I see this over and over again, please list any trades for a rental player that returned more then or even close to what Karlsson returned?
Would You Have Made The Duchene Trade?
- Thread starter saskriders
- Start date
I see this over and over again, please list any trades for a rental player that returned more then or even close to what Karlsson returned?
aragorn
Do The Right Thing
- Aug 8, 2004
- 28,673
- 9,170
How can this be if we got the best player in the deal? Isn't that how trades are gauged by who ever gets the best player in the NHL? It's up to the GM to surround those great players with good players to create a winning environment & the coach to know what he is doing in deploying his players, our coach clearly doesn't know what he is doing. And of course, it still comes down to having at least good NHL goaltending.
I will say this, Duchene looks like one of those players that is very difficult to play with since he is unpredictable as to what he will do at any given moment. I would have thought that Duchene with Dzingel & Ryan would be a good line but all three seem better at doing their own thing than playing as a line. The opposite of that is true with the Tkachuk, White & Stone line who are constantly playing off each other, sometimes too much. Boedker & Tierny are also two skilled players who can't seem to fit in anywhere for any length of time & I don't know what Pajaarvi is doing other than killing the odd penalty. There just seems to be too many odd pieces who don't fit in this puzzle on the forward lines.
BonHoonLayneCornell
Registered User
I dont think we've ever seen a generational superstar such as Karlsson ever moved as a rental. Closest one I can think of is an over the hill Forsberg way back when.
He was also signed for the full year, not a typical deadline rental.
We gave up more for Duchene and he was a 1.5 year rental instead of just 1 year like Karlsson.
What place were we in when tradeing for Duchene, we traded a rental player a prospect and what 18 th overall? That isn't close
NorthCoast
Registered User
- May 1, 2017
- 1,250
- 1,167
No...and I really like Duchene.
The only way I see this as a good trade for Ottawa would have been if we truly were trying to add the one last piece that put us over the top. As great as the run was in the playoffs, we were not a bonafide contender that just needed one piece. We were still building, even if we had kept EK, and I don't think as a small market that we can lose trades unless we are virtually that close.
Why did we lose this trade? Because there's very little upside to Matt Duchene at this stage in his career. Even with the season he is having, is it that much better than the value we paid for? IMO you win a trade when two players at the time of the trade have equal value, and are expected to have similar value going forward, but soon after the trade it is clear that the person you traded for has significantly more value than the person you gave up (Hall-Larson).
If Turris wasn't going to resign then I understand involving him in the trade, but I would have gone after a younger center that still hadn't broken out yet, but who has the potential to become a 1c. Of course you can hit/miss on these but this is how a small market punches above it's weight and adds talent to the roster at a below market price, both in salary and assets given up to trade for them.
The only way I see this as a good trade for Ottawa would have been if we truly were trying to add the one last piece that put us over the top. As great as the run was in the playoffs, we were not a bonafide contender that just needed one piece. We were still building, even if we had kept EK, and I don't think as a small market that we can lose trades unless we are virtually that close.
Why did we lose this trade? Because there's very little upside to Matt Duchene at this stage in his career. Even with the season he is having, is it that much better than the value we paid for? IMO you win a trade when two players at the time of the trade have equal value, and are expected to have similar value going forward, but soon after the trade it is clear that the person you traded for has significantly more value than the person you gave up (Hall-Larson).
If Turris wasn't going to resign then I understand involving him in the trade, but I would have gone after a younger center that still hadn't broken out yet, but who has the potential to become a 1c. Of course you can hit/miss on these but this is how a small market punches above it's weight and adds talent to the roster at a below market price, both in salary and assets given up to trade for them.
BonHoonLayneCornell
Registered User
Interesting. If signing Duchene means we can't sign Stone then I don't even know what to say. They would have known they can't afford both and that would pretty much seal it that they never should have made the trade. If they really made the trade without a plan to sign him, then thats not the GM i would want running my team.You and I see things much the same way. We have two differences. First, I can't live with the deal even if he is signed as it would cost us Stone and who knows who else down the road. I prefer Stone. The next month will be interesting. Hard to ignore today's three scorers.
You and I agree that small market teams must be judicious in who they acquire, there is no room for error.
Our second difference is that I believe this epic collapse was hard to predict. I agree Dorion gambled, for the reasons I outlined in my first email. He (and sadly we) lost in a big way.
Duchene is an upgrade on the ice over Turris.
I'll look for your posts in the Dorion thread if we want to continue our mutual commiseration
I feel pretty strongly that the only way this trade ever made any sense was with an extension. You certainly don't give up that much for one year of him and a deadline rental return that will pale in comparison to what we gave up.
I like him as a player, i hope we can keep him, but I still think the trade was a huge mistake that in hindsight has had catastophic consequences for the franchise. The fan base probably could have bought in to the rebuild if we still had what we gave up for him.
SensHulk
Registered User
Hindsight being 20/20, I never liked how much we had to give up to get matt duchene. If we could have somehow kept kyle turis and still pulled a duchene deal off, I'd do it every day. The optics and shock to the dressing room wasn't worth it imo.
Of course I would also say this would have been alot more tolerable if we could have just managed to no be in 30th place last season, or whatever we ended at. I think everyone believed that colorado would be getting last year's first rounder, not this upcoming one. The whole team is to blame for that one. Even when we traded away our 1st for ryan, we missed the playoffs but ended up giving away the 9th overall pick and it didn't torcher us as much as this.
