Dorion Presser - April 12,18

[BonkTastic]

11 is a number I wouldn't go to. Over 10 gives me the shivers.

Well, get your winter coat ready, because Karlsson's next contract is going to be an arctic gale wind.

 

[GuyBoucherEvilGenius]

Playing Gabriel Dumont instead of Colin White or anyone else is a fireable offence on its own. This team was horrible, let guys like Chlapik and White get their feet wet instead of playing them here and there and shipping them back and forth to the AHL.

As for Matthew Barzal "popping", well, he didn't even get his first point until his 6th game, but he played close to 15 minutes a night, which helped build his confidence to the point where he began to produce.

There is still no tangible proof that playing a guy on a really bad or even really good AHL team "helps development".

The problem is guys like White and Chlapik need consistent top six minutes, PP time, etc to develop their game further. They were not going to get that at the NHL level in the middle of December and January. They were better off in the AHL playing those big minutes than being forced into bottom six roles at the NHL level. The NHL team needs those bottom six spots for penalty killers and role guys who play fewer minutes.

The NHL team is trying to turn around the season and get back into the playoff race. They're not going to bump guys like Brassard out of a top 6 C role just to develop these guys.

After the deadline when we were a clear seller and clearly not making the playoffs, I totally agree. Play White and Chlapik in top 6 roles. Call up some young guys on D. Give them time on PP and PK. Let them make their mistakes at the NHL level and learn from them and fail forward.

In general though, I'm not as high on a guy like White as others are. I just don't see him as a huge top six difference maker. Chlapik I'm not sure how I feel yet. I'm a little more hopeful for the next wave like Formenton, Batherson, and even Brown.

 

[aragorn]

I just don't get the complaints on here about prospect development. Detroit used to be the banner development team keeping their prospects in the minor league farm system consistently longer than any other team it seemed & they were hailed as doing it the right way.

While I agree that bringing in GB's "players" was a mistake, they could have done a better job through UFA or trades to bring in better players BUT they are also under a very tight internal budget, money in - money out. GB's guys were cheap & eager to prove which gave the organization time to keep their prospects in the minor league development team in Belleville to learn the ropes & to improve their game & their physical stature for some.

Who here knows enough about these prospects & whether they are NHL ready or not? It's all a guessing game for us, nobody here knows better than the experts running these teams & all of the variables that go along with that. This is their business & we can only hope that they do know & are doing the best job possible for these players to eventually be for some of them good NHL players but not all. Of course, we can replace these experts, we have done it numerous times with similar results so that may not be the answer either. And some prospects never become NHL players regardless of what we think about them.

 

[JD1]

I don't get this feeling at all. I think people are more weary about where we are as a team.

Is this a contending team in the next few years? I don't think so. At most probably a bubble team unless management can do something drastic to get good players in but that would mean shipping good players/picks/prospects out.

His injury also scares people. Do you blame them?

For the record, I want him resigned.

I like your post here.

I'm a huge EK fan. But anyone that knows hockey knows he had a rough year. He can get 70 points but if he can't play inside his own blueline then we have a problem. yes his injury is concerning and it is prudent to explore options. not doing so is not doing your job if your PD.

talk springing up this week about LA and what they might do with Doughty. first time I've read something that suggests it might not be as cut and dry that they re-up with him.

 

[JD1]

The problem is with paying $10.5M to $12M to 17-18 Karlsson for eight years. This team cannot be on the hook for that. The owner won't pay to bury that kind of problem.


Months ago, I speculated that the least risky move for this team is to wait until November 2018 to see what Karlsson is now. That clearly can't happen, and we'll have to hope his push at the end of this last season shows that he's returning to form.

yep that is exactly the problem.

waiting til the fall to see what you've actually got is difficult to do but it might be in everyone's best interest. especially Erik's.

 

[JD1]

I am willing to bet that EK will be more productive in 8 years than Mark Stone or Matt Duchene. The will be no need to bury EK's salary ever. Was anyone worried about burying Crosby's contract?

that's not a fair comparison and frankly I think you are clever enough to know that

 

[OD99]

...I dont see what the harm is in discussing the risk. We've got a couple months until we have a resolution. We could all just agree to hand him whatever he wants and never bring it up until he's signed or traded i guess.

