GDT: Kevyn Adams Press Conference -- The "Disconnect" Explained--11:00 am

[Taro T]

3 minutes ago, Curt said:

I don’t know man.  What you are saying looks a lot like continuing a cycle as opposed to breaking it.

-Trade everyone draft Reinhart/Eichel

-ROR sick of losing, trade him, draft Dahlin

-Eichel/Reinhart sick of losing, trade them, draft #1

-rebuild with youth, stay pretty bad for a couple years????

-Dahlin sick of losing, trade him????

-Draft Wright/Bedard/Michkov????

Looks like a continued cycle, not a broken cycle.

Well, fortunately Adams has an option to break the cycle right in front of him:  DON'T trade Eichel/Reinhart - draft #1.  Add Danault.  Now, assuming Eichel is healthy in October - a big if, but not impossible, and they have all 4 C slots covered w/ 1-2 contingency plans should any of the 4 pencilled in not pan out or get injured.  And that's with Eakin buried in Ra-cha-cha & no 4C such as Sheahan brought in for cheap.

They also have enough W's to adequately (if not ideally) cover the top 6 & cover the top 9 fairly well.

Fix the GTing & get the right coach.

Cycle broken.  😉

[Scottysabres]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Or is your contention that Eichel Reinhart and Risto are the reason we finished so low, that they’ve created the losing culture, and not that they’ve been adversely affected by it? 

Your reaching Thorny, don't pull a muscle 😉

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, Scottysabres said:

I said this:

"Wright and the next "wonder kid", it's the right time to rebuild the rebuild"

In response to @sabremike comment:

"People simultaneously ranting about needing to change the losing culture while calling for getting rid of the few NHL players we have so that we have a roster that's lucky to win 15 games and gets killed on a nightly basis is itself quite a disconnect."

I would have thought the Wright and "Wonder Kid" comment was self evident as a response to sabremike's comment on losing talent to rebuild. 

No I still don’t get it sorry 

[Curt]

9 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

I'm not sure it would work Curt, and I'm not planting a flag saying this is the end all be all of it, what I did say was that the culture would be indifferent if Eichel, Reinhart and Risto stayed, or go. And there is factual prolonged multi-seasonal data to support that.

What do you mean by “the culture would be in different if they stayed or go”?

Sounds like you are say the culture will be the same whether they stay or go.

Or are you meaning to say that the culture is bad with them, so maybe trading them will improve it?

 

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Well, fortunately Adams has an option to break the cycle right in front of him:  DON'T trade Eichel/Reinhart - draft #1.  Add Danault.  Now, assuming Eichel is healthy in October - a big if, but not impossible, and they have all 4 C slots covered w/ 1-2 contingency plans should any of the 4 pencilled in not pan out or get injured.  And that's with Eakin buried in Ra-cha-cha & no 4C such as Sheahan brought in for cheap.

They also have enough W's to adequately (if not ideally) cover the top 6 & cover the top 9 fairly well.

Fix the GTing & get the right coach.

Cycle broken.  😉

Easy-Peazy 

Edited May 14, 2021 by Curt

[Thorner]

1 hour ago, Scottysabres said:

Your reaching Thorny, don't pull a muscle 😉

No I’m not reaching, your point was muddled, sorry 

I was legitimately asking for clarification.

If I was reaching when asking about if you blamed the 3 for the culture problem, you must think they’ve been weighted down by all the losing, then, if they didn’t cause it? This is what I feel doesn’t jive with your comment about Wright and Bedard - to get them, we’d need more losing, presumably negatively affecting the young players currently on the roster in much the same way Jack, Sam and Risto, were 

Edited May 15, 2021 by Thorny

[Scottysabres]

6 minutes ago, Curt said:

What do you mean by “the culture would be in different if they stayed or go”?

The culture didn't change while they were here, they aren't catalysts to the change if they stay.

If the culture changes, it won't be because of Eichel, Reinhart, Risto, it will be inspite of them. The kids will lead the charge on the change, indeed, it has already begun. Cozens, Mitts, Dahlin, even Tage.

And I don't believe all 3 will be here next season. I don't know who Adam's will move, but as of right now, I don't see Risto and 1 of the other 2 gone. 

10 minutes ago, Thorny said:

No I’m not reaching, your point is exceptionally muddled, sorry 

I was legitimately asking for clarification

Ok. I was responding to sabremike on the lack of talent issue.

[Curt]

39 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

The culture didn't change while they were here, they aren't catalysts to the change if they stay.

If the culture changes, it won't be because of Eichel, Reinhart, Risto, it will be inspite of them. The kids will lead the charge on the change, indeed, it has already begun. Cozens, Mitts, Dahlin, even Tage.

And I don't believe all 3 will be here next season. I don't know who Adam's will move, but as of right now, I don't see Risto and 1 of the other 2 gone. 

Ok. I was responding to sabremike on the lack of talent issue.

Ok I guess.

I suspect that Eichel, Reinhart and Risto have their mind made up (even subconsciously) that this isn’t going to work in Buffalo.  They don’t believe and have mentally moved on.  For me, that’s a reason to move on from them.  Although I’m willing to admit that I could be wrong and maybe any one of them can be salvaged (so to speak).

So you think Risto and one of Jack/Sam will be back?

I feel like losing a lot of games and drafting Wright/Lambert/Bedard/Michkov is not going to turn around the Sabres.  Only finding the correct combination of players to be competitive night in and night out will do that.  It is possible to do that with a lot of young players, but it’s important to have the right type of guys mentally, and it’s important to have some half decent players with some experience and leadership to keep the young guys boosted up.

[#freejame]

This team's spirit will not be broken by an 80 point season. An 80 point season most year's put you in the running for the top pick. We can be bad, develop and grow as a team, and get a top pick. The hockey gods will reward this approach. 

[Curt]

12 minutes ago, #freejame said:

This team's spirit will not be broken by an 80 point season. An 80 point season most year's put you in the running for the top pick. We can be bad, develop and grow as a team, and get a top pick. The hockey gods will reward this approach. 

That would probably be in the 5-10 draft range.  If the team were to finish there, while playing a style that could scale up and the young guys are contributing & progressing, that’s not soul crushing for the younger guys.  Probably for some of the old guard, it would be though.  Kind of depends on who is on the team.

[sabremike]

2 hours ago, #freejame said:

This team's spirit will not be broken by an 80 point season. An 80 point season most year's put you in the running for the top pick. We can be bad, develop and grow as a team, and get a top pick. The hockey gods will reward this approach. 

With this current roster minus Jack and Sam they are far more likely to finish with 55-60 point than 80. Even with Dahlin it's the most putrid roster in the league by miles.

[Curt]

6 minutes ago, sabremike said:

With this current roster minus Jack and Sam they are far more likely to finish with 55-60 point than 80. Even with Dahlin it's the most putrid roster in the league by miles.

We don’t know what the roster will be next season.  The 80 points thing was not a prediction.  It was a bar for what constitutes a non-soul crushing season.

[Scottysabres]

8 hours ago, Curt said:

Ok I guess.

I suspect that Eichel, Reinhart and Risto have their mind made up (even subconsciously) that this isn’t going to work in Buffalo.  They don’t believe and have mentally moved on.  For me, that’s a reason to move on from them.  Although I’m willing to admit that I could be wrong and maybe any one of them can be salvaged (so to speak).

So you think Risto and one of Jack/Sam will be back?

I feel like losing a lot of games and drafting Wright/Lambert/Bedard/Michkov is not going to turn around the Sabres.  Only finding the correct combination of players to be competitive night in and night out will do that.  It is possible to do that with a lot of young players, but it’s important to have the right type of guys mentally, and it’s important to have some half decent players with some experience and leadership to keep the young guys boosted up.

Typo on do to don't as my response. 

[Thorner]

10 hours ago, Curt said:

That would probably be in the 5-10 draft range.  If the team were to finish there, while playing a style that could scale up and the young guys are contributing & progressing, that’s not soul crushing for the younger guys.  Probably for some of the old guard, it would be though.  Kind of depends on who is on the team.

And for many fans, I think 

[JohnC]

9 hours ago, Curt said:

We don’t know what the roster will be next season.  The 80 points thing was not a prediction.  It was a bar for what constitutes a non-soul crushing season.

Odds are that some combination of Jack, Rino and Risto will not be back next season, maybe none. But if the 80 point season that some are projecting next year means that another unserious season will be added to the previous number of seasons with no meaningful end of season games then that will be another brick added on top of this already flatten franchise. That shouldn't be acceptable to the waning fanbase and to the owners. 

Because of the wretched history of dysfunction of this Pegula franchise there isn't much regard/owners for them by the other owners and those involved in the business. The Pegulas have earned their low ratings, if not scorn, for their ineptitude. The point I'm getting at here is that I don't believe that the Pegulas are going to instruct their GM to clear the decks and start another rebuild. My belief/hope is that the Peuglas are going to demonstrate a greater degree of urgency to get this franchise back on track sooner rather than later. What does that mean? It means that whatever players are dispatched by the GM the returns need be of a value that allows this franchise to be a playoff contending team. Is that attainable? It could be but I'm not sure. 

[Curt]

15 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Odds are that some combination of Jack, Rino and Risto will not be back next season, maybe none. But if the 80 point season that some are projecting next year means that another unserious season will be added to the previous number of seasons with no meaningful end of season games then that will be another brick added on top of this already flatten franchise. That shouldn't be acceptable to the waning fanbase and to the owners. 

Because of the wretched history of dysfunction of this Pegula franchise there isn't much regard/owners for them by the other owners and those involved in the business. The Pegulas have earned their low ratings, if not scorn, for their ineptitude. The point I'm getting at here is that I don't believe that the Pegulas are going to instruct their GM to clear the decks and start another rebuild. My belief/hope is that the Peuglas are going to demonstrate a greater degree of urgency to get this franchise back on track sooner rather than later. What does that mean? It means that whatever players are dispatched by the GM the returns need be of a value that allows this franchise to be a playoff contending team. Is that attainable? It could be but I'm not sure. 

-No one projected an 80 point season.  How could someone make a projection?  We don’t have to foggiest idea what the roster will be.  I said exactly this in the post you quoted.

-I don’t know if they are going to be trying to make true hockey trades or trades for youth.  I think either path, or some combination of the two, could lead to great success if properly executed.  I will not scorn the moves until I actually see them.

-This may be an unpopular thing to say, but I don’t think the team needs to go for an immediate playoff push.  They need to follow the path that is best for the team mid-long term.  While I don’t think that should be a “tank” because it’s emotionally destructive, I also don’t think it needs to be an immediate playoff push (although that could potentially be successful, depending on the moves that are made).  I just don’t think that decisions should be made based on fan frustrations built up over a decade.  Decisions need to be made based on an honest evaluation of the roster situation here and now.

Edited May 15, 2021 by Curt

[JohnC]

3 minutes ago, Curt said:

-No one projected an 80 point season.  How could someone make a projection?  We don’t have to foggiest idea what the roster will be.  I said exactly this in the post you quoted.

-I don’t know if they are going to be trying to make true hockey trades or trades for youth.  I think either path, or some combination of the two, could lead to great success if properly executed.  I will not scorn the moves until I actually see them.

-This may be an unpopular thing to say, but I don’t think the team needs to go for an immediate playoff push.  They need to follow the path that is best for the team mid-long term.  While I don’t think that should be a “tank” because it’s emotionally destructive, I also don’t think it needs to be an immediate playoff push (although that could potentially be successful, depending on the moves that are made).  I just don’t think that decisions should be made based on fan frustrations built up over a decade.  Decisions need to be made based on an honest evaluation of the roster situation here and now.

I didn't say that you made such a projection. What I'm saying is that there has to be an urgency attached to whatever strategy is made for the dealt players (if that comes to pass) that the return must be contributing players more so than futures. Getting contributing players can also be young players---they are not mutually exclusive. 

I disagree with you that this team doesn't need to go for an immediate playoff push. Being in a playoff push doesn't mean being a cup contender; it means being a lower playoff contender where a lot of teams are bunched together competing for a spot. I think that is a reasonable and doable goal. Another season of not having meaningful games at the end of the season is going to erode even more an eroding fan base. 

 

[Curt]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

I didn't say that you made such a projection. What I'm saying is that there has to be an urgency attached to whatever strategy is made for the dealt players (if that comes to pass) that the return must be contributing players more so than futures. Getting contributing players can also be young players---they are not mutually exclusive. 

