Jack Eichel: Trade rumors and speculation

[klos1963]

24 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

I know but if he is disgruntled and wants out, what is the alternative.  If you hold on him and showcase him the first month of the season, who has room in season for a $10 mil cap hit?  Also, what if he becomes a negative force in the locker room?

Make the best deal you can this summer and move on.  Futures, conditional picks, roster players, short term cap dumps...have to hope that Adams and Karmanos can sort through the offers, and take the one that they believe will work out the best. 🤞

You ungruntle him.  Nobody would play for this team if they didn't have to. He has 5 years left on his deal. We do have some leverage.

[Thorner]

1 hour ago, LabattBlue said:

I know but if he is disgruntled and wants out, what is the alternative.  If you hold on him and showcase him the first month of the season, who has room in season for a $10 mil cap hit?  Also, what if he becomes a negative force in the locker room?

Make the best deal you can this summer and move on.  Futures, conditional picks, roster players, short term cap dumps...have to hope that Adams and Karmanos can sort through the offers, and take the one that they believe will work out the best. 🤞

Honestly, I know most don't agree, but I don't see it as very likely Eichel doesn't return to form, with the top notch treatment he'll receive, and the age he currently is. I think enough teams will be heavily interested (please people just watch some highlights from the 19-20 season before the covid shutdown and let your heart remember how jaw-dropping this guy was becoming), reasonably convinced enough in his prognosis that with the bidding battle that ensues, the injury concern will be more less forgone. Truth be told, even a trade proposal featuring 3OA does not seem to me to be a deal a team would make if they had serious concerns. Regardless of my feelings of that asset's value relative to Jack Eichel, it has huge value, which we very rarely see move in trades. It's saying something that the deal could include that, plus more. 

If we land a Zegras, because Adams holds firm (admittedly, what I am hearing on this front in pretty positive), I'd be inclined to say we got full value. I've said all along these deals usually never seem to work out for the team trading the best player. The market value of the return always has a built in "dissatisfied superstar who wants out" tax. 

[Marvin]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

I *still* think a true hockey trade represents the reasonable compromise between the "he has to go" group and the "I don't want to rebuild for another 3 years" crew. It's just something the league has decided it doesn't really do with big name players very often. 

 

1 hour ago, LabattBlue said:

I wonder if an acceptable package would be a top prospect, and then multiple conditional 1st round picks based on how many games Eichel plays in the next season or two. 
 

That way both teams are protected.  

My feeling has been that the trade of Jack Eichel will be somewhere between these two.  A couple of conditional picks for 2022-3 plus a blend of good prospects, current mid-range NHLers, and a quasi cap-dump (more useful to us in the short term and overpaid).  So a bit of hockey trade and a bit of rebuild with hedged bets on both sides.

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

 

My feeling has been that the trade of Jack Eichel will be somewhere between these two.  A couple of conditional picks for 2022-3 plus a blend of good prospects, current mid-range NHLers, and a quasi cap-dump (more useful to us in the short term and overpaid).  So a bit of hockey trade and a bit of rebuild with hedged bets on both sides.

I still don't think this is what Adams is targeting. Maybe with Reinhart. 

[Marvin]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I still don't think this is what Adams is targeting. Maybe with Reinhart. 

I figure that they would be part of the other side unloading a bit of cap.

[Thorner]

5 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

I figure that they would be part of the other side unloading a bit of cap.

I guess maybe I am wanting more out of "mid range". Any player that's a dump would I'd guess to be unlikely to live to to my expectation for the type of "now" players I'd want in an Eichel deal. I've kinda just assumed at this point it's futures and will analyze the deal based on its merits in that form. Already established I don't like the pathway if that's the one Adams has chosen, but no sense viewing every move he makes under the prism of that mindset. 

Edited July 3, 2021 by Thorny

[SabresVet]

2 hours ago, klos1963 said:

If we trade for futures, who is in the next group of current players that gets fed up with rebuilding and wants out in 2 or 3 years.

The only exception might be that they have to take on some contract unless they eat some of Jack's contract in the deal.  Especially with his injury concerns.  

It's going to be hard accepting he and maybe Reinhart are gone.  And no doubt by now, word has traveled that Buffalo isn't a destination to win.  

That likely means it's a rebuild with a few long term pieces in-place.  Adams has a lot to prove that he can, with youth, put together a solid roster and do this without Eichel and Reinhart.  

[klos1963]

2 hours ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

 

My feeling has been that the trade of Jack Eichel will be somewhere between these two.  A couple of conditional picks for 2022-3 plus a blend of good prospects, current mid-range NHLers, and a quasi cap-dump (more useful to us in the short term and overpaid).  So a bit of hockey trade and a bit of rebuild with hedged bets on both sides.

