Jack Eichel: Trade rumors and speculation

[Sabres Fan in NS]

22 minutes ago, Thorny said:

 

 

This place is like any other place ... you can run, but you cannot hide.

[Thorner]

17 hours ago, JohnC said:

If Adams follows the McBeane model of rebuilding with the players that fit what they want to accomplish and culling out the players that don't fit in with their blueprint for the type of roster they want to construct I believe that this roster can be remade in two to three years. Although the Sabres have and will shed some of their established core players the GM will not be starting from scratch. We do have a young core to build around. And we have a few good players in the AHL pipeline who are close to being ready i.e. a year or two away. 

One of the main reasons that the Bills have been able to make a rather rapid turnaround is because their drafting has been solid. For the most part there is nothing dazzling about their selections that have included a number of value picks in the mid-rounds. And if you review their free agent pickups they are players who fit in well. Other than Diggs I can't recall a high profile free agent acquisition or trade exchange. 

In general I like would Adams has done. He's had some tough luck that he couldn't control. Jack being injured and thus being devalued on the market hurt with bringing in some good pieces. And Ullmark upping his contract demands with us beyond his value created a big hole at the backstop position. To Adams credit although keeping Ullmark was important his value demands didn't match his talent level. That showed good discipline and judgment on the part of the GM.

The big issue is whether the owners will be willing to give this regime the time needed to do what is required to do to successfully rework this roster. 

 

To this point, you would classify Adams handling of the goaltender position the last two years "good"?

[Sabres Fan in NS]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

To this point, you would classify Adams handling of the goaltender position the last two years "good"?

I believe you are putting words into @JohnC's mouth.  He said KA showed good disipline in not going over what he wanted to pay for Ullie.

I don't think anyone could bring themselves to say that the goaltending has been handled well.  That said, everyone thought that heading into this offseason that an upgrade to Sutton was needed (I like Carter ... I like all goalies named Carter) and it could be argued that Anderson and Dell and (I have already forgotten ... are there others added?) ... are an upgrade on Sutton.

[Thorner]

8 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

I believe you are putting words into @JohnC's mouth.  He said KA showed good disipline in not going over what he wanted to pay for Ullie.

I don't think anyone could bring themselves to say that the goaltending has been handled well.  That said, everyone thought that heading into this offseason that an upgrade to Sutton was needed (I like Carter ... I like all goalies named Carter) and it could be argued that Anderson and Dell and (I have already forgotten ... are there others added?) ... are an upgrade on Sutton.

Negatory - I did not put words in anyone's mouth, I merely asked a question. I understand you don't see that outright here a lot so that adds to the confusion, but there's no agenda behind it I'm legitimately asking. 

If you read the totality of the post, there's a paragraph about how the poster liked what Adams has done, in general. "Tough luck" came up, in addition to conversation about the goalies, a "big hole" is mentioned at goalie and it ends with that situation, overall, being to Adams "credit". 

I agree with you re: what I bolded, but I think clarification on the question I asked is an interesting inquiry given the substance of the post. It's a conversation starter. 

 

Also, yes, the upgrade to Hutton was what was being talked about, but that was clearly under the assumption that Ullmark would be back. (MAYBE!) upgrading Hutton certainly isn't good enough anymore if the position, as a whole, got worse year over year. 

Edited August 23, 2021 by Thorny

[nucci]

52 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You are absolutely right. In addition to the big difference in the sports what the Bills have demonstrated is that when your top people are high quality they will in time put together a winning operation, assuming that there is little outside interference. The Bills have gone from being a laughingstock operation to a well-respected and admired organization. And that turnabout happened fairly quickly after the McDermott and Beane hiring. Staffing matters!

Yes it does. I have read that Beane has had heated discussions with the Pegula's but he seems to win and can back it up. I just don't understand how they can not hire a quality NHL GM

[Sabres Fan in NS]

1 minute ago, nucci said:

Yes it does. I have read that Beane has had heated discussions with the Pegula's but he seems to win and can back it up. I just don't understand how they can not hire a quality NHL GM

Maybe, just maybe, they got very lucky with Beane?  And coach McD?

[Sabres Fan in NS]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Negatory - I did not put words in anyone's mouth, I merely asked a question. I understand you don't see that outright here a lot so that adds to the confusion, but there's no agenda behind it I'm legitimately asking. 

If you read the totality of the post, there's a paragraph about how the poster liked what Adams has done, in general. "Tough luck" came up, in addition to conversation about the goalies, a "big hole" is mentioned at goalie and it ends with that situation, overall, being to Adams "credit". 

I agree with you re: what I bolded, but I think clarification on the question I asked is an interesting inquiry given the substance of the post. It's a conversation starter. 

 

Also, yes, the upgrade to Hutton was what was being talked about, but that was clearly under the assumption that Ullmark would be back. (MAYBE!) upgrading Hutton certainly isn't good enough anymore if the position, as a whole, got worse year over year. 

Cool.

I don't have time to read all the posts, or often all of a long post, so I often just comment on a part of a post and don't really know all the back conversation and context.  

I know it was a general sort of question, but I'm a bit bored, so i just tugged your chain a bit.

Anyway, the loss of Ullie has certainly compounded the goalie mishandling situation.  Bringing in Anderson, Dell ... while keeping Ullie is one thing, but without Ullie it's very different and really made a very bad situation terrible.

[Thorner]

10 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Maybe, just maybe, they got very lucky with Beane?  And coach McD?

I hope people realize how much better the Buffalo Sabres would have been if Jack Eichel touched the puck on every single offensive possession the Sabres had

[nucci]

17 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Maybe, just maybe, they got very lucky with Beane?  And coach McD?

I said that same thing on TBD and got blasted. Pegula's can do no wrong over there

[JohnC]

13 minutes ago, nucci said:

Yes it does. I have read that Beane has had heated discussions with the Pegula's but he seems to win and can back it up. I just don't understand how they can not hire a quality NHL GM

At this point the debate about whether Adams was a good hire is a moot point. He certainly wasn't the most experienced or equipped for that position. Regardless, he was the hire and he is in place. The ownership needs to allow him to do his job without much interference and then make a judgment on his performance. For the most part I liked what he has done. Granato was the right hire and our draft seemed to be sound. (Time will better tell.) I also liked the hiring of Karmanos as the assistant GM and the analytic person. What I like about Adams is that he is a collaborator and recognizes what he does and doesn't know. Overall, I believe he has handled the Jack situation. Because of his complicated health situation it has made it an even more challenging trade situation for him. He just needs the time and space to do his job. 

[Pimlach]

41 minutes ago, Thorny said:

 

 

Still clinging to the “Jack never said he wanted to leave” argument?   
 

Refer to all the conferences and quotes from Adams that are discussed in this thread.  The Eichel trade talks and the media leaks started when Adams got into power and prior to the neck injury disconnect.  Botterill’s firing and Ralph’s massive failure as a coach were the last straw for the old core.  Eichel liked RK, and was concerned about not keeping RK.  So we kept him and RK proved he is not an NHL coach.  
 

Adams started the mantra of “we want people who want to be here” right after his initial talks with the players and before the start of the last past season.  

Jack wants out.  All of the old core  - Reinhart, Risto, McCabe, and Ullmark, wanted out too.  None of them want to be part of another rebuild.  None of them said it to the media, maybe Risto did a bit, but none of them stayed.  
 

Watch what they do. Not what they say. 
 

 

[JohnC]

43 minutes ago, Thorny said:

To this point, you would classify Adams handling of the goaltender position the last two years "good"?

With respect to the Ullmark situation I absolutely believe that he handled it right. Giving him a 6 yr term and a higher average than he got from Boston would have been a mistake similar to the contract mistake that was made with Skinner. He placed a value on a player and had the judgment and fortitude to abide by his decision. 

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Still clinging to the “Jack never said he wanted to leave” argument?   
 

Refer to all the conferences and quotes from Adams that are discussed in this thread.  The Eichel trade talks and the media leaks started when Adams got into power and prior to the neck injury disconnect.  Botterill’s firing and Ralph’s massive failure as a coach were the last straw for the old core.  Eichel liked RK, and was concerned about not keeping RK.  So we kept him and RK proved he is not an NHL coach.  
 

