I don't know if: "Wasn't even being allowed to play" is how I'd view that scenario at all. The Sabres would have happily allowed him to play. The main obstacle was that Eichel wanted out, he was then injured and the team and he disagreed on the proper treatment moving forward which was ultimately the straw that broke the camels back. I also wouldn't call Kulich and a 1st from a team that's been as lousy as the Sabres "a bunch of uninteresting stuff" even if I do think it certainly needs another high end piece added to it to get the conversation started.
Yeah anybody that had really researched the surgery Eichel wanted and looked at the outcomes for other athletes who have had it realized there was an extremely high likelihood of a good outcome for a 24 year old athlete in fantastic shape. Which is exactly how it played out. It really wasn't the anchor to moving Eichel that many might perceive it to be. I think you're about right in the value you're expecting. Kaprizov is the better player, but he's several years older than Eichel was when he was moved and plays the less important position.
How much more do you reasonably expect than 3+ first round picks for a player not resigning for you? It is a future value package. When you give up the best player that is what happens.
Last time I checked, he is a rental, and you don't get extra value if he resigns.
Cool, so we won’t trade him to you.
Cool, 2 year rental. Technically correct. That team needs a direction and trading Kiril is rebuilding. Thats is the kind of deal you get. Maybe you can look for something like a Marner type swap.
They will not accept your offer. There is not even one really enticing piece for Minnesota to sell the fanbase on for trading their best player.
I will live. 3/4 firsts worth of value is the most you are going to get out of anyone.
Not all 1sts are created equal. Your pieces are not enticing. You offered a pile of quantity and not quality.
2 years isn't a rental. It's a lazy attempt to de-value the player. Quit perpetuating that nonsense.
Well, maybe offer up a package worth discussing if you don't want people to be annoyed. Just a thought.
And clownish rebuttals don't make your past hyperbolic statements any more legit. Give it a rest.
The value for a long-term extension is never reflected in the price. The risk usually ends up on the acquiring party to negotiate after the trade anyways.
using big words and acting angry doesn't change the fact you are the one who needs to back off and give it a rest. No interest in my trade idea? Go bother someone else.
So you want more than 4 1sts, or our 3 best assets in Kulich 1st and Benson? Good luck I guess. We have a hole in the top 6, adding Peterka to the trade won't even solve our problem. Maybe if you like Byram enough. It will always be a dollar for quarters with these types of trades.
Is it super hard for you to understand that you won't get him then? You don't just get a top 5 scorer in the league just cause you want to you know, consider both sides instead of your own selfish opinion, the "4 1sts" offer is poop for a player like Kap, period.
Find me a trade where someone got more than 4 1sts for a player, let alone one year of them. WHat do you think you're getting for him? Peterka Benson and 4 more 1sts? Stop dreaming. You don't know what the GM wants or what direction he wants. I specifically stated it was a future only package assuming a rebuild.
What's next? Calling every single player a rental? This is the first time I've heard someone say 2 year rental. A rental is a player with less than 1 season.
