2021/2022 Trade Speculation and Rumours

[bax]

Look, I know there are risks with Eichel’s health. I trust the Flames to do the due diligence.

Acting like Eichel is even a remotely similar acquisition to Tarasenko is silly though.

One is a top line center you have locked up through his prime years and one is a declining, one way scoring winger that likely won’t be worth his cap hit. His best years are behind him.

Flames fans say they want out of this mushy middle, well Tarasenko is the perfect acquisition to stay comfortably there.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by bax

Look, I know there are risks with Eichel’s health. I trust the Flames to do the due diligence.

Acting like Eichel is even a remotely similar acquisition to Tarasenko is silly though.

One is a top line center you have locked up through his prime years and one is a declining scoring winger that likely won’t be worth his cap hit. His best years are behind him.

Flames fans say they want out of this mushy middle, well Tarasenko is the perfect acquisition to stay comfortably there.

From all accounts this last surgery for Tarasenko corrected the issues the previous 2 missed.

Yes it's a risk but a 2.5m retained Tarasenko would be a big time addition to a Flames team with the weakest RW depth last year. Ending up with 2 top 6 RW in Coleman and Tarasenko is a pretty good thing risks and all.

I dont much like how the Flames would have to go about acquiring Tarasenko though. Thats the tricky part for me.

I'm of the belief if you're going to gonout and get Eichel, you move Gaudreau in lieu of Tkachuk. And that doesn't work in the Blues eyes.

Point being, if the Flames are all in on one of the two risky players, may as well try and get em both. That's the shake up the team needs.

Edit: I'm not big or have been big on acquiring Eichel and was hoping the Flames would not go back all in on the core. But it seems management has made up their mind of any hope of impactful change to the roster is going to be getting an Eichel or cutting ties with one of the 2 LWS.

Might as well play along and see what happens.

And Treliving isn't done. Just wish things would hurry up.

[Vinny01]

When it comes to Tarasenko I just don’t see the Flames being a team on his list so they are likely not in the mix for him.

[Rollin22x]

Originally Posted by dammage79

From all accounts this last surgery for Tarasenko corrected the issues the previous 2 missed.

Yes it's a risk but a 2.5m retained Tarasenko would be a big time addition to a Flames team with the weakest RW depth last year. Ending up with 2 top 6 RW in Coleman and Tarasenko is a pretty good thing risks and all.

I dont much like how the Flames would have to go about acquiring Tarasenko though. Thats the tricky part for me.

I'm of the belief if you're going to gonout and get Eichel, you move Gaudreau in lieu of Tkachuk. And that doesn't work in the Blues eyes.

Point being, if the Flames are all in on one of the two risky players, may as well try and get em both. That's the shake up the team needs.

Edit: I'm not big or have been big on acquiring Eichel and was hoping the Flames would not go back all in on the core. But it seems management has made up their mind of any hope of impactful change to the roster is going to be getting an Eichel or cutting ties with one of the 2 LWS.

Might as well play along and see what happens.

And Treliving isn't done. Just wish things would hurry up.

“But it seems management has made up their mind of any hope of impactful change to the roster is going to be getting an Eichel or cutting ties with one of the 2 LWS”

What has management done or said to arrive at this assumption?

[Poe969]

I'd take tarasenko if he was part of a return for Tkachuk but not the centerpiece. And salary needs to be retained for him to be worth it IMO.

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

I know, right? Now change the name to Jack Eichel.

With Eichel, I imagine it’s a matter of balancing the assets sent to acquire Eichel and the risks of a surgery failing against the rewards of having an elite centre.

Dr. Prusmack, the neurosurgeon who spoke to 31 Thoughts, said both fusion and artificial disk replacement have a success rate over 90%. 25% of fusion patients need another surgery within 10 years, and 5% of artificial disk patients do. The artificial disk surgery has been successful in MMA fighters and rugby players and non-pro hockey and football players.

So, I would do it as long as Buffalo is willing to lower the return for Eichel to provide consideration for the risk the Flames are taking in this hypothetical trade.

[Moneyhands23]

I see another quiet week for the Flames...

[Bleeding Red]

Bax - Look, I know there are risks with Eichel’s health. I trust the Flames to do the due diligence.

Surely they are, but according to reports BUF isn't letting anyone see any medical reports or talk to him or talk to his doctor. In the 31 thoughts podcast interview Eichel's doctor was clear on 2 points - no team has contacted him and he couldn't tell them anything without permission from both Eichel & the team.



I think that is what is slowing everything down. Teams may be okay with the surgery "in general" but want specifics on Eichel.



Surprised Eichel hasn't filed a union grievance yet to be able to at least move forward on the surgery.

[Coach]

Is there a reason a team couldn’t call his doctor, and with Eichels permission, have information released? His doctor isn’t working for the team. Or even just have a “case study” conversation with him?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Poe969

I'd take tarasenko if he was part of a return for Tkachuk but not the centerpiece. And salary needs to be retained for him to be worth it IMO.

There's the part that is just hard to get past with the Eichel group. They don't realize acquisition cost or return. They're willing to give up anywhere between four and seven assets to acquire a single player. That is a crippling deal from an organizational depth perspective. You're rolling the dice on that one player. If that one player gets hurt, you're not just ####ed for the short-term, you're ####ed for the long-term.

Conversely, the St. Louis trade is one where you're receiving depth in return for a higher value piece. The deal isn't just for Tarasenko, it's also for two other young assets and a draft pick. We get the four-for-one and we address some pressing concerns on the team at a position where we literally have no organizational depth. If Tarasenko goes down with an injury, and is done, the impact is greatly lessened because you have three other assets to fall back to.

For a team where the fans were crying all last season about lack of depth - and yes, a large percentage of those squeaky wheels are the same who want Eichel regardless of cost - making a multi-player deal for a single player is illogical. This puts us in the same boat as the Edmonton Oilers IMO. A one line team with three other lines that just hold on for dear life, and hope that wins you game. It might win you enough games to get into the post season, but it certainly doesn't work when depth matters.

I'm not against trading for Eichel, if the price is right. I'm not against trading any player if the price is right. What I've seen so far is that Eichel is not worth the squeeze because it weakens our depth and makes us a really easy team to defend against. If that St. Louis deal is available, that is well worth the squeeze, because it adds depth throughout the lineup and makes us harder to play against. In the Eichel scenario, if the first line disappears, its likely a crushing loss on the scoreboard. In the Tarasenko scenario, if the 1st line disappears, you still have threats on the second and third line that could score enough to win. I'll always take depth over the superstar. One player doesn't win you games.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

Surprised Eichel hasn't filed a union grievance yet to be able to at least move forward on the surgery.

This was covered in the Eichel thread. The CBA outlines that a player has a right to their own doctor, so long as that doctor is from a list agreed to by the NHL and the NHLPA. This doctor is obviously not on that list. Eichel hasn't filed a grievance because his people has looked at the procedure and are probably aware they will fail in their attempts. The decision would likely go to a third party physician to evaluate the two arguments and make the call. Because that third party will likely come from the list of physicians already agreed to by the league and PA, the outcome is pretty likely to fall on the Sabres side.

Originally Posted by Coach

Is there a reason a team couldn’t call his doctor, and with Eichels permission, have information released? His doctor isn’t working for the team. Or even just have a “case study” conversation with him?

They could do that. I don't think there is anything preventing them from doing that. But I would think they would also want the information the Sabres have to balance Eichel's doctor's take, and then have their people do a workup on Eichel as well. But this is not allowed. This is a $50M decision here. Any team should be going into this with eyes wide open. That's the problem though. The Sabres and Eichel are trying to get a deal done and asking the teams to maintain an eyes wide shut policy.

[Monahammer]

"organizational depth"

Fellas, we played luminaries like Dominik Simon, Ritchie, and Nordstrom in our regular rotation last year.

