Friedman: Oilers and Sharks discussed Erik Karlsson

TOGuy14

Registered User
Dec 30, 2010
12,064
3,573
Toronto
The Sharks would have to take Barrie and a couple of bad contracts (Pulju, Foegele) to make it work. Plus retain on Karlsson. Long-shot, don't see it working.

It would be interesting to see how many points Karlsson would rack up feeding McDrai & Co. and with Nurse eating the toughest defending minutes. He would look like a modern-day Paul Coffey
If the Sharks are retaining AND taking on a bunch of anchor contracts with a couple years on them I assume Edmonton would have to pay an astronomical price, like Broberg, Holloway and a couple 1st
 

HockeyVirus

Woll stan.
Nov 15, 2020
16,363
23,998
I think it makes sense. There isn't one player the Oilers can add, or even two that fixes their defense. Go all in with offense only and get the best puck mover you can. Oilers would be beating team 7-5 but the fact is a lot of teams aren't built to compete that way so they would win a lot of games.

Come playoffs it is all luck. If they draw teams like the Flames they would roll them over but teams who can run and gun with them it becomes more of a coin flip. With karlsson though... wow
 

Recipe Unlimited

Registered User
Sep 1, 2019
1,031
1,506
I think having Karlsson and McDavid on the same team would be a "too many cooks" type of situation. Both like to have the puck on their stick 90% of the time they're on the ice. I think there are better fits for Karlsson, although I doubt he gets moved with his cap hit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BudBundy

JlindiesANA

Registered User
Dec 15, 2022
656
322
If the Sharks are retaining AND taking on a bunch of anchor contracts with a couple years on them I assume Edmonton would have to pay an astronomical price, like Broberg, Holloway and a couple 1st

I don’t see how Edmonton would even be able to afford Karlsson. Sharks wanted 3 first round picks and only 18% retained.

To get them to take 50% of it, and bad contracts back just to make the cap work doesn’t seem logical at all. I don’t know how they have the money let alone the assets to please San Jose

That contract is just too much to take on even if we were getting him for free.

That’s what I’m saying. I don’t see how Edmonton pulls off a trade like this. Unless a third team jumps in. And they also have to be paid to help out.

Don’t see assets and money to get Karlsson
 

Sasha Orlov

Lord of the Manor
Sponsor
Jun 22, 2018
6,983
15,817
Imagine EDM trading no first rounds picks the entire McDavid era until they trade for Erik Karlsson


In 2023 LMFAO
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,450
13,873
Folsom
Cool. Keep EK and that awful contract all to yourselves.
Someone will pay the Sharks assets for Karlsson. Don't you worry about it. It just seems like pointless exaggeration to believe they'd have to pay to get rid of him. Like it pretty much denies all reality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gecklund

TOGuy14

Registered User
Dec 30, 2010
12,064
3,573
Toronto
I don’t see how Edmonton would even be able to afford Karlsson. Sharks wanted 3 first round picks and only 18% retained.

To get them to take 50% of it, and bad contracts back just to make the cap work doesn’t seem logical at all. I don’t know how they have the money let alone the assets to please San Jose



That’s what I’m saying. I don’t see how Edmonton pulls off a trade like this. Unless a third team jumps in. And they also have to be paid to help out.

Don’t see assets and money to get Karlsson
You always start high in negotiations and work your way to a compromise but let's say SJ retains 20-30% (2.3M - 3.4M) plus this also take on Barrie / Yamamoto, that is like 10M in dead cap for two years, plus the retention they already have going on Burns.

I think SJ could be enticed into that position but it would take a ton of picks and prospects to make it happen which is why I said Broberg + Hollway + 1sts
 

AvroArrow

Mitch "The God" Marner
Jun 10, 2011
18,315
18,922
Toronto
So another player that's all offence and gives zero shits about actually defending ? Edmonton shouldn't touch this, they don't need a PMD or offensive D-man. They need a quality D-man to shut down the opposing teams top guys and a guy who can retrieve the puck. They should be looking at a guy like Ekholm or Parayko if he's available.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,450
13,873
Folsom
You always start high in negotiations and work your way to a compromise but let's say SJ retains 20-30% (2.3M - 3.4M) plus this also take on Barrie / Yamamoto, that is like 10M in dead cap for two years, plus the retention they already have going on Burns.

I think SJ could be enticed into that position but it would take a ton of picks and prospects to make it happen which is why I said Broberg + Hollway + 1sts
I don't think it'll require that much to get the Sharks to move Karlsson and take those cap dumps while retaining to that degree. I think they'll come down to something like two of those future assets with the cap dumps and the roughly 2 mil retention. Barrie can probably be flipped for an additional asset at next year's deadline that will cover the value gap.
 

Slats432

Registered User
Jun 2, 2002
14,926
3,024
hockeypedia.com
If it was Barrie, Foegele, Puljujarvi plus the prospects and picks to make it work, Karlsson at 80% and Gregor would make the cap work.

Doubt it will or should happen but this is where the numbers shake out.
 

Attachments

  • ek.jpg
    ek.jpg
    165.6 KB · Views: 2

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad