The Sabres, Eichel, NHL and NHLPA had a meeting regarding Jack

[spndnchz]

It’s been well documented that Adams threw everything up against Jack to see what his opinion was. Maybe it wasn’t such a good idea.

[darksabre]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Sorry, the ones I already mentioned.

Why? "He's used to things being easy". I can really start and end with that.

This is an unbelievable statement to make in my mind. We have *no idea* how Jack's life has unfolded for him personally over the course of his 24 years on earth. Saying things have been "easy" for him is something I would not be surprised to see *anyone* take significant offense to. I'd wager to say he would find it to belittle the level of commitment a professional athlete of his level had display to get to where he is. 

The last line - I've already laid out my argument for that. The list of NHL players who are adjudged to need "change of scenery" moves is expansive. I don't believe change of scenery players are Pricks. 

I'd also say that Adams desire to move Jack is not in of itself proof or even solid support of anything - the last time they felt that way, they were wrong. 

Good post Thorny.

@dudacek I like you man, but ever since the press conference a while back you really seem to have developed an axe to grind over a bunch of supposed personality defects derived from very little actual information. Your version of John is very different from mine, even though we're both working off of the same raw materials.

[Thorny]

3 minutes ago, spndnchz said:

It’s been well documented that Adams threw everything up against Jack to see what his opinion was. Maybe it wasn’t such a good idea.

And that doesn't make Jack a "prick" or even "GM Jack Eichel"

It just makes Adams look stupid. Just like deferring to Krueger was stupid. 

"Who's more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?" Obi-Wan Kenobi 

[spndnchz]

Just now, Thorny said:

And that doesn't make Jack a "prick" or even "GM Jack Eichel"

It just makes Adams look stupid. Just like deferring to Krueger was stupid. 

"Who's more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?" Obi-Wan Kenobi 

A bit of both, a bit more Adams

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, spndnchz said:

A bit of both, a bit more Adams

And that Jack is a fool when it comes to constructing an NHL hockey team should come as a surprise to no one, least of all Kevyn Adams. And Gretzky was a shite coach. Thankfully for Jack, he wasn't actually being paid to run the hockey team. He was being played to play well. And that he did. 

What's Adams' excuse?

[dudacek]

17 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Sorry, the ones I already mentioned.

Why? "He's used to things being easy". I can really start and end with that.

This is an unbelievable statement to make in my mind. We have *no idea* how Jack's life has unfolded for him personally over the course of his 24 years on earth. Saying things have been "easy" for him is something I would not be surprised to see *anyone* take significant offense to. I'd wager to say he would find it to belittle the level of commitment a professional athlete of his level had display to get to where he is. 
 

Jack’s life is pretty well-documented. He is a member of a supportive comfortably middle class family, who has always been a superior athlete and a hockey prodigy, with all the privilege and social capital that entails. He’s always been the guy who gets picked first, courted and deferred to. Doesn’t mean or suggest he hasn’t worked hard.

The last line - I've already laid out my argument for that. The list of NHL players who are adjudged to need "change of scenery" moves is expansive. I don't believe change of scenery players are Pricks. 

Neither do I. You know that. Rather than simply say “change of scenery” I tried to answer why the change maybe needed. Refresh my memory.

 

17 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I'd also say that Adams desire to move Jack is not in of itself proof or even solid support of anything - the last time they felt that way, they were wrong. 

I’d agree.

[dudacek]

18 minutes ago, darksabre said:

Good post Thorny.

@dudacek I like you man, but ever since the press conference a while back you really seem to have developed an axe to grind over a bunch of supposed personality defects derived from very little actual information. Your version of John is very different from mine, even though we're both working off of the same raw materials.

Maybe we aren’t. 😄

Otherwise, entirely fair.

[darksabre]

4 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Maybe we aren’t. 😄

Otherwise, entirely fair.

Show me on the doll where John hurt you

[Buffalonill]

You guys keep closing threads 

[LGR4GM]

13 minutes ago, darksabre said:

Show me on the doll where John hurt you

That's terrifying. Someone get some enzo sauce.  

[Buffalonill]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

That's terrifying. Someone get some enzo sauce.  

They do realize he has brown hair ..

[Broken Ankles]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

I don't really have wish to become a meme. My "efforts" undoubtedly stand out, but I'd argue that's because it's a pretty noticeably dissenting viewpoint where the board is concerned. 

(This is not about your post) Usually it's on twitter where you'll find more of the negativity, but oddly enough this board reads much more to one side when it comes to Jack Eichel than the online Sabres community at large, at least from my point of view anecdotally, from reading. The aspersions being cast on Jack's overall character have been venturing into ugly IMO for quite some time, and I don't think them representative of an honest look at Jack's time in Buffalo, when viewed in totality, which I believe to be the most fair way of looking at it. They also, forgive me, come off somewhat disingenuous occasionally when they cast judgement on a 6 year frame, yet at the same time have shifted wildly over the course of a matter of months. 

I've been linking positive quotes and articles re: Jack simply because if I didn't, they wouldn't be showing up at all. I think that's fair to say. I think overall, what's painted is a more nuanced picture of a good kid, with flaws, and what became a conflict between said player and an organization, also clearly with flaws, that became combustible.

Of course, there's certainly something to be said for consensus -  and I suppose in that way, at some point distancing from it would be a better course of action rather than railing against a solidly established viewpoint. Whether I agree or not becomes frankly irrelevant.

That point appears to be now, on this issue. 

 

You mean this meme?

Your support of Jack is not at this level, and you seem slightly more stable. 

[Curt]

4 hours ago, dudacek said:

I admire @Thorny’s dogged efforts to refuse to tolerate unsubstantiated name-calling, so I hope this doesn’t descend there. 

Over 6 years of watching, I have observed in Jack a sharp tongue, a tendency to pout and stew when things don’t go his way, and a general tendency be more focused on self than team.

That’s not all he is, and he’s certainly not alone in these qualities as a professional athlete.

Just like you can’t ignore positive comments from guys like Okposo and McCabe, you also can’t ignore Dea’s comments, the whispers of disrespect to coaches and veterans under Bylsma and Housley, or the fact that Jack was clearly far more a Kane guy than a Gionta guy. That recent podcast where Gionta discussed the dressing room without naming names seemed particularly damning.

Especially when hockey culture demands issues remain in the room and public comments are about building up your teammates. I’m not sure I’ve heard/read unprompted stories or comments about Eichel being a great leader or great teammate in terms of getting his teammates focused, having their backs, helping the young players - all those hockey leadership cliches.

I have also observed a general tendency from the Sabres to cater to Jack - Ralph’s hiring and entire approach in particular seemed to revolve around that desire. There’s a reason “GM Jack Eichel” became an Internet meme.

I haven’t seen evidence that Jack is a “prick” but I do think he is used to things being easy, and always going his way, and that he hasn’t learned to fully respect and empathize with those around him. I think there are times he has made younger players and role players feel “less than” and outsiders. I partially blame the Sabres for this for the terrible choices they made in developing the immature 19-year-old elite talent they were handed. I perceive Jack as hard-working and caring about winning, but also someone who was never taught the value of “respect the process.”

I think Adams discovered a dressing room culture he felt essentially revolved around keeping Jack happy and felt elements of the team were being inhibited by that. I think he made overtures with Jack about changing that situation and was met instead with Jack’s frustration with the Sabres failures - basically “I’m fed up” rather than “what can I do to help?”

The net result was Adams started to consider a path without Jack, and Jack feeling snubbed that the organization was no longer giving him the “respect” he deserved.

I liken Jack and the Sabres as a failed marriage - too many poor decisions that can’t be undone without a separation. I wish circumstances had led Jack on to a Jim Kelly-like path, but that didn’t happen.

Adams is right to cut the cord and give the team an opportunity to build a new culture with players who “want to be here” and ready to “respect the process.”

For all of his lack of experience, I think Adams has a clear understanding of what a winning NHL dressing room should look like. I am on board with his vision in that area and his willingness to endure the pain of a rebirth.

Fingers crossed he has the ability to pull it off.

 

4 hours ago, Thorny said:

A lot of good points, mixed with a ton of internet hearsay (GM Jack Eichel?) that I believe has zero value. There's also so, so much unfounded supposition like "he is used to things being easy, and always going his way, and that he hasn’t learned to fully respect and empathize with those around him."

As for the bold, you haven't been reading my links, then haha

I guess I just find it odd that the framing of your post is "over 6 years of watching" when, prior to this offseason, you have expressed this overall opinion of Jack not at all. 

- - - 

"I admire Thorny's dogged efforts to refuse to tolerate unsubstantiated name-calling"

I don't really have wish to become a meme. My "efforts" undoubtedly stand out, but I'd argue that's because it's a pretty noticeably dissenting viewpoint where the board is concerned. 

(This is not about your post) Usually it's on twitter where you'll find more of the negativity, but oddly enough this board reads much more to one side when it comes to Jack Eichel than the online Sabres community at large, at least from my point of view anecdotally, from reading. The aspersions being cast on Jack's overall character have been venturing into ugly IMO for quite some time, and I don't think them representative of an honest look at Jack's time in Buffalo, when viewed in totality, which I believe to be the most fair way of looking at it. They also, forgive me, come off somewhat disingenuous occasionally when they cast judgement on a 6 year frame, yet at the same time have shifted wildly over the course of a matter of months. 

I've been linking positive quotes and articles re: Jack simply because if I didn't, they wouldn't be showing up at all. I think that's fair to say. I think overall, what's painted is a more nuanced picture of a good kid, with flaws, and what became a conflict between said player and an organization, also clearly with flaws, that became combustible.

Of course, there's certainly something to be said for consensus -  and I suppose in that way, at some point distancing from it would be a better course of action rather than railing against a solidly established viewpoint. Whether I agree or not becomes frankly irrelevant.

That point appears to be now, on this issue. 

 

Good stuff guys.  I liked both.  Part of this is just differences of perception.  Is there an objective way to evaluate someone’s personality?  Two of us can both know the same person well and have different opinions about what type of person they are.

I feel like I probably fall somewhere between you two.  I don’t have a particularly high opinion of Eichel, but I don’t think he is any real problem.

I think he is an extremely hard worker very competitive.  I don’t think he is used to things coming easily, but I do think he is used to being able to make things go his way.  When they don’t, he seems to openly show a level of frustration that I would go so far as to call unhealthy or unproductive.  I don’t think he handles failure particularly well.

I have heard people in hockey say really nice things about him in the locker room, and I’ve heard people say negative things about him in the locker room.  To me, these don’t carry equal weight though.  In hockey, say something nice, is the default baseline.  When someone says something negative, it’s just more notable.

I have generally perceived Eichel as quick to show frustration, a little immature, a little temperamental, very hard working, very competitive, confident, wants the spotlight, wants the responsibility, but probably wasn’t/isn’t ready to really be a good leader of men.  Overall, not a bad guy, but not my favorite guy either, probably still needs to mature some.

[Doohickie]

4 hours ago, dudacek said:

I think Adams discovered a dressing room culture he felt essentially revolved around keeping Jack happy

Exclusive Sabres dressing room look-in

 

[Broken Ankles]

3 hours ago, Doohickie said:

Exclusive Sabres dressing room look-in

 

A young and stunning Cloris Leachman.   Send him to the cornfield! 

[Doohickie]

10 minutes ago, Broken Ankles said:

A young and stunning Cloris Leachman.  

She also starred in the first episode of Alfred Hitchcock Presents.

[spndnchz]

8 hours ago, Buffalonill said:

You guys keep closing threads 

Yup 

[gilbert11]

More than a week after that meeting and ‘crickets’?!
 

Anyways, Happy Labor Day!