Value of: Erik Karlsson @ 50% to Vancouver?
- Thread starter Quinntessential
- Start date
That's not much different than your original proposal.
That's a pretty misleading read of what is being discussed.
Stewie Griffin
What the deuce
The Sharks would require something for retaining on Karlsson. He has been a good player, and we're not retaining for the next handful of years for no reason at all. We can just keep him. He sells jerseys, and is one of the only reasons fans have to attend games.
50% retention is why its a bad offer.
How about Garland, Myers, and Podkolzin for Karlsson? No retention and no draft picks. Cap space is pretty much a wash.
We're definitely not interested in trading Podkolzin.
Garland seems like a valuable trade piece elsewhere too, but he and Myers isn't a terrible basis. I made a joke earlier about playing 4 D on our PP1, and I think that might not have gotten what I meant across how I feel about Karlsson coming to the Canucks effectively, but others have summed it up.
Karlsson and Hughes on the same time would neuter one, or both, by merit of not getting all the ice time they need/should have offensively and on the powerplay. It took moving Burns for Karlsson to break out as a Shark, and we saw an awful regression by Ekman-Larsson when we acquired him to play behind Hughes.
Karlsson is on an absolute tear this year, and I have no doubt he will get appropriate value from a team that needs an offensive D. I don't think the Canucks are that team, though, unless it's highway robbery.
Miro4Norris
Registered User
- Jan 24, 2021
- 1,895
- 1,720
Lol Vancouver already has a horrible defending and they add worst defender in the league whose role is already filled 1:1 by Q. Hughes?
Actually, Karlsson's defensive play might be an improvement over some of the guys we have.
Which in this situation very much could be highway robbery. The Sharks won't have much leverage when they discuss moving Karlsson but that leverage is dependent on how flexible Karlsson is willing to be on a trade out of town. If he only wanted to go to Vancouver for whatever reason, the Canucks could get him for very cheap. Though I do agree with your assessment regarding time and opportunities. The only way Karlsson will work well with a premium defenseman is if that sort of d-man is also able to eat big minutes on the left side with him and be defensive.
I do think something gets done in the offseason though. There's been a bit too much come out since Grier got hired that leads me to believe that they're trying to find a home for Karlsson but big contracts with term take time and the most flexibility teams will have is in the offseason.
Breakers
Make Mirrored Visors Legal Again
Oh, I understand Garland/Myers/Podkolzin is a swell price for Karlsson, but unless the Sharks are hamstrung or desperate to unload a single 11.5 million dollar cap hit for two smaller hits, there is no good reason to do that.
Hughes needs a number one role, Karlsson needs a number one role, it's just not a great situation, as much as I'd love Karlsson on this team. If he played defense like a peak Vlasic or Tanev, we'd be discussing a higher price for sure. We're in the same boat there, we need a top pairing defensive player to compliment our big guns.
If you find a team that can take Karlsson's contract as is, fantastic. We're in a Burns/Karlsson situation that was Benning's last poison pill that was fed to us before he was fired, so we need to find someone that needs an LHD that hasn't given up on OEL, that has cap space, that OEL won't nix a trade to. Fun times!
Gecklund
Registered User
Well then it’s a good thing you aren’t in charge of an NHL team because this is a very dumb post. A 2nd round pick for a defenseman on pace for 108 points while also being fine defensively is a f***ing steal no matter what the contract is.
If the Sharks end up trading Karlsson and OEL was willing to go to San Jose at a reduced price, I'd have interest in bringing him in. I just don't think OEL has a good reason to accept a trade to San Jose.
Pyrophorus
Registered User
There is a way for VAN to be better in a few years
That path however; does not go through EK65
It's only a wash until the end of 2024. The Canucks cannot possibly hope to accommodate EK at an 11.5M cap hit from 2024-2027, unless OEL is dealt separately and even then, it's not the best idea.
Pyrophorus
Registered User
I think 2 is fair, but its a very poor move by VAN to even consider any move for him.
If it does go through, fleece Jim/Patrik by making it unprotected.
Pitchforks and torches gathering outside of GM Place again would be a powerful motivator, no? Jokes.
We still have the same problem with Karlsson as we do with OEL though, two very high end offensive D and only so much offensive ice time and PP time to go around. Not that Karlsson wouldn't be a huge improvement on OEL, even just handedness is better for us, but we are still either clipping Hughes' or Karlsson's wings by having them both.
Maybe with OEL but there will be other places he could land at that don't involve him going to a losing high-tax location. San Jose's only appeal to players with trade protection is if they're competing. My interest in OEL doesn't necessarily mean it will be with Karlsson going Vancouver's way. I'd potentially have interest in OEL if it's something they're getting paid enough for whether it's through draft capital or prospects or allows them to dump some other contracts in the process. All situations that are unlikely even without NMC concerns because Vancouver wants pretty much the same sort of thing.
Well he's already in a high tax area, so I don't think that was the X factor in choosing either Boston or Vancouver as landing places.
We're a little stuck, cap wise, as we can't really take more then his cap hit back. Draft capital will be a point of contention, as we just used a 2nd round pick to downgrade (cap wise) from Dickinson to Stillman. We are very, very amenable as a fan base to moving OEL. He would have been an excellent fit if A.) Benning wasn't an idiot and B.) we didn't have Hughes already showing promise to fill the same role before the trade was made.
I think we'd be happy to take back shorter term, or less expensive, contracts in exchange for OEL. The problem is the closest matches, cap wise, are attached to better players, who we can't afford a package of futures for, or are, somehow, Vlasic. Vlasic is signed to a slightly shorter term, at a slightly lower cap hit, but is also already in free fall from the time he signed that deal.
Is there a deal that can be worked out for San Jose under these perameters?
It would depend on if Vancouver is willing to retain on OEL and/or how much cap they're willing to take back on him and what is available to tag with him to make it interesting. If Vlasic is off the table, you're pretty much getting the more desirable cap dumps so while the Sharks could use him and potentially rehabilitate his value for down the road provided that Karlsson is moved elsewhere, we wouldn't be moving anyone out that would dramatically alter their ability to do anything. I think attaching someone like Podkolzin to OEL could make for an interesting possible deal but we would probably ask for some retention in the 1-2 mil range and figure out a return from there. Maybe like Radim Simek who would have one year left at 2.25 plus something else. I haven't fleshed it out very much as you can see so it may still be wildly off for Vancouver's current situation there.
Podkolzin is still on my "don't trade" list. I'd be more open to Hoglander, Klimovich or even Rathbone, but I don't know what the needs of the Sharks are.
I'd be fine with retention on OEL, but bare in mind he has 5 years worth of retention we'd be taking on, so that alone is reasonably valuable.
I wouldn't go as far as to say Vlasic is a non-starter, but even without retention, OEL is younger, still performing better, has declined less, and even the shorter/slightly lower contract means I'd expect some value coming our way in a Vlasic/OEL trade.
Simek is also good. Three Simeks would still be acceptable. I don't know who is considered a cap dump outside of Vlasic, but hit us with what ever, if the cap is close to matching.
Basically, my view on OEL is not that we need to clear the player, or even the cap hit off the team, but the term. His play has value, but we've hammered a round peg into a square hole making him our shut down guy, with Hughes being a premiere puck moving D. If we can replace his pay, or if we're saving a significant cap hit, I don't mind paying something (further roster players of varying quality, non-first round picks, non-Podkolzin prospects), but as I've said, I'd prefer to hold on to Podkolzin
Sharks need to get younger in a lot of places. I would prefer to focus on acquiring top end centers and defensemen but they're lacking in youth pretty much at every position at all levels. Out of that group, I'd probably prefer Klimovich. True on the retention stuff but I think it's manageable if it's kept in that 1-2 mil area and probably on the lower end of that range honestly. As it relates to Vlasic for OEL, depending on the additional ask, I think that could work as well. To note though, Vlasic is having a pretty decent year playing better defensively at a 2nd pairing level with Benning. While he's still significantly overpaid for what he brings by a few million, if defensive issues are an issue, he might actually be a solid answer there for your team.
For me, the guys considered a cap dump from San Jose are obviously Vlasic, Simek, Lindblom, and potentially guys like Labanc and Ferraro. The issue though is that other than Ferraro and Vlasic, they all expire next season and we're a rebuilding team so dumping them isn't necessarily super valuable if we're talking about renting Meier at the deadline and trading Karlsson in the offseason (the EK65 one is probably a requirement for having any real interest in OEL).
Klimovich works for me, not because I don't think he'll do well, but because we have so many wingers already.
1 million is still 5 by the end of term, and 2 being 10. That is still an investment. Bare in mind, Arizona held back a little bit of salary in the original deal, so if we retain anything, that's it for his retention later if there is any possibility of trading him later. I mean, I wouldn't be expecting Toronto/Marleau levels of cost, but OEL at 5.25 million is pretty close to being worth the cap hit, and while still not "valuable", not someone we'd add significantly to to move on from.
Vlasic rebounding is great to hear, but he's still 35 and signed until he's...40? While I hope he keeps up the play, even without him coming our way, I think it would be hard to hope for it. Any utility we get from him in the mean time is welcome, but I still don't see the value being equal between he and OEL. What would you, on behalf of the Sharks, be willing to add to Vlasic for OEL?
Linblom/Simek+Ferraro/Labanc works as a base too, or even Ferraro+Labanc, I don't feel any of those is a bad start for OEL on our part, but I'd think there are some moving parts and some value going back to San Jose though.
