erickompositör72

There's always the really-off-chance that Housley's system creates a whole new attacking offensive style that allows Moulson to find some of his old form. Moulson hurt us a lot, IMO, because he was too slow to attack in Bylsma's system, and he was not strong in the corners and not strong on the puck. If we truly have a 5-man attack, that might put less pressure on Moulson's weaknesses and allow him to do what he is good at: get open and shoot, or clean up garbage in front of the net. Just a thought...

Leverage for Vanek deal? :D honestly, idk

but........ depending on the type of contract he is offered, wouldn't it be perhaps more desirable for him to play somewhere where he might not make the team right away, but has a better chance at winning a championship down the road? The $ could be the same, either way, depending on the contract offered. Just speculating. Wouldn't playing somewhere he has "a better chance of making [the] team" possibly mean a team that's not good?

I didn't like how he used the word "amicable" ...that's how I describe exchanges with my ex-wife :P Vanek's still not signed... hoping him and Sabres have been in touch and are waiting to see how the Eichel contract unfolds! ...if not, Stafford is still available :lol:

Why would that be? Don't we have an owner who'd be more than happy to pay the entire contract upfront, if it were allowed? I hope that's the case. I can't take the drama anymore...

Remember, Kane outscored him (by 10 goals and 2 total points) last season, having played 7 less games. I know CO was awful, but still, in 7 less games. So I don't even think Kane, straight-up, would be worth it. + McCabe? Get outahere

Some people truly live in a bubble

Np, I wasn't sure if I wasn't getting it (quite probable) or I actually said something truly in bad taste... !

I'm actually glad you replied to that extent, because what you say sounds well reasoned and believable, and it's an element of the business that fascinates me. It also piques my curiosity to consider the fact that Jack is 20 years old. At that age, there are probably people in hear ear, advising him on how to proceed at this juncture. How many 20-year-old's would know how to approach a deal worth tens of millions? It's a pretty fascinating scenario. We're all on pins and needles waiting to find out what reasoning from his end prevails.

Ok, let's back up a little bit. I'm intrigued by the whole discussion, and here's where I'm coming from: Jack Eichel is 20 years old. Are you saying you know for a fact that he cannot be influenced at all by an experience agent? I'm not saying I know, for a fact, he will be. I'm just asking the question. Just curious how you seem to be so sure of the answer. I'm assuming that the differences in contract amounts will amount to much more than just "chump change" for his agent, right?

Players (especially stars) hire agents who will get them the most $

Is this sarcasm/irony? Not following...

They don't work for money? They're completely altruistic? Wow, amazing. Must be the only profession with such characters.

I think this could be true. It seems GMTM was hot for Lehner the minute he got the Buffalo job, and thought he had golden insider info--would be seen as a genius for acquiring him. GMBot, on the other hand, has a modus operandi that seems much more broad and thorough.

My curiosity is: how much would Eichel's agent's agenda have to do with the end result? I.e., what are the chances Eichel says "I believe in the team and don't want to put them in a position where they can't hire a supporting staff," and his agent says, "no, you're a star, we need to get you top $" ...etc etc ?

I was going to say, it seems the defense style of the Sabres, and the types of shots they allow, has gone back a few years (even before DDB)- which is why goaltenders like Neuvirth (who I was a big fan of), Enroth, and good ol' Chad had inflated SV%'s on our team. I think that's why a lot of people (front office & fans alike) are in "show me" mode for Lehner.

Also, there is always the off-chance of some freak injury causing him (rightly or wrongly) to be tagged *injury-prone,* which could be leveraged against him. Take the cash while it's on the table- I'm sure that's a calculation of his agent's, for whom these are #'s games.

Seems that the confusion stems from the fact that he didn't realize he had a concussion, at first?

Just wishful thinking. The only "official" thing I've heard is that he was "talking to a few teams"

JBot, get this done so we can resume talks with Vanek!

Another thing to consider about a possible contract, since everybody loves speculating on Kane's mentality- He may just want to win, and be in a place that loves hockey. He's not going to get to play with Jack Eichel if he goes to another team. If things play out the way we all hope they do, he may, himself, imagine being part of a team that could win it all in a few years.

Any chance Mittelstadt could become a more effective center than Samson? Just throwing it out there, I know it's too early to tell. He was super impressive, though. Is the consensus that Reinhart's intelligence/vision would ultimately be wasted as a winger?

Honestly, sometimes I also felt Kane made bad decisions or simply didn't think during a play/with the puck on his stick. However, I think when he finds a chemistry that works, or gets used to playing with a certain line, things will start to look more intuitive. His raw talent alone led him to lead the team last year in goals. Imagine him after real chemistry starts to develop. Speaking of bias- I do admit, I may have a pro-Kane bias. But it just aggravates me when people are still citing a tweet from 5 years ago. That's when I start to sense the anti-bias.

I'll give you the injury thing - we'll have to see on that, going forward. However, your previous post shows a clear dismissal of his skill set.

More of this same BS bias. He's going to crack his ribs again?