Shopping Jack Eichel: Anaheim

[dudacek]

5 hours ago, nfreeman said:

This is fair and certainly possible.  I think though that the Ducks’ owner would need to approve a financial risk like this, and that he is likely mot to approve it.  

I checked out the Ducks year-ender to get a sense of where they were.

Murray said he went to the owners with a plan and they gave him the budget  he needed to execute the plan.

No hint about what that plan was, but if it was Eichel, sounds like they approved it.

[nfreeman]

8 hours ago, Hoss said:

The Ducks started last season with the least cap space in the league and did so while paying David Backes, Ryan Kesler and Patrick Eaves to sit at home and heal up on LTIR as their hockey careers come to a close. I'm skeptical that they're going to run away from a chance at a major piece because of money.

They paid David Backes and Corey Perry a combined $11.1M last season.

 

6 hours ago, dudacek said:

I checked out the Ducks year-ender to get a sense of where they were.

Murray said he went to the owners with a plan and they gave him the budget  he needed to execute the plan.

No hint about what that plan was, but if it was Eichel, sounds like they approved it.

This isn’t just a money issue though. It’s whether they are going to bet their limited dollars on a major injury risk.  If Eichel doesn’t return to form, Anaheim isn’t going to just LTIR him, regain the cap space and spend another $50MM on other players   

I think it’s pretty likely that the Ducks’ owner told Murray that he can spend closer to the cap than they’ve done previously, but that he’s not interested in making a huge bet on a groundbreaking new type of back surgery on Eichel.

I guess we’ll see.  

[Randall Flagg]

I don't see the ducks not wanting Eichel really badly

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

 

This isn’t just a money issue though. It’s whether they are going to bet their limited dollars on a major injury risk.  If Eichel doesn’t return to form, Anaheim isn’t going to just LTIR him, regain the cap space and spend another $50MM on other players   

I think it’s pretty likely that the Ducks’ owner told Murray that he can spend closer to the cap than they’ve done previously, but that he’s not interested in making a huge bet on a groundbreaking new type of back surgery on Eichel.

I guess we’ll see.  

That's the $50 million question, isn't it? Did the rest improve Jack's condition? How risky is the surgery? Is there still a "disconnect" with Jack's current preferred treatment plan and the Sabres? With that of the interested team? How flexible is either party?

[Brawndo]

Friedman mentioned on the Instigators last week he was hearing that there maybe teams who would not be adverse to allowing Eichel to have Surgery.  They are doing research into the procedure and probably would seek permission to speak with Peter Fish and Jack. 

[LGR4GM]

Comtois and Perrault are musts in any Eichel deal if Zegras is off the table. 

[Thorner]

If the 3rd overall is the best piece, it's a bad deal unless Jack's health doesn't recover

If someone would have told you the best piece in a trade of our MVP level centre was a prospect below Dylan Cozens, no one would want that deal 

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

If the 3rd overall is the best piece, it's a bad deal unless Jack's health doesn't recover

If someone would have told you the best piece in a trade of our MVP level centre was a prospect below Dylan Cozens, no one would want that deal 

Not disagreeing with your point — the deal is going to be short of what we want, regardless of return — but I am disagreeing with 3OA being below Dylan Cozens, or Trevor Zegras for that matter. Those two still have that fresh off dominating the WJC sheen on them, but they project as top-6 to 1st-line; they probably aren't franchise guys.

3OA should be Eklund or Beniers, so of a similar tier.

They are on par perhaps, but not below.

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

Not disagreeing with your point — the deal is going to be short of what we want, regardless of return — but I am disagreeing with 3OA being below Dylan Cozens, or Trevor Zegras for that matter. Those two still have that fresh off dominating the WJC sheen on them, but they project as top-6 to 1st-line; they probably aren't franchise guys.

3OA should be Eklund or Beniers, so of a similar tier.

They are on par perhaps, but not below.

Everything I've read re: the deep dive stats had Cozens deserving of a top-3 pick in that draft, a deep draft. I definitely see him, at this stage, as a better prospect than those in range of 3, this draft

Cozens is a better prospect than Beniers imo. Zegras certainly is 

[Buffalonill]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Comtois and Perrault are musts in any Eichel deal if Zegras is off the table. 

Do not trade Eichel for 2nd best prospects. 

