Jack Eichel: Trade rumors and speculation

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, Digger said:

The speculation is that Vegas doesn't want to include Krebs because of the way Suzuki turned out and developed after the Pacioretty trade.  Might make sense on one level if they want to wait it out for Krebs to develop but I have to think that Vegas is still happy that they acquired Pacioretty.  He's played pretty well for them.  Deal seemed fair at the time but may swing in Montreal's favor more as the players age. 

Trading Krebs as part of the deal for Eichel, they are still getting the better player in Eichel in the deal.

Not to mention Pacciorety was 30 when he was traded, not 24.

[Eleven]

5 minutes ago, Digger said:

Trading Krebs as part of the deal for Eichel, they are still getting the better player in Eichel in the deal.

Yep.  Same as Lafreniere in New York.  Otherwise, Eichel can remain a Sabre.

[Thorner]

It does seem increasingly likely they've narrowed in on next year's draft for targeting the centre prospects we need, and are likely to forgo acquiring any of note while dealing away their two best this summer. I guess that means everyone's in agreement they can't draft by BPA next year, right? Have to abandon that strategy? It seems they'll have pigeonholed them into that avenue for addressing the pipeline depth in the crucial centre spot. 

I'm not sure if I am so opposed to the strategy because I think it's risky, or because of my bias against willingly writing off a season - which would be happening if we are targeting that draft for top of the line centre prospects, imo. The roster as has been constructed this offseason till now would support that theory. 

Not even getting this hypothetical prospect(s) in the the system for another year just distressingly bumps the timeline back further. I guess I'm just slow to resigning myself to that being the path. 

Edited August 9, 2021 by Thorny

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I would take that deal in a second.

Drysdale is a premier prospect and a RD, Comtois is 22 and already top 6 forward with edge and the pick will be a high one.
Henrique fills a need and helps the kids grow.

I’m not waiting around to see if Minnesota or Vegas offers up a centre because I doubt their extras are anywhere near an Anaheim 1st of Comtois.

I take three centres in the first round next year and ride Drysdale/Power/Dahlin for a decade.

The one advantage of this trade is that the Sabres will be getting three players who can play next season. That would be in contrast to the Risto and Samson deals where we basically got futures. Of course I would prefer to have Zegras as the centerpiece of an Anaheim deal but if it can't be executed we are still getting two young players in Drysdale and Comtois with plenty of upside who can grow with the team. Just because it isn't the best option doesn't mean that it still can't be a good option. 

[dudacek]

That Anaheim deal is so much better than the Vegas one:

In order of value for me in terms of how high a pick I trade for them in an average draft

Drysdale top five

Krebs top 10

Ducks 1st top 10 

Comtois top 20

Vegas first top 30

Elvenes top top 50

Smith top 50

Henrique top 100

[Thorner]

I think Krebs has more value to us than Drysdale because of need 

[Der Jaeger]

I take the Anaheim deal in a nanosecond.

Hard to think the Sabres are going to do well this season.  With Wright, Lambert, and Savoie all available, they can fill their center spot in the 2022 draft.

[Thorner]

We now have 2 prospective number 1 D in the system, and I'm not sure we have a single prospective 1C. Krebs at least has that upside. His projection is close enough to Drysdale's on a talent level that I'm valuing him more in a deal, personally. Dahlin is still Dahlin and that better be a likely path for Power if he's going first overall: Cozens and MIttelstadt need all the help they can get locking down our top 6 centre spots going forward. I don't know that we can just count on next year's draft and at the onset of a huge rebuild be the weakest at the most important skater position, what if we draft 5th? I don't think we can afford to cash all the sizeable assets we are cashing, all our biggest pieces and not return a single C of note. Doesn't seem smart. 

1 minute ago, Der Jaeger said:

I take the Anaheim deal in a nanosecond.

Hard to think the Sabres are going to do well this season.  With Wright, Lambert, and Savoie all available, they can fill their center spot in the 2022 draft.

Savoie is a sure thing, a year out from being drafted? What if we finished 2nd from the bottom and fall two spots in the lottery?

[Digger]

6 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I think Krebs has more value to us than Drysdale because of need 

I tend to agree with you.  I hate having to wait, hope to draft high and get a great center prospect and then wait for them to develop.

But we are blind in the process right now in not knowing what players are really being offered in a trade.  I will say that I think Vegas needs Eichel more right NOW than Anaheim does.

