Shopping Jack Eichel: Anaheim

[LGR4GM]

This is exactly like how I got railroaded by the board on the Ryan Johnson pick. It isn't about Ryan Johnson, it is about not maximizing your assests. Gibson as a dump in the Eichel trade, sure. Gibson as an important part of the projected 4 pieces with no Zegras or Drysdale in the mix... that's a major problem. 

[Dr. Who]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

This is exactly like how I got railroaded by the board on the Ryan Johnson pick. It isn't about Ryan Johnson, it is about not maximizing your assests. Gibson as a dump in the Eichel trade, sure. Gibson as an important part of the projected 4 pieces with no Zegras or Drysdale in the mix... that's a major problem. 

As my old Jesuit professor used to say, without Zegras or Drysdale, "No sale!"

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

This is exactly like how I got railroaded by the board on the Ryan Johnson pick. It isn't about Ryan Johnson, it is about not maximizing your assests. Gibson as a dump in the Eichel trade, sure. Gibson as an important part of the projected 4 pieces with no Zegras or Drysdale in the mix... that's a major problem. 

I'm with you on the trade being ass but through the prism of his argument, he views that prospect guy as really promising even up to and including surpassing the value of 30A, one day. If he's right and the deal is Beniers+, Beniers, Comtois, and a top 10 Gibson (i definitely diverge, here), it's not like he's undervaluing Jack, at least not within the context of the other offers we've heard. 

Because I:

see Gibson as a non-negligible chance of being a net-negative, 

have zero confidence/faith in/(knowledge of?) that prospect

see Comtois as a good winger

and 3OA as being years away, from a weak draft

...and because I love Jack Eichel's hair, the deal makes me hulk up. 

But there's certainly a chance it's significantly better than the ROR deal. 

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I'm with you on the trade being ass but through the prism of his argument, he views that prospect guy as really promising even up to and including surpassing the value of 30A, one day. If he's right and the deal is Beniers+, Beniers, Comtois, and a top 10 Gibson (i definitely diverge, here), it's not like he's undervaluing Jack, at least not within the context of the other offers we've heard. 

Because I:

see Gibson as a non-negligible chance of being a net-negative, 

have zero confidence/faith in/(knowledge of?) that prospect

see Comtois as a good winger

and 3OA as being years away, from a weak draft

...and because I love Jack Eichel's hair, the deal makes me hulk up. 

But there's certainly a chance it's significantly better than the ROR deal. 

If Perrault is being tossed in the mix it makes it better but you MUST hit on that 3oa in a big way for this to ever really work out for the Sabres. 

Perrault has top 6 potential. 

[Marvin]

IMHO, Gibson should only be included as a cap equaliser.  Goaltenders can be like Bill Ranford and just fall apart or like Jim Carey and get solved.  And although they can bounce back, they are just as likely to stay broken or stay solved.  You need to have either a top prospect or some clearly high-end mid-line-up guys being the main parts of an Eichel trade.  If they insist on some conditionals on top of that or want Gibson as a throw-in for hedging their bets on an Eichel injury, then that is different.

[nfreeman]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

I see Gibson as a good shot at negative value. 

A b prospect (I'd have the 1st we got for ROR above this)

Comtois - a good winger

3rd overall 

= a pittance for a top 10 league C at 24 years old

Serious question:  do you not think the injury is real?  Your posts read like you expect Eichel to resume his MVP-contender-level performance next season like nothing happened.

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

I see Gibson as a good shot at negative value. 

A b prospect (I'd have the 1st we got for ROR above this)

Comtois - a good winger

3rd overall 

= a pittance for a top 10 league C at 24 years old

 

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Let's actually look at this...

Tage Thompson at the time of the draft was a B level prospect expected to be a middle 6 forward. Maxim Comtois is better but at the time Tage was probably considered to be able to reach Comtois (didn't happen but this is equivalent). 

a 1st round pick : 3oa is better but we didn't know what the St Louis pick was going to be but better. 

2 dumps: Gibson

So basically the only improvement is the 3oa. Other than that it is the ROR trade all over again. Without Zegras or Drysdale the trade should be dead in the water. Gibson doesn't move the needle much. 

 

Comtois led his team in scoring and plays a physical two-way game. Making him a rough equivalent to Tage is disengenuous. These are some of Comtois' peers.

• Nick Suzuki 41 points, 56 games
• Robert Thomas 12 points 33 games
• Gabe Villardi 23 points in 54 games
• Max Comtois 33 points in 55 games

 

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

You won't melt down if we trade Jack Eichel for a goalie who might be a decent backup, a 2nd line winger, and 3oa in mediocre draft... hell, I might become a Kraken fan if that is the way they go. 

 

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

My opinions are on the precipice of admittedly being obsolete around here because I funnel most of them through the idea of making the playoffs next year. I've accepted that to be the case I'm just not done complaining about it yet. 

Maybe it's really annoying. I get that. It's just...the Sabres are really annoying. Urgh. I'll get on board with the development year once the games start. 

You get that your take on Gibson is pretty similar to all those internet put-downs you are shaking your head at about Eichel, right?

Too old, contract too big, risk he might be a net negative, he's not as good as his reputation....

52 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

This is exactly like how I got railroaded by the board on the Ryan Johnson pick. It isn't about Ryan Johnson, it is about not maximizing your assests. Gibson as a dump in the Eichel trade, sure. Gibson as an important part of the projected 4 pieces with no Zegras or Drysdale in the mix... that's a major problem. 

 

You've called John Gibson a decent backup, and the equivalent of Vlad Sobotka and Patrick Berglund — two guys who were out of hockey a year or so after we acquired them. Any "railroading" will come from your words.

People are acting like a) John Gibson is not good, b) that the Sabres aren't in desperate need of a starting goaltender, c) that good goalies will be lining up to play here this summer at half of Gibson's contract.

He shouldn't be the centrepiece of the trade, he would be a good addition to it; he takes care of the cap element while still providing value to the roster, and he fills a major need in the organization.

I won't discount @Thorny's concern about net-negative possibilities, but I think that's a worst-case scenario that ignores the equal possibility that he can be an upper-echelon starter for us for at least another five years.

Edited June 21, 2021 by dudacek

[LGR4GM]

5 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

Comtois led his team in scoring and plays a physical two-way game. Making him a rough equivalent to Tage is disengenuous. These are some of Comtois' peers.

• Nick Suzuki 41 points, 56 games
• Robert Thomas 12 points 33 games
• Gabe Villardi 23 points in 54 games
• Max Comtois 33 points in 55 games

 

 

You get that your take on Gibson is pretty similar to all those internet put-downs you are shaking your head at about Eichel, right?

Too old, contract too big, risk he might be a net negative, he's not as good as his reputation....

 

You've called John Gibson a decent backup, and the equivalent of Vlad Sobotka and Patrick Berglund — two guys who were out of hockey a year or so after we acquired them. Any "railroading" will come from your words.

People are acting like a) John Gibson is not good, b) that the Sabres aren't in desperate need of a starting goaltender, c) that good goalies will be lining up to play here this summer at half of Gibson's contract.

He shouldn't be the centrepiece of the trade, he would be a good addition to it; he takes care of the cap element while still providing value to the roster, and he fills a major need in the organization.

I won't discount @Thorny's concern about net-negative possibilities, but I think that's a worst-case scenario that ignores the equal possibility that he can be an upper-echelon starter for us for at least another five years.

No I didn't. I said in comparison to the ROR that is the salary dumping part of it. I even noted specifically that Gibson would be better. SO Railroad away. 

John Gibson is a mediocre starting goaltender worse than Ullmark over the proceeding 2 years. 

Tage had all the potential to be as good as Maxim Comtois is when we traded for him. I love revisionist history too. 

[Marvin]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

No I didn't. I said in comparison to the ROR that is the salary dumping part of it. I even noted specifically that Gibson would be better. SO Railroad away. 

John Gibson is a mediocre starting goaltender worse than Ullmark over the proceeding 2 years. 

Tage had all the potential to be as good as Maxim Comtois is when we traded for him. I love revisionist history too. 

The bolded is what scares me.  He may be solved -- in fact, that is a decent indication that he has been solved.  Like Eichel's neck, I would rather some other franchise figure it out.

Now, if we can bring back Arturs Irbe as goaltending coach, then we can talk.

[LGR4GM]

11 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

Comtois led his team in scoring and plays a physical two-way game. Making him a rough equivalent to Tage is disengenuous. These are some of Comtois' peers.

• Nick Suzuki 41 points, 56 games
• Robert Thomas 12 points 33 games
• Gabe Villardi 23 points in 54 games
• Max Comtois 33 points in 55 games

 

 

You get that your take on Gibson is pretty similar to all those internet put-downs you are shaking your head at about Eichel, right?

Too old, contract too big, risk he might be a net negative, he's not as good as his reputation....

 

You've called John Gibson a decent backup, and the equivalent of Vlad Sobotka and Patrick Berglund — two guys who were out of hockey a year or so after we acquired them. Any "railroading" will come from your words.

People are acting like a) John Gibson is not good, b) that the Sabres aren't in desperate need of a starting goaltender, c) that good goalies will be lining up to play here this summer at half of Gibson's contract.

He shouldn't be the centrepiece of the trade, he would be a good addition to it; he takes care of the cap element while still providing value to the roster, and he fills a major need in the organization.

I won't discount @Thorny's concern about net-negative possibilities, but I think that's a worst-case scenario that ignores the equal possibility that he can be an upper-echelon starter for us for at least another five years.

This post is like reading what I said, completely ignoring the context and then acting like I think John Gibson is Vlad Sobotka and Tage Thompson is jesus. Holy bastardization of what I was saying. 

Here I want to spell it out again because I know it won't help. 

If we used the ROR trade as a similar comparison, Gibson is the part of the trade that Berglund and Sobotka were because he is the cap dump portion. They would be clearing 6mil for the next 5 or 6 years. Tage is the higher end prospect similar to how Comtois is the higher end prospect. Now is Gibson and Comtois better, yes but so is Eichel. This is scaling not a 1v1 comparison. 

I hope that helps or you can continue to say I think Gibson is Sobtka and Tage is Comtois because I am so ***** stupid I can't tell the difference. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Welcome to the first day of a long and hot summer.

It's way too steamy in here.

This thread is bringing out the worst in just about everybody.

[Thorner]

24 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Serious question:  do you not think the injury is real?  Your posts read like you expect Eichel to resume his MVP-contender-level performance next season like nothing happened.

That’s the most likely result imo. If I’m dealing him, if I’m making that choice (and considering he’s under contract, it IS a choice) unless I am *certain* that he *won’t* bounce back, it would not be MY party taking on that risk in the trade - I want full price and the other team can assume the risk. 

Conditional pieces may play a role too 

[Randall Flagg]

7 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

The bolded is what scares me.  He may be solved -- in fact, that is a decent indication that he has been solved.  Like Eichel's neck, I would rather some other franchise figure it out.

Now, if we can bring back Arturs Irbe as goaltending coach, then we can talk.

Our goalie coach right now is a good one

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, Randall Flagg said:

Our goalie coach right now is a good one

Which is my only hope if Gibson is acquired. We have a really good GT coach and perhaps a better system than Anaheim for the defensive zone. 

[Marvin]

3 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

Our goalie coach right now is a good one

True, but Irbe frustrated the hell out of XGMTM by making previously mediocre goaltenders look like Dominik Hasek when they got here.  I still find his work to be in a class by itself.

[Thorner]

26 minutes ago, dudacek said:

 

Comtois led his team in scoring and plays a physical two-way game. Making him a rough equivalent to Tage is disengenuous. These are some of Comtois' peers.

• Nick Suzuki 41 points, 56 games
• Robert Thomas 12 points 33 games
• Gabe Villardi 23 points in 54 games
• Max Comtois 33 points in 55 games

 

 

You get that your take on Gibson is pretty similar to all those internet put-downs you are shaking your head at about Eichel, right?

Too old, contract too big, risk he might be a net negative, he's not as good as his reputation....

 

You've called John Gibson a decent backup, and the equivalent of Vlad Sobotka and Patrick Berglund — two guys who were out of hockey a year or so after we acquired them. Any "railroading" will come from your words.

People are acting like a) John Gibson is not good, b) that the Sabres aren't in desperate need of a starting goaltender, c) that good goalies will be lining up to play here this summer at half of Gibson's contract.

He shouldn't be the centrepiece of the trade, he would be a good addition to it; he takes care of the cap element while still providing value to the roster, and he fills a major need in the organization.

I won't discount @Thorny's concern about net-negative possibilities, but I think that's a worst-case scenario that ignores the equal possibility that he can be an upper-echelon starter for us for at least another five years.

And in turn, you get that, like the frog in slowly boiling water, you’ve become more and more accustomed to horrible trade proposals as the weeks go by? 

Not three weeks ago you said it was shaping up like another ROR and now you’ll go to bat for whatever proposal seemingly

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Better than 3OA? This surprises me

Perrault is good, was drafted too low and just produced in the AHL at 18 similarly to guys like Byfield and Turcotte (year older).

[pi2000]

21 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

No I didn't. I said in comparison to the ROR that is the salary dumping part of it. I even noted specifically that Gibson would be better. SO Railroad away. 

John Gibson is a mediocre starting goaltender worse than Ullmark over the proceeding 2 years. 

Tage had all the potential to be as good as Maxim Comtois is when we traded for him. I love revisionist history too. 

Perfect buy low opportunity.   The Ducks defense in front of him is absolutely abysmal... they rank near the bottom of the league in high danger chances against the past few seasons.    He's constantly under siege.    Having watched him in person over the past 5 years, I would rate him at top 5 goalie across the league.... sure he had a down year, but it's a perfect opportunity to buy low IMO.

That said, I'd be shocked if ANA parted ways with him in an Eichel deal...   It would make little sense for them to do so since the whole idea of trading for Eichel is accelerate their rebuild.     It's more likely a guy like Lukas Dostal is part of the deal than Gibson.   

