2025 NHL Draft: Lose a ton for Porter Martone

[STL Shark]

If we ended up with 1st overall and there was a team with a pick 3-5 (or wherever the next tier drops off, won’t know that until next spring) that also had a top RHD prospect, I would consider a trade down. I don’t think it’s anything that would actually happen in real life. But if we ended up with Hagens then I think you’d at least have to explore trading either him or Smith for a high end young defender. Having both is redundant.


It certainly does not rhyme with ‘baggin’. The ‘Hag’ part of the name rhymes with ‘vague’.

Neither does ‘Martone’ rhyme with ‘ton’. Both pretty awful catch-phrases if you ask me.

Think it would depend how Smith does this year too. If he is able to chip in 35 points as a rookie, I am more inclined to trade Hagens and keep Smith. Like something along the lines of Jiricek + CBJ top 5 pick + Top 10 protected 2026 1st?

Not sure what the value on that would look like with the additional 1st rounder, but something like that (along with a Will Smith successful rookie season) would give me good reason to trade out of #1 overall. Going to get more for that pick than you would for Smith straight up.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Think it would depend how Smith does this year too. If he is able to chip in 35 points as a rookie, I am more inclined to trade Hagens and keep Smith. Like something along the lines of Jiricek + CBJ top 5 pick + Top 10 protected 2026 1st?

Not sure what the value on that would look like with the additional 1st rounder, but something like that (along with a Will Smith successful rookie season) would give me good reason to trade out of #1 overall. Going to get more for that pick than you would for Smith straight up.

Yup, that’s my thought as well. If Smith shows this season that he’s on track to become that elite #2C, then I would listen to offers on Hagens if we ended up with 1st overall again. Something like top-5 pick + Jiricek or Reinbacher or something like that might be reasonable. No idea how the draft will shake out though so I won’t bother speculating beyond this for now.

 

[hohosaregood]

Lose games for James is pretty ez.

 

[STL Shark]

I completely agree if a team can constantly go into the season with two 1st round picks it opens up so much potential. Keeping a strong prospect pipeline is critical to extending a window from 2-3 to 10+ years. Even looking at dealing guys like Ferraro or Zetterlund before their UFA years to accumulate picks. Carolina moving Necas is an example of a competing team moving out a useful player to keep the prospect cupboard full.

Even Eklund could be a candidate to move out at 25-26 if he is tops out as a 2nd liner.

If you always have a good stable of prospects to fill holes then non core players can be replaced with prospects. This also lets prospects cook longer and show they aren’t busts before replacing roster players.

Why is Eklund being a 2nd liner reason to move him out? Last I checked, you need a 2nd line to be a good team. I don't see a path where Musty is ever a better NHL player than Eklund as his skillset is too 1 dimensional and based on scoring off the rush. If Eklund is only a 2nd line LW, that is still a massive win for a 7th overall pick assuming you sign a contract of 2nd line LW value rather than overpaying. Moving off Eklund just to try and draft another Eklund caliber player from a pick that is probably not in the top 10 is awful asset management.

I think dealing Zetterlund this TDL is a great idea as I think he's a 3rd liner on a playoff team, but outscoring his contract thanks to getting way more minutes here than elsewhere. That said, if you can lock him into a 4 year deal at $3.75M then I am keeping him around. Would take an offer like what Brandon Hagel or Tanner Jeannot were traded for from Tampa to consider moving him if we had a chance to lock him up for a fair middle 6 deal.

 

[Star Platinum]

In a thought that is way to early to feel too strongly about one way or the other; depending on how the draft rankings shake out I’d like the org to explore trading back to pick up additional firsts in future drafts under the hypothesis that one could net a couple of firsts by moving from 2OA to something like 6-7OA.

I know the prevailing wisdom is take the potential elite talent at the top of the draft, but taking a long view I think it might be beneficial to keep banking additional firsts in future drafts. It would be a way of ensuring a strong pipeline of good young players as the team is entering a competitive phase, or give additional assets to trade to add any missing pieces in future offseason or trade deadlines without completely missing out the opportunity to add 1st round talent (e.g. the Sharks could trade the additional first and keep their own)

It's an interesting thought.

I think if you have a pick that can take a guy that looks like he'll be in the star tier, you have to draft that guy no matter what no matter where your team is in its development curve. Even a team like Edmonton should be taking a guy like Hagens if they had the opportunity. But if we are at say pick 3 next year and pick 3-7 or something like that are all fairly close, I'm all for that strategy. I always liked how in Detroit's heyday, they always had some new blood coming into their team. I think in a salary cap league, you need those younger cheaper players that can come up and push your veteran talent, especially the guys who are decent, but not gamechanging players.

 

[Star Platinum]

Why is Eklund being a 2nd liner reason to move him out? Last I checked, you need a 2nd line to be a good team. I don't see a path where Musty is ever a better NHL player than Eklund as his skillset is too 1 dimensional and based on scoring off the rush. If Eklund is only a 2nd line LW, that is still a massive win for a 7th overall pick assuming you sign a contract of 2nd line LW value rather than overpaying. Moving off Eklund just to try and draft another Eklund caliber player from a pick that is probably not in the top 10 is awful asset management.

I think dealing Zetterlund this TDL is a great idea as I think he's a 3rd liner on a playoff team, but outscoring his contract thanks to getting way more minutes here than elsewhere. That said, if you can lock him into a 4 year deal at $3.75M then I am keeping him around. Would take an offer like what Brandon Hagel or Tanner Jeannot were traded for from Tampa to consider moving him if we had a chance to lock him up for a fair middle 6 deal.

I can definitely envision Musty becoming a better player than Eklund, but it's not a given by any stretch. But the Sharks have so little NHL-ready forward depth right now that there is no rush to move off Eklund and Zetterlund until someone better is willing to come as a free agent or someone that is clearly better than them comes to take their spot. When and if Musty, Haltunen, or Chenyshov show that they're ready to seriously compete for an NHL top 6 role (and that's probably not anytime soon), we'll cross that bridge then.

 

[Baysick]

We’re Tankin 4 Hagens!

 

[Skeksis25]

I'd rather just draft BPA, even if its Hagens than get overly cute. One year of decent production from Smith and/or Celebrini doesn't guarantee they will be elite. No guarantee with Hagens either, but I'd rather improve our odds.

And if all 3 look to be elite players? Then we can trade one for a better targeted return I feel. A team with a decent defense corp may be willing to trade their stud defensive prospect for a Will Smith who looks like he could be an elite C.

 

[Cas]

I'd rather just draft BPA, even if its Hagens than get overly cute. One year of decent production from Smith and/or Celebrini doesn't guarantee they will be elite. No guarantee with Hagens either, but I'd rather improve our odds.

And if all 3 look to be elite players? Then we can trade one for a better targeted return I feel. A team with a decent defense corp may be willing to trade their stud defensive prospect for a Will Smith who looks like he could be an elite C.

Trade one for a return more suited for building a balanced team, or keep all three as a wicked forward core - there's really no bad options.

Early picks, always pick the best overall prospect.

 

[coooldude]

I'd rather just draft BPA, even if its Hagens than get overly cute. One year of decent production from Smith and/or Celebrini doesn't guarantee they will be elite. No guarantee with Hagens either, but I'd rather improve our odds.

And if all 3 look to be elite players? Then we can trade one for a better targeted return I feel. A team with a decent defense corp may be willing to trade their stud defensive prospect for a Will Smith who looks like he could be an elite C.

Trade one for a return more suited for building a balanced team, or keep all three as a wicked forward core - there's really no bad options.

Early picks, always pick the best overall prospect.

It's total speculation at this point so it's not worth a ton of energy, but there are a couple reasons why we should entertain more than just "pick Hagens"

1. We don't know if he's 1OA anyway
2. You say you can move a player for a great return, but it's harder to do than to say. Anaheim is currently in this situation with a huge pipeline of top 6 talent. "Just trade Zegras for a piece you need" is a lot harder in practice. In the meantime, it's drama, and the team is still losing and looks like a tire fire. I expect they will get better, but I don't think they can a) build a top 6 easily and cleanly with all this talent, b) move pieces as easily as it is in theory. The market is smaller and less efficient when the price is higher.
3. Trade at the draft when the 1OA's value is the absolute highest. It's rarely done in the NHL but it's done a lot more in the NFL and it often works out for the team trading down, even if it also works out for the team trading up (which it obv does not always).

Again, I'm not going to die on this hill, I'm just saying it's not a 100% guaranteed objective truth that we should pick 1OA Hagens and not look back.

 

[Cas]

It's total speculation at this point so it's not worth a ton of energy, but there are a couple reasons why we should entertain more than just "pick Hagens"

1. We don't know if he's 1OA anyway
2. You say you can move a player for a great return, but it's harder to do than to say. Anaheim is currently in this situation with a huge pipeline of top 6 talent. "Just trade Zegras for a piece you need" is a lot harder in practice. In the meantime, it's drama, and the team is still losing and looks like a tire fire. I expect they will get better, but I don't think they can a) build a top 6 easily and cleanly with all this talent, b) move pieces as easily as it is in theory. The market is smaller and less efficient when the price is higher.
3. Trade at the draft when the 1OA's value is the absolute highest. It's rarely done in the NHL but it's done a lot more in the NFL and it often works out for the team trading down, even if it also works out for the team trading up (which it obv does not always).

Again, I'm not going to die on this hill, I'm just saying it's not a 100% guaranteed objective truth that we should pick 1OA Hagens and not look back.

To point one, I'm just using Hagens as shorthand for "whoever the best draftee is."

 

[Juxtaposer]

Trade one for a return more suited for building a balanced team, or keep all three as a wicked forward core - there's really no bad options.

Early picks, always pick the best overall prospect.

On the flip side, do we really want to become Toronto?

 

[Cas]

On the flip side, do we really want to become Toronto?

Toronto's problem is that they have no idea how to build a team, not that they have too many great forwards.

If you can build a deep, good team, you're still better off with three elite forwards than two elite forwards.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Toronto's problem is that they have no idea how to build a team, not that they have too many great forwards.

If you can build a deep, good team, you're still better off with three elite forwards than two elite forwards.

One might argue it’s because their team is incredibly unbalanced. I’m not saying they’d be better off without Marner, I’m saying they’d be better off with a defenseman who is nearly as good as Marner instead of Marner.

I’m also not saying trade the Hagens pick just to trade it, I’m saying explore the possibilities. If a trade comes up that perfectly fills a need, such as trading the Hagens pick for a Jiricek or Reinbacher plus a pick that could give us Frondell/Ryabkin/Schaefer, you’d have to consider it.

 

[spintops]

We Win one lottery and get so spoiled we are immediately arguing over what we are going to do when we win next year's lol

 

[Star Platinum]

It's total speculation at this point so it's not worth a ton of energy, but there are a couple reasons why we should entertain more than just "pick Hagens"

FWIW, to me "pick Hagens" at this point is really just "If there's a clear first overall and we have the first pick, you pick that guy." If it's close, then re-evaluate. This year, there was no debate.

Also, I view Anaheim's situation as a first world problem.

 

[hohosaregood]

One might argue it’s because their team is incredibly unbalanced. I’m not saying they’d be better off without Marner, I’m saying they’d be better off with a defenseman who is nearly as good as Marner instead of Marner.

I’m also not saying trade the Hagens pick just to trade it, I’m saying explore the possibilities. If a trade comes up that perfectly fills a need, such as trading the Hagens pick for a Jiricek or Reinbacher plus a pick that could give us Frondell/Ryabkin/Schaefer, you’d have to consider it.

