Shopping Jack Eichel: Anaheim

[Curt]

25 minutes ago, Thorny said:

17 points in 27 ahl games does not a prospect better than 3OA make 

It’s a nice stat. A tiny sample size. 3 goals. 

The exact phrasing you scoffed at was “I think could be the best piece of the 4 (better than Comtois and #3)”

It’s far from a definitive declaration.  I think that Perrault could be better than both Comtois and the guy at #3 (Guenther? Eklund?).

Not that it’s for sure but he is good enough that it’s a possibility.  To dismiss it as out of the question, I think underestimates Perrault.

Edited June 21, 2021 by Curt

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

This post is like reading what I said, completely ignoring the context and then acting like I think John Gibson is Vlad Sobotka and Tage Thompson is jesus. Holy bastardization of what I was saying. 

Here I want to spell it out again because I know it won't help. 

If we used the ROR trade as a similar comparison, Gibson is the part of the trade that Berglund and Sobotka were because he is the cap dump portion. They would be clearing 6mil for the next 5 or 6 years. Tage is the higher end prospect similar to how Comtois is the higher end prospect. Now is Gibson and Comtois better, yes but so is Eichel. This is scaling not a 1v1 comparison. 

I hope that helps or you can continue to say I think Gibson is Sobtka and Tage is Comtois because I am so ***** stupid I can't tell the difference. 

Well you shoulda just said that in the 1st place 😜

53 minutes ago, Thorny said:

And in turn, you get that, like the frog in slowly boiling water, you’ve become more and more accustomed to horrible trade proposals as the weeks go by? 

Not three weeks ago you said it was shaping up like another ROR and now you’ll go to bat for whatever proposal seemingly

The first sentence is fair.

So is 3OA Gibson Comtois and a prospect offer, at least in the context of 'Eichel will be traded in the next month'.

That is because I believe Gibson is a legit long-term starter, Comtois is a top-six winger with upside and leadership qualities and an "identity" player, and there is a good chance 3OA should bring us a player as good as Cozens.

It is because I am fearing an ROR trade — where the best piece we acquired roughly equals the worst piece in this proposal (Tage/Perreault) — that I am open to doing this one.

[LGR4GM]

14 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Well you shoulda just said that in the 1st place 😜

The first sentence is fair.

So is 3OA Gibson Comtois and a prospect offer, at least in the context of 'Eichel will be traded in the next month'.

That is because I believe Gibson is a legit long-term starter, Comtois is a top-six winger with upside and leadership qualities and an "identity" player, and there is a good chance 3OA should bring us a player as good as Cozens.

It is because I am fearing an ROR trade — where the best piece we acquired roughly equals the worst piece in this proposal (Tage/Perreault) — that I am open to doing this one.

Also a good a point. 

 

really right now all we can do is speculate until something happens. 

[Thorny]

48 minutes ago, Curt said:

The exact phrasing you scoffed at was “I think could be the best piece of the 4 (better than Comtois and #3)”

It’s far from a definitive declaration.  I think that Perrault could be better than both Comtois and the guy at #3 (Guenther? Eklund?).

Not that it’s for sure but he is good enough that it’s a possibility.  To dismiss it as out of the question, I think underestimates Perrault.

I didn't dismiss it at all, had already wrapped up the convo about that with Flagg. Didn't really "scoff" at anything - the "this surprises me" thing was an honest reaction/request to follow up. You sorta just jumped into it after with a Byfield comparison so I added a "small sample size" caveat. Pretty much it

[nfreeman]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Eichel said he thought he’d be fine. The list of mvp level 24 year olds who don’t recover from injuries at this age is quite short. We know for a fact KA was shopping him way before these injury concerns - so I’ve never bought you’re argument it’s for injury reasons he’s being dealt. Any team ponying up at all is going to get the “all good” from their medical staff.  

Any universe where the doctors said there was an EIGHTY PERCENT likelihood he wouldn’t recover would be a universe in which the trading team’s doctors were aware and balking at a deal, in any form 

Of course Eichel says he thinks he'll be fine.  I don't think that statement is meaningful in considering how likely it is that he will in fact be fine.

Do you have a list of MVP-level 24-year-olds who had unprecedented spinal surgery?  Or any spinal surgery?

I don't have a list, but a bit of google reveals:

- Nick Bjugstad had back surgery in March 2015 at age 23.  He had just come off 43 pts in 72 games in his 2nd full NHL season.  Since the surgery, he's played 54, 82, 64, 13 and 44 games, scoring 34, 49, 14, 26, 2 and 17 pts.

- Dave Bolland had back surgery in November 2009 at age 23.  He had just come off 52 pts in 81 games in his 2nd full NHL season.  He played 7 seasons after the surgery, 39, 76, 61, 35, 23, 53 and 25 games, scoring 16, 37, 37, 14, 12, 23 and 5 pts.

- Joffrey Lupul had back surgery in December 2009 at age 26.  He had just come off 50 pts in 79 games in his 5th full NHL season.  He played 6 seasons after the surgery, 54, 66, 16, 69, 55 and 46 games, scoring 31, 67, 18, 44, 21, and 14 pts.

I will also note that a google search for "NHL back surgery" comes up with very few hits -- so I think there are very few precedents for this.

As for the bolded -- we are quite far from knowing this for a fact.  Unless I have missed something, the sole source for this assertion was Wawrow's appearance last week on Tim Graham's podcast, which I went back and listed to just now.

Wawrow did NOT report or say that his sources have told him that Eichel was being shopped prior to the injury.  He said "I believe..." and "there's a belief that..." and similar qualifiers, and the only fact, or anything close to a fact, that he mentioned was Bob McKenzie's reporting from months ago that the Sabres were NOT shopping Eichel, but were listening to offers -- which we broke down in detail on this board when it happened.

So I think we are nowhere near a well-supported determination that KA wants to trade Eichel for any reason other than the injury.

(BTW, I think TG is a reasonably solid reporter, but there is way too much unfunny yukkin' it up on his podcast for my taste.)

[Curt]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

I didn't dismiss it at all, had already wrapped up the convo about that with Flagg. Didn't really "scoff" at anything - the "this surprises me" thing was an honest reaction/request to follow up. You sorta just jumped into it after with a Byfield comparison so I added a "small sample size" caveat. Pretty much it

Fair enough.  Carry on!

[Thorny]

So the presumption is that Eichel is likely to never regain form, that’s why KA is trading him, and the hope is that other teams aren’t smart enough to figure it out? Or they just disagree with the conclusions of our medical team? 

Where does that leave us? I mean full disclosure there’s no reason to give our medical staff the benefit of the doubt over that of another team. So that leaves them at trying to hoodwink another franchise? I don’t see a team giving up 3OA without a near certainty Jack is going to be fine. Maybe that’s just me 

To me, if the injury is the leading factor in a trade, the factor itself would stop the trade from happening 

[Thorny]

I think there’s risk but I think there’s a working assumption he’s going to be ok. Seems to be the case given rumoured suitors 

There’s been so much smoke to the “Adams wants to move Eichel” rumours over several years that it’s really hard for me to see the injury as anything more than a tipping point. Wawrow wasn’t the first person I trust I’ve heard mentioning that 

Edited June 21, 2021 by Thorny

[steveoath]

2 hours ago, pi2000 said:

It's more likely 3OA, Dostal, and Comtois.   

Maybe add a guy like Josh Manson, but they're not getting 3OA AND Zegras IMO.  

I would be tempted to remove the 3OA in that case if it meant Zegras/Drysdale, Comtois and Dostal.  

[That Aud Smell]

Reading through this thread got me like

[nfreeman]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

So the presumption is that Eichel is likely to never regain form, that’s why KA is trading him, and the hope is that other teams aren’t smart enough to figure it out? Or they just disagree with the conclusions of our medical team? 

Where does that leave us? I mean full disclosure there’s no reason to give our medical staff the benefit of the doubt over that of another team. So that leaves them at trying to hoodwink another franchise? I don’t see a team giving up 3OA without a near certainty Jack is going to be fine. Maybe that’s just me 

To me, if the injury is the leading factor in a trade, the factor itself would stop the trade from happening 

Well, someone else asked the (presumably rhetorical) "hoodwinking" question recently, and my answer remains that I don't think there is any attempt to hoodwink anyone.  I would expect any trading partner to have full access to Eichel's medical reports.

More importantly, I would guess that (i) those medical reports say that there is no way to be sure of any outcome, but there is a significant likelihood that he never regains full and stable physical function, (ii) trading partners would have their own doctors review the medical reports and advise them and (iii) there will be teams who are smitten enough with the visions of 2-years-ago Eichel that they are more willing than the Sabres are to shop around for the medical advice they want to hear and generally to take the injury risk -- but that the risk will be priced into the offers they make for Eichel, which is why we will inevitably be disappointed in the return.