If no Zegras 

 

[Thorner]

If the pick was *certainly* not below, and only "perhaps" on par, you'd deal 2019 Cozens for 2021 Beniers. Would you make this trade?

[LGR4GM]

12 minutes ago, Buffalonill said:

Do not trade Eichel for 2nd best prospects. 

If no Zegras 

 

I agree. I am just saying I think we are ***** and that's the prospects we get. 

[Curt]

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Comtois and Perrault are musts in any Eichel deal if Zegras is off the table. 

If no Zegras, I would 100% want Drysdale and #3 OA.

[Crusader1969]

41 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I agree. I am just saying I think we are ***** and that's the prospects we get. 

unfortunately i think you are right but shouldn't be.  I think everyone is forgetting how good Eichel is. 

Zegras and #3 should just be the start of the Ducks offer but as you said, I doubt they get even that for him.

[dudacek]

59 minutes ago, Thorny said:

If the pick was *certainly* not below, and only "perhaps" on par, you'd deal 2019 Cozens for 2021 Beniers. Would you make this trade?

I think from previous conversations you tend to draw sharper lines between prospects than I do.

To answer your question, if I had Beniers, I would not trade him for Cozens. If I had Cozens, I would not trade him for Beniers. I consider them roughly on par in terms of ability, very much the type of player I would want on my team, and project each developing into a Ryan-O'Reilly level NHL player.

Zegras I see as more of a Willie Nylander/Mitch Marner type, with a higher offensive ceiling than Beniers/Cozens, a lower floor, and less all-round utility.

Edited June 16, 2021 by dudacek

[Trettioåtta]

Zegras, 3rd OA, Comtois + Gibson for Eichel + Olaf

[Flashsabre]

7 minutes ago, Trettioåtta said:

Zegras, 3rd OA, Comtois + Gibson for Eichel + Olaf

You aren’t getting Gibson. Trading for Jack is to compete now. You don’t trade away your franchise goalie for that.

But the rest of your deal looks good: Zegras, 3 OA, Comtois, one more pick or prospect for Jack and Olaf. 

[Hoss]

19 minutes ago, Curt said:

If no Zegras, I would 100% want Drysdale and #3 OA.

Drysdale should not be forgotten if Zegras isn’t on the table

[Curt]

4 minutes ago, Hoss said:

Drysdale should not be forgotten if Zegras isn’t on the table

He is very good.  Played in the AHL and NHL as an 18 year old this past season.

[Thorner]

21 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think from previous conversations you tend to draw sharper lines between prospects than I do.

To answer your question, if I had Beniers, I would not trade him for Cozens. If I had Cozens, I would not trade him for Beniers. I consider them roughly on par in terms of ability, very much the type of player I would want on my team, and project each developing into a Ryan-O'Reilly level NHL player.

Zegras I see as more of a Willie Nylander/Mitch Marner type, with a higher offensive ceiling than Beniers/Cozens, a lower floor, and less all-round utility.

That's all fair, but to be honest I don't think any of this changes the substance of what I was trying to say: I don't think many would have been happy with a prospect equal to Cozens being the best piece in an Eichel deal. 

Zegras represents an *absolute must*, for me, not a player I think makes a great deal for us. Even if you consider Zegras more less equal to Beniers (personally no I do not), a prospect two years further out does not an equal asset make. 

Not to mention the progress Zegras has shown since his draft, which is no guarantee in a Beniers. More certainty matters, even if it's only a little bit more. I think it's fair to say Zegras the asset is a substantially more valuable piece than Beniers as is. 

Edited June 16, 2021 by Thorny

[Trettioåtta]

3 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

You aren’t getting Gibson. Trading for Jack is to compete now. You don’t trade away your franchise goalie for that.

But the rest of your deal looks good: Zegras, 3 OA, Comtois, one more pick or prospect for Jack and Olaf. 

True. I would like Gibson though...

[Randall Flagg]

I just had a vision. We acquire 3OA and Gibson and smaller pieces and thats it. Sad

[fiftyone]

17 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I just had a vision. We acquire 3OA and Gibson and smaller pieces and thats it. Sad

Have your visions ever been right before?

[Randall Flagg]

1 minute ago, fiftyone said:

Have your visions ever been right before?

no

[fiftyone]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

no

Phew!