Fire Kevyn Adams

[nfreeman]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Let me see if I can explain the Butcher thing. 

1) He is a terrible player.  Good offensive skills, but a complete train wreck in his own zone and should have never been acquired.  With Hagg, Dahlin and Bryson already here and Samuelsson waiting he was a completely unnecessary acquisition at LHD.  If KA wanted additional depth at LHD to keep Samuelsson in Rochester, cheaper and better defensive players were and are available.

2) The team has an internal cap of 60-65 mill this season.  That means that ever $ under the cap needs to be allocated smartly.  Placing 5% of that cap in who amounts to your 4th LHD again makes no sense.

3) With Ullmark bolting, this money should have been allocated to a goalie instead of a worthless D.  

It's a similar decision to signing Hall last year. Yes he was a splash signing, but a position of strength last year (LW).  His huge cap hit left no money to upgrade the goaltending.  

In both season getting help in goal was a higher priority then adding another LW or another LHD this season.  Yes it got us to the cap, but as we saw with the Boychuk move, that was easily possible another way.  

It's no surprise that KA's best decisions have all come since Karmanos joined the organization, but ultimately KA still has the general manager title and his handling of the goaltending that last two seasons is mindbogglingly horrible. 

This current losing streak is not on DG or the players.  It solely rest on KA and his decision in goal.   

 

I don't think there was any linkage whatsoever between the decision to sign Butcher and the decisions KA made on goaltending.

[dudacek]

3 hours ago, Thorny said:

Thank you for saying the bolded. 

As for the last sentence, reasonable - but when are the results the results? Adams has committed two bad teams to the ice. No, he doesn't get a pass for last year because he knew the players he chose to sign would be bad (seriously?? lol). 

Is it next year? Or is it 3 free pass years. I can't imagine any good plan requires 2 years where we intentionally aren't good, and that doesn't include Adams first year where he was working on a different plan, supposedly. 

Does the team need to win a lot more next year - does next season count as "results"? 

I think you and i walked this ground pretty thoroughly under Botterill.

Rebuild process: Clean up the mess -> Build the foundation -> Develop the foundation -> Compete -> Tweak -> Contend

When you start at the bottom like Adams did, and choose the route he has (IMO, the correct one for long-term success), you get up to 5 years to build a contender. Along the way, you have to acquire potential building blocks, develop those blocks, fill the holes in roster and keep the wins arrow generally trending up.

No year is a free pass. Every year needs to be judged in the context of the plan. This year is about tearing down and pouring a new foundation. Early returns on his choices in those areas get a passing grade from me so far.

Next year I expect better goaltending, the injection of a number of kids, and the continued improvement of the Blinding Light Brigade. And I expect those things to contribute to a more competitive team.

I have found myself able to reset my timer to Jack's trade demand and the paths trod by the Tampas, the Blackhawks, and seemingly more recent teams like the Canes and the Panthers. I get why many can't.

2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Let me see if I can explain the Butcher thing. 

1) He is a terrible player.  Good offensive skills, but a complete train wreck in his own zone and should have never been acquired.  With Hagg, Dahlin and Bryson already here and Samuelsson waiting he was a completely unnecessary acquisition at LHD.  If KA wanted additional depth at LHD to keep Samuelsson in Rochester, cheaper and better defensive players were and are available.

2) The team has an internal cap of 60-65 mill this season.  That means that ever $ under the cap needs to be allocated smartly.  Placing 5% of that cap in who amounts to your 4th LHD again makes no sense.

3) With Ullmark bolting, this money should have been allocated to a goalie instead of a worthless D.  

It's a similar decision to signing Hall last year. Yes he was a splash signing, but a position of strength last year (LW).  His huge cap hit left no money to upgrade the goaltending.  

In both season getting help in goal was a higher priority then adding another LW or another LHD this season.  Yes it got us to the cap, but as we saw with the Boychuk move, that was easily possible another way.  

It's no surprise that KA's best decisions have all come since Karmanos joined the organization, but ultimately KA still has the general manager title and his handling of the goaltending that last two seasons is mindbogglingly horrible. 

This current losing streak is not on DG or the players.  It solely rest on KA and his decision in goal.   

 

I'm not buying your premise that there is some internal cap the Butcher contract has us pressed up against, and that is why we don't have a goalie.

Edited December 9, 2021 by dudacek

[Thorny]

42 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

 

 

You can't ask Adams to fix gt long term and also complain he traded an expiring asset to try and do it. 

I suppose you can but it seems somewhat suspect. It's also only been 1 season because we had Ullmark last year. 

They still needed a guy last year though. 

I'm not complaining he traded an expiring asset for the return he did, I was complaining he let the asset get to the point that it was expiring. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

2 hours ago, dudacek said:

 

I'm not buying your premise that there is some internal cap the Butcher contract has us pressed up against, and that is why we don't have a goalie.

We went from a max cap team to a minimum cap team in one off-season and now have the lowest payroll in the NHL.  We traded away every high priced player that had any market value.  We then failed to sign Ullmark (He signed at around 5pm with) and then at 5:30 pm that day he acquired Butcher for 2.8 and a 5th, signed Anderson (9:30 pm) and then Dell the following day the total of those contracts getting us to the floor.  Even @LGR4GM agrees that Butcher was acquired just to get us to the cap floor.

Of course, by the time Ullmark walked nearly every other goalie with decent talent had already been signed or acquired by trade.  In fact, Comrie, Andersen, Halak, Elliott, Bernier, Holtby, Brossoit, Grubauer, Jones, and Rittich all signed FA deals while KA attempted to re-sign Ullmark.  Also goaltenders like Hill (acquired for a prospect and a 2nd) , Kruemper, MAF (acquired for a prospect), Nedjelkovic (for a 3rd), Vanacek (for a 2nd), and Spenser Martin ( Future Considerations) all changed teams as well.  Hill, Nedjelkovic and Vanecek went for very reasonable prices and wouldn't have hurt our rebuild at all.   

Jack was later traded and we acquired Boychuk's contract to get back to the floor.  While Anderson may still have been signed, I'm pretty confident Butcher and Dell would not have been acquired had Ullmark stayed.   

Management knew this would be a losing season on the ice and at the box office and did almost everything possible to minimize cost this.  Of course there is any internal cap this season.  The real question is will there be one next season as well.  

Edited December 9, 2021 by GASabresIUFAN

[thewookie1]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

We went from a max cap team to a minimum cap team in one off-season and now have the lowest payroll in the NHL.  We traded away every high priced player that had any market value.  We then failed to sign Ullmark (He signed at around 5pm with) and then at 5:30 pm that day he acquired Butcher for 2.8 and a 5th, signed Anderson (9:30 pm) and then Dell the following day the total of those contracts getting us to the floor.  Even @LGR4GM agrees that Butcher was acquired just to get us to the cap floor.

Of course, by the time Ullmark walked nearly every other goalie with decent talent had already been signed or acquired by trade.  In fact, Comrie, Andersen, Halak, Elliott, Bernier, Holtby, Brossoit, Grubauer, Jones, and Rittich all signed FA deals while KA attempted to re-sign Ullmark.  Also goaltenders like Hill (acquired for a prospect and a 2nd) , Kruemper, MAF (acquired for a prospect), Nedjelkovic (for a 3rd), Vanacek (for a 2nd), and Spenser Martin ( Future Considerations) all changed teams as well.  Hill, Nedjelkovic and Vanecek went for very reasonable prices and wouldn't have hurt our rebuild at all.   

Jack was later traded and we acquired Boychuk's contract to get back to the floor.  While Anderson may still have been signed, I'm pretty confident Butcher and Dell would not have been acquired had Ullmark stayed.   

Management knew this would be a losing season on the ice and at the box office and did almost everything possible to minimize cost this.  Of course there is any internal cap this season.  The real question is will there be one next season as well.  

I guess the best way to describe it would be a soft internal cap; I don't feel that Adams wouldn't be allowed to spend on making the team better. Only the Pegulas don't wish to spend money for spending money's sake.

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

We went from a max cap team to a minimum cap team in one off-season and now have the lowest payroll in the NHL.  We traded away every high priced player that had any market value.  We then failed to sign Ullmark (He signed at around 5pm with) and then at 5:30 pm that day he acquired Butcher for 2.8 and a 5th, signed Anderson (9:30 pm) and then Dell the following day the total of those contracts getting us to the floor.  Even @LGR4GM agrees that Butcher was acquired just to get us to the cap floor.

