Jack Eichel: Trade rumors and speculation

[Hoss]

3 hours ago, thewookie1 said:

Hmm, I'd throw out the 1st trade as the only elite level potential talent is Fox. Strome is a UFA after next year, Buchnevich is a good player but not great and an RFA this year, and a mid 1st isn't exactly a given.

Trade 2 is likely the most interesting as you'd get a high grade C, and solid Dman with a mid to late 1st and a prospect. The biggest flaw is both Aho and Pesce are UFAs in 3 years (after this year) and they are in our conference.

Trade 3 is mediocre but almost entirely due to Barzal having a 7mil bridge contract for only 2 additional years. Then he'd get a payday. Sorokin and a late 1st are assets but nothing that makes me overlook their conference alignment.

Trade 4 is likely the only one I might accept; however Landeskog is a UFA this year which puts a damper on it. If he had, let's say a 6x7.5 mil extension and then they also got Makar signed to a solid contract(as he's an RFA this year) getting Newhook would be a bonus. 

On UFAs: the assumption on each trade is that you get a deal done. I didn't consider cap/contract necessarily because I'll just allow that to play out itself. I was just looking for pieces that make some sense.

The Rangers deal would make more sense if you can get Lafreniere involved but I'm not sure if that's reasonable.

The Hurricanes deal and the Avalanche deal are the most interesting in my book. I couldn't really find a whole lot that made sense.

IF a deal were to happen I think the Rangers and Kings are actually the most logical destinations but if it's with the Kings I want a third team taking on one or two of the young pieces we'd get from the Kings and get some young vet pieces from the third team coming our way.

[steveoath]

The best quote I heard about potential Eich trades was something like: if any team wants to trade for Jack Eichel,  it will have to hurt them to attain the player. 

Some of the fantasy trades out there are laughable imo.

[Curt]

6 hours ago, Hoss said:

Building Eichel deals I would consider (that neither team involved would probably do - no cap work was considered in these deals):

Jack Eichel and Rasmus Ristolainen to the Rangers for D Adam Fox, RW Pavel Buchnevich, C Ryan Strome and a 1st (tempted to add K’Andre Miller to this).

Jack Eichel and Rasmus Ristolainen to the Hurricanes for C Sebastian Aho, D Brett Pesce, prospect Jack Drury and a 1st.

Jack Eichel to the Islanders for C Mathew Barzal, Ilya Sorokin and a 1st.

Jack Eichel to the Avalanche for LW Gabriel Landeskog, D Cale Makar and prospect Alex Newhook.

Personally, I don’t think any of those teams would give up a return like that. It’s too much.  Almost every team has a player or two that they consider to be as important as Jack.  They aren’t giving up one of them in a trade for Jack.  (Fox, Makar, Aho, Barzal).  I think you are dreaming there.

 

Edited April 18, 2021 by Curt

[Curt]

2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Personally, I just don't want next season to be all about Jack. Does Jack want to be here, is Jack healthy, is Jack happy, are we winning enough for Jack to want to stay. Jack Jack Jack and nothing but Jack. 

I think we're better off without him and to build a team where no one player stands above the rest. 

I don’t know that we are better off without him, but I think there are scenarios out there where the team is better off with a combination of 3-4 good young players/prospects/high picks.

Totally agree on your philosophy though.  Jack Eichel is not the Buffalo Sabres.  He is just a small part.

[Hoss]

50 minutes ago, Curt said:

Personally, I don’t think any of those teams would give up a return like that. It’s too much.  Almost every team has a player or two that they consider to be as important as Jack.  They aren’t giving up one of them in a trade for Jack.  (Fox, Makar, Aho, Barzal).  I think you are dreaming there.

 

It’s almost as if you didn’t read the first line of the post.

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Hoss said:

It’s almost as if you didn’t read the first line of the post.

I did, lol.  Just adding my opinion.

[Hoss]

1 minute ago, Curt said:

I did, lol.  Just adding my opinion.

I think the only way Eichel is dealt is if the Sabres are good with a solid but not great NHL-now top six/four player and then a bunch of picks/prospects. I don’t think any team is giving much off their active roster.

[Thorner]

9 hours ago, Hoss said:

Building Eichel deals I would consider (that neither team involved would probably do - no cap work was considered in these deals):

Jack Eichel and Rasmus Ristolainen to the Rangers for D Adam Fox, RW Pavel Buchnevich, C Ryan Strome and a 1st (tempted to add K’Andre Miller to this).

Jack Eichel and Rasmus Ristolainen to the Hurricanes for C Sebastian Aho, D Brett Pesce, prospect Jack Drury and a 1st.

Jack Eichel to the Islanders for C Mathew Barzal, Ilya Sorokin and a 1st.

Jack Eichel to the Avalanche for LW Gabriel Landeskog, D Cale Makar and prospect Alex Newhook.

The Hurricanes and Islanders deals are ones that look good to me if we have to move Jack

[Thorner]

6 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Jack Eichel to Anaheim for gibson/zegras.

not enough

5 hours ago, Hoss said:

On UFAs: the assumption on each trade is that you get a deal done. I didn't consider cap/contract necessarily because I'll just allow that to play out itself. I was just looking for pieces that make some sense.

The Rangers deal would make more sense if you can get Lafreniere involved but I'm not sure if that's reasonable.

The Hurricanes deal and the Avalanche deal are the most interesting in my book. I couldn't really find a whole lot that made sense.

IF a deal were to happen I think the Rangers and Kings are actually the most logical destinations but if it's with the Kings I want a third team taking on one or two of the young pieces we'd get from the Kings and get some young vet pieces from the third team coming our way.

the bold is excellent. my fear with an LA deal is precisely the lack of top level immediate talent coming back 

Edited April 18, 2021 by Thorny

[Thorner]

4 hours ago, steveoath said:

The best quote I heard about potential Eich trades was something like: if any team wants to trade for Jack Eichel,  it will have to hurt them to attain the player. 

Some of the fantasy trades out there are laughable imo.

People want to keep in tact their perception of why they don't think they need Jack (these prospects that assuredly will be just as good, if only you give them a few years) yet also acquire Jack. 

3 hours ago, Curt said:

Personally, I don’t think any of those teams would give up a return like that. It’s too much.  Almost every team has a player or two that they consider to be as important as Jack.  They aren’t giving up one of them in a trade for Jack.  (Fox, Makar, Aho, Barzal).  I think you are dreaming there.

 

I can't imagine the NYI not trading Barzal for Jack straight up. 

- - - 

Imagine saying this before the 21 games Jack just played under Ralph. If I had asked you last offseason if the NYI would trade Barzal straight up for Jack, what would everyone say? Eichel had 18 more points last year, and 17 more goals. He was pacing for 22 points more in a regular season.

IMO there's a ridonkulous amount of recency bias going on here leading to far too much weight being placed on an incredibly small sample size under a coach everyone says is harming other players but with Jack, who was physically injured, it's just "weeeeeeelllll"

I get if there are injury concerns, but if Jack proves to be healthy after this injury, imagine not trading Barzal straight up for a player who just emerged as an MVP candidate and top 10 scorer in this league, which is in line with his projections, because of a 21 game sample size

Jack Eichel is a better player than Barzal

Edited April 18, 2021 by Thorny

[dudacek]

9 hours ago, thewookie1 said:

Hmm, I'd throw out the 1st trade as the only elite level potential talent is Fox. Strome is a UFA after next year, Buchnevich is a good player but not great and an RFA this year, and a mid 1st isn't exactly a given.

Trade 2 is likely the most interesting as you'd get a high grade C, and solid Dman with a mid to late 1st and a prospect. The biggest flaw is both Aho and Pesce are UFAs in 3 years (after this year) and they are in our conference.

Trade 3 is mediocre but almost entirely due to Barzal having a 7mil bridge contract for only 2 additional years. Then he'd get a payday. Sorokin and a late 1st are assets but nothing that makes me overlook their conference alignment.

Trade 4 is likely the only one I might accept; however Landeskog is a UFA this year which puts a damper on it. If he had, let's say a 6x7.5 mil extension and then they also got Makar signed to a solid contract(as he's an RFA this year) getting Newhook would be a bonus. 

There is no way you aren’t going to be very disappointed if Jack is actually traded. 

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

People want to keep in tact their perception of why they don't think they need Jack (these prospects that assuredly will be just as good, if only you give them a few years) yet also acquire Jack. 

I can't imagine the NYI not trading Barzal for Jack straight up. 

- - - 

Imagine saying this before the 21 games Jack just played under Ralph. If I had asked you last offseason if the NYI would trade Barzal straight up for Jack, what would everyone say? Eichel had 18 more points last year, and 17 more goals. He was pacing for 22 points more in a regular season.

IMO there's a ridonkulous amount of recency bias going on here leading to far too much weight being placed on an incredibly small sample size under a coach everyone says is harming other players but with Jack, who was physically injured, it's just "weeeeeeelllll"

I get if there are injury concerns, but if Jack proves to be healthy after this injury, imagine not trading Barzal straight up for a player who just emerged as an MVP candidate and top 10 scorer in this league, which is in line with his projections, because of a 21 game sample size

Jack Eichel is a better player than Barzal

Eichel (when healthy and playing) is a better player than Barzal.  However the Islanders would not trade their 1C and best offensive player, along with their #1 goalie and a 1st for him.

I don’t think teams get excited about the idea of trading away central figures (like Barzal, Makar, Landeskog, Aho) from a team that is already finding success with the group that they have.

Edited April 18, 2021 by Curt

[Thorner]

18 minutes ago, Curt said:

Eichel (when healthy and playing) is a better player than Barzal.  However the Islanders would not trade their 1C and best offensive player, along with their #1 goalie and a 1st for him.

I don’t think teams get excited about the idea of trading away central figures (like Barzal, Makar, Landeskog, Aho) from a team that is already finding success with the group that they have.

Well what's your argument? That they won't trade that player along with a goalie and a first, or they won't trade the player for Jack? I was responding specifically to the part, "They aren't giving up one of them in a trade for Jack".

5 hours ago, Curt said:

Personally, I don’t think any of those teams would give up a return like that. It’s too much.  Almost every team has a player or two that they consider to be as important as Jack.  They aren’t giving up one of them in a trade for Jack.  (Fox, Makar, Aho, Barzal).  I think you are dreaming there.

 

 

36 minutes ago, dudacek said:

There is no way you aren’t going to be very disappointed if Jack is actually traded. 

Yup. 

[inkman]

7 hours ago, steveoath said:

The best quote I heard about potential Eich trades was something like: if any team wants to trade for Jack Eichel,  it will have to hurt them to attain the player. 

Some of the fantasy trades out there are laughable imo.

This should be true for all trade.  It’s also a long standing trope, not just specific to Jack Eichel.  

[Curt]

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

Well what's your argument? That they won't trade that player along with a goalie and a first, or they won't trade the player for Jack? I was responding specifically to the part, "They aren't giving up one of them in a trade for Jack".

 

Yup. 

I don’t think that a team, already experiencing success, would trade their best play for Jack Eichel, especially if they are expected to add other pieces in the deal.

And if your expectation is to get some other teams best player in an Eichel trade, I feel pretty confident you will be disappointed with the return of an actual trade.

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Curt said:

I don’t think that a team, already experiencing success, would trade their best play for Jack Eichel, especially if they are expected to add other pieces in the deal.

And if your expectation is to get some other teams best player in an Eichel trade, I feel pretty confident you will be disappointed with the return of an actual trade.

