JohnC

First I want to let you know that I am not pigeon holing you into any "anti" category. With respect to this year's goaltending situation I agree that our goaltending staffing is precarious. That doesn't mean that it is automatically disastrous. With the exception of UPL the netminders we have are short-term. This is a rebuilding team. I just don't think that the GM was willing to seek the market (if available) for a high cost or even mid-level cost for a goalie when he believes that UPL is ready or near ready to be on this roster. I believe that KA thought he would be able to bring back Ullmark. Through no fault of his own (my opinion) it didn't work out. So you move on and make the best of the situation you are in. And just because the situation is what it is now doesn't mean that a trade can't be made to shore up the backstop position.

Ullmark was a free agent. He and his agent were going to explore what the market was for him. That was the right thing for the player to do. I have read accounts that the agent wanted Buffalo to offer a longer term and more $$$ per year than what Boston offered. Is that account accurate? I believe so because Ullmark wasn't willing to sign a deal until he became a free agent and had an opportunity to see what other offers were available. In my view there are no bad guys here. The GM was not going to sign the player beyond what he valued him at; and the player went to a better hockey situation than he had in Buffalo. That's how the market works for a free agent.

This is an interminable thread. Does that mean that he doesn't get traded?

I agree with you that the deal that Ullmark signed with Boston wasn't excessive. From what I have read about the offer the agent took the Boston offer to Buffalo and demanded more term-wise and annual salary-wise. KA said no because he felt that it went beyond the value he pegged Ullmark at. I have no criticism for the player wanting more because from a hockey standpoint Boston was a better situation for him. That's life in the free agent market: The player and organization acting in their own best interests.

I don't understand your point or perspective. You are attributing the franchise's history of failure to a person who had absolutely nothing to do with its prior failures. What he's trying to do now is set a course and follow-through on it. With respect to the Ullmark situation the player was a free agent who made a decision that was in his best interest. And correspondingly the GM placed a value on the player and was not willing to going beyond what he believed his contract value was. Player movement is an intrinsic part of the hockey system. Sometimes the balance of control resides with the organization and sometimes the balance of control resides with the player. That's the system you work within.

KA made a decision with the information he had on hand. There was no guarantee that he would be able to sign the UFA player but he felt that there was a reasonable chance that a deal could get done in the offseason. In real life you don't have the ability to make hindsight judgments. The reality is that if he traded Ullmark at the deadline he wouldn't have gotten much for him because he was going to become a free agent in the offseason. So as a rental player his value would have been very limited. I have no problem how KA handled this situation.

My understanding is that Ullmark would have re-signed with Buffalo but to do so required a longer term and more money per year than what Boston offered. Adams declined the deal because he felt that it went beyond what he valued him at. That was the right decision. As you and others point out Ullmark made the right decision for himself and so did the organization.

I agree he has the authority. The point I was making, and maybe clumsily stated, is whether he has the authority or not it would be unwise to go against the medical judgment/s of experts in the field.

Even if he has the authority to overrule the recommendations by the team doctors and outside consultants it wouldn't be a wise thing to do. It's not very difficult to understand why Jack prefers his favored procedure. But that doesn't mean that it would be the right medical approach. The irony is that as the months pass by he would have been back on the ice sooner if a procedure would have been done months ago. As time goes by and as this saga continues he is putting in jeopardy the ability to be ready for the start of the next season.

You are portraying the GM's stance on this situation as being whimsical. It's not. He is basing his position on the most appropriate surgery on the best medical advice he could find. Jack's preferred surgical procedure is an outlier procedure and not recommended by the majority of medical people in the field. The GM is not out to get Jack or use him as a foil to demonstrate to the hockey world that he is a tough GM who is not going to be taken advantage of by those in the business. If that was his motivation for dealing with this complex issue it would be self-defeating. Jack has options if he wants to exercise them. But he is not willing to do so at his financial risk. If Jack feels so strongly about this particular procedure then he should simply get it and assume the financial risk if it doesn't work out as well as expected. I have no animosity toward Jack. This injury has sidelined him most of last year, and there is a good chance that not only could he be sidelined for all of this year but also there is a chance that his career can be in serious jeopardy. However, even understanding why Jack feels as he does the one person I'm not going to criticize is the person leading the hockey operation who is following the best medical advice he for this type of injury. I will say it again: I have no problem with the way KA has handled this situation.

If someone else posted this link I apologize for the redundancy. Within this post game Sabre.com link is a 14 min clip of Granato commenting on the training camp game and his comments about some of the players. He's a pleasure to listen to because he is usually very clear and succinct when answering questions. https://www.nhl.com/sabres/news/sabres-prepping-for-game-pace-with-blue-vs-gold-scrimmage/c-326366714

I don't see him as a top two line player but I see him being a good third or even fourth line player who can contribute. Don't knock the importance of those lower line players. For the past number of years our lower lines have contributed little offensively. Getting something from those lower lines helps out.

