Jack Eichel: Trade rumors and speculation

[steveoath]

18 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Over 300 pages 😄

That's me out of the sweepstakes then.

[Pimlach]

9 hours ago, klos1963 said:

Pretty sure there will be multiple teams interested in Eichel that he wouldn't mind going to. If he is healthy and Adams wants to trade him, I really don't see the NMC as a huge issue. He'll be easy to trade if he's back to his normal skill level, and he if really wants to leave, he won't hinder a trade.

I hate to agree with you on this, but you are correct. But I still don't see a trade helping us that much and it will probably hurt us.

You hate to agree with me?   If a trade doesn’t help us then you don’t make it.   

[Pimlach]

4 hours ago, sabresparaavida said:

Theoretical: Jack ends up getting surgery and is out the season. The team plays well, but the goaltending lets us down and we finished around the bottom of the league, add one of the top 3 forward prospects, then actually get a starting caliber goalie on the team. Jack agrees to give it a shot and we have mitts and Cozens, proven top 6 players at this point, R2 playing a solid 3C, Quinn playing well after he comes up partway through, Thompson and asplund playing like good top 6ers, Skinner getting some of his game back with granato, and a full pipeline, along with power, Dahlin, and joki rounding most of a excellent top 4, with a deep backend on the left side. All this along with a brinks truck worth of cap space to add to our team. 

Eichel agrees to give it a shot and they  contend for playoffs the next year, and then go deep the year after with more development.

 

[JohnC]

17 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

You hate to agree with me?   If a trade doesn’t help us then you don’t make it.   

On that we agree. 

[Pimlach]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

Everything you say is about the past. What if the situation changes and there is a changing of attitude from the player and the organization? Those who act as if all the fault of this deteriorated relationship is due to the player are not accounting for the half generation of dysfunction coming from this befuddled organization. How could it not be understood why player/s would want to escape such a losing and chaotic situation?

What I object to is this mischaracterization of Jack as if he is a bad guy and a cancer in the room. Nothing is further from the truth. He gets along with his teammates. What you haven't heard during this extended interlude is any of his teammates anonymously criticizing him. That is telling. Has he been the best captain? No. But there is a legitimate question as to why a young player should have been bestowed with that responsibility when he wasn't ready for it. Again, another one of the organization's long list of mistakes. 

It is more likely than not that when he gets healthy he will be dealt. And if dealt it would be a blunder to trade him unless there is a maximum return  The point I'm making is that it would be wise to keep the retention option open. 

Sure, KA will retain him if he can’t get reasonable value. No one wants to give him away for nothing.  KA should not take responsibility for the past, he was not part of it, but Eichel was.  
 

That bit about his influence in the locker room and being a cancer is out there.  You may think it is a mischaracterization but it’s out there somehow.  

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

Sure, KA will retain him if he can’t get reasonable value. No one wants to give him away for nothing.  KA should not take responsibility for the past, he was not part of it, but Eichel was.  
 

That bit about his influence in the locker room and being a cancer is out there.  You may think it is a mischaracterization but it’s out there somehow.  

Just because it is out there doesn't mean that it is true. The best player on the team is a competitive person who desperately wants to win. There is no doubt that he has exhibited his frustration with this long-term franchise malaise. Do you think that he was the only player exasperated with the organizational dysfunction and constant losing? So were Reinhart, Risto and unnamed other players. Reinhart was dealt because of his impending UFA status and his refusal to contractually to commit to the team. So trading him made sense. But Jack is in a different situation in that he is contractually locked up for the long-term. As poisonous as the situation may seem now there is plenty of time to see if this relationship can be salvaged. 

Don't misconstrue my position on Jack. If the organization can make a bonanza deal for him I would be all for it. But if not, then wait until he heals and see exactly where things stand at that later point. 

[klos1963]

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

You hate to agree with me?   If a trade doesn’t help us then you don’t make it.   

My meaning is that I wish things worked out and Eichel would stay here, also that any trade we make likely won't help us as much as we need it too.

[PromoTheRobot]

14 hours ago, JohnC said:

Odds are if Jack heals and gets back on the ice and plays at the level that we have seen him play his trade value increases. On the other hand there is another side to this situation: If he regains his form this Granato coached team because a much better team. You don't think the coach wouldn't want that? The core of Jack's disgruntlement is that he intensely wants to win. And playing for the Sabres has not afforded him that opportunity. It's easy to understand why he is dissatisfied with his situation. 

There are plenty of people who say that he lacks leadership. Well maybe in a classical hockey sense (compared to a player like Okposo)  that is a fair description of him but there are other ways to demonstrate it. He does it through his play. Without question he plays hard, and offensively he is one of the more productive players in the league.  At a different level that represents leadership on the ice through his prolific production. 

If the GM decides to move him he should only do it if the return is commensurate for a top tier player in this league. That means a lot in return! If not, then keep him and do everything you can and as fast as you can to give him more support. My point is don't preclude keeping him if that is the best option. 

 

It all depends if Eichel is done with the Sabres in his mind. Maybe Granato can give him his "love of the game" back? I doubt it will happen but I wouldn't say no to happy Jack sticking around if he buys in to the new regime.

[K-9]

17 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

It all depends if Eichel is done with the Sabres in his mind. Maybe Granato can give him his "love of the game" back? I doubt it will happen but I wouldn't say no to happy Jack sticking around if he buys in to the new regime.

Yeah, that would be nice, but morale is a personal choice and if a player chooses not to be part of the solution as has been demonstrated by several of the TM era tank and rebuild, including Johnny, then it’s an impossible task for any coach. Johnny wants out. Tanking for him didn’t work out. Time to move on. 

[French Collection]

My son’s U18 team motto this season is “fit in or f*** off”

[Hoss]

16 hours ago, Brawndo said:

John Wawrow tweeted Jack indeed will be at Training Camp for a Physical on Wednesday 

I don’t think there was ever a question.

[Thorner]

5 hours ago, JohnC said:

Everything you say is about the past. What if the situation changes and there is a changing of attitude from the player and the organization? Those who act as if all the fault of this deteriorated relationship is due to the player are not accounting for the half generation of dysfunction coming from this befuddled organization. How could it not be understood why player/s would want to escape such a losing and chaotic situation?

What I object to is this mischaracterization of Jack as if he is a bad guy and a cancer in the room. Nothing is further from the truth. He gets along with his teammates. What you haven't heard during this extended interlude is any of his teammates anonymously criticizing him. That is telling. Has he been the best captain? No. But there is a legitimate question as to why a young player should have been bestowed with that responsibility when he wasn't ready for it. Again, another one of the organization's long list of mistakes. 

It is more likely than not that when he gets healthy he will be dealt. And if dealt it would be a blunder to trade him unless there is a maximum return  The point I'm making is that it would be wise to keep the retention option open. 

Good stuff. Particularly the middle paragraph 

[Marvin]

9 hours ago, sabresparaavida said:

Theoretical: Jack ends up getting surgery and is out the season. The team plays well, but the goaltending lets us down and we finished around the bottom of the league, add one of the top 3 forward prospects, then actually get a starting caliber goalie on the team. Jack agrees to give it a shot and we have mitts and Cozens, proven top 6 players at this point, R2 playing a solid 3C, Quinn playing well after he comes up partway through, Thompson and asplund playing like good top 6ers, Skinner getting some of his game back with granato, and a full pipeline, along with power, Dahlin, and joki rounding most of a excellent top 4, with a deep backend on the left side. All this along with a brinks truck worth of cap space to add to our team. 

Eichel agrees to give it a shot and they  contend for playoffs the next year, and then go deep the year after with more development.

You and I have the same idea of what a "fantasy" league.

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

It all depends if Eichel is done with the Sabres in his mind. Maybe Granato can give him his "love of the game" back? I doubt it will happen but I wouldn't say no to happy Jack sticking around if he buys in to the new regime.

I agree with everything you said. And I would like to add that this is not an easy situation for this talented and passionate player. Because of his serious injury he has been sidelined for an extended period of time. Added to that stress is the unknown and dispute over what the best course of treatment should be. It can't be easy for this young player to face the possibility that he many never be the player he once was or even put himself at risk where his physical well-being will be in jeopardy for the rest of his life. 

So I'm not going to be as harsh in judging him and his responses to the situation as the majority of people are. I'm very be open to retaining him if the situation develops where that becomes the best option for the team and the player.  

[mjd1001]

6 minutes ago, JohnC said:

 

So I'm not going to be as harsh in judging him and his responses to the situation as the majority of people are. I'm very be open to retaining him if the situation develops where that becomes the best option for the team and the player.  

If Eichel is healthy, and for SOME REASON (whatever that may be) he legit WANTS to stay with team long term, then of course consider keeping him. I think the issue what a lot of us wanting him gone is...we just don't think he wants to be here, and if you COULD convince him to stay, his heart might not be 100% with the Sabres anymore.

I want him traded simply because I think he is 'done' with the Sabres, and he will never be '100% back'.

[drnkirishone]

Here is the issue with him staying in my opinion. He can't be the captain anymore. His behavior should exclude him from it. I don't know the history of it but guessing most players don't continue playing for a team after being stripped of the captaincy.

[JohnC]

35 minutes ago, drnkirishone said:

Here is the issue with him staying in my opinion. He can't be the captain anymore. His behavior should exclude him from it. I don't know the history of it but guessing most players don't continue playing for a team after being stripped of the captaincy.

Why are you requiring that he be stripped of his captaincy? If he regains his health (and that is an open question) he will continue to be our best and most dominant player. The time not to have bestowed the captaincy on him is when he first entered the league. That was an organizational mistake, and not his. The more favorable time to bestow the captaincy on him is when he is the most dominant and productive player on this team. And assuming that he fully regains his health that is the caliber of player he is. 