That sounds horrible for us. Conditional picks could be ones that aren't favorable to us, mid range NHLers- dime a dozen, don't need to trade your franchise player for them and a cap dump sounds lousy. I doubt this happens, but I don't expect anything to exciting for us. This will be a bad trade with horrible repercussions .

[klos1963]

26 minutes ago, SabresVet said:

The only exception might be that they have to take on some contract unless they eat some of Jack's contract in the deal.  Especially with his injury concerns.  

It's going to be hard accepting he and maybe Reinhart are gone.  And no doubt by now, word has traveled that Buffalo isn't a destination to win.  

That likely means it's a rebuild with a few long term pieces in-place.  Adams has a lot to prove that he can, with youth, put together a solid roster and do this without Eichel and Reinhart.  

And without a goalie. We don't have one.

On top of putting together a solid roster, we still have to worry about the rest of the league, most of the teams in our division are very well run, they aren't going anywhere and they are in better position to acquire top players than we are or likely will be. Trading Eichel will be a franchise killing mistake.

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, klos1963 said:

And without a goalie. We don't have one.

On top of putting together a solid roster, we still have to worry about the rest of the league, most of the teams in our division are very well run, they aren't going anywhere and they are in better position to acquire top players than we are or likely will be. Trading Eichel will be a franchise killing mistake.

I want you to review the cap space for the better teams in our division. 

You don't build teams in free agency. 

[klos1963]

18 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I want you to review the cap space for the better teams in our division. 

You don't build teams in free agency. 

You don't need to build the entire team through free agency, but if you think we are going to draft our way to beat out Tampa, Toronto.... in our division, not to mention the rest of the conference, you're wrong. Also, you acquire good players via trade, and unless you're trading for someone with a long term deal in place don't expect to re-sign them.

If we trade our 2 top players and scramble for a goalie, we will likely battle for the top pick again, players won't want to come or stay here.

And we'll have a lot of cap space if we move Eichel and Reinhart, what good will that do us?

Edited July 4, 2021 by klos1963

[GASabresIUFAN]

16 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I want you to review the cap space for the better teams in our division. 

You don't build teams in free agency. 

You also don't build them by acquiring other peoples problems (Kane, Bogo, Lehner etc....)  Draft, develop and build from within and then and only then acquire missing pieces.

  

 

[GASabresIUFAN]

Just now, klos1963 said:

You don't need to build the entire team through free agency, but if you think we are going to draft our way to beat out Tampa, Toronto.... in our division, not to mention the rest of the division, you're wrong. Also, you acquire good players via trade, and unless you're trading for someone with a long term deal in place don't expect to re-sign them.

If we trade our 2 top players and scramble for a goalie, we will likely battle for the top pick again, players won't want to come or stay here.

And we'll have a lot of cap space if we move Eichel and Reinhart, what good will that do us?

Nothing.

Honestly we need to convince one of Jack or Sam to stay long-term.  I'm leaning toward Sam, but regardless imho one needs to stay.  Jack is easier.  He has 5 years left on his deal and we don't have to trade him.  

Anyone have any idea what the recovery time is for someone with the surgery Jack wants?

[Brawndo]

 

[jad1]

On 7/2/2021 at 8:35 PM, triumph_communes said:

Just like Buffalo was going to get out of the basement adding Hall

 

Theres a lot more to hockey than a talented player. 

Just like Buffalo was going to get out of the basement adding Hall

 

Theres a lot more to hockey than a talented player.  The Oilers have the very best and a great second punch and look at them. 

Just like Buffalo was going to get out of the basement adding Hall

 

Theres a lot more to hockey than a talented player.  The Oilers have the very best and a great second punch and look at them. 

Just like Buffalo was going to get out of the basement adding Hall

 

Theres a lot more to hockey than a talented player.  The Oilers have the very best and a great second punch and look at them. 

Just like Buffalo was going to get out of the basement adding Hall

 

Theres a lot more to hockey than a talented player.  The Oilers have the very best and a great second punch and look at them. 

Just like Buffalo was going to get out of the basement adding Hall

 

Theres a lot more to hockey than a talented player.  The Oilers have the very best and a great second punch and look at them. 

Just like Buffalo was going to get out of the basement adding Hall

 

Theres a lot more to hockey than a talented player.  The Oilers have the very best and a great second punch and look at them. 

Just like Buffalo was going to get out of the basement adding Hall

 

Theres a lot more to hockey than a talented player.  The Oilers have the very best and a great second punch and look at them. 

Gotcha time-loop.😄

The Islanders already have a talented team.  Adding Tavaras to that group would help them get by the Lightning, who win by stockpiling talent.

