Jump to content

Shopping Jack Eichel: Minnesota


dudacek

Recommended Posts

On 8/27/2021 at 10:16 AM, Thorny said:

There must be a breaking point? How much of a return are you willing to sacrifice to keep 2.5 mil of space open? If by keeping 2.5 we were able to get Rossi, and if we don't, we have to settle for, I dunno, a Turcotte level C and 2 firsts, do you still rule out the possibility? 

You haven't filled out the Minnesota trade so I can't answer. 

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

15 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

You haven't filled out the Minnesota trade so I can't answer. 

Eichel with 2.5 Million retained for Rossi, Boldy, 2022 1st and a conditional 2023 2nd that becomes a first with a total of 35 games played for Eichel in the Regular Season and Playoffs. This allows for some injury risk protection for Minnesota. 

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

7 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Eichel with 2.5 Million retained for Rossi, Boldy, 2022 1st and a conditional 2023 2nd that becomes a first with a total of 35 games played for Eichel in the Regular Season and Playoffs. This allows for some injury risk protection for Minnesota. 

Did you say this deal would be done if Sabres were willing to retain at this point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Eichel with 2.5 Million retained for Rossi, Boldy, 2022 1st and a conditional 2023 2nd that becomes a first with a total of 35 games played for Eichel in the Regular Season and Playoffs. This allows for some injury risk protection for Minnesota. 

I would be very happy just to get the highlighted portion above.  I doubt the deal will be this simple at this point.  Minnesota has really been playing up Rossi to the fanbase.  As we get closer to rookie camps in September it's becoming less likely but I haven't lost faith in a trade with them yet.

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

4 hours ago, Brawndo said:

Eichel with 2.5 Million retained for Rossi, Boldy, 2022 1st and a conditional 2023 2nd that becomes a first with a total of 35 games played for Eichel in the Regular Season and Playoffs. This allows for some injury risk protection for Minnesota. 

Just looking at the players/assets coming, yes, I would take it and feel good about it. 
 

I would need to see a team salary projection from now to the end of Eichel’s contract to understand the impact of carrying the $2.5M.    Also need language on what happens if Jack can’t play due to the surgery or future injury that removes all Sabres liability.  

Edited by Pimlach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Digger said:

I would be very happy just to get the highlighted portion above.  I doubt the deal will be this simple at this point.  Minnesota has really been playing up Rossi to the fanbase.  As we get closer to rookie camps in September it's becoming less likely but I haven't lost faith in a trade with them yet.

I do think Krill plays into this as well. I imagine Eichel is more appealing than Rossi at this point in time for Him to play with and might entice a longer contract extension with the Wild. 

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

1 minute ago, Brawndo said:

I do think Krill plays into this as well. I imagine Eichel is more appealing than Rossi at this point in time for Him to play with and might entice a longer contract extension with the Wild. 

I agree.  Kaprizov's contract term and salary may be playing a role.  I would agree that he would most likely want to play with an established center than a rookie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Brawndo said:

Eichel with 2.5 Million retained for Rossi, Boldy, 2022 1st and a conditional 2023 2nd that becomes a first with a total of 35 games played for Eichel in the Regular Season and Playoffs. This allows for some injury risk protection for Minnesota. 

No. Take out the conditions and make the 2023 a first and sure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

No. Take out the conditions and make the 2023 a first and sure. 

You would nix a deal on the conditional pick? I would take that offer in a heartbeat. With Rossi, Boldy, Quinn, Peterka and Rosen in the pipeline you can see the accumulation of talent for the top two lines in a couple of years. What that would represent is legitimate hope. 

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

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

You are the guy on Deal or No Deal who now walks away with nothing

 

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

You would nix a deal on the conditional pick? I would take that offer in a heartbeat. With Rossi, Boldy, Quinn, Peterka and Rosen in the pipeline you can see the accumulation of talent for the top two lines in a couple of years. What that would represent is legitimate hope. 

I'm not retaining 2.5 million for 5 YEARS, just to get a conditional 1st in 2023.

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

27 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

 

I'm not retaining 2.5 million for 5 YEARS, just to get a conditional 1st in 2023.

The Sabres are not retaining salary to get that pick.  They are retaining it to get the additional prospect, or better prospect.

Edited by New Scotland (NS)
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

 

I'm not retaining 2.5 million for 5 YEARS, just to get a conditional 1st in 2023.

The issue over the conditional pick is a miniscule issue. It is between getting a first round pick if conditions are met as opposed to getting a second round pick if the Jack playing time isn't met. The substantive return are the two top tiers prospects plus the first round pick in 2022. As for as retaining salaries I'm sure that the 2.5 m can be negotiated down to between 1.5-2.0 M. Very often when a high salaried player is dealt the sending team is required to take back another player/contract. So retaining salary is not much different from adding a contract in order to get a deal consummated. As the saying goes: Let's not let perfect be the enemy of the good.   

