What is the highest trade package you're willing to give up to swap Misa for Schaefer?

[Patty Ice]

If those are the parameters of a deal if it's Bystedt/Halttunen (preferably Halttunen), and the 33OA, I'd take that deal. A higher grade prospect it would have to be Ottawa's 2nd.

Almost assured they'd want Chernyshov though.

 

[STL Shark]

Yeah, no f***ing shit if you can get 2nd overall, a top prospect, and another late 1st to take a slightly worse prospect at an even more premium position, you do it.

Good f***ing god.

I just don't think Grier is dumb enough to make that sort of move. It's also wild that there are rumors out there about them being interested because Grier has been pretty tight lipped when it comes to big moves.

If anything, it makes me think that NYI is using SJ as leverage to get Chicago to come all the way up from #3 as it would yield a more premium return to still get the guy their fanbase/ownership seems to want in Hagens.

That said, it's likely all just posturing and NYI stay at #1 as indicated by Darche and they make the pick and SJ takes whichever of Schaefer/Misa that NYI doesn't.

 

[STL Shark]

Yes, absolutely. There are other ways to get a 2C or top six winger but if you want a #1 defenseman you pretty much have to draft them.

And how many of those are drafted in the top 2 picks as opposed to picks 5-20 where we're going to be drafting for the next 3-5 years?

 

[Hodge]

And how many of those are drafted in the top 2 picks as opposed to picks 5-20 where we're going to be drafting for the next 3-5 years?

Who are you more confident will develop into a legit #1 defenseman: Schaefer or some future prospect drafted 5th-20th overall over the next 3-5 years?

 

[Hodge]

There's also the factor of time. Ideally we would have already had a top defense prospect developing in the system for a few years before getting Celebrini but Schaefer is close enough in age that we can be confident these two will peak at around the same time. Even if we get lucky with some overlooked defense prospect in 2027 or whenever, Celebrini will already be 25 or 26 by the time that kid establishes himself in the top four.

 

[Juxtaposer]

I like him a lot too. Along with Dickinson and Graf (if he still counts), he's one of our few prospects I'm confident will have a long NHL career. He's not dynamic enough to have legit first line upside though IMO. A consistent 20+20 middle six power forward is still valuable but I'd rather try to find some other way to acquire that piece if that's what it takes to secure Schaefer.

Honestly this makes a lot of sense for both teams. Let the Isles have the Misa+Chernyshov duo, we get the best player in the draft at our position of greatest need, figure out what other pick(s) need to be attached to balance the value. And to top it all off the Blackhawks get hosed.

I wouldn’t be rioting in the streets if we did Misa+Chernyshov for Schaefer, but I wouldn’t be very happy about it. You’re probably right that that would be the cost, which is why I’m in favor of just staying put at #2.

You said that “if you want a #1 defenseman you pretty much have to draft them”, but I just don’t agree with that when the implication is that you have to draft them top-5. Edmonton has built a Cup-caliber defense from two picks in the 6-10 range and two trade acquisitions. Florida has Ekblad, yes, but they would be just fine without him. They traded for Jones and built the rest of the D from scraps.

I’ve made this point over and over again on this and I’m having too busy a morning to get into the nitty-gritty of it again. But it is a well-established fact that you can build an elite defense group without spending a top-5 pick on a defenseman and you can get a true #1 defenseman without using a top-5 pick. That’s why I’m not losing my mind over not getting Schaefer as much as I do want him. And this isn’t just cope, I’ve had Schaefer and Misa locked in their own tier since February.

 

[STL Shark]

Who are you more confident will develop into a legit #1 defenseman: Schaefer or some future prospect drafted 5th-20th overall over the next 3-5 years?

Schaefer, but I am more confident in Misa as an elite 2C (like best in the league a la the 1/2 punch in Edmonton) than I am Smith and/or anyone else in that 5-20 range of future drafts. It is far easier to find difference making D-Men in that range than it is to find difference making centers.

13/16 playoff teams this year found their 1D outside of the top 5 of the draft. Only ones that were inside the top 5 were LA (Doughty), TB (Hedman), and FLA (Jones). 2 of those are HOFers and I don't foresee Schaefer at that level.

Schaefer projects as a backend #1 or really good #2 as opposed to a top 10 D-Man in the world. History shows that there are plenty of those guys available in the range that we're going to drafting for the foreseeable future, and Misa is a valuable enough piece to where you don't need to overpay.

If the cost is #2, #30, and #53, I am fine with that deal to move up. If it's any more than that, you're going strictly for positional need as opposed to making the highest value play (which is never wise when drafting in a non-NFL league).

