Trevor Shackles: The Erik Karlsson Trade Revisited Looking back at the blockbuster deal

I don't think the return was that bad for what was essentially a 1 year rental since it was never certain he was going to resign in San Jose. It's probably better that Ottawa got a bunch of young prospects/picks anyways. Gives them more opportunity to actually rebuild through the draft for a few years. What good would it really be to trade for a roster player like Labanc or Meier that may or may not leave for free agency in a few years just when a rebuild my be coming to fruition?

I don't think the return was that bad for what was essentially a 1 year rental since it was never certain he was going to resign in San Jose. It's probably better that Ottawa got a bunch of young prospects/picks anyways. Gives them more opportunity to actually rebuild through the draft for a few years. What good would it really be to trade for a roster player like Labanc or Meier that may or may not leave for free agency in a few years just when a rebuild my be coming to fruition?
- lemieux_66

Well both Labanc and Meier are still young, and they could have gotten picks/prospects in addition to them as well.

Well both Labanc and Meier are still young, and they could have gotten picks/prospects in addition to them as well.
- Trevor Shackles

Yeah, they are young, but I just don't have much confidence in Ottawa being able to turn things around as fast as say the Rangers just did, so there is the potential that any current nhl player they may have received may have just ended up leaving in 3-5 years before the team is really ready to compete. Assuming they use their picks wisely and draft well. I just feel that Ottawa might have a long rebuild ahead of them with the way the current management is structured.

Ottawa got hosed

SanJose traded nothing but leftovers, DeMelo wasn't even qualified and essentially resigned as a FA before he was traded, thats how little they valued him

Sens would have got more at the trade deadline. You have to get at least a blue chip prospect and a 1st for a player of Karlssons calibre.

Even a blue chip and a 2nd, upgrades to a first if he re-signs

Quality > Quantity

Yeah, they are young, but I just don't have much confidence in Ottawa being able to turn things around as fast as say the Rangers just did, so there is the potential that any current nhl player they may have received may have just ended up leaving in 3-5 years before the team is really ready to compete. Assuming they use their picks wisely and draft well. I just feel that Ottawa might have a long rebuild ahead of them with the way the current management is structured.
- lemieux_66

But like, they're both younger than Tierney, and I'm saying I wish they were the main piece rather than him. They'd still be in their prime when Ottawa needs to be good

But like, they're both younger than Tierney, and I'm saying I wish they were the main piece rather than him. They'd still be in their prime when Ottawa needs to be good
- Trevor Shackles

But that's assuming they would stick around when Ottawa is eventually good, which who really knows if that would happen. Obviously with how the last few years have gone, the star players Ottawa has had have all pretty much left when given the chance so its hard to say if Meier or Labanc would end up staying and it would probably come down to how successful the team is at the time. I just think that someone like those 2 from San Jose could have just left the team in a few years just as the team is ready to compete.

Ottawa got hosed

SanJose traded nothing but leftovers, DeMelo wasn't even qualified and essentially resigned as a FA before he was traded, thats how little they valued him

Sens would have got more at the trade deadline. You have to get at least a blue chip prospect and a 1st for a player of Karlssons calibre.

Even a blue chip and a 2nd, upgrades to a first if he re-signs

Quality > Quantity
- RoloTahmasee

They did get hosed but I have a feeling that 2020 1st is going to be a lot higher, especially now that the backbone of the team ( Pavelski ) is gone and the goaltending remains the same.

But that's assuming they would stick around when Ottawa is eventually good, which who really knows if that would happen. Obviously with how the last few years have gone, the star players Ottawa has had have all pretty much left when given the chance so its hard to say if Meier or Labanc would end up staying and it would probably come down to how successful the team is at the time. I just think that someone like those 2 from San Jose could have just left the team in a few years just as the team is ready to compete.
- lemieux_66

That's also a massive assumption to make, saying they wouldn't want to stay in the future. But even if they didn't want to stay, it doesn't matter---they could get moved for something different and they have more trade value than Tierney.

Wasn’t a great return but Karlsson has 1-2 good years left in him, then it’s all downhill. It’s true there were no blue chip prospects but having the 1st in 2020 could be very beneficial. 2 of the conditions weren’t met correct? SCF and he wasn’t traded to an EC team?

Ottawa got hosed

SanJose traded nothing but leftovers, DeMelo wasn't even qualified and essentially resigned as a FA before he was traded, thats how little they valued him

Sens would have got more at the trade deadline. You have to get at least a blue chip prospect and a 1st for a player of Karlssons calibre.

Even a blue chip and a 2nd, upgrades to a first if he re-signs

Quality > Quantity
- RoloTahmasee

exactly, they knew it works after the Thornton trade with the Bruins

Ottawa traded up three picks in the draft with Nashville to take Karlsson at #15 in the 2008 draft. In return Nashville got Chet Pickard at #18 and Taylor Beck in the third round (2009). Looking back on a deal after the first year does not tell you very much.

Karlsson will never play up to the level we saw before the injuries. Let's finish this conversation a few years from now when we can measure if the size of contract, age and performance levels cause you to be glad that he is no longer on the Sens CAP

It will cost the Sens north of $9m on the CAP next season to keep Chabot. At that point there will be some people who are more than happy with the fact that Ottawa is no longer carrying Karlsson on their CAP

Karlsson did have an injury riddled season... He was still on pace for 70 points in 82 games and nearly led the playoffs in assists despite being eliminated in the Western finals.

None of the players Ottawa received will come close to EK. They received bottom of the lineup players and low round picks (barring a fantastic catastrophe this season in SJ). Those low X round picks have about a 40% or lower chance of even being ROSTER players. Ottawa got fleeced out of this generations best defenseman.

It wasnt a bad trade for the Sens. The team getting the best player wins the deal but the Sens got quite a few pieces so it really wasnt too terrible. Your team is in a tough pickle because your owner sucks but I think he actually did the team a favor by not signing EK65. That eight yr deal is gonna bite the Sharks in the butt imo in 3 yrs. So the Sens got the pieces from the trade AND saved 11.5 in cap space.

Losing the Conference final by one overtime goal was the pinnacle of the Karlsson years. It was never going to get better than that. I think we dodged a bullet by not getting locked into a long-term big money deal with him and I think SJ are going to really regret it in a few years.

Anyway, face it: this team will NEVER have a big money superstar under Melnyk. The excitement of being a Sens fan is 'will we make the playoffs this year' so make the best of it. There won't be another deep run until the stars and planets are all aligned and that may well be another decade.

It will cost the Sens north of $9m on the CAP next season to keep Chabot. At that point there will be some people who are more than happy with the fact that Ottawa is no longer carrying Karlsson on their CAP
- spatso

That's not a good contract for Chabot.

If sj had made the finals, my opinion of this trade would’ve been slightly different.

We’ll see how that 2020 1st pans out but I don’t/didn’t like the deal.

I think we dodged a bullet by not getting locked into a long-term big money deal with him and I think SJ are going to really regret it in a few years.
- sgoodwin

This is something that really shouldn't be lost in the evaluation of the trade, and I would argue applies equally to the look-back on the Spezza trade. Even if Karlsson is objectively worth it for the first 3-4 years of the deal, it's not hard to imagine what tying up $11M/yr on a diminishing asset would do to small-market roster for the rest of the 4-5 years of the deal. And given that a deal of that magnitude would have been implied in the context of retaining Karlsson, it's far from a minor consideration.

Of course, the question remains as to whether they make better choices with the cap space they've established. The next contract for Chabot will be the real indicator as to how the team will be managing its core players going forward.

Karlsson was injured and played less than 60 games. Him re-signing with SJ shouldn't be considered as it was outside of either teams' control and simply a question mark at the time of the deal. If anything, Ottawa won this trade considering how Karlsson did last season and how SJ did in the playoffs.

Karlsson was injured and played less than 60 games. Him re-signing with SJ shouldn't be considered as it was outside of either teams' control and simply a question mark at the time of the deal. If anything, Ottawa won this trade considering how Karlsson did last season and how SJ did in the playoffs.
- AlfieFever

He played less than 60 games... only if you don't include the playoffs. He gave the Sharks 82 games.

You say his re-signing shouldn't be considered, as it was outside of either team's control. But then you don't apply that same logic to his health? Which team had control of his injuries?

As to your last statement, I would like to point out that the team with Karlsson not only made the playoffs, but went on a run. The team without Karlsson finished 31st. But you want to crown the last place team the winner?

If you had to pick a winner today, there is no logical choice but Doug Wilson and the Sharks. Re-evaluate in 2or 3 years if you want a convincing argument for Dorion and the Senators.

He played less than 60 games... only if you don't include the playoffs. He gave the Sharks 82 games.

You say his re-signing shouldn't be considered, as it was outside of either team's control. But then you don't apply that same logic to his health? Which team had control of his injuries?

As to your last statement, I would like to point out that the team with Karlsson not only made the playoffs, but went on a run. The team without Karlsson finished 31st. But you want to crown the last place team the winner?

If you had to pick a winner today, there is no logical choice but Doug Wilson and the Sharks. Re-evaluate in 2or 3 years if you want a convincing argument for Dorion and the Senators.
- You'reWrongBecause...

I think it's clear that Karlsson's season was a disappointment and that he had less of an impact than SJ expected. Ottawa traded him with one season left on his contract. I am judging the trade by that one season in comparison to what the Sens received. Again, I don't see how SJ can be seen as a winner by any means whatsoever.

I think it's clear that Karlsson's season was a disappointment and that he had less of an impact than SJ expected. Ottawa traded him with one season left on his contract. I am judging the trade by that one season in comparison to what the Sens received. Again, I don't see how SJ can be seen as a winner by any means whatsoever.
- AlfieFever

Reasons San Jose won the deal (as it stands today):

1) they got the best player in the trade, not debatable

2) they went deep in the playoffs and it took both Vegas, and the officials, to beat them

3) Karlsson had one of the most productive playoff series ever for a defenseman

4) Doug Wilson extended Karlsson, and the Sharks are going to go right back to competing for a Stanley Cup next season, while the Senators are likely going to go right back to the bottom of the standings

5) Ottawa didn't get any of SJ's best prospects. No Meier, no Merkley, no Hertl, no Labanc... and they could have had Dylan Demelo for nothing, in free agency, just a month or so prior to trading for him

The only way to paint this as a win for Ottawa, right now, is if you frame the trade with bunch of qualifying statements and conditional assertions "Karlsson was never going to sign here, anyway...", "Karlsson was the problem in the room..." and those types of unverifiable statements.

Just looking at the hockey assets, Dorion still didn't get enough for Karlsson.

Again, this is looking at the trade today. In the long run, if the Sharks don't win the Stanley Cup with EK, then of course all the assets they gave up weren't worth it. The same logic applies to Dorion's failed bid to put Ottawa over the top, which is the primary reason the team had to "rebuild" in the first place (well, it's the primary reason as far as PR is concerned, most of us suspect it has more to do with Melnyk's pockets).

But having Karlsson means the Sharks will have a legit chance for at least the next 5 years. I say 5 years, because that seems to be Karl's expiry date, as explained to me by many people on the internet. Karlsson is sure to be a shadow of his former self... because no D is ever any good after age 34... even when the most recent Norris winner is 35 years old... Karlsson will definitely be on the decline... and the Senators will definitely be enjoying an "unprecedented level of success"... yeah, definitely.

I think most people agree that it's Josh Norris and/or what the Sens get for their 1st rounder that will determine the judgement of this trade.

I think the center ice is the most wildcard position in the franchise. Yes the same can be said about goal tending but I'm less worried about that then the center ice position.

Not sure how likely it is that White, Norris, and Brown will hit their respective ceilings and potential -- and how long they can stay there

Trevor Shackles: The Erik Karlsson Trade Revisited
Looking back at the blockbuster deal
- Trevor Shackles

It was a fire sale. You sold a perennial Norris candidate for a bunch of bottom 6 players and a bag of magic beans. It was a bad situation and best not to revisit.

What you really got with the departures of Stone/Hoffman/Dzingal/Douchene/Karlsson was a 4 year window of lottery picks. Take on some bad contracts in exchange for more picks and focus your energy on scouting and trading up for the highest quality players you can find.