I am curious what kind of response this trade makes, both from Ottawa's and from Buffalo's perspective. Essentially it's Karlsson and Ottawa's 4th overall, for Buffalo's 1st overall and O'Reilly. Does this make sense and is it a reasonable trade? It's my first attempt, so pls go easy here...lol

Yeah, it's gonna be a no from me dog.

The 1st overall pick has intrinsic value that can't be valued in trade. Simply getting to pick first and the hype that comes with that and the fact that the player is a very good one to boot, makes trading it for virtually anyone pointless.

Karlsson may be better than Dahlin will ever be but the idea of having Dahlin and what he could be, is priceless. That's why this trade will never happen.

Plus the big elephant in the room is that Ottawa is trading from a point of weakness right now. That doesn't mean they will get fleeced but it means they may have to settle a little less than what they would of expected a year ago.

You are literally on crack.

So then... for instance, if Edmonton offered McDavid for 1st overall, Buffalo would say... no thanks? As a GM, how could you not consider the value of an existing, elite player in his prime... over a young player with huge potential, but totally unproven?




I guess maybe my fan hat is screwed on too tight. lol
The league's consensus is (I believe, anyway) that Karlsson is currently the top best D-man in the league and in his prime, and is incredibly highly sought after. So no amount of "weakness" plays here, as all it takes is two (or more) teams to have high interest. Also, the guy is still under contract for another year... so if I'm a GM of another team and Karlsson is available, whatever I pay for him now in a trade is (for my organization) infinitely better than what I may have to pony up if I have to wait another year to get him.

So if I offer an excellent package now (knowing that if it comes down to a bidding war in 2019, then I would have to significantly overpay at that time). it's easier and cheaper now.... and the Senators would receive very good compensation in return.

Just brainstorming here... good to have this debate, btw - helps me get a broader perspective!

Right. I'm new here, created an account an hour ago to ask about this trade. Your response is a great way to keep new users away from posting anything, ever. Thanks for that.

From a trading perspective, I think it is fairly good deal for both, but there are too many moving parts, like 1 years remaining on a deal with Karlsson. He will probably not want to resign with a team that just finished last, coming from a team that finished second last. If OTT wants to blow up (who is to say they haven't yet), this is perfect for them. If BUF can resign Karlsson, this works for them too.

At first I thought no way, but it is not without its merits. Both O'Reilly and Karlsson are around the same age, Ott gets the cost certainty of O'Reilly's contract, and might even negotiate a little retained salary by Buff., Dahlin gets to play with a little less pressure because he would be behind Chabot for a time. Buff. has depth at centre but could use scoring on the wings - draft pick. While Buffalo itself is not the most desirable destination, it is close to a lot of things, not to mention Melinda's home town. And Karlsson might appreciate an owner willing to spend money, albeit a little too active in the org. like his previous one. Buff. can build a defense around the best defenseman in the league, and have him for the next eight years. You can't build a winner with nothing but young stars, you need some vertern leadership.
The biggest stumbling block is that both teams are in the same division.

....and here I was thinking, "nah he won't use the McDavid extreme to prove his point, don't bother writing it"

Is McDavid available at this time? Does he compare to the 28 year old soon to be UFA with off ice issues that had been put in the media? NO. Of course Buffalo would do Dahlin for McDavid but that is clearly the extreme that would never happen anyway. Karlsson is available however and at his age and injury history, etc does not carry the same weight he has 4 years ago.

Karlsson is the best dman in the game right now but how long will he be? If you could speculate he will be a Norris calibre dman for the next 10 years, I think its not that much of a gamble that the soon to be 1st overall pick who media people are hailing as the next Karlsson, will be a similar talent for even longer.

Buffalo doesn't need Karlsson right now. They still aren't ready to compete for a cup. They don't even have a real #1 goalie yet. They'll end Karlsson in 2-3 years when they've developed some of their young guys and found a true starter goalie, etc. By that time , Dahlin might be as good as Karlsson will be in 3 years.

That's why I brought up the intrinsic value comment. Having the 1st overall pick drums up excitement for the city.. Gives value to the team regardless of what Dahlin does on the ice. Bringing in Karlsson means this team needs to start winning now and they simply are not ready for that.

I hear ya. And yes, I had to use McDavid to explain my perspective. I guess the age difference between the two is a major factor. As is obviously the long-term potential of Dahlin vs. the limited, serviceable years of Karlsson. Ok, fair point.




While I agree with the intrinsic value, I can't imagine a single Sabres fan to be disappointed if they got Karlsson. Even at the price of a 1st overall pick. In the short-term, anyway... but yes, I understand your point regarding a long-term vision. Which is why if I'm Buffalo, I would say no as well. Unless I'm looking for a quick fix! lol

I think you may think I meant more weakness than I actually meant. I guess I should of used leverage.

