Who are the Untouchable Sharks?
- Thread starter TreeLane
- Start date
Fistfullofbeer
Moderator
There is no player on the Sharks who is untouchable. The only player I would considerable borderline untouchable is Karlsson but given his combination of age, contract and injury history I don't know about that either.
Regarding the other players on the list, none of them are top-3 at their positions. None of them are on great contracts other than Ferraro who is on an ELC. And while Ferraro is really good, to me, if you get a better player in return, you make the trade.
The Ice Hockey Dude
Ack! Thbbft!
Not sure i like the question. Untouchable and there is contract term that says can't be moved, etc.
themelkman
Always Delivers
Imo Meier, Couture, Hertl, Karlsson are the only true "untouchables". For guys that just wont be traded id add Ferraro, Merkley and Kane.
Nobody is a true untouchable based on where the team is at but some are going to be very difficult to trade for various reasons.
I would not trade burns, every one on that original list outside of karlsson should go before burns.
Burns when at the top of his game can and will for atleast another 4-5 years of that contract take over games with the way he plays the game. Nobody on that list can do that outside of karlsson.
And the only way i allow burns to be picked by seattle is if they were willing to give up there 1st 4 1st round picks unprotected to the sharks to put him on the list.
Burns when at the top of his game can and will for atleast another 4-5 years of that contract take over games with the way he plays the game. Nobody on that list can do that outside of karlsson.
And the only way i allow burns to be picked by seattle is if they were willing to give up there 1st 4 1st round picks unprotected to the sharks to put him on the list.
The Nemesis
Semper Tyrannus
Nobody.
If Wayne frigging Gretzky can be traded, there's no excuse for claiming that any other player in this organization now can't be. Or really at any point of this org's history.
Prime, post-Hart Joe Thornton shouldn't have been untouchable either. Because by definition "untouchable" means if Pittsburgh came along and offered Crosby/Malkin and 4 1sts that the Sharks would automatically say "no". But that'd be stupid.
There are absolutely guys I wouldn't want to trade except in very lopsided moves. Or that I think likely don't have workable deals out there on account of bad contract terms, NTC/NMC involvement, or lack of perceived value around the league. But just because someone probably wouldn't be dealt for a reason like that doesn't mean they should be considered totally and unilaterally off-limits.
If Wayne frigging Gretzky can be traded, there's no excuse for claiming that any other player in this organization now can't be. Or really at any point of this org's history.
Prime, post-Hart Joe Thornton shouldn't have been untouchable either. Because by definition "untouchable" means if Pittsburgh came along and offered Crosby/Malkin and 4 1sts that the Sharks would automatically say "no". But that'd be stupid.
There are absolutely guys I wouldn't want to trade except in very lopsided moves. Or that I think likely don't have workable deals out there on account of bad contract terms, NTC/NMC involvement, or lack of perceived value around the league. But just because someone probably wouldn't be dealt for a reason like that doesn't mean they should be considered totally and unilaterally off-limits.
matt trick
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2007
- 9,772
- 1,367
Hertl, Karlsson. I’d also so I wouldn’t move Merkley until they think we know what he is. He could be a Josi/Markov/Keith or Marc-Andre Bergeron or anything in between.
Not sure we’ve ever had a prospect with his ability.
also to Nems point I’d trade all three of them for McDavid or McKinnon, but my point is assuming you’re not getting a better player, you keep those three.
Not sure we’ve ever had a prospect with his ability.
also to Nems point I’d trade all three of them for McDavid or McKinnon, but my point is assuming you’re not getting a better player, you keep those three.
hohosaregood
Banned
- Sep 1, 2011
- 32,378
- 12,573
Meier, Hertl, and Karlsson are the only ones close to being untouchable for me.
seroes
Registered User
This is an interesting question. I would say: Hertl, couture, karlsson, kane, and meier. Merkley and Ferraro are also 2 players we should be very hesitant to trade.
If however we are not competitive again next season (as I sadly think we won't be) then the only players we should hold onto are : meier, hertl, Merkley, and Ferraro.
If however we are not competitive again next season (as I sadly think we won't be) then the only players we should hold onto are : meier, hertl, Merkley, and Ferraro.
KarlssonsGroin
pray
- Jul 10, 2010
- 5,677
- 569
really just EK i think. Maybe Meier. thats assuming no stupidly lopsided deals for either.
Le Rosbeef
Registered User
- Jul 27, 2007
- 3,495
- 955
Nobody. Everyone, everything should be on the table if it makes us better.
Doug's plan? Who knows!
I've long been in favour of a rebuild of this team but I appreciate it ain't happening.
Doug's plan? Who knows!
I've long been in favour of a rebuild of this team but I appreciate it ain't happening.
The only game-breaking talents on the roster as of now are Burns and Karlsson. The only "untouchables" would be either game-breakers or absolutely indispensable locker-room leaders. Given the organization's approach to players like Marleau and Pavelski, I don't expect DW to hold out for sentimentality.
I'm not as doom-and-gloom about either of Burns and Karlsson as some on the board seem to be, so I don't expect that the organization sees either contract as something they have to prioritize getting away from; and I trust the Sharks' pro scouting enough not to make the team worse by trading anyone (unless they're trying for another sneaky half rebuild like 2014/15). So any potential deals for those two would probably have to be stupid-lopsided, but I doubt DW the tire-kicker would hang up the phone at the mention of their names.
I'm not as doom-and-gloom about either of Burns and Karlsson as some on the board seem to be, so I don't expect that the organization sees either contract as something they have to prioritize getting away from; and I trust the Sharks' pro scouting enough not to make the team worse by trading anyone (unless they're trying for another sneaky half rebuild like 2014/15). So any potential deals for those two would probably have to be stupid-lopsided, but I doubt DW the tire-kicker would hang up the phone at the mention of their names.
Joe Thornton. Without him the franchise collapses, gets sold and moved to Montana.
PacificOceanPotion
Registered User
- Jun 19, 2009
- 6,042
- 4,741
Nobody is untouchable. If it were a generational talent, (Crosby, Ovechkin,Gretzky etc) which we don't have, I'd say THAT player would be untouchable. We have very valuable players, but if DW needed to flip those chips, there isn't a chip on this team I think he wouldn't throw on the table. EK is the only guy that comes to mind and pretty much we have to keep him at this point to save face. I mean, we lost out on a lottery pick for the guy.
weastern bias
worst team in the league
Considering how terrible the team currently is there's probably nobody that's legitimately untouchable
If I were in charge I'd do my best to avoid trading Meier, Hertl and Karlsson, but even they could be had for the right price
Everyone else is expendable
If I were in charge I'd do my best to avoid trading Meier, Hertl and Karlsson, but even they could be had for the right price
Everyone else is expendable
Pavelski2112
Bold as Boognish
Sorry, you lost me. Were you trying to be sarcastic with out using an emoji to properly show your intent? Use your words buddy.
r/whoosh
Last edited:
