Jump to content

Jack Eichel: Trade rumors and speculation


LGR4GM
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, JohnC said:

Everything you say is about the past. What if the situation changes and there is a changing of attitude from the player and the organization? Those who act as if all the fault of this deteriorated relationship is due to the player are not accounting for the half generation of dysfunction coming from this befuddled organization. How could it not be understood why player/s would want to escape such a losing and chaotic situation?

What I object to is this mischaracterization of Jack as if he is a bad guy and a cancer in the room. Nothing is further from the truth. He gets along with his teammates. What you haven't heard during this extended interlude is any of his teammates anonymously criticizing him. That is telling. Has he been the best captain? No. But there is a legitimate question as to why a young player should have been bestowed with that responsibility when he wasn't ready for it. Again, another one of the organization's long list of mistakes. 

It is more likely than not that when he gets healthy he will be dealt. And if dealt it would be a blunder to trade him unless there is a maximum return  The point I'm making is that it would be wise to keep the retention option open. 

Good stuff. Particularly the middle paragraph 

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

9 hours ago, sabresparaavida said:

Theoretical: Jack ends up getting surgery and is out the season. The team plays well, but the goaltending lets us down and we finished around the bottom of the league, add one of the top 3 forward prospects, then actually get a starting caliber goalie on the team. Jack agrees to give it a shot and we have mitts and Cozens, proven top 6 players at this point, R2 playing a solid 3C, Quinn playing well after he comes up partway through, Thompson and asplund playing like good top 6ers, Skinner getting some of his game back with granato, and a full pipeline, along with power, Dahlin, and joki rounding most of a excellent top 4, with a deep backend on the left side. All this along with a brinks truck worth of cap space to add to our team. 

Eichel agrees to give it a shot and they  contend for playoffs the next year, and then go deep the year after with more development.

You and I have the same idea of what a "fantasy" league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

It all depends if Eichel is done with the Sabres in his mind. Maybe Granato can give him his "love of the game" back? I doubt it will happen but I wouldn't say no to happy Jack sticking around if he buys in to the new regime.

I agree with everything you said. And I would like to add that this is not an easy situation for this talented and passionate player. Because of his serious injury he has been sidelined for an extended period of time. Added to that stress is the unknown and dispute over what the best course of treatment should be. It can't be easy for this young player to face the possibility that he many never be the player he once was or even put himself at risk where his physical well-being will be in jeopardy for the rest of his life. 

So I'm not going to be as harsh in judging him and his responses to the situation as the majority of people are. I'm very be open to retaining him if the situation develops where that becomes the best option for the team and the player.  

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JohnC said:

 

So I'm not going to be as harsh in judging him and his responses to the situation as the majority of people are. I'm very be open to retaining him if the situation develops where that becomes the best option for the team and the player.  

If Eichel is healthy, and for SOME REASON (whatever that may be) he legit WANTS to stay with team long term, then of course consider keeping him. I think the issue what a lot of us wanting him gone is...we just don't think he wants to be here, and if you COULD convince him to stay, his heart might not be 100% with the Sabres anymore.

I want him traded simply because I think he is 'done' with the Sabres, and he will never be '100% back'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, drnkirishone said:

Here is the issue with him staying in my opinion. He can't be the captain anymore. His behavior should exclude him from it. I don't know the history of it but guessing most players don't continue playing for a team after being stripped of the captaincy.

Why are you requiring that he be stripped of his captaincy? If he regains his health (and that is an open question) he will continue to be our best and most dominant player. The time not to have bestowed the captaincy on him is when he first entered the league. That was an organizational mistake, and not his. The more favorable time to bestow the captaincy on him is when he is the most dominant and productive player on this team. And assuming that he fully regains his health that is the caliber of player he is. 

What I find odd is the cavalier way many fans are demanding that one of the best players in the league be dispatched without much regard for the return. A segment of the fanbase (not all) act as if this is a necessity for this woebegone franchise to regain its honor after perceiving that their star play disrespected the organization. What the hanging crowd isn't aware of is that this befuddled organization is not held in high regard by the league because of the shoddy  manner this franchise has been operated. 

As I said in prior posts I'm open to moving him if the return merits it. However, I would be more than happy to retain him if it is in the best interest of the franchise. I'm simply not foreclosing the retention options as many are. 

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, drnkirishone said:

Here is the issue with him staying in my opinion. He can't be the captain anymore. His behavior should exclude him from it. I don't know the history of it but guessing most players don't continue playing for a team after being stripped of the captaincy.

Schoenfeld had his C removed after 76-77 seasons in favor of Danny Gare.  This was done by Punch who apparently was not happy to see Schoeny fighting less, even though his level of play and hitting were still at a high level. 
 

Both players were traded to Detroit during 81-82 season by Scotty Bowman.   
 

 

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

39 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Schoenfeld had his C removed after 76-77 seasons in favor of Danny Gare.  This was done by Punch who apparently was not happy to see Schoeny fighting less, even though his level of play and hitting were still at a high level. 
 

