Speculation: Jack Eichel thread

[TheHudlinator]

The organization that gave him $80 million for 8 years shouldn't have any say on medical decisions?

Not if it's a legitimate surgery

 

[dasaybz]

It does matter.

Eichel takes issue with it and his absence is calling attention to it. It will be an issue moving forward - and you can be sure it'll be a big point of contention in the new CBA - because Eichel isn't acquiescing.

You're missing the point. The next CBA has nothing to do with his situation now. I'm not disagreeing with you at all but it literally doesn't matter pertaining to his situation today.

 

[blankall]

How are these teams even in the same catagory?

Vegas is trying to win now and need a #1 center. Makes sense on paper to deal futures for him.
Anaheim is in a rebuild. How does it make sense to trade Zegras/Drysdale + Comtois + another high 1st?

I would rather continue the rebuild then be Buffalo West and suck until he leaves in FA.

The odds of drafting an Eichel level player, even after many years of purposeful rebuild, are low. If you tank for the next four years, you hope to get an Eichel but might not. A player like Eichel getting moved happens once a generation.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

You're missing the point. The next CBA has nothing to do with his situation now. I'm not disagreeing with you at all but it literally doesn't matter pertaining to his situation today.

In what way?

 

[Zach716]

If you don't have autonomy over your own health decisions - when that choice doesn't threaten anyone else's health - what do you really have?

$80 million dollars, and an agent to tell him the risks and potential freedom he could be giving up to sign said $80 million dollar contract.

 

[duckpuck]

That would make sense if he were disputing whether he should be cleared to play, but he's not. The only thing that makes sense, other than when the injury occurred, is when the parties agreed that Eichel needed surgery (Jack was already opinion shopping for ADR before he even started rest and rehab, but it's not super clear when the Sabres doctors decided that surgery was necessary).

Yawn. This narrative is f***ing tired. The Sabres doctors do not think ADR is the safest/best course of treatment for Eichel. Eichel has been convinced otherwise. Figuring out where to go from there in a way that makes anyone happy is hard.

Compelling counterpoint, but you're still wrong.

I typically ignore the opinions of self announced "attorneys" who laughably claim that there is 100% certainty to the outcome of any litigation/arbitration/dispute - as you did in the prior thread.

The first thing a competent attorney tells their client is that ANYTHING can happen in litigation. But not you - you know for sure what the outcome will be. Really wise attorneys tell their clients that even if they win the case, they may lose on other fronts (public opinion, bad precedents set by the court ruling, animosity with a union, etc.). Winning the battle, but losing the war. The only thing that makes me believe you might actually be an attorney is the arrogance and sanctimony you display in making some pretty strange claims.

To the merits of the bolded quote above, there are lots of other possibilities that "make sense" as at least possible, Somehow despite your self professed legal acumen, these escape you. The first is that the parties may have agreed to extend/toll the applicable deadlines. Happens all the time - particularly when parties don't want to go to Defcon 1 and have a costly and/or embarrassing public dispute (and no doubt the league is wanting this to go away). The other thing that makes some sense - the Sabres doctors may not have rendered a formal recommendation yet, so the 60 day period is not triggered. Another possibility is that Eichel is presenting new medical evidence/opinions that the Sabres doctors likely will reject. If that happpens, arguably it is a new medical "incident" which would (arguably) restart the clock under Section 34.1(c) of the CBA. Eichel has good lawyers that are at least as smart as you - they probably have 5+ other arguments.

I find it odd you're so certain Eichel will lose, yet you have not discussed what is actually being disputed. What are the issues? One issue (not the only) is the standard of care provided by team doctors. Since despite your legal eagle skills you're not able to post the relevant info, I'll help. Here is the standard of care of NHL teams and doctors from Section 34.1(b) of the CBA:

"The primary professional duty of all individual health care professionals, such as team physicians, certified athletic trainers/therapists ("ATs"), physical therapists, chiropractors, dentists and neuropsychologists, shall be to the Player-patient regardless of the fact that he/she or his/her hospital, clinic, or medical group is retained by such Club to diagnose and treat Players . . ."