There's big risk for any player signed to that kind of money. Especially for a franchise with no ability to cover up financial mistakes. This is not a 21 year old Connor McDavid being signed until he's 30, or a Crosby that's already won you multiple cups.

Look how fast Heatley and Spezza fizzled out right around 30 years old after being one of the best duo's in the league for years.

Again, i think its worth it after assessing the risk/reward, but i dont understand what the harm is in acknowledging it and why a few posters seem genuinely offended when anything other than handing him whatever he wants gets discussed.

I would suggest you are taking a pretty extreme view of the people who think signing Karlsson is a good idea.

First I don't think anyone is saying give him whatever he wants. I will speak for myself and say I want a true negotiation - each side should walk away happy or each walks away feeling they gave up a little more than they want.

He isn't McDavid but he has won 2 Norris trophies and been jobbed AT LEAST 1 time for another (I still can't believe he finished tied for 4th in league scoring, PPG and led league in assists and they gave it to Drew Pouty) and led the Senators to within a goal of making the Stanley Cup Finals last year on 1 foot.

Spezza had a bad back for most of his career and Heatley's game was doomed to fall off quick - he couldn't get around the ice. No players age more gracefully than those with great wheels and high IQ.

Again, I don't think people are suggesting just give him what he wants.

If we get a ridiculous haul for him then I will shocked and pissed that he isn't a Senator but I will understand why it was done however the discussion about how risky it is baffles me. He is young, a stud and has proven to be as consistent as they come - those are the players we NEED to keep if we want to be perennially a contender.

 

[JD1]

I would suggest you are taking a pretty extreme view of the people who think signing Karlsson is a good idea.

First I don't think anyone is saying give him whatever he wants. I will speak for myself and say I want a true negotiation - each side should walk away happy or each walks away feeling they gave up a little more than they want.

He isn't McDavid but he has won 2 Norris trophies and been jobbed AT LEAST 1 time for another (I still can't believe he finished tied for 4th in league scoring, PPG and led league in assists and they gave it to Drew Pouty) and led the Senators to within a goal of making the Stanley Cup Finals last year on 1 foot.

Spezza had a bad back for most of his career and Heatley's game was doomed to fall off quick - he couldn't get around the ice. No players age more gracefully than those with great wheels and high IQ.

Again, I don't think people are suggesting just give him what he wants.

If we get a ridiculous haul for him then I will shocked and pissed that he isn't a Senator but I will understand why it was done however the discussion about how risky it is baffles me. He is young, a stud and has proven to be as consistent as they come - those are the players we NEED to keep if we want to be perennially a contender.

I agree and I'm really starting to think that waiting until late fall at about the 20 game mark makes sense both ways.

 

[Boud]

Guys like Fisher and Neil are considered "greats" in the organization because of the countless hours they put into the community, and how over-and-above they were with the fanbase. If either of those guys just showed up to the rink to play and went home after the game to live a private life and didn't involve themselves with the fans or anything else, would they still be considered "greats"? I highly doubt it.

They would for a couple of reasons.

The first reason being that the Senators franchise is still very young. Neil is one of the longest serving Senator so that in itself connects the fans and the player a lot more. Everyone knows Neil because he has played here a long long time but I think the most important thing is that he played a style that literally any fan just loved. He was there to defend our players in those series against the Leafs, he was one of the very best (if not the best) agitators in the game for a period of time. He was part of those best teams that we've had in the early 2000's also and he was part of the cup run and some presidents trophy seasons. I think automatically if you play 1000 games playing hard every night for a team that's only got 25 years of history then you become a "great". Kinda like David Legwand in Nashville, the guy never was an all star but he came to the rink and worked hard, he played a ton of games for them in their short history and he's one of the most respected player in their history.

For Fisher, again a very hard working player. Never take a shift off kind of guy that played the right way his entire career. He was drafted by the team and really grew with the team at the same time as the fanbase grew interest in the team.

You look at a guy like Jason Spezza who played a lot here, and he was great and he was extremely involved with the community and for some reason very few people put him up there with the Fisher, Neil and Phillips. He wasn't that guy that was working his ass off every shift (physically I mean and sometimes making lazy plays) and leaving it all out there like the guys that you mentionned.

