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

[Porous Five Hole]

25 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Why? I really don't understand why we care at all about Boychuk and his 6mil in cap. 

Probably still sore about “the slash.”

[Doohicksie]

25 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Why? The team is at 61.5 according to capfriendly without the ghost of Boychuk.  It better be a decent draft pick.

That included Krebs too, who's being assigned to Rochester.  Plus when you send Murray back down, you're below the cap.  $6 million seems a bit steep, but there may not have been other contracts to grab for only one year for a lesser cost.

[Standing Room Smoking Cigs]

I have to think that the Sabres may end up being the ultimate expansion franchise team 51 years on... If there is player movement of veterans this year, the Sabres will literally have no cast offs from other teams... A team that may average 23 years... The potential to bring in 12 players under 22..

[K-9]

3 minutes ago, Porous Five Hole said:

Probably still sore about “the slash.”

[Doohicksie]

20 minutes ago, Thorny said:

just curious as to what side that would be, that would be giving up those considerations in said future 

Oh, it would probably be something like the Isles taking a similar contract back at some point in the future when they're a little short of the floor or something.

Didn't we get Butcher for "future considerations" from the Devils?  Checking.... yes, and we got a 5th round pick from NJ as well.  For future considerations that the Sabres will some day give to the Devils. 

I'm guessing there's some rule that says one team can't simply "give" a player to another team, so they trade for "future considerations" and those considerations are either never fulfilled or they come out in the wash.  Like if we didn't want Hayden anymore and NJ could use him, he could fulfill the "future considerations" of the Butcher deal and we'd send him to NJ.

Edited November 4, 2021 by The Ghost of Yuri

[Cheektorado]

8 minutes ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

That included Krebs too, who's being assigned to Rochester.  Plus when you send Murray back down, you're below the cap.  $6 million seems a bit steep, but there may not have been other contracts to grab for only one year for a lesser cost.

It's $6M in cap but it sounds like he only costs just over $1M in actual cash.  Like I said in the trade thread there is still plenty of cap if they have a chance to sign a player they really want during the year.

[nfreeman]

11 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I understand we can't be "sure" but to think retention being a "non-starter" in Adams own words, didn't potentially limit SOME discussion with teams would be stretching believability to the breaking point. He doesn't need to "cut them out completely" for that to be the case. 

I feel the degree of difficulty I'm needing to reach here a little extreme. When the GM says it was a "non-starter" in negotiations, ie, the negotiations didn't start, I think the burden of proof falls on the other side. It would need to be satisfactorily explained why a non-starter WOULDN'T limit options

imo

 particularly when the KEY piece in this trade came at the END of discussions 

Respectfully, I think you're taking this too literally.

It seems pretty clear that KA wasn't interested in handicapping the Sabres' cap flexibility for the next 5 years.  Would the handicap of, say, a $1MM cap retention been worth, say, 2 more first-round picks?  Almost certainly yes, but something like that was almost certainly not on the table.

For salary retention to have been meaningful to the acquiror, it would've had to have been in a substantial amount.  KA wasn't interested in locking up a substantial amount of cap space for the next 5 years.  He didn't use those exact words, but I think the meaning is pretty clear.

[Kruppstahl]

7 hours ago, Taro T said:

Probably about as good a deal as they could muster given all the issues.  

But still don't agree that this additional resetting of the reset of the original rebuild was necessary.

Are you kidding?  We just gave away something like a Top 10 C for mostly nothing in return.

We were ALWAYS going to lose this deal, which is a huge reason why I never wanted to move Eichel or Reinhart.

Eichel will flourish in Vegas assuming his neck is OK post surgery.

We just gave up a 1.3 PPG center for bits of crap here and there.

Awesome!

Turning value into less value is what this organization does extremely well.

 

 

 

 

[Doohicksie]

19 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

Guys on NHL on Sirius acting like Eichel will be 100% healthy.  Calling him a 100 point player.  No talk of the potential for him never being the same again.  
 

Full blown Eichel circle jerk. 

I still say there's a significant risk that he will either never play again, or more likely, will never be able to play at the level he was capable of in the past.  I think the most likely scenario is a near-complete return to form, but there are risks out there.  I think one risk is that the ADR is not successful and they need to do the fusion immediately, leading to the longer recovery time so Jack would lose all of this season including playoffs.

We on this forum have been living and breathing the Eichel saga for months now.  I think most of the rest of the league and its fans haven't delved too deeply into what's going on.  In many cases I bet they've only heard the Eichel side of the propaganda so they think this surgery is no big deal.  Whatever.

23 minutes ago, Cheektorado said:

I know a lot about NFL contracts and cap situations BUT I admit I do not know the NHL.  I just have to go along with the move as something that the Sabres need to do to not concern themselves with future moves.  I can see that happening when/if they want to bring some more kids up during the year.

With Krebs in Rochester they are right at the floor.  When Mitts returns (for instance) and they want to send Murray down, they'll be below the floor without Murray's salary.

[SDS]

4 minutes ago, Kruppstahl said:

Are you kidding?  We just gave away something like a Top 10 C for mostly nothing in return.

We were ALWAYS going to lose this deal, which is a huge reason why I never wanted to move Eichel or Reinhart.

Eichel will flourish in Vegas assuming his neck is OK post surgery.

We just gave up a 1.3 PPG center for bits of crap here and there.

Awesome!

Turning value into less value is what this organization does extremely well.

[Doohicksie]

25 minutes ago, JoeSchmoe said:

I've been working all day and haven't had a chance to follow these threads too closely... But has anyone been posting any future lineups with Krebs, Tuch, JJ, Quinn, and Power?

Holy crap... We have a chance to be good... Maybe real good... and maybe by the end of this year (though I still don't trust the goaltending).

There's some discussion here: 

 

[Doohicksie]

10 minutes ago, Kruppstahl said:

Eichel will flourish in Vegas assuming his neck is OK post surgery.

IF his neck is OK post surgery.

[Cheektorado]

4 minutes ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

With Krebs in Rochester they are right at the floor.  When Mitts returns (for instance) and they want to send Murray down, they'll be below the floor without Murray's salary.

Agree.  I also think that there's the chance that later in the year a guy like Eakin could get replaced for a young guy.  

[Marvin]

8 minutes ago, Kruppstahl said:

Are you kidding?  We just gave away something like a Top 10 C for mostly nothing in return.

We were ALWAYS going to lose this deal, which is a huge reason why I never wanted to move Eichel or Reinhart.

Eichel will flourish in Vegas assuming his neck is OK post surgery.

We just gave up a 1.3 PPG center for bits of crap here and there.

Awesome!

Turning value into less value is what this organization does extremely well.

A few points -- not to criticise your point of view, but to give you a bit of perspective.

1. Eichel wanted out.  (As did Reinhart and Ristolainen, for that matter.)  So, as you said, we were going to lose this trade, so the best we can hope for is to mitigate the losses.

2. I am very leery of the ADR.  I hope it goes well for him because the worst case scenario is that he becomes paralysed at a later date.  I don't wish that on anyone no matter how I feel about them.

3. Tuch and Krebs are not "crap".  They are lesser talents than Eichel, but then again, so were Michael Peca and Jay McKee relative to Alexander Mogilny.  I doubt anyone would want to undo that trade.  Maybe we get lucky again.

[SabresBillsFan]

3 hours ago, Hawerchuk said:

Alex Tuch got better each year when playing for Vegas. Loved watching him for the 4 seasons. Glad he was included in the deal.

As a fan of both teams and living in Vegas, I love Tuch and like Krebs as well. But I’m also a huge Eichel fan. Happy for both teams.

[Thorner]

19 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Respectfully, I think you're taking this too literally.

It seems pretty clear that KA wasn't interested in handicapping the Sabres' cap flexibility for the next 5 years.  Would the handicap of, say, a $1MM cap retention been worth, say, 2 more first-round picks?  Almost certainly yes, but something like that was almost certainly not on the table.

For salary retention to have been meaningful to the acquiror, it would've had to have been in a substantial amount.  KA wasn't interested in locking up a substantial amount of cap space for the next 5 years.  He didn't use those exact words, but I think the meaning is pretty clear.

Do you think it's possible a good asset could have been had by retaining a substantial amount for the full 5?

Which bit did I take too literally? My impression was he drew a hard-line stance on significant retention 

Edited November 4, 2021 by Thorny

[K-9]

Just now, SabresBillsFan said:

As a fan of both teams and living in Vegas, I love Tuch and like Krebs as well. But I’m also a huge Eichel fan. Happy for both teams.

This is a refreshingly healthy take. Much appreciated. 

[steveoath]

What happens to Eichel the first time he plays against the Tom Wilsons/Claude Lemuiexs of this world who target his neck? For me that would be one of the biggest worries. 

[dudacek]

22 minutes ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:

Oh, it would probably be something like the Isles taking a similar contract back at some point in the future when they're a little short of the floor or something.

Didn't we get Butcher for "future considerations" from the Devils?  Checking.... yes, and we got a 5th round pick from NJ as well.  For future considerations that the Sabres will some day give to the Devils. 

I'm guessing there's some rule that says one team can't simply "give" a player to another team, so they trade for "future considerations" and those considerations are either never fulfilled or they come out in the wash.  Like if we didn't want Hayden anymore and NJ could use him, he could fulfill the "future considerations" of the Butcher deal and we'd send him to NJ.

It was reported that the future considerations in the Butcher deal were and will continue to be literally nothing.

I suspect that is the case here. It's often industry jargon for 'free'

[nfreeman]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Do you think it's possible a good asset could have been had by retaining a substantial amount for the full 5?

Not an asset good enough to justify the retention.  

[SabresBillsFan]

1 minute ago, K-9 said:

This is a refreshingly healthy take. Much appreciated. 

Season ticket holder for the Knights and have seen Tuch get better each season and excited to see how Krebs develop. But from what I’ve seen of Krebs he’s going to be a solid nhler. Great vision, and more of a playmaker but he is a hustler!

[Marvin]

6 minutes ago, SabresBillsFan said:

As a fan of both teams and living in Vegas, I love Tuch and like Krebs as well. But I’m also a huge Eichel fan. Happy for both teams.

Thank you for this perspective.  I think Tuch, Krebs, and a 1st is a solid return for a broken Eichel.

[Zamboni]

Bottom line is all things considered with what Vegas IS risking and all things considered with what the Sabres got in return… It was a fair deal for both sides with some inherent risk for both sides. As it stands right now in November… Neither side got the better of the other team. At least that’s how I see it.

[French Collection]

4 minutes ago, steveoath said:

What happens to Eichel the first time he plays against the Tom Wilsons/Claude Lemuiexs of this world who target his neck? For me that would be one of the biggest worries. 

Don’t worry, they have Ryan Reaves to protect him, ooopsies. Maybe Lehner will lose his sh.. on someone.

[Cheektorado]

1 minute ago, SabresBillsFan said:

Season ticket holder for the Knights and have seen Tuch get better each season and excited to see how Krebs develop. But from what I’ve seen of Krebs he’s going to be a solid nhler. Great vision, and more of a playmaker but he is a hustler!

That is becoming a theme for the type of player that GMKA desires.