SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Jrroisman

FederationX
Membre depuis
15 janv. 2021
Équipe favorite
Sharks de San Jose
Messages dans les forums
0
Messages par jour
0.0
Forum: NHL Trades7 août 2023 à 9 h 21
Sujet: (PIT/MTL/SJS) - Granlund, Rutta, Petry, DeSmith, Légaré, 2024 1st (PIT), 2025 2nd (PIT) for Pitlick, Hoffman for Karlsson, Hamaliuk, 2026 3rd (SJS)
I think this trade is good for all three teams considering what their goals were and where they are in their life cycles.

<strong>Pittsburgh</strong>

Positive: They got the guy they wanted, and cleared the cap space for him – actually coming out with less cap hit now than they went in with – all in one deal without having to give up any prospects (I’m ignoring Légaré and Hamaliuk because I don’t think they have much chance to make the NHL) or players that they considered essential to their present or future success. The only positive assets it cost them were a protected 1st, a 2nd and $1.5M of retained salary on Petry. You could argue that the cap dumps alone were worth at least that much, so they effectively got the most recent Norris Trophy winner for free.

Negative: If Karlsson was a UFA, would you sign him for 4x$10M? I wouldn’t, but I can see why it makes sense for Pittsburgh. They missed the playoffs last year, so they needed to do something to get back in, but they’re committed to being all in on their aging core. Acquiring Karlsson effectively doubles down on that strategy by bringing in another aging star.

Rating: A-

<strong>San Jose</strong>

Positive: It’s no secret they’ve been wanting to get rid of Karlsson’s contract, and even with him coming off a career year, it still looks like a bad contract at 4x$11M. They got rid of 87% of it, which is quite an accomplishment considering how difficult it is to move a contract of that size, and they picked up a 1st-round draft pick from what could be a non-playoff team in the process. They had to take on some overpaid players, but those players should all be of some use to them, and none of them are signed for more than two years versus Karlsson’s four.

Negative: They gave up their best player and have to wait two years before they’ll see significant savings from this move. The big benefits are in years 3 and 4. Sharks fans who thought he would fetch a huge package of futures that would kick-start their rebuild need to realize that Pittsburgh was probably the only team he was willing to go to that could take him, and it was only because of his great season last year that they were able to move him at all, so although they picked the right time to sell they were probably lucky to get what they got. However, they likely could have got more if they retained more of his salary. I think that might have been better for their rebuild, because I’ll be surprised if by years 3 and 4 they’ll be in a position where they really need all of that 2x$10M cap space they just freed up.

Rating: B

<strong>Montreal</strong>

A much less impactful trade for Montreal. I suspect Petry’s no-trade clause prevented Pittsburgh from sending him to San Jose, otherwise it would have been a two-team trade with San Jose getting the package they sent to Montreal.

Positive: Turning Hoffman and Pitlick into Petry and DeSmith for only a small increase in cap hit should make them a better team this season. I’m not sure DeSmith is much of an upgrade over Montembault, but he’ll create some competition for that spot or maybe allow them to trade Allen. Petry gives them another veteran defenseman who might be able to help their young core develop without the pressure of more responsibility than they’re ready for.

Negative: They’ve turned one year of Hoffman’s bad contract into two years of Petry’s. The retention on Petry should make that more palatable, and they get a 2nd-round draft pick to offset the pain, but I’m not sure they aren’t already past the point in their rebuild where selling cap space for draft picks is a good move.

Rating: B
Forum: NHL Trades6 août 2023 à 17 h 36
Sujet: (PIT/MTL/SJS) - Granlund, Rutta, Petry, DeSmith, Légaré, 2024 1st (PIT), 2025 2nd (PIT) for Pitlick, Hoffman for Karlsson, Hamaliuk, 2026 3rd (SJS)
We won't really know the consequences of this trade for several years, but for now I think this makes sense on some level for all parties involved.

Pittsburgh gets Karlsson and improves quite a bit immediately without having to give up a ton of assets, so in the here and now this trade is a positive for them. However, Karlsson will be on their books at a cap hit of $10M for the next four seasons, and his advanced age combined with that of the rest of the team means that when the bill comes due the Pens will likely be in rougher shape than they otherwise would have been.

