Hoss

I’m lost.

Contingent trades are not legal in the CBA. Vegas will figure out their cap in other ways. Doesn’t mean a second deal can’t happen with Vegas, but I don’t believe there’s any way one is already decided. Too much can change between now and then.

… what? I don’t get this impression anywhere.

There’s a REAL reason to want cap flexibility just like there’s a REAL reason to believe you have to consider all possible options and a REAL reason to think a greater return COULD have trumped cap flexibility. Understood, for sure. I think Eichel for two years would’ve been an interesting dynamic because teams may have been turned off knowing they’d only have one FULL year.

I’ve been playing a lot of catch-up so I’m not sure if this was posted but: the picks move back a year if the Vegas pick doesn’t translate this season (meaning if it ends up top 10). In that scenario, the Vegas first becomes 2023, their second becomes 2024 and our third becomes 2024.

There’s no need for this. It’s a worthy thought one way or the other. I don’t believe this team is going to be spending so close to the cap that retaining $1-3M on Eichel for five years was going to be a difference maker. No chance I would’ve retained $5M unless the return was essentially double what they got from Vegas, but that’s obviously not set in reality. You have to retain for the entire contract - can’t just retain a few years.

So they DID take a cap dump as part of the deal.

I bet this is the “outside pressure” the Sabres felt. Probably knew the Eichel interview was coming and didn’t want to deal with the press.

This is certainly one of those “what ifs” that could stick with the front office/Pegulas for a while.

I’m just waking up so idk if this has been answered but the team says yes, he’ll wear 9.

Every single thing he said about him was a compliment except the part about finishing issues which is accurate.

I’m glad this is finally over, just as everyone else seems to be. This is the value you get for a broken Jack Eichel, nothing more, nothing less. The pick protection is the only real frustrating part and there is a chance (considering Tuch’s injury situation) this is a true zero for Eichel in five years BUT that’s, again, what you’d expect. I feel that’s very unlikely. I haven’t been big on Krebs before but he has made some beautiful play. There was a cross-ice pass for an assist in the playoffs (I think?) last year that changed my mind on him already. The most important questions have yet to be asked: What number will Tuch wear? Mogilny remains the only 89 in team history, his precious numbers are 10 (taken), 12, 17, 37 (taken), 53 (taken). What number will Krebs wear? He wore 18 in Vegas which is retired. 19 was his Juniors number and is available. He has also worn 17. Eichel? 9 and 11 are both available in Vegas (but 15 isn’t). So is 69.

The trade only looks bad if you make up the bold in your head. Nobody said this.

He’s literally just providing videos of their goals/plays and the stats associated with them.

I think we’ve established Chad knows nothing but he’s also probably correct here because that’s the obvious answer.

I don’t think for a second Weekes goes to the media with that offer if Brisson is the lone source. The thinking on reporting and sourcing of information here needs to evolve.

Good to know. Hadn’t seen it mentioned anywhere.

Friedman hasn’t denied anything, that poster is just a boring troll.

I wonder if the external pressure is as simple as another team saying they’re done talking at midnight.

That Vogl tweet is … something. I have no clue what that could mean.

You just take the deal and work on the deal with him on your roster and on the ice. That’s one that probably plays better in the offseason but basically you can just take the best deal once available.