I think a guy like JG Pageau has the potential to become a "great" if he continues to play hard and is a reliable player for the next 10 years.

IMO these are the things that make you great: (need a combination of all of them realistically)

1. Work ethic on ice (and being good obvs)
2. Longevity (being good until mid 30s)
3. Playing a lot of games for same franchise (Bonus points if drafted by said team)
4. Team success with the player/ Good memories from playoffs.
5. Involvement in community.

At some point every player is involved in the community also tbh. Not to the point of Neil, Fisher, Spezza, Turris, Redden, Alfie, White, Carkner and all of those guys but certainly every player does a little bit for the community. When most people (Unless you've been helped directly by a player) remember these guys like Fisher and Neil they remember the fights with Tie Domi, they remember the playoff goals, the great 100+ points seasons, the hits, and just how hard they worked all the time.

I mean Bobby Ryan is bringing thousands of sick kids to games on a yearly basis and you never hear his name out there. Why? He's not a key performer on the team, he's not very exciting to watch on most nights, he hasn't played here his entire career. He's one of the players that's very involved yet a lot of people don't know or even don't care. He's the first player since Redden to buy a suite for CHEO kids...

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

I would suggest you are taking a pretty extreme view of the people who think signing Karlsson is a good idea.

First I don't think anyone is saying give him whatever he wants. I will speak for myself and say I want a true negotiation - each side should walk away happy or each walks away feeling they gave up a little more than they want.

He isn't McDavid but he has won 2 Norris trophies and been jobbed AT LEAST 1 time for another (I still can't believe he finished tied for 4th in league scoring, PPG and led league in assists and they gave it to Drew Pouty) and led the Senators to within a goal of making the Stanley Cup Finals last year on 1 foot.

Spezza had a bad back for most of his career and Heatley's game was doomed to fall off quick - he couldn't get around the ice. No players age more gracefully than those with great wheels and high IQ.

Again, I don't think people are suggesting just give him what he wants.

If we get a ridiculous haul for him then I will shocked and pissed that he isn't a Senator but I will understand why it was done however the discussion about how risky it is baffles me. He is young, a stud and has proven to be as consistent as they come - those are the players we NEED to keep if we want to be perennially a contender.

Yes, I was definitely not referring to everyone, there's just a few posters that are quick to talk down to those debating the potential risk of the biggest contract the Ottawa Senators have ever handed out and potentially second in the entire NHL to date. These are matters of opinion in most cases, but a few seem agitated at the notion of the discussion even taking place.

Personally, I think McDavid is viewed in a manner that only Crosby would be considered. That's just my opinion, and while I agree that Karlsson has been robbed of the Norris twice now, I just think he's not quite considered in that group. I think some have been too quick to point at that contract as a comparable, myself in the past included, but I think it's in a league by itself for the most part. If Karlsson makes it to UFA, it won't matter, it will get out of hand like most do.

Spezza and Heatley were one of the most dynamic duo's in the league, and arguably injuries derailed both of them (pre-existing or not), but isn't that part of the risk debate we're having on Karlsson's injury? They were not the players Karlsson is obviously, but just examples of going from top of the league great to borderline liabilities in a short period of time around passing that 30 year old threshold. That's absolute worst case scenario though, and I don't see it happening here.

I've seen pretty much exactly that put forward numerous times on here. Essentially, doesn't matter what it takes, you sign him, almost as if negotiating with him for anything but what he's expected to get as a UFA is an insult. I still want him signed, just not if it gets out of hand, which 12.5x8 would be imo, at least for us. Melnyk being a douche or not, we're a small market team with a hard budget and little room for error.

Any signing is a risk no matter who it is, just because it's being discussed, doesn't mean it has to be any more than just an acknowledgment of the risk and the different factors involved. He's not that young anymore either, he'll be 29 when the new deal kicks in, for many many players, that's the time to get off the pot if they want an 8 year deal. He had a major injury and surgery that he was very open about struggling to overcome. Some of his interviews on the Team1200 he talked about possible permanent adjustments he would have to make to accommodate it. He did not look good at all for the first half or so imo, of course that's likely just him getting back to 100%, but its also the first time pretty much that we've seen a bad Karlsson out there, it was like an "Oh right, he's human" realization for me. Crosby could have been concussed out of the league, McDavid could have more shoulder problems, you just never know.

 

[JungleBeat]

The problem is guys like White and Chlapik need consistent top six minutes, PP time, etc to develop their game further. They were not going to get that at the NHL level in the middle of December and January

Boston seems to be doing fine with giving their young players second to third line minutes with other good players. The worst thing for a young player is having them play with garbage like Burrows.

 

[OD99]

Yes, I was definitely not referring to everyone, there's just a few posters that are quick to talk down to those debating the potential risk of the biggest contract the Ottawa Senators have ever handed out and potentially second in the entire NHL to date. These are matters of opinion in most cases, but a few seem agitated at the notion of the discussion even taking place.

Personally, I think McDavid is viewed in a manner that only Crosby would be considered. That's just my opinion, and while I agree that Karlsson has been robbed of the Norris twice now, I just think he's not quite considered in that group. I think some have been too quick to point at that contract as a comparable, myself in the past included, but I think it's in a league by itself for the most part. If Karlsson makes it to UFA, it won't matter, it will get out of hand like most do.

Spezza and Heatley were one of the most dynamic duo's in the league, and arguably injuries derailed both of them (pre-existing or not), but isn't that part of the risk debate we're having on Karlsson's injury? They were not the players Karlsson is obviously, but just examples of going from top of the league great to borderline liabilities in a short period of time around passing that 30 year old threshold. That's absolute worst case scenario though, and I don't see it happening here.

I've seen pretty much exactly that put forward numerous times on here. Essentially, doesn't matter what it takes, you sign him, almost as if negotiating with him for anything but what he's expected to get as a UFA is an insult. I still want him signed, just not if it gets out of hand, which 12.5x8 would be imo, at least for us. Melnyk being a *****e or not, we're a small market team with a hard budget and little room for error.

Any signing is a risk no matter who it is, just because it's being discussed, doesn't mean it has to be any more than just an acknowledgment of the risk and the different factors involved. He's not that young anymore either, he'll be 29 when the new deal kicks in, for many many players, that's the time to get off the pot if they want an 8 year deal. He had a major injury and surgery that he was very open about struggling to overcome. Some of his interviews on the Team1200 he talked about possible permanent adjustments he would have to make to accommodate it. He did not look good at all for the first half or so imo, of course that's likely just him getting back to 100%, but its also the first time pretty much that we've seen a bad Karlsson out there, it was like an "Oh right, he's human" realization for me. Crosby could have been concussed out of the league, McDavid could have more shoulder problems, you just never know.

I guess the whole notion of not knowing is a given to me about life in general so to use it as an example of why we should make decisions seems odd.

I may get struck by lightning so should I go outside? What if that lightning strikes my house and it catches fire? Guess I should go outside ...

Of course we can't see the future but we saw what 2nd half Karlsson looked like and at times it was amazing.

A full year after surgery and an extended off season to rehab and train and I believe we see our superstar back on a nightly basis.

Going by what we do know is that he is the most dynamic and electric D on the planet and will be one of the best skaters in the game until he retires.

Look at all the best skaters of their generation and they all aged gracefully.

 

[Boud]

I guess the whole notion of not knowing is a given to me about life in general so to use it as an example of why we should make decisions seems odd.

I may get struck by lightning so should I go outside? What if that lightning strikes my house and it catches fire? Guess I should go outside ...

Of course we can't see the future but we saw what 2nd half Karlsson looked like and at times it was amazing.

A full year after surgery and an extended off season to rehab and train and I believe we see our superstar back on a nightly basis.

Going by what we do know is that he is the most dynamic and electric D on the planet and will be one of the best skaters in the game until he retires.

Look at all the best skaters of their generation and they all aged gracefully.

Great post.

People that say that we should trade Karlsson (or even consider it) are talking with the premise that our prospects will live up to their potential, our pick this year will be a star, and the players we would acquire in a potential trade would put us over the top to become eventually perrenial contenders. Also probably consider that Chabot will be a #1 and that Wolanin will be a great top 4 D.

