kas23

I’m waiting on pins and needles for this one. Could be make or break for the legitimacy of Kevyn’s tenure. Wait, it was last Monday...carry on.

Correct. We need the Rangers to continue to be in the mix as a decoy. They’ll keep the price floor elevated.

Pegulas just haven’t yet hired a person with gonads as large as McDermott or Beane. Once his happens, I do think they will back off. It’s just that no Sabres FO personnel has given them the impression they know what WTF they are doing. Have they given any fan this impression? And yes, this fault solely rests in the Pegula’s lap.

And they probably wouldn’t be wrong. If I were Adams, would be praying teams are thinking this way.

Question, why did you have to go and get opinions from 3 different neurosurgeons in 3 different cities? Did they all have the same medical opinions?

Completely odd. What’s even more strange is that Jack is talking about this to reporters. For the record, it’s hard to have an opinion on this one. We don’t know the facts. There’s only 2 things we know; Sabres medical staff recommended surgery AND Jack Eichel disagrees with them. I think most of agree Jack should’ve kept his thoughts to himself.

Standard of care for disc herniations is conservative care as most herniated discs will resolve on their own. Now, when will that happen? Very hard to tell. But surgery not what you go to first.

There’s no touchy-feely stuff here. He has a contract. He can honor it, or he can not honor it. He has complete control over what happens to his body though, not his boss. But, there may be consequences to his decision. All decisions have potential consequences. btw, my employees love me. None of them would’ve got to the point of Eichel. But, since he’s aired his laundry in public, he’s now going to face brutal criticism. I’m a physician btw and you would be shocked. Not saying you are wrong though. But, it seems everyone has taken a class from Google Medical School nowadays. I wouldn’t be completely surprised if Jack got a second opinion, who then recommended surgery. Jack goes home and Googles it and reads about some success stories and begins to idealize this option.

Ok, he chooses to have surgery. Goes splendidly and he’s pain free. Everyone is happy (until next season...). In another scenario, surgery goes very bad as Sabres docs said it could. He’s damaged goods, his contract is void, and he loses $50M. Given these scenarios, are the Sabres forcing a medical decision on him as some here are suggesting? Is he in the right to publicly complain of his treatment? Answer is “no” and it’s not because of his “contract” as he spelled out. He has the God given right to do whatever he wants to his body, contract or no contract. There may be consequences though. My personal opinion is he’s being selfish and thinks his medical opinion (he’s the one who said he wants surgery at today’s presser) is better than the Sabres medical establishment.

Ok, he’s surgery goes bad, he loses $50M. His surgery goes well. His contract is void. He becomes a FA, he’ll likely recoup that $50M fairly quickly in the form of a new contract of his choosing. So, he has the choice to have surgery, does he not? Let’s say he doesn’t want to roll those dice. He wants to keep his $50M. Doesn’t want to risk it, even though the man himself says he desires surgery. Does he have a single reason to complain? That’s what I’m saying. If he’s complaining about how the Sabres are denying him surgery, he’s completely within his right to undergo surgery, no? What exactly is he looking for? Permission from Mom and Dad?

There’s no evidence he has received a “variety” of medical opinions. Do you evidence otherwise? All we know is that he has received at least 1, that of the team. In likelihood, he received at least another, but this and beyond this opinion is just speculation.

Yeah? What happens next? He becomes a free agent.

They could, and probably would for a lesser player, but neither the NHL nor the NHLPA would ever allow this. Hell would freeze over before they allowed a team to drag one of their star players into court. In all likelihood, a settlement, then free agency. But, that’s neither here nor there. Eichel signed his contract knowing this. The NHLPA also signed off on this. Team doctors are not in support for surgery. End of story. He has nothing to complain about. Probably Googled that surgery helps some people and is running with it.

There’s nothing stopping him from getting his surgery. He’ll be breaking no laws. Sure, he’ll be in breach of his contract, but so what? If this were to happen, the Sabres could try to void the rest of his contract, like they did for Berglund, but I doubt they would. If they did, Jack would then be a free agent and could go to whatever team he chooses. I’m well aware of what the CBA say. So, I ask you. What would the repercussions be?

No ones stopping him from going to get surgery. The Sabres have no leverage to do anything about it. But, for some reason, he’s not. He’s complaining about it instead.

There’s probably much more to this story than what Dr. Eichel lets on. For example, what if the team doctor says that surgery may potentially worsen his condition and favor conservative management. What if second opinion says the same thing? And what if a third opinion says do surgery and Eichel thinks that’s going to solve all his problems (and maybe get him off the team)? You go to enough surgeons and eventually you’ll find someone who will take you to the OR. And besides, there is actually nothing stopping Eichel from going to get surgery. He’s a free man. What would the Sabres do about it? Ground him for a week?

Yes, and due to this, he set himself up for this contract. He made it so he had zero leverage. In fact, if I were their owner, I would’ve have budged from $1.5M.

Darcy is by far, the best GM at dismantling a team. Should get into he Buffalo sports HoF for this feat. As for building a team, he was never allowed to, so can’t comment on this skill

We have known this one already, but hopefully the franchise has learned another lesson: 10. It is beyond imperative that we go into next season with 2 goalies as good as (or hopefully better than) Ulmark. This may include Ulmark himself. We have known this one already, but hopefully the franchise has learned another lesson: 10. It is beyond imperative that we go into next season with 2 goalies as good as (or hopefully better than) Ulmark. This may include Ulmark himself. We have known this one already, but hopefully the franchise has learned another lesson: 10. It is beyond imperative that we go into next season with 2 goalies as good as (or hopefully better than) Ulmark. This may include Ulmark himself.

I’m fine with a high salary, but the term needs to be manageable. 8 years is way too long. Would go 6 or hopefully 5 years. We’ve been burned often with these long terms, and so have many teams in the NHL.

The Lord knows no team. And even if He did, doubt he would sign up for this dumpster fire.

I would rather have Mitts be centering a line then prematurely sending Cozens into that situation.

I agree with everything stated. I was just wondering if there’s people out there that say our losing ways today are due to some nebulous installment of a “losing culture” 6 years ago. It’s actually that this organization has demonstrated a remarkable commitment to incompetence since then: poor drafting, poor player development, dumb contracts being given out, trading good players for peanuts, coaches having no clue, etc. No addition of a “generational” talent wouldn’t changed this. Geez, look at out AHL roster, the team that we’re supposes to develop our talent. It’s a wasteland.

Sorry to be that guy, but what was this lesson?

Correct, if he meant it to be constructive, you don’t go and say it on National TV. That’s unprofessional. Cross him off the list.