The fact we took last year's team which was a bottom feeder, depleted it further is baffling. It's like management wants the avs to get 1st overall. Nothing, absolutely nothing has been done to improve the lineup. As soon as they hit the skids, they declared a 'rebuild' months after selling the farm (and then some) for matt duchene only for him to leave soon
Of course I would also say this would have been alot more tolerable if we could have just managed to no be in 30th place last season, or whatever we ended at. I think everyone believed that colorado would be getting last year's first rounder, not this upcoming one. The whole team is to blame for that one. Even when we traded away our 1st for ryan, we missed the playoffs but ended up giving away the 9th overall pick and it didn't torcher us as much as this.
The fact we took last year's team which was a bottom feeder, depleted it further is baffling. It's like management wants the avs to get 1st overall. Nothing, absolutely nothing has been done to improve the lineup. As soon as they hit the skids, they declared a 'rebuild' months after selling the farm (and then some) for matt duchene only for him to leave soon
BonHoonLayneCornell
Registered User
Nice deflection. Turris wasn't really a rental as the return and extension indicated.
This is what we could have right now instead of Duchene. I think we know what we'd rather have and would happily accept if it were offered for him right now.
1st round pick
3rd round pick
Shane Bowers
2nd round pick
Samuel Girard
Vladislav Kamenev
Andrew Hammond (yes, negative asset)
FolignoQuantumLeap
Don't Hold The Door
I can't because I cant recall a player of Karlsson's calibre ever being traded at his prime age and as a rental. If you could point me towards a similar trade, that would be appreciated.
Two trades I can think of where a team got a better return for a prime aged player with limited term left are the Ryan and duchene trades. Ryan and Duchene both had better returns than Karlsson got.
I am not saying things didnn't sour, I am saying at the time of the trade, value given. Not hindsight. If you owed me 400 dollars and I said just give me 1 apple stock(worth 400) ten years later I sell for 800 that does not mean I ripped you off for double. It just means things change. Noone expected things to go as bad as they did, so many bad things all at the worst possible time.
JungleBeat
Registered User
Was a huge overpayment at the time and still is. We’d be much better off with Girard + Kamenev.
Spartachat
Registered User
I liked the trade at the time. The Sens were doing pretty well at the start of the season and Duchene was an upgrade over Turris. I think the reason why Melnyk did not want to extend Turris spread to the dressing room a bit. Nobody at the time would have thought the Sens would turn out this bad.
BonHoonLayneCornell
Registered User
Hey thats all fair. Some predicted it, some didnt. I think we should have expected more of a drop off since we had basically lost our top pairing in Methot gone and Karlsson playing poorly off surgery, with no reasonable fill ins, especially with Boucher refusing to use Chabot. I'm not going to pretend i thought thats where we would end up though. At the time of the trade it was basically, nice upgrade, hope we extend him, but yeesh thats a massive return for Colorado. I liked the upgrade, but even without us tanking that pick, the price was too high and Dorion should have walked away and sought out something else. If we could sign him it would at least ease some of the pain, but I've lost confidence in that happening now that we're almost out of time.
We may be using hindsight for the value of that first round pick, but it doesnt really matter, the reality is that looking at it now, its just plain bad and has cost the franchise greatly. My opinion, and consensus at the time was that it was too much for Duchene even before we fell apart. If I'm the Gm, the only way i even consider acquiring him in that trade is if he's already agreed to an extension. Mortgaging the future for a hope and a prayer you can sign him to the largest contract in Senators history at the same time your two best players need deals when you havent signed a player to a long term deal in over four years is not smart.
Last edited:
Gil Gunderson
Registered User
If 95 re-signs? All day every day, even with what we know about what has happened since.
If 95 doesn’t stay? You’d have to have a hole in your head to think that was worth it.
If 95 doesn’t stay? You’d have to have a hole in your head to think that was worth it.
branch
#GirlBoss #Vibes
- Jan 12, 2008
- 8,871
- 7,272
It’s about why the team was even in the absurd position of having to trade Karlsson as a rental. It should have never come to that point. It’s an absolute joke. Every team in the league would have come to a conclusion prior to that and have their ONLY franchise player signed.
I can't wait for the trade deadline so we can discuss this in a completely different context - not.
JungleBeat
Registered User
I hate to offend people personaly and for some reason everyone goes apeshit if you dare mention the king without acting like he is St.Erik. A lot of wasted time went on with him going in front of the camera and saying how he loves Ottawa and wants to stay forever but in reality he had zero intentions of negotiating and was just kicking the can down the road. That was a serious handcuffing, his refusual to negotiate a sign and trade was also a big FU to the franchise. He is allowed to make those choices but there is plenty of blame to go around for the Karlsson position.
Gil Gunderson
Registered User
DrakeAndJosh
Intangibles
If he's signed and we don't end up giving Colorado a top 5 pick (which at this point seems inevitable), then I still like the trade. It's hard to get number one centres and Duchene is incredible. If he walks or we trade him at the deadline for peanuts, it's a devastating, franchise altering deal that probably pushes us back five years at least (like the Kessel deal did for Toronto). We'd be in such a great position for an actual rebuild (not this pathetic fake rebuild to cut costs) if we had just traded Turris for Kamenev/Girard/2nd + had a shot at Hughes.
I don't fault Dorion for the value of the trade (even though he clearly paid way too much), if this was a 15-20 pick like I expected last year it would be fine. It's the complete lack of awareness of where the team was and not actually having a long term plan that's completely mind boggling. You don't trade significant futures for a star heading to free agency and then decide to do a full rebuild three months later, that's just inept.
I don't fault Dorion for the value of the trade (even though he clearly paid way too much), if this was a 15-20 pick like I expected last year it would be fine. It's the complete lack of awareness of where the team was and not actually having a long term plan that's completely mind boggling. You don't trade significant futures for a star heading to free agency and then decide to do a full rebuild three months later, that's just inept.
