JohnC

Excellent analysis and clearly stated. This is a fair appraisal of the situation. The only part of your post that I can quibble with is the timeline for the rebuild. Will it take 2-3 or 3-4 years? I'm not sure? As you smartly point out it is essential to not try to the force the rebuild and let it run its course. This is how Ottawa has done it. Now they are at a stage where it can be a competitive team for a long time. It's a tough process that requires vision and fortitude.

The good old days of players staying with the teams that drafted them are not only over with but have been gone for a long time. Loyalty from players to teams and teams to players is mostly nonexistent. In the era of free agency and the cap player movement is an established part of the fabric of pro sports. As you wisely noted relationships don't always work. There isn't an organization in any pro sport (and increasingly in the college ranks) where relationships get frayed and the inevitable outcome is breaking up. More often than not the most important issue isn't whose fault it is for the erosion as it is how do you react to it. (Again, as you noted with your don't give up comment.)

He's going to be dealt. It's just a question of when.

The young players currently on the roster and in the short-pipeline that you list offers some hope. But the reality is that it is going to take at least another couple or few years for those players to be at a stage where this roster will be seriously competitive. What has to happen is for this regime to have the courage of its conviction to follow through with their rebuilding plan. As you well know and have vigorously stated that it is imperative that the goaltending is upgraded so that it can undergird the rebuilding process. There are a number of roster issues that need to be addressed. And that is the most important one.

The organization had an opportunity to sign him to a longer term deal a couple of years ago, if not earlier. There were at least two contract negotiations where he was only offered short term deals. So this year he took advantage of his contract status and used it as leverage to get out. The organization miscalculated and ended up losing one of their primary players for less than full value. The onus is on the organization for how the situation developed. The main factor for players wanting out is not about money as it is about the persistent losing. It can be demoralizing for players who have been subjected to it for extended periods of time. I don't blame any player who wanted to find greener pastures. The lesson to be learned is that systemic organizational failure has consequences. I'm not a pessimist about the future. But no one can deny that the recent past has been a disaster.

I can't say for sure if he is happy or not. What shouldn't surprise him is that the 3 core players will be moved. Unless he is clueless he knew fully well that those soon to be dispatched players didn't want to be here. The reality is that the Sabres are in a rebuild situation. Does he want to be part of it? If he doesn't then the organization will move on. In my opinion from a professional standpoint Ullmark is in a good situation here. He has a good chance of being a #1 goalie and an opportunity to improve his status for his next contract. Ullmark has steadily worked his way up the developmental ladder in this organization. Each year he has gotten better and moved up the ranks. Through his contract stance it will soon be known whether he wants to be here or not. If he doesn't then the organization will simply seek other options. That's life in the hockey business.

Your thinking is skewed beyond repair. Samson's worth is determined by the market. His contract status as an UFA next year diminished his talent worth. In the real world you get what you can get. And that doesn't always conform to what you want to get. That really isn't a difficult concept to understand.

Do you honestly believe that if KA had better offers he would have declined them to make this deal? Whether one is an experienced GM or a neophyte GM no GM who is half sentient is going to decline a better offer for a player that is going to be traded. I thought the Sabres would have gotten more in a Reinhart trade. I was wrong. Why is it surprising that when a player has leverage and has preferences as to where he wants to go that he will exercise that leverage? And why is it surprising that by exercising his contract leverage the market is going to be suppressed? Some hockey fans believe that real life NHL hockey should correspond with their fantasy hockey outlook on things. For those in their delusional world: It doesn't!

I'm confident that some people will say that it is a stinky pick.

If you live in New Jersey is that possible? 🤡

You excel at stereotyping. You must believe all Italians like pasta.

I doubt it. If Minn does trade for Eichel the focus for the Sabres will probably be their top prospects such as Boldy and Rossi. I don't believe that Minn will give up both of them.

Assuming that he does sign an extension what would you consider to be a fair-value return from this trade?

In a year or two when he physically matures we should get a better feel for him as a prospect. I consider him a reasonable pick. (Not saying you are saying otherwise.) Only time will tell. It appears that he has offensive tools. Now it comes down to is when is this boy going to be developed enough to compete against tough men. The benefit he had playing against men is that he got some insight into what it takes to play at the higher level. The Sabres have to exhibit patience and not make the "MItts Rush" mistake of throwing a player into the fire when he isn't ready.

He was a boy playing against men. With his peers he excelled. It's going to take some time for him to mature. Within his age group he ranked high. As a prospect this is not going to be a quick development. But if he is handled in the right way and not rushed the Sabres should get a return on their investment in a few years.

There is a wide boundary within the definition of the word. The one thing I know you are not is uncooperative. You are a fine chap. But on certain issues you can be obstinate. I can't criticize anyone for being obstinate because at times I can also be stubborn, as others have often told me. 🍺 https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/recalcitrant

You are a recalcitrant. 🙂

I don't intend to make excuses for KA but the reality is that Krueger was running the show last year. Adams was implementing Krueger's requests. All I can say is that we will have to see how tonight transpires, especially if the expected trades materialize. I certainly like the return for Risto. Hopefully the acquired picks turn out to be something worthwhile. There is still plenty of time to maneuver before the season starts. I recommend waiting for the how things turn out after tonight before making a judgment. I'm cautiously optimistic that after tonight the rebuild process will be accelerated and the timetable will be within a reasonable period of time.

Yes. If you complain about that I'm going to relegate you to the curmudgeon room and lock the door.

I know what will make the both of us happy. Ideally, it would be a Jack deal with Anaheim where we acquire Zegress plus and their 3OA pick in which we select Eklund. Of course with our first pick we select Power. How about that as a scenario? Would you find that as satisfying?

Everything you said about his inexperience is accurate. But starting off with the firing of Krueger he has done a number of positive things. He elevated Granato as an interim HC, and then made him the HC. In my opinion that was the right thing to do. He hired Karmonos to support him in his office. That was a good hire. He hired a respected stat analyst. Tonight's draft selection should be sound. Where I am holding my judgment, as I'm sure you are, is getting a credible return for the shipped out players. For me that is the big measuring stick. Added to the list that you are known to stress is how he addresses the goaltending situation. My point is let's wait a little longer before offering a scathing review.

I didn't say your position is ridiculous. You wrongly perceived my response. My point is that there is nothing unusual about the cyclical nature of success (up/down) for teams in this sport and other sports. You can't always be good because there is going to be an inevitable slide. My point is in comparison to Buffalo good organizations handle the down cycles more effectively. In a smartly run organization the upsides last a little longer and the downsides are shorter.

Most often when your good players approach 40 they are no longer on the team. Good organizations prepare for the torch being passed.

Sam Cosentino a NHL draft analyst talks about the draft and the Sabres' situation on WGR. This is a 10 min segment. He talks about Power and other prospects and also about the Jack situation. https://www.audacy.com/wgr550/authors/howard-and-jeremy

As I said in the prior post there is a life cycle in a roster. That's an inescapable part of all pro sports, especially under a cap system. What Boston has demonstrated for a very long time is that they are capable of steadily adjusting their roster as time goes by. That's what well run organizations do. Boston will have some slippage but what they won't do is fall into the enduring abyss like the Sabres have been in for a decade. To their credit Boston is a model of consistency. And to their discredit Buffalo is also a model of consistency.