 

[Hodge]

I wouldn’t be rioting in the streets if we did Misa+Chernyshov for Schaefer, but I wouldn’t be very happy about it. You’re probably right that that would be the cost, which is why I’m in favor of just staying put at #2.

You said that “if you want a #1 defenseman you pretty much have to draft them”, but I just don’t agree with that when the implication is that you have to draft them top-5. Edmonton has built a Cup-caliber defense from two picks in the 6-10 range and two trade acquisitions. Florida has Ekblad, yes, but they would be just fine without him. They traded for Jones and built the rest of the D from scraps.

I’ve made this point over and over again on this and I’m having too busy a morning to get into the nitty-gritty of it again. But it is a well-established fact that you can build an elite defense group without spending a top-5 pick on a defenseman and you can get a true #1 defenseman without using a top-5 pick. That’s why I’m not losing my mind over not getting Schaefer as much as I do want him. And this isn’t just cope, I’ve had Schaefer and Misa locked in their own tier since February.

Edmonton is an extremely flawed team that still hasn't won anything and gets dragged on deep runs by two of the greatest playoff performers in NHL history. That's not a realistic blueprint that anybody should be modeling a team after even ignoring the fact that they haven't been successful. Florida can survive without Ekblad for a game here and there but I completely disagree that they would have been fine without him anchoring their top pairing last year. Zito acquired Jones because they know they need insurance in case Ekblad gets injured or bolts in free agency.

I don't even disagree with your premise that there are ways to build a successful defense corps without a true #1 or players picked in the top 5, especially since we seem to be in a fallow period for championship-caliber #1 defensemen. Pronger, Niedermayer, Lidstrom, Weber and Chara are gone and nobody has really emerged to replace them beyond Makar, Heiskanen and maybe Dahlin. If Schaefer can develop into one of those guys it just makes constructing the rest of the defense so much easier and less complicated. I place a lot of value in that even if it's far from a guarantee (obviously none of the picks or prospects we're discussing are guarantees).

 

[Hodge]

Schaefer, but I am more confident in Misa as an elite 2C (like best in the league a la the 1/2 punch in Edmonton) than I am Smith and/or anyone else in that 5-20 range of future drafts. It is far easier to find difference making D-Men in that range than it is to find difference making centers.

13/16 playoff teams this year found their 1D outside of the top 5 of the draft. Only ones that were inside the top 5 were LA (Doughty), TB (Hedman), and FLA (Jones). 2 of those are HOFers and I don't foresee Schaefer at that level.

Schaefer projects as a backend #1 or really good #2 as opposed to a top 10 D-Man in the world. History shows that there are plenty of those guys available in the range that we're going to drafting for the foreseeable future, and Misa is a valuable enough piece to where you don't need to overpay.

If the cost is #2, #30, and #53, I am fine with that deal to move up. If it's any more than that, you're going strictly for positional need as opposed to making the highest value play (which is never wise when drafting in a non-NFL league).

Edmonton's 1/2 punch works because they have the 3rd or 4th best center in the world playing 2C. Nobody seriously believes Misa has that kind of potential (or that Celebrini is going to turn into McDavid for that matter). A more realistic ceiling for Misa is probably someone like Marleau. Great player, definitely a core or at least borderline core piece but I think you can get by finding someone who does 80% of what Marleau does at 80% of the cap hit if it means adding a franchise defenseman to one of the worst organizational defensive depth charts in the league.

We disagree on Schaefer's projection. I just think the massive improvement he demonstrated from his draft minus one year compared to the start of his draft year combined with the fact that he's nearly 2026 eligible gives him sky high potential. I don't think it's reasonable to put a ceiling on him until we see what he looks like next season. I view him as the dman version of Celebrini who we can already say was clearly underrated at the time of the draft.

We have the best center prospect and the best goalie prospect in the league. If we add the best defense prospect to that group it wouldn't be crazy to start dreaming about the 2030s belonging to the Sharks. Keeping the pick and drafting Misa or Martone is just not anywhere near as exciting to me.

 

[mogambomoroo]

IMO MG doesn't need to be too desperate to trade for that #1 overall pick. Just wait and see what happens with the market. There is a scenario where Chicago trades up to #1 overall just to get Misa, that's almost a guarantee you get Schaefer with #2 and that saves Sharks a ton of assets. Sharks just don't need to be that desperate at this stage, just sell the idea to Islanders that you comfortable with #2 and that if they want to swap picks it needs to happen at a lower price.

 

[Bizz]

We didn't draft Burns, Boyle, or EK65 and they're the 3 best 1D's this team has ever had.

 

[Hodge]

We didn't draft Burns, Boyle, or EK65 and they're the 3 best 1D's this team has ever had.

And how many Cups did that lead to? The closest we ever got was with prime Vlasic as our #1.

 

[dmcccdmn]

Edmonton is an extremely flawed team that still hasn't won anything and gets dragged on deep runs by two of the greatest playoff performers in NHL history. That's not a realistic blueprint that anybody should be modeling a team after even ignoring the fact that they haven't been successful. Florida can survive without Ekblad for a game here and there but I completely disagree that they would have been fine without him anchoring their top pairing last year. Zito acquired Jones because they know they need insurance in case Ekblad gets injured or bolts in free agency.

I don't even disagree with your premise that there are ways to build a successful defense corps without a true #1 or players picked in the top 5, especially since we seem to be in a fallow period for championship-caliber #1 defensemen. Pronger, Niedermayer, Lidstrom, Weber and Chara are gone and nobody has really emerged to replace them beyond Makar, Heiskanen and maybe Dahlin. If Schaefer can develop into one of those guys it just makes constructing the rest of the defense so much easier and less complicated. I place a lot of value in that even if it's far from a guarantee (obviously none of the picks or prospects we're discussing are guarantees).

Edmonton also doesn't have a real goalie. Give them a good one and we'll see.

 

[hockfan1991]

The horse has been beaten to death, now we are beating the horses children to death

 

[Jargon]

And how many Cups did that lead to? The closest we ever got was with prime Vlasic as our #1.

I agree with you with your overall premise on getting Schaefer. I wouldn't trade Dickinson but I would -- while being very pained about it -- trade Chernyshov. Having Celebrini, Schaefer, Dickinson and Askarov as the spine of the team is ridiculous. Hopefully Will can hold down that 2C spot too.

All that said, I don't really blame the D for us not winning the cup -- I blame the fact that DW couldn't build a 3rd and 4th line worth a damn.

 

[SJS1991]

The horse has been beaten to death, now we are beating the horses children to death

The horse beating will continue until morale improves…

 

[Hodge]

Edmonton also doesn't have a real goalie. Give them a good one and we'll see.

True. I just don't think the Oilers build is a useful or replicable model for other teams. If anything I think getting Schaefer would set us up to have a similar build to the 2010s Kings teams led by Kopitar, Doughty and Quick.

 

[TheBeard]

We didn't draft Burns, Boyle, or EK65 and they're the 3 best 1D's this team has ever had.

Has this team ever drafted a competent D-man in the first round? Is the closest Rathje?

 

[Bizz]

Has this team ever drafted a competent D-man in the first round? Is the closest Rathje?

Stuart was fine before the Thornton trade.

 

[TheBeard]

Stuart was fine before the Thornton trade.

Forgot about Stuart but the fact he’s the best of them isn’t exactly a bragging point.

Edit: forgot about Hannan

 

[Negatively Positive]

Just stay at 2. I'm still mad about all the 49ers gave up to move up for Lance. What a f***ing waste. One of those picks could have been an OL who might slow down Chris Jones and we'd have a SB. We don't have even know for sure NYI are taking Schaefer. Could have give up a good asset for nothing.

 

[SJS1991]

Just stay at 2. I'm still mad about all the 49ers gave up to move up for Lance. What a f***ing waste. One of those picks could have been an OL who might slow down Chris Jones and we'd have a SB. We don't have even know for sure NYI are taking Schaefer. Could have give up a good asset for nothing.

Terrible comparison… Kyle would have traded all those assets to draft more 3rd round RBs. He doesn’t value Oline.

 

[dmcccdmn]

Just stay at 2. I'm still mad about all the 49ers gave up to move up for Lance. What a f***ing waste. One of those picks could have been an OL who might slow down Chris Jones and we'd have a SB. We don't have even know for sure NYI are taking Schaefer. Could have give up a good asset for nothing.

But scouts were so high on Lance. 49ers gave up huge assets to draft a great prospect at the position of their greatest needs. Sounds similar to the same argument being made for the San Jose and Schaefer? A prospect is still a prospect. Nothing is guaranteed.

 

[dmcccdmn]

Terrible comparison… Kyle would have traded all those assets to draft more 3rd round RBs. He doesn’t value Oline.

This most recent draft was rich in DL compared to OL. They also had to cater to their superstar defensive coordinator.

 

[SJS1991]

This most recent draft was rich in DL compared to OL. They also had to cater to their superstar defensive coordinator.

ok… my joke still stands. Kyle doesn’t value oline. He is becoming the new Bill Belichick, and by that I mean Kyle the GM is going to make Kyle the coach’s job much much harder.

And I know lynch is there… but Kyle has a huge amount of power in player selection. Last post on football haha back to ice soccer.