Is There a Path Forward for Eichel and the Sabres?

[Curt]

57 minutes ago, Thorny said:

It would also be unthinkable to trade Jack this year, in a year the North division scores 10 goals a game inflating the stat curve, after Jack spends the year under, even if you don’t think bad, an offensively suffocating system, with the cherry on top being he may be hurt. Trading him during/after this year would be laughable. 

You could make the argument we’d be more limited in any potential Eichel deal by trading him now due to his current production and the surrounding optics then we would be by having to tip toe around his NMC

There is an argument that his current season performance is devaluing him some.

I strongly disagree with the bolded though.  You think they can’t get fair value for him now?  How would it be when he has a NMC, publicly demands a trade, then it’s leaked out that he will only go to the Bruins, Rangers, or Islanders.  Or some bs like that.  Then you will see a real devaluation.

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Give him a competent coach next season and make sure the real Jack is still there. And if he still isn’t playing well, deal him then. 

I don’t think the opportunity cost of declining to “get out in front” of a more limiting potential trade request is near worth sacrificing the opportunity cost of the very real possibility Jack looks like himself again under a guy who’s actually a hockey coach. 

We should be thinking about ways to prevent the trade request from happening rather than resigning ourselves to its inevitability and probably creating a self fulfilling prophecy in the process. 

I/we are just expressing our opinions.  We do not determine the actions of players or teams here.  We feel how we feel, and the players/teams are going to do what they are going to do.

The Sabres obviously don’t come here looking for advise.

[Thorner]

8 minutes ago, Curt said:

There is an argument that his current season performance is devaluing him some.

I strongly disagree with the bolded though.  You think they can’t get fair value for him now?  How would it be when he has a NMC, publicly demands a trade, then it’s leaked out that he will only go to the Bruins, Rangers, or Islanders.  Or some bs like that.  Then you will see a real devaluation.

I’d definitely take my chances with the NMC (considering we can REFUSE TO TRADE HIM) and competent management on the lookout for a deal than with a depreciated Jack and THIS management which is just an extension of Pegula. 

This group will consummate a bad trade. An experienced group at least has a chance. To convince him, or fair better in a deal. 

3 minutes ago, Curt said:

I/we are just expressing our opinions.  We do not determine the actions of players or teams here.  We feel how we feel, and the players/teams are going to do what they are going to do.

The Sabres obviously don’t come here looking for advise.

I was speaking about the organization Curt 

[Thorner]

Also, Jack’s NMC kicks in not until July 2022. Is the return, under a depreciated Jack, so much better right now or this offseason than it’d be during the season next year, at next year’s deadline, or even the 2022 draft, so as to be worth willingly sacrificing the chance Jack completely gets back to normal, after this absurdly longest of long whopper of a 17 game stretch, next year under a competent coach? His value might even be higher next year if he lights it up and for some reason makes a formal request. 

No reason we should entertain an Eichel trade short of crazy offer any time this season or offseason, certainly not with this management group. 

Edited March 2, 2021 by Thorny

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

I’d definitely take my chances with the NMC (considering we can REFUSE TO TRADE HIM) and competent management on the lookout for a deal than with a depreciated Jack and THIS management which is just an extension of Pegula. 

This group will consummate a bad trade. An experienced group at least has a chance. To convince him, or fair better in a deal. 

I was speaking about the organization Curt 

Sure, you can REFUSE to trade him, but for how long?  It just becomes an impossibly unhealthy situation for the team as well as the player.  It’s not a solution.

Honest questions here.

You don’t trust this management group to make a good trade.  Do you trust them to create a winning team for next season?

Do you actually think the management team is going to be changed this season/offseason?  

[Thorner]

14 minutes ago, Curt said:

Sure, you can REFUSE to trade him, but for how long?  It just becomes an impossibly unhealthy situation for the team as well as the player.  It’s not a solution.

Honest questions here.

You don’t trust this management group to make a good trade.  Do you trust them to create a winning team for next season?

Do you actually think the management team is going to be changed this season/offseason?  

