Dreger: Eichel situation may be shifting, multiple teams involved

[K-9]

3 minutes ago, MattPie said:

ROR: was a healthy 1C on many teams, terrible return. Eichel: injured 1C on most teams, anyone thinking another team will trade the same as a healthy Eichel is dreaming.

I seriously doubt any team is to pay full value (as defined as a healthy Jack). There's risk to trading for Eichel because he may not come back to 100% (or at all); that's going to downgrade his price. The only way Jack draws full price is if he heals up (one way or another) and proves he's 100%. Otherwise it'd be incredibly dumb for a GM to bet the farm on him.

Exactly. Which is why KA should remain patient. 

[MattPie]

5 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Exactly. Which is why KA should remain patient. 

I haven't been following closely, there's the "usual" surgery, and the one Jack wants. Since neither seem to want to budge, could he heal on his own? Or does some surgery have to happen or he's LITR for the next 5 years?

[JoeSchmoe]

This thread has turned into another bickerfest just like the main Eichel one. The wild speculations are annoying too. 

We'll find out when we find out.

 

[K-9]

10 minutes ago, MattPie said:

I haven't been following closely, there's the "usual" surgery, and the one Jack wants. Since neither seem to want to budge, could he heal on his own? Or does some surgery have to happen or he's LITR for the next 5 years?

I suspect that after the initially prescribed rest, the disc did not reabsorb as much as they would like to see and surgery of some sort is now in order. The fusion is usually a six month recovery, the disc replacement a three month recovery.

If Jack had the fusion as prescribed when his 12 week rest period was over in June he would be four months into his recovery and on schedule for his desired Olympics, so it’s a shame he missed that window.So now the window for the Olympics becomes the three month for recovery from the disc replacement procedure, but time is of the essence.

Regardless, I think KA can remain patient here. It’s not like Jack would be the first player to miss an entire season due to injury. But it sounds like he’s putting pressure on his agent to get him traded. KA should ignore that completely. Jack’s impatience and his agent’s inability to broker the proper deal is not his problem. 
 

 

Edited October 8, 2021 by K-9

[Hoss]

6 hours ago, tom webster said:

Or Lebrun is wrong, or there was never an offer close enough to justify releasing medicals or Eichel’s previous counsel wouldn’t allow it or…….. 

 

Certainly possible. We can make any of those assumptions! Mine is just as valid as those. If "there was never an offer close enough" is true then my original sentiment stands because an offer was never going to be close enough until teams got a look at medicals. It's an extremely necessary part of this process. If a team expressed any level of serious interest (teams don't just make offers willy nilly, even if they make half-assed offers) then those medicals should've been handed out like condoms on a college campus.

I think the chances of his "previous counsel" not wanting medicals released, especially considering they halfway did it publicly, is very unlikely.

[Hoss]

6 hours ago, Andrew Amerk said:

KA might not have been allowed to do that without John’s permission. It sounds like John has decided to share them himself now?

I still don’t understand what other teams would need to see. It’s been public for a long time now what’s wrong with John, and what the available options for treatment are. Do they expect to see some shocking new detail in an X-Ray that multiple medical experts missed?

I doubt medical records are the reason John hasn’t been traded, it’s the fact that he hasn’t gotten fixed. 

I'm genuinely confused why some posters think his medical records aren't extremely important and necessary here. All injuries aren't created equal and there are varying levels of severity and ways to treat those different levels. We've already seen it reported (including by medical professionals themselves) that there are differing opinions on treatment. There is absolutely no way you can make decision on treatment without getting a thorough look at those medicals. There is no "shocking" detail needed to need to see them.

Because I don't believe there's ANY chance of a team trading for him without seeing the medicals then I can confidently deduce that not releasing medical records has played a role in this deal not happening.

3 hours ago, MattPie said:

Apparently a candidate for the Buffalo's Mayor.

The Democratic nominee*

[Hoss]

5 hours ago, Taro T said:

Doubt a team "kicking the tires" on Eichel would only be concerned with the neck.  Is it in the Sabres best interest (should all the stars align & they never get an offer worth trading him) or Eichel's best interest to have 20 or so teams know exactly what injuries he's played through & couldn't play through?  Teams have NEVER targeted a star player's weaknesses/injuries in the past.  Certainly nobody would use that info nefariously.  (Where's the rolleyes smiley when you need it.) 

