Confirmed Trade: [VAN/SJ] Jannik Hansen (20% retained) for Nikolay Goldobin & conditional 4th rounder

UnderratedBrooks44

Registered User
Sep 13, 2005
17,564
315
Miranda's house
For those that didn't like the deal for the Sharks, isn't the entire franchise at a crossroads after this season given that Thornton and Marleau's deals are up? It makes sense to focus on the here and now. They'll still have a good team no matter what happens, but Thornton and Marleau are getting pretty old whether they stay or not. Taking a shot this year at the expense of the future makes total sense.
 

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
I like Goldobin, I'm just wondering if we maybe could've got more. The pick and it's condition are extremely weird though.

I guess it depends on how you value Goldobin vs a late 1st. Because while I'm sure other teams would have pawned up the 1st, I doubt too many would have offered up a prospect like Goldobin, who - especially in this draft I'd value higher then a mid/late 1st.
 

Pavelski2112

Bold as Boognish
Dec 15, 2011
14,533
9,240
San Jose, California
For those that didn't like the deal for the Sharks, isn't the entire franchise at a crossroads after this season given that Thornton and Marleau's deals are up? It makes sense to focus on the here and now. They'll still have a good team no matter what happens, but Thornton and Marleau and getting pretty old whether they stay or not. Taking a shot this year at the expense of the future makes total sense.

This is basically it, but Goldobin had no future here. It's not like we traded a prospect like Lebanc, who has already contributed a great degree to the Sharks' success this season.

If Thornton and Marleau are gone after this season, that's pretty much it for our Cup window. Last year was probably the only chance, but DW had to take another shot, and he made a great choice. We'll see where it takes us.
 

CanadienShark

Registered User
Dec 18, 2012
37,547
10,824
I like Goldobin, I'm just wondering if we maybe could've got more. The pick and it's condition are extremely weird though.

I doubt that. I'm hesitant about Goldobin alone for Hansen. I understand why we made the move though. Hansen is a great fit on any team, and he's sure as hell going to help us win this year more than Goldobin would. I can live with Goldobin + 1st only because we'd have won the cup in that case, but that'd be a big overpayment in my opinion. I'd be very unhappy if we gave up Goldobin + 1st and did not win the cup.
 

nucksauce

Registered User
Oct 30, 2013
851
219
I have this feeling in the sharks system Hansen will flourish. If he is given a chance in the top 6 with Couture/Thorton he could be exactly what they are looking for to push them to the conference finals or a cup final.

The thing is, regardless of where he plays in the lineup he won't disappoint.

IMO Hansen is the best top 9 forward in the NHL.
 

Pavelski2112

Bold as Boognish
Dec 15, 2011
14,533
9,240
San Jose, California

He never meshed with the coaching staff. He did well in the AHL, but every callup he's had with the big team has been ok to whatever.

A lot of questions about his defensive game, which is iffy on a team which prides itself on its defensive system. He had been improving little by little, but guys like Lebanc and Meier had already passed him by.

This is the last year of the Cup window, and Goldy was the most expendable piece.
 

PG Canuck

Registered User
Mar 29, 2010
63,002
24,216
I guess it depends on how you value Goldobin vs a late 1st. Because while I'm sure other teams would have pawned up the 1st, I doubt too many would have offered up a prospect like Goldobin, who - especially in this draft I'd value higher then a mid/late 1st.

