Jack Eichel and 2023 3rd Traded to Vegas for F Alex Tuch, C Peyton Krebs, 2022 1st Top Ten Protected and 2023 2nd

[SabresVet]

 

53 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Honestly have never expected the Pegulas to be unwilling to spend if they think it'll actually help the cause.

The only time they've EVER seemed to cheap out were when O'Reilly was traded & personally believe that was personal to them (they didn't want to pay THAT guy any more than they'd already paid him & that bit us all in the bippy) & when they made significant cuts to the back office & front office when COVID hit.

Suppose they've cheaped out on GM hires, but at least 2 of those were recommended by people they trusted and this last 1 was based on their own 1st hand interactions with him.

But would be mildly surprised if a majority of that cap space gets spent on FAs.  Expect they've got a bunch of it penciled in on raises for guys that are currently here.

Something changed with the Sabres going back to the end of the Botterill era.  For example, that slide presentation referencing "lifestyle maintenance" or something similar.  Firing Botterill weeks after giving him a vote of confidence, which I always took was JB's refusal to gut their front office which later happened.  Money has become so important to them when previously it wasn't and winning was more of a priority.  I'm not going to demand ownership take financial losses, but if you're not exhausting options then you're not trying to win.  And with the virus largely over, it's going to be interesting how they approach spending next season.   

I see the Pegula's responding proportionally and keeping spending down until the fans return.  When that is, I don't know, but it won't be soon.  This team has no marketable stars aside from perhaps Dahlin and he's been so-so lately.

 

[Standing Room Smoking Cigs]

I like this trade... Sabres lose a $10,000,000 contract. Buffalo will always have to pay extra because of the a lot a things, especially since it's been a decade since this team mattered. GMKA, was clear that trading with some salary retention was a non-starter... He said the team needs flexibility going forward to the future, I think at the trade deadline, that the possibility of retention money could be in play. Girgensons may be moved and if we retain salary it may yield a higher (possible 3rd round)... Skinner isn't going anywhere unless there is desperate GM who's job depends on some playoff success. Speaking for myself... I think maybe moving Olofsson could possibly garner the team a 2nd rounder... Honestly... this team should compete at the latest 23-24. The prospect pool they have and will have is incredible... I'm talking the Habs prospects 50 years ago

[Thorner]

10 minutes ago, dudacek said:

75 per cent on the 4 1sts.

But he also checked off his following goals in the trade: avoiding retention; avoiding cap dumps, avoiding conditional picks, and adding legit top 6 (centre) prospect.

Do we buy this?

Every indication we got was the difference between "more or less" was named Peyton Krebs.

I'm not sure if we buy it. It's been posted often though that Krebs WASN'T on the table, so that respected analysts are saying contrary to that I think does serve an appropriate balance

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, Standing Room Smoking Cigs said:

I like this trade... Sabres lose a $10,000,000 contract. Buffalo will always have to pay extra because of the a lot a things, especially since it's been a decade since this team mattered. GMKA, was clear that trading with some salary retention was a non-starter... He said the team needs flexibility going forward to the future, I think at the trade deadline, that the possibility of retention money could be in play. Girgensons may be moved and if we retain salary it may yield a higher (possible 3rd round)... Skinner isn't going anywhere unless there is desperate GM who's job depends on some playoff success. Speaking for myself... I think maybe moving Olofsson could possibly garner the team a 2nd rounder... Honestly... this team should compete at the latest 23-24. The prospect pool they have and will have is incredible... I'm talking the Habs prospects 50 years ago

Why would you want to trade Olofosson for a second round pick when he is demonstrating that he is capable of being a second line player who can score on a team that lacks scorers? He's been a pleasant surprise that has come up from your own system. He's a player that you should be happy to have and not eager to dispatch. 

[Thorner]

I do think it's pretty clear retention COULD have significantly altered the deal, though. That it was a non-starter ruled out teams, and I can't see how Adams could have adequately gauged the trade market by ruling out retention so early in the process. That is one thing I can say I definitely didn't like hearing, that retention was a non-starter. 

Don't always agree with Greg but he does a good job here imo laying out both the factors working against Adams beyond his control, and the factors working against that were self imposed

https://www.espn.com/nhl/insider/story/_/id/32550032/nhl-trade-grades-golden-knights-trade-jack-eichel-send-peyton-krebs-alex-tuch-picks-sabres

 

Edited November 4, 2021 by Thorny

[North Buffalo]

2 hours ago, calti said:

sounds about fair for the situation ..Vegas is the one taking a risk....Altho is it wrong to hope that Eichel has a great career and the surgery goes beautifully?

