JohnC

Very often when a high cost player is dealt a player who is not at the core of the deal is included by the other team to offset some of the added contract cost. In a sense that has a similar effect of retaining some portion of the departing player's contract. The benefit for the Sabres is that they would be able to get some utility out of the returning player.

Not necessarily. If the Sabres aren't willing to let their asset to go for less than what they have him valued at then Jack is smart enough to recognize that his doorway to getting out of here is to demonstrate to the his potential suitors that he is back to his old form. And that means for the organization and him to get what they want he will have to play. If he gets the fusion surgery he might not play at all this season. If he gets the surgery that he wants he might not play until the second half or later this season. It wouldn't be surprising that a full season will pass before Jack will be able to show on the ice what he is capable of.

If Arttu, Mitts, Cozens, Dahlin, Joki, Thompson, Bjork, Asplund, Samuelsson and maybe Bryson all play better that would be a good sign. Next year Power, Quinn and Peterka and maybe UPL should be added to the mix. Ryan Johnson might be another year away? Will a Jack deal add another prime player or two to the prospect pool not far from NHL ready? I'm not sure a deal will be made until his health situation is clarified. Those who are arguing that this year is going to be a tough year are probably correct. Our subtractions of Reinhart, Ullmark and probably Jack will leave gaping holes on a roster that was already thin to begin with. From a won/loss standpoint it is going to be a tough year. Can this team at least be entertaining and provide future hope? I think so. My big worry is that unless there is an upgrade in our goaltending situation it will undercut whatever progress that can be had. Watching a franchise go through a rebuilding process is tough to digest. Either the organization is fully committed to it or you end up taking short cuts that extend the rebuild time. There is no other way.

I'm inclined to agree with you. There were reports in Washington that they didn't want to lose Dillon, a defenseman, who was exposed in the draft. So it appears that a side-deal was made for them to take Vanecek and then give up a second round pick to get him back. I'm just hoping that this front office is not satisfied with the current goalie staffing and is willing to seize opportunities to upgrade that position. As it stands it is very troubling. As I have previously stated the organization made the right decision not to pay the contract that would have been needed to retain Ullmark. But in the short run it put the Sabres in a bind.

The article I cited said that his agent asked for a six year deal. Did we counter it? I can't say for sure.

I agree with you about the military situation. But to a lesser degree this compelling of vaccinations is happening in colleges, jobs and even entertainment settings. No one should be forced to get it yet there are settings where if you aren't vaccinated you can be excluded from the job or setting. I have no problem with that exclusion.

He wanted a longer term and more to play in Buffalo than Boston. From his perspective I understand why. As I said before he did what was right for him and the organization made a decision that was right for them.

In the military the soldiers will soon be required to get vaccinated whether they want to or not.

My mistake. They traded him back to Washington.

There was a golden opportunity for the Sabres to acquire a good young goaltender who may even turn out to be better than Ullmark because he is more durable. Seattle took Vitek Vanecek from Washington in the expansion draft. And then traded him back to Seattle for a second round pick. He would have been a marvelous pickup in a trade for a second round pick, a higher pick than what Washington had to offer. That would have been a terrific fall back position.

Ullmark is a good goaltender. He is not worth a 6 yr contract at $6 M per year. The organization put itself in a bind with the extended and overvalued Skinner contract. And because of that they lost some roster flexibility that can't get out of it. The organization placed a value on Ullmark and wouldn't go outside their value of him. That's the right way to run the operation. There are things that one can validly criticize the GM for. This is not one of them.

According to some reports Ullmark through his agent was asking for a 6 year term for $36 m from Buffalo. He ended up signing a 4 yr contract with Boston for $20 M. The amount of money he wanted certainly was a factor but the the 6 yr term he was asking for was more problematic. The organization made the right decision in not signing him. Ullmark did what was right for himself and the GM made the right decision for the organization. https://buffalonews.com/sports/sabres/linus-ullmarks-exit-opens-door-for-ukko-pekka-luukkonen-to-be-sabres-starter/article_7af9bba6-f0af-11eb-935d-07125018f070.html

