Jack Eichel: Trade rumors and speculation

[Thorner]

6 minutes ago, erickompositör72 said:

Yeah, I think people are forgetting watching a healthy Jack, and how, when he has the puck in the offensive zone, he just skates around and toys with the other team. They simply cannot take the puck from him. They just try to take all passing lanes away from him and keep him to the perimeter. Oh yeah, and they usually double team him. Oh yeah, and they still can't take the puck away from him.

Agree. I think people are forgetting that, by and large, last season we were all talking about how Eichel's season mirrored MacKinnon's breakout season to nearly a "T". 

[DarthEbriate]

7 hours ago, Hoss said:

This one has been the most frequently suggested offering and I still think it's a hell no for me. I'm not trading Eichel unless I'm getting at least two pieces I know can play in the NHL immediately. Turcotte and Byfield probably get an NHL shot next season but they could also be two absolute nothings and then we end up watching one of the most talented players in this franchise's history walk for zilch.

It also begs the question... why would LA give up all that high-potential, cheap talent to get when they have many more holes in the lineup? They just finished their tank. They have been working for years to get all the old (albeit Cup-winning) core and its reward contracts off the books. Dustin Brown, Jonathan Quick, and Drew Doughty are the only rough contracts remaining. Kopitar's is high, but fine. Adding Eichel makes them better, but it doesn't make them an immediate contender with all the other holes still to fill? Plus, LA's GM would never taken on another 10M salary without getting rid of Quick or Brown (or maybe Doughty).

It'd be like if we went back in time 5 years. We've just tanked. Our lineup is garbage, but we have Eichel and we have Sam. And along comes Tampa Bay and says: "Hey, we'll trade you 8M/year Stamkos who's been injured a bunch already, but boy oh boy, can he shoot the puck. You know, when he's healthy. We want Eichel, Reinhart, and 2 more picks."  But then go back to our post-tank garbage lineup. Put Stamkos on it. Great, it's better. Now take away $6M in additional salaries because it was near the cap, and then take away Jack and Sam. There are still gaping holes everywhere in the lineup. Stamkos and ROR are going to be good, but that's not a good roster, and worse -- what about the chunks of every season when Stamkos isn't on the ice?

[dudacek]

Accurate or not, there is a perception here and around the NHL that Eichel is and was a clear step above Byfield. Same with Reinhart and Turcotte.

[Scottysabres]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Your perspective is SEVERELY broken if you don't think Jack Eichel is one of the 10 best players to play for the Sabres. More recency bias, all because he looked like ***** while playing injured this year for a terrible coach. 

Yes and my contention has never been you can't move Eichel, just that if you do it must be for an overpayment to make sure you not only reproduce Jack but also add on to what he brings (80-90pts a season). 

Jack's had 1 season at 80+, another close, so he "may", and I stress "may" turn in some consistency on the score sheet at that level. But in 5 1/2 seasons he hasn't yet. And while your basing your statements on Eichel on point totals solely it appears, I'm looking at the larger impact on the franchise overall in my opinions of the subject.

Recency biased? If you mean Eichel's complete time on the roster, which is the most recent 5 year franchise stretch, then ya, of course. By your very standard, we shouldn't consider Eichel at all, to avoid, you know, "Recency Bias". (SMH)

[Marvin]

Let's see.

Dominik Hasek is a clear #1.

Gil Perreault should be a clear #2.

The next tier, based on my perception and statistics, include Bill Hajt, Jim Schoenfeld, Danny Gare, Mike Ramsey, Dale Hawerchuk, Pat LaFontaine, Alexander Mogilny, and Jack Eichel.  So he is at worst 10th on my list.

[LGR4GM]

10 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

Jack's had 1 season at 80+, another close, so he "may", and I stress "may" turn in some consistency on the score sheet at that level. But in 5 1/2 seasons he hasn't yet. And while your basing your statements on Eichel on point totals solely it appears, I'm looking at the larger impact on the franchise overall in my opinions of the subject.

Recency biased? If you mean Eichel's complete time on the roster, which is the most recent 5 year franchise stretch, then ya, of course. By your very standard, we shouldn't consider Eichel at all, to avoid, you know, "Recency Bias". (SMH)

Did not mention points. 

You would be hard pressed to name 10 former Sabres that you could successful argue were more talented then Eichel even adjusting for era. For example Drury and Briere, neither as good as Eichel. Teams they were on had more success but the players themselves did not have more talent. 

3 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

Let's see.

Dominik Hasek is a clear #1.

Gil Perreault should be a clear #2.

The next tier, based on my perception and statistics, include Bill Hajt, Jim Schoenfeld, Danny Gare, Mike Ramsey, Dale Hawerchuk, Pat LaFontaine, Alexander Mogilny, and Jack Eichel.  So he is at worst 10th on my list.

I think this is fair. Not saying Eichel is some all powerful most amazing Sabre ever but he's as talented as the players listed here when adjusted for era. 

[Scottysabres]

32 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Did not mention points. 

You would be hard pressed to name 10 former Sabres that you could successful argue were more talented then Eichel even adjusting for era. For example Drury and Briere, neither as good as Eichel. Teams they were on had more success but the players themselves did not have more talent.

And this is where you and I part ways. Drury was absolutely as talented as Eichel, imho. His ability to be positioned to acure the nickname "Captain Clutch" wasn't merely luck. It was on ice hockey acumen and vision. Something Eichel hasn't shown with remotely the same consistency, again, imo.

Perreault, Martin, Hasek, Andreychuk, Robert, Andreychuk, LaFontaine, Molginy, Hawerchuk, Drury, Miller, Vanek and #13, Eichel.

In that order, based on what I've witnessed over 45 years. Now, Eichel can over take some of them, but he hasn't shown it yet, imo.

[erickompositör72]

35 minutes ago, Scottysabres said:

And this is where you and I part ways. Drury was absolutely as talented as Eichel, imho. His ability to be positioned to acure the nickname "Captain Clutch" wasn't merely luck. It was on ice hockey acumen and vision. Something Eichel hasn't shown with remotely the same consistency, again, imo.

Perreault, Martin, Hasek, Andreychuk, Robert, Andreychuk, LaFontaine, Molginy, Hawerchuk, Drury, Miller, Vanek and #13, Eichel.

In that order, based on what I've witnessed over 45 years. Now, Eichel can over take some of them, but he hasn't shown it yet, imo.

Take those teams with Drury, replace him with Eichel, and you have a cup

[PerreaultForever]

17 hours ago, Hoss said:

This one has been the most frequently suggested offering and I still think it's a hell no for me. I'm not trading Eichel unless I'm getting at least two pieces I know can play in the NHL immediately. Turcotte and Byfield probably get an NHL shot next season but they could also be two absolute nothings and then we end up watching one of the most talented players in this franchise's history walk for zilch.

Really don't see how they could be nothings. A bunch of people here scoffed at Lafreniere and he looked pretty good against us yesterday and he's only beginning. These guys are going to be very good hockey players. 

[PerreaultForever]

8 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

You would be hard pressed to name 10 former Sabres that you could successful argue were more talented then Eichel even adjusting for era. For example Drury and Briere, neither as good as Eichel. Teams they were on had more success but the players themselves did not have more talent. 

Not as talented as Eichel but better leaders and thus we won more games with them. 

[Hoss]

10 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Really don't see how they could be nothings. A bunch of people here scoffed at Lafreniere and he looked pretty good against us yesterday and he's only beginning. These guys are going to be very good hockey players. 

Sure. But they’re still prospects regardless. Guys do bust. You’d rather be getting young players who have already produced at the NHL level if you’re trading a franchise center.

[dudacek]

58 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Really don't see how they could be nothings. A bunch of people here scoffed at Lafreniere and he looked pretty good against us yesterday and he's only beginning. These guys are going to be very good hockey players. 

I don't recall anyone scoffing at Lafreniere. On the contrary, what I remember is people saying that if we were making a deal with the Rangers, he would have to be targeted.

The point is if you are trading a proven elite player you'd prefer someone who's already proven a certain level of NHL ability, a guy who already is what Byfield could be, or a least further on his way.

 

55 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Not as talented as Eichel but better leaders surrounded by much better talent and thus we won more games with them. 

Fixed

[Pimlach]

10 hours ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

Let's see.

Dominik Hasek is a clear #1.

Gil Perreault should be a clear #2.

The next tier, based on my perception and statistics, include Bill Hajt, Jim Schoenfeld, Danny Gare, Mike Ramsey, Dale Hawerchuk, Pat LaFontaine, Alexander Mogilny, and Jack Eichel.  So he is at worst 10th on my list.

I don’t understand why Rick Martin never makes these lists of top tier Sabres.  Take away that knee injury and he is a 500 career goal scorer and in the HOF.  On top of that he played an honest game on defense too.  