Yeah I agree. I wouldn't have been too keen on picks this year strictly.
 

xMARCStheSPOT

Registered User
Oct 22, 2006
961
0
Sunnyvale, CA

Also the coaching staff didn't seem to keen on his maturity either. But my guess is his defensive play was a huge piece to the issue. As well as his strength. At the AHL level he could pretty easily use his offensive ability to rack up points. However at the NHL level where guys are bigger, stronger and know how to really knock you off the puck, he couldn't really keep possession of pucks for long enough to let his skills take over. During his call ups he had a couple rushes that showed flashes of his abilities, but any time we got into a cycle or consistent pressure into the zone, he was a liability. Great kid though who loves to have a good time and enjoy when he plays. I really hope he finds a way to add some bulk and flourish for you guys.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,428
13,846
Folsom
Also the coaching staff didn't seem to keen on his maturity either. But my guess is his defensive play was a huge piece to the issue. As well as his strength. At the AHL level he could pretty easily use his offensive ability to rack up points. However at the NHL level where guys are bigger, stronger and know how to really knock you off the puck, he couldn't really keep possession of pucks for long enough to let his skills take over. During his call ups he had a couple rushes that showed flashes of his abilities, but any time we got into a cycle or consistent pressure into the zone, he was a liability. Great kid though who loves to have a good time and enjoy when he plays. I really hope he finds a way to add some bulk and flourish for you guys.

He was given way too little of time to actually get a real idea of how he plays at this level. 9 games last season and 2 games this year where he got ten shifts in one game is hardly a good basis for evaluating a player especially those who will need to learn to adjust before you can really see them come into their own. They gave those opportunities to Labanc and Meier even after their struggles. They didn't give that to Goldobin. They gave him no real shot to adjust his game at the NHL level.
 
Mar 15, 2011
7,206
3
NJ
He never meshed with the coaching staff. He did well in the AHL, but every callup he's had with the big team has been ok to whatever.

A lot of questions about his defensive game, which is iffy on a team which prides itself on its defensive system. He had been improving little by little, but guys like Lebanc and Meier had already passed him by.

This is the last year of the Cup window, and Goldy was the most expendable piece.

He played ELEVEN games in the NHL with his most common linemates being Ward and Wingels. Not sure you can draw any conclusions from his time with San Jose.
 
Mar 15, 2011
7,206
3
NJ
He was given way too little of time to actually get a real idea of how he plays at this level. 9 games last season and 2 games this year where he got ten shifts in one game is hardly a good basis for evaluating a player especially those who will need to learn to adjust before you can really see them come into their own. They gave those opportunities to Labanc and Meier even after their struggles. They didn't give that to Goldobin. They gave him no real shot to adjust his game at the NHL level.

I agree with this. This is very poor asset management and the condition that the fourth becomes a 1st if they win a cup is insane. I get you have a cup, but this terrible from SJ.
 

Gene Parmesan

Dedicated to babies who came feet first
Jul 23, 2009
84,758
2,406
California
I agree with this. This is very poor asset management and the condition that the fourth becomes a 1st if they win a cup is insane. I get you have a cup, but this terrible from SJ.

He's also had 3 training camps with two different staffs. He's had chances.
 

Mr Fahrenheit

Valar Morghulis
Oct 9, 2009
7,789
3,281
For those that didn't like the deal for the Sharks, isn't the entire franchise at a crossroads after this season given that Thornton and Marleau's deals are up? It makes sense to focus on the here and now. They'll still have a good team no matter what happens, but Thornton and Marleau are getting pretty old whether they stay or not. Taking a shot this year at the expense of the future makes total sense.

Thornton and Marleau are more than likely going to re-sign in San Jose
 

Quid Pro Clowe

Registered User
Dec 28, 2008
52,301
9,174
530
This is basically it, but Goldobin had no future here. It's not like we traded a prospect like Lebanc, who has already contributed a great degree to the Sharks' success this season.

If Thornton and Marleau are gone after this season, that's pretty much it for our Cup window. Last year was probably the only chance, but DW had to take another shot, and he made a great choice. We'll see where it takes us.
I'm thinking Joe and Patty already have deals in place that will be signed immediately after the expansion draft.
 

Brent Burns

“”“Re-tooling on the fly”””
Feb 7, 2007
7,262
574
Lol at anybody thinking Thornton and Marleau are signing anywhere other than SJ
 

Mattb124

Registered User
Apr 29, 2011
6,571
4,008
You're holding it against him for not making the NHL as a 19 and 20 year old? He's done nothing but produce in the AHL as a young man.