Yes it is 👺

[Standing Room Smoking Cigs]

3 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Why would you want to trade Olofosson for a second round pick when he is demonstrating that he is capable of being a second line player who can score on a team that lacks scorers? He's been a pleasant surprise that has come up from your own system. He's a player that you should be happy to have and not eager to dispatch. 

Is Olofosson a 5,000,000 player 2 years from now... He may be, but in honesty I don't see a position for him in 2 years with the prospects... It could burn the Sabres but his contract could be 3 young players going forward 2 years fromnow

[Thorner]

But in the end we'll never know what we could have got, even by retaining, so, might as well just hope for the best from the guys we got and I'll judge Adams on the deal based on how the components play, and mostly on if the team becomes good or not.

I hope the team becomes good. Shall see! 

[Doohicksie]

43 minutes ago, Thorny said:

And if he's ending conversations "quickly", I'd imagine even Kevyn Adams doesn't know exactly what could have been had 

I really think that's irrelevant.  The Sabres would be okay for a couple of years but beyond that any retained salary would hamper the Sabres' ability to retain the talent they're amassing.

[Ruff Around The Edges]

Greg Wyshynski is and forever will be a smug Sabres hater. I knew him from a Devils board way back before he became big time and he was always salty about Hasek winning Venizas over his boy Brodeur. Always take what he says about Buffalo with a grain of salt and more saltiness from him.

[MODO Hockey]

 

 

What a shitshow this org really is.

[LGR4GM]

Salary Retention for 5 years to up the deal = Trees

Understanding your cap situation will be significantly different in years 4 and 5 when you plan to be very competitive = Forest

You have to see the forest through the trees. 

Edited November 4, 2021 by LGR4GM

[Thorner]

Just now, Ruff Around The Edges said:

Greg Wyshynski is and forever will be a smug Sabres hater. I knew him from a Devils board way back before he became big time and he was always salty about Hasek winning Venizas over his boy Brodeur. Always take what he says about Buffalo with a grain of salt and more saltiness from him.

His point that the Sabres could have gained more by retaining though isn't a biased viewpoint - it's a common practice from many "good" teams in this league. In the end it bothers me less that they didn't retain, not retaining may very well have been the best option all things considered - what rubs me the wrong way is more that it apparently was a very hard "non starter". I think finding out what COULD have been had from other teams, keeping more teams in the loop, would have made sense. Just allows the accumulation of more info.

[LGR4GM]

10 minutes ago, MODO Hockey said:

 

 

What a shitshow this org really is.

You don't like the trade? 

[Doohicksie]

27 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I hate to say it, but what motivation was there for KA to do this earlier?  Would having an injured Tuch and a green Krebs (probably still in Rochester even if acquired prior to the season) have made a difference to the Sabres?  If not, then so what?

[LGR4GM]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

His point that the Sabres could have gained more by retaining though isn't a biased viewpoint - it's a common practice from many "good" teams in this league. In the end it bothers me less that they didn't retain, not retaining may very well have been the best option all things considered - what rubs me the wrong way is more that it apparently was a very hard "non starter". I think finding out what COULD have been had from other teams, keeping more teams in the loop, would have made sense. Just allows the accumulation of more info.

What team has retained salary for 5 years and you don't know how much. If it was 1 million, sure Adams should have retained but if it was 3-5 million, hell no. 

[Thorner]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Salary Retention for 5 years to up the deal = Trees

Understanding your cap situation will be significantly different in years 4 and 5 when you plan to be very competitive = Forest

You have to see the forest through the trees. 

Larger Forest: some people don't think waiting 4 or 5 years to be competitive is a good strategy and it's ok to have a difference of opinion on what strategy is prudent 

[LGR4GM]

10 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Larger Forest: some people don't think waiting 4 or 5 years to be competitive is a good strategy and it's ok to have a difference of opinion on what strategy is prudent 

Yea, I remember those ppl in 2015 when I lost my ***** as we traded away all our top picks and then in 2016-2018 as we tried that same strategy instead of building through the draft like we should have. Botterill and Murray traded quite a few picks over the years instead of trying to stockpile talent is my point. We need that critical mass of talent and always have. 