On the surface, I feel like the Sharks should have extracted more from Pittsburgh for taking on Granlund and Rutta's contracts, however I am impressed they still got a first round pick while only retaining $1.5M of his cap hit. This trade will look a lot better for San Jose if they can rehabilitate Granlund, Rutta, and/or Hoffman and trade them elsewhere for more assets.

To me Montreal did very well here as a third team. They got a 2nd round pick and another option at goalie while shedding a player who was on his way out anyway. Petry returns to familiar surroundings and can be a mentor for their young defense, though his contract in my mind is less moveable than Hoffman's. The Habs might be stuck with him if they can't find any takers and his play declines, a very real possibility considering Petry's age. Overall though I think Montreal got the best combination of current value and lower risk of the three teams.
Forum: NHL Trades6 août 2023 à 17 h 18
Sujet: (PIT/MTL/SJS) - Granlund, Rutta, Petry, DeSmith, Légaré, 2024 1st (PIT), 2025 2nd (PIT) for Pitlick, Hoffman for Karlsson, Hamaliuk, 2026 3rd (SJS)
This is pretty fair for all teams involved imo.
From a Sharks perspective, this was a good return for what Grier was willing to do. Didn't retain too much, acquired players that slot into the top six and can be flipped for assets, and accelerating the rebuild just slightly. This gives us a great shot to improve defensively, and an even better chance to get players that will help the future (i.e. Celebrini, Kiviharju, Eiserman). For once, I can actually see direction in what Sharks management wants to do, and they want to rebuild. The Burns deal was iffy, but the trades since the Meier deal have been pretty good for the team, and there are potentially more on the way.

Pittsburgh gets a facelift on the cap front, as well as a Norris winning defenseman who will play a substantial role in getting them back to the playoffs, and Dubas can still get a supplemental piece for the bottom six with the extra space, assuming he doesn't want Alex Nylander playing 10-15m a night. They also undid all of Hextall's wrongs, which is a win.

Montreal did decently and got Petry back who should aid their young blueline or the potential for more assets, as well as getting a second rounder, and a backup goaltender in DeSmith, which could mark the end of both Jake Allen and Cayden Primeau, as Montembeault/DeSmith is the likely tandem.
Forum: NHL Trades6 août 2023 à 17 h 0
Sujet: (PIT/MTL/SJS) - Granlund, Rutta, Petry, DeSmith, Légaré, 2024 1st (PIT), 2025 2nd (PIT) for Pitlick, Hoffman for Karlsson, Hamaliuk, 2026 3rd (SJS)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>sensonfire</b></div><div>1. This is a trade involving the Sharks' franchise player who just happened to win the Norris Trophy as best NHL defenceman recently.

With retained salary for 4 years.

The only piece of any significance that the Sharks got is a Top 10 protected first.

This is not amazing work by San Jose.




2. A lot of the trades that Mike Grier has made as GM have resulted in the Sharks getting the "short end of the stick".

This is yet another example.




3. A player's on-ice performance has just as much weight as the contract to which he is signed.

Erik Karlsson is an elite franchise defenceman that just recently won the Norris Trophy.

He's not just a number on a piece of paper.

The Sharks should have got a first and then some.




4. The Sharks can't buy out Granlund or Rutta until next June.




5. When making a trade, the team decides when the trade happens, not the player.

The team's interests come before that of the player's when making a trade.

A hockey team is made up of 20-23 players, not just one.

I'm amazed I need to spell that out for you.




6. If Karlsson wanted out and there's no good trade to be made, then too bad.

No trade for Karlsson then.

He's under contract until 2027 and the Sharks held his rights until the day he becomes a UFA.

There's no such thing as "forever", so go easy on the hyperbole.




7. Mike Grier is a rookie GM who gets the "short end of the stick" way too often.

That's not exactly an impressive feat.

But you be you.</div></div>


1 - The retained salary is minimal compared to what most people expected.
2 - I don't really have a comment on that one.
3 - It is a combination of both. Karlsson's injury history and performance prior to this season caused there to be a very limited market for him. Instead of saying a Norris winner only got this trade, you should ask yourself what circumstances with the salary cap caused it so that a Norris winner could only get this trade. Look at how many very good players and stars have been given away for nothing. This shouldn't be a shock.
4 - I did not suggest they could, perhaps I should have been more specific. I was referring to the final year on their contract, hence not bringing up Hoffman who will be a UFA at that time.
5 - This is not true. If it was true, we wouldn't have seen Chychrun go to the Senators, or any of the other trades that always happen this way. The reality is that teams risk more by holding on to disgruntled players. I outlined it in a previous post. There is a reason GMs always say "oh man I don't have to trade this guy if I don't get what I want", then the player coincidentally gets traded at a logical deadline (training camp, prior to July 1st, trade deadline, etc) with the GM not getting what they actually wanted.
6 - This is covered in 5. I won't re-iterate my entire previous post. But there are very valid reasons why a player gets moved in these scenarios.
7 - Again, I don't really have a comment on that. I think he did great work to get out of almost the entirety of years 3/4 of a massive contract that has mostly been through to be un-moveable, and to get a 1st round pick.
Forum: NHL Trades6 août 2023 à 14 h 48
Sujet: (PIT/MTL/SJS) - Granlund, Rutta, Petry, DeSmith, Légaré, 2024 1st (PIT), 2025 2nd (PIT) for Pitlick, Hoffman for Karlsson, Hamaliuk, 2026 3rd (SJS)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BCAPP</b></div><div>The big cost for Pittsburgh is having karlsson at 10 million for years 3 and 4</div></div>

They are the perfect trade spot because with how old their core is, this is hardly going to be a worry.

If Karlsson can continue to play like a top pairing defenseman for the next 2 seasons, Pittsburgh could possibly flip Karlsson with retention when he is down to 1-2 years remaining. If he proves himself that way, it will help alleviate any concerns about his long term play, and obviously 1-2 years is a lot less term than 4 years. I can already see the thread, where Pittsburgh gets a late 1st++ for Karlsson, and people dunk on San Jose for Pittsburgh getting more for him, while completely ignoring the context of why San Jose got what they did.
Forum: NHL Trades6 août 2023 à 14 h 46
Sujet: (PIT/MTL/SJS) - Granlund, Rutta, Petry, DeSmith, Légaré, 2024 1st (PIT), 2025 2nd (PIT) for Pitlick, Hoffman for Karlsson, Hamaliuk, 2026 3rd (SJS)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Koskinen_The_Great</b></div><div>Yup. No clue what he's galaxy braining, again. Sharks fans for months were asking for multiple 1sts yet this is win?!? Ok yeah sure. The easy play was rentaining max especially with only 1 retention spot left now. This is as confusing as Poile using a retention spot long term for less than 250k on Ekholm. Sit or get off the pot. Grier didnt show much creativity here. This is simply a white flag by the Sharks.</div></div>

Saying that Sharks fans didn't understand the market for Karlsson isn't a good counterpoint.

All reports for the last year and a half have pointed to there being very little market for Erik Karlsson due to his injury history and NMC. His play this year gave San Jose an out, but it was a very limited one. There was a very limited market for him. Grier did a good job to maximize his leverage in that limited market.

I guarantee you that within a week once all the talking heads like Friedman spill what they know, we will find out that there were almost no teams willing to take Karlsson without heavy retention and almost no teams willing to give up 1st round picks.

There is a reasonable chance that whatever level of retention Grier was willing to do may have been dictated by ownership. There is also no guarantee that increasing the retention would have increased the market for Karlsson by an amount that would justify retaining half. I would guess that it wouldn't do a lot to move the market. Pittsburgh got Karlsson at 10M, and San Jose also had to facilitate Pittsburgh dumping roughly 11 million in cap over the next 2 years. That's a lot of cap consideration going to Pittsburgh, which says that short term cap wasn't the only issue with Karlsson. Even at half retained, he's still a near 6M player for the next 4 years. Teams were clearly unwilling to take on the risk of his term given his level of play prior to this season. There was nothing San Jose could do about the term.