luck, which could come in the form of any or all of the following turning into impact players: - 1 or more of the Rochester forwards (Bailey, Baptiste, CJ, Nylander, Fasching, O'Regan) - Guhle - Mittlestadt - This year's #1 - Bogo - McCabe - Reino -- out of the gate, not just during garbage time - ROR -- out of the gate, not just during garbage time - FA pickup Obviously not all of those will happen, but a few certainly could. And good goaltending would go a long way. It's possible.

There's been a bit of a wee-wee contest today on Twitter involving Harrington and this guy: https://twitter.com/MikeStrawMedia, and IMHO Harrington comes across like a bozo -- including an outright lie about what Straw reported about Lehner.

I saw this too. I think there's a very good chance that it happens. Then we just need SJ to fall off the table next year.

This is true, but... This is the troof. This too. Racist.

Yes indeed.

As to the first bolded: it is impossible to know this. As to the 2nd bolded: why would any other NHL team give up anything for the bottom of the barrell on the 2nd-worst team in the NHL?

A lot of teams are going to take shots at JT. SJ could certainly have JT at the top of their wish list, but that doesn't mean they have no intention of re-signing Kane, especially if JT goes elsewhere and Kane plays well for them. And why on earth would SJ give up more than they need to for Kane? Clearly what they gave up today was enough to get him.

Why do you think this? Yes indeed. I've wondered this myself.