Now that that's on the table, you can feel free to explain how an NHL doctor is honoring his/her primary allegiance to the player by recommending fusion surgery that benefits the team (over the player's strong objection). Specifically, fusion presents a strong likelihood of life long complications that might be avoided by disk replacement - almost certain downside to the player's quality of life. The only benefit of fusion is the perceived increase likelihood of playing in the NHL. Is that honoring the primary duty to the player patient or is that putting the team's interest ahead of the players? I don't know - and neither do you. But I'm smart enough to admit that and to acknowledge neither side has a 100% chance of winning.

 

[TommyDangles]

Not if it's a legitimate surgery

That's right.

He's giving them elite hockey for that money. They shouldn't have any say in his health decisions.

There's nothing stopping him from getting the surgery. He could have it tomorrow if he wanted to.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

$80 million dollars, and an agent to tell him the risks and potential freedom he could be giving up to sign said $80 million dollar contract.

Or he could keep his $80 million and go on LTIR until the Sabres trade him to a different franchise instead of staying with a perennial losing team that won't let him make his own health choices.

Seems like an easy choice to me.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

There's nothing stopping him from getting the surgery. He could have it tomorrow if he wanted to.

Why would he when he can do this instead?

 

[tsujimoto74]

"The primary professional duty of all individual health care professionals, such as team physicians, certified athletic trainers/therapists ("ATs"), physical therapists, chiropractors, dentists and neuropsychologists, shall be to the Player-patient regardless of the fact that he/she or his/her hospital, clinic, or medical group is retained by such Club to diagnose and treat Players . . ."

Now that that's on the table, you can feel free to explain how an NHL doctor is honoring his/her primary allegiance to the player by recommending fusion surgery that benefits the team (over the player's strong objection). Specifically, fusion presents a strong likelihood of life long complications that might be avoided by disk replacement - almost certain downside to the player's quality of life. The only benefit of fusion is the perceived increase likelihood of playing in the NHL. Is that honoring the primary duty to the player patient or is that putting the team's interest ahead of the players? I don't know - and neither do you. But I'm smart enough to admit that and to acknowledge neither side has a 100% chance of winning.

I'm not going to engage with any of your ad hominem character attack bullshit, but I will explain to you that it is, in fact, possible for 2 doctors to disagree about something for entirely medical reasons. So the Sabres' spinal specialist doing his duty to Eichel by giving his best medical advice.

 

[TommyDangles]

Why would he when he can do this instead?

Do what instead? Jack can go right now if he wants to. His contract would likely get voided, but he can do what he wants.

 

[Kranix]

I typically ignore the opinions of self announced "attorneys" who laughably claim that there is 100% certainty to the outcome of any litigation/arbitration/dispute - as you did in the prior thread.

The first thing a competent attorney tells their client is that ANYTHING can happen in litigation. But not you - you know for sure what the outcome will be. Really wise attorneys tell their clients that even if they win the case, they may lose on other fronts (public opinion, bad precedents set by the court ruling, animosity with a union, etc.). Winning the battle, but losing the war. The only thing that makes me believe you might actually be an attorney is the arrogance and sanctimony you display in making some pretty strange claims.

To the merits of the bolded quote above, there are lots of other possibilities that "make sense" as at least possible, Somehow despite your self professed legal acumen, these escape you. The first is that the parties may have agreed to extend/toll the applicable deadlines. Happens all the time - particularly when parties don't want to go to Defcon 1 and have a costly and/or embarrassing public dispute (and no doubt the league is wanting this to go away). The other thing that makes some sense - the Sabres doctors may not have rendered a formal recommendation yet, so the 60 day period is not triggered. Another possibility is that Eichel is presenting new medical evidence/opinions that the Sabres doctors likely will reject. If that happpens, arguably it is a new medical "incident" which would (arguably) restart the clock under Section 34.1(c) of the CBA. Eichel has good lawyers that are at least as smart as you - they probably have 5+ other arguments.