You're acting like we have so much to lose here... we were a team who didn't even make the playoffs.

4-7 assets who are unlikely to impact our ability to win a cup are worth the chance to get a franchise changing asset.

And let's be clear, the rumors are all 4 assets. Most here can justify giving up to 5 to beat other bids. I havent seen 7 suggested but hyperbole reigns as always.

[Vinny01]

Lanny the beef from the fans on this board was not depth it was lack of high end talent.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

"organizational depth"

Fellas, we played luminaries like Dominik Simon, Ritchie, and Nordstrom in our regular rotation last year.

You're acting like we have so much to lose here... we were a team who didn't even make the playoffs.

4-7 assets who are unlikely to impact our ability to win a cup are worth the chance to get a franchise changing asset.

And let's be clear, the rumors are all 4 assets. Most here can justify giving up to 5 to beat other bids. I havent seen 7 suggested but hyperbole reigns as always.

100%. What exactly are we gutting? One of our playoff chokers? One of our prospects that MAYBE has middle 6 potential? A first round pick that can be converted to a franchise C?

Sign me up. Enough with the mediocrity.

[Monahammer]

This type of argument is what turned Phaneuf into Stajan, Ian White, Hagman, and others. Let's be on the other side of one of these trades for once. I don't remember Toronto fans complaining about losing all their organizational depth lol.

[bax]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

There's the part that is just hard to get past with the Eichel group. They don't realize acquisition cost or return. They're willing to give up anywhere between four and seven assets to acquire a single player. That is a crippling deal from an organizational depth perspective. You're rolling the dice on that one player. If that one player gets hurt, you're not just ####ed for the short-term, you're ####ed for the long-term.

Conversely, the St. Louis trade is one where you're receiving depth in return for a higher value piece. The deal isn't just for Tarasenko, it's also for two other young assets and a draft pick. We get the four-for-one and we address some pressing concerns on the team at a position where we literally have no organizational depth. If Tarasenko goes down with an injury, and is done, the impact is greatly lessened because you have three other assets to fall back to.

For a team where the fans were crying all last season about lack of depth - and yes, a large percentage of those squeaky wheels are the same who want Eichel regardless of cost - making a multi-player deal for a single player is illogical. This puts us in the same boat as the Edmonton Oilers IMO. A one line team with three other lines that just hold on for dear life, and hope that wins you game. It might win you enough games to get into the post season, but it certainly doesn't work when depth matters.

I'm not against trading for Eichel, if the price is right. I'm not against trading any player if the price is right. What I've seen so far is that Eichel is not worth the squeeze because it weakens our depth and makes us a really easy team to defend against. If that St. Louis deal is available, that is well worth the squeeze, because it adds depth throughout the lineup and makes us harder to play against. In the Eichel scenario, if the first line disappears, its likely a crushing loss on the scoreboard. In the Tarasenko scenario, if the 1st line disappears, you still have threats on the second and third line that could score enough to win. I'll always take depth over the superstar. One player doesn't win you games.

Many posters here are fully aware of the potential acquisition cost in an Eichel trade. It's been widely reported that Buffalo is looking for predominantly future assets (although they will likely need to take some cap back). I fail to see how replacing Monahan with Eichel at the expense of some combination of a couple 1st round picks, Valimaki, Zary, Pelletier, Coranato, Kylington, etc is "crippling a franchise". There's a significant chance some of these assets don't develop into anything more than depth or bottom half of the roster players.

Conversely the Flames would retain prime assets in Hanifin, Andersson, Gaudreau, Lindholm, and Tkachuk. Valuable for competing now (or via trade if they decide to pull the chute in the coming years).

A large portion of these posters also understand that you can not win in the NHL without elite talent. Take a look at every Stanley Cup champion in the past decade and they are all stocked with elite talent which Eichel is. Some fans want to see the Flames (who seem to be committed to trying to win now) push all their chips in and acquire the hardest piece to get- a young, elite, top line center. These types of players rarely become available via trade. Who was the last center of this caliber? Joe Thornton? I don't think SJ regrets that trade.

