Jack Eichel: Trade rumors and speculation

[Hoss]

21 minutes ago, The Ghost of Doohickie said:

Last time I logged in we were on page 227 only a day, or 2, ago.

Now on page 334 and nothing has changed.  Is that right?

Definitely not. Page 328 started on Tuesday.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

7 minutes ago, Hoss said:

Definitely not. Page 328 started on Tuesday.

Sorry, meant 327 ... as advertised, my typing is not very goodly

My main point was that nothing really has canged.  Is that right?  I can't read all the recent pages.

[Hoss]

4 minutes ago, The Ghost of Doohickie said:

Sorry, meant 327 ... as advertised, my typing is not very goodly

My main point was that nothing really has canged.  Is that right?  I can't read all the recent pages.

Nope. A report that trade talks are essentially dead so Jack’s camp is throwing medical opinions at the Sabres trying to get them to approve his choice.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

1 minute ago, Hoss said:

Nope. A report that trade talks are essentially dead so Jack’s camp is throwing medical opinions at the Sabres trying to get them to approve his choice.

What a circus all round.

[SHAAAUGHT!!!]

13 hours ago, darksabre said:

I don't think any team trading for Jack is doing it with this current season in mind.

Unless they are timing his return for the playoffs so his $10MM doesn't count against the cap this season ...cough cough cough Tampa cough cough cough

[steveoath]

Marek and Friedman really fkn annoy me now. Clearly being told to create the "Sabres and the baddies" narrative.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5cigwjC8XglVlc13qGavFK?si=nCOn3iA9ShK_nvr3qsFRKg&utm_source=copy-link

[Hoss]

The Sabres are the bad guys here. That can be okay if you’re into “winning at all costs” (even though this team won’t be winning any time soon). They have someone who wants to get treatment for a serious injury and serious pain he’s dealing with and they’re refusing to let it happen. They’re demanding that he get a treatment he is not comfortable with and therefore prolonging the pain and injury. There’s no other way to see that, in my opinion, than the Sabres are the bad guys. It’s immoral. But it’s also standard practice in sports.

[darksabre]

6 minutes ago, Hoss said:

The Sabres are the bad guys here. That can be okay if you’re into “winning at all costs” (even though this team won’t be winning any time soon). They have someone who wants to get treatment for a serious injury and serious pain he’s dealing with and they’re refusing to let it happen. They’re demanding that he get a treatment he is not comfortable with and therefore prolonging the pain and injury. There’s no other way to see that, in my opinion, than the Sabres are the bad guys. It’s immoral. But it’s also standard practice in sports.

There are no bad guys here, man. It's just a bad situation. Jack can get that treatment anytime he wants, the Sabres aren't stopping him from doing it. His desire to continue having this particular NHL contract is the only impediment. If the surgery is so important he should just take the boatloads of money he's already made and get on with things. 

[Cheektorado]

15 hours ago, K-9 said:

I read in this forum that the insurance company will not cover the ADR. Sounds like they need even more convincing than the Sabres. 

This point seem to be the crux of the whole situation and it still is not totally confirmed.  If this is true AND Jack is adamant about his choice then the Sabres are in a tough situation.  IF the Sabres are in a tough situation why would any other team want to put itself into it for a kings ransom?

IF this is true then whatever sports media and fans say isn't worth spit.  Teams would have to determine the risk and make their minds up themselves.

[Norcal]

43 minutes ago, steveoath said:

Marek and Friedman really fkn annoy me now. Clearly being told to create the "Sabres and the baddies" narrative.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5cigwjC8XglVlc13qGavFK?si=nCOn3iA9ShK_nvr3qsFRKg&utm_source=copy-link

Media gonna media

[Hoss]

25 minutes ago, darksabre said:

There are no bad guys here, man. It's just a bad situation. Jack can get that treatment anytime he wants, the Sabres aren't stopping him from doing it. His desire to continue having this particular NHL contract is the only impediment. If the surgery is so important he should just take the boatloads of money he's already made and get on with things. 

Fair points.

[bob_sauve28]

9 hours ago, The Ghost of Doohickie said:

Last time I logged in we were on page 227 only a day, or 2, ago.

Now on page 334 and nothing has changed.  Is that right?

So...you log out? 

