nfreeman

No. The author of the article, who is not McK, is the one saying in the article that Housely is the leading candidate. McK does not say that in the article. The point of the thread is that if McK says Housley is the leading contender, then there is a pretty good likelihood that Housley is indeed the leading contender. But McK didn't say that. He said some other stuff, from which the writer of the article inferred that Housley is the leading contender.

McK does not say that Housely is the leading contender. The thread title implies that he did say that.

I appreciate the enthusiasm, but the link provided by the OP does not say what the thread title says it says.

This. I'm not interested in committing to him for more than 2 years. He's solid but at this point certainly replaceable. If he crushes it this year then give him an extension.

An OHL team or a strong D-I team would be a great addition for Buffalo. Getting both would be fantastic.

A suitable universe might be the one in which the Sabres make him the best contract offer. You're probably right -- I'm not sure what Dreger previously reported. Still, I would think that following the other guys' reports, Dreger would check with his sources, who must have said they didn't know of anything that was close. Since Friedman (IMHO) was backpedaling yesterday, I'm guessing that nothing is going to happen anytime soon. I would also guess that there were brief talks between JBott and the Kings, and the Kings weren't willing to pony up a good enough defenseman. Separately but relatedly, I think one underappreciated (including by me) aspect of the Kane situation is the impact of the new coach's opinions on the Sabres' decision about Kane. If JBott thinks he wants Housley or Tocchet (or either), and they both sit in his office and tell him they badly want Kane, that has to affect his thinking on how much $$ to offer Kane. And I'd say it's probably 66.67% likely that Kane has not told the Sabres that he wants to go to FA. He may feel that way, but it seems like it would not be in his interests to tell the team that at this point.

Well, a lot of pro athletes have gotten into legal scrapes and not left town because of them, especially when the charges were dropped. Also, a lot of free agents have signed extensions with losing teams when the Benjamins and the respect and appreciation were sufficient. Yes indeedly. This is pretty optimistic. It's not unlikely though that Kane will be traded and these candidates will get their shots at his slot.

While I certainly see nothing wrong in him chasing the big payday, I'm curious as to what it is about his time here that makes you think he's inclined that way. Separately, Darren Dreger was on the Instigators this morning and is now well away from saying he knows of anything specific or imminent regarding a Kane trade.

That doesn't sound like a big deal.

Good work. Do we know what year the BB timeline started?

Good post. Totally agree with the bolded, and I'll add that the same is true for trading Kane IMHO -- unless he's told them he's leaving in FA. This is what I expect too. There aren't going to be a bunch of high-quality defensemen falling from the trees. One or 2 may shake loose, but they will be few in number and expensive. I don't agree with keeping someone because the price to acquire him was high, but I completely agree with the bolded. This is also true -- one or 2 will probably become available. I'll be interested to see whether JBott gets into the bidding. We know that Darcy would've looked up nervously from his coupon-clipping and quickly shaken his head no, while GMTM would've hastily spilled his pint while sorting through a pile of credit cards to find a couple that weren't maxed out. I expect JBott will plot a middle course. Great stuff as always RF. With Tocchet and Housely looking like strong contenders for the Sabres' job, I'm curious as to your views on Pittsburgh's and Nashville's D group in terms of possession, passing, system, etc. Do you think Kane took shortcuts on the ice? I thought he played hard pretty consistently.

Well, we all knew that nothing was going to happen until after the finals, innit? Patience, grasshopper. The fireworks will begin in another 7-10 days.

Exactly. Ennis has zero to negative value in trade right now. If you want Eberle, you're giving up a #1 and/or a top prospect.

What is this based on? The article says: That sounds more like Asplund didn't hear from JBott at all, got antsy and signed with his SHL team.

Absolutely.

Whoa there. I have Fargo and GoT clearly ahead of BCS, and that's just in the 1-hour drama category.

Just listened to this. I think Friedman has walked back a bit from "I think a trade is likely." In addition to the point you mentioned about not getting Martinez or Muzzin unless Kane signs an extension, he was more like "I know LA is interested." I'm now at the point where I don't think Kane is going to be traded before July 1, because I don't think the Sabres will get anything decent for him unless an extension is part of the deal.

So sorry to have offended you, Mr. AngryLiger!

Excellent. If Sammy and ZJ are healthy, the Bills might actually have a pretty good set of WRs. I've also heard Jairus Byrd might be available at S. Maybe, just maybe, TP has stumbled into hiring the right guys this time.

Great scene. Also: first appearance by SG in a legal role! I hope it's not the case, but I wouldn't be surprised if next season were the last one.

You don't, of course. I was just kidding. Also, with PA on hiatus, I don't have anyone to give grief to. I guess I just thought your "don't you think they've both decided to move on" question was awfully...conclusive, or something, in light of the complete lack of anything from either Kane or the Sabres on this. And while I agree that Friedman and McK are both credible, I think the percentage of deals that actually happen and that they report on in the way they reported on this one -- i.e. "I believe a trade is likely...I don't think he fits into their long-term plan," and "if they can make a deal it will happen," and not "I'm informed that the Sabres and Team X are very close to finalizing a deal in which the Sabres would receive ABC and Team X would get Kane" -- is, while higher than Garth's percentage, still pretty low. Having said all that, there certainly is enough smoke not to be surprised if it happens.

This is where I take issue, sir. I have seen zero indications that this decision has been made by either side. I also think the only fact you've cited is TP's references to character in the GMTM/DDB termination presser (although I certainly could've missed something). #dudafacts

What? Here's what you said: You made a very specific claim about their respective stats. GA responded with: In other words, GA responded with the actual, specifically applicable data that relates to your claim as to the 2 players' stats. As it turns out, one of your claims (GPG) was right, while the other was wrong (PPG). You would've known this if you'd bothered to check the facts before you posted. Then, when presented with the actual facts, your response, instead of "I was right about GPG but wrong about PPG" was to claim that GA was cherry-picking his data. Again: how in the world can GA's post be described as cherry-picking?

OK, but that's a pretty big "if." Serious question: do you think Kane is holding his teammates back from greater success? This is fair. I suppose I'm assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that the Sabres oughta be able to get a real player who's ready now in exchange for Kane.

This. I detest the idea of trading Kane for futures. If the Sabres have to trade him, they need to get a good player who will be in their lineup this fall. Fair, but as I mentioned above it can't be for futures. That would be an unambiguous step back.