[Thorner]

I like how we need to consider attitude and chemistry when bringing in players and not just talent level, but organizational, positional need is just like mehhhhhhh lol

[JohnC]

7 minutes ago, dudacek said:

That Anaheim deal is so much better than the Vegas one:

In order of value for me in terms of how high a pick I trade for them in an average draft

Drysdale top five

Krebs top 10

Ducks 1st top 10 

Comtois top 20

Vegas first top 30

Elvenes top top 50

Smith top 50

Henrique top 100

If Tuch was included in a Vegas deal with Krebs I would take a Vegas deal over the Anaheim deal. If Krebs wasn't included in the Vegas deal I would be more than happy with your proposed Anaheim deal that included Drysdale and Comtois. When you are rebuilding and are able to add pieces then you do so even if the positions are not being filled in the sequence you preferably want. The mentality should be to add as much talent as you can and then sort it out. 

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, Thorny said:

 

Savoie is a sure thing, a year out from being drafted? What if we finished 2nd from the bottom and fall two spots in the lottery?

Lambert, Cooley, Gaucher, or even and I ***** you not, Jack Hughes. 

Drafting 4th overall in this draft you are still getting a center in all likelihood. There's a couple defenders and a couple of wingers that are going to be in that top 5 conversation. It's gonna be a crazy draft. 

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Lambert, Cooley, Gaucher, or even and I ***** you not, Jack Hughes. 

So is the working theory that when gutting your roster at a particular position in a given offseason, like this one when we are trading our top 2 centres, it's ok for that particular position to go unaddressed in any of the deals, and to just signal the next draft, a year away, as the chosen path to address the hole? We allow them a full year?  Actually asking.

I just find it funny that we've been saying all along a top level C prospect coming back is a baseline necessity and we've talked ourselves down to something much less. At least much less according the the parameters we initially set, where we said addressing C was important. 

Have we just shifted away from that really being a necessity, or have we talked ourselves into that being ok? Just trying to wrap my mind around it. 

[Thorner]

8 minutes ago, JohnC said:

If Tuch was included in a Vegas deal with Krebs I would take a Vegas deal over the Anaheim deal. If Krebs wasn't included in the Vegas deal I would be more than happy with your proposed Anaheim deal that included Drysdale and Comtois. When you are rebuilding and are able to add pieces then you do so even if the positions are not being filled in the sequence you preferably want. The mentality should be to add as much talent as you can and then sort it out. 

You don't "sort it out", though. If you can get a top level D prospect back in a deal but not a top level C prospect, it's probably an indication what is more valued league wide. If you can't trade your franchise C for a deal that includes a top level C prospect, you aren't getting one in any other way than the draft. Your biggest piece already proved insufficient. So, there'd be nothing to sort out: the plan would be next year's draft, or the following

Edited August 9, 2021 by Thorny

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

So is the working theory that when gutting your roster at a particular position in a given offseason, like this one when we are trading our top 2 centres, it's ok for that particular position to go unaddressed in any of the deals, and to just signal the next draft, a year away, as the chosen path to address the hole? We allow them a full year?  Actually asking.

I just find it funny that we've been saying all along a top level C prospect coming back is a baseline necessity and we've talked ourselves down to something much less. At least much less according the the parameters we initially set, where we said addressing C was important. 

Have we just shifted away from that really being a necessity, or have we talked ourselves into that being ok? Just trying to wrap my mind around it. 

Is it okay? no. 

Is it what they appear to be doing, yes. They are going to add another 1st round pick in 2022 and draft probably 3 centers in the first round. 

We are in in year 1 of a 3 year rebuild I think. It sucks but maybe they will finally do this correctly. 

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

You don't "sort it out", though. If you can get a top level D prospect back in a deal but not a top level C prospect, it's probably an indication what is more valued league wide. If you can't trade your franchise C for a deal that includes a top level C prospect, you aren't getting one in any other way than the draft. Your biggest piece already proved insufficient. So, there'd be nothing to sort out: the plan would be next year's draft, or the following

As long as the defender is not left handed. 

[jahnyc]

There is no way the Ducks are offering all of that for Eichel.  I just don't see it.

[thewookie1]

As I told Chad, if the 2022 pick is Top 10 protected I would insist on Perrault being added.

I need a C prospect coming back in any Eichel trade; Drysdale + Comtois are great pieces but I'd still need a C prospect for at minimum, organizational depth.