You can’t refuse forever, but you have at least until the NMC kicks in. There’s no sense fast tracking it and giving up the chance to try Jack with a new coach or coach/GM duo next season (or a reconfigured front office with an added POHO or something). Why would we not hang onto this type of player as long as possible in case things finally kick into motion. We definitely need the coaching change anyways. 

I don’t have confidence in them to put together a winning team, no, but I’m less opposed to Adams at this juncture. I think a new coach coupled with a good offseason puts the likelihood at greater than that of our ability to come out well from one of the most difficult trades to make. With an experienced GM, I think the likelihood for both improvement to the tune of convincing Jack, and maximizing a return for him should it come to that, go up. 

I don’t see a compelling argument at this stage to dealing him before next season starts. 

 

[nfreeman]

@john wawrow -- I hope you've been keeping well.  We'd sure appreciate your thoughts on whether RK is going to get canned and whether Eichel will be traded!

 

[Randall Flagg]

Adding @tom webster to the call.

[dudacek]

53 minutes ago, Thorny said:

You can’t refuse forever, but you have at least until the NMC kicks in. There’s no sense fast tracking it and giving up the chance to try Jack with a new coach or coach/GM duo next season (or a reconfigured front office with an added POHO or something). Why would we not hang onto this type of player as long as possible in case things finally kick into motion. We definitely need the coaching change anyways. 

I don’t have confidence in them to put together a winning team, no, but I’m less opposed to Adams at this juncture. I think a new coach coupled with a good offseason puts the likelihood at greater than that of our ability to come out well from one of the most difficult trades to make. With an experienced GM, I think the likelihood for both improvement to the tune of convincing Jack, and maximizing a return for him should it come to that, go up. 

I don’t see a compelling argument at this stage to dealing him before next season starts. 

 

How many coaches and GMs is he going to get? (Rhetorical question, I understand your position is "as many as it takes")

 

People like to point out Yzerman and Sakic as guys who waited a long time for their team to come around.

Yzerman made the semi-finals in his 3rd and 4th seasons. Sakic made it on a 105 point playoff team in his fifth.

Marcel Dionne finally made them in his fifth season — after he got traded.

I think Jack's drought is unprecedented for a player of his stature.

It's not that I want to move him, it's that I think he is emotionally gone.

Edited March 2, 2021 by dudacek

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

You can’t refuse forever, but you have at least until the NMC kicks in. There’s no sense fast tracking it and giving up the chance to try Jack with a new coach or coach/GM duo next season (or a reconfigured front office with an added POHO or something). Why would we not hang onto this type of player as long as possible in case things finally kick into motion. We definitely need the coaching change anyways. 

I don’t have confidence in them to put together a winning team, no, but I’m less opposed to Adams at this juncture. I think a new coach coupled with a good offseason puts the likelihood at greater than that of our ability to come out well from one of the most difficult trades to make. With an experienced GM, I think the likelihood for both improvement to the tune of convincing Jack, and maximizing a return for him should it come to that, go up. 

I don’t see a compelling argument at this stage to dealing him before next season starts. 

 

I do hear you.  I think I’m just feeling that the relationship may already be fatally broken.  I don’t mind Adams either.  I actually dont have any reason to think he wouldn’t do fine making a trade.

If you go into next season and halfway through, things aren’t going well, I think it’s much harder to negotiate then, because everyone can see that NMC deadline looming only a few months away.

Maybe they bring in a new coach, maybe, but I don’t think it’s a forgone conclusion, and I would be very surprised if they made a big change to upper management.

[DarthEbriate]

47 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think Jack's drought is unprecedented for a player of his stature.

Except for teammate Taylor Hall, who was 26 when he won the Hart and made the playoffs for his first time (and with the help of MoJo and Drew Stafford and...  Matthew Kinkaid??? in goal). Also after being traded.

[Scottysabres]

Listened to the Howard show this morning, they all agreed Jack is most likely gone this off season.

I tend to agree.

