Friedman: Flames have begun extension talks with Gaudreau & Eichel speculation

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by dammage79

End of the day I think Eichel boils down to Anaheim or Calgary.

And in the end he ends up a Duck.

I just don’t see a huge appetite for a team like Anaheim square in the middle of a rebuild to give up significant assets to have him play with no supporting cast for an extended period of time.

[djsFlames]

They're going to send a player that forced his way out of their organization to Disneyland?

Awful nice of them.

(But yeah, I could see it)

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Yoho

I just don’t see a huge appetite for a team like Anaheim square in the middle of a rebuild to give up significant assets to have him play with no supporting cast for an extended period of time.

Agreed. The one thing Buffalo is going to insist on from the Ducks is Zegras.

[keenan87]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Mark Stone wouldn't sign an extension with Calgary
/

You must be Mark Stone's mom. Any childhood stories you want to share?

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by keenan87

You must be Mark Stone's mom. Any childhood stories you want to share?

That was widely reported at the time IIRC.

Vegas had the kelly McCrimmon advantage

[djsFlames]

It's true, apparently. Stone would've been a rental if we ponied up Valimaki to get him.

Another reason to hate Vegas.

But its a misconception when looking at Brad's blunders. He wasn't getting 8+ years of Stone.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Buffalo does not want to retain salary to trade Eichel to the Rangers.

No way, no how. And on the off chance they did consider it, Kakko and LaFreniere would be what’s coming back.

Similarly, they don’t want to send him him to Vegas and watch him live his best life the next ten years while they’re still the Sabres.

They want to trade him to us. They want to say “you don’t wanna be in Buffalo, Jack? #### you, have fun in Canada.”

Give them a reason.

I guess he's off to Winnipeg then.

[N-E-B]

Originally Posted by Yoho

I just don’t see a huge appetite for a team like Anaheim square in the middle of a rebuild to give up significant assets to have him play with no supporting cast for an extended period of time.

Yeah, I don't get it either. I don't doubt that they're in on Eichel and I think they will try to get him, but I really don't understand what the appeal is to them. They're in the early years of a rebuild and by all accounts it's going quite well for them.

The Ducks would be better off to stay the course. Trying to accelerate a rebuild like this usually turns out poorly.

Calgary probably shouldn't be in on him either. I think the smart move is to rebuild here. But they've clearly indicated that's not the direction they want to go with the Coleman signing so if they're not going to rebuild I'd much rather they go all out. At least they could say they tried.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

So the Sabres have to abide by the negotiated CBA but the player doesn't and can work outside of the contract he signed? Wouldn't the second an injunction is granted allow the gloves to come off and it frees either the league or the team to take action against the player. It definitely allows the team to act within the rules of the CBA and suspend the player at minimum. Don't you think the Sabres likely have data in regards to the value that Eichel has brought in ticket sales and memorabilia sales, and they could extrapolate to make their argument and determine potential damages? Reputation is always tough to argue on (especially Buffalo's) but if they can determine possible lost revenues as a result that is that not a clear definition of possible damages?

Read the CBA and cite me the exact language that says he has to undergo the medical procedure advocated by the team and can’t get his own. In fact, cite the language that says the team has any control aside from money.

[flamesgod]

Originally Posted by Yoho

I just don’t see a huge appetite for a team like Anaheim square in the middle of a rebuild to give up significant assets to have him play with no supporting cast for an extended period of time.

Ya, no kidding. There are posters here that don’t think it makes sense for the Flames to go get Eichel. When I look at the age of Calgary’s core, it makes a lot of sense to me. When you consider where Anaheim is at, it seems silly for them to go after him. Unless they could keep all their big prospects. In which case, Calgary can beat their offers.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by flamesgod

Ya, no kidding. There are posters here that don’t think it makes sense for the Flames to go get Eichel. When I look at the age of Calgary’s core, it makes a lot of sense to me. When you consider where Anaheim is at, it seems silly for them to go after him. Unless they could keep all their big prospects. In which case, Calgary can beat their offers.