What folks are holding against him is that he didn't improve defensively enough over portions of 3 years to fit into the Sharks' system. He was also surpassed by Lebanc and Meier on the depth chart so he became an expendable asset. Add to that the fact the Sharks' window is closing, he became even more expendable.

My personal opinion for some time has been that, if he was to carve out an NHL career, it wouldn't be in San Jose.
 

ThorNton Apologist

Jumbo needs a cup
Oct 1, 2006
2,421
824
Cali
I agree with this. This is very poor asset management and the condition that the fourth becomes a 1st if they win a cup is insane. I get you have a cup, but this terrible from SJ.

Poor asset management is definitely a stretch. If Goldobin does bust, DW will be praised for trading away a prospect while they still had value. He has done this before, notably Wishart in the Boyle trade. As far as the condition on the pick, if you asked Sharks fans we would give up multiple years of 1sts for just one cup win this year so trading pick #31 in a weak draft is the last of my concerns with this deal
 

Siludin

Registered User
Dec 9, 2010
7,352
5,280
This is basically it, but Goldobin had no future here. It's not like we traded a prospect like Lebanc, who has already contributed a great degree to the Sharks' success this season.

If Thornton and Marleau are gone after this season, that's pretty much it for our Cup window. Last year was probably the only chance, but DW had to take another shot, and he made a great choice. We'll see where it takes us.

Hansen will be a big part of the Sharks. Being a perennial contender means maintaining a standard of excellence on your actual NHL roster, not in the prospect pool. You can't buy success; you have to grow into it, but once you there, you can ship out prospects and maintain that success for many seasons, as San Jose has.

This is also how Chicago/Washington/New York/Pittsburgh have maintained themselves as perennial threats. They go out and move out prospects for players, and their existing prospects have to fight tooth and nail to earn their spots on deep rosters, rather than be gifted NHL minutes because their team has thrown in the towel and their best players have stopped trying.

This is how Detroit really stayed afloat as long as they did. Players like Larianov, Lang, Shanahan, Schneider, Chelios, Hull were already star players or first liners before they were acquired by a very already-successful team.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,428
13,846
Folsom
Poor asset management is definitely a stretch. If Goldobin does bust, DW will be praised for trading away a prospect while they still had value. He has done this before, notably Wishart in the Boyle trade. As far as the condition on the pick, if you asked Sharks fans we would give up multiple years of 1sts for just one cup win this year so trading pick #31 in a weak draft is the last of my concerns with this deal

Wishart was a throw-in for that trade. The Boyle traded was predicated on Matt Carle and the 1st as the return more than anything else.
 

ThorNton Apologist

Jumbo needs a cup
Oct 1, 2006
2,421
824
Cali
Wishart was a throw-in for that trade. The Boyle traded was predicated on Matt Carle and the 1st as the return more than anything else.

He still held value though. He was only traded 2 years after his draft year. Carle was also an asset that lost value after being traded
 

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
Many prospects produce at an AHL level.

He's played 69 AHL games over the last two seasons and he's played 11 NHL games over that span. However 9 of those games were last year as a rookie and someone new to North America. And as an AHL rookie this year, he's scored 15 goals and 41 points in 46 games.

What more do you expect from him based on what he's currently done? He's young, and when given a chance, he's produced. Two NHL games with the only two forwards he's played any time with was Ward and Hertl, that's not a chance. Not a real one anyway. Give him time, most young players need it. And certainly give him more than 69 AHL games (especially when he's producing) before labeling him as anything other than a young skilled player. Could he bust or not become a legitimate top 6 NHL player? Absolutely. But it's way too soon to try and call him anything right now other than a promising young prospect. Maybe he becomes more, maybe not. Time will tell.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad