Stoner Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 3 hours ago, Ogelthorpe said: John has a brand name pop problem. That and his attitude is why he has not been traded. I see you GIF.
darksabre Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 1 minute ago, Doohickie said: That would entail accepting a major risk and a ton of financial liability. I think they would have considered it if they weren't actively trying to trade him. But it seems pretty clear they're not messing around with trying to get him outta here so he's just kinda stuck right now.
Doohicksie Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 5 minutes ago, darksabre said: I think they would have considered it if they weren't actively trying to trade him. No I don't think so. The point is that Jack could end up paralyzed with the disc replacement (maybe unlikely, but more likely than with fusion surgery). I don't think any one on the Sabres staff wants that possibility on their conscience, not to mention the legal and financial considerations.
Popular Post K-9 Posted July 31, 2021 Popular Post Report Posted July 31, 2021 His agent’s statement aside, I’m convinced team Eichel has NO desire to get traded at this point. They are playing the long game until his NMC kicks in and he has more control over who he is traded to. What else explains why team Eichel has deliberately been sabotaging his trade value the entire time? He’s gonna get the surgery, sit out the year, collect his 10 mil, and wait it out. Kevyn Adams has flaws as a GM, but his handling of the Eichel trade situation isn’t one of them. I’m glad he’s sticking to his guns on this issue. F Jack Eichel. 10
klos1963 Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 10 minutes ago, K-9 said: His agent’s statement aside, I’m convinced team Eichel has NO desire to get traded at this point. They are playing the long game until his NMC kicks in and he has more control over who he is traded to. What else explains why team Eichel has deliberately been sabotaging his trade value the entire time? He’s gonna get the surgery, sit out the year, collect his 10 mil, and wait it out. Kevyn Adams has flaws as a GM, but his handling of the Eichel trade situation isn’t one of them. I’m glad he’s sticking to his guns on this issue. F Jack Eichel. We don't have to trade him next year either, for that matter. Especially with the no movement clause. "Jack, either add more teams to your wish list or stay here" 3
darksabre Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 10 minutes ago, Doohickie said: No I don't think so. The point is that Jack could end up paralyzed with the disc replacement (maybe unlikely, but more likely than with fusion surgery). I don't think any one on the Sabres staff wants that possibility on their conscience, not to mention the legal and financial considerations. I disagree. The number one concern is his return as an asset. I think if they weren't worried about getting anything from him other than his gameplay they'd let him have the surgery. If it goes wrong then you LTIR his contract off the books and wash your hands clean of the thing. "We did what was right for Jack to get him on the ice to help the team win" would be the messaging, and Jack's team would never dispute it. But they want to trade him. They want to get a return on the asset. So no surgery.
Curt Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 38 minutes ago, LGR4GM said: Since Krueger left the only failure is the Reinhart trade. Failure might be a strong word for the Reinhart trade but mediocre at best Mediocre seems like the right description. And for the Risto trade, I might go with stunningly good. Lol
Sabres Fan in NS Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 14 hours ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said: That does not mean the medical staff are incompetent. I do believe that the Sabre medical staff are giving good advice to not have the surgery. It is a last resort type of thing, IMO, and has (apparently) never been performed on a hockey player. I do not believe that the Sabre medical staff ever drifted from that position and the agent's are outright lying in the PR statement. I do not think that the statement deserves a response from the Sabres. 5
Curt Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 32 minutes ago, Doohickie said: I believe that once a player waives their NMC it is for the entire contract; you can't do it a year at a time (which if I have that right was a brilliant move to get Skinner to waive his to expose him to the expansion draft). I think maybe players can waive their NMCs for certain time periods. They can for specific events, such as expansion draft. Skinner waived his NMC for the expansion draft only. It’s still intact.
LGR4GM Posted July 31, 2021 Author Report Posted July 31, 2021 35 minutes ago, Digger said: But why? The information may be new to us as fans and media is having fun writing about this but I don't think there's anything new from a GM's perspective. I know that it may not be entirely legal and allowed under the CBA but I would think that GM's have talked unofficially to Eichel's agents. I would also think there's been some discussion from the GM's talking back and forth. The two procedures can be researched pretty easily. The risk hasn't changed today. I think the 31 thoughts podcast was read entirely from a script on this one. I don't see any new information for NHL gms. They know what the injury is, they have experts they can ask about the procedures. Jack's agent statement isn't a surprise or anything new to GMs because they already know Eichel wants the replacement surgery. 1
Doohicksie Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 3 minutes ago, Curt said: I think maybe players can waive their NMCs for certain time periods. They can for specific events, such as expansion draft. Skinner waived his NMC for the expansion draft only. It’s still intact. Hmmm.... I didn't know that.
Curt Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 13 minutes ago, darksabre said: I disagree. The number one concern is his return as an asset. I think if they weren't worried about getting anything from him other than his gameplay they'd let him have the surgery. If it goes wrong then you LTIR his contract off the books and wash your hands clean of the thing. "We did what was right for Jack to get him on the ice to help the team win" would be the messaging, and Jack's team would never dispute it. But they want to trade him. They want to get a return on the asset. So no surgery. So, the bolded is definitely spoken like someone who isn’t on the hook for $50M. If he has to go on LTIR, that’s not washing your hands of the situation. You still need to pay him.