If Eichel was healthy, I think it would change a lot of opinions. The blow-up-in-face potential is higher than a lot of people feel comfortable with.

[Calgary4LIfe]

@ topfiverecords



Yes, I guess people know my shtick well enough. Also, thank you for paying attention and making sure you capitalize that random letter in my name. I think you have been the first to do so in all these years. LoL

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by keenan87

You must be Mark Stone's mom. Any childhood stories you want to share?

This was pretty widely known at the time. And unsurprising. Live and play in Vegas or Calgary, easy choice for most players I’m sure.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Was Iginla the solution for Pittsburgh, Boston or Colorado?

The reason the Flames never made the playoffs before '03-04 is that they couldn't afford to pay any real players and had to make do with B prospects and castoffs. With the salary cap, that problem doesn't exist anymore. You can't use that as an excuse for Buffalo.

The biggest reason the Flames never won anything with Iggy is because Darryl didn’t offer Phaneuf for Thornton when he had the chance.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

If Eichel was healthy, I think it would change a lot of opinions. The blow-up-in-face potential is higher than a lot of people feel comfortable with.

That's true, but I mean what is the upside of this team as currently assembled? It's not like next year's first round pick is going to make us a contender.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

The retention thing is a simple negotiating ploy. At the end of the day they would weigh the best offer retained vs. best offer no retention and decide accordingly. Far more likely they take back a contract with shorter term instead of retaining, which may generate a return at it's last TDL.


A big question is how contract insurance works in the event of a trade. I couldn't find much recent info, but it seems most teams insure their highest paid 5-7 players through a league-wide policy (Geico) and premiums are determined accordingly...but I wonder how that works with a player trade? Would the coverage/premium be transferable?

Good question. I was also wondering about how the insurance works.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Read the CBA and cite me the exact language that says he has to undergo the medical procedure advocated by the team and can’t get his own. In fact, cite the language that says the team has any control aside from money.

Section 5 of the Standard Players Contract. Easy to source online and read, which is all part of the CBA, and not all SPC are insured, I think it is about 5 per team (but this probably is insured because of the money)

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

That's true, but I mean what is the upside of this team as currently assembled? It's not like next year's first round pick is going to make us a contender.

Maybe or maybe not. But if we trade for Eichel and he ends up on LTIR or a shell of his former self for a $10 million cap hit, the 1st rounder could end up making Buffalo a contender. The Flames without Eichel and the roster players given up to get him would have a high chance of making it a top 3 pick IMO.

Just my opinion, but I feel that if we don't find a way to replace Gio anyway, I don't think even Eichel would keep us out of the lottery. Eichel was on pace for 7 goals over 82 games last year. I highly doubt he gets back to 100% for next season, so trading for him likely writes off the season anyway.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Maybe or maybe not. But if we trade for Eichel and he ends up on LTIR or a shell of his former self for a $10 million cap hit, the 1st rounder could end up making Buffalo a contender. The Flames without Eichel and the roster players given up to get him would have a high chance of making it a top 3 pick IMO.

Just my opinion, but I feel that if we don't find a way to replace Gio anyway, I don't think even Eichel would keep us out of the lottery. Eichel was on pace for 7 goals over 82 games last year. I highly doubt he gets back to 100% for next season, so trading for him likely writes off the season anyway.

If we are going to be that bad in your mind, you must be pro trading Gaudreau and everyone not nailed down to embrace the tank?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Beatle17

Section 5 of the Standard Players Contract. Easy to source online and read, which is all part of the CBA, and not all SPC are insured, I think it is about 5 per team (but this probably is insured because of the money)

I read it and it doesn’t say what you think. That section spells out what happens where a player claims to be injured and unable to play. The team can make a determination if he is unfit to play or not, and the mechanism to follow if there’s a dispute about that, and who pays salary, etc. There is absolutely nothing in Section 5 about disputes about the proper treatment for such an injury.

The fact I read it is why I asked for the specific language (not just “read X”). Because it just isn’t there.