That, unfortunately, is not how it works and definitely not how it will unfold. There is a risk in signing Karlsson but that's true about any decision made in life. There's risk in signing him, there's significant risk in NOT re-signing him since we already know something... And that something that we do know is that he's the best D on the planet. The simple solution is to let him play and show us that he's still the player he's been for almost 10 years in this league. Once you see that, you sign him.

I personally don't doubt that, but for some people that do doubt he will be back to his top 3 player in the NHL status ... here's a scenario worth considering. Don't trade him in the offseason. Keep him and let him prove that he can play. Then you can sign him. Trading him because we don't know right now is idiocy, not only because we have time, but also because what we'll get back for him will be magic beans. Karlsson is still under contract for the next season. We still have time to see him after a full offseason of training.

We'll know what's the intention of the team this summer. If they decide to trade him in the offseason, we'll know 100% that the team had no intention of signing him at all and that they didn't want to give him the contract he deserves. If they are worried that there is a risk that he doesn't come back to the level he was last season but still want to sign him, they will let him prove himself. At this point anyways who the f*** cares if he's traded at the deadline or this offseason? What we'll get back is not even close to the value he brings to the team and the franchise.

Players like Karlsson come once every 20 years. Once every 20 years in the entire NHL, not on a team. So you can imagine how long it could take to ever get a player of that caliber again.

 

[JD1]

Great post.

People that say that we should trade Karlsson (or even consider it) are talking with the premise that our prospects will live up to their potential, our pick this year will be a star, and the players we would acquire in a potential trade would put us over the top to become eventually perrenial contenders. Also probably consider that Chabot will be a #1 and that Wolanin will be a great top 4 D.

That, unfortunately, is not how it works and definitely not how it will unfold. There is a risk in signing Karlsson but that's true about any decision made in life. There's risk in signing him, there's significant risk in NOT re-signing him since we already know something... And that something that we do know is that he's the best D on the planet. The simple solution is to let him play and show us that he's still the player he's been for almost 10 years in this league. Once you see that, you sign him.

I personally don't doubt that, but for some people that do doubt he will be back to his top 3 player in the NHL status ... here's a scenario worth considering. Don't trade him in the offseason. Keep him and let him prove that he can play. Then you can sign him. Trading him because we don't know right now is idiocy, not only because we have time, but also because what we'll get back for him will be magic beans. Karlsson is still under contract for the next season. We still have time to see him after a full offseason of training.

We'll know what's the intention of the team this summer. If they decide to trade him in the offseason, we'll know 100% that the team had no intention of signing him at all and that they didn't want to give him the contract he deserves. If they are worried that there is a risk that he doesn't come back to the level he was last season but still want to sign him, they will let him prove himself. At this point anyways who the **** cares if he's traded at the deadline or this offseason? What we'll get back is not even close to the value he brings to the team and the franchise.

Players like Karlsson come once every 20 years. Once every 20 years in the entire NHL, not on a team. So you can imagine how long it could take to ever get a player of that caliber again.

you have a lot going on in this post and some of it makes sense.

what I don't understand about guys that are saying sign him without question is they can't explain it and be honest at the same time. I've been pretty vocal that the team needs to assess the risk and the potential return. Several other guys are saying the same thing. Nowhere have I mentioned all these premises you'r talking about on other guys and picks working out. They need to assess it on EK's health and ask. Chabot's potential growth might be a small factor.

The other thing that's quite dishonest over the past few weeks is the return on Karlsson. If he's the best D in the game, and I agree he is, then why do guys downplay the potential return? He's not going to be traded for peanuts. Waiting til July when the opportunity for a trade and sign deal will maximize the return and in that scenario what comes back will reflect his status in the game and his status isn't worth peanuts.

I don't mind opinions either way. That's what a message board is....an exchange of opinion. But guys should at least be honest about it.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

If you're a poker player, Karlsson is a straight flush. When you have that hand, you go all in.

 

[WadeRedden]

If you're a poker player, Karlsson is a straight flush. When you have that hand, you go all in.

