2018 NHL Entry Draft

Lagoon wrote:I do agree we could lose him. I agree that management isn’t helping. But I’ve always maintained that they will use him all season until closer to the deadline for simple optics. In those 5 months of playing, my only hope is that both sides let cooler heads prevail, the Sens get back to winning and Karlsson reups.

I don't see any scenario under which the season begins with Karlsson in Ottawa and without a new contract. I know similar things have happened with other superstars (Tavares, Stamkos), but I do not see it happening here. I think it's a done deal that he's getting traded. Dorion will make an offer just to say he made an offer, and then Karlsson will be traded at some point in the summer.

I guess we will see. I see the Sens keeping him until around the deadline and maybe beyond for all the reasons we’ve discussed.

tim1_2 wrote:

Lagoon wrote:I do agree we could lose him. I agree that management isn’t helping. But I’ve always maintained that they will use him all season until closer to the deadline for simple optics. In those 5 months of playing, my only hope is that both sides let cooler heads prevail, the Sens get back to winning and Karlsson reups.

I don't see any scenario under which the season begins with Karlsson in Ottawa and without a new contract.  I know similar things have happened with other superstars (Tavares, Stamkos), but I do not see it happening here.  I think it's a done deal that he's getting traded.  Dorion will make an offer just to say he made an offer, and then Karlsson will be traded at some point in the summer.

Yeah, as you’ve previously pointed out, if he gets injured during the season then the only option would be to resign him and he would likely say no.
Besides melnyk has no appetite for a 12 mill contract

Flo The Action wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

Lagoon wrote:I do agree we could lose him. I agree that management isn’t helping. But I’ve always maintained that they will use him all season until closer to the deadline for simple optics. In those 5 months of playing, my only hope is that both sides let cooler heads prevail, the Sens get back to winning and Karlsson reups.

I don't see any scenario under which the season begins with Karlsson in Ottawa and without a new contract.  I know similar things have happened with other superstars (Tavares, Stamkos), but I do not see it happening here.  I think it's a done deal that he's getting traded.  Dorion will make an offer just to say he made an offer, and then Karlsson will be traded at some point in the summer.

Yeah, as you’ve previously pointed out, if he gets injured during the season then the only option would be to resign him and he would likely say no.
Besides melnyk has no appetite for a 12 mill contract

If you believe that the relationship is strained at best (and broken at worst) as I do, the offer the Sens will present him in July will likely just add insult to injury (i.e. something around $8.5M per season). At that point, it'll likely be the last straw, the Karlsson camp will counter with something crazy (like $13M+ per season), the Sens will be like "well, we tried!" and then a trade will occur shortly after.

I don’t disagree that if Karlsson is traded, the “we tried” excuse is used. I just see them “trying” for longer than most. Around the deadline if he is dealt.

Would you accept:

To Vegas: Ryan, Karlsson
To Ottawa: Glass, Nosek, Theodore, 2019 1st rd pick, 2019 2nd rd pick

It sure would signify a full and complete rebuild. I would not accept that offer. That is not the direction I want to go. If you want me to put my rebuild hat on, I would accept Glass, Tuch, Theodore and that 2019 1st for Karlsson and Ryan.

Lagoon wrote:It sure would signify a full and complete rebuild. I would not accept that offer. That is not the direction I want to go. If you want me to put my rebuild hat on, I would accept Glass, Tuch, Theodore and that 2019 1st for Karlsson and Ryan.

Sorry my friend but if Karlsson goes then it's a full rebuild whether we want to admit it or not.

The reality is paying Karlsson twice what he makes now isn't going to lead to Karlsson being twice as good. It's $5-6M or so more committed to the same player who is going to depreciate in time and is an injury risk. It also means spending $6M less in other areas. Don't get me wrong. I would love to see Karlsson stay at a reasonable price but if he's asking for anything more than $11M/year I'm rebuilding. If you get a potential top-four defenceman, a top-six prospect, and a 1st rd pick then I think you really have to consider making the trade - especially if it means moving Ryan. That's a lot of cap space and there are a lot of good prospects coming down the pipe who are going to need to get paid.