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

34 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The issue over the conditional pick is a miniscule issue. It is between getting a first round pick if conditions are met as opposed to getting a second round pick if the Jack playing time isn't met. The substantive return are the two top tiers prospects plus the first round pick in 2022. As for as retaining salaries I'm sure that the 2.5 m can be negotiated down to between 1.5-2.0 M. Very often when a high salaried player is dealt the sending team is required to take back another player/contract. So retaining salary is not much different from adding a contract in order to get a deal consummated. As the saying goes: Let's not let perfect be the enemy of the good.   

I don't agree with you. I'm not the Sabres gm. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Very often when a high salaried player is dealt the sending team is required to take back another player/contract. So retaining salary is not much different from adding a contract in order to get a deal consummated.

I respectfully disagree. You could attempt to trade the cap dump player, or acquire one that serves a role.  Dead cap space is just dead space. 

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

1 hour ago, steveoath said:

I respectfully disagree. You could attempt to trade the cap dump player, or acquire one that serves a role.  Dead cap space is just dead space. 

Do you know what is more important than cap space especially for a team that has plenty of cap room? Adding potential first or second line players to the roster for a rebuilding team. 

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

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

The issue over the conditional pick is a miniscule issue. It is between getting a first round pick if conditions are met as opposed to getting a second round pick if the Jack playing time isn't met. The substantive return are the two top tiers prospects plus the first round pick in 2022. As for as retaining salaries I'm sure that the 2.5 m can be negotiated down to between 1.5-2.0 M. Very often when a high salaried player is dealt the sending team is required to take back another player/contract. So retaining salary is not much different from adding a contract in order to get a deal consummated. As the saying goes: Let's not let perfect be the enemy of the good.   

Retaining is very different when the existing term is 5 years.  A cap dump is rarely anything greater than one year.  In addition to this, Minnesota has no true “cap dumps” so retention is their only preference in making a trade cap compliant.  I have no evidence to support this but I think Terry is 100% against retention.  He wants the contract gone and paying $1-2.5m annually to see John play elsewhere would draw his ire.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Broken Ankles said:

Retaining is very different when the existing term is 5 years.  A cap dump is rarely anything greater than one year.  In addition to this, Minnesota has no true “cap dumps” so retention is their only preference in making a trade cap compliant.  I have no evidence to support this but I think Terry is 100% against retention.  He wants the contract gone and paying $1-2.5m annually to see John play elsewhere would draw his ire.  

There were reports that Carolina was willing to offer a lot more for a ROR trade than what St. Louis gave us.  The condition was that there needed to be some salary retention. In hindsight the Carolina offer would have benefited the team much more. If Rossi and Boldy were part of a deal that included a first round pick a reasonable salary retention would make sense especially when considering that the Sabres are dealing a prime player who not only is not fully healthy but alos who may never be the player he once was. 

Let me also add that this team has been mired in the muck of mediocrity during Terry Pegula's decade long tenure. As an owner he has made a lot of blundering decisions that has kept this sunken franchise submerged. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, JohnC said:

There were reports that Carolina was willing to offer a lot more for a ROR trade than what St. Louis gave us.  The condition was that there needed to be some salary retention. In hindsight the Carolina offer would have benefited the team much more. If Rossi and Boldy were part of a deal that included a first round pick a reasonable salary retention would make sense especially when considering that the Sabres are dealing a prime player who not only is not fully healthy but alos who may never be the player he once was. 

Let me also add that this team has been mired in the muck of mediocrity during Terry Pegula's decade long tenure. As an owner he has made a lot of blundering decisions that has kept this sunken franchise submerged. 

This is not accurate. 

It was not salary retention, it was we pay his 7.5 mil signing bonus. A one time thing with no cap ramifications. 

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

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

This is not accurate. 

It was not salary retention, it was we pay his 7.5 mil signing bonus. A one time thing with no cap ramifications. 

Pegula is not concerned with cap ramifications. He is concerned with the bulk $$$ regardless how it is categorized. If you multiply $1.5 X 5 yrs. you get $7.5 M. That would be in the range of the total salary retention that is referred to by some accounts for a Jack deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If only the CBA allowed for conditional salary retention. Essentially the Sabres would retain a portion of Eichel’s salary but if he meets a certain performance point the retention disappears for either the next year or multiple years.

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

10 hours ago, JohnC said:

Pegula is not concerned with cap ramifications. He is concerned with the bulk $$$ regardless how it is categorized. If you multiply $1.5 X 5 yrs. you get $7.5 M. That would be in the range of the total salary retention that is referred to by some accounts for a Jack deal. 

Your post was not accurate and that was my point. Adams is 100% concerned with cap ramifications. 

Also, if Pegula is such a penny pincher why are the Sabres hiring 2 front office ppl and why was KA allowed to fire another coach that will still get paid? 

Again, comparing retaining 2.5 million, the cost we were talking about before you changed the number,  for 5 years (12.5 million dollars) to a one time signing bonus isn't the same. You have to carry 2.5 mil less against the cap and we might not care this year, or next year but years 3-5 you might need that extra space. 

If you're giving someone Eichel for 7.5 million bucks instead of 10 for the next 5 years, they need to significantly sweeten the deal. 

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

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...