Speculation: Eichel Megathread VI: Eichel's agent issue statement critical of Sabres

[Ledge And Dairy]

He would count against the cap but the cap is raised to the cap max plus any salaries on LTIR.

I've read and re-read the rules on this. I may be wrong. Fine I'm probably wrong. But it clearly says the cap is increased to the max cap plus the LTIR salaries. And the cap is calculated daily.

No its not, when a player is placed on LTIR your teams cap ceiling essentially becomes your current cap hit of a healthy roster + your LTIR pool, not the league cap ceiling + your LTIR pool. During the offseason you can exceed the league cap by 10% but your team must be compliant for day 1 of the next season.
To fully utilize LTIR cap relief you have to be spending to the cap excluding that LTIR players contract.

 

[Ice Mammoth]

Your argument is that they’re in the same conference, which is nonsense. You’re the only person on the planet that thinks there’s a rivalry between the two teams. You’re the only one that thinks differently.

I wrote in two comments:
“There is rivalry. My opinion is unchanged. I presented my arguments. Teams play in the same conference.
I think so. You think differently. It is ok“.
“Any teams from the same conference are rivals. Not to be confused with principled or historical rivalry.
I think so. You think differently. It is ok“.

You answered me.
“Your argument is that they’re in the same conference, which is nonsense. You’re the only person on the planet that thinks there’s a rivalry between the two teams. You’re the only one that thinks differently“.

You joked? You made a good joke! I had a good laugh. Did I understand correctly? It was a joke? I hope so.

The answer is easy to find on the internet.
"I do believe it's heating up," Friedman said of the Eichel trade market. "I believe the Sabres' preference is to send Eichel west. Some of the eastern teams I've spoken to or heard from say they can tell the Sabres aren't as thrilled with the idea of him being in the same division and/or conference. I think some of the eastern teams believe if they're going to get him it's really going to cost them."

NHL Rumour Roundup: Will Sabres move Eichel to the Western Conference?

“Geography could also slow progress in moving Eichel. The Athletic's Rick Carpiniello reported a league source said Sabres owner Terry Pegula wants the center traded to a Western Conference team“.


Will Jack Eichel be Moved this Summer?

Link to an unfamiliar forum. Comment # 1576
“According to a league source, Buffalo owner Terry Pegula wants Eichel to land in the Western Conference. So if the Rangers are actually going to be in this race, the cost will be higher for them, say, than the Wild. It may be astronomical. And that doesn’t even include the $10 million cap hit (or the concerns about his neck injury).”

Speculation: - Eichel Mega Thread III

You can find a lot of this information on the internet. I'm too lazy to look for more.

“Buffalo owner Terry Pegula wants Eichel to land in the Western Conference.“ Why do you think? Do you have any suggestions?
“So if the Rangers are actually going to be in this race, the cost will be higher for them, say, than the Wild“.Why do you think? Do you have any suggestions?

I have guesses. I will quote my comment.
“Any teams from the same conference are rivals. Not to be confused with principled or historical rivalry.
I think so. You think differently. It is ok“
I will add a little - If the teams play in the same league, they are rivals. This is on the rise: league, conference, division. “Not to be confused with principled or historical rivalry“.

You wrote - “You’re the only one that thinks differently“.
You made a mistake. You can't have that kind of data. Terry Pegula thinks the same.
There are at least two of us. Not the worst company.

 

[Pizza!Pizza!]

NHL Rumour Roundup: Will Sabres move Eichel to the Western Conference?

“Geography could also slow progress in moving Eichel. The Athletic's Rick Carpiniello reported a league source said Sabres owner Terry Pegula wants the center traded to a Western Conference team“.


Will Jack Eichel be Moved this Summer?

Link to an unfamiliar forum. Comment # 1576
“According to a league source, Buffalo owner Terry Pegula wants Eichel to land in the Western Conference. So if the Rangers are actually going to be in this race, the cost will be higher for them, say, than the Wild. It may be astronomical. And that doesn’t even include the $10 million cap hit (or the concerns about his neck injury).”

Speculation: - Eichel Mega Thread III


“Buffalo owner Terry Pegula wants Eichel to land in the Western Conference.“ Why do you think? Do you have any suggestions?
“So if the Rangers are actually going to be in this race, the cost will be higher for them, say, than the Wild“.Why do you think? Do you have any suggestions?

Ken Holland is going to offer Mikko Koskinen a 1st and a 2nd for him.