I'd really consider moving Hoffman at the draft depending on who's available within the top 10 if the organization gets the impression that Karlsson doesn't want to sign here. If you can get out of the draft with Wahlstrom, Bouchard/Merkley, and a big body at 22nd (Noel?) it's a very successful draft. Mark my word - if Ottawa drafts at 22nd they will take Noel if he is still around (6'5" RW from Ottawa...) Add Theodore and Glass to a young group of White, Chabot, Wolanin, Formenton, Brown, Chlapik, Batherson and plus these three guys then you're competing for a cup again in a few years.

Next year could be a little painful don't get me wrong, bt the idea of having: Chabot, Theodore, Wolanin, Bouchard, Jaros on defense, Gustavvson & Hogberg in nets, and all the forwards listed above plus Duchene, Stone and Dzingel and you're looking at a deep 4 line team that can skate and move the puck.

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:

Lagoon wrote:It sure would signify a full and complete rebuild. I would not accept that offer. That is not the direction I want to go. If you want me to put my rebuild hat on, I would accept Glass, Tuch, Theodore and that 2019 1st for Karlsson and Ryan.

Sorry my friend but if Karlsson goes then it's a full rebuild whether we want to admit it or not.

The reality is paying Karlsson twice what he makes now isn't going to lead to Karlsson being twice as good. It's $5-6M or so more committed to the same player who is going to depreciate in time and is an injury risk. It also means spending $6M less in other areas. Don't get me wrong. I would love to see Karlsson stay at a reasonable price but if he's asking for anything more than $11M/year I'm rebuilding. If you get a potential top-four defenceman, a top-six prospect, and a 1st rd pick then I think you really have to consider making the trade - especially if it means moving Ryan. That's a lot of cap space and there are a lot of good prospects coming down the pipe who are going to need to get paid.

I'd really consider moving Hoffman at the draft depending on who's available within the top 10 if the organization gets the impression that Karlsson doesn't want to sign here. If you can get out of the draft with Wahlstrom, Bouchard/Merkley, and a big body at 22nd (Noel?) it's a very successful draft. Mark my word - if Ottawa drafts at 22nd they will take Noel if he is still around (6'5" RW from Ottawa...) Add Theodore and Glass to a young group of White, Chabot, Wolanin, Formenton, Brown, Chlapik, Batherson and plus these three guys then you're competing for a cup again in a few years.

Next year could be a little painful don't get me wrong, bt the idea of having: Chabot, Theodore, Wolanin, Bouchard, Jaros on defense, Gustavvson & Hogberg in nets, and all the forwards listed above plus Duchene, Stone and Dzingel and you're looking at a deep 4 line team that can skate and move the puck.

Oh for sure. I’m not saying trading Karlsson is anything but the start of a full rebuild. I just don’t see and don’t want it.

What you said about Karlsson getting twice the salary but not being twice the player, is in my opinion basically like saying you want to be a development team for the NHL.

As far as this draft goes, I think the Sens are going to make the mistake of taking the 2nd Dman from the board and trying to figure out who is that second best Dman. I think they will get it right however by drafting Hughes and then get that 10th overall from Edmonton and take a forward. Sort of the opposite of what you suggested with a forward and then a D. I don’t know which way is right, but I’d be ecstatic with Hughes and Farabee/Kotkamiemi. Noel at 22 is slight reach but trying to grab one of the youngest, but biggest players in the draft wouldn’t make me cry. It’s just that at 22 and with this draft group, someone in the Sens top 15 should be available and I don’t think Noel should be or is in their top 15.

And when you list all our young players, I salivate. That’s why I don’t think we need to make huge rebuilding changes.

Lagoon wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:

Lagoon wrote:It sure would signify a full and complete rebuild. I would not accept that offer. That is not the direction I want to go. If you want me to put my rebuild hat on, I would accept Glass, Tuch, Theodore and that 2019 1st for Karlsson and Ryan.

Sorry my friend but if Karlsson goes then it's a full rebuild whether we want to admit it or not.

The reality is paying Karlsson twice what he makes now isn't going to lead to Karlsson being twice as good. It's $5-6M or so more committed to the same player who is going to depreciate in time and is an injury risk. It also means spending $6M less in other areas. Don't get me wrong. I would love to see Karlsson stay at a reasonable price but if he's asking for anything more than $11M/year I'm rebuilding. If you get a potential top-four defenceman, a top-six prospect, and a 1st rd pick then I think you really have to consider making the trade - especially if it means moving Ryan. That's a lot of cap space and there are a lot of good prospects coming down the pipe who are going to need to get paid.

I'd really consider moving Hoffman at the draft depending on who's available within the top 10 if the organization gets the impression that Karlsson doesn't want to sign here. If you can get out of the draft with Wahlstrom, Bouchard/Merkley, and a big body at 22nd (Noel?) it's a very successful draft. Mark my word - if Ottawa drafts at 22nd they will take Noel if he is still around (6'5" RW from Ottawa...) Add Theodore and Glass to a young group of White, Chabot, Wolanin, Formenton, Brown, Chlapik, Batherson and plus these three guys then you're competing for a cup again in a few years.

Next year could be a little painful don't get me wrong, bt the idea of having: Chabot, Theodore, Wolanin, Bouchard, Jaros on defense, Gustavvson & Hogberg in nets, and all the forwards listed above plus Duchene, Stone and Dzingel and you're looking at a deep 4 line team that can skate and move the puck.

Oh for sure. I’m not saying trading Karlsson is anything but the start of a full rebuild. I just don’t see and don’t want it.

What you said about Karlsson getting twice the salary but not being twice the player, is in my opinion basically like saying you want to be a development team for the NHL.

As far as this draft goes, I think the Sens are going to make the mistake of taking the 2nd Dman from the board and trying to figure out who is that second best Dman. I think they will get it right however by drafting Hughes and then get that 10th overall from Edmonton and take a forward. Sort of the opposite of what you suggested with a forward and then a D. I don’t know which way is right, but I’d be ecstatic with Hughes and Farabee/Kotkamiemi. Noel at 22 is slight reach but trying to grab one of the youngest, but biggest players in the draft wouldn’t make me cry. It’s just that at 22 and with this draft group, someone in the Sens top 15 should be available and I don’t think Noel should be or is in their top 15.

And when you list all our young players, I salivate. That’s why I don’t think we need to make huge rebuilding changes.

What I am saying about Karlsson is equivalent to Ontario raising the minimum wage. Just because you increase the minimum wage fro $10/hour to $14/hour doesn't mean the quality of service is going to be better. It means you're paying more for what you already have. Ottawa is what they are now with Karlsson and they won't win a cup with Karlsson. I feel the same way with Hoffman - he's got a good contract now but when Ottawa is ready to compete he'll be up for a new deal and we'd in theory have an internal replacement by then.

Why is Noel a reach at 22nd? Too high or too low? I think he fits what this team needs like a glove.

Saying we couldn't win a cup with Karlsson is such BS. Remember last year's playoffs? We were essentially one goal away from that Cup, and EK put the team on his back...he was incredible, and on a damaged foot.

It's hard to say with 100% certainty what EK we would get going forward...he did say that this past season was the most difficult of his career. He went through a lot and I bet when all the contract/trade nonsense is behind him, he goes back to being an annual Norris candidate.

If the Bruins weren't decimated by injuries we very well could have lost that series. They are practically the same team this year and showed just how good they could be when healthy. The Rangers were weren't very good last year and they still gave us a run for our money. Everyone talks about being on the wrong side of a Game 7 one-goal game. Here are the results of all the playoff games last year which would provide more context to my argument that last year's run could have gone anyway, which includes a first rd loss to Boston.

