JohnC

In your metric does it matter who dumps who?

Louis C.K. is steadily working his way back from being ostracized to being back in front of the mike. https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2020/03/11/louis-ck-new-standup/

Is an increase in ex girlfriends a positive or negative metric?

That's my point. What metrics will you use to measure crazy?

You don't need to do any experiments to determine if our fan base is more rational than the NY fan base. Just read some of the posts on this site and you will realize that some of our crowd are just as untethered as their crowd. Fans are fans. It doesn't matter where the location is or even what the sports are because a significant proportion of fans everywhere are out of this world bat shiiit crazy. Try listening to some call-in sports shows. A lot of time it seems that more space invaders are calling in than earthlings.

Do you think Sabre fans are any less unreasonable as Ranger fans? Being unrealistic is the standard no matter what location you are at.

Attached is a 10 min link of Steve Kournianos from TheDraftAnalysis.com on WGR. He gives a very positive summary of the Sabre draft. At the end of the draft he talks well of the goalie pickup in the Reinhart trade. Included in the same line is a 13 min link with the Sabre Director of Amateur Scouting . https://www.audacy.com/wgr550/authors/howard-and-jeremy

I just don't know. The Sabres have been bad for so long. Not doing something that is reasonable to make your term better for the near future is aggravating. On the other hand as you point out we don't know if the report is true or not.

If what is reported is true and the Sabres are unwilling to take back some money then the owner is undercutting his own franchise. It's short-sighted and maddening.

I would be happy with a Minnesota deal, especially if it included Rossi. And if it were required I would want the Sabres to take back money in order to get this deal done. But my sense (my opinion) is that financial considerations are being required by the ownership when these deals are made. I'm hoping that a reasonable deal for Jack can get done and everyone can move on.

For where this team is and where it is going in the near future the financial strategy that @Pimlach gave is relevant to the Sabre situation.

I highly doubt that the Sabres will take back any of Jack's salary if/when dealt. The appeal of Jack for teams interested in him is that he still has plenty of term left. So there will be little worry about keeping him in the fold for the near future. My understanding of what is happening in the Pegula owned team that money considerations are very much being factored in hockey decisions, at least for right now.

There is another way of looking at the Jack value chart. The multiple reports are that other teams haven't as yet increased their price offer to fall within the Sabres' acceptable range. That is the right strategy to take when you have the player in question under contract. I have no problem with the way Adams is handling this issue.

Excellent job. The return on Jack seems to be declining. There are a lot of realistic trade possibilities that you listed. The absolute minimum return needs to include a potential 1C player such as Rossi from Minn. and Turcotte from LA. I would love to have Anaheim's Zegras but not sure he is attainable. That is the floor that needs to be met.

There are many reasons why over the years the Sabres have fallen by the wayside. The organization has displayed many facets to the concept of incompetence. The soul-crushing that happened last year had a lot to do with Krueger and his anachronistic approach to the game. Shortly after he was dispatched there was a stunning display in the difference of what he had done and how the team transitioned out of its collective depression after the coaching change was made.

I'm sure Ullmark and his agent have the outline of a deal with the Sabres. It is a contract that he can compare to other offers. If another team is willing to go much beyond it he might consider the outside offer. But I lean towards what @tom websterstated in his post.

The situation in Buffalo from a hockey perspective is a good situation for him. If he signs it is likely that he will be our #1 goalie. Will he get the same opportunities to burnish his stats with another team? I'm not sure that is the case. Will he be offered more money than what Buffalo is willing to pay him? That's what he and his agent will soon find out. I'm also sure that although he is not going to garner a very long term contract I don't think he is willing to settle for a one year deal. As I said in a prior post if Ullmark wants to remain in Buffalo he will get paid a fair market contract for the caliber that he is. If he would rather be someplace else then so be it. I'll wish him the best and the organization will proceed to pursue other options. That's how the business works.

Assuming Jack is healthy he is not going to sit under any circumstances. It wouldn't be in his best interest. KA has a value range for Jack. If a deal can be made within the range he will make a deal. If not he will hold on until the range is met.

Maybe he will eventually be a second pairing defenseman but if he makes the roster next year it will be as a third or fourth pairing player. That in itself would give him a great opportunity to show what he is capable of. If he doesn't make the big club roster at the start of the season he will be getting a lot of playing time in the AHL and be better prepared when he gets an opportunity.

The Sabres and Jack have one thing in common. Both sides recognize that it is time to move on. Jack is not buying in to the rebuild just as Risto and Reinhart were not invested in it. What Jack wants is a fresh start somewhere else; what the franchise wants is a reset. It's in the interest of both sides to move on. How it gets done and the timing of it are to be determine. But the inevitable divorce will get done. Adams has not been subtle about the buy-in required from his players, and Jack has made his feelings known to the organization not so much where he wants to go to but where he doesn't want to be.

Samuelsson's father is well schooled in the world of the NHL. If he is counseling his son he would certainly be telling him that he is in a situation where he will be afforded a golden opportunity to play sooner and establish himself as a player in the league than he would be with other franchises. He would be telling his son to prepare himself the best he can and seize this opportunity in front of him.

You have a choice: You get what you can get or you wait it out a little longer and start the season with Jack on the roster. By moving out Risto and Reinhart you make it more likely that the return on Jack is less because teams recognize that eventually Jack will have to be moved. I was happy with the return for Risto but disappointed on the return for Reinhart. But when you are cornered and in a tough situation you have to adjust to it. There is no hiding the fact to the rest of the league that the Sabres want to move on from the three players who formed the old core. It's not a question of being in a position of strength or weakness as it is the reality of the direction where this organization is heading toward i.e. rebuilding. I believe that it's in Jack's and the franchise's best interest to move on from each other. I have little criticism for Jack wanting to have a fresh start somewhere else. When you have systemic failure it's not surprising that you get more player/s disillusionment. I'm at the point where if the return meets my lower expectation of getting a respectable return I will be sufficiently satisfied.

The desire that the Sabres wanted 4 good young pieces for Jack that are at a 1st round value were returns that were hoped for. There is nothing wrong with starting off negotiations at a highpoint. If the market doesn't respond to your initial high stance then you adjust and move your expectations downward. If the Sabres can come away with 2 or surprisingly 3 high value returns I will be more than satisfied. The Sabres are not driving this market; it is responding to it. It comes down to expectation facing the reality of the marketplace.

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.)