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Well, someone else asked the (presumably rhetorical) "hoodwinking" question recently, and my answer remains that I don't think there is any attempt to hoodwink anyone.  I would expect any trading partner to have full access to Eichel's medical reports.

More importantly, I would guess that (i) those medical reports say that there is no way to be sure of any outcome, but there is a significant likelihood that he never regains full and stable physical function, (ii) trading partners would have their own doctors review the medical reports and advise them and (iii) there will be teams who are smitten enough with the visions of 2-years-ago Eichel that they are more willing than the Sabres are to shop around for the medical advice they want to hear and generally to take the injury risk -- but that the risk will be priced into the offers they make for Eichel, which is why we will inevitably be disappointed in the return.

I guess I just can’t see a team ponying up a third overall, a good player in Comtois, and a reasonable prospect for a guy with “significant likelihood” of not regaining health. That’s a huge return in any ordinary trade. It’s just small relative to what an Eichel should get. But it seems much more in line with “depressed return due to known willingness to move player + unhappy superstar wants out + 10 million dollars per + the regular concerns that go with missing most of a season due to injury. Look at the ROR return. 

To me if the return looks like that, the prognosis is reasonable. If Adams garnered that kind of return for some sort of “50/50” likelihood to ever regain form, it would be an incredible deal. 

“Incredible” trades are few and far between 

11 minutes ago, steveoath said:

I would be tempted to remove the 3OA in that case if it meant Zegras/Drysdale, Comtois and Dostal.  

Of course. Zegras is a significantly better asset. Beyond anything else it’s 2 years further along 

[Flashsabre]

Reading KA’s comments from Lance’s story it sounds like they are sick of the diva’s BS and want to move him and create a team that works hard and plays for each other.  I’m sure the Captain’s comment that “Jack Eichel has to look out for Jack Eichel” just cemented that for them.

[Thorny]

If someone said you could have Barkov for Cozens, Quinn/Peterka, and Mittelstadt, but there’s only a 50% chance he can get back to form from injury, do you make the trade? 

- - - 

For the record I don’t think teams will “convince” themselves Eichel is going to be fine if the medical evidence doesn’t look that way. They aren’t professionals in that field so it’s tougher to “see what you want to see” like GMs often do with regular roster decisions. 

Edited June 21, 2021 by Thorny

[mjd1001]

1 minute ago, Flashsabre said:

Reading KA’s comments from Lance’s story it sounds like they are sick of the diva’s BS and want to move him and create a team that works hard and plays for each other.  I’m sure the Captain’s comment that “Jack Eichel has to look out for Jack Eichel” just cemented that for them.

I'm half way to where you are.  On one hand, Eichel could (should) be just very frustrated.  You can be frustrated with the team, your injury...and add to that just having a bad day about something else and what he said is TOTALLY understandable as a 'one-off' type of comment.

On the other hand, I can also see where he might not be the leader that they want....it is POSSIBLE he is a guy that has a little more entitlement to him than what the Sabres want.   Not saying it is true, but if that came out as true at a later date it wouldn't surprise me.

At this point, most of us just want some resolution to this.  Will he stay, won't he? Where will he go, what is the return?  the longer it lasts, the more posters on this board are going to take runs at each other.

[nfreeman]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

If someone said you could have Barkov for Cozens, Quinn/Peterka, and Mittelstadt, but there’s only a 50% chance he can get back to form from injury, do you make the trade? 

I think the question needs to include:  "...but if the 50% chance comes through for you, you keep your high-paying dream job for an indefinite period, and if you don't make a big splashy move like this, you're probably fired in 1 year or less?"

[Thorny]

Just now, nfreeman said:

I think the question needs to include:  "...but if the 50% chance comes through for you, you keep your high-paying dream job for an indefinite period, and if you don't make a big splashy move like this, you're probably fired in 1 year or less?"

That’s a great point, I just think it’s really tough probably to schmooze the injury stuff. It’s why KA and the team have no problem standing firm in their stance on Jack: they bow to the medical evidence 

The owner would probably want to see the medical reports in Anaheim 

I mean, if he’s a meddler..I guess 

[rickshaw]

I liked this line from the part two story in the Buffalo news…..