It is undebatable that a rebuild is happening. But I disagree with you that the trading of Reinhart and Risto indicate a desire to bottom out in pursuit of a particular player in the next draft. Reinhart and Risto were dealt because of their contract status. They were going to be UFAs in the following year. So it made sense to trade them for whatever you could get. There is little additional information needed to be added to the probable Eichel trade. (It might happen a lot later than most people want it to be.) He doesn't want to be here and be a part of the rebuild. I understand his stance and am not critical of it. If this was a deliberate bottoming out do you think that Dahlin and Cozens, Joki, Mitts etc. wouldn't be placed on the market? Just because the Ullmark negotiation didn't work out that doesn't mean that the course of this franchise was going to be dramatically altered. And by the way considering what Ullmark wanted the organization made the right decision by not meeting his demands. Anyone who has an iota of objectivity recognizes that this year's team has a way to go before being a playoff team. But the best way and quickest way to get back into becoming a contending team is to follow the plan that it has set out i.e. continue and stick to the rebuild with players who are bought in. There is no other way.

Of all the people involved in the local hockey scene the one person I consider to be the most knowledgeable about the Sabres and the league is Marty Biron. He is not the type of person to stylistically be harsh with his criticisms and judgments but his opinions are usually spot on. Behind his congeniality is a lot of hockey knowledge.

Terrific analysis. Putting the front office in order and assembling a quality staff is a priority in having a competent hockey operation. Granato was the right hire for this young roster. He wasn't immediately installed. There was a review that he and the other candidates were subjected to. Based on how he handled the team last year there is no doubt that he was the favored candidate. In this year's draft there was a near unanimity by the hockey analysts that our overall drafting was sound. It seems to me that KA is more of a collaborator than a controlling executive. For him coming to the right decision requires a process that has a lot of inputs. There is no quick fix. Getting back to being a serious franchise is going to take time. The goaltending position certainly has to be a priority that needs to be addressed. As you and many others have pointed out the issue hovering over this troubled franchise is whether the Pegulas are going to allow this regime the time and space to do their jobs. The model the Pegulas need to follow are the Bills.

I'm just as concerned with the current goaltending situation is as you are. But that doesn't mean that the situation that exists now is going to be the same situation when the season starts. How about waiting a little longer to see what happens before throwing in the towel before the bell rings?

It's really sad that some people are so out of touch with the real world and allow themselves to be influenced with such nonsense. What's even more frightening is not that some people can be swayed to their detriment to the point where their life is endangered but it is the number of people who fall in that ignorant category. (I am not using the word ignorant to gratuitously mock anyone.) It's the size of this group that falls in this gullible category. That worries me a lot. Reasoning and facts simply don't penetrate this hardcore faction.

Disseminating false information is not necessarily illegal. However, it can be if the claim is made by a doctor. If someone is so ignorant to act on false statements that are so absurdly outlandish I don't see where it is a crime. What it means is that stupid behavior can be deadly to the practitioner. If a parent gave these animal vitamins to a child in order to protect a child from the virus that would be a crime associated with negligence. But if an adult person is ignorant enough to believe something so ridiculous and act on it I don't see where it is a crime.

Apparently it is.

There are a lot of insane and crazy things said and promoted coming from a variety of outlets. You can't control the content of all outlets. A little common sense and intelligence goes a long way. I don't wish anyone any misfortune, especially when it comes to health. But when you do something as hazardous as taking animal vitamins you are doing it to yourself. Again, I'm not wishing anyone any bad consequences but this type of moronic behavior is self-afflicted. In this case ignorance can be deadly.

People have the constitutional right to be stupid.

I blame the owner for not stepping in sooner and ordering the firing of Krueger when it was apparent the team quit on him. There was a clear line of demarcation between the departure when the team played like it was in a stupor and then giving a more energetic effort after Granato took over. Why do you think Sam was traded this offseason?

Sam made it clear through his agent that he was not signing a long term deal here. He was going to be an UFA if he signed the one year deal. And Sam was explicit in some end of game interviews that scoring winning goals in end of season meaningless games meant little to him. Understandably, he wanted out and he was going to position himself to get out. All this was played out in the open.

That's hindsight. I'm sure that after communicating with his agent he believed he could sign him. In the end he wasn't going to go beyond the value he placed on him. That was the right thing to do. As I said in a prior post Ullmark acted in his best interest and so did the organization. When a player is an UFA you don't have total control. There is certainly more to do to address that critical position.

Afraid of answering what? I stated my position on the Ullmark decision. As it stands the goaltending situation is tenuous. That's obvious.