True, but you can't tell me many expected the Sharks, a team that had missed the playoffs only once in the 13 years since the lockout, to completely implode two years after the trade was made, largely due to injuries to their best players.
I would argue that there's a significant difference in luck between that and trading your own upcoming 1st round pick when your team has more losses than wins and having that continue to a more significant degree, but I understand the logic behind the comparison.
Looking strictly in hindsight isn't the proper way to evaluate trades, just as evaluating a trade solely based on how it looked at the time it was made is not correct. Have to look at both to be fair.
I think it's fair to say the return for Karlsson was underwhelming when it was made due to a lack of high-end pieces in exchange for one of the best D in the league, but also that Norris was a great bit of scouting and he has proven to be an excellent centerpiece. Karlsson imploding post-trade is irrelevant as the team didn't choose to trade him instead of re-signing him, rather Karlsson requested a trade and refused to re-sign.
I can't think of a single team in recent memory that engaged in a full tear-down rebuild that had the kind of talent to trade that the Sens did. Karlsson was a top 3 D in the league at the time he was dealt, Duchene and Stone were producing over a PPG when traded, Brassard had 38P/58GP (and an extra year on his deal at an attractive cap hit/salary), Pageau had 40P/60GP, and Dzingel had 44P/57GP. All of them deserved to return nice pieces after excellent play in the seasons they were traded.
The only trade where we got more value than should have been reasonably expected was Pageau. Brassard and Dzingel returns were fair. Karlsson, Stone and Duchene returns were disappointing. Hoffman return was embarrassing.
So pretty much every post you make Hale has to be tempered with your own disposition. Your disposition is rather negative towards the team.
I wanted to move on from Karlsson. Took serious heat for it. Guess what? It was the right call. I was on record that the Sharks would decline. Guess what. Right call. I was on record that Norris might prove to be a better player than White. Right call. You can't call all this total luck. There are other guys here that thought the same.
Stone? I'm glad we moved him. Said so at the time. Huge risk to sign a below average skater with a poor track record of rebounding from (frequent) injury. Would you agree to take on Stone's deal today? Probably not.
You want to look at both to be fair? Then be fair. I called you out the other day on the 16 draft pick thing where you completely ignored that 2 high end picks were used to acquire DeBrincat. Be fair. That's what you said in the post above.
And if you're going to be fair, then look back and acknowledge those calling for Karlsson's trade made the right call. You want to call it an underwhelming return? At the time? Be fair. Acknowledge that maybe PD saw the Sharks declining, cause if guys on this board were calling it, then I suspect we weren't alone.
Karlsson's return was embarrassing. You know what was embarrassing? The return proposals on this board. Ludicrous. It was well known league wide that Karlsson was available in early July. Public info. Private info probably before that. Why didn't we get a better return? Probably because pro scouts were concerned about his skating. Guys here voiced concern about it, I was one of them. Couldn't pivot and it was obvious. I expressed it. So no Hale...the return on Karlsson wasn't disappointing, it was what the market could bare, and it turned out very very well. It appears to me that it's your expectation that wasn't met, which is different than disappointing.
When Stone was traded for Brannstrom I said he'd outplay Brannstrom for 3 of the 5 years. I might have missed that by a year but I'll bet few would trade them for one another even up by the conclusion of this year.
Hoffman. That situation was a mess. To not call him a tainted asset is revisionist bs. I will say that what Wilson did was a learning experience for Dorion, but regardless we weren't getting full value for Hoffman
At the time, the only one of Duchene, Karlsson and Stone that I said I'd sign to the contract/keep was Duchene
. That's not looking too bad now is it. Definitely I wouldn't want Stone or Karlsson on their deals and Duchene just posted 43 goals.
If you didn't see the decline in Karlsson's game in the year after the ecf run, that's on you. Calling him a top 3 D when we traded him is bullshit. He finished 12th in Norris voting his last year in Ottawa and human beings being what they are, some of those votes were name recognition. I'll say it again so it's unequivocally clear...if you didn't see the decline in his game, that's on you. He wasn't a top 3 D when we moved him. His decline was obvious. Too bad you didn't see it. Watch more video I guess.
