Proposal: NYR - SJ again

CanadienShark

Registered User
Dec 18, 2012
39,817
14,381
Walman
Bordeleau

For

Kakko
Jones
Carrick

Walman solidifies the left side, Bordeleau is depth.

Kakko with new talented youngsters might help his game.

The cap works, probably off on value.
I've always liked Kakko, but we'd prefer a right shot RW. I don't love or hate this deal, but honestly we're probably better off just sticking with Walman. Jones and Carrick don't offer any real value to SJ.
 

Voodoo Glow Skulls

Formerly Vatican Roulette
Sponsor
Sep 27, 2017
5,662
2,992
I've always liked Kakko, but we'd prefer a right shot RW. I don't love or hate this deal, but honestly we're probably better off just sticking with Walman. Jones and Carrick don't offer any real value to SJ.

IMO, Jones and Carrick offer offer depth, that would enable more moves to build.
 

jonlin

Registered User
Nov 11, 2011
6,043
5,857
NYR get:

Granlund 5M UFA 2025

2025 2nd

SJ get:

Kakko 2.4M RFA 2025

Miller 3.872M RFA 2025

NYR get the best player in the deal and an early 2nd. Granlund should be a decent add for their window. SJ get 2 young upcoming players who will fit their rebuild. NYR doesnt have the cap to resign all their guys.
 

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
28,558
4,147
Da Big Apple
NYR get:

Granlund 5M UFA 2025

2025 2nd

SJ get:

Kakko 2.4M RFA 2025

Miller 3.872M RFA 2025

NYR get the best player in the deal and an early 2nd. Granlund should be a decent add for their window. SJ get 2 young upcoming players who will fit their rebuild. NYR doesnt have the cap to resign all their guys.
NO value of KK + KAM collectively more and prefer them to Gran
also
after jettisoning Trouba, Lindgren, Vesey this yr and bread before end of next season agrees to waive to avoid ugly scene [he is not sniffing 11.6 again] that IS enuf to resign, even if we do a big # of Shesty, which is not a given

Kakko is needed for when Panarin leaves
 

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
28,558
4,147
Da Big Apple
Kakko is no Panarin. He is more like 1/3 of a Stone.
You are entirely missing the pt
KK = effective and functional depth on a productive line
we do not have sufficient reserve ready to replace if we recognize
1RW = held for Gabe P
bread is gonna go b'c Rs not paying anywhere near 11.6 for him
we do not have depth w/ready replacements
plus we like what we have
 

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
38,203
11,363
I can see something with Rangers and Walman. Don’t think Bystedt needs to be I be involved here. That’s kind of a weird inclusion
 

Juxtaposer

Outro: Divina Comedia
Dec 21, 2009
49,802
22,919
Bay Area
Kakko would be like your second best forward.
Don't be ridiculous, he isn't better than Eklund, Granlund, Toffoli, Zetterlund, or Celebrini. I think you know better than to respond to that poster with something just as silly.

What exactly do any of these trade proposals do for the Sharks? We can't trade Walman without getting a better defenseman in return, as Walman is literally our only D who has an argument to be called top-4. I would have time for Zac Jones if he were coming for a mid-round pick, but we simply cannot downgrade from Walman to him. Trading Bystedt for anything but an equivalent RHD prospect makes absolutely no sense, because he's quite literally the perfect 3C prospect: 6'4", great skater, strong defensively, good pace, great on faceoffs, excellent PKer, and putting up more than a PPG in the AHL as a 20 year old. Othmann is a fine prospect but we have plenty of LW prospects and young players between Eklund, Musty, Bordeleau, Chernyshov, and Gushchin, he really does nothing for us compared to Bystedt.

We're done with the tear-down where you just trade anyone for anything. At this point, the only trades we should be making are either ones that give us meaningful futures (Granlund at the deadline) or legitimate upgrades to the team that don't sacrifice significant future pieces. None of the trades I've seen in this thread do either of those things for us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CupfortheSharks

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
71,406
15,076
Folsom
A guy who has played on the first pair of one of the best teams in the league the last five years would be on the Sharks third pair? Highly doubt it.

Left handed defensemen can play on the right side, you know.
It’s what Lindgren is now and moving forward not what he was in previous seasons. He’s not that guy anymore and he wouldn’t add anything of worth to this bad blue line. Hard to see him playing the right side over Ceci and Thompson either. Even if he did, it does what for the Sharks?
 

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
28,558
4,147
Da Big Apple
It’s what Lindgren is now and moving forward not what he was in previous seasons. He’s not that guy anymore and he wouldn’t add anything of worth to this bad blue line. Hard to see him playing the right side over Ceci and Thompson either. Even if he did, it does what for the Sharks?
while he shows wear + tear, short term he is useful, generally speaking.
That said, Rs need to go younger for cap so either it is self rental or get something

He can be flipped w/2 lesser picks for 2 better picks
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
71,406
15,076
Folsom
while he shows wear + tear, short term he is useful, generally speaking.
That said, Rs need to go younger for cap so either it is self rental or get something

He can be flipped w/2 lesser picks for 2 better picks
Maybe but playing defense for the Sharks right now is not going to help a rental’s trade value. We don’t have a retention slot and guys who are declining and expensive don’t have much trade value. We’d literally only take him off your hands in a trade that provides us real future value.
 