[Marvin]

23 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

I don’t understand why Rick Martin never makes these lists of top tier Sabres.  Take away that knee injury and he is a 500 career goal scorer and in the HOF.  On top of that he played an honest game on defense too.  

I thought long and hard about Rico.  I think he's the top of the next tier.

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, Hoss said:

Sure. But they’re still prospects regardless. Guys do bust. You’d rather be getting young players who have already produced at the NHL level if you’re trading a franchise center.

Keep in mind there is a part B to this trade. You get 2 rookie contracts and you can dump that Eichel money on maybe a Nick Foligno as a new captain or some other good free agent. maybe two. 

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I don't recall anyone scoffing at Lafreniere. On the contrary, what I remember is people saying that if we were making a deal with the Rangers, he would have to be targeted.

The point is if you are trading a proven elite player you'd prefer someone who's already proven a certain level of NHL ability, a guy who already is what Byfield could be, or a least further on his way.

It was during the draft, not the trade thread. I remember several people predicting he would be a bust. But it doesn't matter.  The other part, see above. 

[#freejame]

Just now, PerreaultForever said:

Keep in mind there is a part B to this trade. You get 2 rookie contracts and you can dump that Eichel money on maybe a Nick Foligno as a new captain or some other good free agent. maybe two. 

I still think If you can get Byfield, Turcotte, Bjornfot and Kaliyev for Eichel you take it. If Landeskog somehow becomes a free agent you outbid everyone for him with that Eichel money. We're a better team if all that happens. 

[PerreaultForever]

Just now, #freejame said:

I still think If you can get Byfield, Turcotte, Bjornfot and Kaliyev for Eichel you take it. If Landeskog somehow becomes a free agent you outbid everyone for him with that Eichel money. We're a better team if all that happens. 

Don't think you get all four but yes, Landeskog would be another of the good FAs you can use the saved money on. Agreed. 

[#freejame]

Just now, PerreaultForever said:

Don't think you get all four but yes, Landeskog would be another of the good FAs you can use the saved money on. Agreed. 

I don't think I do the deal without all four. Maybe a first instead of Kaliyev but I need Bjornfot coming back. 

[Hoss]

6 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Keep in mind there is a part B to this trade. You get 2 rookie contracts and you can dump that Eichel money on maybe a Nick Foligno as a new captain or some other good free agent. maybe two. 

I'm not throwing money at Nick Foligno nor am I making him my captain. I'd be open to bringing him in but not for a whole lot of $$$. Landeskog is a guy I would absolutely throw money at to "replace" Eichel, though.

2 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Don't think you get all four but yes, Landeskog would be another of the good FAs you can use the saved money on. Agreed. 

I'm opening up to a deal with LA that looks like Byfield, Turcotte, Kempe and a pick. I do not think LA is giving us much more than Byfield.

[PerreaultForever]

3 hours ago, Hoss said:

I'm not throwing money at Nick Foligno nor am I making him my captain. I'd be open to bringing him in but not for a whole lot of $$$. Landeskog is a guy I would absolutely throw money at to "replace" Eichel, though.

I'm opening up to a deal with LA that looks like Byfield, Turcotte, Kempe and a pick. I do not think LA is giving us much more than Byfield.

imo Foligno is exactly what this team needs.

So I'm curious, assuming a trade for Jack is made who's your new captain? 

[Hoss]

1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said:

imo Foligno is exactly what this team needs.

So I'm curious, assuming a trade for Jack is made who's your new captain? 

Probably nobody. Maybe Samson if freeman will let him but again, probably nobody.

[Stoner]

2 hours ago, Hoss said:

Probably nobody. Maybe Samson if freeman will let him but again, probably nobody.

@nobody

[nfreeman]

6 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

imo Foligno is exactly what this team needs.

I'd agree with this 100% if we knew we'd get the Foligno of 2-3 years ago, and I kinda expect him to dig deep and bring it in the playoffs, but he turns 34 in October and his numbers indicate a decline.  They need someone who brings intensity and leadership AND still has enough legs and effectiveness to play in the top 6.

[dudacek]

20 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

I'd agree with this 100% if we knew we'd get the Foligno of 2-3 years ago, and I kinda expect him to dig deep and bring it in the playoffs, but he turns 34 in October and his numbers indicate a decline.  They need someone who brings intensity and leadership AND still has enough legs and effectiveness to play in the top 6.

IMO, this Foligno plan smells a lot like bringing in Brian Gionta again. You're going to get a good man, but temper your expectations on the player and expect to overpay on the contract.