Adams started the mantra of “we want people who want to be here” right after his initial talks with the players and before the start of the last past season.  

Jack wants out.  All of the old core  - Reinhart, Risto, McCabe, and Ullmark, wanted out too.  None of them want to be part of another rebuild.  None of them said it to the media, maybe Risto did a bit, but none of them stayed.  
 

Watch what they do. Not what they say. 
 

 

I agree Eichel wants out now. The timeframe you are linking that back to is purely speculation - something you took issue with.

That the rumours started when Adams took over is just as easily applied to a guess that Adams must have wanted him gone, as it is to the idea that Jack must have wanted out, at that point, because of the regime change. 

Certainly, no one on this board was talking about Jack wanting out with any kind of certainty before recent events. In fact, those claims were largely shot down. 

[Thorner]

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

With respect to the Ullmark situation I absolutely believe that he handled it right. Giving him a 6 yr term and a higher average than he got from Boston would have been a mistake similar to the contract mistake that was made with Skinner. He placed a value on a player and had the judgment and fortitude to abide by his decision. 

So if we enter into the season with the goalies we have, and they perform more less as common expectation would have you believe (it's not expected to be very good), would you still classify the handling of the Ullmark situation proper?

And if so, would you consider Adams' work on goaltending situation, as a whole, satisfactory?

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Still clinging to the “Jack never said he wanted to leave” argument?   
 

Refer to all the conferences and quotes from Adams that are discussed in this thread.  The Eichel trade talks and the media leaks started when Adams got into power and prior to the neck injury disconnect.  Botterill’s firing and Ralph’s massive failure as a coach were the last straw for the old core.  Eichel liked RK, and was concerned about not keeping RK.  So we kept him and RK proved he is not an NHL coach.  
 

Adams started the mantra of “we want people who want to be here” right after his initial talks with the players and before the start of the last past season.  

Jack wants out.  All of the old core  - Reinhart, Risto, McCabe, and Ullmark, wanted out too.  None of them want to be part of another rebuild.  None of them said it to the media, maybe Risto did a bit, but none of them stayed.  
 

Watch what they do. Not what they say. 
 

 

Jack wanted out just as Risto and Reinhart wanted out. And I have no criticisms for their sentiments. And it is understandable that McCabe wouldn't want to be part of another rebuild. As you noted the GM in his end of season interviews talked with all the players. After the interviews he repeatedly publicly stated that he wanted players that wanted to be here and be part of the rebuild. What's obvious is obvious. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

7 minutes ago, JohnC said:

With respect to the Ullmark situation I absolutely believe that he handled it right. Giving him a 6 yr term and a higher average than he got from Boston would have been a mistake similar to the contract mistake that was made with Skinner. He placed a value on a player and had the judgment and fortitude to abide by his decision. 

I find it diffficult to believe that the Sabres would not have matched the offer Ullie got from the Bruins.  It's not outlandish.  I think they likely would have made a slightly better offer to try to keep him if they knew what he was offered and Linus had given the Sabres a chance to match / beat the offer from the Bruins.  I find it doubtful that Ullie gave the Sabres that chance.

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

So if we enter into the season with the goalies we have, and they perform more less as common expectation would have you believe (it's not expected to be very good), would you still classify the handling of the Ullmark situation proper?

And if so, would you consider Adams' work on goaltending situation, as a whole, satisfactory?

As I stated before with respect to the Ullmark situation I wholeheartedly agree with how he handled it. Ullmark acted in his interest and the GM acted in what he believed to be his best interest. 

Am I satisfied with the goaltending situation as it stands? No. I'm hoping for additional moves. TBD!

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

As I stated before with respect to the Ullmark situation I wholeheartedly agree with how he handled it. Ullmark acted in his interest and the GM acted in what he believed to be his best interest. 

Am I satisfied with the goaltending situation as it stands? No. I'm hoping for additional moves. TBD!

Expertly parsed but I see you have no interest in answering my question ; ) 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

We have no way to know who wanted out and who was forced out.  No one has stated such.  It could be that the Sabres have decided to go in a completely different direction and decided to trade a number of players.

