Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I think @LGR4GM's got the pulse of this one best. Bob is smart enough to know what that tweet sequence would cause, at best it's willful ignorance. There's no way the subject matter of that tweet sequence was news-worthy to the point of making it all worth it. 

How do I know that?  Because the most talked about aspects of it all are things the tweet/Sabres/Eichel's agent denied are going to happen. The biggest point of discussion it sparked was "Eichel wants out, what can my team give to get him". That's the narrative. Bob would know this would happen. 

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Drag0nDan said:

A lot of losing, and injuries/rehab.  Many players would just call it quits, its probably rather depressing and lonely.  Then when you come back you're immediately trade bait.  I don't blame buffalo either, he didn't do a thing when he was here other than cost a lot and be injured.

Erroneous. Bogo made the trade request. 

3 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

Whew, that was close. Where would we be without Jack?

How is this honestly still a thing when we saw it applied to ROR when he was dealt, when he then proceeded to win a Conn Smythe? Baby/bath water. I know you know Jack is good enough to be the best player on a cup team. The fact that it's arguable we could win it with a Best Player worse than Jack doesn't correlate to having Jack not being a very good thing.

The implication of your argument is basically, "who cares if we lose him, weren't winning with him". If I'm ever drowning and treading water waiting for a lifeguard, I'll be sure to chop my nuts off to save on weight as they sure as shite ain't helping me right now, amirite? The fact that they'd be an incredible aid to my inherent biological pursuits me and my wife share should I ever address the actual issue is not something I need to worry about right now, I guess. 

Sobotka. 

Edited by Thorny
Posted
17 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Erroneous. Bogo made the trade request. 

How is this honestly still a thing when we saw it applied to ROR when he was dealt, when he then proceeded to win a Conn Smythe? Baby/bath water. I know you know Jack is good enough to be the best player on a cup team. The fact that it's arguable we could win it with a Best Player worse than Jack doesn't correlate to having Jack not being a very good thing.

The implication of your argument is basically, "who cares if we lose him, weren't winning with him". If I'm ever drowning and treading water waiting for a lifeguard, I'll be sure to chop my nuts off to save on weight as they sure as shite ain't helping me right now, amirite? The fact that they'd be an incredible aid to my inherent biological pursuits me and my wife share should I ever address the actual issue is not something I need to worry about right now. 

Sobotka. 

What trade? He signed with Tampa as a free agent.

Posted
6 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

What trade? He signed with Tampa as a free agent.

They terminated his contact so he could do that. And they only terminated his contract because no one would trade for him. And they were attempting to trade him because he requested a trade this season officially. 

Posted (edited)

Thus is my opinion only

The owners of the Sabres would not trade jack because they would end up with like 6 people that still rooted for the sabres afterwards.  

I suspect it would be a mass exodus because nobody would think the sabres owners cared if they traded their franchise player without getting another guaranteed franchise player and then some more

Edited by miles
Posted

This is what I think really happened  

 

Nyr: I am interested in jack. Will u take this?

Buff: no thanks

 

Nyr to media: we are making a run at jack

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Thorny said:

They terminated his contact so he could do that. And they only terminated his contract because no one would trade for him. And they were attempting to trade him because he requested a trade this season officially. 

Correct...they terminated his contract because he didn't report to Roch. He later signed w/Tampa as FA. There was no trade.

Just wanted to clarify that. No doubt it turned out to be a bad situation and hate to see that happen.

We good?

Posted
14 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Or maybe... Mackenzie heard the rangers called about Eichel and decided to run with it because in the end he literally reported a giant nothingburger. It was 4 poorly worded tweets that ended up being nothing. So in essence it was BS. 

Eichel isn't being traded and to think otherwise is delusional. 

and they said Gretzky would never leave Edmonton................

Nothing is 'delusional" . Is it likely  no, is it possible always. 

Rangers made an offer, Adams said no, that likely happened. But Adams also said he's not "shopping" Eichel. Doesn't mean with the right offer it couldn't happen. 

Posted
2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

and they said Gretzky would never leave Edmonton................

Nothing is 'delusional" . Is it likely  no, is it possible always. 

Rangers made an offer, Adams said no, that likely happened. But Adams also said he's not "shopping" Eichel. Doesn't mean with the right offer it couldn't happen. 

Likely happened huh? Has it been confirmed that NYR actually made an offer? I understood it as NYR called and asked if Eichel is available/open to offers. Full stop. Nothing beyond that question.

 

Posted
12 hours ago, Thorny said:

They terminated his contact so he could do that. And they only terminated his contract because no one would trade for him. And they were attempting to trade him because he requested a trade this season officially. 

No team would trade for him with his contract, that's true.  I think they wanted him to have a chance to go somewhere and play in the post season. I think Tampa wanted him all along and so the Sabres chose to waive him, he chose not to report, all of that played out so he could sign in Tampa... a team that both the Sabres and Bogosian knew would come calling as soon as his contract and the money associated with it were terminated.

