Jack Eichel: Trade rumors and speculation

[steveoath]

3 hours ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

There's the MMA guy that did it and continues to compete, but I can only assume that all the risk is on his part

Yup. They are classed as self employed. However, it should be noted that weidman first had surgery in 2015 and needed further surgery in 2019. I am slightly confused as to what the first surgery was though. I cant find a lot of info on that,  just the 2nd which is the ADR.

https://www.bjpenn.com/mma-news/ufc/photo-chris-weidman-undergoes-unexpected-neck-surgery/

Things have not gone well for him. He has lost 5 of 7 since surgery. 4 KO/TKO and then the horrendous leg break in his first fight after the ADR. I don't imagine he will fight again.

Edited October 24, 2021 by steveoath

[Hoss]

18 hours ago, WildCard said:

Maybe it's mobile but the way 'approved' lines up here on my phone is very satisfying.

Good call 😆 that’s odd.

[nfreeman]

15 hours ago, dudacek said:

I think some one will give up the Crown Jewels for Jack if TP assumes the financial risk, especially once Jack is back on the ice and looking like Jack.

I've been thinking a bit more about this.  I think I was kinda missing your point yesterday -- I think you were saying that if other teams are willing to risk $50MM in trading for Jack and letting him have the ADR (although I think we agree at this point that these other teams aren't willing to risk much more than that, i.e. they are unwilling to give up much in trade for Jack) -- why isn't TP willing to risk $50MM, let Jack have the ADR and restore his value, and then trade him for a rich bounty?  In other words, TP is as rich as any of these other guys, and if some of them are willing to risk $50MM on Jack, why isn't TP?

I think there are a few possible answers:

1. The Sabres' analysis of the likelihood of Jack's return to full value could be materially different from those other teams' analyses -- e.g. they might see it as 25% likely and they see it as 60% likely.

2. The Sabres likely view time as being on their side -- they might think there is a reasonable likelihood that if they wait another month or 2, either Jack will cave and have fusion or another GM will cave and give up the crown jewels for Jack -- and if either of those things happen the Sabres can avoid taking the $50MM risk.

3.  This is the big one:  the reward for the Sabres taking the $50MM risk isn't the same as it is for an acquiror taking that risk.  The acquiror's upside is a fully recovered, motivated, and thrilled-to-be-outta-jail Jack Eichel, i.e. a MVP-candidate-level player in his prime.  The Sabres' upside is a couple of blue-chip prospects and some draft picks, any or all of whom may or may not develop, in a few years, into top-end NHL players, or who might be just OK, or who might wash out, or who might be deeply unhappy to be traded to Buffalo from Vegas or NYC or Southern California.

It's apples and oranges.

 

[Weave]

10 hours ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

They're willing to accept a transfer of the risk from the Sabres, but the mitigation of that risk on their end is offering a lower return.

If you were buying a $1000 item, you'd willingly pay $1000 for it.  But if you find out it is damaged, but it *might* be fixable, you're going to expect on discount on the chance that it won't be worth $1000 in the future.  It may only be worth $100 as-is, and you may be willing to roll the dice an pay, say, $600 for it, in the belief that it might be worth at least that much in the future (and maybe the full $1000), but as long as it's in the as-is state, you'll never pay the full price for it, even though there's a chance it might be worth that after the repair.

Yup.  At this point Jack is the hockey equivalent of a flipper house.  Sure, if you fix it ip it might be worth $350k,  but as is it’s a $95k house.

[Doohicksie]

3 hours ago, nfreeman said:

1. The Sabres' analysis of the likelihood of Jack's return to full value could be materially different from those other teams' analyses -- e.g. they might see it as 25% likely and they see it as 60% likely.

Oh, this is exactly what's happening.  Like I said, there are uncertainties in the numbers, and depending on whether you already own that asset, or looking to acquire the asset, drives the risk scenario.

[kas23]

If I were Jack, assuming I knew all the medical information and risks, would take on the financial risk and have the ADR done. He’s already made more money than all of us would make in a lifetime and could comfortably retire even if his remaining contract was voided. He’s 24. I don’t think he’s getting the right advice here, especially from his agents, who have a financial interest on that $50M remaining. This whole situation is being driven by greed, on both sides. 
 

However, there could be teams that automatically drop out if he gets the ADR. I don’t believe a single word that other teams would readily allow him to have the ADR. That’s his agents feeding the press. 

Edited October 24, 2021 by kas23

[Doohicksie]

But you're not Jack.

This is already been covered.  Jack doesn't have the cojones to risk $50 million.  If he did, he would have done exactly what you suggest by now.

He likes playing hockey.  He likes money more.  That's all I need to know about Jack.

[Marvin]

Aside: I just want to say that I am glad I keep checking this thread.  8 have learnt a lot about how to think about negotiations in general.

I am formulating an idea of what a compromise trade would look like from the standpoint of mutual risk-mitigation for both sides if the NHL brokers it.  My pages-long proofs on homework problems in graduate school were about this complicated.

[kas23]

5 minutes ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

But you're not Jack.

This is already been covered.  Jack doesn't have the cojones to risk $50 million.  If he did, he would have done exactly what you suggest by now.

He likes playing hockey.  He likes money more.  That's all I need to know about Jack.

Agree. As someone who has lived with a chronic disease all my life, with multiple surgeries, I can now say that you cannot put a price on health. Certainly not $50M. However, I know how a 24 year-old male thinks. They’re indestructible.

[Doohicksie]

5 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

I am formulating an idea of what a compromise trade would look like from the standpoint of mutual risk-mitigation for both sides if the NHL brokers it.  My pages-long proofs on homework problems in graduate school were about this complicated.

An interesting project perhaps but unless you and understand the CBA, probably not realistic.  But hey, we're not going anywhere for a while.

[PromoTheRobot]

14 minutes ago, kas23 said:

If I were Jack, assuming I knew all the medical information and risks, would take on the financial risk and have the ADR done. He’s already made more money than all of us would make in a lifetime and could comfortably retire even if his remaining contract was voided. He’s 24. I don’t think he’s getting the right advice here, especially from his agents, who have a financial interest on that $50M remaining. This whole situation is being driven by greed, on both sides. 
 

However, there could be teams that automatically drop out if he gets the ADR. I don’t believe a single word that other teams would readily allow him to have the ADR. That’s his agents feeding the press. 

There's greed and there's liability. I don't see how the Sabres are being greedy other than wanting maximum return for Eichel. They don't want to be liable if the worst case scenario occurs.

[PromoTheRobot]

4 minutes ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

An interesting project perhaps but unless you and understand the CBA, probably not realistic.  But hey, we're not going anywhere for a while.

Then there's the liability. In a worst case scenario, what you describe only spreads liability. No one in their right mind would touch it.

[dudacek]

4 hours ago, nfreeman said:

I've been thinking a bit more about this.  I think I was kinda missing your point yesterday -- I think you were saying that if other teams are willing to risk $50MM in trading for Jack and letting him have the ADR (although I think we agree at this point that these other teams aren't willing to risk much more than that, i.e. they are unwilling to give up much in trade for Jack) -- why isn't TP willing to risk $50MM, let Jack have the ADR and restore his value, and then trade him for a rich bounty?  In other words, TP is as rich as any of these other guys, and if some of them are willing to risk $50MM on Jack, why isn't TP?

I think there are a few possible answers:

1. The Sabres' analysis of the likelihood of Jack's return to full value could be materially different from those other teams' analyses -- e.g. they might see it as 25% likely and they see it as 60% likely.

2. The Sabres likely view time as being on their side -- they might think there is a reasonable likelihood that if they wait another month or 2, either Jack will cave and have fusion or another GM will cave and give up the crown jewels for Jack -- and if either of those things happen the Sabres can avoid taking the $50MM risk.

3.  This is the big one:  the reward for the Sabres taking the $50MM risk isn't the same as it is for an acquiror taking that risk.  The acquiror's upside is a fully recovered, motivated, and thrilled-to-be-outta-jail Jack Eichel, i.e. a MVP-candidate-level player in his prime.  The Sabres' upside is a couple of blue-chip prospects and some draft picks, any or all of whom may or may not develop, in a few years, into top-end NHL players, or who might be just OK, or who might wash out, or who might be deeply unhappy to be traded to Buffalo from Vegas or NYC or Southern California.

It's apples and oranges.

 

I think this is a reasonable take on what the Pegulas might be thinking.

But when does the statute of limitations expire on 2?

Because 3 might be apples and oranges, but it fails to account for the fact that the alternative to the bolded is, at best, paying Jack Eichel $12.5 million after insurance to rot, and any collateral damage that goes with it.

I guess I am of the belief that the risk/reward of allowing ADR is a better bet for the Sabres than the risk/reward of the status quo.

But it all comes down your first point, and that’s why people’s mileage may vary.

Edited October 24, 2021 by dudacek

[LabattBlue]

Does anyone think Jack has seriously considered retirement?  I know he would be giving up a lot of money, but he has also made millions already in his career. 

[klos1963]

11 hours ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

There has been some talk about it here.  I found a case of a guy who had it done, returned to the NHL, it drove the injury to the next disc and he was advised to retire; and then there's Kris Letang who had fusion surgery in 2017 and is still playing.  What are the actual numbers?  I don't know.  But even in the case of the player who retired, he wasn't paralyzed or anything, just couldn't play anymore.

I think the real concern is what if Eichel takes a hit and ends up a quadriplegic?  Who, legally, holds the liability for that?  Eichel?  The team who cleared his surgery?  The NHL?

As far as what are the numbers?  I don't know.  I tried looking for them myself and found just a few individual stories of players who had fusion and returned, or attempted to return, to the NHL.

Thanks, it seems either way, Eichel is at risk. It's pretty scary surgery if any discussion of potential paralysis is involved.

[Hoss]

1 minute ago, LabattBlue said:

Does anyone think Jack has seriously considered retirement?  I know he would be giving up a lot of money, but he has also made millions already in his career. 

No, I don’t think he’s even considered it.

[klos1963]

21 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

There's greed and there's liability. I don't see how the Sabres are being greedy other than wanting maximum return for Eichel. They don't want to be liable if the worst case scenario occurs.

I don't see either side being greedy or evil or anything nefarious.  I think Eichel's health is most important to both parties and everything , liability, contract, insurance... falls into place after. But I really think when you're talking surgery of the spinal column, health is by far the highest priority. 

I actually don't believe their is a ton of animosity involved either, I'm sure Jack is frustrated sitting on the sidelines unable to play, but I think too much of the anger is made up by 339 page threads and reporters speculating on trades for months on end.  It's a stalemate where neither side will blink, it's a very serious health issue and tension is expected during discussions.

[nfreeman]

48 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think this is a reasonable take on what the Pegulas might be thinking.

But when does the statute of limitations expire on 2?

Because 3 might be apples and oranges, but it fails to account for the fact that the alternative to the bolded is, at best, paying Jack Eichel $12.5 million after insurance to rot, and any collateral damage that goes with it.

I guess I am of the belief that the risk/reward of allowing ADR is a better bet for the Sabres than the risk/reward of the status quo.

But it all comes down your first point, and that’s why people’s mileage may vary.

As for the statute of limitations on the Sabres' willingness to wait out Jack and the potential bidders -- I think it doesn't end until after the season.  They aren't planning on any boost to their team from an Eichel trade this year, and they probably figure that the same crappy offers will be there on draft day 2022, if not better.

As for the alternatives -- I think there is almost zero possibility that the Sabres agree to take the $50MM risk, or for that matter any risk that is substantially higher than $12.5MM, on the ADR.  So I think the alternative to the status quo from the Sabres' perspective is not the Sabres taking the $50MM risk, but is rather taking a lesser package in trade on or about draft day 2022.

Finally, I'll respectfully disagree that it all comes down to different assessments of the likelihood of full recovery post-ADR.  I think it's certainly an important factor, but I also think that the other factors that have been discussed in this thread all play into the risk-reward calculation, which is part of why this is so complicated and hasn't been resolved yet. 

[Doohicksie]

12 hours ago, K-9 said:

When I looked into it, I could only come up with two: Kris Letang and Derek Dorsett. Both returned to play after six month rehabs. Letang continues to play at an all star level while Dorsett was forced to retire after recurring issues with his neck. 

If they are it, that means they're looking at 50-50 that Jack will ever play at a high level again.  So expecting full payment or Jack is absurd.  A top prospect, a first round pick, and maybe some conditional picks are all they should expect.

[SDS]

Video: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=575577382859345&id=1018880351564908&m_entstream_source=permalink

[Doohicksie]

45 minutes ago, klos1963 said:

Thanks, it seems either way, Eichel is at risk. It's pretty scary surgery if any discussion of potential paralysis is involved.

To be fair, I have no idea what the chances are.  I think from the surgery itself, it's minimal, basically zero.  If he takes a big hit?  I don't know.  10%?  1%?  0.1%?  When you think about how many hits a player takes, if every hard one is a 0.1% chance of debilitating injury, that's still way too high I think.  It means that sooner or later, it will happen.

[Doohicksie]

4 minutes ago, SDS said:

animation of ADR surgery.
 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=575577382859345&id=1018880351564908&m_entstream_source=permalink

That looks absolutely frightening to me.

[dudacek]

6 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

As for the statute of limitations on the Sabres' willingness to wait out Jack and the potential bidders -- I think it doesn't end until after the season.  They aren't planning on any boost to their team from an Eichel trade this year, and they probably figure that the same crappy offers will be there on draft day 2022, if not better.

As for the alternatives -- I think there is almost zero possibility that the Sabres agree to take the $50MM risk, or for that matter any risk that is substantially higher than $12.5MM, on the ADR.  So I think the alternative to the status quo from the Sabres' perspective is not the Sabres taking the $50MM risk, but is rather taking a lesser package in trade on or about draft day 2022.

Finally, I'll respectfully disagree that it all comes down to different assessments of the likelihood of full recovery post-ADR.  I think it's certainly an important factor, but I also think that the other factors that have been discussed in this thread all play into the risk-reward calculation, which is part of why this is so complicated and hasn't been resolved yet. 

I think the main argument in favour of ADR from my perspective is that I see it as the only way the Sabres get a significant return.

In my opinion, GMs aren’t paying up for a broken Jack, Jack isn’t getting fusion. 

So in my head, the options are be stubborn on ADR and eventually trade him for at best a Sam Reinhart return, or risk the contract on ADR in the hopes of a return that even the Wookie would be OK with.

Since it’s Terry’s money not mine, I’m taking option B

[Indabuff]

I like how the suggested videos after that one are house repairs.

[K-9]

1 hour ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

If they are it, that means they're looking at 50-50 that Jack will ever play at a high level again.  So expecting full payment or Jack is absurd.  A top prospect, a first round pick, and maybe some conditional picks are all they should expect.

Depends on how you look at it I guess. I see it as 50/50 Eichel plays at an All Star level again. 

Going by such limited examples is not advisable anyway. Every case, every patient, every prognosis is different.