I know that's a bit foreign and shocking to us Sabres fans, who've grown accustomed to watching the clowns in charge the last decade try to use the addition by subtraction method to build a winner.

We'll win by getting rid of Miller.  We'll win by getting rid of Vanek.  We'll win by getting rid of Kane.  We'll win by getting rid of O'Reilly.  Never worked.  Win totals didn't improve, and neither did the locker room.

Now it's we'll win if we get rid of Eichel.  We'll win if we get rid of Reinhart.  We'll win if we get rid of Ristolainen.

In a couple of seasons, Dahlin, Cozens, and Mittlestadt will be the culprits.

It's always the same, looking for the perfect player in a imperfect world.

Maybe someday the Sabres will hire a GM who is just as interested in building a team as he is in tearing it apart.

The Buffalo Sabres motto has been the future is 3 years away every season for the last 10 years.

 

 

[I-90 W]

2 hours ago, klos1963 said:

And without a goalie. We don't have one.

On top of putting together a solid roster, we still have to worry about the rest of the league, most of the teams in our division are very well run, they aren't going anywhere and they are in better position to acquire top players than we are or likely will be. Trading Eichel will be a franchise killing mistake.

Honestly though I can’t see how the franchise could be any more dead than it already is. 

[klos1963]

31 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

Honestly though I can’t see how the franchise could be any more dead than it already is. 

Watch

[LGR4GM]

59 minutes ago, klos1963 said:

You don't need to build the entire team through free agency, but if you think we are going to draft our way to beat out Tampa, Toronto.... in our division, not to mention the rest of the conference, you're wrong. Also, you acquire good players via trade, and unless you're trading for someone with a long term deal in place don't expect to re-sign them.

If we trade our 2 top players and scramble for a goalie, we will likely battle for the top pick again, players won't want to come or stay here.

And we'll have a lot of cap space if we move Eichel and Reinhart, what good will that do us?

K, I don't agree with you. The entire no one wants to be here thing is just overplayed.

[Marvin]

1 hour ago, jad1 said:

I know that's a bit foreign and shocking to us Sabres fans, who've grown accustomed to watching the clowns in charge the last decade try to use the addition by subtraction method to build a winner.

We'll win by getting rid of Miller.  We'll win by getting rid of Vanek.  We'll win by getting rid of Kane.  We'll win by getting rid of O'Reilly.  Never worked.  Win totals didn't improve, and neither did the locker room.

Now it's we'll win if we get rid of Eichel.  We'll win if we get rid of Reinhart.  We'll win if we get rid of Ristolainen.

Getting rid of Miller and Vanek was so that we could get into the mindset and habit of losing.  It was subtraction by subtraction.

We then exacerbated the problem by wasting capital to try and take short cuts.  We failed to build depth.  We failed to find quality depth.  The main parts were talented but ill-fitting. 

We then added insult to injury by unnecessarily resetting.  We again failed to find quality depth while starting to build franchise capital, so tried "addition by subtraction" from where we had a comparative strength at the time (but not real, excess strength) -- which was as unsuccessful as you indicate.

This time, the players want out.  This is recognised as painful reality by most.  Only a few people believe that unloading The Tank Three is addition by subtraction.  Most of us recognise their trades as the negatives that they are and as the necessities that they are.

[Andrew Amerk]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

K, I don't agree with you. The entire no one wants to be here thing is just overplayed.

No one wants to come here, unless there’s an overpayment. 

[nucci]

I can't see any positives for this franchise if they trade Eichel

[freester]

5 minutes ago, nucci said:

I can't see any positives for this franchise if they trade Eichel

Unless they get an incredible return and Eichel never recovers fully. This is highly unlikely and more likely this will be another ROR trade with a garbage return. 

[LGR4GM]

8 hours ago, Andrew Amerk said:

No one wants to come here, unless there’s an overpayment. 

This just isn't true and I'm just tired of hearing it spoken like gospel. 

[PromoTheRobot]

 

 

[JohnC]

22 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

This just isn't true and I'm just tired of hearing it spoken like gospel. 

What is true is that this organization is not recognized for its competency and stability. That surely is a disqualifying factor for a segment of the players on the market and players with NMC. This franchise's maligned reputation is well deserved. But to put things in perspective a lot of players don't want to go to many locations for a variety of reasons. Some players don't want to play out west while some players don't want to play north of the border. The NY area teams may appeal to some players while others have no interest to play in that high cost and densely populated areas. 

As you point out the misconception that Buffalo is an undesirable destination is an exaggerated notion. In fact, if Buffalo can regain its footing there should be a lot of appeal because its location is close to where a lot of players reside just north of the border. And it shouldn't be forgotten that this hockey market has the potential to be an vibrant hockey market once the franchise reestablishes its credibility.