Both players were traded to Detroit during 81-82 season by Scotty Bowman.   
 

 

The Neanderthal era of hockey is long gone. Thankfully, fighting for the sake of fighting is mostly nonexistent. As you point out what you should want out of your players is hard hitting and play. The goon hockey of that Punch era won't and shouldn't be tolerated in this era of skill, speed and toughness. I'm aware that I am in the minority on this issue but if I had it my way anyone who instigates a fight would be suspended 10 games for a first time offense, suspended 20 games for a second offense and then banished from the league for a year for a third time offense. It's dangerous and its stupid. If you want to see some contrived fighting it would be better to go to a Wrestlemania  match.  

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

Adams has made a very public declaration of building around people who want to be here and are entirely focused on making the Sabres better.

A captain who has very publicly expressed the opposite creates a very difficult situation for him, at least if you buy the premise that the captaincy is an important role that demands a certain standard of behaviour from the person holding it.

I don’t think Jack would have much issue returning to the room as a teammate. But as a leader? How  do you follow someone who neither shares your goal, nor believes in its possibility?

Edited by dudacek
  • Like (+1) 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

Why are you requiring that he be stripped of his captaincy? If he regains his health (and that is an open question) he will continue to be our best and most dominant player. The time not to have bestowed the captaincy on him is when he first entered the league. That was an organizational mistake, and not his. The more favorable time to bestow the captaincy on him is when he is the most dominant and productive player on this team. And assuming that he fully regains his health that is the caliber of player he is. 

What I find odd is the cavalier way many fans are demanding that one of the best players in the league be dispatched without much regard for the return. A segment of the fanbase (not all) act as if this is a necessity for this woebegone franchise to regain its honor after perceiving that their star play disrespected the organization. What the hanging crowd isn't aware of is that this befuddled organization is not held in high regard by the league because of the shoddy  manner this franchise has been operated. 

As I said in prior posts I'm open to moving him if the return merits it. However, I would be more than happy to retain him if it is in the best interest of the franchise. I'm simply not foreclosing the retention options as many are. 

Because his behavior is not what a captain should be doing. I want more qualities besides talented and point producing in a captain

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

Schoenfeld had his C removed after 76-77 seasons in favor of Danny Gare.  This was done by Punch who apparently was not happy to see Schoeny fighting less, even though his level of play and hitting were still at a high level. 
 

Both players were traded to Detroit during 81-82 season by Scotty Bowman.   
 

 

Another example would be joe Thornton. But I think they are the exceptions.

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Adams has made a very public declaration of building around people who want to be here and are entirely focused on making the Sabres better.

A captain who has very publicly expressed the opposite creates a very difficult situation for him, at least if you buy the premise that the captaincy is an important role that demands a certain standard of behaviour from the person holding it.

I don’t think Jack would have much issue returning to the room as a teammate. But as a leader? How  do you follow someone who neither shares your goal, nor believes in its possibility?

There is a good chance that Jack might not be able to play for quite awhile. So there is no need to be forced into making a decision regarding him. Situations that have deteriorated and appear to be irreconcilable between the parties involved can dramatically change over time. That doesn't mean that it will change but there is the possibility that it could change. What I have been saying is that regarding the Jack saga there is still plenty of time to allow this situation to play out before foreclosing any option.  

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

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

Situations that have deteriorated and appear to be irreconcilable between the parties involved can dramatically change over time.  

I am curious, what athletes have done so? I can't think of any that happened without the player leaving for a number of years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The Neanderthal era of hockey is long gone. Thankfully, fighting for the sake of fighting is mostly nonexistent. As you point out what you should want out of your players is hard hitting and play. The goon hockey of that Punch era won't and shouldn't be tolerated in this era of skill, speed and toughness. I'm aware that I am in the minority on this issue but if I had it my way anyone who instigates a fight would be suspended 10 games for a first time offense, suspended 20 games for a second offense and then banished from the league for a year for a third time offense. It's dangerous and its stupid. If you want to see some contrived fighting it would be better to go to a Wrestlemania  match.  

In the era I am speaking of,  they really did not just fight for the sake of fighting.  That is an unfair description.   But fighting was part of the game and it was driven by the intensity of the players on the ice - not by stupid scripted fights by players that could not play.  Those players came later in the late 80’s when each team curiously signed a goon or two that couldn’t even play hockey but was on the roster to fight and protect star players.  In the 60’s and the 70’s players labeled as fighters were also real hockey players, with very few exceptions.  Some great and talented players were guys that fought.  Don’t broad brush that era as Neanderthal.  Gordie Howe just might fire a puck straight at your helmets-less head. 
 

In my opinion, today’s regular season games, while mostly devoid of hitting and fighting, can sometimes be boring.  There are too many teams, too many mediocre players, and the stars players are spread too thin.   There are not even 32 true game dominating #1 centers for the 32 teams.  I watch it because I love hockey, but it is not as entertaining to me until the playoffs.  Then they start hitting a lot more and the games get much better.   
 