 

[elchud]

No its not, when a player is placed on LTIR your teams cap ceiling essentially becomes your current cap hit of a healthy roster + your LTIR pool, not the league cap ceiling + your LTIR pool. During the offseason you can exceed the league cap by 10% but your team must be compliant for day 1 of the next season.
To fully utilize LTIR cap relief you have to be spending to the cap excluding that LTIR players contract.

Yes. Thats what I said.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

Yes. Thats what I said.

But you would not accrue cap space from to the LTIR players now "vacant" cap hit, as your Accruable Cap Space Limit (ASCL) is adjusted

 

[elchud]

But you would not accrue cap space from to the LTIR players now "vacant" cap hit, as your Accruable Cap Space Limit (ASCL) is adjusted

Ok thats where I would be wrong.

 

[elchud]

But you would not accrue cap space from to the LTIR players now "vacant" cap hit, as your Accruable Cap Space Limit (ASCL) is adjusted

So there's no point in replacing a players salary if they are on LTIR because it will screw you when they come back?

 

[Dr Quincy]

He would count against the cap but the cap is raised to the cap max plus any salaries on LTIR.

I've read and re-read the rules on this. I may be wrong. Fine I'm probably wrong. But it clearly says the cap is increased to the max cap plus the LTIR salaries. And the cap is calculated daily.

Yes, when the player is off LTIR you're back to the basic maximum cap. But its a daily calculation so money was saved when the LTIR pool was in effect.

This would fail if you *replaced* Eichels salary when he was on LTIR. Which you could absolutely do. Choosing not to do so would be why savings would accrue.

Savings wouldn't accrue. Let's say a team is at $72 million and adds Eichel. They are at $82 million with him. They are at 82 whether he is playing, injured but not on LTIR or injured and on LTIR. They accrue nothing. Yes, they are allowed to replace him and go up to $10m over... but that still doesn't accrue because technically they are over the cap, not under. In addition this means that any possible roster bonuses they have would be applied to the following year's cap and reduce it, effectively making their team's cap in 22-23 $79m (or however much $$ in bonuses are achieved).

 

[Dr Quincy]

So there's no point in replacing a players salary if they are on LTIR because it will screw you when they come back?

It's a good tool if:

1) The player is gone for the season or at least until playoffs when cap isn't an issue
2)You can do some follow up move to create some space right before bringing the guy back

In this case if a team is expecting Eichel back it would be crazy to spend all $10m to go over because it would be a nightmare when he came back. A couple million? Sure you can figure something out.

 

[Zach716]

To be fair, as a Sabres fan, I absolutely get that Eichel has diminished value. I also can put myself in another teams GM spot and ask what would I give up for a player with Eichels serious issue (s).

I think the Sabres have another 7 weeks or so to get an excellent value return so would prefer they not settle for a disappointing return.

If he isn't moved by 22 September, I start feeling extremely nervous and all these offers which are disappointing look much more enticing.

There is a bottom line to me...a high end center prospects. Id do Krebs/Tuch/Miller right now even though I dont like the value. KK/Drouin/Byron/1st/1st id do right now even though its Montreal. Im not as diamond hands as most Sabres fans.

Jeez man... taking on Drouin’s cap hit for the next 2 years alone is going to cost at least a 1st to cancel out if we’re comparing recent cap relief trade values. At that point you’re trading Eichel for a 1st, an overpaid 3/4th liner, and a decent young 3C that may or may not ever pan out as a 2C.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

So there's no point in replacing a players salary if they are on LTIR because it will screw you when they come back?

Exactly (unless they can be sent back down ofc), all your accruable cap space would have to be earned through how much you are under the cap when they are presumably healthy.

Either way a team acquiring Eichel likely doesnt want him on LTIR for more than a few weeks at most

 

[Jim Bob]

Going off of this, I do have a sliver of hope that a deal with Anaheim can still happen.

They talked about how Murray will change his mind out of the blue and do a deal that had seemed to be dead.

And in the Buffalo section, they talked about how the NHL can be about "being Alpha" and that the Sabres are trying to prove that they won't get pushed around by Team Eichel.

 

[Djp]

He would count against the cap but the cap is raised to the cap max plus any salaries on LTIR.

I've read and re-read the rules on this. I may be wrong. Fine I'm probably wrong. But it clearly says the cap is increased to the max cap plus the LTIR salaries. And the cap is calculated daily.

Yes, when the player is off LTIR you're back to the basic maximum cap. But its a daily calculation so money was saved when the LTIR pool was in effect.

This would fail if you *replaced* Eichels salary when he was on LTIR. Which you could absolutely do. Choosing not to do so would be why savings would accrue.

