Kevyn Adams Press Conference 11/4 11am EST

[Brawndo]

To discuss Eichel Trade 

[Flashsabre]

I will give Adams credit. The guy was hired with no experience and given an absolutely brutal situation to navigate and I think he has come out the other side of the heavy lifting pretty well.

He identified the character issues in the dressing room, sold the Pegulas on a tear down and has done it right. He didn’t think he knew better then everyone else and has surrounded himself with people in the front office who are well thought of.  He is acquiring multiple picks/young pieces and there seems to be an identity forming:speed and character.

There is a long way to go but this is what a proper rebuild looks like. 

[LGR4GM]

lol character issues. 

THE TEAM WAS NOT TALENTED ENOUGH AND HAD ATROCIOUS COACHING. 

[Weave]

27 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

lol character issues. 

THE TEAM WAS NOT TALENTED ENOUGH AND HAD ATROCIOUS COACHING. 

I’m not sure that character issues is the correct phrase to describe Jack, but it is notable that KA singled out Jack as a person that he wanted to move on from.  And I am sure KA was very aware that the base issue was talent and coaching.  
 

There was something that KA identified, and I don’t think it was a loss of love for the game.

[Flashsabre]

18 minutes ago, Weave said:

I’m not sure that character issues is the correct phrase to describe Jack, but it is notable that KA singled out Jack as a person that he wanted to move on from.  And I am sure KA was very aware that the base issue was talent and coaching.  
 

There was something that KA identified, and I don’t think it was a loss of love for the game.

I didn’t mean Jack individually, I meant there were characters issues in that room that he identified and he has made moves to change the culture. Overall talent and coaching has always been the problem and I am hoping that they have figured that out with Granato and all the young pieces and picks coming into the lineup.

[inkman]

 

[Stoner]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

lol character issues. 

THE TEAM WAS NOT TALENTED ENOUGH AND HAD ATROCIOUS COACHING. 

What weave said. We don't know everything about the team. There's not much doubt left that the organization found out something, specific or in general, about Eichel that it didn't care much for. (inkman version: ...didn't care much.)

[LGR4GM]

53 minutes ago, Weave said:

I’m not sure that character issues is the correct phrase to describe Jack, but it is notable that KA singled out Jack as a person that he wanted to move on from.  And I am sure KA was very aware that the base issue was talent and coaching.  
 

There was something that KA identified, and I don’t think it was a loss of love for the game.

Yea singled him out... like Reinhart and Ristolainen... you know the older players with value on the team. 

[msw2112]

The Sabres have had talent on the roster.  Eichel, Reinhart, Risto, Hall, Kane, O'Reilly, Ullmark, etc.  Other teams certainly saw value in these guys and were willing to trade assets or pony up big money to obtain them.  There was clearly a deficienty in coaching and, to an extent, coaching can set the tone for team chemistry, but it only goes so far.  The Bills moved on from talented guys like Watkins and Dareus as part of reshaping their culture and the Sabres appear to be doing the same.  It's too soon to tell whether it will work out, but I appreciate that the team has a plan and is executing it.  Guys like Thompson, Asplund, Middlestadt and others are developing into quality NHL regulars and there are some potential future stars in Quinn, Peterka (sp), Krebs, Power and others.  They have Levi, Portillo and UPL in the goalie pipeline, although UPL is looking more questionable over time, as he's having a difficult time establishing himself at the AHL level.

There is potential/promise for the future.   Plus, despite a couple of losses in California (which I didn't see), the team is generally playing better overall and seems to be competitive on a regualr basis.  There have been worse times to be a Sabres fan. 

[Weave]

56 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Yea singled him out... like Reinhart and Ristolainen... you know the older players with value on the team. 

And it is very possible that this is all it is, sort of a mini tank.  But I don’t see that aligning with the notion that KA wanted to move Jack as soon as he took the reigns.

[Thorner]

14 minutes ago, Weave said:

And it is very possible that this is all it is, sort of a mini tank.  But I don’t see that aligning with the notion that KA wanted to move Jack as soon as he took the reigns.

I always really like when I read this being stated. It points to the fact we can simply judge KA on the results. But assuredly, he must be judged on the results. He didn't HAVE to make the moves he did. He made a choice. 

[SDS]

20 minutes ago, Weave said:

And it is very possible that this is all it is, sort of a mini tank.  But I don’t see that aligning with the notion that KA wanted to move Jack as soon as he took the reigns.

 

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I always really like when I read this being stated. It points to the fact we can simply judge KA on the results. But assuredly, he must be judged on the results. He didn't HAVE to make the moves he did. He made a choice. 

From the press conference, what I’m getting is that most likely Jack let everyone know how dissatisfied he was and that was the impetus of Adams wanting to move him early on. After the season when they talked, Jack reaffirmed that mentally he wasn’t prepared to lead the charge anymore. So Adams followed through.

So Adams followed through.

This is entirely on Jack. How can Adams get up in the morning, look everyone in the face, state that he only wants a team of players who want to be here, and have that Boston dude sitting in the middle like a three horn purple headed alien with a C on his chest?

either Adams eats his own dog food or he’s a hypocrite. He chose the former.

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, SDS said:

 

From the press conference, what I’m getting is that most likely Jack let everyone know how dissatisfied he was and that was the impetus of Adams wanting to move him early on. After the season when they talked, Jack reaffirmed that mentally he wasn’t prepared to lead the charge anymore. So Adams followed through.

So Adams followed through.

This is entirely on Jack. How can Adams get up in the morning, look everyone in the face, state that he only wants a team of players who want to be here, and have that Boston dude sitting in the middle like a three horn purple headed alien with a C on his chest?

either Adams eats his own dog food or he’s a hypocrite. He chose the former.

I don't care if he eats dog food, or if he's a hypocrite. I care if he builds a good team, that's it. 

"Entirely on Jack". 

So, if the trade works out well, Adams is a genius. 

If the trade works out poorly, Adams had no choice.

So, Adams isn't answerable for the results of this team. Fun. 

[Weave]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I don't care if he eats dog food, or if he's a hypocrite. I care if he builds a good team, that's it. 

"Entirely on Jack". 

So, if the trade works out well, Adams is a genius. 

If the trade works out poorly, Adams had no choice.

So, Adams isn't answerable for the results of this team. Fun. 

I don’t buy that. It’s his job to make that decision work out, regardless of why he made the decision.  He’ll be accountable for how he handled the situation, not that he inherited it.

[SDS]

5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I don't care if he eats dog food, or if he's a hypocrite. I care if he builds a good team, that's it. 

"Entirely on Jack". 

So, if the trade works out well, Adams is a genius. 

If the trade works out poorly, Adams had no choice.

So, Adams isn't answerable for the results of this team. Fun. 

Feel free to judge the other side of this ledger anytime you want. There are two people here and your only response has been to question the ability of one side. If you could just stop for a moment and tell me what a general manager should do when your star player says “I don’t wanna be here anymore“?

Adams has made this painfully clear in his very judicious, polite way of speaking about the situation, that certain people, including Jack, made it known they did not want to be here. At any point are you going to hold Jack accountable for this? Does Jack own any of this? Or are we just collecting talent here?

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, SDS said:

Feel free to judge the other side of this ledger anytime you want. There are two people here and your only response has been to question the ability of one side. If you could just stop for a moment and tell me what a general manager should do when your star player says “I don’t wanna be here anymore“?

Adams has made this painfully clear in his very judicious, polite way of speaking about the situation, that certain people, including Jack, made it known they did not want to be here. At any point are you going to hold Jack accountable for this? Does Jack own any of this? Or are we just collecting talent here?

Bolded is tiring. I've posted countless times that I feel there IS blame on both sides. 

I have heard from several sources I trust, including from in and around this board, that Adams was the impetus behind moving Jack. Is that true? We can't really know right now. But we also can't know that Jack ever said "I don't want to be here anymore". Do we agree it's hypothetically possible to choose to keep your disenfranchised player, in an effort to repair the relationship? I believe there is precedent for other, disgruntled players, to change their tune. I am of the opinion, if it was me, I would have kept the player. Of course this is built on incomplete info re: who Jack is behind the scenes, but so is the other side of the coin. 

With all due respect, your "there are two people here" thing is a mis-fire. It is only my argument thus far that has a bottom-line of objectivity - Adams should be judged on the results. 

Your "Adams had no choice" argument actually makes it so that only one side can have fault. 

[LGR4GM]

47 minutes ago, Weave said:

And it is very possible that this is all it is, sort of a mini tank.  But I don’t see that aligning with the notion that KA wanted to move Jack as soon as he took the reigns.

This isn't a thing. Either you tank or your don't. You can't just kinda sorta gut your team of talent to finish as low as possible. 

[SwampD]

4 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

This isn't a thing. Either you tank or your don't. You can't just kinda sorta gut your team of talent to finish as low as possible. 

What? Seriously, what?

[Weave]

29 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

This isn't a thing. Either you tank or your don't. You can't just kinda sorta gut your team of talent to finish as low as possible. 

Toronto

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

This isn't a thing. Either you tank or your don't. You can't just kinda sorta gut your team of talent to finish as low as possible. 

But it is.

48 minutes ago, Weave said:

Toronto

And there is the prime example of one.

Get rid of your high priced guys you want to move away from & keep the kids that could help add a few meaningless wins to bottom line down on the farm where they're in key roles on a winning team.

The blue print is there.  The smart teams don't scorch & salt the earth before beginning the rebuild.

[LGR4GM]

31 minutes ago, Taro T said:

But it is.

And there is the prime example of one.

Get rid of your high priced guys you want to move away from & keep the kids that could help add a few meaningless wins to bottom line down on the farm where they're in key roles on a winning team.

The blue print is there.  The smart teams don't scorch & salt the earth before beginning the rebuild.

The Sabres had no young talent in 2013 or 2014

[MDFan]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

Bolded is tiring. I've posted countless times that I feel there IS blame on both sides. 

I have heard from several sources I trust, including from in and around this board, that Adams was the impetus behind moving Jack. Is that true? We can't really know right now. But we also can't know that Jack ever said "I don't want to be here anymore". Do we agree it's hypothetically possible to choose to keep your disenfranchised player, in an effort to repair the relationship? I believe there is precedent for other, disgruntled players, to change their tune. I am of the opinion, if it was me, I would have kept the player. Of course this is built on incomplete info re: who Jack is behind the scenes, but so is the other side of the coin. 

With all due respect, your "there are two people here" thing is a mis-fire. It is only my argument thus far that has a bottom-line of objectivity - Adams should be judged on the results. 

Your "Adams had no choice" argument actually makes it so that only one side can have fault. 

Per Eichel today, he asked to be traded, before last season.  

[Marvin]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

Bolded is tiring. I've posted countless times that I feel there IS blame on both sides. 

I have heard from several sources I trust, including from in and around this board, that Adams was the impetus behind moving Jack. Is that true? We can't really know right now. But we also can't know that Jack ever said "I don't want to be here anymore". Do we agree it's hypothetically possible to choose to keep your disenfranchised player, in an effort to repair the relationship? I believe there is precedent for other, disgruntled players, to change their tune. I am of the opinion, if it was me, I would have kept the player. Of course this is built on incomplete info re: who Jack is behind the scenes, but so is the other side of the coin. 

With all due respect, your "there are two people here" thing is a mis-fire. It is only my argument thus far that has a bottom-line of objectivity - Adams should be judged on the results. 

Your "Adams had no choice" argument actually makes it so that only one side can have fault. 

Adams can have no choice about trading Eichel (Eichel said he asked before last season), yet still be at fault for how he handled it, what the return is, and how the trade turns out long-term.  Yes, he was dealt a tough hand, but I expect him to play it as best he could.  So far, the word that comes to mind is "so far, passable."  If it goes to pot, then it's a failure.

[Thorner]

25 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

Adams can have no choice about trading Eichel (Eichel said he asked before last season), yet still be at fault for how he handled it, what the return is, and how the trade turns out long-term.  Yes, he was dealt a tough hand, but I expect him to play it as best he could.  So far, the word that comes to mind is "so far, passable."  If it goes to pot, then it's a failure.

 

But this is because of Adams' chosen course, his desire to rebuild, right? I think it's easy enough to just agree it should come down to the results, then. Can hardly blame Adams for moving a guy who said he wanted out, but he assuredly still is accountable for the total result of his plan - Jack backing out is a domino to fall from him choosing that plan. 

The motivations behind the deal itself, it context, make sense. It's really the overall strategy on trial, for me. 

Maybe it always has been. Hearing Jack say he wanted out because the team didn't want to try and win is something I've been talking about for a long time, maybe too long. 

Edited November 4, 2021 by Thorny

[WildCard]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

The Sabres had no young talent in 2013 or 2014

I'm pretty sure @Thorny has went down this rabbit hole extensively.