It would be pretty crazy for the Isles to not trade Barzal for Eichel, straight up, imo. I understand why they wouldn't do it, but last I checked, they haven't won a cup, either. I think they'd do it, one is a clearly superior player. And if they didn't do it, I'd be confident in saying I disagreed with their evaluation.

The bolded just needs to stop lol. You don't need to tell me about your confidence that I'll be disappointed, I know I'll be disappointed. That's pretty much the founding principle of my argument, and why a trade doesn't make sense. 

The fact we can't get a player even notably inferior to Jack, tells me all I need to know. 

[Flashsabre]

Why do people keep saying they shouldn’t trade Eichel then? It IS NOT the Sabres idea to trade Eichel. This trade will only happen IF Eichel forces his way out and refuses to play here anymore.

[dudacek]

Just now, Flashsabre said:

Why do people keep saying they shouldn’t trade Eichel then? It IS NOT the Sabres idea to trade Eichel. This trade will only happen IF Eichel forces his way out and refuses to play here anymore.

Why are you so sure?

[Thorner]

11 minutes ago, Curt said:

I don’t think that a team, already experiencing success, would trade their best play for Jack Eichel, especially if they are expected to add other pieces in the deal.

And if your expectation is to get some other teams best player in an Eichel trade, I feel pretty confident you will be disappointed with the return of an actual trade.

Wild don't trade Kaprizov for Eichel?

Caps don't trade a 33 year old Backstrom for Eichel?

Vegas doesn't trade Stone for Eichel?

Jets don't trade Scheifele for Eichel?

Barkov? 

Too broad a brush

[Thorner]

5 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

Why do people keep saying they shouldn’t trade Eichel then? It IS NOT the Sabres idea to trade Eichel. This trade will only happen IF Eichel forces his way out and refuses to play here anymore.

Ya, if Eichel is forcing the move the dynamics change. If it's the Sabres idea, it's a bad idea full stop if the posters in this thread are to be believed, re: return

[dudacek]

Just now, Thorny said:

 

Caps don't trade a 33 year old Backstrom for Eichel?

Vegas doesn't trade Stone for Eichel?

 

I don't think the Sabres make those trades without a significant add, which I think is kinda @Curt's point.

It's about the hole ripped in your team in order to add a player of Jack's quality. Real contenders already have core players and probably don't need a building block as massive as Eichel to put themselves over the top.

 

[Thorner]

5 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I don't think the Sabres make those trades without a significant add, which I think is kinda @Curt's point.

It's about the hole ripped in your team in order to add a player of Jack's quality. Real contenders already have core players and probably don't need a building block as massive as Eichel to put themselves over the top.

 

Again, that's not what I took issue with/was asking for clarification on. He said, "Almost every team has a player or two that they consider to be as important as Jack.  They aren’t giving up one of them in a trade for Jack."

I'm simply asking if we could, say, call up Winnipeg and say, we'll give you Eichel for Scheifele, if we know Jack is going to ask out. What do the Jets say? Cause if I'M the Sabres, i make that trade long, long before i make the one for prospects and picks ala LA

Edited April 18, 2021 by Thorny

[Flashsabre]

23 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Why are you so sure?

Why would the Sabres trade Eichel if he doesn’t want out?

[dudacek]

30 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

Why would the Sabres trade Eichel if he doesn’t want out?

Because they have identified him as part of the problem?

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Wild don't trade Kaprizov for Eichel?

Caps don't trade a 33 year old Backstrom for Eichel?

Vegas doesn't trade Stone for Eichel?

Jets don't trade Scheifele for Eichel?

Barkov? 

Too broad a brush

Obviously it’s going to vary team to team, and maybe one of them would, but honestly I think the general answer here is no.  Maybe Backstrom or Scheifele, not positive.

This may just be a difference of opinion in what you and I think the trade market would be.