nfreeman

We’re having an interesting conversation here. No need to get snippy.

Well, the point of the agreement would be to make it clear that the parties agreed contractually that Jack, not the Sabres, was responsible for the decision. As for duress, it would certainly not exist here. The Sabres aren't forcing him to do anything -- they're willing to pay him $50MM to do nothing. What you're suggesting would be a crazy outcome, which is not unheard of but still so unlikely as not to constitute a real risk or substantial part of the Sabres' analysis IMHO. I think it's as simple as Jack wants the ADR and he wants the Sabres to bear the risk, while the Sabres don't want to bear the risk.

This is probably not correct. Jack would sign a bunch of documents stating that the Sabres wanted him not to have ADR, but that he was insisting on ADR, he understands and assumes all risk, he releases the team and TP from all liability, etc. If all that happened -- and it's pretty much certain that the Sabres would insist on that type of agreement -- and the surgery (or playing in the NHL following the ADR) went wrong, Jack could certainly sue anyway, but he would probably lose.

KC and Baltimore are both getting spanked.

As for the statute of limitations on the Sabres' willingness to wait out Jack and the potential bidders -- I think it doesn't end until after the season. They aren't planning on any boost to their team from an Eichel trade this year, and they probably figure that the same crappy offers will be there on draft day 2022, if not better. As for the alternatives -- I think there is almost zero possibility that the Sabres agree to take the $50MM risk, or for that matter any risk that is substantially higher than $12.5MM, on the ADR. So I think the alternative to the status quo from the Sabres' perspective is not the Sabres taking the $50MM risk, but is rather taking a lesser package in trade on or about draft day 2022. Finally, I'll respectfully disagree that it all comes down to different assessments of the likelihood of full recovery post-ADR. I think it's certainly an important factor, but I also think that the other factors that have been discussed in this thread all play into the risk-reward calculation, which is part of why this is so complicated and hasn't been resolved yet.

I generally agree with this, but I also think Dahlin's top speed is a bit lower than I would like and is clearly lower than guys like Makar and Hughes.

Good stuff @Taro T. I agree on Cozens — he seems to be improving and gaining confidence every game. I kinda liked both Bryson and Miller though — eye of the beholder I suppose.

I've been thinking a bit more about this. I think I was kinda missing your point yesterday -- I think you were saying that if other teams are willing to risk $50MM in trading for Jack and letting him have the ADR (although I think we agree at this point that these other teams aren't willing to risk much more than that, i.e. they are unwilling to give up much in trade for Jack) -- why isn't TP willing to risk $50MM, let Jack have the ADR and restore his value, and then trade him for a rich bounty? In other words, TP is as rich as any of these other guys, and if some of them are willing to risk $50MM on Jack, why isn't TP? I think there are a few possible answers: 1. The Sabres' analysis of the likelihood of Jack's return to full value could be materially different from those other teams' analyses -- e.g. they might see it as 25% likely and they see it as 60% likely. 2. The Sabres likely view time as being on their side -- they might think there is a reasonable likelihood that if they wait another month or 2, either Jack will cave and have fusion or another GM will cave and give up the crown jewels for Jack -- and if either of those things happen the Sabres can avoid taking the $50MM risk. 3. This is the big one: the reward for the Sabres taking the $50MM risk isn't the same as it is for an acquiror taking that risk. The acquiror's upside is a fully recovered, motivated, and thrilled-to-be-outta-jail Jack Eichel, i.e. a MVP-candidate-level player in his prime. The Sabres' upside is a couple of blue-chip prospects and some draft picks, any or all of whom may or may not develop, in a few years, into top-end NHL players, or who might be just OK, or who might wash out, or who might be deeply unhappy to be traded to Buffalo from Vegas or NYC or Southern California. It's apples and oranges.

NJ was better and deserved the W. That rookie C Mercer is really fast. The Sabres needed more offense from Skinner, TT and VO. Toker was really good though.

But if Jack never plays again, the insurance (based on what we've heard, which sounds reasonable IMHO) will cover 75%, so TP's exposure is $12.5MM. If another team acquires him and he has ADR, the exposure jumps to $50MM, minus whatever the Sabres take back, which will probably be $12.5MM or less. If you agree that no one is going to give up their crown jewels for Jack even if TP somehow bears the $50MM risk (which again I don't think is possible), then what's in it for TP to increase his risk above the $12.5MM? Because some teams are willing to risk $50MM, minus whatever the Sabres take back, but so far no one is willing to risk more than that -- i.e. not the money AND their best prospects.

But TP doesn't believe in ADR enough to take on the $50MM risk, and I don't see how a deal could be engineered under which the Sabres bear the $50MM risk in exchange for a Zegras/Drysdale/1st rounder or similar rich trade package. For that matter, I don't think any GM is going to give up his crown jewels for a pre-full-recovery Eichel regardless of how much the $50MM risk will be reduced. My point was that a GM with a stinking rich and risk-tolerant owner might be willing to risk the $50MM, or most of it, but not the $50MM AND the crown jewels, which, to an owner like that, are more precious and harder to replace than the $50MM.

I agree generally that good advanced metrics over a small sample size don't mean much, and that it's way too soon to be giddy about the Sabres, but I will say that their style of play looks much faster, in both ends of the rink, much closer to the net on offense and much more puck-possession-oriented than RK's did.

I would guess that: - those 5 teams are not willing to give up good assets in trade for Eichel - those 5 teams, in any trade for Eichel, will require the Sabres to take some combination of bad contracts (which are also not insured, so every dollar they unload that way offsets a dollar of Eichel's cost) and Eichel salary retention - any insurance coverage that those 5 teams would be able to get for ADR would cost much more and pay much less than the Sabres' coverage for fusion - those 5 teams are all deep-pocketed teams (Vegas, Rangers, Habs, Philly, etc.) who can live with up to a $50MM uninsured risk, minus whatever retention/bad contracts they get the Sabres to take back.

But the article @Thorny cited said:

Well, I don't think "proof" in this case will be obtainable, since we'll never get to see the policy, although Vogl or Hammy or someone should ask KA the question. But we all know how insurance companies work. It seems almost certain that if the policyholder's doctors recommend against a surgical procedure, but the policyholder consents to it, coverage will be voided.

I think the bolded is overstating the matter. If he voids his contract, but the surgery works, he will still make a very handsome living playing hockey. And if it doesn’t work, his inability to play hockey for a living will not be the result of anything the Sabres did.

Interesting. A promotion for Bjork. Good for him.

This is obnoxious.

Well, it sounds like the owners/teams' rights end where prevailing medical advice ends -- i.e. the owners can't instruct a player to undergo some radical unproven surgery -- they can just prevent the player from both having that type of surgery AND making the team bear the risk. If ADR was the prevailing consensus treatment, he'd win the medical grievance procedure and be able to make the Sabres bear the risk. To use an absurd example, should Jack have the right to visit a witch doctor and follow that doctor's instructions to chop off half of his toes and eat them, while making the Sabres bear the risk on his contract? The players agreed that the owners have the right not to bear the economic risk if a player wants to have a procedure that os not supported by the prevailing majority of medical experts in the field. That's all they gave away. It doesn't seem like that big of a concession to me, and it seems reasonable from the owners' perspective.

Good to see ya @MODO Hockey!!

In addition to being the first good team the Sabres will have played, I also expect the Bruins to bring their A game. Ullmark's homecoming plus Hall's return to the scene of his suckitude plus the opportunity to lay the smack down on an undefeated team on the road will motivate them.

So far, I've found ESPN+ to be significantly better than nhl.tv. Separately: I wonder if Samuelsson skates with the Sabres for the next couple of days and then, depending on how he looks, goes straight into the lineup vs NJ (presumably an easier opponent than Boston)?

BTW, I read yesterday that Hayden went to Yale, continuing a somewhat interesting (to me, anyway) string of NHL enforcers from top universities (e.g. George Parros from Princeton, Tanner Glass from Dartmouth, etc.)

Well, look who's a Sabres optimist alluva sudden! Donnie Meatballs just might justify your love.

Leaving aside the civil lawsuits, is Watson not accused of rape by multiple women? And are there not 10 criminal complaints? If he gets convicted on multiple rape counts, he's going to prison for a real amount of time -- enough so that his career probably is over. The problem, of course, is evidence.