1) Karlsson definitely has reason to leave the organization in search of fresh start after everything that has happened.
2) Ottawa will not be a good team for a long time. Karlsson will want to win soon.
3) Karlsson will be the highest paid dman in the league in short order.
4) Teams that have significant interest know that if they wait till next season they could throw their hat in the ring in hopes of getting him for nothing.
5) Ottawa in order to maximize their return HAVE to move Karlsson at the draft.

They aren't trading from as high of leverage as they should. That's all I meant. They'll still get a great return but it should have been a stupidly good return. That's all I meant.

Yeah, agreed. But then I have to ask, when specifically should they have traded him if his value is not as great as it was some time ago? Historically, GMs aren't in the habit of trading away their best players unless they absolutely have to... so those windows of opportunity to move those elites for top value is usually missed. (unless the GM is a visionary and can see the future ahead of everyone else...) so in hindsight, of course they should have traded him then instead of now.

This is actually really interesting!

This has been a perfect storm of unluckyness for them. In a perfect world where there was no drama and the Sens finished lets say 10th in the division, Karlsson's value would be through the roof right now. All these events that have transpired since them being eliminated by Pittsburgh has been a steady downward slope. If only a few things happened differently. lets say no Hoffman issue and no trade for Duchene/Turris, I truly believe Karlssons value would be what it should be. Once again, not saying he has no value right now. he's still gonna get Ottawa some major pieces but it should of been more considering he's widely regarded as the best dman in the game.

First, it doesn’t matter to me whether you or anyone posts on here. Actually, the less ridiculous posts the better.

As to the merits of the proposal, that was really the only response fittig for me. To trade the best defensive prospect in the last 47 years for an aging player on a one year contract, PLUS giving away a top center and one of the best two way players in the league at the position is so absurd that the only appropriate response is point to the use of an illegal narcotic.

You have a very interesting (albeit also very narrow-minded) point of view of who widely considered to be the best defenseman in the league -- labelling him only as "aging"... What about his 60-80 pts a year? Leadership? Veteran experience? Yeah, not like that matters.

