Jump to content

Jack Eichel: Trade rumors and speculation


LGR4GM

Recommended Posts

We don't need the piece Thorny wants for this year. We probably need it in the organization by October 2022. There are a lot of ways we could go about getting it from this point. Drysdale is worth getting if the best available center prospect otherwise is worse than Kravtsov. He, and other pieces in our organization, have the potential to make this team good or to help bring in that piece 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

He’s pointing out that we have unproven babies in two of our what, five most important positions, and no one behind them if they fail.

And he’s saying it would be a mistake to not use our best trade asset to address that.

I don’t agree with him given the option being discussed at the moment, but it’s hardly out of line for a topic of conversation.

On the contrary, it’s a huge concern.

Of course his concern about the center position is a legitimate issue. I'm not saying otherwise. Who disagrees that there is a center deficiency on this team?  But repeatedly pointing out what should have happened doesn't advance anything in the Jack trade rumors topic. If a prospective trading partner doesn't include a top tier center prospect then the follow-up issue is what alternative trade packages can be acceptable in a trade deal. Where you are at is where you are at!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

Of course his concern about the center position is a legitimate issue. I'm not saying otherwise. Who disagrees that there is a center deficiency on this team?  But repeatedly pointing out what should have happened doesn't advance anything in the Jack trade rumors topic. If a prospective trading partner doesn't include a top tier center prospect then the follow-up issue is what alternative trade packages can be acceptable in a trade deal. Where you are at is where you are at!

 

3 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

We don't need the piece Thorny wants for this year. We probably need it in the organization by October 2022. There are a lot of ways we could go about getting it from this point. Drysdale is worth getting if the best available center prospect otherwise is worse than Kravtsov. He, and other pieces in our organization, have the potential to make this team good or to help bring in that piece 

Ok, I'll stop mentioning it. 

  • Thanks (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Idk if agree. Maybe not to the same extent but Peterka, Poltapov, and even Quinn feature a grittiness. Kisakov and Rosen are pretty fearless. 

From what I’ve read on here, I understand the Marchand factor is an element I value more than you do.

Comtois brings that along with as much willingness to get his nose dirty and  more physical strength than any of the above. Added to the more important fact he is a good two-way hockey player, it’s a package we don’t have in the system and, in my observation, most championship teams have in their arsenal.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Of course his concern about the center position is a legitimate issue. I'm not saying otherwise. Who disagrees that there is a center deficiency on this team?  But repeatedly pointing out what should have happened doesn't advance anything in the Jack trade rumors topic. If a prospective trading partner doesn't include a top tier center prospect then the follow-up issue is what alternative trade packages can be acceptable in a trade deal. Where you are at is where you are at!

It’s funny how we complained for years that Buffalo didn’t have a solid center spine. Then, for a short time, they had one. 

Now we are back to complaining about it again. The biggest insult was Samson, who should’ve been a C all this time, but only became one at the end. 

Years of misery to draft C’s John and Samson and acquire ROR, all gone. 

Edited by Andrew Amerk
  • Like (+1) 4
  • Sad 1
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think you’re so focused on the need for centre you are ignoring other needs.

I like Joki as much as the next Sabrefan, but he certainly not a sure fire 1st-pairing RD and there is literally no one in pipeline who might be. Hell, Laaksonen is the only other RD in the the entire organization who projects as an NHL.

And while we have plenty of wingers, we have no one at all who approaches the power forward mode or plays with an edge. Pekar? Brett Murray? 

At centre we at least have two guys with legitimate shots at turning into top-six level players. I absolutely agree we need more, but we also need RHD and power forwards and this trade meets both needs.

Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good great.

But we need centers, not 30 wingers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, dudacek said:

So draft three in the 1st round next year.

Trade one of your wingers, or left defenceman for one.

You make it sound easy, but the Sabres are sitting on a top C that they can’t even trade. 

Edited by Andrew Amerk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, dudacek said:

From what I’ve read on here, I understand the Marchand factor is an element I value more than you do.

Comtois brings that along with as much willingness to get his nose dirty and  more physical strength than any of the above. Added to the more important fact he is a good two-way hockey player, it’s a package we don’t have in the system and, in my observation, most championship teams have in their arsenal.

 

 

I love what Comtois brings. I just feel there's bits and pieces of that in other wingers we have too. 

I love grit, but only when paired with talent. Comtois fits 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Krebs, Rossi, Zegras, Lafreniere, Byfield, all 1C prospects are all off the table, then there’s only one logical thing to do. Kevyn said everyone needs to have patience and this is a long game. So, it’s time to take ***** the market. Get him back on the ice and prove to GMs he’s healthy. Tell Jack we couldn’t get anything better for him than a bag of pucks and a used jock strap, which isn’t that far from the truth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SwampD said:

But, he’s a pederass.

The Jesus jabs are getting old. Don’t cry about people “bringing up religion”in hockey threads when they come to His defense. If it’s not allowed, people should stop bringing it up as a joke. 

8 hours ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

Why not The Jesus?  John Turturro would be cool.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

The Jesus jabs are getting old. Don’t cry about people “bringing up religion”in hockey threads when they come to His defense. If it’s not allowed, people should stop bringing it up as a joke. 

 

"The Jesus" is a reference to "The Big Lebowski."  The character was played by John Turturro.  I was trying to lighten things up, but I guess it fell flat.

Edited by Marvin, Sabres Fan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I-90 W said:

The Jesus jabs are getting old. Don’t cry about people “bringing up religion”in hockey threads when they come to His defense. If it’s not allowed, people should stop bringing it up as a joke. 

 

Haven’t watched The Big Lebowski, have you?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Curt said:

Haven’t watched The Big Lebowski, have you?

Nope, I haven’t. But if people so much as even named the current or former president, irregardless of context, it would be rightfully interpreted as bringing up politics. This is no different. Actually it’s much worse but I think you get my point. 
 

I don’t bring up religion around here, but I sure do have to defend Him every now and then. People unanimously don’t like these talks here, so others probably shouldn’t bring it up. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

Nope, I haven’t. But if people so much as even named the current or former president, irregardless of context, it would be rightfully interpreted as bringing up politics. This is no different. Actually it’s much worse but I think you get my point. 
 

I don’t bring up religion around here, but I sure do have to defend Him every now and then. People unanimously don’t like these talks here, so others probably shouldn’t bring it up. 

It wasn’t a religious reference.  It was a reference to a character (a league bowler named Jesus) in a film scene.

  • Thanks (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...