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

[Thorny]

10 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

As to the question of whether Jack's disenchantment started when he learned that KA was shopping him (if that's indeed what happened) -- I think the question probably oversimplifies the situation.

We all saw how good Jack was a couple of seasons ago.  KA saw it too.  And yet KA putatively decided that Jack had to go.  Why on earth would KA make that determination if there weren't other, serious, issues with Jack?

It just seems insane to think that KA would decide to unload a franchise #1 C without a really good reason.

How much has Adams spoken about the “blinding light” of the youth and their enthusiasm? If we are going to take him at his word here, that type of mentality is a huge deal to KA. There doesn’t have to be some huge “elephant in the room” character issue where Jack is concerned when him being actively disenfranchised from years of losing may just have him in a mindset where he’s not radiating the energy, positivity, and perceived commitment KA is after. In other words: he needs a change of scenery. Another in the LONG list of athletes across a multitude of sports who have needed the same thing. 

That Jack is a star player doesn’t give me pause regarding a GM taking that road: yes his skill is going to be very difficult to replace, but the amount of gravitating influence the player has will correspond to his talent and importance within the organization. 

Edited September 2, 2021 by Thorny

[nfreeman]

7 minutes ago, Thorny said:

How much has Adams spoken about the “blinding light” of the youth and their enthusiasm? If we are going to take him at his word here, that type of mentality is a huge deal to KA. There doesn’t have to be some huge “elephant in the room” character issue where Jack is concerned when him being actively disenfranchised from years of losing may just have him in a mindset where he’s not radiating the energy, positivity, and perceived commitment KA is after. In other words: he needs a change of scenery. Another in the LONG list of athletes across a multitude of sports who have needed the same thing. 

That Jack is a star player doesn’t give me pause regarding a GM taking that road: yes his skill is going to be very difficult to replace, but the amount of gravitating influence the player has will correspond to his talent and importance within the organization. 

I can't see KA, or any NHL GM, deciding to unload Eichel because Eichel wasn't enthusiastic enough.  An insufficiently positive attitude, or even a neutral attitude, is qualitatively different from a negative attitude.

I think realistically we're looking at one or some combination of the following factors in driving KA's decision:

- Jack having an actively negative/toxic attitude

- Jack making it clear that he didn't want to be a Sabre

- Jack's injury

[Thorny]

11 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

I can't see KA, or any NHL GM, deciding to unload Eichel because Eichel wasn't enthusiastic enough.  An insufficiently positive attitude, or even a neutral attitude, is qualitatively different from a negative attitude.

I think realistically we're looking at one or some combination of the following factors in driving KA's decision:

- Jack having an actively negative/toxic attitude

- Jack making it clear that he didn't want to be a Sabre

- Jack's injury

Well, there is more evidence against the first bolded than there is *for* most of the arguments being made - if you look at the overall picture of comments that have been made, recently, by teammates, Jack is clearly well liked and considered to be strong within the room. If we aren't going to listen to what Kyle Okposo and Jake McCabe have to say, what are we even doing? How are their actual words not a stronger argument than mere guessing about what KA is thinking?

Second bold...it's possible but there's has been plenty of indication KA was exploring a move pre-injury, so while it certainly factors into the equation now, I don't see the injury as the driving factor. 

Which leaves the idea Jack didn't want to be a sabre. It's possible - many think it likely. I've already expressed my reasons for why I think KA was exploring moving Eichel. They moved ROR, didn't they? He seems to be doing ok? Also, teams move players they perceive to have a toxic attitude - clearly they were wrong about ROR. Maybe they were right about his ability to be that guy in Buffalo? Which is what I said might have been what happened with Jack. 

For the sake of argument, if the team decided it had to move Jack because he "didn't want to be here", it's more less the same reason they moved Sam and Risto, no? Knowing they wouldn't be able to get them locked up LT because they didn't want to be here. I wouldn't deem either of those players a selfish prick. 

Edited September 2, 2021 by Thorny

[Weave]

13 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

I can't see KA, or any NHL GM, deciding to unload Eichel because Eichel wasn't enthusiastic enough.  An insufficiently positive attitude, or even a neutral attitude, is qualitatively different from a negative attitude.

I think realistically we're looking at one or some combination of the following factors in driving KA's decision:

- Jack having an actively negative/toxic attitude

- Jack making it clear that he didn't want to be a Sabre

- Jack's injury

I don’t think it has to be that severe.

Warning, not a well fleshed out theory to follow.