The St.Louis scenario you have described is Dion Phaneuf 2.0. We give up the younger, elite talent for which reason? So we can get a couple prospects and picks? Why are we doing this if we are trying to win now? Tarasenko for Tkachuk makes us a worse team today. You state the trade is good because we have no RW depth, but we have Coleman, Tkachuk, Mangiapane, and Dube all capable of playing the right side in the top 6.

So no, trading prospects, picks, and Monahan doesn't cripple the Flames depth and put them in the same position as the Edmonton Oilers- far from it. In fact a potential Eichel trade would probably leave us with 95% of the current roster in tact.

Yes, one player doesn't win you games but does a combination of Eichel, Gaudreau, Lindholm, Tkachuk, Mangiapane, Backlund, Hanifin, Andersson, Tanev, and Markstrom win you games? I would say yes, and probably a lot of them.

[Sofa GM]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

"organizational depth"

Fellas, we played luminaries like Dominik Simon, Ritchie, and Nordstrom in our regular rotation last year.

You're acting like we have so much to lose here... we were a team who didn't even make the playoffs.

4-7 assets who are unlikely to impact our ability to win a cup are worth the chance to get a franchise changing asset.

And let's be clear, the rumors are all 4 assets. Most here can justify giving up to 5 to beat other bids. I havent seen 7 suggested but hyperbole reigns as always.

This is a bad assessment, the fact we missed the playoffs speaks to the lack of our organizational depth. By giving away numerous higher end assets to acquire Eichel it will get much worse before it gets better. If we were to give up assets according to some of the proposals on here, we would sink into the depths.....

Eichel is not god, he is a hockey player with a bum neck....

[bax]

The fact is it's going to be almost impossible for Buffalo to "win" any Jack Eichel trade. They wouldn't be trading him if they weren't backed into a corner. The team that acquires Eichel will be the one that wins the trade.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by Sofa GM

This is a bad assessment, the fact we missed the playoffs speaks to the lack of our organizational depth. By giving away numerous higher end assets to acquire Eichel it will get much worse before it gets better. If we were to give up assets according to some of the proposals on here, we would sink into the depths.....

Eichel is not god, he is a hockey player with a bum neck....

Even if we made the playoffs we would’ve still lost. Our top forwards have shown by not just one but numerous years of not getting it done. It’s a failure on Brad’s part if we don’t inject some kind of offensive talent in the top 6. If we roll with the same group I don’t see how we can expect different results.

I’m not asking to try and acquire a questionable top 4 D for draft picks, I’m asking to bolster the offense in whatever way they can. Franchise-level C? Go for it. Keep yourself in the race while he’s still available. He has go be gone before puck drop. And before I hear “he’s not a franchise C” let’s remember what team he’s been playing for.

“Bum neck” Eichel wants nothing more than a change of scenery with the organization that is treating their franchise player like ****.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Sofa GM

This is a bad assessment, the fact we missed the playoffs speaks to the lack of our organizational depth. By giving away numerous higher end assets to acquire Eichel it will get much worse before it gets better. If we were to give up assets according to some of the proposals on here, we would sink into the depths.....

Eichel is not god, he is a hockey player with a bum neck....

No, wrong. We missed the playoffs because our top end players consistently underperform in crunch time.

At most, the rumored pieces that we would include in an eichel trade take 2 players out of our current top 9. In exchange, we get a player that is potentially our best player. Then we give up futures.

So we're talking about really exchanging 2 pieces of the current top 9 and some players not playing for us right now (and who may never play with us- not like we're handing out NHL chances with Sutter at the helm.) The current top 9 who has won nothing and choked in the playoffs consistently.

The depth issues were hopefully solved by bringing in players like Pitlick, Coleman, and Lewis. All three are superior to Ritchie, Simon and Nordstrom. If you believe Coleman is a top 9 player, than bringing him + Eichel in immediately fills the two top 9 holes created moving for eichel.