Until somebody came up with an offer (even conditional) that might be acceptable to Adams, how does it make sense to turn over the records?

Absolutely, once somebody is serious, let them see the records.  Heck, let them have their own doctors examine him.

 

This is a fair point but I'm certain the "medicals" being discussed pertain exclusively to the neck issue which is already public enough info for teams to target one way or the other.

[thewookie1]

7 hours ago, dudacek said:

Sorry I misread.

So you think the Sabres have been wrong to dig in against ADR?

I can honestly understand both sides; at this point though I would let him have the surgery he wants. If he's willing to potentially end his career in order to get this operation then who are we to stop him. My whole run-them-around is in order to not give the idea we are over ruling our team doctors. If the appearance is that of a rogue action by Eichel versus Adams telling him to do it; everyone saves face.

[Hoss]

It's not really worth anything but fun to mention: Emily Kaplan of ESPN mentioned on their new ESPN+ show that she thinks Eichel will be traded to Vegas within the next few weeks.

[tom webster]

3 hours ago, Hoss said:

Certainly possible. We can make any of those assumptions! Mine is just as valid as those. If "there was never an offer close enough" is true then my original sentiment stands because an offer was never going to be close enough until teams got a look at medicals. It's an extremely necessary part of this process. If a team expressed any level of serious interest (teams don't just make offers willy nilly, even if they make half-assed offers) then those medicals should've been handed out like condoms on a college campus.

I think the chances of his "previous counsel" not wanting medicals released, especially considering they halfway did it publicly, is very unlikely.

No, you made an unequivocal statement about Adams. Why, exactly, have none of these journalists called and asked? It’s not really hard to get on a phone and ask for comment. Finally, again, it is amusing to me when “insider” info is gospel when it validates one’s opinion, but garbage when it doesn’t.

[Brawndo]

The tweet is misleading, the article talks about Med Info being shared, Adams and Brisson talking 3-4 times a day.

That the Sabres are agreeable to a conditional pick 

Flames and Ducks are still in it LeBrun believes

[That Aud Smell]

13 hours ago, Brawndo said:

LeBrun was on Insider Trading, mentioned that the Sabres are now willing to put conditions on certain parts of the trade to facilitate one happening 

2 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

The tweet is misleading, the article talks about Med Info being shared, Adams and Brisson talking 3-4 times a day.

That the Sabres are agreeable to a conditional pick 

There's no way an arguably fair deal gets done here without conditions. They have to be part of the deal.

If Eichel/receiving team accomplishes this/these things, then the Sabres get that thing/those things.

What makes it tricky is the matter of what present value the Sabres can expect to receive. There's no conditioning that. And there may be nothing to do there but grin and bear it, from the Sabres' perspective. The Sabres are most likely not getting a top-shelf prospect/young NHLer in this deal.

[Taro T]

5 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

There's no way an arguably fair deal gets done here without conditions. They have to be part of the deal.

If Eichel/receiving team accomplishes this/these things, then the Sabres get that thing/those things.

What makes it tricky is the matter of what present value the Sabres can expect to receive. There's no conditioning that. And there may be nothing to do there but grin and bear it, from the Sabres' perspective. The Sabres are most likely not getting a top-shelf prospect/young NHLer in this deal.

IMHO, at least some of those conditional pieces need to be based on the Eichel 2 years out, not just over the next season.  Fully expect that he'll get back to the 100 point pace Eichel & Adams needs to be shrewd enough to get value from that stage, too.

[That Aud Smell]

23 minutes ago, Taro T said:

IMHO, at least some of those conditional pieces need to be based on the Eichel 2 years out

absolutely - i'd hope they could go as far as 3 years out.

of course, that would be a lot of delayed gratification (and, sure, risk) for the Sabres.

but i don't see any other way for the Sabres to pull something close to fair value.

[thewookie1]

45 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

The tweet is misleading, the article talks about Med Info being shared, Adams and Brisson talking 3-4 times a day.

That the Sabres are agreeable to a conditional pick 

Flames and Ducks are still in it LeBrun believes

Vogl's anti-Sabre bias is easily seen by the title's blurb. 

Nothing in the article points to the Sabres being forced to trade Eichel on the cheap like he seems to want to conclude.

[Weave]

37 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

There's no way an arguably fair deal gets done here without conditions. They have to be part of the deal.

If Eichel/receiving team accomplishes this/these things, then the Sabres get that thing/those things.

What makes it tricky is the matter of what present value the Sabres can expect to receive. There's no conditioning that. And there may be nothing to do there but grin and bear it, from the Sabres' perspective. The Sabres are most likely not getting a top-shelf prospect/young NHLer in this deal.

How do you establish present value for Jack?  Boy, I’d hate to be the person responsible for that evaluation.  
 

Id guess a prospect with high end potential but question marks might fit the bill of present value.  Add a conditional based on next season and another conditional one more season out.  Boy, that sounds awful, but might be fair market value…..

[thewookie1]

At minimum the Sabres should demand a Bluechip Prospect, a cap dump and some conditional stuff. 

[WildCard]

Just make it end already

[That Aud Smell]

5 minutes ago, Weave said:

Id guess a prospect with high end potential but question marks might fit the bill of present value.  Add a conditional based on next season and another conditional one more season out.  Boy, that sounds awful, but might be fair market value…..

Sadly, I think this is right on.

OTOH, there was a puff piece about Sam Ventura in today's online Buffalo News. They're building out the analytics department and, we have to hope, will be really good about what kinds of role players they bring in. Relatedly, moving Eichel's cap hit could be one of the significant benefits the team realizes from this deal.

[nfreeman]

13 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

Vogl's anti-Sabre bias is easily seen by the title's blurb. 

Nothing in the article points to the Sabres being forced to trade Eichel on the cheap like he seems to want to conclude.

Wow.  Just read LeBrun’s article and I must agree — that was a highly misleading tweet by Vogl and indicative, IMHO, of having an axe to grind with the organization.

Not impressed with Vogl’s recent work at all on this.  It’s OK and natural to have an opinion.  It’s not OK to be dishonest or to pretend or be ignorant of the key factors in a situation because you’re taking sides.

[K-9]

1 hour ago, Brawndo said:

The tweet is misleading, the article talks about Med Info being shared, Adams and Brisson talking 3-4 times a day.

That the Sabres are agreeable to a conditional pick 

Flames and Ducks are still in it LeBrun believes

Can Vogl be any more obvious in his bias against the Sabres organization with that first sentence? What an absolute joke he is as a reporter; a disgrace to the profession. 

[CallawaySabres]

Maybe a stupid question but if there are conditions involved, how does that work if major pieces in trade are players, not picks??

[That Aud Smell]

28 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Wow.  Just read LeBrun’s article and I must agree — that was a highly misleading tweet by Vogl and indicative, IMHO, of having an axe to grind with the organization.

Not impressed with Vogl’s recent work at all on this.  It’s OK and natural to have an opinion.  It’s not OK to be dishonest or to pretend or be ignorant of the key factors in a situation because you’re taking sides.

I keep reading that The Athletic is out there trying to be bought. I am sure that their rank and file are being pushed hard to generate clicks.

21 minutes ago, CallawaySabres said:

Maybe a stupid question but if there are conditions involved, how does that work if major pieces in trade are players, not picks??

Um - it doesn't. 😔

[dudacek]

Could a solution be Buffalo sending a conditional pick the other way?

For example:

• Jack Eichel and a Buffalo conditional 1st in ‘23 for Krebs and Elvenes.
• If Eichel plays x games this year, Sabres get their 1st back.
• If Eichel plays y games next year, Sabres get a Vegas 1st
• If Eichel scores z points over the next 2 years, or Vegas wins a cup, Sabres get another Vegas 1st

or something else along those lines that gives Sabres fair value if Eichel is healthy and protects the Knights if he is not.

[nfreeman]

15 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Could a solution be Buffalo sending a conditional pick the other way?

For example:

• Jack Eichel and a Buffalo conditional 1st in ‘23 for Krebs and Elvenes.
• If Eichel plays x games this year, Sabres get their 1st back.
• If Eichel plays y games next year, Sabres get a Vegas 1st
• If Eichel scores z points over the next 2 years, or Vegas wins a cup, Sabres get another Vegas 1st

or something else along those lines that gives Sabres fair value if Eichel is healthy and protects the Knights if he is not.

This is a good idea, and I can definitely see this kind of piece being part of a deal, but I don't think the Sabres are getting Krebs or Zegras or Byfield or Kakko or any other elite prospect unless and until the other GM sees Eichel playing NHL games, looking awesome and not breaking.