If pick #14 works out, how do you grade the EK deal?

[Alaskanice]

This sentiment really illustrates the complexity of evaluating a trade independent of the full ripple effect.

Each action, trading Karlsson, winning the lottery, the use of the assets acquired in the Karlsson trade, while dependent on each other in some way, shouldn't necessarily be evaluated jointly, but inevitably will be.

Trading Karlsson was obviously a must, his season last year was ridiculous, and it hurt the tank. Winning the lottery is great, allows the Sharks to select Celebrini. Even though it softens (for me personally, I feel better about the Karlsson deal now that the lottery has been won) or heightens your feelings about the Karlsson trade, it shouldn't nullify the importance of what is acquired with the 14th pick both in evaluating the trade and for the rebuild. And I would argue that with the lottery win, from a holistic standpoint, actually makes what happens with 14th overall more important. Hitting on that pick, with Celebrini, Smith, Musty, Eklund etc. could accelerate the rebuild even more.

In summation, I might just be getting greedy.

Be greedy. It worked for Gordon Gecko.

 

[weastern bias]

Each action, trading Karlsson, winning the lottery, the use of the assets acquired in the Karlsson trade, while dependent on each other in some way, shouldn't necessarily be evaluated jointly, but inevitably will be.

I disagree, in a results based business the results matter when evaluating the quality of a transaction

Karlsson's presence was the single biggest obstacle in the way of finishing 32nd, removing him from the roster allowed us to be in the position we are today

Winning the lottery from last place completely vindicated all of our tank moves, Karlsson included, and if the 14th pick is used to draft a good player or used an an asset to aquire more picks, a higher pick or a helpful roster player it's just the cherry on top

 

[Lebanezer]

I disagree, in a results based business the results matter when evaluating the quality of a transaction

Karlsson's presence was the single biggest obstacle in the way of finishing 32nd, removing him from the roster allowed us to be in the position we are today

Winning the lottery from last place completely vindicated all of our tank moves, Karlsson included, and if the 14th pick is used to draft a good player or used an an asset to aquire more picks, a higher pick or a helpful roster player it's just the cherry on top

I’m not sure I agree with the idea that just getting rid of Karlsson was worth it since we won the lottery. That seems like poor asset management.

 

[Hodge]

I’m not sure I agree with the idea that just getting rid of Karlsson was worth since we won the lottery. That seems like poor asset management.

Karlsson's contract was a liability not an asset.

 

[Lebanezer]

Karlsson's contract was a liability not an asset.

Not to the point that he had no value at all. If there’s any value, it’s an asset.

 

[Hodge]

Not to the point that he had no value at all. If there’s any value, it’s an asset.

He had no value at all. We got the 1st for taking on Granlund, Rutta and Hoffman as cap dumps.

 

[Lebanezer]

He had no value at all. We got the 1st for taking on Granlund, Rutta and Hoffman as cap dumps.

You can choose to view it that way if you want. Not really where this discussion needs to go anyway. The point here is that we now have an asset with the 14th overall pick. There’s no reason to act like that asset doesn’t matter relative to the rebuild or the Karlsson trade because we won the lottery.

 

[themelkman]

The trade is still meh.

If we get a good second pairing D or second line forward out of the pick I will be decently happy with the scouting department

 

[weastern bias]

I’m not sure I agree with the idea that just getting rid of Karlsson was worth it since we won the lottery. That seems like poor asset management.

Not to the point that he had no value at all. If there’s any value, it’s an asset.

But when you factor in the lottery win we didn't trade him for nothing, we functionally traded him for the opportunity to draft a #1C on an entry level contract

Celebrini has so much more value than Karlsson had as the time of the deal that it's almost ridiculous how it worked out for us, it's the Stuzle swap on steroids

Karlsson's contract was a liability not an asset.