Of course, by the time Ullmark walked nearly every other goalie with decent talent had already been signed or acquired by trade.  In fact, Comrie, Andersen, Halak, Elliott, Bernier, Holtby, Brossoit, Grubauer, Jones, and Rittich all signed FA deals while KA attempted to re-sign Ullmark.  Also goaltenders like Hill (acquired for a prospect and a 2nd) , Kruemper, MAF (acquired for a prospect), Nedjelkovic (for a 3rd), Vanacek (for a 2nd), and Spenser Martin ( Future Considerations) all changed teams as well.  Hill, Nedjelkovic and Vanecek went for very reasonable prices and wouldn't have hurt our rebuild at all.   

Jack was later traded and we acquired Boychuk's contract to get back to the floor.  While Anderson may still have been signed, I'm pretty confident Butcher and Dell would not have been acquired had Ullmark stayed.   

Management knew this would be a losing season on the ice and at the box office and did almost everything possible to minimize cost this.  Of course there is any internal cap this season.  The real question is will there be one next season as well.  

Your continued statement is that because of the 2.8mil for Butcher, Adams COULD NOT get a goalie. The implication is he decided to spend 2.8 mil on Butcher instead of the goalie and it isn't true. He could have done both

We are at the cap floor because why wouldn't we be? What should we have done? Over signed guys to long deals? That's short term thinking. If Adams could have signed a 3 year stopgap he would have but Butcher had no impact on that. Also we were at the cap floor without Butcher, he like the other contract they got just gave us some maneuverability. 

Butchers 2.8 million had 0 impact on the goalie situation. 

[Pimlach]

On 3/14/2021 at 1:09 AM, Second Line Center said:

So 4 GMs in 8 years.  

Another coach is a certainty.  

That will be 4 in 6 years?  

Who wants to come here? 

Who even wants these jobs?

The Krueger hire was clearly all Terry.  Botterill I think we can all now safely say in addition to sucking at his job probably had a problem with Terry hiring Ralph so he was canned.  

 

Terry Pegula is clearly the problem.   

This team needs a President because it needs to shake the fact (it's not an impression anymore) that the clueless owner is too involved and contributed to decisions from awful hires to bad contracts.   For a decade now.  

 

Nicely stated.  Keep it up and you will get a look at the first line someday. 

[SwampD]

I thought KA signed Johnny Boychuk to get to the cap floor.

 

[dudacek]

1 minute ago, SwampD said:

I thought KA signed Johnny Boychuk to get to the cap floor.

 

Also signed Aaron Dell and John Hayden and traded for Malcolm Subban, Peyton Krebs and Alex Tuch, while trading away Jack Eichel since adding Will Butcher's $2.8 million. Really not seeing how Butcher's contract is tying his hands in any way, shape or form.

It's pretty clear the Sabres entered the season not planning on being very good, and that they don't want to spend money to be bad.

That doesn't mean they have an internal cap.

[JohnC]

5 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

 

 

You can't ask Adams to fix gt long term and also complain he traded an expiring asset to try and do it. 

I suppose you can but it seems somewhat suspect. It's also only been 1 season because we had Ullmark last year. 

Yzerman upgraded the goaltending position last offseason without giving up much in the way off assets. The Capitals made a pre-expansion deal with Seattle to  expose their young backup and then have him traded back for a second round pick. My criticism of KA is not that he didn't re-sign Ullmark because the player had the ultimate say in where he wanted to go. My problem is that when you have a free agent player where there is a risk of losing the player you should have a reasonable fallback position just in case you couldn't get a deal done. 

The goaltending issue entering this offseason wasn't necessarily about addressing the position for the long term. It was to find a reasonable option for the position for the short-term and buy yourself some time to address it for the long term. Because of Anderson's age was he really going the best option for the short-term to bide time until either one of the younger goalies in the pipeline would be ready or for the short-term give the organization more time for a longer term solution? I don't believe it was.  

[Hank]

Wanting to trade a top 40 pick in a deep draft to finish in 24th place instead of 30th place is incredibly dumb. 

