Hoss
-
Posts
22,210 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Hoss
-
-
44 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:
I honestly don't think the trade is over. I believe there will be a part two with a Dman coming here.
If Eichel, Patches, and Stone come back the VGK will be 10mil over the cap with the then 26 players.
Regardless if they have zero extras and waive McNabb they still end up 4 mil over the cap.
Between our home game against Vegas on March 10th and the end of the season, Vegas plays 24 games. They may very well be in a dog fight to make the playoffs and if Eichel and the others are already healthy I highly doubt they will elect to Kucherov Eichel and potentially miss the playoffs altogether.
As such, few teams would have the cap space to eat 5 to 8 million in March hence another deal. Just food for thought.
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.
-
1 hour ago, triumph_communes said:
Retaining salary meant we lose one of those prospects three years from now if things go well for us.
… what?
57 minutes ago, Thorny said:Retaining salary seemed like a reasonable option based on pages and pages of debate before the deal, and now that it didn't happen, it's reading like retaining salary is suddenly the biggest gaffe possible when negotiating a trade, to the point of mere discussion about the possibility of doing so is considered beyond the realm of realism.
lol
I don’t get this impression anywhere.
-
6 minutes ago, K-9 said:
No need for what? To point out that people will keep condemning KA for not taking back salary no matter what? Or to point out that there is a very good REAL reason and strategy not to?
Sorry, but the the former group bases their entire argument on conjecture.
The latter group readily sees the REAL reason why cap flexibility is critical moving forward.
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.
Just now, thewookie1 said:Oh I know, I was meaning it as if Eichel had a 2x10mil contract versus 5x10mil contract. That the impact/cost is far different
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.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, K-9 said:
For people who think KA and the rest of the front office are a bunch of inept clowns yeah, they will dig deep into the total conjecture well for a long, long time.
For people who understand the importance of maintaining optimal cap flexibility for critical decisions that will need to need to be made in the near future, not so much.
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.
3 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:Depends really, if most teams wanted 3 mil + then I too would of made it a nonstarter.
I’d be angry if we refused to retain for 2 years but I certainly understand the unwillingness to retain for 5. After all, even Krebs, Cozens, Dahlin, etc of ELCs and bridges would come up still before the 5 year time frame. Add in the unknown of what the cap will be in 5 years and it becomes a value in of itself.
You have to retain for the entire contract - can’t just retain a few years.
-
2 hours ago, The Ghost of Yuri said:
Not strictly part of the trade, but...
So they DID take a cap dump as part of the deal.
-
2 hours ago, dudacek said:
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.
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.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Thorny said:
I think the chances it may have altered the return significantly does bear conversation:
And if he's ending conversations "quickly", I'd imagine even Kevyn Adams doesn't know exactly what could have been had
This is certainly one of those “what ifs” that could stick with the front office/Pegulas for a while.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Zamboni said:
Will Jack wear #9 in Vegas?
I’m just waking up so idk if this has been answered but the team says yes, he’ll wear 9.
-
6 hours ago, LGR4GM said:
Pronman hates anyone who isn't Tuch's size and says "he's not that big" crap. 5'11" 190lbs is pretty solid.
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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
-
13 minutes ago, nfreeman said:
Serious question: if the Sabres don’t really get Tkachuk, but rather just a Reinhart-trade-level return for him, is that Calgary trade really compelling? It looks like a couple of medium-low first-rounders, a young player who is just OK and one or 2 non blue chip prospects. Am I missing something?
The trade only looks bad if you make up the bold in your head. Nobody said this.
-
-
-
32 minutes ago, pi2000 said:
K. Baker makes it sound like every mid to late pick is gonna be a superstar.
He’s literally just providing videos of their goals/plays and the stats associated with them.
-
2
-
-
14 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
I think we’ve established Chad knows nothing but he’s also probably correct here because that’s the obvious answer.
-
41 minutes ago, pi2000 said:
What a gongshow. Brisson pressing hard in the media... that deal reported by Weekes is simply bait for Vegas to up their offer. Well played by Brisson if it works, but I don't believe for a second there is any truth to it, LMAO.
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.
-
1
-
-
-
2 minutes ago, Shootica said:
Friedman absolutely said that he was getting a lot of pushback on the Weekes tweet. Said that he would never disparage another reporter but he made it clear that none of his sources were echoing what Weekes said. This was on Tim & Friends shortly after the tweet.
Now which one of them you trust more is a whole nother story.
Good to know. Hadn’t seen it mentioned anywhere.
-
1 minute ago, Flashsabre said:
Friedman denying anything doesn’t hold much weight. Guy has been a dumpster fire in regards to this trade saga.
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.
-
8 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
I mean... anything is possible.
That Vogl tweet is … something. I have no clue what that could mean.
-
3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
The Tkachuk flip maybe?
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.
Jack Eichel and 2023 3rd Traded to Vegas for F Alex Tuch, C Peyton Krebs, 2022 1st Top Ten Protected and 2023 2nd
in The Aud Club
Posted
I’m lost.