They had 3 great young forwards to build around, they didn't need to go overpaying for Tavares at the time. If anything, they needed to go all in on Karlsson. As long as their 1D is Morgan Reilly, they're going nowhere.

 

[Juxtaposer]

They had 3 great young forwards to build around, they didn't need to go overpaying for Tavares at the time. If anything, they needed to go all in on Karlsson. As long as their 1D is Morgan Reilly, they're going nowhere.

Y’all know I love Karlsson but I really don’t think having him the last four years instead of Tavares changes any of those series.

I mean, this is all academic, but I think that balance in team-building is incredibly important.

 

[Hodge]

Toronto failed because GM Boy Genius made a bunch of stupid trades and signings, not because they drafted too many elite forwards.

On that note, this kid definitely has that 1st overall pick it factor. He's like an unholy combo of MacKinnon and Filip Forsberg.

 

[Shark Finn]

Only if Hagens was Danish. Coppin' Hagens would be perfect.

Never mind if he's American. This is gets my homer vote.

 

[CanadienShark]

Lose games for James is pretty ez.

Set a losing tone for Martone.

 

[tiburon12]

We Win one lottery and get so spoiled we are immediately arguing over what we are going to do when we win next year's lol

Technically we didn't win the lottery, just no one else won so we got 1st by default. as much of a "well actually" nerd take this is, it matters w/r/t winning 1st after finishing not-32nd

 

[JotAlan]

One might argue it’s because their team is incredibly unbalanced. I’m not saying they’d be better off without Marner, I’m saying they’d be better off with a defenseman who is nearly as good as Marner instead of Marner.

I’m also not saying trade the Hagens pick just to trade it, I’m saying explore the possibilities. If a trade comes up that perfectly fills a need, such as trading the Hagens pick for a Jiricek or Reinbacher plus a pick that could give us Frondell/Ryabkin/Schaefer, you’d have to consider it.

IMO, Martone is good, but overrated because of his size. I will exemplify the difference between him and Hagens for myself. If the draft were jointly 2023/2024/2025 Hagens would be fighting for second place with Michkov Celebrini, Carlsson, Fantilli. Martone would be after Smith, fighting to get into the top 10 with Demidov, Levshunov, Reinbacher, Leonard.
That said, I would love to get Martone if Hagens wasn't possible, but if you win the lottery it's about picking Himmy and not looking back. I don't believe the Leafs' problem is having several elite forwards, I think it's the GM not knowing how to form the team around them.

 

[spintops]

If the draft were jointly 2023/2024/2025 Hagens would be fighting for second place with Michkov Celebrini, Carlsson, Fantilli.

That wouldn't be a fight mate. You can take Celebrini out and say "they would be fighting for thiird"

 

[STL Shark]

I can definitely envision Musty becoming a better player than Eklund, but it's not a given by any stretch. But the Sharks have so little NHL-ready forward depth right now that there is no rush to move off Eklund and Zetterlund until someone better is willing to come as a free agent or someone that is clearly better than them comes to take their spot. When and if Musty, Haltunen, or Chenyshov show that they're ready to seriously compete for an NHL top 6 role (and that's probably not anytime soon), we'll cross that bridge then.

From every scouting report I have read and listened to on podcasts (and also just using historical evidence of late 1st and early 2nd rounders compared to top 10 picks), it sounds like all of those players have a LONG way to go in order to even be NHL players. Even further to be a guy that can put up 45 points and drive play at the NHL level as a 21 year old (or ever).

Eklund started so much further ahead from a well-rounded NHL game that I don't see a way that he's realistically passed up. Doesn't mean he becomes the elite 1st line wing that we hoped for when he was drafted, but I think he's a guy that can easily become a Patrick Sharp caliber player (3rd to 4th best forward on a Cup winner) if we're using the 2010's Blackhawks roster as our comparison model for this build (i.e. Celebrini/Smith = Toews/Kane stuff that floats around).