Proposal: Trade Rumours/Proposals PART XXX

[bert]

About 63 hotdogs.

Haha what a beauty. I think Phil Kessel could be a good fit on a veteran team that has great leadership and is knocking on the door of a championship. A team that needs some more offense. However Arizona was never a good fit for him the same way he is a bad fit in Ottawa.

 

[Sweatred]

Let me guess Sweatred had no idea what I posted then implied I said something that I didn't. Colour me shocked.

I think he quoted you fairly accurately ? The good news is the quote is posted.

 

[Micklebot]

About 63 hotdogs.

He could give Joey Chestnut a run for his money

 

[JD1]

There are certainly some that focus on our internal budget, and attribute that solely to the owner. Fans are often emotional and look to place blame, but look past the animus towards the owner and you get the root of the argument, our internal budget is likely one of the biggest reasons we specifically are not in on Eichel. I think it would be foolish to believe our internal budget doesn't play into the calculus for deciding on whether to trade for Eichel or not.

I don't think internal budget has anything to do with the apparent lack of interest in Eichel.

 

[Beville]

Absolutely do not want Domi, he’s a .

As for Kessel, not ideal but he’s an absolutely Dorion target to a T: a lot of money, and old.

 

[Micklebot]

I don't think internal budget has anything to do with the apparent lack of interest in Eichel.

Agree to disagree I guess. I think it's pretty logical to conclude our risk profile regarding acquiring big contracts is greater than teams with bigger budgets. Garrioch indicated that we kicked the tires, so presumably we were scared off by who the player is, but rather the cost/benefit and associated risks. With a bigger budget we might be able to take bigger risks.

 

[GCK]

Agree to disagree I guess. I think it's pretty logical to conclude our risk profile regarding acquiring big contracts is greater than teams with bigger budgets. Garrioch indicated that we kicked the tires, so presumably we were scared off by who the player is, but rather the cost/benefit and associated risks. With a bigger budget we might be able to take bigger risks.

Do you know how the Senators medical staff feels about disc replacement surgery in a hockey player. I imagine the Sabres aren’t the only medical staff in the league that is against it.

 

[TheDebater]

If this team was willing to spend, Karlsson and Stone would both be Senators right now. Regardless of hindsight, I do not believe for a moment that trading them away was a "hockey decision"; it was a money decision.

Bringing in Jack Eichel is a huge financial commitment, and with our owner, that supersedes the hockey decisions.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Agree to disagree I guess. I think it's pretty logical to conclude our risk profile regarding acquiring big contracts is greater than teams with bigger budgets. Garrioch indicated that we kicked the tires, so presumably we were scared off by who the player is, but rather the cost/benefit and associated risks. With a bigger budget we might be able to take bigger risks.

Naw, if his salary was the key issue PD wouldn’t have touched base to begin with. Far more logical is that the asking price was such that we walked away. It’s important that we make sure that 10 million is well spent of course, so it matters to us, but I don’t think it’s the deciding factor in not ‘getting’ eichel.

Having a bigger budget would be nice, but I suspect that it wouldn’t make much of a difference if we aren’t willing to meet the ask.I got price.

 

[Ice-Tray]

If this team was willing to spend, Karlsson and Stone would both be Senators right now. Regardless of hindsight, I do not believe for a moment that trading them away was a "hockey decision"; it was a money decision.

Bringing in Jack Eichel is a huge financial commitment, and with our owner, that supersedes the hockey decisions.

But both those players were offered huge money deals apparently….

JE, in a bubble, is probably the only situation where it actual makes sense to take on that amount of money given his age and skill.

Blaming EM is just the easy path to take, when it’s far more likely that our staff doesn’t want to give up the assets needed to acquire a player that their not likely over the moon about, for a number of reasons.

 

[Micklebot]

Do you know how the Senators medical staff feels about disc replacement surgery in a hockey player. I imagine the Sabres aren’t the only medical staff in the league that is against it.

It was well known that he wanted it for quite a while now, seems we wouldn't have kicked the tires if that was a deal breaker.

It's all going to come down to the risks vs benefits and our willingness to take risk. Our budget impacts our willingness to take risk, his neck increases the risk, everything interacts, you can't really ignore one unless you think something is a deal breaker on its own. If he were put on waivers and we had unlimited budget, do you think we'd make a claim? If yes, then you probably don't see the surgery as a deal breaker.

 

[Micklebot]

Naw, if his salary was the key issue PD wouldn’t have touched base to begin with. Far more logical is that the asking price was such that we walked away. It’s important that we make sure that 10 million is well spent of course, so it matters to us, but I don’t think it’s the deciding factor in not ‘getting’ eichel.

Having a bigger budget would be nice, but I suspect that it wouldn’t make much of a difference if we aren’t willing to meet the ask.I got price.

What if they asked for retention? Not like we haven't done that before.

 

[bert]

I don't think internal budget has anything to do with the apparent lack of interest in Eichel.

Its probably not the main reason but its definitely a factor, among many. He isnt and shouldnt be a target for this team right now. Money isnt even close to the biggest reason why, but there is no way its not something thats taken into consideration. Mostly that they arent a cap team and they have big money to spend on other players coming up as well.

Naw, if his salary was the key issue PD wouldn’t have touched base to begin with. Far more logical is that the asking price was such that we walked away. It’s important that we make sure that 10 million is well spent of course, so it matters to us, but I don’t think it’s the deciding factor in not ‘getting’ eichel.

Having a bigger budget would be nice, but I suspect that it wouldn’t make much of a difference if we aren’t willing to meet the ask.I got price.

Maybe maybe not, he could have touched base and had a conversation to see if they were willing to take big contracts back. If not then its a non starter. There are many factors at play, who they would take, who they would want etc. Thats the logical way to look at it, to say money isnt a factor with the Sens would be pretty disingenous based on all of the decisions that have been made in the last 5 years. They have paid assets to take contracts several times, its clearly a factor.

 

[Ice-Tray]

It was well known that he wanted it for quite a while now, seems we wouldn't have kicked the tires if that was a deal breaker.

It's all going to come down to the risks vs benefits and our willingness to take risk. Our budget impacts our willingness to take risk, his neck increases the risk, everything interacts, you can't really ignore one unless you think something is a deal breaker on its own. If he were put on waivers and we had unlimited budget, do you think we'd make a claim? If yes, then you probably don't see the surgery as a deal breaker.

The key risk is the group of assets that we would have to give up, not his salary. That is where the perspectives differ.

The size of the contract is of concern on the one hand, though given it’s length and his regular skill level it’s much less so than EK’s contract for example.

It’s the assets that we would have to give up, and the holes we’d have to make in our team, for a guys that has some red flags right now on and off the ice, along with phenomenal skills.

 

[Ice-Tray]

What if they asked for retention? Not like we haven't done that before.

Yeah we’re likely not asking for retention as a means to make the deal more palatable. This isn’t Henrique, this is the biggest available asset in quite some time, and the Sens would be even less likely to fork over the additional assets to make that situation considerable. In my opinion of course.

EDIT: Actually, I think I remember reading that the Sabres were offering that in exchange for more assets, so perhaps it has been an ask. It would cost more in players and picks though which I think is already a sticking point.

 

[BondraTime]

Eichel is exactly what the team needs.

As long as it doesn’t involve giving up Stutzle, Sanderson, Chabot and Tkachuk, we’d be on the winning side.

24 year old in his prime legit league MVP type player with size.

It’s not happening, unfortunately, as it would be unbelievable for the team and give them a legit 4 year window.

 

[Micklebot]

The key risk is the group of assets that we would have to give up, not his salary. That is where the perspectives differ.

The size of the contract is of concern on the one hand, though given it’s length and his regular skill level it’s much less so than EK’s contract for example.

It’s the assets that we would have to give up, and the holes we’d have to make in our team, for a guys that has some red flags right now on and off the ice, along with phenomenal skills.

A roster can only be so big, we've got lots of assets that will eventually some will have to be moved.

I think the cost in assets is certainly going to be a primary factor, and maybe it will outweigh the salary commitment and risk, but we won't know the cost to acquire him until he is traded, Joe Thornton got traded for a handful of mediocre players. Pronger was acquire by Edmonton for a bunch of inconsequential picks and players (that one backfired pretty quick mind you when he and his wife wanted out).

It's all just a balancing act, as one variable changes the calculation shifts.

 

[Micklebot]

Eichel is exactly what the team needs.

As long as it doesn’t involve giving up Stutzle, Sanderson, Chabot and Tkachuk, we’d be on the winning side.

24 year old in his prime legit league MVP type player with size.

It’s not happening, unfortunately, as it would be unbelievable for the team and give them a legit 4 year window.

Healthy Eichel would be worth the price imo, so long as you suggested it didn't include our core guys. Broken Eichel would close our window pretty quick though as we simply cannot spend our way out of a mistake

 

[JD1]

Agree to disagree I guess. I think it's pretty logical to conclude our risk profile regarding acquiring big contracts is greater than teams with bigger budgets. Garrioch indicated that we kicked the tires, so presumably we were scared off by who the player is, but rather the cost/benefit and associated risks. With a bigger budget we might be able to take bigger risks.

f*** you're a difficult person to engage with. I said nothing about acquiring big contracts. This discussion is about Jack Eichel. Period. My comment was about Jack Eichel. No one else. And to repeat.... i do not think our apparent lack of interest in acquiring Jack Eichel is related to budget

 

[Sweatred]

Naw, if his salary was the key issue PD wouldn’t have touched base to begin with. Far more logical is that the asking price was such that we walked away. It’s important that we make sure that 10 million is well spent of course, so it matters to us, but I don’t think it’s the deciding factor in not ‘getting’ eichel.

Having a bigger budget would be nice, but I suspect that it wouldn’t make much of a difference if we aren’t willing to meet the ask.I got price.

Well said -

 

[Ice-Tray]

A roster can only be so big, we've got lots of assets that will eventually some will have to be moved.

I think the cost in assets is certainly going to be a primary factor, and maybe it will outweigh the salary commitment and risk, but we won't know the cost to acquire him until he is traded, Joe Thornton got traded for a handful of mediocre players. Pronger was acquire by Edmonton for a bunch of inconsequential picks and players (that one backfired pretty quick mind you when he and his wife wanted out).

It's all just a balancing act, as one variable changes the calculation shifts.

I agree, and I’m ok with the idea of brining in Eichel, in a general sense, I’ve soften on that.

My main concern is about what we have to give up, and I don’t envy the staff if they have to trade kids before we know what we have. Norris and Pinto are two players that I don’t want to trade up front, along with Brady and Stu. On the back end Chabot and Sanderson, and Kleven, are guys I don’t want to lose either.

Batherson, Brandstrom, Gus, picks? Damn!

 

[Micklebot]

f*** you're a difficult person to engage with. I said nothing about acquiring big contracts. This discussion is about Jack Eichel. Period. My comment was about Jack Eichel. No one else. And to repeat.... i do not think our apparent lack of interest in acquiring Jack Eichel is related to budget

Would Jack Eichel not be a big contract? Pretty sure that's the implication when people suggest our budget deters our interest in Eichel.

 

[Micklebot]

I agree, and I’m ok with the idea of brining in Eichel, in a general sense, I’ve soften on that.

My main concern is about what we have to give up, and I don’t envy the staff if they have to trade kids before we know what we have. Norris and Pinto are two players that I don’t want to trade up front, along with Brady and Stu. On the back end Chabot and Sanderson, and Kleven, are guys I don’t want to lose either.

Batherson, Brandstrom, Gus, picks? Damn!

I think I could live with trading one of Norris or Pinto for him, because you only have so many mins to go around for centers. But it would sting. Problem is the health risk combined with our susceptibility to bad contracts, we simply can't afford to make mistakes

 

[bert]

To be honest I am really happy that they didnt do anything major. Its boring and all but its not the time to do it, once they get a taste of this lineup with Sanderson in it should be when this team starts to make some moves. By then I think we will know if they really need to go after a center or not, yes it appears that way however this team has 5 guys that are 24 and under that they have spent alot of draft and player capital on that arent close to being fully developed. Norris, Pinto, L. Brown, Greig and White are all relatively young. The next two seasons is going to tell us pretty much exactly what they have. By then Sanderson will be a top 4 d men and the sens should have something that looks like a solid top 4 d. Thats when the makeup of this roster will start to come together to see what type of team this is going to be. Getting out of Dadonovs contract and getting two assets was a great move. One of Dorions best, these types of trades will go a long way the next couple of years. The team has to be frugal they cant make mistakes on big contracts they dont have the ability to fix these mistakes if they are major.

 

[operasen]

Do you know how the Senators medical staff feels about disc replacement surgery in a hockey player. I imagine the Sabres aren’t the only medical staff in the league that is against it.

This is a huge point. Not a surgeon myself so would love to hear an opinion as to viability and recovery time for a top rated, physically impactful player and game.