PromoTheRobot

I voted NO but not for the stated reason. It should read: "NO - The Sabres should not assume any risk for a player who's never going to play here again."

I am so sick of this excuse. We are trying to turn the page and get better. What happened the last ten years is the PAST. You might as well say the Sabres are always wrong because they lost 18 games in a row last year. As for Lehner this is the second time he's gone off on the Sabres. I smell a new choreographed charm offensive, this time from Brisson. I thought Jack fired Fish because his attempts didn't work?

I don't think this matters as much as potential future liability.

Adams screwed up trusting Linus. He should have moved him at the deadline.

Exactly! Nothing is simple when millions of dollars are involved.

You're making a leap that Jack desire for ADR is in his best interest. He's been sold on a procedure that probably works great on regular folks but is unproven among professional hockey players who regularly get shoved head-first into the boards. ADR isn't a tonsillectomy or LASIK.

Because there is/was a US-based UHL too.

You need cause to void a deal. Jack not adhering to team medical decisions is cause.

Voiding means you are go longer bound by the terms (paying money) of a contract but the contract is still in effect.

I guess there's a difference between termination and voiding.

Buffalo News article says all 6 preseason game will be streamed but only in the Buffalo area. Obviously someone messed up last night as I could see the stream in NH. Please don't fix it.

That is not a given. Also ADR is fairly new in pro athletes. There's no real track record if it works long term or can take a hit.

Tonight he is.

I was happy with the effort even if they lost. But this was entertaining.

65. Who is that?

Granato said it's not. Just for tonight.

Even if you gave Jack his surgery teams would still be skeptical and not offer anything of value.

So which nothing do you prefer? The one that doesn't help us, or the one that doesn't help us but helps another team and Eichel?

If ADR was such a slam dunk you'd think he'd do this.

Translation: get nothing for Jack.

Why is it we have not heard this from any reporters? Seems pretty important. Is insurance one of those things teams never speak of?

So you like the easy part (criticism) but not the hard part.

Curiosity? Share it with a reporter? Does Jack have any say in who sees his records?

Sure.

Only if Jack goes rogue. Is there a liability to the Sabres if they okay ADR and he gets hurt badly afterwards?