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, steveoath said:

Marek and Friedman really fkn annoy me now. Clearly being told to create the "Sabres and the baddies" narrative.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5cigwjC8XglVlc13qGavFK?si=nCOn3iA9ShK_nvr3qsFRKg&utm_source=copy-link

They also started the Hague rumors. I have no doubt in my mind Buffalo has no interest in a 2/3 pairing LHD at this time. Friedman has really convinced me in the last few years that he is a shill and thats his shtick for getting insider info. 

[kas23]

16 hours ago, K-9 said:

I read in this forum that the insurance company will not cover the ADR. Sounds like they need even more convincing than the Sabres. 

Not exact, just like Jack can go get his surgery anytime he likes, the Sabres can also give their blessing. There will be consequences though. Their insurance policy for Jack will likely be terminated before he’s even discharged from the hospital. The arguing over all this is who wants to be the bag holder. Jack vs Terry. I’ll go with the guy who built a multi-billion dollar corporation from scratch. 

[dudacek]

2 hours ago, steveoath said:

Marek and Friedman really fkn annoy me now. Clearly being told to create the "Sabres and the baddies" narrative.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5cigwjC8XglVlc13qGavFK?si=nCOn3iA9ShK_nvr3qsFRKg&utm_source=copy-link

 

1 hour ago, Norcal said:

Media gonna media

This fascinates me.

Why did you walk away feeling like the Sabres sound like the bad guy?

(I didn't)

Where is the manufactured narrative in that segment?

(The closest I can come up with is "this situation is bad for the league" which certainly is a widely held point of view and hard to argue against: star player can't play hockey, team's most valuable asset can't be traded, potential CBA battle brewing, never mind the perception among some that the owners are holding a player's health hostage. How can you not characterize it as bad?)

Edited October 22, 2021 by dudacek

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, Hoss said:

They have someone who wants to get treatment for a serious injury and serious pain he’s dealing with and they’re refusing to let it happen. They’re demanding that he get a treatment he is not comfortable with and therefore prolonging the pain and injury. There’s no other way to see that, in my opinion, than the Sabres are the bad guys. It’s immoral. 

Just FYI - you misspelled "a collectively bargained for allocation of rights."

Jokes aside: It blew me away when I learned just how much control the NHLPA has allowed the owners to have over the healthcare of its members. And I'm unaware of how other leagues deal with it.

[dudacek]

12 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

They also started the Hague rumors. I have no doubt in my mind Buffalo has no interest in a 2/3 pairing LHD at this time. Friedman has really convinced me in the last few years that he is a shill and thats his shtick for getting insider info. 

Pretty sure this is false. It originated here three months ago:

 

[steveoath]

36 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

This fascinates me.

Why did you walk away feeling like the Sabres sound like the bad guy?

(I didn't)

 

I guess, for me, this was the last straw. Their overall narrative creative is clear.

'The Sabres need to trade eichel. He should get the surgery he wants. The one sided deep dive into 1 particular surgery. This looks bad for nhl/Sabres.' They seem to think Adams not being willing to drop his ask is foolish, and of course we should accept a Zamboni driver and a bunch of Tim Hortons gift cards as a fair trade.

Not once have they acted like actual journalists and sought to clarify the Sabres side. I.e. are there insurance ramifications and if so what are they? Why not balance their interview with a surgeon who recommends fusion/rest? 

I'm sick of all the talking heads trying to put pressure on sabres/adams to make a trade at a "reduced rate". 

Plus I think I just needed to vent tonight! 🥴

 

 

[K-9]

46 minutes ago, kas23 said:

Not exact, just like Jack can go get his surgery anytime he likes, the Sabres can also give their blessing. There will be consequences though. Their insurance policy for Jack will likely be terminated before he’s even discharged from the hospital. The arguing over all this is who wants to be the bag holder. Jack vs Terry. I’ll go with the guy who built a multi-billion dollar corporation from scratch. 

What do you mean, “not exact?” If the insurance company won’t cover it, they won’t cover it, just as many other insurance companies don’t cover cervical ADR, either. That’s as exact as it gets imo. 

As you point out, Eichel can get his preferred surgery any time he likes but I’m not sure he’s willing to suffer the legal ramifications to do so or else he would have done it a while ago. 

[nfreeman]

44 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Just FYI - you misspelled "a collectively bargained for allocation of rights."

Jokes aside: It blew me away when I learned just how much control the NHLPA has allowed the owners to have over the healthcare of its members. And I'm unaware of how other leagues deal with it.

Well, it sounds like the owners/teams' rights end where prevailing medical advice ends -- i.e. the owners can't instruct a player to undergo some radical unproven surgery -- they can just prevent the player from both having that type of surgery AND making the team bear the risk.  If ADR was the prevailing consensus treatment, he'd win the medical grievance procedure and be able to make the Sabres bear the risk.

To use an absurd example, should Jack have the right to visit a witch doctor and follow that doctor's instructions to chop off half of his toes and eat them, while making the Sabres bear the risk on his contract?

The players agreed that the owners have the right not to bear the economic risk if a player wants to have a procedure that os not supported by the prevailing majority of medical experts in the field.  That's all they gave away.  It doesn't seem like that big of a concession to me, and it seems reasonable from the owners' perspective.

 

[7+6=13]

52 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Pretty sure this is false. It originated here three months ago:

 

I'd throw in an 8th round draft pick and get it done. 

[Brawndo]

The last seven minutes of the 32 Thoughts Podcast was devoted to Adams

Marek, wondered if the reason why the deal had not been made was related to Adam's being a rookie GM and not wanting to make a mistake

Friedman responded going back to Adam's Playing Days, He found Adams to be a thoughtful guy. 

He realized He was thin at in the Front Office so they hired Jason Karmanos Sam Ventura and Dom Galamini. 

The latter two being described as Smart Guys by the Analytics Community. 

EF's sense from Adams is that the Eichel Situation is very emotional for all parties involved and that Adams knows what He doesn't know and He is trying to remove the emotion and be patient on the trade. Friedman thinks what He is doing is he smart play for the team.

He disagrees with Eichel not being able to have the surgery He wants.

Friedman looks at what Adams is doing with the Sabres, it might be a recency bias as the are 3-0, and thinks He is trying to build the organization the right way/

[K-9]

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

 

This fascinates me.

Why did you walk away feeling like the Sabres sound like the bad guy?

(I didn't)

Where is the manufactured narrative in that segment?

(The closest I can come up with is "this situation is bad for the league" which certainly is a widely held point of view and hard to argue against: star player can't play hockey, team's most valuable asset can't be traded, potential CBA battle brewing, never mind the perception among some that the owners are holding a player's health hostage. How can you not characterize it as bad?)

The perception by some that the owners are holding a player’s health hostage is as short-sighted as it gets with absolutely no regard for the complexity of the situation. Given that lack of ability to understand complexity, I’ll simplify it for those who hold the view that the owners are holding Eichel’s health hostage:

Jack Eichel is free to get whatever treatment from whatever doctor for whatever ails him and that has always been the case. Full stop.

Edited October 22, 2021 by K-9

[Curt]

2 hours ago, Hoss said:

The Sabres are the bad guys here. That can be okay if you’re into “winning at all costs” (even though this team won’t be winning any time soon). They have someone who wants to get treatment for a serious injury and serious pain he’s dealing with and they’re refusing to let it happen. They’re demanding that he get a treatment he is not comfortable with and therefore prolonging the pain and injury. There’s no other way to see that, in my opinion, than the Sabres are the bad guys. It’s immoral. But it’s also standard practice in sports.

I mostly agree.

Someone wants to get a certain surgery to fix their injured neck.  Their employer, says, “No, sorry, you can’t get the surgery that you think is best.  Our doctors don’t think it’s best and our insurance just wouldn’t cover it.”

I understand why it’s happening, but Sabres organization doesn’t exactly come out on the moral high ground.

Edited October 22, 2021 by Curt

[Curt]

6 minutes ago, K-9 said:

The perception by some that the owners are holding a player’s health hostage is as short-sighted as it get with absolutely no regards for the complexity of the situation. Given that lack of ability to understand complexity, I’ll simplify it for those who hold the view that the owners are holding Eichel’s health hostage:

Jack Eichel is free to get whatever treatment from whomever doctor for whatever ails him and that has always been the case. Full stop.

This is also true, however, sympathizing with Eichel is not the result of a legal evaluation, it’s an emotional response.

Legally everything is fully above board and no one is violating anyone’s legal rights.  All parties signed contracts that they would abide by these rules.

Still, it really sucks for Eichel that he would possibly need to give up a guaranteed $50M in order to get the surgery he feels is best for his long term health.

Its certainly possible to see the situation as morally grey, if not straight up reflecting poorly on the Sabres, while at the same time recognizing that the organization is just protecting its interests and isn’t doing anything wrong from a legal standpoint.