What would you give up for Eichel?

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

You’d really walk away from a deal for 24 year old Jack Eichel over Zary or Wolf?

No, but I don't think we can afford to let our prospect pool at C or G get any thinner. I'd try to make some other adjustments (ie. Pelletier and the 1st) or get a little something back before just pushing those chips in.

I'f plug my nose and do Lindholm + Valimaki + protected 1st + Pelletier, though I'd rather add another pick/prospect to switch Monahan in for Lindholm.

And then I'd still move Gaudreau to replenish depth and futures.

[SportsJunky]

How bad are the Sabres?

https://twitter.com/user/status/1374817154026061827

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by SportsJunky

How bad are the Sabres?

https://twitter.com/user/status/1374817154026061827

In that scenario the top teams in the division would almost certainly drop their pt%, unless PHI NYR and NJD went nearly winless

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

In that scenario the top teams in the division would almost certainly drop their pt%, unless PHI NYR and NJD went nearly winless

Salient point. There's virtually no scenario where Buffalo would go 26-0 and miss the playoffs (at the time of posting this). http://www.sportsclubstats.com/NHL/C...t/Buffalo.html

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

It doesn’t matter. We have a #1C locked in for five years after this one.

We have a #1G signed for 5 years after this.

We have Darryl Sutter behind the bench.

We don’t need 1st and 2nd round picks. We need NHL players.

Trade all the futures, because otherwise what’s the point?

Trading away 1st and 2nd round picks is risky. If you can do the trade without giving up 1st or 2nd that would be a lot better. Why mortgage the future to take a risk on an unknown?

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

Trading away 1st and 2nd round picks is risky. If you can do the trade without giving up 1st or 2nd that would be a lot better. Why mortgage the future to take a risk on an unknown?

The unknown in this equation is “how do you win a championship without at least one player who’s at least as good as Jack Eichel?”

Tampa, St Louis, Washington, Pittsburgh, Chicago, LA, none of these teams won without star power. In fact, what they all have in common is a surplus of star power.

They had to go through star power as well. There are no cupcake matchups.

Star players don’t play with 19 year olds. They like to play with veterans who understand the game. A 2nd round pick who might be three years before he’s ready to take a 4th line shift doesn’t help you when you have Eichel under contract for five.

Like, don’t waste them, but the picks are more valuable to be turned into real talent instead of prospects when you have a franchise player like this.

[flylock shox]

I can't be the only person who watches that Eichel highlight package and thinks that for every one of those plays, I've seen Johnny do just as well if not better.



Maybe the ones against Nashville and Tampa - which involve a bit of power - Johnny wouldn't be able to pull off, but I'm confident there are other sorts of plays Johnny has made that match or best those ones too.


Maybe Eichel's all-around game is great, but I'm hardly left blown away by his top 10 plays (particularly if the idea is that he's our counter to McDavid, whose highlights are actually stunning). And his inability to have an impact on Buffalo this year (pre-injury) doesn't really get me ready to trade the farm for him.

[Harry Lime]

On Eichel :

"What I've been told is this, if they trade him, what they really want is four pieces that are first round picks or players that are playing if not in the NHL, or elsewhere in the NCAA that were first round picks, and they're having success, they're not struggling. So that's why I believe it's going to be really important to see what they're going to get in return. But they want young players, that are probably playing in the NHL right now, that were first round picks. If they're not playing in the NHL, they need to be first round picks playing like first round picks at the level they are. So we'll see how it's going to turn out," Lavoie said on Sportsnet 590 radio late last week.

That is why Newhook, Byram, 1st and 2nd is not enough. Byram and Newhook meet the criteria of proven assets, but 1st and 2nd do not.

From a Calgary standpoint, my argument would be (proven assets) Tkachuk is worth the equivalent of 2 recent 1sts, Monahan worth one recent first, and the Flames would have to add a third piece that has proven success at a level at/or near the NHL.

Four players/prospects farther along in their development, playing at a high level, is a huge ask. One that I would be willing to give up for Eichel.

Tkachuk
Monahan
one of Pelletier/Zary

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

From a Calgary standpoint, my argument would be (proven assets) Tkachuk is worth the equivalent of 2 recent 1sts, Monahan worth one recent first, and the Flames would have to add a third piece that has proven success at a level at/or near the NHL.

Four players/prospects farther along in their development, playing at a high level, is a huge ask. One that I would be willing to give up for Eichel.

Tkachuk
Monahan
one of Pelletier/Zary

Tkachuk's performance this year has been pretty pedestrian so no one is considering him worth two recent firsts. Based on that article the deal would have to be Tkachuk, Monahan, Valimaki and one of Zary or Pelletier, which is an insane amount to give up for a player that has not elevated the team he is currently with. Flames would be insane to jump into this as it would hollow out the team for a decade.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Salient point. There's virtually no scenario where Buffalo would go 26-0 and miss the playoffs (at the time of posting this). http://www.sportsclubstats.com/NHL/C...t/Buffalo.html

That table is actually funnier. They could go 20-3-3 and only have a 2.7% chance of getting in

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by New Era

Tkachuk's performance this year has been pretty pedestrian so no one is considering him worth two recent firsts. Based on that article the deal would have to be Tkachuk, Monahan, Valimaki and one of Zary or Pelletier, which is an insane amount to give up for a player that has not elevated the team he is currently with. Flames would be insane to jump into this as it would hollow out the team for a decade.