Today the skill is high.  The skating is better. The conditioning is way better,  The goaltenders are better because they are much bigger, they wear huge equipment, and they play without fear of injury.   The scripted fights by inconsequential players are gone.   

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

32 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

In the era I am speaking of,  they really did not just fight for the sake of fighting.  That is an unfair description.   But fighting was part of the game and it was driven by the intensity of the players on the ice - not by stupid scripted fights by players that could not play.  Those players came later in the late 80’s when each team curiously signed a goon or two that couldn’t even play hockey but was on the roster to fight and protect star players.  In the 60’s and the 70’s players labeled as fighters were also real hockey players, with very few exceptions.  Some great and talented players were guys that fought.  Don’t broad brush that era as Neanderthal.  Gordie Howe just might fire a puck straight at your helmets-less head. 
 

In my opinion, today’s regular season games, while mostly devoid of hitting and fighting, can sometimes be boring.  There are too many teams, too many mediocre players, and the stars players are spread too thin.   There are not even 32 true game dominating #1 centers for the 32 teams.  I watch it because I love hockey, but it is not as entertaining to me until the playoffs.  Then they start hitting a lot more and the games get much better.   
 

Today the skill is high.  The skating is better. The conditioning is way better,  The goaltenders are better because they are much bigger, they wear huge equipment, and they play without fear of injury.   The scripted fights by inconsequential players are gone.   

The 90’s gave birth to some great “power forwards” who could score and play physical and fight. Cam Neely, Mike Ricci, Kevin Stevens, Bob Probert come to mind among many others. Some of those players were my favorites growing up, because they had such an amazing blend of talent. 

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

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

In the era I am speaking of,  they really did not just fight for the sake of fighting.  That is an unfair description.   But fighting was part of the game and it was driven by the intensity of the players on the ice - not by stupid scripted fights by players that could not play.  Those players came later in the late 80’s when each team curiously signed a goon or two that couldn’t even play hockey but was on the roster to fight and protect star players.  In the 60’s and the 70’s players labeled as fighters were also real hockey players, with very few exceptions.  Some great and talented players were guys that fought.  Don’t broad brush that era as Neanderthal.  Gordie Howe just might fire a puck straight at your helmets-less head. 
 

In my opinion, today’s regular season games, while mostly devoid of hitting and fighting, can sometimes be boring.  There are too many teams, too many mediocre players, and the stars players are spread too thin.   There are not even 32 true game dominating #1 centers for the 32 teams.  I watch it because I love hockey, but it is not as entertaining to me until the playoffs.  Then they start hitting a lot more and the games get much better.   
 

Today the skill is high.  The skating is better. The conditioning is way better,  The goaltenders are better because they are much bigger, they wear huge equipment, and they play without fear of injury.   The scripted fights by inconsequential players are gone.   

I'll take this ear over the prior eras. Your last paragraph aptly points out why I have the position that I do. 

When you refer to the Gordie Howe era you looking back more than a half century ago. As time passes by things change and for the most part for the better. As I said before my preference is a minority view: Fighting should not be part of the game. It's archaic and goes against the spirit of player safety. 

Edited by JohnC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, JohnC said:

Everything you say is about the past. What if the situation changes and there is a changing of attitude from the player and the organization? Those who act as if all the fault of this deteriorated relationship is due to the player are not accounting for the half generation of dysfunction coming from this befuddled organization. How could it not be understood why player/s would want to escape such a losing and chaotic situation?

What I object to is this mischaracterization of Jack as if he is a bad guy and a cancer in the room. Nothing is further from the truth. He gets along with his teammates. What you haven't heard during this extended interlude is any of his teammates anonymously criticizing him. That is telling. Has he been the best captain? No. But there is a legitimate question as to why a young player should have been bestowed with that responsibility when he wasn't ready for it. Again, another one of the organization's long list of mistakes. 

It is more likely than not that when he gets healthy he will be dealt. And if dealt it would be a blunder to trade him unless there is a maximum return  The point I'm making is that it would be wise to keep the retention option open. 

None of his teammates have anonymously criticized him, but hasn’t one of his (ex)teammates openly criticized him?

JS Dea was not complimentary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, drnkirishone said:

Because his behavior is not what a captain should be doing. I want more qualities besides talented and point producing in a captain

Another example would be joe Thornton. But I think they are the exceptions.

Didn’t this happen to Ovie as well?  Then went on to win the cup.

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

2 hours ago, Curt said:

None of his teammates have anonymously criticized him, but hasn’t one of his (ex)teammates openly criticized him?

JS Dea was not complimentary.

Gionta talks about the locker room in Buffalo. It was not complimentary.  The mix of young Jack and Sam, with “vets” like ROR, KANE, Bogo was bad chemistry. 

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

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...