He's King Karl. More like a Royal Flush imo

 

[NorthCoast]

you have a lot going on in this post and some of it makes sense.

what I don't understand about guys that are saying sign him without question is they can't explain it and be honest at the same time. I've been pretty vocal that the team needs to assess the risk and the potential return. Several other guys are saying the same thing. Nowhere have I mentioned all these premises you'r talking about on other guys and picks working out. They need to assess it on EK's health and ask. Chabot's potential growth might be a small factor.

The other thing that's quite dishonest over the past few weeks is the return on Karlsson. If he's the best D in the game, and I agree he is, then why do guys downplay the potential return? He's not going to be traded for peanuts. Waiting til July when the opportunity for a trade and sign deal will maximize the return and in that scenario what comes back will reflect his status in the game and his status isn't worth peanuts.

I don't mind opinions either way. That's what a message board is....an exchange of opinion. But guys should at least be honest about it.

With the current toxicity around the situation I can't see how trading EK would impact team revenues, which would impact player budget. IE: Budget with EK is 68 and 65 without for example. This means you have to subtract 2-3 million from whatever number he gets for the next few years because we wouldn't have that money for another player anyways. We can only use it on him. Therefore an 11 million contract is actually an 8-9 million contract.

While I am sure some are sandbagging the return, I think the more important point on return is that you will never get the better player back. This can be okay in some situations (trading vet for futures during rebuilld) but it almost never happens with players of EKs caliber under the age of 30. That's because you need elite players to win the cup if you look at the past decade or so. And so the whole point of drafting and building is to find 1-2 and build around them. You don't trade them, ever, under 30 unless it's 1-1 because they are so hard to get in the first place. You can list 5-6 teams that have never had a player as good as EK and we are considering trading him in a quality for quantity deal when he still has 5-6 good years left in him. I don't think any other team would do this.

 

[OD99]

While I am sure some are sandbagging the return, I think the more important point on return is that you will never get the better player back. This can be okay in some situations (trading vet for futures during rebuilld) but it almost never happens with players of EKs caliber under the age of 30. That's because you need elite players to win the cup if you look at the past decade or so. And so the whole point of drafting and building is to find 1-2 and build around them. You don't trade them, ever, under 30 unless it's 1-1 because they are so hard to get in the first place. You can list 5-6 teams that have never had a player as good as EK and we are considering trading him in a quality for quantity deal when he still has 5-6 good years left in him. I don't think any other team would do this.

This is the bigger risk IMO. There have been very few instances in any sport where a superstar player has been traded and the return was even close to appropriate value. Heck even with regular very good players the team that acquires them usually wins out and that is because even very good players are hard to come by let alone GENERATIONAL talents.

Name another D in the league that has carried his team in the last 15 years (or further)? There are other great D but not one of them has had a similar team around them - they have All-Star players as supporting cast.

I guess at the core I don't think Karlsson was as bad as many here believe too - he wasn't himself but he gets a fair bit of grace considering his circumstances and his long history of being great should supersede a bad stretch after a freak and devastating injury. Heck Crosby wasn't himself for a half a season 2 years ago and then made a push in the 2nd half - can you imagine them deciding to trade him because of that? He also has head issues which I submit has a much higher % of occurring again to a degree that would put him out for good.

Lastly...GMPD doesn't have a great track record IMO when it comes to trades so that does also weigh in to my thoughts.

 

[Sensung]

The 2nd half of the season as Karlsson got healthy he went back to being thd best Dman in the league, even though he still was not 100%.

He'll get healthy and dominate the NHL again starting next season. I just hope it is in a Sens Jersey.

The risk in trading him is far greater than signing him. If he wants anything McDavid or under you sign him without hesitation.

 

[Ice-Tray]

With the current toxicity around the situation I can't see how trading EK would impact team revenues, which would impact player budget. IE: Budget with EK is 68 and 65 without for example. This means you have to subtract 2-3 million from whatever number he gets for the next few years because we wouldn't have that money for another player anyways. We can only use it on him. Therefore an 11 million contract is actually an 8-9 million contract.

