Nuxfanabroad Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 OEL & Tanner Pearson For EK65 Of course such a deal is highly unlikely, for a number of reasons. Still feel this proposal is a fun gauge to see where most fans are at. Interesting factors: - for an aging star, EK's contract is potentially very toxic - yet no one can deny his incredibly impressive start to 22-23. How long can he actually maintain such gaudy numbers? - OEL would prob fit better on SJ. They don't have a Lhd star like Q Hughes taking the prime Off D-man responsibilities. - Would be pretty insane to see what QH & EK could get up to, if sometimes paired - Also interesting both Swedes have 4 yrs left after 22-23 campaign - SJ's incentive is an obvious rebuild required. 7 mill is easier to deal with than 11 mill Lastly, we could still tank by selling off a variety of other pieces, especially if such a deal didn't pay off in the immediate future. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 I doubt SJ would do it, & its probably not wise for us either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chon derry Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrJockitch Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 I have actually thought about that somewhat lately, I wonder whether JR would be crazy enough to go after EK. ‘He may just be that kind of crazy. ‘Man that would be a fun d to watch on a very bad team. ‘I think EK with some retention and taking OEL would be worth consideration. Pearson goes as well, still would be more Cap pain and why would SJ do it? They are trying to rebuild as we should be. They want youth and pics not trading a player playing great for similar aged and injured player that is playing poorly. ‘Fun to think about EK and QH but that is about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 This is actually the type of move Aquilini would want. It’s a move in hopes of “winning now” and totally disregards the hope for an improved future. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 I don't think San Jose would go for it. Karlsson likely ages better, and is a former captain himself so OEL can't even bring them that. Pearson will be off the books sooner than later too, and OEL's buyout may be more palatable a couple years from now. If the idea is to restructure the roster or rebuild I don't see why we'd want to take on Karlsson's cap hit anyway. San Jose would be better off retaining 50% and selling Karlsson off for assets that'd help their inevitable rebuild than they would be trading him to us for OEL and Pearson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted November 23, 2022 Author Share Posted November 23, 2022 Ftr, think I would give this a whirl. First though, they'd have to be able to flog some other vets(Myers, BB or CG 'pick 1', etc...) Then I'd sell 1 of Bo or JT. Just try to get lots of picks/youth & snarl. THEN, go for a deal like this. QH & EK would be a bloody hoot to watch. Isn't pro sport entertainment, after all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Jay 22 Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 I actually legit lol’d. You called EK65’s contract potentially toxic down the line…I don’t disagree. However given both of their play this year, OEL’s is easily worse right now. Why would San Jose even do this? Tanner Pearson is a dime a dozen player who’s production can replicated at half of his cost. I don’t even like the Sharks and even I find this idea laughable. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 Just now, Blue Jay 22 said: I actually legit lol’d. You called EK65’s contract potentially toxic down the line…I don’t disagree. However given both of their play this year, OEL’s is easily worse right now. Why would San Jose even do this? Tanner Pearson is a dime a dozen player who’s production can replicated at half of his cost. I don’t even like the Sharks and even I find this idea laughable. Don’t the Sharks save 4 mil on the cap after the Pearson contract expires though? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Jay 22 Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 (edited) 1 minute ago, Alflives said: Don’t the Sharks save 4 mil on the cap after the Pearson contract expires though? And that’s enough for them to accept a terrible deal? Good one Edited November 23, 2022 by Blue Jay 22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 Well I do this deal 100% of time. Send it in. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 If the Sharks do it, I'd drive OEL and Pearson to the airport myself. Given that EK would probably continue to dominate offensively, we could keep him and keep upping his value (or alternatively, what I'd really want to do is just flip him at his peak for serviceable young pieces and assets). That being said, it doesn't fit their timeline when they would be rebuilding (their roster has gotten a lot younger, outside of Couture/ Hertl) and if they found a taker who could stomach that cap hit they would almost certainly move him for more young assets, such as 1st round picks and prospects (they already have an experienced and overpriced LHD in Vlasic, not sure why they would also take on OEL). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 3 minutes ago, Blue Jay 22 said: I actually legit lol’d. You called EK65’s contract potentially toxic down the line…I don’t disagree. However given both of their play this year, OEL’s is easily worse right now. Why would San Jose even do this? Tanner Pearson is a dime a dozen player who’s production can replicated at half of his cost. I don’t even like the Sharks and even I find this idea laughable. Who cares why San Jose does this? If they will, then hell f**king yes... it's just too bad SJ would never ever consider this without a real asset going their way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted November 23, 2022 Author Share Posted November 23, 2022 1 minute ago, Blue Jay 22 said: I actually legit lol’d. You called EK65’s contract potentially toxic down the line…I don’t disagree. However given both of their play this year, OEL’s is easily worse right now. Why would San Jose even do this? Tanner Pearson is a dime a dozen player who’s production can replicated at half of his cost. I don’t even like the Sharks and even I find this idea laughable. Usually I don't view these potential deals in 'absolutes'. There have been too many over the past that have surprised. For example, the return that Tkachuk fetched this past summer. There could be financial motivations, in some cases. The Sharks appear even more bleak than ourselves. Lots of LT committed to aging vets, limited young talent, & 6 mill of dead cap next season. They appear to be overachieving, early-on(tho I haven't watched them at all); but it wouldn't surprise me to see them scorch earth & aim for Bedard-types. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 6 minutes ago, Blue Jay 22 said: And that’s enough for them to accept a terrible deal? Good one How is it so terrible for them? EK is way overpaid, and his play is declining. OEL is way overpaid too, and his play is also declining. We get stuck with an even worse contract. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Jay 22 Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 Just now, Nuxfanabroad said: Usually I don't view these potential deals in 'absolutes'. There have been too many over the past that have surprised. For example, the return that Tkachuk fetched this past summer. There could be financial motivations, in some cases. The Sharks appear even more bleak than ourselves. Lots of LT committed to aging vets, limited young talent, & 6 mill of dead cap next season. They appear to be overachieving, early-on(tho I haven't watched them at all); but it wouldn't surprise me to see them scorch earth & aim for Bedard-types. If the Sharks publicly declared tomorrow that EK65 was for sale and the reason being was for financials, 29 other teams would still be able to top this terrible proposal. OEL has absolutely zero value to any rebuilder. His contract sucks, his play sucks…he is a negative asset. Pearson is barely above that. This does nothing for their organization except save them a few bucks. Surely, even when other teams would try to low ball them, they would still be able to get actual assets to build with. You should have just proposed a conditional 7th round pick for EK65. It would have been less insulting 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 Just now, Blue Jay 22 said: If the Sharks publicly declared tomorrow that EK65 was for sale and the reason being was for financials, 29 other teams would still be able to top this terrible proposal. OEL has absolutely zero value to any rebuilder. His contract sucks, his play sucks…he is a negative asset. Pearson is barely above that. This does nothing for their organization except save them a few bucks. Surely, even when other teams would try to low ball them, they would still be able to get actual assets to build with. You should have just proposed a conditional 7th round pick for EK65. It would have been less insulting EK has significant negative value. No team, unless managed by Benning, would trade for that contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted November 23, 2022 Author Share Posted November 23, 2022 Would argue that such a deal represents more of a gamble from Van's pov, than SJ's. They already got steamrolled in the orig Ott/SJ Doug Wilson landmine. They won't tap dance past ANY GM now, missing one leg... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Jay 22 Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 Just now, Alflives said: EK has significant negative value. No team, unless managed by Benning, would trade for that contract. I don’t know about that. In fact, I’ll say I disagree because I could see someone like the Ducks or Red Wings, 2 teams with massive cap room but bad defense, more than welcoming him to their blue line after this year and with the year he is having. But I do agree that contract is bad and worrisome. But one thing that is inarguable is that OEL, himself, is overpaid and has significant negative value…so why would the Sharks even sniff him? Surely they would just keep the better “negative” asset lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 4 more years (after this season), at $11.5 million. That is a hefty salary. Ekman-Larsson Pearson Poolman Then maybe Canucks would still probably need to trade Boeser or whoever, bring in another LD. Hughes - Karlsson X - Myers Dermott - Schenn Stillman - Burroughs Rathbone 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now