Confirmed with Link: Sharks acquire Jake Walman and 2nd round pick 2024 (#53) for future considerations

[WSS11]

Hodge when there is an uphill argument to be made

I imagine he already has this hanging in the house somewhere.

 

[OrrNumber4]

@Hodge had one very strong argument...if Walman was so valuable, how can you explain this trade?

It's strange that the Sharks didn't trade a contract back. Per Holland, I suspect that Yzerman made this proposal and Grier rushed to say yes.

 

[Hangemhigh]

This is the type of trade I like. Free established NHL player and free pick.
GMMG could have at least sent the rights to say Addison to them. Maybe that is the considerations.

 

[tiburon12]

@Hodge had one very strong argument...if Walman was so valuable, how can you explain this trade?

It's strange that the Sharks didn't trade a contract back. Per Holland, I suspect that Yzerman made this proposal and Grier rushed to say yes.

It's a strong argument insofar that it has no immediate counter. But that can change with a single quote from Yzerman, and then his argument is worth nothing. If he had, say, backed up the opinion with secondary "proof", like game film or stats that proved what he was saying, then even if the foundation of his argument fails he can still rest on something.

It's puzzling Walman was given away for free + some, that's for sure. But we can't logically conclude the reason is because he is "one of the worst players in the NHL" on that one fact alone.

And even if he IS the single worst player in the league, we just got an extra second for taking him in a season we arent competing. So it's even more puzzling someone would dig their heels into an argument on the player's quality so much when it really is entirely secondary to the whole trade.

 

[Le Rosbeef]

Smart move again.

We now have 1, 14, 33, 42 and 53.

As much as I'm happy to swing for whatever they think is worth it at those 5 picks, it's hard to ignore we now have plenty of collateral to move up, If I was Mr Grier, I'd be looking strongly at any guys we covet who might fall slightly near the top.

What would 14 + 33 be worth?
Knowing we have two more second rounders makes that 33 - a very good pick in its own right - movable to me.

 

[Barrie22]

I’m ready to yell “who?!” At the top of my lungs!

I'm ready to yell who after pick 1 and 14

 

[mogambomoroo]

As long as we don't have to yell "who?" at 1st overall, I'm fine

 

[jMoneyBrah]

This trade reminds me of when DW traded Erhoff to Vancouver. It was a salary cap clearing trade where the entire value of the trade was on one side of the ledger. Erhoff + Lukowich for, “future considerations” personified, Patrick White and Daniel Rahimi. I’m pretty sure in isolation both Erhoff and Lukowich had some positive value (Lukowich obviously representing less than Erhoff), but because the Nucks had DW in a bind they got them both for the stiff price of clearing out some worthless contracts.

The point being that these cap clearing trades are sometimes not accurate reflections of player values; and that circumstance and leverage play an outsized influence.

 

[jkutswings]

Wings fan coming in peace.

At the moment I'm just echoing the majority of the reaction: this is a very puzzling deal at face value, and it will be interesting to see what (if anything) comes from "future considerations".

Jake Walman (in my opinion) is a middle pairing guy that's fine at offense and thin on defense. Not a guy to log big minutes or play in all situations, but I think he's better than the bad home stretch he had last season, and is still definitely an NHL player. Zero concern about his cap hit or contract whatsoever.

There were rumblings of possible off-ice issues and/or him not buying into the style of play the team wanted, but none of this has been confirmed. Just being transparent that elements besides his play might be a factor.

If I were the Sharks, I'd be thrilled to get a second rounder, even if I may have to shelter the guy a bit who came with it. We'll see what Detroit does and whether it involves San Jose again, but at the moment Grier looks to have made a superb trade.

 

[matt trick]

I'll concede it is odd that Yzerman didn't just waive Walman. Perhaps he has no- or even, negative- value around the league. However, he absolutely has positive value to us. For San Jose he'll hopefully end up our 3rd or 4th best d-man, though right now, he may be our best, and certainly our best offensive threat from the blue line.

The Athletic ranked San Jose in the zeroth (is that a word?) percentile for defender ranking last year 32/32. San Jose needed to add two top four, or near top four defenseman. However, those guys will be in demand from everyone. This means San Jose is going to need to offer more in terms of years or dollars, possibly extending into the the Celebrini/Smith new contracts.

Unless someone is a legit d-man (i.e. Montour, or Chyrchrun next year) you'd want to have around at that point, I'm hesitant to offer that kind of money. Someone like Demelo (off the market), Ghost, Zadorov, Dillon, Tanev, or Roy would likely take 4+ years from San Jose, and Demelo and Roy aside, that would be terrible deals.

Walman is about as good of an option as we'll see for a two-year $7M investment. He's ideal. Let's go find a right handed version.

I've been all in on moving up from 14 (or failing that 33). Would love to see us walk away with something like Celebrini, Yakemchuk, Elick, and Hutson from these five picks. Hope one of those guys becomes a top 4 d-man and add a franchise center? Yes please.

 

[vilpertti]

If I were the Sharks, I'd be thrilled to get a second rounder, even if I may have to shelter the guy a bit who came with it. We'll see what Detroit does and whether it involves San Jose again, but at the moment Grier looks to have made a superb trade.

There ain't anyone to shelter him with on Sharks D.

Which is great if it works out, and great if it doesn't. The team isn't looking to compete for playoffs.

 

[STL Shark]

Being a mediocre GM doesn't mean he's doing crazy shit like proactively acquiring a 2nd round pick then offering it to only one team as a sweetener for taking Walman.

Yzerman has signed plenty of bad contracts and Walman is certainly one of them. Soft third pairing offensemen are not a valued commodity. Good on Grier for taking advantage of the situation but this trade is perfectly reasonable on its face. No need to speculate about some side deal.

To prove out that you have no idea what you're talking about, you call a guy that was deployed in a shutdown role and played only 42 mins of PP time all season an "offenseman" like he's Calen Addison. He played less PP time and was deployed in an even more defensive role than 2018-19 noted "offenseman" Marc Edouard Vlasic for crying out loud.

 

[STL Shark]

I just showed you using your own chart that Walman was one of the worst players in the league last season.

Moneypuck xG corroborates this. Red Wings went from being Sharks-level awful with Walman on the ice to just a regular bad team with him off.

If you want to say "it's just one season"...the guy has literally only played two seasons in the NHL. At 28 years old.

It is almost like when you're deployed above your level as a top pairing guy with heavy D starts and facing opponents' top lines every shift, you're going to appear worse. Detroit signed him to a deal that was too rich and deployed him in a way that they were trying to make commensurate with that contract. He's a 4/5 guy on most teams that was misused.

If you're going to say that he's one of the worst D-Men in the NHL, I look forward to your thesis on Moritz Seider since he put up the same numbers for the most part (since they were D partners).

 

[themelkman]

@Hodge had one very strong argument...if Walman was so valuable, how can you explain this trade?

It's strange that the Sharks didn't trade a contract back. Per Holland, I suspect that Yzerman made this proposal and Grier rushed to say yes.

Its really not a good argument. He appeals to the authority of a gm, while being the same guy who hates everything a former gm did with a passion.

If Doug Wilson made that trade he wouldnt be saying "look he obviously had to make this trade he had no other option". So its unclear if he thinks a GM has to be rational, or if some can make bad trades.

 

[Hodge]

Its really not a good argument. He appeals to the authority of a gm, while being the same guy who hates everything a former gm did with a passion.

If Doug Wilson made that trade he wouldnt be saying "look he obviously had to make this trade he had no other option". So its unclear if he thinks a GM has to be rational, or if some can make bad trades.

So why didn't Yzerman put Walman on waivers instead of going out of his way to acquire an extra 2nd he could attach as a sweetener?

Doing that instead of simply waiving Walman goes beyond mere incompetence. It would be a symptom of collective front office insanity.

The only logical explanation is that Yzerman didn't waive Walman because he knew for a fact, based on conversations with other teams, that Walman would not be claimed.

I think there's probably more to this than Walman simply being a cap dump. He is a grown man obsessed with Fortnite. Probably another Laine situation.

 

[TheBigDrunkPanda]

Smart move again.

We now have 1, 14, 33, 42 and 53.

As much as I'm happy to swing for whatever they think is worth it at those 5 picks, it's hard to ignore we now have plenty of collateral to move up, If I was Mr Grier, I'd be looking strongly at any guys we covet who might fall slightly near the top.

What would 14 + 33 be worth?
Knowing we have two more second rounders makes that 33 - a very good pick in its own right - movable to me.

I think it would be pretty lucky if it would fetch up to 8th but I think that’s seattles pick. Most probable is tenth but at that point it should be the 42 not the 33rd

 

[Pinkfloyd]

So why didn't Yzerman put Walman on waivers instead of going out of his way to acquire an extra 2nd he could attach as a sweetener?

Doing that instead of simply waiving Walman goes beyond mere incompetence. It would be a symptom of collective front office insanity.

The only logical explanation is that Yzerman didn't waive Walman because he knew for a fact, based on conversations with other teams, that Walman would not be claimed.

I think there's probably more to this than Walman simply being a cap dump. He is a grown man obsessed with Fortnite. Probably another Laine situation.

So what if he does have negative trade value? This is still subjectively the correct move for the Sharks to make because Walman, while not a perfect player, is better than a lot of what the Sharks have and makes them better. The Fortnite stuff is just grasping at straws. People, including lots of professional athletes, play video games. It is not an addiction for a large majority of them.

 

[STL Shark]

I think there's probably more to this than Walman simply being a cap dump. He is a grown man obsessed with Fortnite. Probably another Laine situation.

Now we know you're just a mindless troll. Before you regressed back to the same contrarian style of inflammatory posting you had before your time off, I thought you at least made some valid points. Now you're slinging poo at the wall just trying to get trolls off. Do better and take another break.

 

[Hodge]

So what if he does have negative trade value? This is still subjectively the correct move for the Sharks to make because Walman, while not a perfect player, is better than a lot of what the Sharks have and makes them better. The Fortnite stuff is just grasping at straws. People, including lots of professional athletes, play video games. It is not an addiction for a large majority of them.

