If Eichel is traded, what is your desired package?

[Brawndo]

1 minute ago, TheCerebral1 said:

 

Zegras, Comtois, Lacombe, 1st, 2nd. Just throwing things out into space.  That's a return I could live with.  Some might prefer Drysdale over Comtois and I'm okay with that too.

I highly doubt both Drysdale and Zegras would be part of the return, but if that was the case take the deal and run. 

[#freejame]

3 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

For comparison the Ducks were in on PLD until the last minute and lost out on Him as they wouldn’t include Drysdale or Zegras in the return. Bob Murray is certainly more in the I have to win now mode, would He be willing to include one of them  for a better player in Eichel? 
 

Each Team’s Top Prospect should be on the table along with First Round Picks as a starting point 

My plan isn’t to copy @dudacek and what he’s got going do, but I would like to take whatever data comes out of this to show what kind of difference there will be between what we believe Eichel to be worth compared to what is actually believed to be fetched. I think it’ll be pretty eye-opening. My mistake in this is that I had a top-5 NHL prospect in every option, which is certainly no guarantee for what he will fetch.  

[mjd1001]

The problem is there is just SO much that we don't know.

I can't get by the first part of it...does he (and/or how much) want to be traded?  Is Eichel in the "I'd like to be traded and I'll work with you on it, but if I'm not traded I'll be OK".....or is he more like "I'll keep this quiet but I never want to play for this franchise again, EVER!"...or maybe he doesn't even wanted to be traded as much as we all think?    I have a hard time getting beyond not knowing even that.

The problem is there is just SO much that we don't know.

I can't get by the first part of it...does he (and/or how much) want to be traded?  Is Eichel in the "I'd like to be traded and I'll work with you on it, but if I'm not traded I'll be OK".....or is he more like "I'll keep this quiet but I never want to play for this franchise again, EVER!"...or maybe he doesn't even wanted to be traded as much as we all think?    I have a hard time getting beyond not knowing even that.

[Weave]

I would need to see a middle career, middle of the pack 1C or top shelf 2C, and at at this stage of our offseason a starting goalie.  If we have a plan to address goalie that doesn’t require Jack then I want their top prospect.  There would need to be more, but those 2 would be the bulk of my ask.

[#freejame]

3 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

The problem is there is just SO much that we don't know.

I can't get by the first part of it...does he (and/or how much) want to be traded?  Is Eichel in the "I'd like to be traded and I'll work with you on it, but if I'm not traded I'll be OK".....or is he more like "I'll keep this quiet but I never want to play for this franchise again, EVER!"...or maybe he doesn't even wanted to be traded as much as we all think?    I have a hard time getting beyond not knowing even that.

The problem is there is just SO much that we don't know.

I can't get by the first part of it...does he (and/or how much) want to be traded?  Is Eichel in the "I'd like to be traded and I'll work with you on it, but if I'm not traded I'll be OK".....or is he more like "I'll keep this quiet but I never want to play for this franchise again, EVER!"...or maybe he doesn't even wanted to be traded as much as we all think?    I have a hard time getting beyond not knowing even that.

None of those things matter. This is very vague and could be done with any player on any team in the NHL, regardless of their availability. Take Dylan Cozens for example. Nobody wants to trade him. But you can replace Eichel in the question and it’s still a fair question. All that is being asked is your perceived value of a player in relation to the rest of the league and what you believe the leagues perceived value of a player is. 

[Rasmus_]

14 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

I highly doubt both Drysdale and Zegras would be part of the return, but if that was the case take the deal and run. 

 

That's why I countered with Zegras, Comtois, Lacombe 1st and 2nd.

[I-90 W]

I’m pulling for Anaheim because I want Zegras. If not I’d like a bunch of young players (not prospects) and an elite goalie. This is in regard to both Jack and Sam together. The young players would have to include a 1C obviously.

[jad1]

3 hours ago, Thorny said:

Oh, that's definitely what he's thinking. (well, at least what the players he'll acquire will potentially be, in a few years down the line)

I'm surprised his comments about how we've had the talent, what's missing is the mindset didn't get more play around here. Does ANYONE think we've had enough talent? If KA actually thinks that, isn't he inarguably wrong?

Like, scary wrong?

Adams hasn't done many things right since he took the job, so him being scary wrong is definitely a possibility.

If he actually makes this idiotic trade, it better not be for prospects, because he won't be here when those prospects are ready to contribute.

Based on the history of his predecessors, he's got maybe two more seasons to show significant improvement before his owners lose patience.

 

[JohnC]

If a deal was made with the Rangers I would insist on Kakko, LaFreniere and if possible add K'Andre Smith.  If I had to swap first round picks or give up a second round pick for this young trio I would do it. My minimum would be Kakko and LaFreniere for Jack. If not I would look to the west. If the Rangers were receptive to this deal but wanted our first round pick I would be open to it if we at least got back their second round pick.  

[JohnC]

5 hours ago, Thorny said:

Oh, that's definitely what he's thinking. (well, at least what the players he'll acquire will potentially be, in a few years down the line)

I'm surprised his comments about how we've had the talent, what's missing is the mindset didn't get more play around here. Does ANYONE think we've had enough talent? If KA actually thinks that, isn't he inarguably wrong?

Like, scary wrong?

I understand what your point is about the reality of the limitations of this roster. Few can argue otherwise. But I also understand the point that KA was making about the required collective attitude that the players have to have in order to succeed. You have to have players who believe in the direction and style of play that is being set by the coach. Even with younger and lesser experienced players there was a stark difference in energy and resilience between playing for Granato than with Krueger. KA made some very revealing comments about the exit interviews for the younger players who were optimistic about the future while some of the players who have been exposed to long term failure lacked enthusiasm about the future. Risto basically said in his exit interview that he didn't care whether he was retained or not. Reinhart (one of my favorite players) was candid in saying that he was tired of not playing meaningful games at the end of the season every year. 

My opinion is that Risto, Reinhart and Jack will be dealt because they have been worn down by being exposed to such long-term failure. They can't fake their lack of belief because they don't actually believe and they can't fake their lack of enthusiasm about being here because that is not what they feel. 

[thewookie1]

6 hours ago, JohnC said:

If a deal was made with the Rangers I would insist on Kakko, LaFreniere and if possible add K'Andre Smith.  If I had to swap first round picks or give up a second round pick for this young trio I would do it. My minimum would be Kakko and LaFreniere for Jack. If not I would look to the west. If the Rangers were receptive to this deal but wanted our first round pick I would be open to it if we at least got back their second round pick.  

No way in hell am I trading Eichel and a Top 3 pick for Lafreniere and Kakko.

The only way our 1st is involved is for McDavid or a tiny pick swap. (For instance #3 to #7)

Aside from Fox, not one of the Rangers youngsters really intrigue me. Kakko is a winger and Lafreniere is more of a winger style as well. Not to mention neither have done much to impress thus far. 

[#freejame]

1 hour ago, thewookie1 said:

No way in hell am I trading Eichel and a Top 3 pick for Lafreniere and Kakko.

The only way our 1st is involved is for McDavid or a tiny pick swap. (For instance #3 to #7)

Aside from Fox, not one of the Rangers youngsters really intrigue me. Kakko is a winger and Lafreniere is more of a winger style as well. Not to mention neither have done much to impress thus far. 

K'Andre Miller interests me more than Kakko and is only slightly behind LaFreniere (who may still only be all hype). I have zero interest in adding to a package to the Rags that only includes Miller, Kakko/Lafreniere, and say Chytill or Buchnevich. Even if the deal is Miller, LaFreniere, and Chytill/Buch I still don't think it touches some of the other offers. 

Slight sidebar: Outside of Miller, is there realistically a better defenseman we can get? Bjornfot is good but hes going to be a sharp 4/5. Miller to me projects 2/3. Drysdale obviously has top pairing potential, but Zegras fills a bigger need. I guess if we could somehow pull Byram out of COL he would be better, but to me it looks like our best bet at an impact D outside of the draft is Miller, once our other needs are considered. 