What I find odd is the cavalier way many fans are demanding that one of the best players in the league be dispatched without much regard for the return. A segment of the fanbase (not all) act as if this is a necessity for this woebegone franchise to regain its honor after perceiving that their star play disrespected the organization. What the hanging crowd isn't aware of is that this befuddled organization is not held in high regard by the league because of the shoddy  manner this franchise has been operated. 

As I said in prior posts I'm open to moving him if the return merits it. However, I would be more than happy to retain him if it is in the best interest of the franchise. I'm simply not foreclosing the retention options as many are. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

18 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

Did NS give us John? It's one of the greatest things we've ever had.

@Thorny gave it to us, but he denounced it soon after.  I and some others refused to give up the new fangled tradition and here we are.

Long live John!!

[Stoner]

 

[Pimlach]

2 hours ago, drnkirishone said:

Here is the issue with him staying in my opinion. He can't be the captain anymore. His behavior should exclude him from it. I don't know the history of it but guessing most players don't continue playing for a team after being stripped of the captaincy.

Schoenfeld had his C removed after 76-77 seasons in favor of Danny Gare.  This was done by Punch who apparently was not happy to see Schoeny fighting less, even though his level of play and hitting were still at a high level. 
 

Both players were traded to Detroit during 81-82 season by Scotty Bowman.   
 

 

[JohnC]

39 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Schoenfeld had his C removed after 76-77 seasons in favor of Danny Gare.  This was done by Punch who apparently was not happy to see Schoeny fighting less, even though his level of play and hitting were still at a high level. 
 

Both players were traded to Detroit during 81-82 season by Scotty Bowman.   
 

 

The Neanderthal era of hockey is long gone. Thankfully, fighting for the sake of fighting is mostly nonexistent. As you point out what you should want out of your players is hard hitting and play. The goon hockey of that Punch era won't and shouldn't be tolerated in this era of skill, speed and toughness. I'm aware that I am in the minority on this issue but if I had it my way anyone who instigates a fight would be suspended 10 games for a first time offense, suspended 20 games for a second offense and then banished from the league for a year for a third time offense. It's dangerous and its stupid. If you want to see some contrived fighting it would be better to go to a Wrestlemania  match.  

[dudacek]

Adams has made a very public declaration of building around people who want to be here and are entirely focused on making the Sabres better.

A captain who has very publicly expressed the opposite creates a very difficult situation for him, at least if you buy the premise that the captaincy is an important role that demands a certain standard of behaviour from the person holding it.

I don’t think Jack would have much issue returning to the room as a teammate. But as a leader? How  do you follow someone who neither shares your goal, nor believes in its possibility?

Edited September 19, 2021 by dudacek

[drnkirishone]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

Why are you requiring that he be stripped of his captaincy? If he regains his health (and that is an open question) he will continue to be our best and most dominant player. The time not to have bestowed the captaincy on him is when he first entered the league. That was an organizational mistake, and not his. The more favorable time to bestow the captaincy on him is when he is the most dominant and productive player on this team. And assuming that he fully regains his health that is the caliber of player he is. 

What I find odd is the cavalier way many fans are demanding that one of the best players in the league be dispatched without much regard for the return. A segment of the fanbase (not all) act as if this is a necessity for this woebegone franchise to regain its honor after perceiving that their star play disrespected the organization. What the hanging crowd isn't aware of is that this befuddled organization is not held in high regard by the league because of the shoddy  manner this franchise has been operated. 

As I said in prior posts I'm open to moving him if the return merits it. However, I would be more than happy to retain him if it is in the best interest of the franchise. I'm simply not foreclosing the retention options as many are. 

Because his behavior is not what a captain should be doing. I want more qualities besides talented and point producing in a captain

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

Schoenfeld had his C removed after 76-77 seasons in favor of Danny Gare.  This was done by Punch who apparently was not happy to see Schoeny fighting less, even though his level of play and hitting were still at a high level. 
 

Both players were traded to Detroit during 81-82 season by Scotty Bowman.   
 

 

Another example would be joe Thornton. But I think they are the exceptions.

[JohnC]

13 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Adams has made a very public declaration of building around people who want to be here and are entirely focused on making the Sabres better.

A captain who has very publicly expressed the opposite creates a very difficult situation for him, at least if you buy the premise that the captaincy is an important role that demands a certain standard of behaviour from the person holding it.

I don’t think Jack would have much issue returning to the room as a teammate. But as a leader? How  do you follow someone who neither shares your goal, nor believes in its possibility?

There is a good chance that Jack might not be able to play for quite awhile. So there is no need to be forced into making a decision regarding him. Situations that have deteriorated and appear to be irreconcilable between the parties involved can dramatically change over time. That doesn't mean that it will change but there is the possibility that it could change. What I have been saying is that regarding the Jack saga there is still plenty of time to allow this situation to play out before foreclosing any option.  

Edited September 19, 2021 by JohnC

[drnkirishone]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

Situations that have deteriorated and appear to be irreconcilable between the parties involved can dramatically change over time.  

I am curious, what athletes have done so? I can't think of any that happened without the player leaving for a number of years