[thewookie1]

Can someone beat up any and all Ranger fans that started chanting "We want Eichel" 

 

I never want to hear the BS again.

[Curt]

3 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

Can someone beat up any and all Ranger fans that started chanting "We want Eichel" 

 

I never want to hear the BS again.

Then you better hope he’s traded soon so you won’t have to hear it.

😉

[Randall Flagg]

If it ends up being NYR, I want Shestyorkin and Zibanejad. I want Fox too, even if that means we are adding something (I have absolutely no idea what the value of either of these packages would be)

[Jävə Keith]

On 2/27/2021 at 4:30 PM, PerreaultForever said:

If those are the bones of a good team I think we have osteoporosis. 

I'm tired of excuses and losing with the same core. I want a new culture and I think the only way to get that is to tear it all down and start again building around unspoiled new talent. 

Tonight Dylan Cozens showed this team and its fanbase what genuine leadership, passion, sacrifice, and humilty with maturity are all about. (Ironic it takes a 19 y.o. rookie to show the team that)

I was always an Eichel defender, but his attitude has begun to disgust me.  He is acting like a woke entitled Boston baby. That is why this core is so rotten and has been in recent years.  This year of Eichel has turned this epiphany light on for me.

Purge the culturally weak core (especially Eichel - whom you will get the double benefit from the trade of eliminating a negative player while getting a big return of the right kind of players for your perceived "greatest player asset")

and build around the mature beyond his years kid with a work ethic, passion, humility, and grit from the Yukon Territory!

Edited March 3, 2021 by Jävə Keith

[Thorner]

12 hours ago, dudacek said:

How many coaches and GMs is he going to get? (Rhetorical question, I understand your position is "as many as it takes")

 

People like to point out Yzerman and Sakic as guys who waited a long time for their team to come around.

Yzerman made the semi-finals in his 3rd and 4th seasons. Sakic made it on a 105 point playoff team in his fifth.

Marcel Dionne finally made them in his fifth season — after he got traded.

I think Jack's drought is unprecedented for a player of his stature.

It's not that I want to move him, it's that I think he is emotionally gone.

Well, why is it rhetorical? You've ignored my statement - why move him before next season starts? I'm not sure you understand my position at all based on how much of my position is continually ignored. 

Is the trade return going to be better in season this year or at this year's draft, with Eichel having a down season hampered by injury, poor play, and Krueger, than it will be during next season or at next year's draft? If it is, at all, which I doubt, is that small difference enough to punt the chance his mood turns around (which is a complete guess by the way, that he's "emotionally gone") next season?

Why move him before next season? That is the question I am asking. If teams are lining up now, they will line up then. Surely Jack is a good enough player that we shouldn't rush trading him before we need to. I don't think "Jack is such a cancer that we have no chance of winning with him next season so we need to move him now" is much of a defendable position. 

Edited March 3, 2021 by Thorny

[Thorner]

12 hours ago, Curt said:

I do hear you.  I think I’m just feeling that the relationship may already be fatally broken.  I don’t mind Adams either.  I actually dont have any reason to think he wouldn’t do fine making a trade.

If you go into next season and halfway through, things aren’t going well, I think it’s much harder to negotiate then, because everyone can see that NMC deadline looming only a few months away.

Maybe they bring in a new coach, maybe, but I don’t think it’s a forgone conclusion, and I would be very surprised if they made a big change to upper management.

First bold - you have no reason to think he wouldn't do fine making that trade? Not the fact that those trades are ridiculously difficult to pull off no matter who is making them? But you have no reason to think it won't end up fine, for this Pegula led management group?

Second bold - it's the complete opposite - if teams see the looming NMC, they'll know they are likely out of the mix coming up, and will pony up their offers. I'm guessing you think teams will play hardball but they'd have no reason to - they'd lose out on Jack potentially and the teams that would stay in the running will still be there when the clause kicks in.