Pavel Buchnevich

"Pavel Buchnevich The Fake"
Dec 8, 2013
59,506
26,153
New York
Don't be ridiculous, he isn't better than Eklund, Granlund, Toffoli, Zetterlund, or Celebrini. I think you know better than to respond to that poster with something just as silly.

What exactly do any of these trade proposals do for the Sharks? We can't trade Walman without getting a better defenseman in return, as Walman is literally our only D who has an argument to be called top-4. I would have time for Zac Jones if he were coming for a mid-round pick, but we simply cannot downgrade from Walman to him. Trading Bystedt for anything but an equivalent RHD prospect makes absolutely no sense, because he's quite literally the perfect 3C prospect: 6'4", great skater, strong defensively, good pace, great on faceoffs, excellent PKer, and putting up more than a PPG in the AHL as a 20 year old. Othmann is a fine prospect but we have plenty of LW prospects and young players between Eklund, Musty, Bordeleau, Chernyshov, and Gushchin, he really does nothing for us compared to Bystedt.

We're done with the tear-down where you just trade anyone for anything. At this point, the only trades we should be making are either ones that give us meaningful futures (Granlund at the deadline) or legitimate upgrades to the team that don't sacrifice significant future pieces. None of the trades I've seen in this thread do either of those things for us.
Kakko is not a bad player. Just because he’s been a disappointment shouldn’t get that twisted that he’s some total bust that’ll be out of the league in a year or two.

He has 6 points in 8 games from the third line so far this season, and gets virtually no special teams time. He’s a very responsible defensive player, yearly puts up good analytics, and has already scored 40 points in a season in this league.

It’s what Lindgren is now and moving forward not what he was in previous seasons. He’s not that guy anymore and he wouldn’t add anything of worth to this bad blue line. Hard to see him playing the right side over Ceci and Thompson either. Even if he did, it does what for the Sharks?
Actually, that’s not true.

Rangers fans have radicalized radicalized about Lindgren and it’s probably one of our stupider fan narratives in years.

He literally had one bad season. He’s 26. His body of work in this league is pretty good, and shouldn’t have to be defended against one down season.
 

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
28,558
4,147
Da Big Apple
Maybe but playing defense for the Sharks right now is not going to help a rental’s trade value. We don’t have a retention slot and guys who are declining and expensive don’t have much trade value. We’d literally only take him off your hands in a trade that provides us real future value.
sorry I don't understand

I give you X = a commodity + 2 lesser picks
you give me back 2 better picks


that is what Lindy's value is, IMO

in this case, instead, he is being discounted and sent w/other futures

but YOU, [SJ] can flip lindy a la the bold
he's worth that as a rental

2 better picks for 2 lesser picks, I would argue, on its face, is real value

if you get a better offer you should take it
if multiple smaller pieces are enuf, you may wish to consider it

gotta work on the election
peace out
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Grinner

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
71,406
15,076
Folsom
Actually, that’s not true.

Rangers fans have radicalized radicalized about Lindgren and it’s probably one of our stupider fan narratives in years.

He literally had one bad season. He’s 26. His body of work in this league is pretty good, and shouldn’t have to be defended against one down season.
Even if I give you all that, he’s still a second pairing blue liner on an expiring contract that is making a lot that the Sharks can’t retain on. To another contending team, he’s likely playing a similar tweener role of being a third pairing guy that can play the second pairing in spurts. This sort of player is just not going to look good on the Sharks for any length of time. Whatever you think he’s worth, he’s likely worth less by the time the Sharks would rent him elsewhere.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
71,406
15,076
Folsom
sorry I don't understand

I give you X = a commodity + 2 lesser picks
you give me back 2 better picks


that is what Lindy's value is, IMO

in this case, instead, he is being discounted and sent w/other futures

but YOU, [SJ] can flip lindy a la the bold
he's worth that as a rental

2 better picks for 2 lesser picks, I would argue, on its face, is real value

if you get a better offer you should take it
if multiple smaller pieces are enuf, you may wish to consider it

gotta work on the election
peace out
The Sharks have no interest in a short term commodity that we’d have to give up better picks to get when that commodity wouldn’t return those picks lost when we rent him out. Lindgren is a cap dump to the Sharks. Nothing more.
 

Lindberg Cheese

Registered User
Apr 28, 2013
7,353
4,822
Cambodia
50/50, We just have to dangle Trouba and Lindgren in front of Grier, talk a good word salad on intangibles, leadership, winning culture and we’ll come away with Walman and Bystedt.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad