JohnC

I agree with you that if Sam showed a desire to be part of another interminable building project the organization would want him back. But there are two sides to this coin here that reinforce one another. One is that Sam can't fake his fatigue with the mounting losses and lack of meaningful games. The player's understandable attitude is not compatible with the buy-in attitude he is trying to foster here. And the second part is that because of his history of consistent play his value is very high. This is a case where the player essentially made the decision for the GM.

I just get the sense that by moving some of the prime players who have been here for a while that the young GM is making a statement that this is a new era separate from the failed and stale previous era. Could the GM retain Eichel and Samson and try to build around them? Yes he could but I don't believe he wants to. He just seems determined to shake up this roster and have more of a fresh start.

There was a game last year when Tage took a foolish and ill-timed penalty. And in that game he also started reverting to his loping style of play instead of playing with more decisiveness. If I recall correctly he benched him for a game or so and then he sparingly played him making him earn back his playing time. His play improved and his playing time increased. He made his players accountable and they played better.

Granato's success is predicated on KA adding enough talent to give him a chance to succeed. If the expected departing assets don't bring enough of a return to spread out and add to the talent base, and if the increased cap room is not smartly utilized then Granato is not going to succeed, or would any other coaching hire. The one position that would have the most positive influence is solidifying the goaltending. It's unlikely that the talent that will be shipped out will be matched with the talent coming, at least for the short term. But that doesn't mean that next year's roster can't be thickened and improved upon. What it comes down to is that Granato's chances of succeeding is predicated on Adams doing a smart job this offseason.

You are being punctilious.

When 90% of the hockey prospect analysts say the same thing about who should be the first pick then it isn't a stretch for someone to say that they have extreme confidence in who the first pick should be. If you disagree with that then so be it.

And I say with with extreme confidence that it will be Power.

The HC should be able to bring in the coaches he wants to work with. It would be a mistake for the organization to dictate who should be on his staff. It is reasonable for the front office to review the prospective coaches before approving of the hiring but it should be Granato to have the most say in the assembling of his staff.

I got the timing wrong but the candidate right. I'm more than happy with this obvious selection. When the Sabres make the first pick it needs to be Power. Let's stick to the basics and not outsmart ourselves. I'm sure almost everyone will agree that Adams is going to be judged by the more difficult and complicated task of getting a return on his departing assets.

I was commenting on what he said on WGR. I should have been more explicit. But it wasn't his original thought because he credited to Bulldog.

Leave Paulie alone. The view that he cited came from Bulldog on the Shoop and the Bulldog Show. Some of the criticism that Paul draws is merited; and much of the scathing criticism he receives is not merited. It's not a very positive experience to handle post game interviews for the press or the players. Covering this erratic organization for a long time when the storyline is the same has to be exasperating and exhausting.

Yes.

Added to what has been said a recommendation was given on behalf of this individual who got another job.

Yes.

What the Sabres are asking for is what the Rangers are saying absolutely not to, at least according to what some people who follow the Rangers are saying.

What we do know for sure is that whatever happened was reported within the organization. Then it wasn't referred to the proper public authorities to do their job in investigating this matter.

I not only believe that Granato is the best coaching candidate for this team but also am inclined to believe that he already has been notified that he is the choice or at least the heavy favorite to be the coach. And it shouldn't be surprising that if his hiring news conference was called before the trades that it would be the focus of attention of the reporters at the conference.

You make a keen observation about fan disinterest and the disconnect between the fans and business interest in their diminished product. What is worse than antipathy is apathy. Adams is very aware of the community disinterest and it is reflected in his numerous public references to it. What does this mean from a hockey and business standpoint? It's not too difficult to conclude that he will make a number of high profile moves to jolt the organization and establish a line of demarcation between the old failed era and this new and era. From a hockey standpoint it might make more sense to reconcile the Jack issue and keep your star player in the fold. But from a business sense if you want to jolt the fan base and promote interest in a remade product making some major change makes a lot of sense. What's obvious to me is that Adams has set a course and he is determined to implement it. Where he is going to be judged is the return on the departing assets. I'm not saying anything new here. But what I am emphasizing is that the GM has set a course and he is not deviating from it. There is no question that the Buffalo franchise has been an invisible franchise on the NHL stage. As the draft approaches and the Cup series concludes I see the Sabres getting a lot of attention. That in itself is a change.

This issue was talked about on WGR. It was theorized that Granato may already be the designated coach but the public announcement is not being made until the Eichel trade is made. The reasoning/conjecture is that if a press conference was called to make the coaching announcement before the high profile trade that questions about Eichel and other trade deals would dominate the coaching hire. Does this line of thinking have merit? It makes sense but I can't say for sure.

I have heard at least three people who cover the Rangers say that under no circumstances will the team give up LaFreniere. Miller is another player that they will be unlikely to deal, while Kappo would be considered in a trade. The Rangers already have a number of top tier young players playing who in the not too distant future will require lucrative contracts. It wouldn't be difficult to fit in Eichel in their current contract structure but when the other contracts need to be upgraded his hefty long term contract will make it difficult to keep their emerging talents. My understanding is that the Rangers have a sizeable talent pool in their system who are not quite ready to play in the NHL. It doesn't seem to me that the Sabres are willing to make a deal where they give up Eichel for mostly futures. The centerpiece of a deal with any team needs to be a young player with a lot of potential who can play right away, even if the player is not ready to immediately play a prominent role. Would I be willing to trade Jack to the Rangers for LaFreniere and Kappo/Miller plus their top pick? Yes. Would they? Probably not.

Thanks for the information.

The more I think about the ROR trade and the return the more I want to blow my top. I don't care who the GM is not every trade deal or transaction is going to work out. But even with a deal that doesn't work out that doesn't mean that it has to more than marginally set you back. The ROR trade is emblematic of how badly run this franchise has been since the Pegula takeover. When there is little thought and coherency to the operation you get sustained failure.

I'm don't think you intended it but you are making a compelling argument to keep Jack even if it is only for the short term. The hope is that he regains his health and is able to exhibit his extraordinary physical talents. Whether it is for our long term benefit or turns out to be a showcase situation where his maximum value is marketed. It's not difficult to understand why the GM wants to make a Jack trade and start afresh. However, while it is clear that Jack is frustrated with the situation he is in that doesn't mean that he is a negative influence in the locker room. By getting him back to health you are in a better situation whether you keep him or move him when his value has been restored. What it comes down to is what is the best course to take with this major asset. If the Sabres can come away in a trade with a 1C young player talent and a high draft pick then I have little reservations about a trade. But if the return is not near the value going out then the wisest course might be to show more patience.

Yes he is going to act in his best interest. That's normal for him and every player. And that best interest approach also applies to the team. I didn't understand the point being made.

What wrong with that?