I never said it wasn't the correct move for the Sharks. It's a terrific move for us.

My argument is simply that it's not some bizarre lopsided trade that needs to be explained by the "future considerations" paying off. I mean, there are posters on the Red Wings board thinking the future considerations is us giving them Zetterlund for Christ's sake. Utter delusion.

Most front offices hated Dougie Hamilton for visiting museums on off days. I don't know anything about Walman's personality beyond the article I linked but if he is an introverted gamer I can see why NHL teams wouldn't want anything to do with him.

So add it all up and we have a 28 year old who has never played a full NHL season and has only made it to 60 games twice, coming off a terrible season, with potential off-ice chemistry issues, signed for $3.4M through 2026. Zero intangibles like physicality, fighting, leadership, etc. It's not difficult to understand why this asset is considered a cap dump in need of a sweetener. No conspiracy theories required.

 

[Hodge]

Now we know you're just a mindless troll. Before you regressed back to the same contrarian style of inflammatory posting you had before your time off, I thought you at least made some valid points. Now you're slinging poo at the wall just trying to get trolls off. Do better and take another break.

Why are you suddenly commander of the Jake Walman defense squad? You didn't know who this guy was 24 hours ago.

I linked an article from a legit source where he is quoted as saying he is "always" playing Fortnite. Personally I don't give a shit what players do with their spare time as long as they're not hurting anybody but you're extremely naive if you think that doesn't raise red flags for conservative GMs.

 

[Mattb124]

@Hodge had one very strong argument...if Walman was so valuable, how can you explain this trade?

It's strange that the Sharks didn't trade a contract back. Per Holland, I suspect that Yzerman made this proposal and Grier rushed to say yes.

Not sure exactly what was posted, but that is not a strong argument in the least. No one other than Yserman knows what the rationale for the trade was, and it could very well be that in his mind the potential value of what could be added with the cap space created by trading Walman + 2nd was greater than the value of those two assets. That absolutely does not mean Walman had no or negative value.

As mentioned above, the Erhoff trade was to create cap space for Heatley who the Sharks saw as a more valuable asset to the team. To suggest that trade was an indication of Erhoff’s market value is just ignorant.

 

[Hodge]

Not sure exactly what was posted, but that is not a strong argument in the least. No one other than Yserman knows what the rationale for the trade was, and it could very well be that in his mind the potential value of what could be added with the cap space created by trading Walman + 2nd was greater than the value of those two assets. That absolutely does not mean Walman had no or negative value.

As mentioned above, the Erhoff trade was to create cap space for Heatley who the Sharks saw as a more valuable asset to the team. To suggest that trade was an indication of Erhoff’s market value is just ignorant.

Except your comparison doesn't work because Ehrhoff was traded for actual (minimal) value while Walman was dumped alongside a 2nd.

DW didn't waive Ehrhoff because acquiring Patrick White and rights to his compensatory pick was better than losing Ehrhoff for nothing.

In this scenario, the Red Wings would literally have been better off losing Walman for nothing on waivers. Why didn't they do that?

 

[matt trick]

@Hodge Two questions:

1. Which Sharks d-men do you think Walman is better than?
2. Which UFA d-men would you prefer San Jose sign for less than 2x$3.4M?

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I never said it wasn't the correct move for the Sharks. It's a terrific move for us.

My argument is simply that it's not some bizarre lopsided trade that needs to be explained by the "future considerations" paying off. I mean, there are posters on the Red Wings board thinking the future considerations is us giving them Zetterlund for Christ's sake. Utter delusion.

Most front offices hated Dougie Hamilton for visiting museums on off days. I don't know anything about Walman's personality beyond the article I linked but if he is an introverted gamer I can see why NHL teams wouldn't want anything to do with him.

So add it all up and we have a 28 year old who has never played a full NHL season and has only made it to 60 games twice, coming off a terrible season, with potential off-ice chemistry issues, signed for $3.4M through 2026. Zero intangibles like physicality, fighting, leadership, etc. It's not difficult to understand why this asset is considered a cap dump in need of a sweetener. No conspiracy theories required.

Some of this is agreeable. I don't see what evidence there is to say most front offices hated Dougie Hamilton for visiting museums on off days. I don't see what evidence there is that he's some introverted gamer that NHL teams won't want anything to do with him. If you're adding it up with what you think is the case rather than what is shown to be the case, you're going to be making some silly claims. All that really matters though is that we got paid to take him and it shouldn't surprise anyone if we were able to rent him in his contract year for a similar pick.

Except your comparison doesn't work because Ehrhoff was traded for actual (minimal) value while Walman was dumped alongside a 2nd.

DW didn't waive Ehrhoff because acquiring Patrick White and rights to his compensatory pick was better than losing Ehrhoff for nothing.

In this scenario, the Red Wings would literally have been better off losing Walman for nothing on waivers. Why didn't they do that?

He also wanted to get rid of Lukowich's final year so that they had the cap space to acquire Dany Heatley.

 

[Timo Time]

People are mad we got a 2nd and a defenseman, an area this team severely lacks; all for free? Surely draft reactions will go well.

GMMG continues to impress