- - - 

The tide has turned so severely in the last week. It's gone from not wanting to trade Jack to actively looking for reasons to do it as soon as possible. There is *no reason* to move him now, especially with these theories being concocted solely on assumptions about how Jack must be feeling. Fix the issues (coach, anyone?) that we KNOW are issues, and see what Jack looks like next year. He's had like *18* games this year!! What Jack has brought to this team and would bring to this team again under a competent structure is not being adequately valued.

- - -

The odds of winning this trade are statistically unlikely on it's face. That needs to be the starting point when considering the overall situation. The only way it makes sense is if you have no other choice, ie Jack has irredeemably given up. There's no way we know that to be the case, and there's no way if he has checked out that it's not reasonably likely he starts singing a different tune if the tides shift next season. It's happened many times before. 

Just wait till next season. He's too valuable and it's too likely we'll lose the trade to not wait till next season, particularly when there's no apparent negative for waiting, anyways. The thread started with the idea we may need to move him before his NMC kicks in. That remains the case. A full year/year and a half before that? Fireable asset management. 

No one was saying Jack had proven he couldn't win heading into the season. In fact, you guys were saying the opposite. 18 games is not enough of a sample size to declare we need to move him one second before it's necessary. 

Edited March 3, 2021 by Thorny

[Thorner]

8 hours ago, Scottysabres said:

Listened to the Howard show this morning, they all agreed Jack is most likely gone this off season.

I tend to agree.

If Jack is gone AND Krueger is back, I'm not. Would be a complete spit in the face. 

Edited March 3, 2021 by Thorny

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Last Eichel Fan said:

First bold - you have no reason to think he wouldn't do fine making that trade? Not the fact that those trades are ridiculously difficult to pull off no matter who is making them? But you have no reason to think it won't end up fine, for this Pegula led management group?

Second bold - it's the complete opposite - if teams see the looming NMC, they'll know they are likely out of the mix coming up, and will pony up their offers. I'm guessing you think teams will play hardball but they'd have no reason to - they'd lose out on Jack potentially and the teams that would stay in the running will still be there when the clause kicks in.

- - - 

The tide has turned so severely in the last week. It's gone from not wanting to trade Jack to actively looking for reasons to do it as soon as possible. There is *no reason* to move him now, especially with these theories being concocted solely on assumptions about how Jack must be feeling. Fix the issues (coach, anyone?) that we KNOW are issues, and see what Jack looks like next year. He's had like *18* games this year!! What Jack has brought to this team and would bring to this team again under a competent structure is not being adequately valued.

- - -

The odds of winning this trade are statistically unlikely on it's face. That needs to be the starting point when considering the overall situation. The only way it makes sense is if you have no other choice, ie Jack has irredeemably given up. There's no way we know that to be the case, and there's no way if he has checked out that it's not reasonably likely he starts singing a different tune if the tides shift next season. It's happened many times before. 

Just wait till next season. He's too valuable and it's too likely we'll lose the trade to not wait till next season, particularly when there's no apparent negative for waiting, anyways. The thread started with the idea we may need to move him before his NMC kicks in. That remains the case. A full year/year and a half before that? Fireable asset management. 

No one was saying Jack had proven he couldn't win heading into the season. In fact, you guys were saying the opposite. 18 games is not enough of a sample size to declare we need to move him one second before it's necessary. 

(1) Maybe I should have said that I have no reason to believe that Adams wouldn’t do as well as anyone else making the trade.  I have no reason to believe that Adams is bad at negotiating trades.

(2) Maybe you are right.  Maybe having a looming NMC would not result in hardball negotiations.  

(3) I don’t want to trade Jack ASAP.  I want the team to play well and win, and for Jack to play well and be happy.  If that is with Jack on the team, great.  I just fear (and personally believe) that a trade is inevitable.  I believe that at some point, the team will have no choice.  

So, I don’t think they need to trade Jack immediately.  They can see how next season goes.  They could do it in the offseason.  They do have some time.

I just have a feeling of impending doom regarding the situation.  That’s why I started the thread.  I don’t think they can pull out of the relationship tailspin.  And that was before the two Flyers games this past weekend.  Responses really started changing after that.  If you go look at the first page of this thread, responses were mixed.  It did shift since the weekend.