LGR4GM Posted July 31, 2021 Author Report Posted July 31, 2021 1 minute ago, Curt said: So, the bolded is definitely spoken like someone who isn’t on the hook for $50M. If he has to go on LTIR, that’s not washing your hands of the situation. You still need to pay him. I think they NHL has insurance on those contracts that helps pay them but I honestly do not know and am speculating.
darksabre Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 2 minutes ago, Curt said: So, the bolded is definitely spoken like someone who isn’t on the hook for $50M. If he has to go on LTIR, that’s not washing your hands of the situation. You still need to pay him. Sure. In real dollars it's a lot. But that's always a risk with signing any player to a big fat deal.
Curt Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 Just now, LGR4GM said: I think they NHL has insurance on those contracts that helps pay them but I honestly do not know and am speculating. They may, likely do, but is an insurance company going fork over a $50M payment to compensate a team for the poor result of an “experimental” surgery? I feel like they would fight it for sure. 2
dudacek Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 (edited) Three points to the statement/podcast combo 1) add pressure to KA to pull the trigger 2) provide interested GMs with a first-hand argument in favour of Jack’s preferred surgery 3) give Jack an avenue to vent his frustration over not getting his way yet. The crux of this angle is this: Adams clearly wants to avoid a decision on the surgery by trading Jack first. Other GMs and Eichel’s camp know that. The surgery decision is leverage to create an additional pressure point: “Kevyn, you can’t avoid the surgery question forever, make the deal.” Edited July 31, 2021 by dudacek
Doohicksie Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 26 minutes ago, Curt said: They may, likely do, but is an insurance company going fork over a $50M payment to compensate a team for the poor result of an “experimental” surgery? I feel like they would fight it for sure. Not to mention if: 1) the Sabres approve the surgery, 2) he plays for the Sabres (or possibly gets traded to another team), 3) suffers a debilitating injury related to the surgery, the Eichel camp could then conceivably sue the club for approving the surgery in the first place. Because the CBA puts the teams in charge of medical treatment, they assume liability for the results of that treatment. 2
LGR4GM Posted July 31, 2021 Author Report Posted July 31, 2021 1 hour ago, LGR4GM said: He wanted to sign Ullmark and that was clearly a miscalculation. He is obviously banking on UPL to be ready next season. It is a weakness but not a mistake because Adams doesn't plan for this team to compete for the playoffs this season. I wanted to add to this. I think it is a mistake to not fix the goaltending but I don't think it matters this year to Adams plans moving forward. Hope that clarifies it. 2
Doohicksie Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 4 hours ago, Gatorman0519 said: The Sabres do hold serious entertainment value in the NHL. Unfortunately not because we are an elite winning franchise with star players. It’s the sheer circus show of dysfunction that is mesmerizing. It will make their rise from the ashes all the more impressive. And they will rise. 4 hours ago, LGR4GM said: They should send him to Europe tomorrow to go to the best artificial disc doctor there. Give him the surgery and tell him if it is a problem his contract is void. That's the hang up: If the team sends him, if they okay it, they can no longer void his contract. The only way they can void it is if he does it on his own... which is why he hasn't done that yet. 2
bob_sauve28 Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 1 hour ago, New Scotland (NS) said: I do believe that the Sabre medical staff are giving good advice to not have the surgery. It is a last resort type of thing, IMO, and has (apparently) never been performed on a hockey player. I do not believe that the Sabre medical staff ever drifted from that position and the agent's are outright lying in the PR statement. I do not think that the statement deserves a response from the Sabres. Oh, wow, I sort of took it at face value that they had. I mean that's pretty bad if they lied.
steveoath Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 Hypothetically, if jack does something that causes his contact to be void do we still hold his rights? Seems a sh1tty situation where he could conceivably void the contract and walk to whoever and we get no compensation. (Aside from being freed from from the cash commitment to him). #idontunderstandhowthisworks
PromoTheRobot Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 2 hours ago, Derrico said: I’ll believe it when I see it. KA has failed spectacularly on some of his past decisions to this point. Let me guess. Losing Borgen? 2 minutes ago, steveoath said: Hypothetically, if jack does something that causes his contact to be void do we still hold his rights? Seems a sh1tty situation where he could conceivably void the contract and walk to whoever and we get no compensation. (Aside from being freed from from the cash commitment to him). #idontunderstandhowthisworks We don't have to void it. We can choose to retain his rights.
bob_sauve28 Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 1 hour ago, Doohickie said: Not to mention if: 1) the Sabres approve the surgery, 2) he plays for the Sabres (or possibly gets traded to another team), 3) suffers a debilitating injury related to the surgery, the Eichel camp could then conceivably sue the club for approving the surgery in the first place. Because the CBA puts the teams in charge of medical treatment, they assume liability for the results of that treatment. This really is messed up. Can the Sabres just allow him to make his own decision? Assume the risk himself?
Sabres Fan in NS Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 Just now, bob_sauve28 said: Oh, wow, I sort of took it at face value that they had. I mean that's pretty bad if they lied. As @nfreeman (a lawyer, if I recall correctly) pointed out the statement did not say exactly what surgery the Sabre doctors had now said is needed. Seems that they were very cleaver not to say what surgery. Maybe the Sabres docs have said that a lesser proceedure may be warranted at this time if rest has not helped that much. Apparently, there is a less risky proceedure than what John wants. 1
PromoTheRobot Posted July 31, 2021 Report Posted July 31, 2021 Just now, bob_sauve28 said: This really is messed up. Can the Sabres just allow him to make his own decision? Assume the risk himself? You risk getting nothing for a vital asset. 1
Recommended Posts
Posted by SDS,
Three minute ADR overview animation
Recommended by SDS
5 reactions
Go to this post