I also have to agree with this, the Karlsson contract was such an anchor it turned a reigning Norris Trophy winning 100 point defenseman into a cap dump with term, we had to retain salary just to get a bunch of cap dumps in return

The 14th overall pick is a miracle return for a 32 year old $11M player signed for 4 more years who averaged 55 points per 82 games over the previous 4 seasons (followed by one obscene outlier year of production completely out of line with any other season he had in the previous 13 years of his career)

And then you utilize that opportunity to position yourself to draft Celebrini? INCREDIBLE deal

 

[Lebanezer]

But when you factor in the lottery win we didn't trade him for nothing, we functionally traded him for the opportunity to draft a #1C on an entry level contract

Celebrini has so much more value than Karlsson had as the time of the deal that it's almost ridiculous how it worked out for us, it's the Stuzle swap on steroids


I also have to agree with this, the Karlsson contract was such an anchor it turned a reigning Norris Trophy winning 100 point defenseman into a cap dump with term, we had to retain salary just to get a bunch of cap dumps in return

The 14th overall pick is a miracle return for a 32 year old $11M player signed for 4 more years who averaged 55 points per 82 games over the previous 4 seasons (followed by one obscene outlier year of production completely out of line with any other season he had in the previous 13 years of his career)

And then you utilize that opportunity to position yourself to draft Celebrini? INCREDIBLE deal

I think we can just agree to disagree.

 

[tiburon12]

The trade is still meh.

If we get a good second pairing D or second line forward out of the pick I will be decently happy with the scouting department

Let me ask you this: If we can agree that A) Karlsson's contract was too big to move (especially because of the flat cap), B) Grier had to operate without wasting Hasso's money, and C) Keeping Karlsson this year to hold out for better trade return would have lowered his value and jeopardized our chances at 1OA, then how is the trade "meh"?

Or another question, what was your expectation for the return that makes the actual return "meh" in comparison?

 

[Bizz]

it would go from an F- to an F

 

[Munnyro]

The question is kinda silly. You either analyze it immediately and/or in 3-5 years after the draftee is actualized. To me they're separate conversations.

Trading EK65 was the right move. Same with Hertl and Burns. Whether it is assets, the team being worse or whatever. I really wanted Nemac in the Meier trade. Even 1 for 1 or we give a 2nd. The GM would have to be desperate to make that.

Overall the deal is fine. I'd pay lots of money to see what the alternative deals are.

 

[SoftDumpInTheCorner]

Hard to say the return for SJ was great on trading a Norris winning defenseman. But Grier was pinned to the wall on EK's demands and left him little room for trade leverage. Getting Rutta and Granlund is ok in the short term. I think Rutta can help Mukhamadullin transition if they are paired together this season. Going forward he could be a short term solution on defense in the 3rd pairing. Granlund can shelter the hard minutes this season if Celebrini and Smith make the jump this year. Then at trade deadline if the production is there he can fetch something whether it's a pick or prospect.

Obtaining the 14th overall pick is probably about as good as they could get. If this pick ends up a top 4 defenseman or top 9 forward, I dont think the Sharks can be too upset at the results considering the circumstances. The only objection I personally had about the trade was the salary retention, granted its for only three more seasons and the Sharks will need to come up to the cap floor next season.

Lots of people have bagged Grier recently but he has done a fantastic job in stripping this team down and giving a new life to the farm system. I just hope ownership and the fans stay out of his way and let him see his prospects develop and play in the big show.

 

[DG93]

Hard to say the return for SJ was great on trading a Norris winning defenseman. But Grier was pinned to the wall on EK's demands and left him little room for trade leverage. Getting Rutta and Granlund is ok in the short term. I think Rutta can help Mukhamadullin transition if they are paired together this season. Going forward he could be a short term solution on defense in the 3rd pairing. Granlund can shelter the hard minutes this season if Celebrini and Smith make the jump this year. Then at trade deadline if the production is there he can fetch something whether it's a pick or prospect.

Obtaining the 14th overall pick is probably about as good as they could get. If this pick ends up a top 4 defenseman or top 9 forward, I dont think the Sharks can be too upset at the results considering the circumstances. The only objection I personally had about the trade was the salary retention, granted its for only three more seasons and the Sharks will need to come up to the cap floor next season.

Lots of people have bagged Grier recently but he has done a fantastic job in stripping this team down and giving a new life to the farm system. I just hope ownership and the fans stay out of his way and let him see his prospects develop and play in the big show.

Can't forget the part where Grier dumped 40M (out of 46M) of an albatross contract, that's a huge win in itself

 

[Star Platinum]

Hard to say the return for SJ was great on trading a Norris winning defenseman.

I don't think that's a fair context to judge that trade. Look at what his production was for several seasons before that career year - he was playing between 50-60 games a year and the only other All Star year he had for us was his first season for the Sharks. He was not playing at even an All Star level for three years prior to his Norris Trophy year and he's still got the highest average salary for a defenseman in the league for the next two years. Yeah, he had a great year, but he had plenty of reasons that would give a team pause in trading for him.

I give them credit for being smart enough to trade him at the height of his value and I think the value they got back, all things considered was fair. If they manage to draft a genuine top half of your team player at #14, I call it a huge win.

 

[Hangemhigh]

I was glad he was shipped. Contract was terrible and his performance during it was bad. Probably the #1 reason DW was "retired." Granlund and the 1st are sweet gravy. I say the trade is an A for GMMG.

 

[stator]

I was glad he was shipped. Contract was terrible and his performance during it was bad. Probably the #1 reason DW was "retired." Granlund and the 1st are sweet gravy. I say the trade is an A for GMMG.

I wouldn't say his performance was bad. There was aspects of his game that was exceptionally good, but then parts that were shocking bad to me given his contract size and position. I gave the trade a B, but since it was the trade that enabled 1OA, I'd have to re-evaluate it and give an A.

The question remains whether Celebrini will return to BU or not.

 

[fasterthanlight]

The "realized value" of a trade manifests over time, e.g., you can argue that we wouldn't have won the lottery if we didn't trade Karlsson and so that was a realized value of the trade. But, in my view, the "value" of a trade should be judged/debated based on the expected value at the time, rather than the eventual realized value. Winning or losing the lottery, a purely random event, should not impact our view on the value of the trade itself. Similarly, if Pittsburgh randomly hits a hall of famer on the 2026 3rd round pick we gave them, that shouldn't impact our view of this trade.

 

[GRANdSharks]

The sharks outlook is way more optimistic today then when the trade was made, given the cap savings and direction the team is headed, even if the pick busts out I think we should overall be happy with where we're at post karlsson trade. Any failure beyond this point is less on this trade and more on the execution of the front office building up this team.

 

[Hangemhigh]

I wouldn't say his performance was bad. There was aspects of his game that was exceptionally good, but then parts that were shocking bad to me given his contract size and position. I gave the trade a B, but since it was the trade that enabled 1OA, I'd have to re-evaluate it and give an A.

The question remains whether Celebrini will return to BU or not.

His performance relative to his contract and assets given up for him were bad.
He probably would have needed to be healthy, in the line up, and averaging about 80 points a season to be worth his contract.
Getting rid of Karlsson allowed the Sharks to move into true rebuild mode, probably also enabling Hertl to want to be moved.

 

[OrrNumber4]

I would mostly grade the trade "at the time", with a slight bonus for the pick ending up being 14th overall. The player drafted with the pick shouldn't be a factor.

 

[Pavelski2112]

The trade at the time was good, picking up some vets that wouldn't hurt the tank and getting a first in the process. Maybe a B, B+.

The trade now is going to go down as an incredibly important turning point in this franchise's history moving forward. A+, all hail Mike Grier.

 

[hotcabbagesoup]

Reading through this thread for the first time today I just don't feel any longing for EK.

I feel a longing for Hertl, yes. Both guys similarly albatross-sized contracts. It's just EK, he was so good but it didn't feel like he was good for the team. His arrogance and eliteness mixed together just didn't vibe with the humbleness and modesty that I've always wanted the team to have. Do I want EK back right now? Mehhh not really but I also feel that we need a #1 Dman. I just don't know, I'm conflicted.

 

[OversKy]

Reading through this thread for the first time today I just don't feel any longing for EK.

I feel a longing for Hertl, yes. Both guys similarly albatross-sized contracts. It's just EK, he was so good but it didn't feel like he was good for the team. His arrogance and eliteness mixed together just didn't vibe with the humbleness and modesty that I've always wanted the team to have. Do I want EK back right now? Mehhh not really but I also feel that we need a #1 Dman. I just don't know, I'm conflicted.

Burns wasn't much worse than EK65 besides his Norris year imo and bringing him in was a redundancy that sank the Sharks. DW desperately felt he had to bring a cup in for out of loyalty to the vets and hit the panic button after failing to get Tavares. It should've been Tavares, or look somewhere else for a top center or complimentary players. Ultimately pajama boy went to the Leafs who literally did the same thing at the center position and probably should've ACTUALLY went for EK65 to push them to be true contenders with a 1D. I'm ecstatic about trading EK65, I got the same big arrogance vibes and think he brought a rift in the changeroom since he got here. He did that while being dainty and overpaid... good riddance