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Curt said:

(1) Maybe I should have said that I have no reason to believe that Adams wouldn’t do as well as anyone else making the trade.  I have no reason to believe that Adams is bad at negotiating trades.

(2) Maybe you are right.  Maybe having a looming NMC would not result in hardball negotiations.  

(3) I don’t want to trade Jack ASAP.  I want the team to play well and win, and for Jack to play well and be happy.  If that is with Jack on the team, great.  I just fear (and personally believe) that a trade is inevitable.  I believe that at some point, the team will have no choice.  

So, I don’t think they need to trade Jack immediately.  They can see how next season goes.  They could do it in the offseason.  They do have some time.

I just have a feeling of impending doom regarding the situation.  That’s why I started the thread.  I don’t think they can pull out of the relationship tailspin.  And that was before the two Flyers games this past weekend.  Responses really started changing after that.  If you go look at the first page of this thread, responses were mixed.  It did shift since the weekend.

It's a good thread, I was in on/understanding your line of thinking from the beginning. 

The more I think about (2) the more I think the offers would actually, if anything, ramp up the closer it gets. Teams that know they aren't getting Jack after July 1 2022 may bidding war themselves into a frenzie. At the very lest, they can't risk low-balling the Sabres as those teams will in fact run out of time. 

 

[LGR4GM]

Trading Jack is a catch 22. Unless you are getting something absurd in response, you shouldn't do this. 

We are talking Zegras, Perreault, LaCombe, Comtois and then you take Henrique to make the cap work better. This is an offseason trade though. Even that might not be enough but it at least has interest. 

Basically if I am trading you Eichel I want your top prospect, your next 2 really good prospects, a good young NHL player, and something else. I need 5 pieces and I get to name them and if any of them are a no, there is no deal and I walk away. The power in any relationship lies with whoever cares least. 

[pi2000]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Trading Jack is a catch 22. Unless you are getting something absurd in response, you shouldn't do this. 

We are talking Zegras, Perreault, LaCombe, Comtois and then you take Henrique to make the cap work better. This is an offseason trade though. Even that might not be enough but it at least has interest. 

Basically if I am trading you Eichel I want your top prospect, your next 2 really good prospects, a good young NHL player, and something else. I need 5 pieces and I get to name them and if any of them are a no, there is no deal and I walk away. The power in any relationship lies with whoever cares least. 

I agree with this.

However, do you trust Sabres management to execute a trade of this magnitude?    I certainly don't.  

With the state of the franchise, with the financial issues causing them to trim down a large chunck of their front office positions, I'm afraid the primary motivation behind an Eichel trade would be to dump salary.... meaning the return will most likely be underwhelming.

[Trettioåtta]

I don't see the Sabres keeping Eichel into next season. Dude is already checked out. What is sad, is if he actually tried this season i think we would have had a shot. 

He had 6 points in his first 3 games. We lost and that broke his spirit - when we needed our captain to step up and lead this team, I think he just broke and quit. Since then he has 9 points in 15 games. 8 of his 15 points are secondary assists - he is often not the one creating the chances.

As for the point about a player of Jack's calibre not making the playoffs for so long - Jack is less than a point per game player across his career and plays mediocre (at best) defence. Crosby can pretty much play with two mops on his wing and he'll make them seem like serviceable NHL players.

I am not fully blaming Jack - it is unfortunate that Sam and Skinner seem to be unable to drive lines themselves. But I don't see how you really recover from this.

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, pi2000 said:

I agree with this.

However, do you trust Sabres management to execute a trade of this magnitude?    I certainly don't.  

With the state of the franchise, with the financial issues causing them to trim down a large chunck of their front office positions, I'm afraid the primary motivation behind an Eichel trade would be to dump salary.... meaning the return will most likely be underwhelming.

No. 

I wouldn't trade Eichel at this juncture because I don't think you can win that trade.