Value of: Erik Karlsson at the draft

[Albatros]

This is a terrible take. No one is lining up to give a 33 year old defenseman 4 years 11.5 million. Makar didn't get it and he is better and so much younger.

Makar wasn't UFA, took 9 to win now and become one at 29.

 

[Tempo]

EK had a dead cat bounce year.

If SJ can get out of that contract without much retention or taking much salary back, I would call that a win.

 

[TotalHomer]

You adding Lundell? Because Bob isn’t any better than Kahkonen and Karlsson is again a 100 point defenseman.

*checks notes*

Karlson has averaged about 50 games per year for the prior four years and put up around 40 points. Calling him a 100 point defenseman is rather generous.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

*checks notes*

Karlson has averaged about 50 games per year for the prior four years and put up around 40 points. Calling him a 100 point defenseman is rather generous.

It’s the most recent and relevant thing for anyone looking to add to their lineup.

 

[Gecklund]

*checks notes*

Karlson has averaged about 50 games per year for the prior four years and put up around 40 points. Calling him a 100 point defenseman is rather generous.

But he scored 100 points. How is that generous? It’s literally stating facts.

 

[TotalHomer]

But he scored 100 points. How is that generous? It’s literally stating facts.

More realistic expectation is that he'll give you 50 games again in the future. It would be rather stupid to bet on this year when the previous four have been awful.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

EK had a dead cat bounce year.

If SJ can get out of that contract without much retention or taking much salary back, I would call that a win.

It's not a dead cat if it shatters records. Give your damn head a shake.

And for all the other Karlsson haters on these boards; your opinion is null - the guy is a generational defensemen and his name will be in the record books. Eat that.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

More realistic expectation is that he'll give you 50 games again in the future. It would be rather stupid to bet on this year when the previous four have been awful.

Not when he’s healthy.

 

[Gecklund]

More realistic expectation is that he'll give you 50 games again in the future. It would be rather stupid to bet on this year when the previous four have been awful.

But his past four haven’t been awful. He’s had one bad year and that was the 22 in 56 since coming to SJ. The others were a 0.7 PPG, 0.71, 0.85.

 

[Fatass]

Now that the season has concluded, what would you(r team) offer up for the Century Man™? At this stage of his career, Karlsson is looking to go to a contending franchise, and this does not fit the timeline for a "retool" with the Sharks. Assumedly, GMMG would be looking for prospects and/or picks as the centerpiece of any deal. It's understood that his injury history, as well as a full NMC, will possibly affect the assets being offered in return. Offers may include retention or cap dumps, but this should also reflected in the returning value. May the best offer prevail!

It very much depends on the amount the Sharks will retain. With no retention I don’t think there will be buyers, unless there are contracts going back to make up for the No retention. If the retention brings his salary under 10 (9-9.5) then I could see a club that sees themselves as one piece away (him) offering up a first. So likely it’s a later first, and a prospect the club is okay with giving up because he’s a few years away from being NHL ready.

 

[TotalHomer]

But his past four haven’t been awful. He’s had one bad year and that was the 22 in 56 since coming to SJ. The others were a 0.7 PPG, 0.71, 0.85.

He gave the team 50 games for 11.5 million.

Define what you mean by "awful".

 

[NikB]

Karlsson is worth -1 1st round picks, plus 1 1st for each ~1.5m or so the Sharks retain.

 

[Gecklund]

He gave the team 50 games for 11.5 million.

Define what you mean by "awful".

Okay and? He scored at 0.7+ pace. If that’s awful you need to look at most defenseman in the league.

 

[TotalHomer]

Okay and? He scored at 0.7+ pace. If that’s awful you need to look at most defenseman in the league.

Because games played matter. If he plays one game next year and scores a point I'm sure you will come out saying that he was PPG that season.

 

[Fourier]

Okay and? He scored at 0.7+ pace. If that’s awful you need to look at most defenseman in the league.

It's certainly not awful. But if he does that next year his value will plummet. With $3M retained given his injury history you might be looking a return similar to what Burns got.

 

[smytty]

Wait what? This checked out D just had the best season of ANY defenseman in over 30 years. If he’s checked out, I’d hate to know what every single other D in the league is.


That offer absolutely nothing for SJ. Therefore are cap dumps.

... just because San Jose isn't interested in those players doesn't mean they are cap dumpa.

But he scored 100 points. How is that generous? It’s literally stating facts.

Nuge is a 100 point player. So how much should New Jersey add in a Nuge for Jack Hughes deal?