I find it odd you're so certain Eichel will lose, yet you have not discussed what is actually being disputed. What are the issues? One issue (not the only) is the standard of care provided by team doctors. Since despite your legal eagle skills you're not able to post the relevant info, I'll help. Here is the standard of care of NHL teams and doctors from Section 34.1(b) of the CBA:

"The primary professional duty of all individual health care professionals, such as team physicians, certified athletic trainers/therapists ("ATs"), physical therapists, chiropractors, dentists and neuropsychologists, shall be to the Player-patient regardless of the fact that he/she or his/her hospital, clinic, or medical group is retained by such Club to diagnose and treat Players . . ."

Now that that's on the table, you can feel free to explain how an NHL doctor is honoring his/her primary allegiance to the player by recommending fusion surgery that benefits the team (over the player's strong objection). Specifically, fusion presents a strong likelihood of life long complications that might be avoided by disk replacement - almost certain downside to the player's quality of life. The only benefit of fusion is the perceived increase likelihood of playing in the NHL. Is that honoring the primary duty to the player patient or is that putting the team's interest ahead of the players? I don't know - and neither do you. But I'm smart enough to admit that and to acknowledge neither side has a 100% chance of winning.

5 years left. Sit and rot, we are in control, he's being very mean to a billionaire and his bosses, the thousands of fans.

 

[duckpuck]

There's nothing stopping him from getting the surgery. He could have it tomorrow if he wanted to.

This is childish. There is nothing stopping us from murdering a person, yet somehow most people don't because, as it turns out, there are legal and other bad consequences.

 

[TheHudlinator]

There's nothing stopping him from getting the surgery. He could have it tomorrow if he wanted to.

I mean the fact he wants to honor his contract and still get his neck fixed clearly is stopping him since you know the Sabres won't let him get a legitimate medical procedure that won't leave him in a position to get at minimum of a surgery every decade for the rest of his life.

 

[TommyDangles]

This is childish. There is nothing stopping us from murdering a person, yet somehow most people don't because, as it turns out, there are legal and other bad consequences.

It's childish? People here are acting like Jack is prevented from getting the surgery. He's not. He can get it if he wants to. It's happened before in sports. Jets guard Kelechi Osemele had a medical dispute with the team over shoulder surgery. Team said no and he got it anyways. Team voided his contract and was free to sign with another team the next year.

Unless you're expecting Jack to ignore the team doctors, get surgery on his own, and have the organization be on the hook if it goes wrong.

What a horrible analogy that was lmao.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

I wonder if either party has floated a Disks for Deals swap? Eichel gets the disk replacement, and waves his NMC.

 

[TommyDangles]

I mean the fact he wants to honor his contract and still get his neck fixed clearly is stopping him since you know the Sabres won't let him get a legitimate medical procedure that won't leave him in a position to get at minimum of a surgery every decade for the rest of his life.

You can't ignore the team doctors, get a surgery without permission, and expect the organization to give you your guaranteed money and be on the hook if it goes wrong.

I think the Sabres doctors are familiar with the procedure, since their spine doctor has the most disc replacements performed in the U.S.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Do what instead? Jack can go right now if he wants to. His contract would likely get voided, but he can do what he wants.

Sure. But maybe he thinks he should be able to both keep his job and make his own health decisions.

Seems like the sort of idea worth sitting out for.

 

[Zach716]

I wonder if either party has floated a Disks for Deals swap? Eichel gets the disk replacement, and waves his NMC.

His NMC doesn’t start until this summer. Not a factor atm.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

His NMC doesn’t start until this summer. Not a factor atm.

Given he won't be fully recovered until that time frame it could be considered a factor by the Sabres.

 

[TheHudlinator]

You can't ignore the team doctors, get a surgery without permission, and expect the organization to give you your guaranteed money and be on the hook if it goes wrong.

I think the Sabres doctors are familiar with the procedure, since their spine doctor has the most disc replacements performed in the U.S.

