dudacek

Watching the presser changed my mind entirely. This was not the sledgehammer pronouncement I was expecting from the headline. I found Adams to be calm, transparent and borderline gracious in his delivery and his message. I would imagine the goal was to address the Eichel situation in a way that allows the organization to get its position out there clearly so they can clear the deck as much as possible in order to allow the focus to be on the players that are here. Not sure what he could have done differently to accomplish that goal.

Just watching the presser now. It was a direct answer to a direct question. I withdraw my objection.

This is fair. Maybe my gut reaction was wrong. That would be how I'd have done it.

Looks like Saturday was more than a maintenance day then. You are the medical guy, but there is no way he should be anything other than fully recovered from a hernia surgery five months ago, right? Wonder if there is something else going on there. Limped off after blocking a shot.

What did you think of Kyle's play in April?

I'm neither shocked, not offended by the move. I said right after the disconnect press conference there is no way Jack could be captain any longer after what was said there. I don't think it was necessary or helpful to announce the move the way Adams did. Not because it affects his trade value but because it comes across as simply airing dirty laundry and in no way helps get the process to the goal, which is moving Eichel for fair value.

Totally on the same page with @darksabre. There is some logic to making the move and telling the team privately as part of the 'culture shift' sending the message of don't expect him to come back and reassert himself, it's your team now. But making it public serves no purpose I can see and just twists the knife. It was going to happen organically and announcing it was totally unnecessary.

Training camp kickoff presser.

This is weird and very Sabres, but a team that has Girgensons, Caggiula, Hinostroza, Bjork, Asplund, Hayden and Eakin in the lineup on any given day, needs Kyle Okposo to do more than just shut people down. I think projecting Kyle as a 4th-line hard-minutes guy is a mistake based on how Krueger used him. Donnie didn't use a grind line. Those minutes played stats in April were eye-opening: I think both Kyle and Donnie think the old warhorse has more skill than Krueger gave him credit for and wouldn't be surprised to see Kyle on Cozens' flank, or getting some PP minutes. Okposo's age and career trend line says that won't last and injuries seem inevitable. But common sense says somebody has to score on this team. it won't be much — 30 points? — but I think that guy might be Kyle.

Believe it or not Kyle Okposo is in the sixth and penultimate season of a 7-year deal that will probably end up in GM textbooks as an illustration of how not to approach free agency. Okposo has the dubious distinction of having seen his stats drop in each and every year of a $42 million deal that pays him to be a top-six forward. He, along with Girgensons, are the only players on the roster who have played more than 200 games in blue and gold. Over the past few seasons he has redeemed himself in the eyes of many Sabres watchers by remaking himself into a useful bottom six forward (disregarding the contract) and one the team's more likable class acts. https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=93992 Last season was an odd one for Kyle. He started off with 1 point his first 18 games. He then reeled off 10 points in an 11 game stretch after Granato took over — his best stretch ever in a Sabre uniform — until Matt Irwin decided he had seen enough. That surprising point run happened during a stretch where he was moved from his 4th-line grinder role to a spot in the top six, where he was playing 15 to 20 minutes a game. What do you expect from Okposo this season?

This only is a problem if the Sabres and Dahlin fail to show improvement over those two years. So, fair point.

So a handful of NHLers expressing issues with getting vaccinated today. Are we expecting the Sabres to have any issues?

Do you think that if we are patient some team will come around to paying more than what they have already offered for Eichel, without some change in Eichel's status in terms of health and reputation, or some movement in Adams ask?

Does your friend know first-hand the insurance will not cover Jack's preferred surgery? Does he know first-hand that a different policy cannot be negotiated?

Except it doesn't. Adams job is use the asset of Jack Eichel to make his team better. He has not done that. Jack is not helping the team by playing, he is not helping the team by providing assets in a trade. He's not helping the team by rehabilitating his health or his reputation. I don't understand why the default is that no deal is a success because Adams "hasn't caved." We have no idea what deals have been rejected or what avenues have not been pursued. You don't know what offers he has received. Trying doesn't matter. You asked what he could have done and he failed to build a better team. You don't know about the insurance situation, or whether there were ways around it. You don't know if it was "for nothing" And he could have taken him off the market.

I understand some of these things are contradictory, and I am not endorsing any of them, let alone all. Just throwing some possibilities out there to answer your question. Not quietly shopped Eichel last fall before the season started and instead patched up the relationship. Traded Jack last fall when he was healthy and his value was as high as it is going to be. Built a better team last winter in order to prevent the organizational frustration that has boiled over Not tried to deal an injured Eichel and instead made it clear he was not on the market until he got healthy again. Allowed Jack to get the surgery he wants Drawn a line in the sand by telling Jack that nothing was going to happen until he accepted the team-endorsed treatment, forcing his hand. Adjusted his trade criteria in order to better accommodate the needs of a partner (things like taking back salary, accepting 3 parts instead of 4, or making a hockey trade) Acknowledged that Jack isn't worth what he thought he was on the market and accepted a lesser return (which doesn't mean a bad return). Gotten creative by bringing in multiple teams (like the Duchene trade) Made the trade highly conditional based on performance-based criteria Obviously we don't know what he has or hasn't tried. I'm not comfortable with the generally accepted premise around here that Adams has done everything he can.

Don't people come here specifically to share opinions on the successes and failures of the Sabres? How is saying Adams needs to do better on the Eichel situation any different than saying Ralph Krueger needs to do better in the way he handles Jeff Skinner, or Risto needs to do better on getting the puck out our zone, or Kim Pegula needs to do better with the game day experience? I have not blamed Adams for the situation, but I think he has more agency here than you do.

Don't think there is anything here I disagree with. Definitely on board with the bolded. Eichel doing things that suggest he deserves the "bad guy" label doesn't change the fact that Adams hasn't been shy about pointing those things out.

I'm ecstatic he's here. It's his team now and he needs to be asserting himself on the ice and in the room from day one.

"We want players who want to be here." Over and over again. Players who bleed Sabre blue, players who wake up in the morning thinking about how they are going to make the Sabres better, "blinding light" players . The subtext is impossible to ignore.

Glad it's done. They paid too much for three years, I think. Best case scenario is he outplays it immediately and signs a long-term extension prior to the final year. And hooray! We're over the floor!

There is a slim possibility that a rejuvenated Cody Eakin might show up to camp and save his career. But going into camp with perhaps the worst player on the worst team in the league pencilled into the starting lineup would be a huge mistake that tells the room and the fans that management simply doesn't get it. If I was Don Granato, I would have made it crystal clear to Cody Eakin this summer that he in not among his top 12 up front and that if he wants to play he will have to make the tea in training camp.

If it wasn't clear, the "do better" was aimed at Adams, not at you.

He was injured in March and is no closer to being healthy, right? People think (thought?) he could be traded despite being injured, right?

No, leveraging the asset for fair market value is the correct play. I think a lot of you have missed the point of this (deliberately provocative) thread. A lot of people (me included) don't want Adams to take less than market value. But their satisfaction that he hasn't made a bad trade has blinded them to the fact that he has failed to make a good one, or apparently made any progress in removing the obstacles blocking it. Too many of you have chosen to adopt a side in this. It should not be about Jack getting his way, versus Adams staying strong. It should be about making the Buffalo Sabres better. To the bold, you didn't have Eichel on the team in the spring, you don't have him now, and there is a damn good chance you won't have him in a year. One of the best assets in the NHL is sitting on a shelf, not making the Buffalo Sabres better. Yes, when you are a Buffalo Sabres fan, not ***** things up (yet) is equivalent to handling things well. This is precisely my point. Adams may have been dealt a bad hand here. But he has failed to keep the team's relationship with its captain on track. He has failed to find a way to resolve Jack's injury situation. And he has failed to make a deal. And people are OK with these failures because Jack is a "prima donna," we haven't got "bent over," and "we weren't planning on winning this season any way." This is where @pi2000 would say "do better"