JohnC

For a team in their cap situation giving up a lower first round pick to take a high cost contract off of their hands makes a lot of sense. That pick is unlikely to be on the roster in the next three to four years. And that lower pick is also not guaranteed to move ahead of the young players already in their system when the player is more developed. Selling off contracts is what happens when you have a roster full of talented players. You can't keep them all. I would rather be in a roster situation that Toronto is in where there are a number of high end players on the roster squeezing the cap than be in a situation where you don't have enough good players with commensurate contracts. Considering where the Sabres are with their bottom-feeding cap situation, I'm hoping that the Sabres can add a good player to their roster by selectively adding a player that another team can't fit onto their roster because of the cap squeeze. Vegas is in that tight money situation. That's a fertile roster to poach a good player from.

In some situations, as it was in this case, the issue isn't whether you win a trade or not because a decision was made to deal him. The organization and owner (apparently) were determined to deal him before his bonus kicked in. When the trade first happened it seemed as if the organization got fleeced. As time goes by it doesn't seem as imbalanced a deal as it first did. Just as with the Jack deal you make the best deal you can and then move on.

Wasn't it J. Botts who got Tage Thompson in return for ROR? It took some time for the fruits of that trade to manifest itself but as time goes by that deal looks better, or at a minimum can be considered a fair value trade.

Attached is an article from a WGR site by Paul Hamilton. He brought up comments from the Rochester coach on JJ and Rousek. His comments on Rousek suggest that the organization has another quality NHL prospect in the system. It was pointed out that Rousek was a J Botts draft selection. https://www.audacy.com/wgr550/sports/sabres/amerks-hit-stride-at-right-time-of-season

Blaming Jack for this team's failure because he was sold as the franchise savior makes little sense. If you want to attach blame for this team's dismal record while he was here, a better target would be the owner and hockey operation. He was not the cause of why this franchise was mismanaged.

Simply stated don't give out your SS# and address. With those two pieces of information you can end up in the morass of being a victim to identity theft.

We are going in circles. Again, what is the evidence that he was a negative influence in the room? There is none other than a few oblique references. Was he a positive influence in the room? I can't say. I'm not the one throwing out character judgments about him. It may be that he simply wasn't an influential presence in the room one way or the other. If that characterization is accurate (don't really know) then that is far from being a toxic presence.

I'm not taking any of your comments with any sense of hostility. I agree with you that Jack was not going to be part of the solution. The player understood that and so did the GM. As I have said on other posts moving him was the right thing to do for him and for the Sabres. It gave him an opportunity for a fresh start, and it accelerated the rebuild by adding two good players and hopefully a good prospect. In addition, although the Sabres are in an excellent cap shape it provided the front office more options in adding talent due to the elimination of his high salary. This flailing franchise desperately needed a reset----and it got it.

I not reframing the issue. What is being called for is to disprove a negative characterization. My complaint is how can you disprove a negative when there isn't much evidence that he was a toxic presence? The burden is on those who are making the claim. I'm aware of Brian Gionta's oblique negative comments about him. I heard him comment on this issue on WGR. It wasn't as negative as many are trying to portray. I'm not suggesting Jack was an angel. But if you look at the totality of comments about him from his many former teammates there were very few comments that suggested that he was a negative influence in the room.

Brian Gionta has discretely been critical of Eichel. So what! He wasn't the leader that many people hoped for. He was simply too young and ill-equipped for the role. The idea that I should have to prove a negative that he was a toxic presence is an absurdity. He may not have been an exceptional leader but that doesn't mean that he was a destructive presence in the locker room. I'm not the one making the scathing claim about him as a person. It's not my responsibility to prove the unsubstantiated claims of others.

You can talk about any player you want. And so can I.

In my opinion Marty Biron is one of the better hockey analysts in the game. Don't let his congenial manner mask the fact that he is very knowledgeable about what is going on in the league. He was asked on the Instigator Show which he co-hosts if Cal Petersen, a goalie in college who became a free agent and signed with the LA Kings, was a big loss for Buffalo. He said no. The reason that he gave was that if he would have signed with the Sabres when they had his rights he would not have succeeded here because the organization was in a state of chaos and dysfunction. Jack felt stuck in that unstable franchise situation. I don't blame him for wanting out. This franchise failed him, other players and the fans. I'm confident that now things have turned in a positive direction for Buffalo. The GM in my opinion was right that the old core needed to be flushed out in order for the new core to start anew. In my view the trade worked out for the best for the dealt player and the franchise that sent him to another destination.

Jack may not have been the best teammate. Even if that is the case to attribute a large role for the failure of this dismally functioning franchise is unfair and unreasonable. Searching for a specific demon when the stench of incompetence oozed throughout the organization, starting with the ownership, makes little sense. The player is gone. Find another bogeyman to pursue!

The issue for the Leafs is not so much do they want to keep him as it is can they afford to keep him. If I were advising the Sabres he would be a goalie that I would recommend targeting this offseason. If I'm going to overpay a player on a short to medium term deal he is the caliber of goalie I would do it for.

What kind of ridiculous and biased question are you posing? Eichel played in an organization that was recognized for its half generation of stupendous dysfunction. And it is well known that most of its prominent players wanted out. Some of them are ROR, Reinhart, Risto, McCabe, Montour and etc. And as you point out I'm not aware of any of his former teammates speaking critically of him. Everyone is looking for a fall guy for an organization that reeked with incompetence. A cheap shot might get you an applause from this audience but no clapping will be coming from me.

Next year Krebs, JJ and Quinn are likely going to be added to the Sabre roster. As young players they should have a lot of upside. If you presume, as I do, that Cozens and Mitts are ready to make strides in their respective games as NHL players, you can see the roster filling out. And let's not forget how impressive Power was in his introductory stint at the end of the season. You can see the organic (players within the system) growth of this roster. This offseason, the GM doesn't need to bring in a quantity of players to round out this roster. Just a few judicious additions, that must include a quality goaltender, will continue to keep this team on an upward trajectory. For the most part internal improvement and internal competition will propel this team. Even the skeptics have to acknowledge that compared to a year or two ago what was thought to be a very dark situation has turned into a very bright and hopeful situation.

Great shot of the crowd. That picture of a filled arena with a boisterous crowd gives me hope that if Buffalo can be a serious team next year the crowds will return in Buffalo.

Are you implying that when I am called stupid (as I'm often called) there is a chance that I could be receiving a back handed compliment? Is that what you call the power of positive thinking? 🙃

I agree with everything you said. With respect to Skinner his effort could never be question. However, playing for Krueger he was like a fish out of water. There was little cohesion between him and his linemates. He seemed disconnected from his linemates. On the other hand with his first line members this season there was a cohesion and fit that didn't exist under Krueger. How many high quality passes did he make to put his mates in a position to score this past season compared to the previous wasted year? And as you keenly pointed out Granato allowed the player/s to utilize their assets and upgrade their weaknesses. There is two sides to this coin of player development: good coaching and player receptivity to it.

Your comments about Skinner are not off topic. As with Tage, coaching was a critical factor in each player stepping up their game. In each case the coach got the player to emphasize their assets and improve upon their individual weaknesses. Granato made the observation about Skinner that even when he was metaphorically exiled by the previous coach, Skinner still remained one of the hardest working players in practice.

Granato demonstrates the value of coaching and player development. And this player development doesn't only apply to the young players. If you look at Skinner and compare his play under Krueger and Granato it is a stark difference. Krueger took a $9 M player and turned him into a $250,000 scrub. Under Granato the same player became a productive $6-7 M caliber player. How's that for regaining value on a locked in contract? It shouldn't be surprising that Okposo has been revitalized and is playing as well as he has in his career under the coach with the cool blue framed glasses. Overall, KA has done an excellent job. The most influential decision he has made is elevating Granato to the HC position. You can't overvalue the positive ramifications of that coaching selection.

A while back Granato was on WGR and talked about Thompson's shooting and his high rate of scoring goals this season. The advice he gave TT last offseason and this season that he seemed to take to heart is to get his shot off quicker rather than delay to maneuver around for a more open shot. The coach stressed that with the caliber of his powerful shot that he didn't need to wait for a better positioned shot. The coached worked to change his mind-set from being a precision shooter to being more of a bulk shooter. It's obvious by the results that the player was receptive to what his coach was advocating for.

https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/buffalo-supermarket-mass-shooting/index.html

Is JJ the fastest skater on the Amerks? He has a high gear motor!

I agree with your comments. As far as the cap situation being negatively influenced by too many players requiring pay increases that isn't a problem that one should lament over. It's a problem that although challenging to handle indicates that you have a number of good players who will soon have to get paid more. That's a situation to celebrate! All good teams have to make tough personnel decisions as who to keep and who to deal because of cap considerations. I would rather be in that situation than be in a situation where your roster is filled with low cost mediocrities resulting in plenty of cap space. And as you note, the key is to draft and development well so that you have a steady stream of replacement players. What is encouraging is that I see KA not only following that draft and development model but also impressively executing that model. The train is moving in the right direction. The only thing that can knock this train off course is not adequately addressing the goalie situation.