LTI.r is not bonus cap space. If someone is on LTIT you can use that space to spend against

say with Eichel on roster you are $1M under the cap. You LTIR is $10M you have $9M in space to use. $1M is lost due to cap difference.

my you doubke paying your expenditures are over the cap and you still run the risk of cap rollover.

 

[bernmeister]

The Rangers should be out on Eichel unless they get heavy retention, either by way of Buffalo directly or split between them and a third team brought into the mix. They would need him down around 6.5-7.5M in order to run him and Zibanejad together for the next 5 years. Otherwise, it doesn't make enough sense for them to pay assets for Eichel just to let Zibanejad walk.

Perhaps Buffalo and a third team each retain 1.5M. That's a manageable retention hit even if it's for 5 years. I think in this scenario, Kakko is on the table. Brooks was pushing the envelope at 50%, as obviously that would never happen, but I wouldn't be surprised if the underlying message was "the Rangers need some retention in order to talk Kakko".

Appreciate some recognition of the cap, and need to not add ? of Eich to lose Zib + premium assets.

However, retention is not enough.
Any eich deal turns us into the top heavy Leafs.
We have structural cap problems straight jacketing us for coupla years, until Trouba's 8m gets dealt.

If ya wanna push the issue
losing Strome + Geo covers about 2/3s of Eichs 10, roughly, and we may be able to get creative on the last third.

But ZERO bluest blue chips can go
no on moving Krav, Kakko etc
and Chytil is essential for replacing Strome.

Hence it has to be
Strome + Geo +
acceptable number of cond 7ths each of which can turn into higher picks, including 1sts IF IF IF Eich's production merits.
otherwise no.

After that statement, I don't even know if I want him here. I have been 50/50 on it to this point.
No way I give up Kakko, or Kratzov. The price keeps going down. Chytil, Barron, and a pick or a prospect, we get Eichel and the sabred retain $2.5 million per year and pray the guy can become healthy, return to form, and isn't a locker room cancer. That's a whole lot of prays right there. The longer this goes on the less he will command.

no.
Eichel is certain cap hit and medical risk
if he fails, we might not get medical release of contract, worse case scenario is he can still technically [barely] play but is a shell of himself
then we are screwed and have to buy out his contract.

no to any of that
will do conditional picks to satisfy desire for futures but will NOT prepay for the hope we wish Eich may return to form

 

[bernmeister]

Rangers should NOT be in on this

Only big move that makes sense, which I will post in another thread, is to trade an extended then retained Zib ++ for Matthews.

Should not go in on Eichel

 

[Kranix]

Rangers should NOT be in on this

Only big move that makes sense, which I will post in another thread, is to trade an extended then retained Zib ++ for Matthews.

Should not go in on Eichel

Fire up nhl 21 and get that deal done!

 

[bbny]

Appreciate some recognition of the cap, and need to not add ? of Eich to lose Zib + premium assets.

However, retention is not enough.
Any eich deal turns us into the top heavy Leafs.
We have structural cap problems straight jacketing us for coupla years, until Trouba's 8m gets dealt.

If ya wanna push the issue
losing Strome + Geo covers about 2/3s of Eichs 10, roughly, and we may be able to get creative on the last third.

But ZERO bluest blue chips can go
no on moving Krav, Kakko etc
and Chytil is essential for replacing Strome.

Hence it has to be
Strome + Geo +
acceptable number of cond 7ths each of which can turn into higher picks, including 1sts IF IF IF Eich's production merits.
otherwise no.




no.
Eichel is certain cap hit and medical risk
if he fails, we might not get medical release of contract, worse case scenario is he can still technically [barely] play but is a shell of himself
then we are screwed and have to buy out his contract.

no to any of that
will do conditional picks to satisfy desire for futures but will NOT prepay for the hope we wish Eich may return to form

There are cap problems for the Rangers when planning for the future, which is why retention is the only way Eichel makes enough sense. Eichel @ 10m turns us into Leafs. Eichel @ 6.5-7.5M does not.

There is a significant change to Eichel's value when retention is added, elevating his current value from "probably not a bluechip return" to "probably a bluechip return". Especially for a team like the Rangers.

 

[Gustave]

I want to point out how counter productive it is for the owner to accept a lesser offer because of the conference caveat.