We would be better to trade the players who are holding the team back try get some 1st's and go from there. Hall might be available so there are some short term options if we want to go the partial rebuild route.

[dino7c]

Trade players for assets at the deadline, trade assets for players in the offseason

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

On Eichel :



That is why Newhook, Byram, 1st and 2nd is not enough. Byram and Newhook meet the criteria of proven assets, but 1st and 2nd do not.

From a Calgary standpoint, my argument would be (proven assets) Tkachuk is worth the equivalent of 2 recent 1sts, Monahan worth one recent first, and the Flames would have to add a third piece that has proven success at a level at/or near the NHL.

Four players/prospects farther along in their development, playing at a high level, is a huge ask. One that I would be willing to give up for Eichel.

Tkachuk
Monahan
one of Pelletier/Zary

In my books Bowen+Newhook+1st+2nd is superior to what you are proposing from the Flames particularly in light of contract situations.
I mean that's a helluva offer. Flames can't match that. They don't have those type of prospects.

[Buck Murdock]

Rewind to the Mark Stone sweepstakes....what would you give up/ paid him to come to Calgary, and how different do you think the Flames would be now?

[Harry Lime]

I think that NHL GMs put more stock in known quantities. Just a difference in philosophy.

Tkachuk is 23 and Monahan 26, so although they are getting paid, they are not past their prime. Eichel isn't exactly on his ELC either.

Byram and Newhook could be the second coming of Sakic and Foote, but they could just as easily be the Flames equivalent of Parsons and Bennett. You never really know until they get to the show, and that's the benefit of offering a Tkachuk and Monahan in a situation like this. Less guesswork and gambling for Buffalo.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

I think that NHL GMs put more stock in known quantities. Just a difference in philosophy.

Tkachuk is 23 and Monahan 26, so although they are getting paid, they are not past their prime. Eichel isn't exactly on his ELC either.

Byram and Newhook could be the second coming of Sakic and Foote, but they could just as easily be the Flames equivalent of Parsons and Bennett. You never really know until they get to the show, and that's the benefit of offering a Tkachuk and Monahan in a situation like this. Less guesswork and gambling for Buffalo.

If BUF had a path to contention within Monahan or Tkachuk's contract windows they wouldn't be trading Eichel at all...

5 more full years of Eichel at close to fair value
vs.

3 years of Monny and fair value
1 year of Tkachuk at close to fair value, then either 1x9M or you're backing up the truck to extend him.

Pelletier/Zary does not balance that scale.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

I can't be the only person who watches that Eichel highlight package and thinks that for every one of those plays, I've seen Johnny do just as well if not better.



Maybe the ones against Nashville and Tampa - which involve a bit of power - Johnny wouldn't be able to pull off, but I'm confident there are other sorts of plays Johnny has made that match or best those ones too.


Maybe Eichel's all-around game is great, but I'm hardly left blown away by his top 10 plays (particularly if the idea is that he's our counter to McDavid, whose highlights are actually stunning). And his inability to have an impact on Buffalo this year (pre-injury) doesn't really get me ready to trade the farm for him.

Johnny Gaudreau has never shot a puck the way Eichel is shooting the puck in some of those highlights.

He doesn’t protect the puck like Eichel. He doesn’t create effortless separation like Eichel.

Which is a very good reason to acquire Eichel and Play him with Gaudreau - giving Johnny a line mate who can make the same plays he can at speed is exactly what he needs.

It’s very obvious Eichel is a special player, and he plays THE premium position in the game.

If he’s available, you pay the freight.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by New Era

Tkachuk's performance this year has been pretty pedestrian so no one is considering him worth two recent firsts. Based on that article the deal would have to be Tkachuk, Monahan, Valimaki and one of Zary or Pelletier, which is an insane amount to give up for a player that has not elevated the team he is currently with. Flames would be insane to jump into this as it would hollow out the team for a decade.

I mentioned before that I haven't watched Eichel enough to form a strong opinion on him. I love the highlight reels, but like you said, it is somewhat concerning that the Sabres suck as bad as they do with him in the line-up.

I get the sense that people who like Eichel see him potentially in the young star player tier, like Matthews, Draisaitl (puke), or MacKinnon (despite his relatively poor production this year, he is still an elite player). So if I am going by that assumption, I would trade Tkachuk, Valimaki, Zary, and a 1st. That's it though, no more roster players anyway.

If Buffalo wants 4 pieces, they have to accept that not one of them is going to be par-on-par with Eichel. When they say they 4 assets of current "1st round quality", they better be meaning top 5 to 15, and not top 5.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Johnny Gaudreau has never shot a puck the way Eichel is shooting the puck in some of those highlights.

He doesn’t protect the puck like Eichel. He doesn’t create effortless separation like Eichel.

Which is a very good reason to acquire Eichel and Play him with Gaudreau - giving Johnny a line mate who can make the same plays he can at speed is exactly what he needs.

It’s very obvious Eichel is a special player, and he plays THE premium position in the game.

If he’s available, you pay the freight.

These two together would be an opposing coaches nightmare. And yes Eichel is worth the freight, if it's Tkachuk, Andersson/Valimaki, top prospect and a 1st you pay it. personally I hope the top prospect isn't Pelletier but what ever.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Buck Murdock

Rewind to the Mark Stone sweepstakes....what would you give up/ paid him to come to Calgary, and how different do you think the Flames would be now?

It would have been a franchise changing deal, the benefits of which we would have enjoyed for years.