[bunomatic]

45 minutes ago, Hank said:

Wanting to trade a top 40 pick in a deep draft to finish in 24th place instead of 30th place is incredibly dumb. 

Wanting to win-priceless

[Brawndo]

23 hours ago, Thorny said:

It's been TWO seasons. It's a large enough timeframe where a reasonable addition can be expected, if management is actually aiming for such. There has been plenty of movement. It's the exact same as the Botterill 2C situation. 

Also the "Adams knew it would fail" thing is really quite weird. He knew it would fail because he brought in players like Staal who weren't good? That's why he signed them to short term deals? Because he knew his additions wouldn't get it done? 

What? lol

Adams through His Playing Career developed relationships with People who are now in NHL Front Offices and Coaching Staffs, who gave Him an outside honest assessment of the State of the Sabres. 
 

Before The Covid Pause Hit, He spent a lot of time around and travelled with the team and got a first hand look at the dynamics of the locker room and Krueger’s Coaching Abilities.
 

Shortly after He was named GM, Jack tells the organization He wants out and Adams approaches Pegula about moving Him in Summer of 2020. Pegula tells Him let’s try one more season. 
 

Adams looks at the lack of depth on the Team, the dynamics between players, the barren prospect pipeline and the fact that the Head Coach well just plain sucked and realized yeah this wasn’t going to cut it. 
 

So He could have signed UFAs to long term deals, traded Draft Picks and Prospects in an attempt a quick fix. A path that wasn’t going to ultimately work and would also screwed the team even worse for the future. 
 

Or he could trade for Staal and sign Hall to a one year deal and hope for the best, realizing that the team would not be hamstrung moving forward. 

23 hours ago, Thorny said:

Also we need to stop alleviating blame for Adams for Reinhart. Why do we need to gloss over the negatives just because Adams has shown some positives? He didn't HAVE to trade Reinhart. By his OWN ADMISSION Reinhart was open to signing LT when Adams came aboard. Adams COULD have signed him. He chose not to.

What players say to media, isn’t always the same that’s being told to the teams management. 
 

Botterill Decision to bridge Reinhart instead of signing Him to a long term was the catalyst for Sam’s Departure. 
 

Adams has made mistakes, He should have moved Ullmark when a deal wasn’t done at the TDL rather than trusting His supposed interest in an extension. And the fact that despite His Best Efforts, the current Sabres Goalie Situation is on Him. 
 

It’s not His Fault that Holtby would rather take a short term lower AAV backup role in Dallas, over even listening to the Sabres Offer. 
 

Adams mentioned that the organization has to be better. They have to scout better, develop players better, coach  better, Kevyn even mentioned He has to be better as a GM. 
 

You and Dudacek are correct that this is a results based business and the results have been sub optimal thus far. 
His draft and development plans are TBD. 
 

EDIT: If @LGR4GMis intrigued by His Two Drafts, Adams is definitely onto something 

That being said the idea Firing Him now or it the end of the year isn’t the best decision for the team. 

I believe in the Pegulas Eyes  he has a minimum of two years more to show progress by being a playoff contender, I personally want genuine improvement next season. 

Edited December 10, 2021 by Brawndo

[LGR4GM]

Adams 2 drafts are fascinating and I'm really curious to see a full year of Ventura and Galimini(sp?) Because that's gonna impact a 2022 draft where they have 3 firsts. So far Adams has drafted Quinn, Peterka, Power, Poltapov, Bloom, Novikov (love him), I do have questions about Rosen but I think that's a size issue (he's not strong enough yet). He also added Levi, Tuch, Krebs via trade so he's on to something impo. I do need Krebs to get more primary assists but he's still developing and is in the correct league. 

I also feel kisakov was a bit of a reach but they only had limited data because covid. 

Edited December 10, 2021 by LGR4GM

[North Buffalo]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Adams 2 drafts are fascinating and I'm really curious to see a full year of Ventura and Galimini(sp?) Because that's gonna impact a 2022 draft where they have 3 firsts. So far Adams has drafted Quinn, Peterka, Power, Poltapov, Bloom, Novikov (love him), I do have questions about Rosen but I think that's a size issue (he's not strong enough yet). He also added Levi, Tuch, Krebs via trade so he's on to something impo. I do need Krebs to get more primary assists but he's still developing and is in the correct league. 

I also feel kisakov was a bit of a reach but they only had limited data because covid. 

Agreed, I think he has done decent possible better... we shall see the next two years but I do think for a first time GM he has done decent.  I just hate waiting for guys to develop  though I know it is the only way to fix this ship.  Goalie is everyone's big lament this year and while I agree, goalies are so fickle... I just hope they draft another one.

Edited December 10, 2021 by North Buffalo

[LabattBlue]

21 hours ago, nucci said:

I miss having tough forwards who could score...Gare...Dudley

…and Foligno.  Maybe my 2nd favorite player all-time after Perreault. 

[JohnC]

If you look at the prospects that @LGR4GM listed you can see the talent base in the organization swelling. How many of them (Quinn, Peterka, Krebs) will be NHL ready next season? When you include Samuelsson and Power to the prospect pool you are looking at half a dozen young players on the roster next year or soon after. Tuch should be on the ice this season so you are looking at half a dozen new players added, all with upside to their game.  

What will be the pace of the infusion of players? With the current Rochester group the primary prospects most likely will be funneled in between the beginning of next season to before the ending of the next season. That's quite a major transition. 

Of all the prospects in the system the most intriguing prospect to me is Levi. If he becomes what his college play indicates he could end up becoming in a couple years or so our anchor goalie.

[inkman]

23 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

He also could have re-signed Ullmark then as well and chose not to.

Because Boston gave him a contract he wasn’t willing to 

[GASabresIUFAN]

21 minutes ago, inkman said:

Because Boston gave him a contract he wasn’t willing to 

No , that isn’t correct.  KA could have extended Ullmark the season before (KA 1st off-season) and that is what Thorny and I were discussing.  People seem to forget that this last off-season was KA’s second in charge. Both Ullmark and Reinhart were given 1 year deals that first off-season.  Ullmark was coming off a very credible 2.69 w a .915 and KA decided that wasn’t worth a long-term deal.  Had he given him a reasonable 3 or 4 year deal then, we wouldn’t be in the mess we are in now.  Had he also signed Reinhart to a multi-year extension, he might have received an even better trade this past off-season or had his No.1 center.  Again, penny wise and pound foolish.  

 

Edited December 10, 2021 by GASabresIUFAN

[Thorny]

10 hours ago, Brawndo said:

What players say to media, isn’t always the same that’s being told to the teams management. 

Botterill Decision to bridge Reinhart instead of signing Him to a long term was the catalyst for Sam’s Departure. 

I believe in the Pegulas Eyes  he has a minimum of two years more to show progress by being a playoff contender, I personally want genuine improvement next season. 

I mean sure, but without hearing that Reinhart *wasn't* open to a deal two offseasons ago, there's no reason to assume he couldn't have locked up Reinhart at that time. If you show him the money, he stays, if he's still two years out from UFA. As you mentioned, Adams was travelling with the team and had a good idea of the makeup right when he took over - he should have signed Sam then. If he knew the team was going to be bad and knew he had no chance of signing Sam the following offseason, by bridging him one more year he made the choice/put the team in the situation where they had to lose Sam. 

"Who knows, maybe Sam wanted to sign one year deals until he got out" isn't much of a defense. It's Adams job to lock up his key players. Of course Botterill's decisions factor in massively as well, but Adams could have also signed Reinhart. 

- - - 

As for the last bit - it's discouraging to learn that he has an additional two years to achieve progress. Like you, I'd hope for that progress next season. If he's allowed another write-off year, I do think the plan is in big trouble. 

Edited December 10, 2021 by Thorny

[dudacek]

10 hours ago, Brawndo said:

 

That being said the idea Firing Him now or it the end of the year isn’t the best decision for the team. 

I believe in the Pegulas Eyes  he has a minimum of two years more to show progress by being a playoff contender, I personally want genuine improvement next season. 

Building a team and an organization properly takes time.

Firing the builder after 80 games seems premature under any circumstances. 

Firing one who came in saddled with Jason Botterill’s roster and Ralph Krueger’s coaching, who was forced to gut his hockey department and trade his franchise centrepiece during a pandemic seems utterly ridiculous. Especially when his only obvious egregious mis-step so far is his handling of the Ullmark situation and replacement.

Not sure if the industry opinion of the Sabres could get any worse, but that might do it.

[Curt]

On 12/9/2021 at 10:43 AM, Thorny said:

Also we need to stop alleviating blame for Adams for Reinhart. Why do we need to gloss over the negatives just because Adams has shown some positives? He didn't HAVE to trade Reinhart. By his OWN ADMISSION Reinhart was open to signing LT when Adams came aboard. Adams COULD have signed him. He chose not to.

This situation is incredibly murky from our outside perspective.

Yes, Reinhart can say “I was willing to sign long term.” but what kind of contract was he really willing to sign?

If the requirement was 8 years, $9M or something like that then yes, Reinhart can rightly say  “I was willing to sign long term.”, but Adams was also probably right to take the path he did.

[Thorny]

1 minute ago, Curt said:

This situation is incredibly murky from our outside perspective.

Yes, Reinhart can say “I was willing to sign long term.” but what kind of contract was he really willing to sign?

If the requirement was 8 years, $9M or something like that then yes, Reinhart can rightly say  “I was willing to sign long term.”, but Adams was also probably right to take the path he did.

So we just don't know. It's the results that matter, though. *Could* Adams have signed Reinhart? Yes. He was two years out from UFA when Adams took over. Throwing out a hypothetical, "maybe Reinhart wanted way too much" isn't a strong argument. By the same coin I could say, "maybe Adams wasn't convinced Reinhart was a core player" or "maybe Reinhart asked for a reasonable salary but his sticking point was term". 

Adams didn't sign him. He doesn't need to be tarred and feathered for it, but it wasn't a situation that had any sort of conclusive developments where it can be claimed he should be held blameless for how the Reinhart situation/trade turned out. 

He's simply responsible for the results. If they team gets good, or Levi turns out swell...the trade is fine. If he isn't able to turn the team around...of course his failure to lock up Reinhart should count as a strike on the negative side. 

I'm not building a case for why he should be fired. I'm maintaining the case that Adams is amendable to the results. 

[Thorny]

9 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Building a team and an organization properly takes time.

Firing the builder after 80 games seems premature under any circumstances. 

Firing one who came in saddled with Jason Botterill’s roster and Ralph Krueger’s coaching, who was forced to gut his hockey department and trade his franchise centrepiece during a pandemic seems utterly ridiculous. Especially when his only obvious egregious mis-step so far is his handling of the Ullmark situation and replacement.

Not sure if the industry opinion of the Sabres could get any worse, but that might do it.

3 straight near bottom of the league finishes is egregious. Next year, the results matter.

Obviously, it looks like Pegula's mileage may vary on that one. 

[thewookie1]

15 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

No , that isn’t correct.  KA could have extended Ullmark the season before (KA 1st off-season) and that is what Thorny and I were discussing.  People seem to forget that this last off-season was KA’s second in charge. Both Ullmark and Reinhart were given 1 year deals that first off-season.  Ullmark was coming off a very credible 2.69 w a .915 and KA decided that wasn’t worth a long-term deal.  Had he given him a reasonable 3 or 4 year deal then, we wouldn’t be in the mess we are in now.  Had he also signed Reinhart to a multi-year extension, he might have received an even better trade this past off-season or had his No.1 center.  Again, penny wise and pound foolish.  

 

Technically, there's a good chance both asked for more money than what they received on their 1 year deals, and would of prevented us from signing Taylor Hall. We know how much of a failure Hall was but at the time it seemed to be a pretty solid risk - reward to get the team to playoff contention.

Ullmark signed for 1x2.6mil before last season. His minimum would of been rather close to his contract he got this year. So lets say 4.85mil for 4 years.

Reinhart signed 1x5.2mil for last season. His multiyear contract was assumed to be akin to 5 to 7 years at around 7mil. (Florida taxes brought it down to 6.5 mil)

That would be 4.05 mil in additional cap we would of had to find. As of Nov 1st last year we had just shy of 3.5mil in cap space. Unless we could of got Hall at a cheaper price, fans would of rioted had we extended Ullmark and Reinhart and made the Staal trade without anything else.