And O'Reilly, whom you consider to be "one of the best two-way players in the league" is also intriguing... I'd love to see any reasonable hockey person refer to this player as you did. Is he on par with Bergeron? Kopitar? Tavares? Certainly not even close, doubt anyone would put this guy in their top 20 in the league as far as two-way centres go.

~~~

Well anyway. I sense that your opinion isn't exactly shared by the majority of those who commented after you. At least you were able to muster up some form of mature response this time, as your first comment made you sound like a mouthy 12-year old. My apologies if you are, in fact, twelve. At least you tried.

Good point. I think it summarize it well.

The value in this deal seems to be fair. We know it won't happen because Buffalo is not ready to be competitive so it makes no sense to acquire Karlsson who might not want to re-sign with them too like you said

I am sorry but do you happen to be using this same narcotic? O'Reilly is good, could potentially be great even if in the right situation, but you are telling me that a person that gets sooo bummed out about being on a losing team that he goes on TV and says he has "lost the will to play" one of the best 2 way players in the league??? As the other poster said guys like Bergeron, Kopitar, and Toews are all ten times better than O'Reilly and don't get their feelings hurt when they lose. Not going to lie I would not put Tavares in a 2 way Centre argument he is not the greatest defensively. I know the argument of "personality has nothing to do with on ice production" has a bit of merit for about 5 seconds but the on ice product is not exactly elite either. I would place him in a secondary tier of 2 way centre, very good ones that could be great but are currently no where near the top in terms of two way centres let alone players.

I didnt say ROR was one of the best centers, I said one of the best 2 way centers, and there's a big difference there as you mentioned. He is absolutely one of the better ones in the league there and I really dont think thats debatable nor would any reasonable person debate that. The metrics are clear. Now, as for his comments about last year, I have zero worry about them and I'm glad he said that and glad he feels that way. The Sabres were expected to compete for a playoff spot, and once the year started many of the players loafed around the ice and did not produce. ROR wants nothing more to win and I'd feel defeated to if I was on a roster that was so clearly terrible and showed no hope for winning games. Winners feel pissed about losing. Losers aren't moved much one way or another.

I disagree with that. They were a good team just 1 year ago reaching the ECF after a 98 pts season (despite many key injuries) and bringing the eventual champs to the 2nd OT in game 7.

Sure things have changed since and the team was inexplicably not the same as they came back from the Sweden road trip November 16th (they had a good start with 21 pts in 16 games, 107 pts pace over a full season)

2 things that hurt was the loss of MacArthur (again) to LTIR. He was expected to be the 6th/7th best forward on the team. There was also the Vegas expansion that screwed the Sens who lost Methot as they could really have used him another year or two. They had no one ready to fill his role and mainly, be Karlsson's partner. Another thing is Karlsson went under surgery in the summer and it pretty much took it all year to slowly get back to form. He was struggling defensively at first. Then, they traded Turris away for a significant upgrade in Duchene, but apparently it hurt team chemistry. Finally, goaltending was poor and Boucher was incapable of changing his stupid game plan once teams figured out how to play against his system.

There's so much parity in this league, that a few factors like that can bring a good team to a disastrous season.

But back to the initial point and why I disagree, well unless they totally blow it up and trade Karlsson, Stone and Duchene.

Those 3 are elite players and 3 major blocks to build around. I believe they also have young players that will become somewhere between good, great and elite. Thomas Chabot and Logan Brown comes to mind but I have my money on Drake Batherson as well who I believe will be an impact player, maybe not as much as Mark Stone but in the same way. Let's not forget they also have the 4th and 22nd OA picks in the draft tonight. Plus, they have several quality young players/prospects like Dzingel, Pageau, White, Chlapik, Formenton, Ceci, Jaros, Wolanin, etc who will fill a role on the team.

Zadina-Duchene-Stone
Formenton-Brown-Batherson
Dzingel-Pageau-White
Boedker, Chlapik,etc

Chabot-Karlsson
Wolanin-Ceci
Harpur-Jaros

Gustavsson
Hogberg

I really like the potential of that lineup

And what is the problem with that? Turris is a good player but Duchene is a significant upgrade... It's actually one of Dorion trades I like, assuming they don't give Colorado a top-10 pick next year...

And if they do? Lol Bias aside if Karlsson is gone this year, Sens will be bad. I'll stake my life on it. Frankly, I'm hoping they aren't too bad. I want the Habs to be worse so they can get a better pick in the Hughes draft!

Ok but you named this as a reason for a "steady downward slope"... My question is how can you qualify a significant individual player upgrade as that?

As for who will be bad or not next year, it's still too early too tell. Even in training camp it's hard to predict, I didn't expect the Sens to be this bad just after comming 1 goal away from the SCF

I meant that ever since the Duchene trade in which the Sens gave up a lot of assets for a player that believe wasn't worth that return and only a small upgrade over Turris, things started to go down hill. I feel the Sens players semi checked out after that. But that's just a observation.

From a Sens standpoint, the deal could still be worth it.

Turris is almost 29 y/o and was an UFA-to-be. The Sens didn't want to commit big money and term to him (and rightfully so IMO, while he is a good player. It might have taken more than 6x6 in Ottawa since the taxes are much heavier than in Nashville). So they used him to get a significant upgrade over him. On top of that, they gave some assets but not necessarily as much as it is made out to be.

- Shane Bowers : 28th OA pick in 2017, could be an excellent 3rd line center and with Duchene, Brown, Pageau, White, Chlapik and Batherson, the Sens could easily afford to use him as a trade asset. He was maybe the 8th-9th best Sens prospect at that time. Now he would be around 11th-12th I'd say.

- Andrew Hammond : 30 y/o goalie who was going to become UFA but had the remainder of the season left at a yearly $1,500,000 salary. The Sens didn't want to use him in the NHL anymore and we know that saving money is always important for them. He was a pure cap dump for Ottawa, they have tried to get rid of him for a while.

- 2018 3rd round pick : it was partly (or entirely, impossible to say) to compensate Colorado for taking Hammond, which unfortunately happened in many other trades as well (give a pick to save money)

- 2018 1st round pick : which became the 2019 1st round pick since it was top-10 protected and the Sens surprisingly had a really bad season after coming so close to reach the Stanley Cup finals. Now it remains to be seen where that pick will end up but Dorion just reiterated that they want to be competitive this upcoming season, and it's logical since they don't have their own 1st round pick. If it wasn't the case, they might have just gone with a quick rebuild.

So, the price paid pretty much depends on where that 1st pick will be next draft. If it ends outside of the top-10, then I can easily live with that and be glad that Duchene is part of the core going forward. Believe me, he is not a small upgrade on Turris who is and should be a 2nd line center. Duchene is also 2 years younger. He just have higher end skill and much better strength, quickness and skating.

Now it's true that the team struggled after the Duchene trade. They actually won their first 2 games with Duchene and had a good season start (after 16 games they were on a 107 pts pace over a full season) but when they came back from Sweden, everything fell apart but you can't say it was because of Duchene. Goaltending and coaching were awful for the rest of the year, injuries hurt and the locker room was apparently broken (which is partly due to the war between the Karlssons and the Hoffmans). I have heard from some credible sources too that many players didn't like to play for Boucher too.