He should expect to receive the BEST offer without any other consideration. The Sabres need to maximise the return and not settle for something different. How do you expect the franchise to turn around if what you receive isn’t up to par? He’s hurting his own team…

 

[Techcoockie]

Canadian's market would implose between a :

Matthews vs Eichel (best USA center battle)
Suzuki vs Tavares

KK + Ghule + prospect + first 2022 can be part of the deal imo.

 

[bernmeister]

There are cap problems for the Rangers when planning for the future, which is why retention is the only way Eichel makes enough sense. Eichel @ 10m turns us into Leafs. Eichel @ 6.5-7.5M does not.

There is a significant change to Eichel's value when retention is added, elevating his current value from "probably not a bluechip return" to "probably a bluechip return". Especially for a team like the Rangers.

respectful disagree

setting aside risk of whether or not eich actually delivers,
and to what extent

the math you are forgetting is that losing a premium blue chip = likely replacement by a veteran which = increased salary vs the cap

obv, that vet is more immediately and more going forward than an elc

of course you don't have to replace w/a vet, you can replace w/an elc
but if that elc is inferior, then you again do not wind up ahead.

As I said, w/possible exception of Jones thanks to Fox and others, we do NOT have a surplus of bluest blue chip elcs.

so it is not really a zero sum game going forward

hence only way Eich to Rangers makes sense for Rangers
is

Strome + Geo + multiple conditional picks each of which can be a 1st depending on what Eichel proves is justified

 

[ChuckLefley]

No its not, when a player is placed on LTIR your teams cap ceiling essentially becomes your current cap hit of a healthy roster + your LTIR pool, not the league cap ceiling + your LTIR pool. During the offseason you can exceed the league cap by 10% but your team must be compliant for day 1 of the next season.
To fully utilize LTIR cap relief you have to be spending to the cap excluding that LTIR players contract.

The cap is always the league cap. If you put someone on LTIR it’s still the league cap, but you get to exceed it by the LTIR amount. The cap ceiling doesn’t change to your cap hit plus the LTIR. Perhaps you’re not wording it well because that would mean a team with a $75m cap hit would have that as their ceiling if they put someone on LTIR and thus would have a lower cap ceiling than the rest of the league.

 

[Boxscore]

The Ducks and Vegas are just not a logical fit unless the Sabres are willing to take a bath on the deal just to see Eichel out West -- which would be complete buffoonery.

The Ducks are not going to be moving any of their prized chips like Zegras, Drysdale, McTavish, etc. ... so the best the Sabres will be lucky to get would be a Comtois or Rackell and some picks. Vegas could offer Krebs and Hague, but, meh.

Out West, the Kings and Wild should be the teams all over this. And in the East, the Rangers or likely Flyers would blow that offer out of the water -- and both have a bunch of good prospects to bundle.

 

[Jim Bob]

The Ducks and Vegas are just not a logical fit unless the Sabres are willing to take a bath on the deal just to see Eichel out West -- which would be complete buffoonery.

The Ducks are not going to be moving any of their prized chips like Zegras, Drysdale, McTavish, etc. ... so the best the Sabres will be lucky to get would be a Comtois or Rackell and some picks. Vegas could offer Krebs and Hague, but, meh.

Out West, the Kings and Wild should be the teams all over this. And in the East, the Rangers or likely Flyers would blow that offer out of the water -- and both have a bunch of good prospects to bundle.

I'll take Krebs over the prospects that the Rangers are reportedly willing to part with.

And LA is definitely out after signing Danault.

 

[TGWL]

Not sure if anyone can answer this. Before I ask it , I want to point out something that I believe is accurate (correct me if I'm wrong)

If a player chooses to retire in the middle of his contract, the contractual obligation ends with both parties, but the team still hold his rights if he were come back during the lifetime of his contact.

So hypothetically what if Eichel retired and then does his own surgery. Once you retire, the team has 0 say on what surgical procedure you do in private life. Then after the surgery ,Eichel says he wants to return to the NHL . His contract with Buffalo will be counted again where it left off. Eichel resumes his former stance of wanting to be traded. I assume Buffalo can't suspend or even void his contract because his surgery took place at a time when he deassociated him self with NHL as a retired player.

It may be pointed out that if you retire, you need to stay retired for a full season. I don't think that's accurate. Mike Fisher once retired with Nashville, only to come back later in the same season and participated on their playoff run.

So can Eichel theoretically do what I suggest?

Eichel wants to be traded. ("He's never said that". Stop, lol). But Eichel isn't looking to give up millions of dollars. 1. I'd assume Buffalo would only use the breach of contract if the surgery ends up being a bad idea. 2. Eichel would be very foolish to lose the rest of his contract if things go south.