I disagree with you that this team doesn't need to go for an immediate playoff push. Being in a playoff push doesn't mean being a cup contender; it means being a lower playoff contender where a lot of teams are bunched together competing for a spot. I think that is a reasonable and doable goal. Another season of not having meaningful games at the end of the season is going to erode even more an eroding fan base. 

 

You did say that some here were projecting an 80 point season.

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

But if the 80 point season that some are projecting next year means that another unserious season will be added to the previous number of seasons with no meaningful end of season games then that will be another brick added on top of this already flatten franchise.

Hey, I would prefer they be a good team (nay, great team!) too.  And I think that playoff contention is a possibility.  However, I disagree with the course of action being decided by fan sentiment.  That’s not a good compass for decision making.

Also, I think if they were to acquire lots of high quality futures (prospects/players who aren’t quite baked yet) in trades, an 80 point season would not be the end of the world.

Honestly, this team could go in so many different directions right now, and I’m not one to say there is only one single pathway to success.  They can get there different ways.  The important thing is to get the right players, be they veterans, young pups, or prospects.

[sabremike]

2 hours ago, Curt said:

-No one projected an 80 point season.  How could someone make a projection?  We don’t have to foggiest idea what the roster will be.  I said exactly this in the post you quoted.

-I don’t know if they are going to be trying to make true hockey trades or trades for youth.  I think either path, or some combination of the two, could lead to great success if properly executed.  I will not scorn the moves until I actually see them.

-This may be an unpopular thing to say, but I don’t think the team needs to go for an immediate playoff push.  They need to follow the path that is best for the team mid-long term.  While I don’t think that should be a “tank” because it’s emotionally destructive, I also don’t think it needs to be an immediate playoff push (although that could potentially be successful, depending on the moves that are made).  I just don’t think that decisions should be made based on fan frustrations built up over a decade.  Decisions need to be made based on an honest evaluation of the roster situation here and now.

Once again: How do you get rid of a losing culture by being OK with losing and throwing away seasons (In a league all but rigged so that just about any team can compete for a playoff spot)? That mentality needs to die and this organization needs to start having standards that need to be met like every other team in the league does. 

[Curt]

35 minutes ago, sabremike said:

Once again: How do you get rid of a losing culture by being OK with losing and throwing away seasons (In a league all but rigged so that just about any team can compete for a playoff spot)? That mentality needs to die and this organization needs to start having standards that need to be met like every other team in the league does. 

I think you get rid of a losing culture by assembling the correct mix of players who have a resilient  mentality as well as the talent.  That and good coaching.

If that group of players acquired includes prospects who aren’t quite there yet, and that results in the team being not quite playoff ready, then so be it.  If they are the right guys then they are the right guys.

I’m trying to put high value on the type of person brought into the organization right now.

[Thorner]

1 hour ago, Curt said:

You did say that some here were projecting an 80 point season.

Hey, I would prefer they be a good team (nay, great team!) too.  And I think that playoff contention is a possibility.  However, I disagree with the course of action being decided by fan sentiment.  That’s not a good compass for decision making.

Also, I think if they were to acquire lots of high quality futures (prospects/players who aren’t quite baked yet) in trades, an 80 point season would not be the end of the world.

Honestly, this team could go in so many different directions right now, and I’m not one to say there is only one single pathway to success.  They can get there different ways.  The important thing is to get the right players, be they veterans, young pups, or prospects.

Ordinarily I would agree, but when considering trading the face of the franchise, sometimes these things factor in. It's an entertainment product after all and he's been, I would say, by far our most entertaining player since he's been here - worth the price of admission, so to speak.

I'd imagine garnering the price of admission is something that matters to ownership, to John's point

59 minutes ago, sabremike said:

Once again: How do you get rid of a losing culture by being OK with losing and throwing away seasons (In a league all but rigged so that just about any team can compete for a playoff spot)? That mentality needs to die and this organization needs to start having standards that need to be met like every other team in the league does. 

Agree. Prioritize winning. The culture follows. 

The won't win until they bottom-line their measurement of success with wins. 

[Thorner]

18 minutes ago, Curt said:

I think you get rid of a losing culture by assembling the correct mix of players who have a resilient  mentality as well as the talent.  That and good coaching.