”Getting away from anyone in this organization or on this team that's more concerned about themselves.”

[thewookie1]

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

If someone said you could have Barkov for Cozens, Quinn/Peterka, and Mittelstadt, but there’s only a 50% chance he can get back to form from injury, do you make the trade? 

- - - 

For the record I don’t think teams will “convince” themselves Eichel is going to be fine if the medical evidence doesn’t look that way. They aren’t professionals in that field so it’s tougher to “see what you want to see” like GMs often do with regular roster decisions. 

Depends on my circumstances to be honest. Give Barkov, Eichel’s contract and my current roster; it would certainly be a tempting offer however I’d likely try to switch one of the Centers out due to the sheer depth it would gouge out. Additionally 50/50 is a tad under reporting the many outcomes that could come in the future. For instance if we have a 50% chance of getting great Eichel, a 10% chance 90% Eichel and then it cascades from there then I’d say yes with my previous caveat. After all a 75% Eichel or Barkov is likely better than any of the other players mentioned.

[dudacek]

I think Comtois and 3OA is likely the best centrepiece on the table.

The question is how much more can Adams squeeze out of Murray?

What is the least amount acceptable?

[GASabresIUFAN]

41 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think Comtois and 3OA is likely the best centrepiece on the table.

The question is how much more can Adams squeeze out of Murray?

What is the least amount acceptable?

I think there will need to be 4 pieces.  I doubt we can get Zegras or Drysdale, but if we can get Comtois, the 3OA, Larsson/Fleury and Jones/Steel for Eichel and Bjork I think we'd do the deal. 
 

We traded essentially 2 mid levels firsts (Grigorenko and Zadorov) and 2 high seconds (Compher and our top 2nd in the 2015 draft) for ROR and McGinn.  

Comtois is a 2nd rd pick, Steel, Jones and Larsson were all late 1sts.  Fleury was a top 10 pick, but is essentially a disappointing pick at this point, but could be useful to us as we need two 2 if Risto is traded.   Steel and Jones could both benefit from a change of scenery.  

Edited July 7, 2021 by GASabresIUFAN

[Curt]

7 hours ago, dudacek said:

I think Comtois and 3OA is likely the best centrepiece on the table.

The question is how much more can Adams squeeze out of Murray?

What is the least amount acceptable?

If I’m adding a couple more pieces to 3 OA and Comtois, I want Terry and Dostal.

To me that would be good because we get a couple young guys who can contribute day 1, and a couple high upside pieces who can be in the NHL in 2022-23.

[Thorny]

8 hours ago, dudacek said:

I think Comtois and 3OA is likely the best centrepiece on the table.

The question is how much more can Adams squeeze out of Murray?

What is the least amount acceptable?

3rd overall isn't enough of a centerpiece, so the least acceptable would be a piece greater than 3OA. I've been talked into the inevitability of the deal but I won't get to a point where 3OA in a purportedly weak draft is enough to be the centerpiece in an Eichel deal. It's not even close, for me. 

Unless we find out Jack is a long shot to regain health and KA was playing this poker game with a bluff all along, I think we should get Zegras in an Anaheim deal (a prospective 1C) as the base minimum. Without that I can't consider it a good deal on paper through the prism of the info we have available to us at this time. 

If there's no good young C in the return, and we use our high picks on D and Wingers, I've already expressed I think we are in a really bad spot at C....all this time looking for a 2C, and we finally likely get one in Cozens or Casey, and we are going to trade our 1C. And the guy we just moved to top 6 C in Reinhart. There's scenario here where we torpedo our centre depth that we had finally just begun to fill out - it's frightening to me, Eklund and Power be damned. 

Edited July 7, 2021 by Thorny

[Buffalonill]

8 hours ago, dudacek said:

I think Comtois and 3OA is likely the best centrepiece on the table.

The question is how much more can Adams squeeze out of Murray?

What is the least amount acceptable?

 

Wow please don't trade him then.

 

What a horrible offer 

[LGR4GM]

8 hours ago, dudacek said:

I think Comtois and 3OA is likely the best centrepiece on the table.

The question is how much more can Adams squeeze out of Murray?

What is the least amount acceptable?

I think that's the plan because if Comtois and 3oa were enough (for the center of the deal) the trade would be either done or there would be all the rumors about it being close that we see for stuff like this. 

The good news is Karmanos and Ventura can help Adams and I bet they are.