[JohnC]

6 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I like how we need to consider attitude and chemistry when bringing in players and not just talent level, but organizational, positional need is just like mehhhhhhh lol

Most people agree with you regarding the priority of the center position for the Sabres. But if a deal isn't there to be made in acquiring players such as Krebs and Zegras then you go to your next best options. Would I prefer Zegras over Drysdale in an Anaheim deal? Absolutely yes. But if Anaheim or Vegas is not going to budge in yielding one of their young centers then adding a prospective top one or two pairing defenseman such as Drysdale and a second line forward in Comtois would be a good fallback position. If one is realistic in accepting the reality that it is going to take another year or two to assemble enough talent for this roster to be a serious team then adding talent in general and then later sorting out the talent on hand is the right approach to take. 

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Is it okay? no. 

Is it what they appear to be doing, yes. They are going to add another 1st round pick in 2022 and draft probably 3 centers in the first round. 

We are in in year 1 of a 3 year rebuild I think. It sucks but maybe they will finally do this correctly. 

As long as the defender is not left handed. 

Drysdale having that going for him would be a huge plus, definitely. Part of the allure of having both a Dahlin and Power though, is it gives us the opportunity to take advantage of them in our top 4: they may not need an all-star partner to find success, in fact they shouldn't. Having a guy like Drysdale makes what may be a strength even stronger, and that would be great, but I'd guess considering what we have at C in the system that the high level C prospect if attainable has larger runway to provide value. 

[LGR4GM]

Just now, Thorny said:

Drysdale having that going for him would be a huge plus, definitely. Part of the allure of having both a Dahlin and Power though, is it gives us the opportunity to take advantage of them in our top 4: they may not need an all-star partner to find success, in fact they shouldn't. Having a guy like Drysdale makes what may be a strength even stronger, and that would be great, but I'd guess considering what we have at C in the system that the high level C prospect if attainable has larger runway to provide value. 

Cozens is still a high level C prospects. 

you could do

Dahlin - Jokiharju

Power - Drysdale

[Thorner]

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Most people agree with you regarding the priority of the center position for the Sabres. But if a deal isn't there to be made in acquiring players such as Krebs and Zegras then you go to your next best options. Would I prefer Zegras over Drysdale in an Anaheim deal? Absolutely yes. But if Anaheim or Vegas is not going to budge in yielding one of their young centers then adding a prospective top one or two pairing defenseman such as Drysdale and a second line forward in Comtois would be a good fallback position. If one is realistic in accepting the reality that it is going to take another year or two to assemble enough talent for this roster to be a serious team then adding talent in general and then later sorting out the talent on hand is the right approach to take. 

Well there's the hitch. I'm not realistic and pretending we still aren't doing this.

Edited August 9, 2021 by Thorny
I should add, it taking that long to assemble the team we want is because of the chosen path

[JohnC]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

You don't "sort it out", though. If you can get a top level D prospect back in a deal but not a top level C prospect, it's probably an indication what is more valued league wide. If you can't trade your franchise C for a deal that includes a top level C prospect, you aren't getting one in any other way than the draft. Your biggest piece already proved insufficient. So, there'd be nothing to sort out: the plan would be next year's draft, or the following

Of course you can sort out the talent on hand if you accept the obvious reality that this is more than a one year rebuild. Wanting to do something is not the same as being able to do something. There are a variety of ways to build a roster. If you get Drysdale and include Power to the mix in another year and add them to what you already have with Dahlin and Joki then you are assembling a top tier blueline. What's the matter with that? 

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Brawndo said:

 

How about that return from Anaheim 

Drysdale, Comtois, Henrique and a 1st

I would probably just pull that trigger, depending on how discussions with other teams had gone so far.  Drysdale is a great prospect and that 1st probably wouldn’t be too late.

[Thorner]

7 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Cozens is still a high level C prospects. 

you could do

Dahlin - Jokiharju

Power - Drysdale

He is but I say it's less likely than 50 percent he fills a 1C spot to the level we'd want - it's certainly within range but I think solid 2C is a smarter bet. I'd feel much more sturdy on a bet of Cozens and Krebs than just Cozens. We just don't have anything coming at C right now to back Casey and Mittelstadt in their pursuit of competently filling the top 6 and betting on both to do it seems folly. 

Edited August 9, 2021 by Thorny

[Randall Flagg]

If Krebs isn't available, Vegas' number should be permanently blocked.

If no centers like Krebs are available, and drysdale is, you could turn Drysdale into a Krebs level prospect fairly easily at some point in the future, or keep him because he's sick.

If the best piece we can get for Jack is really truly Comtois or Perreault-like prospect, you go down with the ship in epic defiance, flipping off everyone along the way, and keep Jack indefinitely, and see what happens. You can get that ***** at deadline deals for mediocre players for chrissake. 

Edited August 9, 2021 by Randall Flagg