 

[Mattb124]

Carolina is actually a unicorn in the respect that they have a wide window to win and a ton of cap space. But if Karlsson wants to go to a team that will be a threat during his contract the list is pretty short on teams that could make the move without some major cap manipulations and that need a RHD like him.

I do not know what a deal would look like, but if a player like Slavin and Karlsson could develop chemistry that could be the best pairing in the league in terms of tilting the ice.

 

[Gecklund]

It's certainly not awful. But if he does that next year his value will plummet. With $3M retained given his injury history you might be looking a return similar to what Burns got.

Then we will keep him. He’s miles better than Burns ever was and has been the whole time he’s been in SJ.

As I’ve said like 4 times in this thread now, I’m not saying we wouldn’t take back cap. I’m not saying we won’t retain. I’m saying we need to get value back and a B prospect and late first is no where near enough to move him.

... just because San Jose isn't interested in those players doesn't mean they are cap dumpa.


Nuge is a 100 point player. So how much should New Jersey add in a Nuge for Jack Hughes deal?

it means they are cap dumps in this trade and have 0 value to SJ. How is this hard to understand? Bourgault and a late first isn’t enough for us to move Karlsson at full value never mind retaining 3M.

 

[Flan the incredible]

Makar wasn't UFA, took 9 to win now and become one at 29.

He was also a decade younger and not injury prone. No one is paying Ek 2 million more than the top dmen on the league now.

 

[OilerSuperstar17]

Wouldn't be surprised to see Holland circle back for a 3rd attempt at getting him.

2024 1st + Bourgault + Kulak + Ceci (cap reasons) for Karlsson (30% retention).

I don't see either Ceci or Kulak as cap dumps but if made available they are likely in the 3rd round pick value spot. If a team was offering the 3 1sts value for Karlsson at 18% he would have been moved already.

If San Jose is hung up on getting a 2023 1st the Oilers are obviously out.

If KH tries for EK65 again and gets him, Bouch isn't staying. He's either in this trade or another one.

Both of them are cap dumps. Add another first or good prospect especially at that retention. Horrible value

They aren't cap "dumps". You really need to understand the difference between "cap dumps" and "cap reasons". Kulak and Ceci are serviceable and can play.

 

[Gecklund]

If KH tries for EK65 again and gets him, Bouch isn't staying. He's either in this trade or another one.



They aren't cap "dumps". You really need to understand the difference between "cap dumps" and "cap reasons". Kulak and Ceci are serviceable and can play.

You need to understand that neither of them have any value and are purely cap dumps to SJ. Don’t tell me what I need to “understand” when you clearly can’t even comprehend my point.

 

[OilerSuperstar17]

You need to understand that neither of them have any value and are purely cap dumps to SJ. Don’t tell me what I need to “understand” when you clearly can’t even comprehend my point.

And what makes you think they have no value? They would have value to your team considering they'd both be veteran, top-4 dmen on your team.

You do need to understand cause you're not getting what you think you are for EK65 even with the season he's had. $11.5m is too much for any team and you're going to have to take contracts back to make it work.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

And what makes you think they have no value? They would have value to your team considering they'd both be veteran, top-4 dmen on your team.

You do need to understand cause you're not getting what you think you are for EK65 even with the season he's had. $11.5m is too much for any team and you're going to have to take contracts back to make it work.

The Sharks are rebuilding so their value is mostly in what value they can extract from them in a trade elsewhere. They're not going to place trade value in them in a deal for Karlsson no matter where they'd play in our lineup. So if you think either of them will move the needle a little closer to acceptable for the Sharks then you're simply mistaken. They're throw-ins for the Sharks if you want it to be less biting but it's hardly a distinction. Talking about taking contracts back to make it work is pretty much what a cap dump is and what someone like Ceci or Kulak would be in this proposal.

 

[AcerComputer]

Before this season, he had negative value. Now that he has bounced back, you unload him for whatever you can get. If SJ needs to retain 50% you do it. People on here thinking that they'll get multiple firsts with little retention are delusional.

 

[Le Rosbeef]

Before this season, he had negative value. Now that he has bounced back, you unload him for whatever you can get. If SJ needs to retain 50% you do it. People on here thinking that they'll get multiple firsts with little retention are delusional.

Off the ice? On the ice? His value isn't binary.

The guy is about to win his 3rd Norris Trophy and you think San Jose should retain 50% (i.e. holding $5.75m for four more years) just to 'get rid' of him... meaning another franchise can add him for under $6m per?

...and it's the Sharks who are delusional?