We might be competitive next year but the elcs run out in year 3 so years 4 and 5 are where you need the salary. 

Edited November 4, 2021 by LGR4GM

[PerreaultForever]

Finally caught up! Glad it's over!

Overall I think a reasonable and fair trade. If Eichel recovers fully and plays to his potential maybe history will say Vegas won the deal, but I think we got about all we could under the circumstances and will be a better team for it. If Eichel really is a s##t and there was locker room issues due to him and such well then we will win the deal hands down and Vegas will slide. Time will tell. My guess is he racks up points and they do well but he will never take them to the promised land and in the long run we will be better. Our foundation is improving. 

I really like Tuch as a player and think he is exactly the type of guy we need. He is a character guy, a playoff guy, a fierce competitor, and it will rub off on his team mates. Being a local-ish boy won't hurt at all. Once he's back and healthy we are all going to love this guy.

Krebs has great potential. I'd really like to see Cozens on his wing IN ROCHESTER for this season. The future is brighter.

Wish the pick wasn't lottery protected as Vegas could miss this year with all their injuries but picks are picks and don't mean anything until you see what you get down the road. Helps stock the cupboard.

So I'm satisfied. Not ecstatic, but satisfied. and really really glad it's over. 

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

What team has retained salary for 5 years and you don't know how much. If it was 1 million, sure Adams should have retained but if it was 3-5 million, hell no. 

Ya like I said for me it's more so the apparent hard-line stance on it. I think it should have been a consideration, depending on what it would have garnered in return. Obviously there is a point where retention would be worth it, it's not an unmatchable asset. 

4 minutes ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

I hate to say it, but what motivation was there for KA to do this earlier?  Would having an injured Tuch and a green Krebs (probably still in Rochester even if acquired prior to the season) have made a difference to the Sabres?  If not, then so what?

There's a human side I subscribe to in this situation, as well. YMMV on that

[dudacek]

Friedman just told Marek that Krebs was always a player Buffalo targeted and that he was put on the table about a week  ago.

He spoke to Jack face-to-face this morning. Clips coming later.

Interview was scheduled before the trade happened and he thinks it would have gone a lot differently if it had not. Suggested the desire to avoid that may have helped close the deal.

Edited November 4, 2021 by dudacek

[DarthEbriate]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Salary Retention for 5 years to up the deal = Trees

Understanding your cap situation will be significantly different in years 4 and 5 when you plan to be very competitive = Forest

You have to see the forest through the trees. 

Roger roger that. In 5 years we'll be on second contracts (health/performance permitting) of Cozens, Krebs, JJP, Quinn, Power, and Samuelsson. We've also learned from the Concept of Moulson Ehrhoff Hodsgon Bylsma Krueger. There's only so many people you want to be paying to not be on your team at a time.

And we now know that the Pegulas are out of drills lying about for more wells and will be running an efficient operation so as not to crimp their lifestyle. Priorities have changed in the last 10 years. I figure they'll spend to the cap again someday, but not until the team is considered a leaguewide contender.

[Doohicksie]

7 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You don't like the trade? 

He doesn't like the Sabres.

[PerreaultForever]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

Ya like I said for me it's more so the apparent hard-line stance on it. I think it should have been a consideration, depending on what it would have garnered in return. Obviously there is a point where retention would be worth it, it's not an unmatchable asset. 

As a counter, retaining salary for any length of time is a constant reminder and this gives you more of a clean slate. We will be in great shape to add players or sign kids longer term if they earn it even with the Skinner burden. Retaining salary for another pick? Not really worth it. 

[Marvin]

29 minutes ago, Standing Room Smoking Cigs said:

I like this trade... Sabres lose a $10,000,000 contract. Buffalo will always have to pay extra because of the a lot a things, especially since it's been a decade since this team mattered. GMKA, was clear that trading with some salary retention was a non-starter... He said the team needs flexibility going forward to the future, I think at the trade deadline, that the possibility of retention money could be in play. Girgensons may be moved and if we retain salary it may yield a higher (possible 3rd round)... Skinner isn't going anywhere unless there is desperate GM who's job depends on some playoff success. Speaking for myself... I think maybe moving Olofsson could possibly garner the team a 2nd rounder... Honestly... this team should compete at the latest 23-24. The prospect pool they have and will have is incredible... I'm talking the Habs prospects 50 years ago

Welcome.