While I am sure some are sandbagging the return, I think the more important point on return is that you will never get the better player back. This can be okay in some situations (trading vet for futures during rebuilld) but it almost never happens with players of EKs caliber under the age of 30. That's because you need elite players to win the cup if you look at the past decade or so. And so the whole point of drafting and building is to find 1-2 and build around them. You don't trade them, ever, under 30 unless it's 1-1 because they are so hard to get in the first place. You can list 5-6 teams that have never had a player as good as EK and we are considering trading him in a quality for quantity deal when he still has 5-6 good years left in him. I don't think any other team would do this.

And yet folks continually slam the Duchene trade as an overpayment when we got the far better player in the deal, and only gave up a good player and futures to get him.

We won't get a player as good as EK back, but we can get some assets that could be excellent players, along with some very good players. An EK trade will yield some fantastic returns I have no doubt, and sometimes when you're able to fill a few holes on a team, it is possible that as a team you come out better.

We shall see, exciting times!

 

[Ice-Tray]

This is the bigger risk IMO. There have been very few instances in any sport where a superstar player has been traded and the return was even close to appropriate value. Heck even with regular very good players the team that acquires them usually wins out and that is because even very good players are hard to come by let alone GENERATIONAL talents.

Name another D in the league that has carried his team in the last 15 years (or further)? There are other great D but not one of them has had a similar team around them - they have All-Star players as supporting cast.

I guess at the core I don't think Karlsson was as bad as many here believe too - he wasn't himself but he gets a fair bit of grace considering his circumstances and his long history of being great should supersede a bad stretch after a freak and devastating injury. Heck Crosby wasn't himself for a half a season 2 years ago and then made a push in the 2nd half - can you imagine them deciding to trade him because of that? He also has head issues which I submit has a much higher % of occurring again to a degree that would put him out for good.

Lastly...GMPD doesn't have a great track record IMO when it comes to trades so that does also weigh in to my thoughts.

He was terrible and uninspired this year. The injury explained the reduced skill level early on, but the uninspired play for virtually the entire season can not be so easily explained away. I was disgusted by his effort on many nights, especially as captain.

This was new for me, and given the timing and all of the swirling rumours, it matter a whole lot going into negotiations. I personally think folks have love for EK and it clouds their judgement. It's hard to argue with other fans that he's the best player in the NHL, and the best D man year after year, but then have to face what we saw this year in a n honest manner to ourselves, let alone to others.

Based on what I saw this year in terms of his effort and emotional commitment, I would be all over trading him. Based on the entire body of work I would like to be sure that this season was blip, and a return to being the model player and captain for our team is where he's heading. You have to explore all options at this point, given how bad he was this year.

Again, his attitude was FAR more concerning to me than his play, though him admitting that he would never be able to play the same way again and that he would have to adapt is also of concern. Even rounding out near the end of the year he was not able to catch guys on the back check like he used to, nor has he been able to rush the puck like he used to. Is he still a fantastic player? Hell yes! But is he still in the conversation for best player in the NHL, definitely not after this season, next season we can only hope for a full return to form, especially of we're committing 12+ million for the next 8 years.

 

[Ice-Tray]

The 2nd half of the season as Karlsson got healthy he went back to being thd best Dman in the league, even though he still was not 100%.

He'll get healthy and dominate the NHL again starting next season. I just hope it is in a Sens Jersey.

The risk in trading him is far greater than signing him. If he wants anything McDavid or under you sign him without hesitation.

He was absolutely not the best D man in the league at any point last season.

 

[Sensung]

Feel free to check out the stats, both basic and advanced, from Jan 1st on and then get back to me.

 

[coladin]

Well, get your winter coat ready, because Karlsson's next contract is going to be an arctic gale wind.

I wonder if it is possible to separate the emotion that goes into this deal. I would love to have him back at any cost is my emotional response. The other side of my brain has issues with Karl getting more than 10M. Like I said, tough call here for management.

 

[FolignoQuantumLeap]

And yet folks continually slam the Duchene trade as an overpayment when we got the far better player in the deal, and only gave up a good player and futures to get him.

We won't get a player as good as EK back, but we can get some assets that could be excellent players, along with some very good players. An EK trade will yield some fantastic returns I have no doubt, and sometimes when you're able to fill a few holes on a team, it is possible that as a team you come out better.

We shall see, exciting times!

The Islanders won the Yashin trade under this logic. Well, at least they got Yashin locked up long term in their trade.