Proposal: Sharks selloff

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
71,532
15,213
Folsom
Literally that entire team was trash and it was largely because Eichel and Ullmark were both injured, their coaching sucked, and the team quit.

Pretending that anybody devalued a recent Hart winner because of a bad half season with a dogshit team is hilarious.

The entire team quitting included Hall who has a reputation of that and hence his value reflected that. He was not a better player by any means than Hertl now in a less valuable position. Just stop embarrassing yourself and quit while you're only this far behind.

Hall was in his second consecutive disappointing season where his issues followed him around to three more teams.
 

WingsMJN2965

Registered User
Oct 13, 2017
18,106
17,700
The entire team quitting included Hall who has a reputation of that and hence his value reflected that. He was not a better player by any means than Hertl now in a less valuable position. Just stop embarrassing yourself and quit while you're only this far behind.

Hall was in his second consecutive disappointing season where his issues followed him around to three more teams.

That moment when you get a new argument dangled out in front of you and abandon ship on the old one because it wasn't working. :laugh:

Lmao, easily gets beaten.

You'd think a 3rd round pick for Ned gets beaten too, and yet Yzerman seems to have a knack for fleecing GMs.
 

WingsMJN2965

Registered User
Oct 13, 2017
18,106
17,700
Uh what? It's the same argument, genius.

Flipped from, "He sucked", to, "He quit on the team". Pick one and stick with it. The entire team sucked. The entire team quit. Nobody was selling a Hart winner short because of 30 games. Try again.

That's your argument?


:laugh: Carry on in your delusion I guess

You can call it delusional all you want but the fact is Yzerman has done it multiple times soooo...
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
71,532
15,213
Folsom
Flipped from, "He sucked", to, "He quit on the team". Pick one and stick with it. The entire team sucked. The entire team quit. Nobody was selling a Hart winner short because of 30 games. Try again.

It's not one or the other when both apply. He sucked and then he quit like he's quit on teams before.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

WingsMJN2965

Registered User
Oct 13, 2017
18,106
17,700
These aren't circles. These are direct points that you're choosing to ignore because you won't own a dumb take you made.

The point has been addressed directly. Nobody's devaluing a Hart winner over a 30 game stint with an awful team. You continuing to beat that dead horse is the circle we keep going through.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
71,532
15,213
Folsom
The point has been addressed directly. Nobody's devaluing a Hart winner over a 30 game stint with an awful team. You continuing to beat that dead horse is the circle we keep going through.

And you're choosing to ignore that his issues weren't isolated to 30 games. I don't even understand why you chose that number as if it was one stretch of games on one team. It happened repeatedly and on multiple teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

OrrNumber4

Registered User
Jul 25, 2002
16,798
6,263
I suspect that Barabanov and Remier might go for a first-rounder. Barabanov is the ideal piece for a contending team, and with so many teams needing good goaltending...well, they might get blinded by his numbers.
I can't see any true contender wanting Kane, and everybody else will probably just wait until he is bought out.
Bonino could be a pretty valuable piece next season. With that expiring contract, I bet he could get a 2nd next year for a team looking for some forward depth.
Labanc is likely to go in a "change of scenery" trade. Maybe the Rangers give up on Chytil?
Burns is likely to go for a similar player; a good player who isn't delivering on his contract and probably also needs a fresh start. Something like a trade for Seguin/Johansen (maybe Tavares?).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

WingsMJN2965

Registered User
Oct 13, 2017
18,106
17,700
Burns is likely to go for a similar player; a good player who isn't delivering on his contract and probably also needs a fresh start. Something like a trade for Seguin/Johansen (maybe Tavares?).

Pretty unlikely anybody's trading a 30/31 year old for a 37 year old who's signed until he's 40.
 

OrrNumber4

Registered User
Jul 25, 2002
16,798
6,263
Pretty unlikely anybody's trading a 30/31 year old for a 37 year old who's signed until he's 40.

Granted that Burns is older, but the other players have worse contracts and are arguably even worse value. Sure, Seguin is 30 but he has a 10 million cap hit for five more years and has been quite unproductive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

WingsMJN2965

Registered User
Oct 13, 2017
18,106
17,700
Granted that Burns is older, but the other players have worse contracts and are arguably even worse value. Sure, Seguin is 30 but he has a 10 million cap hit for five more years and has been quite unproductive.

Pretty good chance that Burns from 37-40 isn't all that great either.

Nashville and Dallas don't really make sense anyways. Both have good D groups and lack offense.

Toronto actually makes the most sense out of any of them as they have a need at defense, but they're likely not retaining $3M on Tavares, and SJS certainly can't afford to add $3M in cap.
 

OrrNumber4

Registered User
Jul 25, 2002
16,798
6,263
Pretty good chance that Burns from 37-40 isn't all that great either.

Nashville and Dallas don't really make sense anyways. Both have good D groups and lack offense.

Toronto actually makes the most sense out of any of them as they have a need at defense, but they're likely not retaining $3M on Tavares, and SJS certainly can't afford to add $3M in cap.

With the cap going up and the Sharks jettisoning Hertl/Reimer/Bonino and perhaps buying out Kane, they'll have the space.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad