If Saad had a contract past next year maybe but I see Buffalo asking for Boqvist + Dach and the 2020 1st.

I wouldn’t do that from hawks point of view.
Cap implications

DeBrincat?

I wouldn't do it as a hawks fan, really hurts our forward depth and salary cap. Typically 3 forwards at 10 million isn't the recipie for sucess. Maybe is buffalo took more salary back and the 2021 1st instead of 2020. My counter would be:
Dach, Strome, Saad, Dehaan, 2021 1st, 2020 2nd for Eichel and Pilut

No, not without taking something else out

Pass from Buffalo

Chicago should, Buffalo should not accept that offed

Dach is a nice starting piece, but I honestly don't think the quality of this trade, overall, is enough. There are several teams I can think of, offhand, that could make better offers without completely blowing up their own team: Devils, Arizona, Nashville, LA.

I absolutely agree. Most trades in the NHL have less the 4 or 5 pieces and adding DeBrincat could replace 2 of the pieces Chicago is giving up. I can't remember where I heard it but it makes sense. If you can't get close with 1 pick, 1 player and 1 prospect it's not very likely that the trade will happen.

Every Leaf fan says …..

"what do you mean having 3 forwards earning 10 + million isn't going to be successful ? "

Sabre pass easily. It's not even a top 10 offer that would be made for Eichel. But he's not moving anyway yet so it's pointless.

agreed

This is a laughably ridiculous point. Most NHL trades don't involve a top 5 center entering his prime. Turn the thinking part of your brain on for a while.

Go through and look at the trades genius very few have more than 4-5 pieces you might want to check the facts before you run your mouth because all you did was make your self look stupid. The whole thing is pointless because Buffalo isn't trading Eichel and with the move Buffalo just made gutting their coaching staff was done for him and he won't be asking for a trade any time soon.

Nothing you said above remotely refutes my point. Try reading comprehension again.

What point? All you did was call my point laughably ridiculous. You have to make a point before I can refute it.