The entire situation orchestrated to trade an asset to an organization bypassing the normal rules.  Sure Bogosian has to give up some money in the deal, but he's more interested in the Stanley Cup chance.. and look at that.. now he'll have a ring.  One might hope that the favor done by Buffalo translates into some off-season favors... 

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, LTS said:

No team would trade for him with his contract, that's true.  I think they wanted him to have a chance to go somewhere and play in the post season. I think Tampa wanted him all along and so the Sabres chose to waive him, he chose not to report, all of that played out so he could sign in Tampa... a team that both the Sabres and Bogosian knew would come calling as soon as his contract and the money associated with it were terminated.

The entire situation orchestrated to trade an asset to an organization bypassing the normal rules.  Sure Bogosian has to give up some money in the deal, but he's more interested in the Stanley Cup chance.. and look at that.. now he'll have a ring.  One might hope that the favor done by Buffalo translates into some off-season favors... 

Lol. It won't. 

Edited by LGR4GM
Posted
41 minutes ago, LTS said:

No team would trade for him with his contract, that's true.  I think they wanted him to have a chance to go somewhere and play in the post season. I think Tampa wanted him all along and so the Sabres chose to waive him, he chose not to report, all of that played out so he could sign in Tampa... a team that both the Sabres and Bogosian knew would come calling as soon as his contract and the money associated with it were terminated.

The entire situation orchestrated to trade an asset to an organization bypassing the normal rules.  Sure Bogosian has to give up some money in the deal, but he's more interested in the Stanley Cup chance.. and look at that.. now he'll have a ring.  One might hope that the favor done by Buffalo translates into some off-season favors... 

Yet another decision based on money and not hockey.

Posted
9 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Yet another decision based on money and not hockey.

Yes, but this was TB's decision, not the Sabres'.  Bogo forced his way out because RK decided he couldn't play any more, not because the Sabres were trying to save $$.

Now, if one wants to ask whether this was a poor decision by RK, or whether RK should've been able to get more out of Bogo (like he should've been able to do with Skinner) I think that's a legit question.

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Now, if one wants to ask whether this was a poor decision by RK, or whether RK should've been able to get more out of Bogo (like he should've been able to do with Skinner) I think that's a legit question.

I hope we're not going to see a narrative now about the Sabres squandering Zach ***** Bogosian.

He didn't play better in Tampa and he couldn't stay in the lineup in Tampa either. When he did play, he was more successful because he was surrounded by better players. Period. End of story.

The guy was an NHL defenceman here too, but we couldn't rely on him to stay in the lineup. Rightfully, we went out and got other players who could. They were better. He lost his job because of it.

And then, instead of trying to get it back, he quit.

***** him.

Edited by dudacek
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted

This thread is still going, eh? That's as bad as someone quoting a forty year-old movie franchise for nostalgia and ease-of-recognition to garner...  *waves hand*  This is not the thread we're looking for. You can go about your business. Move along.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
32 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Yes, but this was TB's decision, not the Sabres'.  Bogo forced his way out because RK decided he couldn't play any more, not because the Sabres were trying to save $$.

Now, if one wants to ask whether this was a poor decision by RK, or whether RK should've been able to get more out of Bogo (like he should've been able to do with Skinner) I think that's a legit question.

I’ll just say that I’m not convinced that that is the real reason.

Posted
2 hours ago, SwampD said:

Yet another decision based on money and not hockey.

He was the Sabres FIFTH RH D-man on the depth chart.  Clearly Botterill tried to trade him, but due to the contract couldn't find any takers.

JBott & the Pegulas get enough criticism for moves that warrant criticism.  Don't have to go after ones that don't move the needle.  In a salary capped world, money & hockey are interrelated and they can't spend that kind of money on a guy that doesn't even get into the lineup.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
On 9/29/2020 at 9:05 AM, PASabreFan said:

Bianca Bogosian?

I wonder how you and Radar have lasted this long. I honestly don't get the sentiment. Eichel is the one who will end your fandom?

It’s not really Eichel.  It’s everything thats happened since Darcy said “It may require some suffering.”  The Eichel situation is more an exclamation point or final straw.  Will I actually no longer be a fan of the Sabres?  Probably not.  I’ll always be a fan.  Very frustrated w/ this franchise though.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
2 hours ago, nfreeman said:

Yes, but this was TB's decision, not the Sabres'.  Bogo forced his way out because RK decided he couldn't play any more, not because the Sabres were trying to save $$.

Now, if one wants to ask whether this was a poor decision by RK, or whether RK should've been able to get more out of Bogo (like he should've been able to do with Skinner) I think that's a legit question.

Bogosian was no longer a plan for the Sabres. No one is going to get more from Bogosian and no one has.  He filled in with TB.. he'll be a UFA and I'm really curious if he ends up anywhere.

In the end, the Sabres let him go to a team where he might have a shot at the childhood dream.  That's doing an NHL vet a favor.

  • Like (+1) 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...