When you look at our prospects on the blueline and the young players already with the big club it's becoming evident that in a couple to a few years this organization will have assembled a quality unit. Dallin/Joki/Sameulsson/Power/Johnson/Bryson??/Laaksonen/Pilut??/ are young players that still have plenty of upside. Brick by brick the ramshackle house is being rebuilt.

Don't try to figure out why the moderator deleted your post. I was sanctioned on a factual post I made on the Covid issue. The moderator went bazooka on me. His intemperate response to me was outrageously out of proportion to my post. He acted as if I impugned his mother. At first I was upset being penalized and then I cooled off and realized that part of life is dealing with erratic behavior. Don't let it bother you: It's like water rolling off a duck's back.

@Brawndo is the answer man. When he speaks people should listen.

He will be given an opportunity to be our primary net minder. If he struggles he will be sent down. If you are hoping for a surprise don't count out Dell. Is our goal tending as bad as some of our pessimists (most notably @GASabresIUFAN) who are in a state despair over the current staffing? I'm wary but not ready to jump off the cliff yet. Too many people are making assumptions. I simply don't know.

Krueger had a strong ideological approach to the game. He also had a strong belief in himself. When things started to go south his reflexive response was to more ferociously adhere to the tenants that he strongly held. This very smart man who was used to being at the podium spouting his wisdom in eloquent terms didn't understand the simple dictum: When digging yourself deeper into a hole the best way to get out of your predicament is to stop digging. Too much talking and not enough listening.

Someone else (?? want to give credit to the person) wisely pointed out that goaltending is one of the most mercurial positions in hockey or even sports in general. One year a goaltender can play at a Vezina level and then the next year fall off the cliff and play at the Hutton level. A couple of year's ago the Flyers' Carter Hart, a rookie, took the league by storm. The next year he struggled. Could Dell, Anderson or even UPL surprise else this year? I don't know! What I do know is that anyone who confidently assumes one way or another how any of these players will play is residing on a thin limb on tall tree.

I strongly believe that Adams is determined to get some value for Jack. And that is not going to happen until the player demonstrates that he can return to his elite form at some point. That's why I have concluded that this is a long term game. We may be a year away (if ever) for an ending to this saga. What many people here fail or are reluctant to consider is that Jack may never be what he once was.

This franchise has been subjected to a series of missteps for a vey long time. So it is unfair to single out one section of that catalogue of failures. However, Krueger's reign as the HC was an unmitigated disaster that set this franchise back to unimaginable depths. Whatever talent he had on the roster playing in his "system" resulted in the suppression of their respective individual talents in order to be subordinated to his stifling "system". What was a little peculiar was that Granato was on Krueger's staff. As soon as Krueger was dispatched the former subordinate in many ways flipped the script and did the opposite of what his former boss did. The line of demarcation was the coaching changeover where we watched an unpalatable game under the former coach to a more palatable and entertaining game under the new coach. The talent that was once strangled was allowed to breathe. And you didn't have to be a hockey maven to recognize it. People can criticize the GM for a lot of things; they can't do it for his coaching selection.

The conundrum in a proposed Jack trade is that no team is going to give up a prime prospect for him until he proves that he is healthy or on his way to regaining his health. It hasn't happened up to now and I don't see it happening until Jack's health status is clarified. It's like a vehicle deeply stuck in the mud with no tow truck on the way. Nothing is moving!

I don't want to get involved in a spat. However, from my reading I don't think he is trying to be condescending. He simply gave his responses point by point to some of your responses. As @New Scotland (NS)perceptively points out this topic appears to have run its course. Not because it isn't a worthy topic but because there hasn't been any movement or change in this extended stalemate. You are one of the better posters in this forum. I don't always agree with your takes but I always consider them because they are well stated and reasoned. I've noticed that in this extended topic that the level of friction has increased among the contributors. As I said in a prior post more attention should be paid to the players on the ice than to this current Jack situation unless there is a change in this non-moving drama. I hope you receive my comment in the spirit it was intended.

Why would it be in a violation if both parties agree to the change? It's not unusual for a player to waive or modify their NMC or trade clause in the signed contract. So if both parties agree to it then I don't see what the issue is.

You ask a very penetrating question regarding how many teams are open to the ADR procedure? What if the answer is not many, at least to the extent that they would be willing to give up substantial assets until the results are known? Jack can get the ADR procedure but it will be at the expense of invalidating his contract. So far he hasn't been willing to take that course of action. When one looks at this situation it is not too difficult to understand the stances of each side. The problem for Jack is because of the CBA the contract favors the organization's side. I do believe there can be a resolution in this stalled situation. In order for there to be movement he will have to modify the contract where he will be assuming the financial risk if the end result doesn't work out. So far he hasn't been willing to do that.

Maybe more extra strength bleach should have been added to the wash? 🤡