Tavares vs Karlsson (San Jose)

Who is/would have been the better add?


  • Total voters
    203

SR

Registered User
Mar 31, 2008
6,711
5,297
Arizona
With San Jose missing out on John Tavares this off season and acquiring Karlsson, who is/would have been the better add?

Edit: Mod can you please add poll. SOB I forgot.
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
Chances are if Tavares agreed to go to San Jose they never end up trading for Karlsson. So at the time the Sharks wanted Tavares instead of him.

You’re coming to the conclusion they wouldn’t have preferred Karlsson, if they knew they could get him. That part is your own interpretation, and you can’t really know that. None of us can. It sounds nice, but you’re subtlety suggesting they would value Tavares over Karlsson, and that’s not a statement you can support.
 

LeafsNation75

Registered User
Jan 15, 2010
37,975
12,506
Toronto, Ontario
You’re coming to the conclusion they wouldn’t have preferred Karlsson, if they knew they could get him. That part is your own interpretation, and you can’t really know that. None of us can. It sounds nice, but you’re subtlety suggesting they would value Tavares over Karlsson, and that’s not a statement you can support.
I said chances were if they got Tavares I don't think they trade for Karlsson. It's not like I said 100% without a doubt singing Tavares meant no chance they trade for him.

If I had said if they signed Tavares chances are they don't end up re-signing Joe Thornton since both play Centre and Tavares is a lot younger would you not agree?
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
I said chances were if they got Tavares I don't think they trade for Karlsson. It's not like I said 100% without a doubt singing Tavares meant no chance they trade for him.

If I had said if they signed Tavares chances are they don't end up re-signing Joe Thornton since both play Centre and Tavares is a lot younger would you not agree?

“So at the time the Sharks wanted Tavares instead of him.”

I reiterate, you’re trying to suggest they value Tavares over Karlsson, and you can’t know that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JFG

LeafsNation75

Registered User
Jan 15, 2010
37,975
12,506
Toronto, Ontario
“So at the time the Sharks wanted Tavares instead of him.”
Obviously that was true since they reportedly offered him 7 years at $91 million which would have been a #13 million AAV. So no one can dispute that for a short period of time that Tavares was the Sharks #1 priority to sign instead of trying to trade for Karlsson.
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
Obviously that was true since they reportedly offered him 7 years at $91 million which would have been a #13 million AAV. So no one can dispute that for a short period of time that Tavares was the Sharks #1 priority to sign instead of trying to trade for Karlsson.

You realize that San Jose couldn’t offer a contract to Karlsson, right? All they could do was discuss a trade with Ottawa, which we wouldn’t have heard much about until after the trade.

Again, you’re trying to suggest San Jose valued Tavares more. It’s that simple. You’re countering the argument that no one would prefer Tavares to Karlsson by taking two different situations(a trade vs. a contract offer) and acting like it means San Jose valued Tavares more. As a neutral observer, if given the choice, I take Karlsson. If I’m San Jose, I take Karlsson. If I know I can get Karlsson signed for long-term, while also trading for him and giving up not too much, I’d probably injure myself trying to get to the phone as quickly as I could. Even if Tavares is on the other line.

What if San Jose just didn’t realize they could get Karlsson without paying a premium? What if they were making an offer to Tavares while also trying to trade for Karlsson? It doesn’t need to be one or the other. Both can occur at the same time, and regardless of the result if San Jose gets one of them it’s a win for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: felixpettersson

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
And if I could somehow get both, I’d bend heaven and earth to make the salary work. San Jose wasn’t without options there.
 

MyBudJT

Registered User
Mar 5, 2018
7,429
4,576
I would have said the same thing in May -- Give me Tavares over Karlsson

1) Leafs don't need offensive defenseman
2) I'm a firm believer that a defenseman shouldn't be a liability defensively.

Karlsson was tied with Ceci with most GA (43 % of team's GA) -- while Ceci averaged 1:19 more SHTOI/G

Karlsson may be the most overrated player on these boards.
 
Last edited:

LeafsNation75

Registered User
Jan 15, 2010
37,975
12,506
Toronto, Ontario
You realize that San Jose couldn’t offer a contract to Karlsson, right? All they could do was discuss a trade with Ottawa, which we wouldn’t have heard much about until after the trade.

Again, you’re trying to suggest San Jose valued Tavares more. It’s that simple. You’re countering the argument that no one would prefer Tavares to Karlsson by taking two different situations(a trade vs. a contract offer) and acting like it means San Jose valued Tavares more.

What if San Jose just didn’t realize they could get Karlsson without paying a premium? What if they were making an offer to Tavares while also trying to trade for Karlsson? It doesn’t need to be one or the other. Both can occur at the same time, and regardless of the result if San Jose gets one of them it’s a win for them.
There is a thing called trade rumors and prior to July 1st I remember Karlsson's name was talked about in trades to Tampa Bay and Las Vegas. So if San Jose was interested in trading for him at the same time they wanted to sign Tavares I'm sure people like Bob McKenzie and Pierre LeBrun would have reported that. Don't forget Tampa also had a meeting with Tavares about possibly signing with them when everyone knew they also wanted to trade for Karlsson.

Now I'm not outright trying to suggest that San Jose valued Tavares more. All I did was post the evidence of the contract they offered him at that time and don't forget that Doug Wilson posted a thank you message for Tavares just for meeting with them.
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
There is a thing called trade rumors and prior to July 1st I remember Karlsson's name was talked about in trades to Tampa Bay and Las Vegas. So if San Jose was interested in trading for him at the same time they wanted to sign Tavares I'm sure people like Bob McKenzie and Pierre LeBrun would have reported that. Don't forget Tampa also had a meeting with Tavares about possibly signing with them when everyone knew they also wanted to trade for Karlsson.

Now I'm not outright trying to suggest that San Jose valued Tavares more. All I did was post the evidence of the contract they offered him at that time and don't forget that Doug Wilson posted a thank you message for Tavares just for meeting with them.

Because trade rumors are always so accurate, right? We always know how trades are going to go down before they happen, right?

No, actually you outright said that they preferred Tavares to Karlsson. So saying you aren’t trying to say that is pretty obviously not true. You did say that. Practically word for word.
 

LeafsNation75

Registered User
Jan 15, 2010
37,975
12,506
Toronto, Ontario
No, actually you outright said that they preferred Tavares to Karlsson.
I only said that based on the evidence at that time which was their contract offer to Tavares. So had Tavares agreed to sign with them I don't think Doug Wilson would have changed his mind on the chance they could trade for Karlsson.
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
I only said that based on the evidence at that time which was their contract offer to Tavares. So had Tavares agreed to sign with them I don't think Doug Wilson would have changed his mind on the chance they could trade for Karlsson.

Maybe. But, again, it’s possible they didn’t know Karlsson was actually available to them for the right price.

Which is kind of the point. How San Jose valued Karlsson vs. Tavares is something only they can know. Offering a contract to Tavares doesn’t mean they didn’t value Karlsson more highly. It could very well mean they felt Tavares was the more attainable, not the more valuable. Let’s not pretend, as you were, that it’s evidence San Jose valued Tavares more.

Personally, I’m not sure who would value Tavares over Karlsson if we’re looking at them one-to-one. Karlsson is clearly the better player, both in terms of ability compared to his peers playing the same position and overall ability regardless of position. Tavares is a great player, but Karlsson is simply one of the best.
 

LeafsNation75

Registered User
Jan 15, 2010
37,975
12,506
Toronto, Ontario
Which is kind of the point. How San Jose valued Karlsson vs. Tavares is something only they can know. Offering a contract to Tavares doesn’t mean they didn’t value Karlsson more highly. It could very well mean they felt Tavares was the more attainable, not the more valuable. Let’s not pretend, as you were, that it’s evidence San Jose valued Tavares more.
Would you not agree that San Jose at least valued Tavares more than Joe Thornton at the time? Using my logic if Tavares signs with them I don't see Thornton getting re-signed since both play Centre and Tavares is 11 years younger. Plus they only re-signed Thornton the day after Tavares signed in Toronto so he was their second choice.
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
Would you not agree that San Jose at least valued Tavares more than Joe Thornton at the time? Using my logic if Tavares signs with them I don't see Thornton getting re-signed since both play Centre and Tavares is 11 years younger. Plus they only re-signed Thornton the day after Tavares signed in Toronto so he was their second choice.

I can’t speak for San Jose here, and their fans would know better, but I suspect some of that might be salary related. They may have wanted to sign Thornton the entire time, and been planning to, but they needed to know what salary would work and what changes might need to be made.

Tavares would fit into their longer term plans better, and that’s obvious.
 

CantLoseWithMatthews

Registered User
Sep 28, 2015
49,550
59,135
Sharks look like they could use a center more despite Karlsson being a better player. I would also say that it would have made more sense for them to add the player for nothing, but they pretty much did that anyway
 
  • Like
Reactions: leafsfan2point0

LeafsNation75

Registered User
Jan 15, 2010
37,975
12,506
Toronto, Ontario
Something else to consider is this. Let's say the Sharks don't win the Cup in 2019 and Karlsson does not sign an 8 year extension, because as of today that has not happened. Won't that make trading for him look like a bad move?
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
Something else to consider is this. Let's say the Sharks don't win the Cup in 2019 and Karlsson does not sign an 8 year extension, because as of today that has not happened. Won't that make trading for him look like a bad move?

Not at all. It would have been a risk worth taking, and when you consider what they gave up, I think it’s a much lower risk than it could have been.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->