Value of: Jumbo Joe to NSH at the deadline
- Thread starter beardawg
- Start date
Quid Pro Clowe
Registered User
This isn't a very realistic start to a hypothetical:
It would take multiple season ending injuries to core players to knock the Sharks out of playoff contention. They have a deep roster.
Then Joe would have to wave for Nashville which usually means a player does not intend to resign, which doesn't seem likely regarding the team's history. I can suspend disbelief for this part.
And in your proposal you're not offering any of your best prospects. The Sharks would want NHL ready quality, not quantity. The team still has a solid core without Jumbo Joe and would want someone who could slot in next year, not 4 years from now.
So all and all this doesn't really seem like a good start to a proposal. Joe would be expensive.
It would take multiple season ending injuries to core players to knock the Sharks out of playoff contention. They have a deep roster.
Then Joe would have to wave for Nashville which usually means a player does not intend to resign, which doesn't seem likely regarding the team's history. I can suspend disbelief for this part.
And in your proposal you're not offering any of your best prospects. The Sharks would want NHL ready quality, not quantity. The team still has a solid core without Jumbo Joe and would want someone who could slot in next year, not 4 years from now.
So all and all this doesn't really seem like a good start to a proposal. Joe would be expensive.
hohosaregood
Banned
- Sep 1, 2011
- 33,167
- 13,826
Sharks are gonna want well regarded futures because selling Thornton means a rebuild. I'd guess like Fiala or Fabbro or Girard and picks or something along those lines.
Honestly, if we were going to go for the cup the only prospect off the table should be Saros.
As much as I like Kamenev, we can win a cup with center depth like this:
Johansen
Thornton
Fisher
Riberio/Jarnkrok/Scissons.
Are you trying to win the cup or not? Nashville is already one of the strongest teams in the league and you inquire not about a depth guy but about a #1 C. One of the top forwards in the NHL. That is an attempt to put yourself over the top and win now move. Either commit to going for it now or not. You can't start right off by limiting it to only picks and prospects then eliminating 3 prospects from discussion.
If you inquire about Thornton then none of your prospects are off the table. And they shouldn't be, because you are talking about making your team possibly the leading contender for the cup this year.
EDIT- If I was answering this call, I would require Fiala to be involved in the trade to start the conversation.
If you inquire about Thornton then none of your prospects are off the table. And they shouldn't be, because you are talking about making your team possibly the leading contender for the cup this year.
EDIT- If I was answering this call, I would require Fiala to be involved in the trade to start the conversation.
themelkman
Always Delivers
OldAsianSharksFan
More 1OV picks please
1. We need Joe for a Cup run, so he's technically not available.
2. If he Was available, none of your prospects are off the table. How else are you getting a PPG 1C?
I'd want Fiala+. Don't care if Joe is old. Don't wanna pay the price? I guess we keep our captain then.
Gecklund
Registered User
Forsberg+. No reason AT ALL for us to move him. He will retire in San Jose. That article you read is absolutely wrong.
Community
44 is Rielly good
They're talking about Joe Thornton, not Joe Pavelski
In all seriousness, I think it's obvious that the Sharks would never deal Thornton without at least one of those prospects on the table (coming from a non-Shark fan). And it doesn't matter, because it would take a lot for the sharks to not even be in contention for a playoff spot by the TDL (like Pavelski + Burns + Vlasic + Jones injuries).
Nalens Oga
Registered User
I feel like they should see how Rinne plays in the first 20-40 games and then really decide if he's the goalie they want going into the playoffs so in other words, save up that cap space.
One Winged Angel
You Can't Escape
While I agree that you have to give to get, Forsberg+ is just as ridiculous.
His name shouldn't even pop up in these discussions.
Makes no sence for Nashville, Thorton is getting worse and sucks in the playoffs. What Nashville really needs is a starting goalie
Gecklund
Registered User
Considering Joe Thornton was our best player last year, you have to give us one of your best for us to even consider it. The only reason I would consider Forsberg too is because we have Hertl who can somewhat fill in at center. We don't have the center depth to truly replace Thornton yet and trading him for anything less than a top line forward downgrades our team way too much.
In a hypothetical where San Jose, for whatever reason, gave up on their cup dreams and does Nashville a favor I'd do Fiala/Kamenev+. Forsberg, on the other hand is a non-starter in any scenario, real or fake.
WTFMAN99
Registered User
- Jun 17, 2009
- 34,208
- 12,348
If SJS is out at the deadline and wanted to do a pure rental and Nashville had an interest
Thornton at 50% for Ribiero, Fiala 2018 3rd, and conditional pick. It's a 2nd round pick that becomes a 1st if Nashville is in the conference final
So 2 top 90 picks, or a 2nd+3rd or 1st+3rd, Fiala and taking back Ribiero for a few months. That's not a bad trade.
Thornton at 50% for Ribiero, Fiala 2018 3rd, and conditional pick. It's a 2nd round pick that becomes a 1st if Nashville is in the conference final
So 2 top 90 picks, or a 2nd+3rd or 1st+3rd, Fiala and taking back Ribiero for a few months. That's not a bad trade.
Satastic
Nazi punks **** off
How is "Thorton" getting worse when he literally just had one of his best seasons to date? I'm not going to address the "playoff choker" since thatll apparently never leave him
I'm confused. The Sharks made it to the Stanley Cup Finals this past year and unless I'm missing something haven't lost anyone of critical importance from that silver medal team. Why on Earth would Joe Thornton agree to leave a team and area he clearly loves to death in the last year of his contract when the Sharks are Cup contenders?
It just makes no sense to me. I find it extremely unlikely Thornton retires anywhere other than where he currently is.
It just makes no sense to me. I find it extremely unlikely Thornton retires anywhere other than where he currently is.
CanadienShark
Registered User
- Dec 18, 2012
- 40,079
- 14,773
Vaasa
Registered User
Something like this I am thinking.
Playing along with the scenario (Sharks are out for some reason) I could see the Sharks offering Joe Thornton up as a playoff rental to any teams' Joe wants. I am guessing they won't actually re-sign him until after the expansion draft, but I'm sure they already have a framework of a deal worked out. So giving JT another shot at the Cup while adding some nice assets makes sense for both the Sharks and Joe Thornton. If he doesn't win the Cup with the team he is rented to, then he comes back to a Sharks team that has a better chance of winning the Cup in one of remaining years.
In the scenario laid out by OP, this is about the type of return I would think appropriate.
One Winged Angel
You Can't Escape
And if you even tried to tell me that you would trade Forsberg for Thornton, you're full of ****.
You don't see trades like that.