[Pimlach]

27 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Maybe, just maybe, they got very lucky with Beane?  And coach McD?

They got some initial help from Polian but they scared him away when they fired Marone and forced a rebuild of the coaching staff.  Polian wanted to consult on player personnel with Marone, not start over. 
 

They finally got rid of Brandon and they listened to the League sources and used the league tools and data bases.  They knew about McDermott before they hired him.  They hired Rex instead, at the behest of Brandon, not Whaley.  
 

After that they went back to McDermott.  McDermott did the first draft with Whaley, and he recommend Beane when Whaley was fired.  Some think Beane was always part of the vision but they had to wait for his contract to expire.  Beane was young and this was the likely the reason he was passed over in NC because he was well thought of there.  
 

Bottom line is the NFL offers resources for coach hires, and not only for minority coaches.  The NHL is an old boys club which Terry and Kim are not part of.  
 

 

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Like McDavid in Edmonton. 

He did lift the team, he just couldn't lift them enough. 

I really liked this post. Eichel is a wonderful talent, a game-changer. Generational? Probably not. A rare player for any given team to have? I'd say so.

He was just horribly miscast here in Buffalo, which is such a shame. Now, I acknowledge that the "casting" that occurred wasn't totally of the team's making. I reckon he wanted some of it, demanded some of it ... or just felt obliged to take it on.

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

I find it diffficult to believe that the Sabres would not have matched the offer Ullie got from the Bruins.  It's not outlandish.  I think they likely would have made a slightly better offer to try to keep him if they knew what he was offered and Linus had given the Sabres a chance to match / beat the offer from the Bruins.  I find it doubtful that Ullie gave the Sabres that chance.

As noted by Paul Hamilton on WGR he wanted a 6 term from Buffalo while Boston offered a 4 yr. term.  And he was asking for a higher average salary than what Boston offered him. I hated to see him leave but Adams made the right decision. 

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

Expertly parsed but I see you have no interest in answering my question ; ) 

Play your BS games with someone else. 

[Doohicksie]

22 minutes ago, JohnC said:

At this point the debate about whether Adams was a good hire is a moot point. He certainly wasn't the most experienced or equipped for that position. Regardless, he was the hire and he is in place. The ownership needs to allow him to do his job without much interference and then make a judgment on his performance. For the most part I liked what he has done. Granato was the right hire and our draft seemed to be sound. (Time will better tell.) I also liked the hiring of Karmanos as the assistant GM and the analytic person. What I like about Adams is that he is a collaborator and recognizes what he does and doesn't know. Overall, I believe he has handled the Jack situation. Because of his complicated health situation it has made it an even more challenging trade situation for him. He just needs the time and space to do his job. 

I think you could question some of the moves he made last off-season but it's reasonable to give him a pass since it appears that as the new guy he deferred to Krueger's wishes. If he was instructed in the beginning to keep Krueger on it would make sense to come in and at least try to cooperate. As the Krueger situation played out it seemed that the vision for the team shifted to that of Adams. So from that standpoint it's kind of like Adams is still in his first off-season.  (Last year he was essentially red shirted.)

Edited August 23, 2021 by Doohickie

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

I really liked this post. Eichel is a wonderful talent, a game-changer. Generational? Probably not. A rare player for any given team to have? I'd say so.

He was just horribly miscast here in Buffalo, which is such a shame. Now, I acknowledge that the "casting" that occurred wasn't totally of the team's making. I reckon he wanted some of it, demanded some of it ... or just felt obliged to take it on.

Arguably miscast in role, yes, and also miscast regarding fans' expectations for what one player can accomplish by themselves or with little help. The Sabres not only created an unachievable ask of Jack through their scorched earth tank and the decisions following, they told the fans to expect it as well. 

It's fine to see and point out fault in JE. But there's still a standard and expectation I see being applied that we won't get from any player, ever. 

[Hoss]

6 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

We have no way to know who wanted out and who was forced out.  No one has stated such.  It could be that the Sabres have decided to go in a completely different direction and decided to trade a number of players.

It’s a chicken or the egg situation but Samson, Jack and Risto all made it clear they wanted to be elsewhere.