Major hypothetical: If NYR offered Miller, Chytil, and Buchnevich for Sam while LA simultaneously offered Byfield, Turcotte, and Kaliyev for Eichel, and we knew we had the first pick for Power, do you take those deals? On their own, I don't think it's enough. But combined, I think we are set up in a better position. Sign Danault for asking price to play one C, understand you're a lottery team with a deep top-line center pool, hire Donny G to keep progressing the kids for three years and then bring in the new coach to get us over the hump. 

2021 Depth Chart

Skinner (meh)--Danault--Cozens

Buchnevich--Chytil--Olofsson

Mitts--Byfield--Kaliyev

Girgs--Turcotte--R2

It's not a playoff roster, and arguably four of the players might start in the AHL, but it frees up a bit of cap to quite literally bump any player down on the depth chart by bringing in a Coleman type to shore up our bottom six. Neither trade would be my ideal trade, but I think this roster make-up is about as close to what might be achievable on the trade market. Are we a better team because of it? Not immediately. Will we be? Likely. Package Tage and RIsto for the top RHD you can find and sign a goalie and this would be the most optimistic I would be about an 80 point season in years. 

1 hour ago, thewookie1 said:

No way in hell am I trading Eichel and a Top 3 pick for Lafreniere and Kakko.

The only way our 1st is involved is for McDavid or a tiny pick swap. (For instance #3 to #7)

Aside from Fox, not one of the Rangers youngsters really intrigue me. Kakko is a winger and Lafreniere is more of a winger style as well. Not to mention neither have done much to impress thus far. 

K'Andre Miller is the real deal and had it not been for Fox's breakout everyone would be hearing significantly more about it. I would prefer he wasn't the main deal in an Eichel/Reinhart trade, but the dude has a lot of skill. 

[JohnC]

11 hours ago, thewookie1 said:

No way in hell am I trading Eichel and a Top 3 pick for Lafreniere and Kakko.

The only way our 1st is involved is for McDavid or a tiny pick swap. (For instance #3 to #7)

Aside from Fox, not one of the Rangers youngsters really intrigue me. Kakko is a winger and Lafreniere is more of a winger style as well. Not to mention neither have done much to impress thus far. 

I'm not sure if you correctly read my post. I said I would swap (exchange) first round picks with the Rangers if I could get LaFreniere, Kakko and Smith. In that deal we would get the Ranger's lower first round pick. I would also consider giving them our second round pick (keeping our first round pick) for the aforementioned trio. 

Where you and I diverge is that I place more value on the upside of LaFreniere and Kakko than you do. And another factor that needs to be taken in consideration is that other teams are going to be wary of Jack's health status which will have a dampening effect on a trade deal. 

[inkman]

I desire a large package 

[nfreeman]

On 6/1/2021 at 9:41 AM, Thorny said:

We'll have no idea whether the players we have brought in have the character to get it done until they actually reach a talent tipping point. 

Mark Messier would "suck" on this team. This isn't about creating culture, it's about winning hockey games and until they competently fill out the roster to adequate standards the culture and character of these players is a significantly inferior variable. 

Just need to keep going back to the ROR comparison because it's just such a microcosm for so much - he was a guy who "wasn't a good fit" and he's a Conn Smythe winner, now. The problem isn't the players we are asking to fit, it's what we are asking them to fit into. 

If ROR didn't "fit" here, the issue is Here. 

No.

Messier would be exactly what the doctor ordered for this team.  Like Jim Kelly did for the Bills, Messier would lift the Sabres, by force of will and ability, out of the quicksand in which they are embedded.

It's not all about hands and feet.  A huge percentage of it is between the ears.

@PASabreFan is absolutely right that what the Sabres need isn't another high draft pick who can skate like the wind and dangle filthy.  They need skill, yes, but it needs to be combined in a body with blood and guts.

If Eichel and Reino want out, give me as many Peca, Drury, Warrener and McKee types as we can get, plus MAF in goal next year and a real coach and let's see what we can do.

 

[LGR4GM]

I don't think you should trade Jack Eichel but if you are going to...

Alex Turcotte (C, because I don't think Byfield will be made available) 

Brock Faber (RHD, currently plays on a pair with Ryan Johnson and is an excellent shutdown defender. He's a high character guy with lots of upside)

Gabriel Vilardi (C, seems pretty decent and could also be shifted to RW. He has some development to do but he can at least immediately be plugged into an NHL lineup)

Arthur Kaliyev (LW, has worked on his game a ton after sliding in his draft year because he didn't play defense. Perfect example of a young player growing parts of their game as they mature)

Adrian Kempe (LW, he is ready to breakout. After 2 years cut short by covid, there is underlying production that says he's going to put up 45pts. Kempe also makes 2mil per year so he helps the Kings cap along with Vilardi's 894k to take almost 3 million from LA while giving them 10mil in Eichel. They have 9.1mil in cap currently)

Finally the Kings 1st round pick in 2022 unprotected (deeper draft)

We trade them Eichel and our 2022 2nd round pick. 

 

Edited June 2, 2021 by LGR4GM

[Thorner]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't think you should trade Jack Eichel but if you are going to...

Alex Turcotte (C, because I don't think Byfield will be made available) 

Brock Faber (RHD, currently plays on a pair with Ryan Johnson and is an excellent shutdown defender. He's a high character guy with lots of upside)

Gabriel Vilardi (C, seems pretty decent and could also be shifted to RW. He has some development to do but he can at least immediately be plugged into an NHL lineup)

Arthur Kaliyev (LW, has worked on his game a ton after sliding in his draft year because he didn't play defense. Perfect example of a young player growing parts of their game as they mature)

Adrian Kempe (LW, he is ready to breakout. After 2 years cut short by covid, there is underlying production that says he's going to put up 45pts. Kempe also makes 2mil per year so he helps the Kings cap along with Vilardi's 894k to take almost 3 million from LA while giving them 10mil in Eichel. They have 9.1mil in cap currently)

Finally the Kings 1st round pick in 2022 unprotected (deeper draft)

We trade them Eichel and our 2022 2nd round pick. 

 

This could be the deal, honestly. The bolded is just goldilocks for what I think KA is going to attemp 

[LGR4GM]

The LA Kings have 20mil in cap space next year before the expansion draft and they don't have any high priced RFA's to sign. Basically even if they did my trade and take in Eichel they will still have 13million in cap and they only need to sign 3-4 players or bring up 3-4 players such as Fagemo or Kupari. Basically they can fill out their roster and still add a nice piece or 2 in free agency and still sit under the cap. They also get to keep their 1st in 2021 allowing them to start a restock of some of the forward depth being cleared out. Eichel takes Vilardi's spot and is an upgrade and Kupari can slot in to the 3rd line at wing as Byfield can be protected or played with Eichel or Kopitar. 

The loss of Faber is inconsequential to LA as they have Grans in the system. Turcotte really has no place to play for them as they are loaded at forward. Kempe helps the cap a little and gives the Sabres a fully formed NHL forward. It works but it depends on if LA values Eichel that much. 

Kaliyev is a big win for us as he would be a natural winger for LA and they need that goal scoring but it's the price of business. 

[Marvin]

27 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

No.

Messier would be exactly what the doctor ordered for this team.  Like Jim Kelly did for the Bills, Messier would lift the Sabres, by force of will and ability, out of the quicksand in which they are embedded.

Enough of the Mark Messier worship.  If he really were as good as reputed, he would not have undermined a very good Vancouver Canucks team.

[Thorner]

2 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

Enough of the Mark Messier worship.  If he really were as good as reputed, he would not have undermined a very good Vancouver Canucks team.

This is what Mark thinks of this post

[nfreeman]

@Thorny -- as between Drury and Vanek, which one had more talent?  And which one would make a bigger difference on this Sabres team?

[Marvin]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

This is what Mark thinks of this post

**** him.  I am still correct.

[Thorner]

21 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

@Thorny -- as between Drury and Vanek, which one had more talent?  And which one would make a bigger difference on this Sabres team?

Probably Vanek, but we need both. Once the roster is adequately stocked with talent, we can begin to isolate finicky, hidden "culture" variables. And by adequately stocked, I don't mean a good team. I mean the roster stocked to a mediocre level. 

Until then, players who have proven themselves to be worthy centerpieces on Championship rosters will look "culturally incapable" on this team. We cannot know whether the players we have exude the leadership we want until the team reaches a minimum talent threshold. Until then, those abilities will be swallowed up and made invisible. 

The "experiment" that is the Buffalo Sabres is not adequately set up and sealed so as to reliably produce answers as to what "character trait" variables are lacking. ROR was lacking the culture we needed here, yet on a competent team - he was not. The Sabres experiment did not provide accurate readings, and it won't until the talent is at an appropriate level. 

Edited June 2, 2021 by Thorny

[nfreeman]

13 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Probably Vanek, but we need both. Once the roster is adequately stocked with talent, we can begin to isolate finicky, hidden "culture" variables. And by adequately stocked, I don't mean a good team. I mean the roster stocked to a mediocre level. 

Until then, players who have proven themselves to be worthy centerpieces on Championship rosters will look "culturally incapable" on this team. We cannot know whether the players we have exude the leadership we want until the team reaches a minimum talent threshold. Until then, those abilities will be swallowed up and made invisible. 

The "experiment" that is the Buffalo Sabres is not adequately set up and sealed so as to reliably produce answers as to what "character trait" variables are lacking. ROR was lacking the culture we needed here, yet on a competent team - he was not. The Sabres experiment did not provide accurate readings, and it won't until the talent is at an appropriate level. 

Do you mean that Vanek was more talented than Drury was, or that Vanek would improve this team more than Drury would?  Or both?  If your meaning was that Vanek would improve this team more than Drury would, I could not disagree more.

I agree that guys like ROR, who are significant contributors to good teams, have drowned and will continue to drown in the Sabres' current suckitude, and I would expect the same will occur with Eichel and Reino if they are traded to good teams -- i.e. they will be good contributors on those teams.  But the ROR example kinda proves my point -- i.e. he's a talented guy who wasn't a blood-and-guts leader type, and he made very little difference in the on-ice results here. 

That doesn't mean that trading ROR was the right move, or that trading Eichel and/or Reino will make the team better, as I agree with you that talent is needed for a team to succeed.  But I think at this point in time this team needs heart, determination and leadership more than it needs pure talent.  It needs Drury much more than it needs Vanek.

 

[Thorner]

7 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Do you mean that Vanek was more talented than Drury was, or that Vanek would improve this team more than Drury would?  Or both?  If your meaning was that Vanek would improve this team more than Drury would, I could not disagree more.

I agree that guys like ROR, who are significant contributors to good teams, have drowned and will continue to drown in the Sabres' current suckitude, and I would expect the same will occur with Eichel and Reino if they are traded to good teams -- i.e. they will be good contributors on those teams.  But the ROR example kinda proves my point -- i.e. he's a talented guy who wasn't a blood-and-guts leader type, and he made very little difference in the on-ice results here. 

That doesn't mean that trading ROR was the right move, or that trading Eichel and/or Reino will make the team better, as I agree with you that talent is needed for a team to succeed.  But I think at this point in time this team needs heart, determination and leadership more than it needs pure talent.  It needs Drury much more than it needs Vanek.

 

Adding Drury on his own wouldn't do anything.

Doubt me? We have a player as talented as Jack Eichel on this roster and that talent has translated to literally nothing in the standings. You think Drury's "little league world series" leadership narrative would make a dent? Drury's "intangibles" are going to succeed where Eichel's "talent" could not? 

Bogus. 

We've literally seen for years how easily a player's positive contributions can be swallowed up because of the nature of an NHL roster - the rest of the roster matters too much. Drury's positives would be swallowed up as well. 

Drury's "intangibles" only got the positive light of day because of rest of the roster around him was built to succeed. Add that to today's roster and it wouldn't matter one iota. 

Edited June 2, 2021 by Thorny