He isn't ignoring them thus he hasn't had a surgery. He wants to try an alternative that is a legitimate procedure that has less negative effects on his long term health. The best part is he can do the disk fusion as a fall back if this doesn't work but he can't do it the other way around. Lehner had a problem with how the doctors handled his injury wouldn't be shocked if Eichel wants another opinion.

 

[TommyDangles]

Sure. But maybe he thinks he should be able to both keep his job and make his own health decisions.

Seems like the sort of idea worth sitting out for.

That's why both parties have agreed to a trade. Maybe it would've already happened if his previous agents weren't so dumb.

But saying, "Sabres shouldn't have a say" is just incredibly stupid. They absolutely should have a say.

 

[duckpuck]

I'm not going to engage with any of your ad hominem character attack bullshit, but I will explain to you that it is, in fact, possible for 2 doctors to disagree about something for entirely medical reasons.

Says the guy who said "you can put that GoogleLaw degree away; I'm an actual lawyer." I appreciate your newly found distaste for ad hominem. Convenient that it comes just as someone challenges you to produce actual legal thinking.

Either show us your lawyer skills and defend your legal position (that Eichel has a 0% chance of winning), or stop playing the lawyer card (which is an obnoxious thing to do in pretty much any situation, by the way, so probably just stop doing that in any event).

And to respond to your point, the fact that two doctors disagree is the starting point, not the end. The question is what happens when they disagree under the CBA. Another question is whether the team doctor can defend the standard of care he's advocating for.

And big picture - do you think the league wants a determination on this issue? Do they want to risk a ruling that a team doctor can't consider (or preference) the likelihood of returning to the ice over a player's long term health? What are the implications for that type of ruling in the context of concussions or other procedures?

A lot of people on this board would do disk replacement over fusion. Its pure speculation, but I'm guessing most people would choose replacement over fusion if both were offered (but I could be wrong). In any event, the team is asking Eichel to forego the benefits of disk replacement primarily (if not solely) to maximize Eichel's NHL career and on-ice production. Does that meet the standard of care? To suggest the answer to that question is 100% certain is silly.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

That's why both parties have agreed to a trade. Maybe it would've already happened if his previous agents weren't so dumb.

But saying, "Sabres shouldn't have a say" is just incredibly stupid. They absolutely should have a say.

According to the CBA, yes.

Morally, no.

And that's why he's sitting out.

 

[Zach716]

Says the guy who said "you can put that GoogleLaw degree away; I'm an actual lawyer." I appreciate your newly found distaste for ad hominem. Convenient that it comes just as someone challenges you to produce actual legal thinking.

Either show us your lawyer skills and defend your legal position (that Eichel has a 0% chance of winning), or stop playing the lawyer card (which is an obnoxious thing to do in pretty much any situation, by the way, so probably just stop doing that in any event).

And to respond to your point, the fact that two doctors disagree is the starting point, not the end. The question is what happens when they disagree under the CBA. Another question is whether the team doctor can defend the standard of care he's advocating for.

And big picture - do you think the league wants a determination on this issue? Do they want to risk a ruling that a team doctor can't consider (or preference) the likelihood of returning to the ice over a player's long term health? What are the implications for that type of ruling in the context of concussions or other procedures?

A lot of people on this board would do disk replacement over fusion. Its pure speculation, but I'm guessing most people would choose replacement over fusion if both were offered (but I could be wrong). In any event, the team is asking Eichel to forego the benefits of disk replacement primarily (if not solely) to maximize Eichel's NHL career and on-ice production. Does that meet the standard of care? To suggest the answer to that question is 100% know is silly.

By rumored accounts Eichel has been shopping around doctors and having difficulty finding any other ones agreeing ADR is the best for Eichel. If Eichel gets hit and his disc dislodges and he becomes paralyzed from the neck down for the rest of his life, is that Sabres doctors being selfish and neglecting to look out for his long term life outlook?

I guess I just don’t understand your major skepticism with the Sabres doctors motives when most other physicians agree with their stance.