If that group of players acquired includes prospects who aren’t quite there yet, and that results in the team being not quite playoff ready, then so be it.  If they are the right guys then they are the right guys.

I’m trying to put high value on the type of person brought into the organization right now.

You'd be hard pressed to make a compelling argument for why this couldn't have been Jack, until this franchise happened to him. There's nothing wrong with Jack Eichel. Or, at least, there wasn't. 

[Curt]

17 minutes ago, Thorny said:

You'd be hard pressed to make a compelling argument for why this couldn't have been Jack, until this franchise happened to him. There's nothing wrong with Jack Eichel. Or, at least, there wasn't. 

Disagree to be honest.  Not that there is something particularly wrong with Eichel, but he has never come across as an especially mature, mentally resilient guy.  From his first year he was prone to frustration and publicly venting it.  Compared to Cozens, for example, their personas are night and day.

I don’t really want to get too deep into this because it quickly gets judgy and we can’t know everything about these guys.  My goal is not to trash anyone.

[Thorner]

Just now, Curt said:

Disagree to be honest.  Not that there is something particularly wrong with Eichel, but he has never come across as an especially mature, mentally resilient guy.  From his first year he was prone to frustration and publicly venting it.  Compared to Cozens, for example, their personas are night and day.

I don’t really want to get too deep into this because it quickly gets judgy and we can’t know everything about these guys.  My goal is not to trash anyone.

Would you rather have Dylan Cozens than Jack Eichel? Like all things considered?

Also, you should consider checking out the Jack Eichel press conference I posted the other day. Man had turned a huge corner last season in maturity level. It was all the rage around here at that time but it seems to no longer be a talking point, at all

O'Reilly's character was questioned, by the fans here, by Ownership, by multiple franchises.

It's all voodoo and BS. Give me talent and work the rest out later

[Thorner]

Patrick Kane by all accounts is a total d-bag and he's won a Conn Smythe. You can trade a player for character reasons, but not one as good as Jack. His talent trumps the other stuff, particularly when any of the other stuff is just guesswork 

Don't like Jack's leadership, too similar to Kane? That's why you build around Eichel with other good players, too, just like Chicago did

Maybe Dylan Cozens is Toews. Toews still needed Kane. 

I'm glad Carter and Richards were brought up in another thread - character reasons a big part of why they were dealt, too. Then they won cups.  People tout Granato endlessly and HE said that Jack and the guys are totally different in room and always come competitive. Why can't we listen to him?

Edited May 15, 2021 by Thorny

[Curt]

27 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Would you rather have Dylan Cozens than Jack Eichel? Like all things considered?

Also, you should consider checking out the Jack Eichel press conference I posted the other day. Man had turned a huge corner last season in maturity level. It was all the rage around here at that time but it seems to no longer be a talking point, at all

O'Reilly's character was questioned, by the fans here, by Ownership, by multiple franchises.

It's all voodoo and BS. Give me talent and work the rest out later

 

23 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Patrick Kane by all accounts is a total d-bag and he's won a Conn Smythe. You can trade a player for character reasons, but not one as good as Jack. His talent trumps the other stuff, particularly when any of the other stuff is just guesswork 

Don't like Jack's leadership, too similar to Kane? That's why you build around Kane with other good players, too, just like Chicago did

Maybe Dylan Cozens is Toews. Toews still needed Kane. 

I'm glad Carter and Richards were brought up in another thread - character reasons a big part of why they were dealt, too. Then they won cups.  People tout Granato endlessly and HE said that Jack and the guys are totally different in room and always come competitive. Why can't we listen to him?

All things considered?  No, I would rather have Jack Eichel.  He is too talented and I would never consider him a terrible person, or culture killer or anything.  He is like a neutral for me, put into a position where he was expected to be a ++.  Cozens is like a ++.  I hope that makes sense.

True that Eichel sounded more mature last season. I think I’ve said this before, but it shouldn’t be noteworthy when the team captain gives a mature sounding interview.  That should be the default.

I never said that you can’t  win with Eichel or any nonsense like that.  You are the one who brought up Eichel.

I ardently disagree that the importance of players’ personalities is all BS, as you say.

Edited May 15, 2021 by Curt