Proposal: Karlsson (19% retained) for Chabot + 2nd/Jarventie + Thomson/JBD

[Tuna99]

I dunno, it feels like it's the people wanting to trade Chabot for a soon-to-be 33 year old who just had an outlier year that are basing their opinion solely on emotion and nostalgia.

Outlier, he’s won 2 Norris and should have 4 if Doughty was Finnish or Swedish he never gets his Norris and if Matt Cooke parents loved him EK wins another Norris

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Outlier, he’s won 2 Norris and should have 4 if Doughty was Finnish or Swedish he never gets his Norris and if Matt Cooke parents loved him EK wins another Norris

Lol. Likely. How else does one grow up to be such a piece of shit that you spend your career running around intentionally injuring your peers.

 

[Loach]

Based on some of the posts in this forum, many seem to believe Karlsson "forgot how to play hockey" at 27 years old. The same age Chabot will be next year...

I like Chabot. I think he can rebound under a new coach. But he's not young. He's a veteran and needs to be way better. If he didn't get off to such a horrid start in October/November, maybe we'd be playing on Saturday night. How so many people baby him (on Twitter and in the media) is wild.

And in regards to the trade, it doesn't make sense, you're right.

Karlsson doesn't fit this team's timeline and San Jose would have zero interest in paying Chabot the $46M he's owed over the next 5 years as they rebuild.

Wouldn't SJ just flip Chabot for picks and prospects? Or it would be a 3, 4 team trade?

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Wouldn't SJ just flip Chabot for picks and prospects? Or it would be a 3, 4 team trade?

With his backloaded contract, injury problems, and up and down play, I'm curious what he's worth in general. Is he a net positive asset that can be expected to bring in much or is he owed too much with too many question marks to be seen as a desirable asset worth the traditional 3 1sts type package.

 

[Tuna99]

Lol. Likely. How else does one grow up to be such a piece of shit that you spend your career running around intentionally injuring your peers.

He was a Leafs fan as a kid

 

[Loach]

With his backloaded contract, injury problems, and up and down play, I'm curious what he's worth in general. Is he a net positive asset that can be expected to bring in much or is he owed too much with too many question marks to be seen as a desirable asset worth the traditional 3 1sts type package.

When he signed that contract and we got to see how the salary worked, backloaded with trade protection, my first thought was he would be traded before that happened. That would be an EM thing to do. We are a unique franchise in that way. I don't think other clubs look at backloaded/front loaded contracts the same way. I think it plays a part, but cap hit is more important than actual dollars spent in a given year. Would a team give up a mid 1rst, high prospect, mid level prospect..I'm with you...not sure.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Is it? Because Karlsson has been a core piece on pretty competitive teams. I believe he's made it to conference finals twice, right? The Sharks were brutal last year, no doubt. But Karlsson has been in the league for 12 years. MO implies that he's always been a good player but on bad teams... which isn't really true.

Using where San Jose finished last year as a "slight" against him would be like using Ottawa's record over the last 4 years as a slight against Tkachuk. "Tkachuk's MO is missing the playoffs and getting media attention in the summers." That'd be a dumb take, wouldn't it?

It’s not really a slight. It’s that he seems to thrive when it’s all eyes on him. And he can do whatever he wants. (Thrive offensively) And that won’t be the case here.

Two competitive teams. One was…not that competitive but he was playing at an insane level. Which he was absolutely capable off.

Guy was a -26 this year. -26 lol. I know. Bad team. But he had 101 points

I'm convinced nobody here watches much, if any, Sharks games. Probably because they're a west coast team and much too late for east coasters. He looks like the same player that was in Ottawa when I've watched him 30-40 games a season. His first season there was good and his play has pretty much fluctuated with the state of the team, which is no surprise. He's capable of the same level of play he had in Ottawa and I don't get the prevailing thought that he's washed or that this season can be waved away as nothing but abandoning defence even though it's unheard of. It was arguably the best offensive season ever seen by a defenceman and yet its just hand waved away as nothing.

No it isn’t. It’s widely recognized as a great offensive season.

Certainly a high risk move, you're acquiring a guy through their 33-36 year old seasons with an injury history.

I suspect what we saw this year is likely Karlsson's peak. Having said that, Lidstrom had some of his best seasons at around the same age as the remaining years of Karlsson's contract, so you never know.

Lidstrom didn’t have the questions marks up to 33 that karlsson has

 

[Micklebot]

It’s not really a slight. It’s that he seems to thrive when it’s all eyes on him. And he can do whatever he wants. (Thrive offensively) And that won’t be the case here.

Two competitive teams. One was…not that competitive but he was playing at an insane level. Which he was absolutely capable off.

Guy was a -26 this year. -26 lol. I know. Bad team. But he had 101 points


No it isn’t. It’s widely recognized as a great offensive season.


Lidstrom didn’t have the questions marks up to 33 that karlsson has

Lidstrom had one of his best seasons at 37. Question marks are just that, questions, not known answers.

-26 on a bad team, well, 21 of those minuses came with the goalie pulled. Bad teams end up behind, have to pull the goalie, and the offensive players end up out there to take another meaningless minus most of the time, he played over 50 mins with no goalie in his net, just 13 with the opposition's net empty. 5v5 he was 96 GF, 96 GA. There's a reason nobody should put much stock in plus minus, it's just so filled with noise that it becomes meaningless.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

It’s not really a slight. It’s that he seems to thrive when it’s all eyes on him. And he can do whatever he wants. (Thrive offensively) And that won’t be the case here.

Two competitive teams. One was…not that competitive but he was playing at an insane level. Which he was absolutely capable off.

Guy was a -26 this year. -26 lol. I know. Bad team. But he had 101 points


No it isn’t. It’s widely recognized as a great offensive season.


Lidstrom didn’t have the questions marks up to 33 that karlsson has

His plus minus was better, in the single digits, most of the season and took a nosedive after further gutting of the team including his D partner up to that point. It was pointed out as a positive by analysts whenever the discussion came up considering how far in the red the team was and how the advanced numbers demonstrated they were much worse without him on the ice.

This is why I'd like to see him go to a contender. Lets see what this is. Its waved away as impossible that it's anything but an outlier and an abandoning of defense from people that likely haven't seen more than a game all year. He is not getting the respect he deserves for it imo. He will always have his defensive warts, like all offensive dmen typically do, but what he did this year is literally impossible if you're washed up as most imply.

I guess I just can't help but wonder how informed opinions are. That's not to say they're wrong, but how many Sharks game has the average Sens fan from Ontario seen this year or years prior? 1-2 a year? maybe even 0? Who on here is from Ontario? Likely the majority. Who is staying up until 1am est to watch a lottery basement dweller with no intriguing prospects that you need center ice to be able to watch. Just seems to me that while people may be right, they're really just parroting a prevailing opinion and are talking out of their ass basically.

And his contract is only 4 more years at this point, will have at least that quoted 18% retention, and will surely have salary going back the other way, so I think the risk is a bit exaggerated. Hell, Josh Norris' shoulder makes me more nervous than Karlsson would if he were brought here.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

When he signed that contract and we got to see how the salary worked, backloaded with trade protection, my first thought was he would be traded before that happened. That would be an EM thing to do. We are a unique franchise in that way. I don't think other clubs look at backloaded/front loaded contracts the same way. I think it plays a part, but cap hit is more important than actual dollars spent in a given year. Would a team give up a mid 1rst, high prospect, mid level prospect..I'm with you...not sure.

Ya that's a good point about Melnyk and the budget concerns. Most other franchises don't seem to put nearly as much importance on actual aav. Interesting hypothetical though. I think he's young enough that he would still garner an okay return, but likely not a big package we'd all be happy with.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

Karlsson is our Crosby.

Anything to bring him home.

 

[Butchy Dakkar]

Isn’t there a thread specifically for proposals?

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

EK65 turns 33 in just about a month….. realistically how many more seasons does he have…. And how many are going to be like the 4 or 5 seasons previous to this one…. Which could be considered the “exception”…… would not make this or any similar trade….. besides he has full control on whether he gets traded, and doubt he wants to return to Ottawa…. Been there, done that.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

We can still bring him back... in statue form at the opening ceremonies of the new arena. Should be retired by then.

 

[Agent Zub]

EK65 turns 33 in just about a month….. realistically how many more seasons does he have…. And how many are going to be like the 4 or 5 seasons previous to this one…. Which could be considered the “exception”…… would not make this or any similar trade….. besides he has full control on whether he gets traded, and doubt he wants to return to Ottawa…. Been there, done that.

Probably three more elite years - Hall of Fame players usually dominate and, at the very least, play well until the end of their careers. Take Karlsson's worst year as a Senator; it is still far superior to the best season Chabot has ever given us. Like I said, it's like comparing a Crosby-level talent to a DeBrincat-level talent. Not even close. The Crosbys and Karlssons are built different.

And what do you think? That a player who just put up one of the most dominant seasons in NHL history is going to lose all that ability in the span of two years? That makes no sense

 

[Stylizer1]

Chabot is not dynamic in anyway. He doesn't hurt us but he doesn't add to our offense more than an average top pairing dman does. He was supposed to be Karlssons replacement but has yet to even be all star caliber. Karlssons worst is still better than Chabots best.

 

[Back in Black]

1 year wonder! He'll be back to himself in no time....

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Or they've watched Chabot regress for the last 3 seasons...