[nfreeman]

21 minutes ago, Thorny said:

That’s the most likely result imo. If I’m dealing him, if I’m making that choice (and considering he’s under contract, it IS a choice) unless I am *certain* that he *won’t* bounce back, it would not be MY party taking on that risk in the trade - I want full price and the other team can assume the risk. 

Conditional pieces may play a role too 

Not trying to be argumentative -- why do you think this?  He was a shell of himself last season, a month ago he was openly pushing for an unprecedented type of spinal surgery because the rehab wasn't working and we've heard nothing to indicate that there has been any improvement -- and if the rehab had worked, it would've been in the Sabres' interest to make that known since that would've increased the price other teams are willing to pay in trade.

As for certainty and wanting the other party to bear the risk -- sure, in a perfect world both of those would happen, but this is a much grayer situation than a black-and-white one IMHO.  I.e. there is no way for KA, a doctor or anyone else to be certain. 

IMHO, if KA has consulted with the docs and has been advised that it's 80% likely that Eichel won't regain his top form, he has to act on that.

 

[steveoath]

13 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

Lukas Dostal

Yes yes yes

Zegdale (either would be acceptable)

Comtois

Dostal

3oa

That's my ask. Might not get, but ya never know. Would drop 3OA for 2/3 rounder if that would seal the deal.

 

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, nfreeman said:

Not trying to be argumentative -- why do you think this?  He was a shell of himself last season, a month ago he was openly pushing for an unprecedented type of spinal surgery because the rehab wasn't working and we've heard nothing to indicate that there has been any improvement -- and if the rehab had worked, it would've been in the Sabres' interest to make that known since that would've increased the price other teams are willing to pay in trade.

As for certainty and wanting the other party to bear the risk -- sure, in a perfect world both of those would happen, but this is a much grayer situation than a black-and-white one IMHO.  I.e. there is no way for KA, a doctor or anyone else to be certain. 

IMHO, if KA has consulted with the docs and has been advised that it's 80% likely that Eichel won't regain his top form, he has to act on that.

 

Eichel said he thought he’d be fine. The list of mvp level 24 year olds who don’t recover from injuries at this age is quite short. We know for a fact KA was shopping him way before these injury concerns - so I’ve never bought you’re argument it’s for injury reasons he’s being dealt. Any team ponying up at all is going to get the “all good” from their medical staff.  

Any universe where the doctors said there was an EIGHTY PERCENT likelihood he wouldn’t recover would be a universe in which the trading team’s doctors were aware and balking at a deal, in any form 

[dudacek]

47 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

No I didn't. I said in comparison to the ROR that is the salary dumping part of it. I even noted specifically that Gibson would be better. SO Railroad away. 

John Gibson is a mediocre starting goaltender worse than Ullmark over the proceeding 2 years. 

Tage had all the potential to be as good as Maxim Comtois is when we traded for him. I love revisionist history too. 

 I quoted you directly. Even bolded the relevant parts.

I can agree with your third sentence. The point I am making is that Comtois has realized potential and Thompson had not, which means a lot. An extreme example would be like saying Zegras has potential to be a 1st line centre and therefore has similar value to Eichel.

[Thorner]

29 minutes ago, Curt said:

Perrault is good, was drafted too low and just produced in the AHL at 18 similarly to guys like Byfield and Turcotte (year older).

17 points in 27 ahl games does not a prospect better than 3OA make 

It’s a nice stat. A tiny sample size. 3 goals. 

[pi2000]

10 minutes ago, steveoath said:

Yes yes yes

Zegdale (either would be acceptable)

Comtois

Dostal

3oa

That's my ask. Might not get, but ya never know. Would drop 3OA for 2/3 rounder if that would seal the deal.

 

It's more likely 3OA, Dostal, and Comtois.   

Maybe add a guy like Josh Manson, but they're not getting 3OA AND Zegras IMO.  

[Curt]

25 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Not trying to be argumentative -- why do you think this?  He was a shell of himself last season, a month ago he was openly pushing for an unprecedented type of spinal surgery because the rehab wasn't working and we've heard nothing to indicate that there has been any improvement -- and if the rehab had worked, it would've been in the Sabres' interest to make that known since that would've increased the price other teams are willing to pay in trade.

As for certainty and wanting the other party to bear the risk -- sure, in a perfect world both of those would happen, but this is a much grayer situation than a black-and-white one IMHO.  I.e. there is no way for KA, a doctor or anyone else to be certain. 

IMHO, if KA has consulted with the docs and has been advised that it's 80% likely that Eichel won't regain his top form, he has to act on that.

 

I feel like this is the realistic mindset.