Quoting: wi11dabeast
I agree with the Karlsson part mostly. After submitting this trade, I realized that I forgot to take away the condition on the 2nd round pick in 2024. Although, I think that if the sharks retain the contract, they should get this 3rd or 2nd out of it. I think that getting Karlsson at 9 mil would be a huge snag in the direction of EDM. Because I did not mean the 2nd first round pick, do you think it would be more worth it? You basically said that he would be worth Barrie, Pulj, Bouchard, a 2 1sts. What if I take out a first, and add Broberg? Flipping a 2024 1st (most likely high to mid 20s) for broberg seems like a decent deal. Although, I am not as familiar with him as other prospects so I don’t really know his full value.
In general, most NHL-active prospects are substantially more valuable than first round picks as they're playing at a discount. ELCs tend to be about half the cost as a typical "quality depth" contract (think Nuutivara) or offer far more still and talent than a typical depth deal (think MacDonald). Given Edmonton's cap situation, how highly Broberg is valued by the organization, and the ceiling he may or may not have, any deal that sees Broberg moved cannot happen. Holland actually shut talks down on Chychrun once Broberg's name came up.
Karlsson's contract is a unique case and I almost don't care about what other teams are paying for cap space right now: Erik Karlsson as he is today is not a guarantee. His production plummeted last year which presents an inordinate amount of risk on the side acquiring him.
San Jose is not retaining on this deal as a favour to Edmonton, but to simply make the contract moveable. At $11.5M nobody can acquire Karlsson, and nobody should given his injury history and the remaining term on the deal. At the rumoured $2.1M retention, the deal starts to become more palatable and thus discussions about moving the contract can occur. However, we need to maintain a sense of realism: how many contending teams can accommodate a >$9M contract come deadline time? Taking back salary at this point, especially if the Sharks refuse to retain past that rumoured $2.1M mark, is necessary and you no longer get to ask for assets in exchange for that returned salary.
Right now your offer is essentially a top prospect and a third round pick over what I and other Oiler fans will find reasonable and I really think that just comes down to misinterpreting what you're getting in exchange for Karlsson. Bouchard is his immediate replacement. If the Oilers had the luxury of time, Bouchard's name would never enter trade conversations. His underlying numbers are in the ballpark of Hamilton-esque to Karlsson-esque. This piece is the crux of the deal, he is not a throw in. Likewise, Barrie is not a cap dump: he's in the upper echelon for point production and possession numbers this season. Realistically, he has been for 4 of the last 5 seasons. You treat him like a cap dump when acquired from Edmonton but sell at a premium to Pittsburgh: the inconsistencies in your math do not add up. Why doesn't Edmonton just pay less for Karlsson, as they no longer need to include Barrie in the deal, and recoup assets from another team?
I think it's reasonable that most contending teams should be able to accrue about $2M in cap space come the deadline. If we take the retention of $2.1M to heart, this would suppose that the Sharks should be able to expect about $7.4M in salary cap to be returned in a Karlsson deal. The combination of Barrie, Bouchard, and Puljujarvi comes in at just over $8.3M. There is no discrepancy here that would suggest that Broberg and another midround pick be included to facilitate a trade. San Jose can walk away with extra 2023 and 2024 first round picks in tow, a graduated prospect in Bouchard who will in time replace Karlsson as San Jose's #1RD, and a quality puck-moving rearguard that can be flipped at a profit next year. All I would ask is a C-prospect (Coe), Lorentz (depth for Edmonton), and maybe the return of San Jose's 6th round selections in both years as I personally do not like the idea of moving high picks out without low ones being returned.
The Sharks set the precedent of moving out a quality offensive RHD with limiting suitors when they hucked Burns to the Hurricanes for essentially nothing and retained a boatload in the process. Karlsson may be a step up, and the deadline is always more expensive than the offseason, but there's a limit to what the Sharks can actually ask in exchange for Karlsson. The alternative is no trade at all, and by the time he can be moved, San Jose is likely not getting anything of value returned.