JohnC

Nothing is easy in this situation. But as our recent history with ROR illustrates is that making a precipitous unbalanced deal in order to get rid of a player not only doesn't help the situation it sets the franchise back. If the Rangers wanted to trade for Jack I would be agreeable to it if we got back Kakko and LaFreniere. If that type of deal doesn't materialize with them or any other trade proposal then the organization should bide its time and wait for a fair offer.

Yes.

The issue with Eichel is that he has an unresolved disc issue and has a lingering abdominal problem that hasn't been clearly diagnosed. When healthy he is a supreme asset. In my view it would be a mistake to panic and trade him for less than a reasonable/generous return. It would be a mistake to jump the gun and take what you can get sooner than later approach. And on the flip side of the equation if Jack was determined to get out of this turbulent franchise it would be in his interest to get the health issues resolved and so that he can showcase his talents and expand his market.

How can Eichel be traded when his health status is in question? As it stands he is not going to pass a physical for us or any interested team. It is in the interest of the organization to get him back healthy and back to playing at an elite level so that his value can be enhanced. This is a tough situation compounded by the Reinhart contract situation which in my view (and apparently your view) the more immediate concern.

The reverberating transaction that undercut the assets already on the roster and the intended added talents to the roster was the hiring of Krueger as the HC. It was an intriguing out of the box hire that turned out to be a disaster. The organization took a coach who was successful coaching a less talented Swiss team against more talented teams. His philosophy was to focus on stifling the more potent opposition and play a close to the vest game. That restrictive approach to hockey was not going to work with the more free flowing game played by talented offensive players in the NHL. The poster child for his preordained doomed approach is the suffocating of his own talent is exemplified by the play of Dahlin. He took a talented player with an expansive game and reduced it to a smaller and limited game. This organization has made a lot of bad personnel decisions. But hiring Krueger and keeping him on longer than they should have was a crushing mistake that set this franchise back. I am a strong advocate for Granato. I thought he did a marvelous job under the circumstances. Others argue for hiring a coach with more experience. I'm not saying they are wrong; it's simply a difference of opinion. The priority is for this befuddled franchise to do their due diligence and make a sound coaching hire and then get to the task of putting the roster pieces back together.

I agree with you that Sam is more likely to be traded than Jack. My sense is that he is tired playing for such a erratic franchise that hasn't come close to sniffing the playoffs during his career. As he has publicly stated the standard scenario for him is not only not making the playoffs but not even coming close to playing meaningful end of season games. How dispiriting that must be for him? How do you think he feels when he sees Taylor Hall forcing the Sabres to trade him to a team he wants to go to and ends up thriving with his new team and playing in the playoffs? Sam has been our most consistent performer playing for one of the most inept franchises in the league. How many coaches and GMs has he played for? Well now to a degree he has the leverage to force a change. It doesn't matter if the organization is willing to give him an extended contract. If he wants to be somewhere else he will be in a position of leverage with his upcoming UFA status (as you noted) to force a change. Because of the systemic incompetence of this turbulent organization it has created a franchise well known for its futility. It's become a destination where players not only don't want to come to but also a place where they want to get out of. When you constantly crap on yourself you can't hide from the stink!

You don't have to respond to this futile circular discussion. If you believe that I think that the organization has been smartly run then you are way off the mark. Of course the organization has do a better job running the organization. Who is saying otherwise? There is nothing more to add to this exchange.

Who doesn't agree with the importance of balance, team spirit and unity for team success? That's not a novel idea. It's like saying that mothers should be loved. Tell me something that I don't know. It's plainly evident to everyone that the Sabres have been a poorly run operation for a very long time. The constant changing of staffs and philosophies have kept this franchise deeply mired in the muck of mediocrity. Poor decisions stacked on top of poor decisions have deeply sunk this franchise. You don't have to be a hockey aficionado to recognize gross incompetence. The bottom line is that I fundamentally disagree with your resorting to the "old school" solutions to today's hockey failures. Looking back to function in the world of today is a recipe for continued failure. And I'm not buying it.

You better be able to run fast because the big critters can move fast and they like meat. ☠️

Some people want to go to the zoo in the hope of seeing the cuddly dinosaurs.

We certainly don't have the right makeup. It's primarily due to the lack of talent. And it's also due to an incongruent mixture of players. When you have an extended history of bad management and constantly changing of staffs what do you expect? You certainly are not going to have a stable franchise when it is erratically run. No matter how many oldsters you want to bring back to the future they will not be the solution to a failed operation in this modern NHL era. A preponderance of bad decisions predictably are going to lead to bad results. If you want to believe that the Rangers fighting in the last or second last game of the season is going to be a meaningful bonding factor then go ahead and believe that old school fantasy/bullllshiiit. That adrenalin rush will have absolutely no carryover. I'm not saying that teammates shouldn't stick up for one another. But what I am saying is thuggish hockey doesn't trump more talented teams that play well together. You are absolutely right that the Imlach era had an identity. And it should be understood that every era has its own identity. I'm confident that the Imlach era/approach would be an abject failure if it was applied to this era. Change is inevitable in the sports world as it is in life. Looking back for solutions is not going to lead you to success.

The Punch Imlach era was half a century ago! How management handled players in that era is long gun. It's a different world with contracts and free agency. If you want to look back to the bygone days for issues associated with today's hockey world then keep up with your search. If you want to look back then do so. I'm looking forward.

I'm not advocating a trade for Jack. But if he were dealt I would rather see him go to the Rangers for young players such as Kakko and LaFreniere plus a high end prospect. This would be a fair trade for both teams and a good situation for Jack in a more sparkling market. In my view this proposed trade would not set the franchise back in the short run. It would add more talent to the roster and continue with the trend of accumulating young players who still have a lot of upside.

Pamper the superstars? What the heck are you talking about? The problem isn't that our one and only superstar (who was injured for most of the season) is pampered as it is not enough talent on the team. That's the heart of the matter for this failed franchise. And on top of that it is foolishly managed. Compare the difference how this team performed with Granato behind the bench instead of the prior more eloquent coach who was a disaster. Granato took a team that cratered under Krueger and infused it with children from the AHL resulting in this team playing dramatically better. Maybe you are not able to see the difference in the quality of play but it was evident to anyone who had a penny's worth of objectivity. You may have noticed it but Babcock was fired. And you may not be aware of it that this team has performed better without his tiresome scowling phony tough guy act. You want Tortorella? He's on the market because he was fired, again, and again, and again, and again. The worst thing this franchise needs is an old time Neanderthal coach for this young team. When one has to resort to going back to the Imlach era to find a solution to what's going on now in hockey is beyond being absurd.

Toronto's goaltending has been good. They have a talented roster with a number of high cost players. I don't see them making a major expenditure for a goalie. They are doing very well without needing to go outside and outbidding the market to bring in Ullmark, a goalie who has durability issues. I just don't see it happening.

I'm not sure that Ullmark is going to get a better offer with someone else. The bigger issue with him is who is going to give him the longest term contract. My sense is that Ullmark realizes that in Buffalo he will be in a better position to be a #1 goalie than any other place. And hopefully since Granato took over there is more upside with this young roster than most other places that will be a consideration for him. The issue that this organization has to consider when placing a value on McCabe is his durability. His injury record is troublesome. I like him as a player and as a mature presence in the room. But because of his injury history I would be very wary about giving him an extended deal. If I had a choice between keeping Risto or McCabe I would take Risto because of his ability to stay in the lineup.

The Leafs are doing better without him. His dictatorial style of coaching and managing players is antiquated and ineffective. The bullying and tyrannical approach that worked in a prior era no longer works. The players of today are more independent and influence because of their rich contracts and the free agency. Blustering old time coaches can't handle this new reality. Tough. Get the hell out of the way and talk about the good old days at the local tavern.

Sure. If Jack wants to be on a serious cup contending team next year or the year after its not going to happen in Buffalo. Even with some good additions this offseason I still see this team as a marginal playoff team scratching to get into the playoffs. I believe the Sabres are capable of being a playoff team as a fringe participant. In my estimation that is where we are at.

I like everyone else don't know what Jack's state of mind. When healthy I consider Jack to be a top 10-12 player in the league. What I have been saying in these multiple posts is that I am willing to listen to offers for players (any players) if I believe the deal will in the end make this a better team after the transaction. Would a Kakko, LaFreniere plus a high end prospect who is ready or near ready to play be a good return for Jack? Some would say yes and others no. I would equivocate and say I'm not sure. But what I can say for sure is that I would listen to offers. I want to make the playoffs next year as much as anyone. On the other hand I would not give up a young asset such as Cozens for a short term benefit of squeaking into the playoffs at the expense of a player who is going to be a long term asset.

If one believed that a current deal could make this roster better in a year or two then it is certainly worthy of being considered.

I agree with you that if Jack is dealt the players replacing him would be lesser players. That doesn't mean that there can't be a return of multiple players that wouldn't make this roster better. As an example would a trade with the Rangers in which Kakko, LaFraniere and another high end prospect be a good return that could make this a better and fuller roster? Maybe yes or no?

As you stated if a deal were to be made I would want the two kids plus another piece. In that scenario you would thicken the roster and have more of a buffer for the inevitable injuries.

I do believe that the Sabres can win next year. But that is not to say that I wouldn't consider deals that might improve the roster. Could a bonanza return on Jack potentially upgrade the roster by adding talent and thickening the roster? It could. I'm not advocating for trading our best player. But that doesn't foreclose listening to any offers for him or anyone else.

Management doesn't want to get rid of Jack. The Sabres fielded calls on him as they would do for any player. Just the same way as other organizations field calls for any of their players. You keep the lines of communication open to everyone and you keep your options open for now and the future. Jack is a great player. Does that mean that if someone would make an eye-popping offer that could potentially improve the roster that we wouldn't consider it?

Does trading Jack to the Rangers for Kakko and La Freniere and a high end prospect seem like a reasonable return? I'm not advocating for Jack to be moved. I'm just not sure that the team's timeline is acceptable to his timeline for competitiveness.