Both guys are bad defensively. One guy is a lot better offensively than the other.

It's a completely unrealistic trade scenario, though. I don't think San Jose would have any interest in Chabot.

Chabot is young enough to turn it around. And a lot of the problems (imho) are from a coach that overplayed him to save his own neck.

Chabot improves noticably when his minutes are cut down to around 20-22 minutes a night.

Outlier, he’s won 2 Norris and should have 4 if Doughty was Finnish or Swedish he never gets his Norris and if Matt Cooke parents loved him EK wins another Norris

I love Erik, but he's in his 30s now, with a huge contract.

If the deal involves putting him in a time machine and making him 22 again, I'd do the deal in a heartbeat. But that ain't happening.

We have to look at the bigger picture here. The team isn't ready to compete yet. Hell, they may not even be ready to make the palyoffs next year. It might be another 3-4 years before they get their heads out of their asses and become a team that can reliably get out of the first round. Time is not on Erik's side here.

 

[Stylizer1]

This team needs veterans. Better yet veterans with swagger. Not since Hasek have we had a vet in the room like that.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

I just want to see him back with an owner and GM that could actually surround him with a cap ceiling quality roster. We really wasted a lot of his best years with lackluster teams.

 

[dumbdick]

I do this. No problem. Without a 2nd thought.

 

[Samsquanch]

On paper and in theory, I guess it seems like it would make the Sens a better team..... But I would pass as of today. He's a wildcard in every sense of the word.

The only reason I wouldn't do it is that I've heard enough about Karl's personality around the lockerroom/at practice that it raises enough caution for me to pass on him.

Who knows how much of what I heard is true, ill just say hes "cliquey" in that he's not everyone's cup of tea, and runs with a small circle on the team. And I just wouldn't want to take the risk of rocking the boat and messing up the teams chemistry by trading someone as beloved and respected as Chabby is by the core group.

The only version of EK I want is the one that knows he's the big dog on the team and demands that the puck runs through him. It's no coincidence that Burns leaving and the Sharks getting thin up front were followed up by his resurgence this season imo.

But the elite scoring version of EK is also cocky and a bit arrogant/overconfident to some degree. Would he be the top dog here, or is he more like a mild and watered down version of his current self?

Hes not the hardest worker at practice or in the gym, and lacks intensity/interest at times when hes playing away from the puck. And im not sure that I want that player around our young core. Not at his price tag and in exchange for one of our most loyal soldiers.

 

[Samsquanch]

This team needs veterans. Better yet veterans with swagger. Not since Hasek have we had a vet in the room like that.

So what do you call Giroux then....? Hes probably our best FA signing ever that happens to be a star veteran player, and also captained a popular team for a decade....

Hasek was a weirdo goalie that bailed on the team when they needed him most.... not exactly the shining beacon of stability you seem to be craving...

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

Probably three more elite years - Hall of Fame players usually dominate and, at the very least, play well until the end of their careers. Take Karlsson's worst year as a Senator; it is still far superior to the best season Chabot has ever given us. Like I said, it's like comparing a Crosby-level talent to a DeBrincat-level talent. Not even close. The Crosbys and Karlssons are built different.

And what do you think? That a player who just put up one of the most dominant seasons in NHL history is going to lose all that ability in the span of two years? That makes no sense

EK65 was and probably still is my favourite Senator… but since he left the Sens, he has not been a “dominant“ player, until this season, he did not have “all of that ability“ until this season, so what leads you to believe he will be able to play at this seasons level, when he had so many subpar seasons since he left the Senators?

with the salary cap staying where it is now, for at least one more season if not more, why would the management bring on cap management headaches for a few more years of EK65, and the players lost in a trade that have many more year ahead of them than EK65?


No one is disputing his 2022 23 seasons has been spectacular for him personally….. not so much for his team, and what guarantees are there that he can repeat a few more years like this past one?

take a look at his plus/minus….. how is that going to help the Senators defensive zone shortcoming?

also this looks his first 82 game season for the Sharks, can he stay out of injury trouble that has plagued him since his move to San Jose?



hard pass.

 

[bicboi64]

I don't get the logic behind the argument that EK hasn't been good in SJ. Even though he's player on one leg prior to this season, he produced at a .67 ppg, or a 55 point average. That isn't worth $11 million per season, but once again, this is one legged Karlsson who is finally feeling healthy for the first time in years. At his "bad", he's still very good (night and day compared top Chabot.

This year, the Sharks had a goal differential of -87, EK's +- is -26, he's not even the worst on his team. If we're going to use plus minus, lets have some context behind it.

I get the argument of not thinking EK can maintain his healthy play at his current age with injury history, totally valid argument, its why I don't want him back. But the notion that he has been "bad" by any means or not dominant, he's still dominant enough to be a very good defender.