I think it plausible (maybe even likely) that Jack loves the concept of NHL hockey alot more than he loves actual NHL hockey.  He works extremely hard on his skills, game, and fitness, works plenty hard game day (aside from occasional coasting) but doesn’t embrace the deeper, darker aspects of the NHL game.  Derek Roy comes to mind.  Most of us remember Roy involved in a scuffle along the boards and reportedly replied with, “c’mon man, it’s just a game”.  I could see Jack being a committed, world class skill version of Derek Roy.

Yeah, in the context of Roys disrespect by the Sabres fanbase that is pretty heavy criticism, but it explains KAs desire to move on from him.  He doesn’t have to be at a Roy level of apathy for the pro game for the team to see it as a red flag.  Sure, it could be a narrative in search of a flaw.  But the rational reasons for moving on from a world class talent are few.

Edited September 2, 2021 by Weave

[Thorny]

I don't need to meet the standard of "rational reasons" for my argument because the franchise has already proven they'll move 1st line centres for non. 

They really, really could just want to move Jack cause they feel he's too affected by the losing. 

They literally moved ROR for that reason. 

[Weave]

Just now, Thorny said:

I don't need to meet the standard of "rational reasons" for my argument because the franchise has already proven they'll move 1st line centres for non. 

Lol

I sure hope rational is the basis for the move.  If it is emotional, we’re *****.

[Thorny]

Jack isn't a "it's just a game" guy. He's a "smashes his stick in frustration cause he wants to win more than anything" guy. Is that the behavior KA is after? Maybe not! But I don't question his passion. 

[Weave]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

Jack isn't a "it's just a game" guy. He's a "smashes his stick in frustration cause he wants to win more than anything" guy. Is that the behavior KA is after? Maybe not! But I don't question his passion. 

Neither do I.  I don’t think its a lack of passion.  It’s a lack of something else. Its an intangible for sure, and I don’t know how to adequately describe it, so I probably won’t spend much more energy trying to elaborate or defend it.

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, Weave said:

Lol

I sure hope rational is the basis for the move.  If it is emotional, we’re *****.

I just find it funny there has to be some deeper, scandalous reason for why Jack can't be here when we've LITERALLY seen with a recent move that doesn't need to be the case. This is recent history, under the same owner. Maybe Jack is a total douche but the overall picture painted by those that know him does not put forth that conclusion. 

2 minutes ago, Weave said:

Neither do I.  I don’t think its a lack of passion.  It’s a lack of something else. Its an intangible for sure, and I don’t know how to adequately describe it, so I probably won’t spend much more energy trying to elaborate or defend it.

Fair enough but Occam's Razor utterly laughs at "vague" and "intangible"

[Sabres Fan in NS]

1 minute ago, Weave said:

Neither do I.  I don’t think its a lack of passion.  It’s a lack of something else. Its an intangible for sure, and I don’t know how to adequately describe it, so I probably won’t spend much more energy trying to elaborate or defend it.

He is passionate about the game and the team.  I think his problem is  that he has no idea how to deal with the frustration that he is experiencing.  If the Sabres were a good team John would be a fantastic and happy part of it.  He just does not know how to deal with all the losing.  Many are like this and I don't fault him.

[MISabresFan]

So they all got together and now it appears Jack is moving forward with the surgery.  Now what happens if that is true?  Is that why they got together to figure out if Jack moves on with the surgery where does he stand with the Sabres and the League.  

Makes for a great soap opera.

[Dr. Who]

3 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

He is passionate about the game and the team.  I think his problem is  that he has no idea how to deal with the frustration that he is experiencing.  If the Sabres were a good team John would be a fantastic and happy part of it.  He just does not know how to deal with all the losing.  Many are like this and I don't fault him.

I really don't know. I have an irrational bias against Boston, so I indulge the bratty, entitled storyline when things look bleak. If he's just frustrated with the losing, that's entirely understandable. If that is the case, I'd rather try and talk him into getting healthy and staying, because that is the best path to this team getting better quickly, though it appears the situation has grown so toxic that isn't possible anymore.

[JoeSchmoe]

Let's all talk about Jack Eichel!!! 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

16 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Let's all talk about Jack Eichel!!! 

Who?

[woods-racer]

16 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Let's all talk about Jack Eichel!!! 

You're a little late to this party.

 

It's Tricky Dicky now. 

[Doohickie]

22 hours ago, RangerDave said:

What I meant was that if Jack is determined to never play for the Sabres again, Adams wants to get something that will add value to the team in return.  If he does that, the team will be in a better position than they are now with either Jack sitting out or Jack playing unhappily and affecting the team morale.

I took that to mean that KA is moving on from Jack and building the team with what he has now.  Assuming he is able to get a good team built independent of the Jack return, a decent return from a Jack trade is just gravy.

[Doohickie]

17 hours ago, Weave said:

It appears to me that KA has come to the conclusion that building around Jack isn’t the path he is most comfortable with.

I'm not sure I personally agree with KA, but also remember that Adams has been around the team for quite some time, all the way back to the ROR trade, and he has a well-informed understanding of the dynamic Jack brings to the dressing room, an insight we don't have, and an insight that Krueger had over a much smaller time slice.

[bob_sauve28]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

I can't see KA, or any NHL GM, deciding to unload Eichel because Eichel wasn't enthusiastic enough.  An insufficiently positive attitude, or even a neutral attitude, is qualitatively different from a negative attitude.

I think realistically we're looking at one or some combination of the following factors in driving KA's decision:

- Jack having an actively negative/toxic attitude

- Jack making it clear that he didn't want to be a Sabre

- Jack's injury

Everything about this situation is clouded in darkness. Like what the heck was Jack's original injury? He was hurt and not playing well all season, from what we were told, anyway. Then the neck injury, the "disconnect" press conference to being actively shopped. 

[dudacek]

2 hours ago, nfreeman said:

As to the question of whether Jack's disenchantment started when he learned that KA was shopping him (if that's indeed what happened) -- I think the question probably oversimplifies the situation.

We all saw how good Jack was a couple of seasons ago.  KA saw it too.  And yet KA putatively decided that Jack had to go.  Why on earth would KA make that determination if there weren't other, serious, issues with Jack?

It just seems insane to think that KA would decide to unload a franchise #1 C without a really good reason.

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.

[SabresVet]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

I don't need to meet the standard of "rational reasons" for my argument because the franchise has already proven they'll move 1st line centres for non. 

They really, really could just want to move Jack cause they feel he's too affected by the losing. 

They literally moved ROR for that reason. 

I see it as Jack's tired of the losing and knew a rebuild was ahead.  He didn't want to hang around for that and eat up his prime years continuing to lose. 

But I also think that players know about organizations and saw the Pegula's stewardship as insufficient.  Specifically, that it would not anytime soon produce a winner. 

[Thorny]

5 minutes 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.

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. 

 

[Digger]

15 minutes 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.

Thanks.  This was a nice post, well written with good insight.

[thewookie1]

15 minutes 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. 

 

I'd say its one part people trying to justify the need to trade Eichel, one part actually taking off the rose colored glasses and seeing Eichel's legitimate shortfalls, and one part inherent biases about athletes/his region of birth/the results we've had/etc.

 

34 minutes 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.

 

This was a great post that sums up a lot of how Eichel seems to look as we try and figure out who Eichel really is. Eichel has every reason to be angry about a great many things but he likely was also pigheaded in unwillingness to help fix some of those problems he actually had input/influence over.

[dudacek]

19 minutes 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. 

 

Maybe I haven’t read all the links?

But the ones I recall were Okposo basically engaging in coachspeak - positive reinforcement of positive steps Jack has taken in order to facilitate continuation, and McCabe building up a buddy. With both sets of comments coming at the prompting of reporters in the context of  (my words) Jack showing elevated maturity.

***

I have considered Jack self-centred and immature, but not irredeemably so, pretty much his entire Sabres career. I didn’t complain about it much because he was young and competitive and had time to mature. It appeared he did mature in year 5. And I would not be surprised if the maturation continues if he is traded to an environment where it can be nurtured.

The “supposition” is indeed a narrative of sorts, but it is one I’ve concluded based on what I’ve observed in trying to make sense of what has happened. 

Do you think Jack’s qualities as a leader and a teammate have played a role in the Sabres struggles? Why or why not? Which of suppositions don’t ring true to you? Why?

Finally, why do you think Adams wants to trade a franchise talent, and what makes you think that?

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Maybe I haven’t read all the links?

But the ones I recall were Okposo basically engaging in coachspeak - positive reinforcement of positive steps Jack has taken in order to facilitate continuation, and McCabe building up a buddy. With both sets of comments coming at the prompting of reporters in the context of  (my words) Jack showing elevated maturity.

***

I have considered Jack self-centred and immature, but not irredeemably so, pretty much his entire Sabres career. I didn’t complain about it much because he was young and competitive and had time to mature. It appeared he did mature in year 5. And I would not be surprised if the maturation continues if he is traded to an environment where it can be nurtured.

The “supposition” is indeed a narrative of sorts, but it is one I’ve concluded based on what I’ve observed in trying to make sense of what has happened. 

Do you think Jack’s qualities as a leader and a teammate have played a role in the Sabres struggles? Why or why not? Which of suppositions don’t ring true to you? Why?

Finally, why do you think Adams wants to trade a franchise talent, and what makes you think that?

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.