I apologize for the long email but when I make this argument I try to provide facts because it's the only way to really backup my argument.

6 Games vs Boston:
1. 2-1 loss
2. 4-3 OT win
3. 4-3 OT win
4. 1-0 win
5. 3-2 OT loss
6. 3-2 OT win

Ottawa wins series 4-2 with 4 of 6 games going to OT, and the other two games 1 goal difference.

6 Games vs Rangers:
1. 2-1 win
2. 6-5 OT win (Pageau with 4 goals, 3 goal comeback in 3rd period)
3. 4-1 loss
4. 4-1 loss
5. 5-4 OT win
6. 4-2 win
Two OT wins (one of which was a huge comeback), 1 goal win, 2 goal win. Two lopsided losses.

7 Games vs Pens:
1. 2-1 OT win
2. 1-0 loss
3. 5-1 win
4. 3-2 loss
5. 7-0 loss
6. 2-1 win
7. 3-2 OT loss
All close games with the exception of games 3 & 5.

So yes, we did come within one goal but we narrowly escaped the Bruins (injured) and Rangers (overrated) while Pitt had to go through Columbus and Washington. I guess what I am arguing is that we could have just as easily gone to the cup final or lost in the 1st or 2nd rounds. We got lucky with our opponents and scored key goals at key times.

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:

Lagoon wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:

Lagoon wrote:It sure would signify a full and complete rebuild. I would not accept that offer. That is not the direction I want to go. If you want me to put my rebuild hat on, I would accept Glass, Tuch, Theodore and that 2019 1st for Karlsson and Ryan.

Sorry my friend but if Karlsson goes then it's a full rebuild whether we want to admit it or not.

The reality is paying Karlsson twice what he makes now isn't going to lead to Karlsson being twice as good. It's $5-6M or so more committed to the same player who is going to depreciate in time and is an injury risk. It also means spending $6M less in other areas. Don't get me wrong. I would love to see Karlsson stay at a reasonable price but if he's asking for anything more than $11M/year I'm rebuilding. If you get a potential top-four defenceman, a top-six prospect, and a 1st rd pick then I think you really have to consider making the trade - especially if it means moving Ryan. That's a lot of cap space and there are a lot of good prospects coming down the pipe who are going to need to get paid.

I'd really consider moving Hoffman at the draft depending on who's available within the top 10 if the organization gets the impression that Karlsson doesn't want to sign here. If you can get out of the draft with Wahlstrom, Bouchard/Merkley, and a big body at 22nd (Noel?) it's a very successful draft. Mark my word - if Ottawa drafts at 22nd they will take Noel if he is still around (6'5" RW from Ottawa...) Add Theodore and Glass to a young group of White, Chabot, Wolanin, Formenton, Brown, Chlapik, Batherson and plus these three guys then you're competing for a cup again in a few years.

Next year could be a little painful don't get me wrong, bt the idea of having: Chabot, Theodore, Wolanin, Bouchard, Jaros on defense, Gustavvson & Hogberg in nets, and all the forwards listed above plus Duchene, Stone and Dzingel and you're looking at a deep 4 line team that can skate and move the puck.

Oh for sure. I’m not saying trading Karlsson is anything but the start of a full rebuild. I just don’t see and don’t want it.

What you said about Karlsson getting twice the salary but not being twice the player, is in my opinion basically like saying you want to be a development team for the NHL.

As far as this draft goes, I think the Sens are going to make the mistake of taking the 2nd Dman from the board and trying to figure out who is that second best Dman. I think they will get it right however by drafting Hughes and then get that 10th overall from Edmonton and take a forward. Sort of the opposite of what you suggested with a forward and then a D. I don’t know which way is right, but I’d be ecstatic with Hughes and Farabee/Kotkamiemi. Noel at 22 is slight reach but trying to grab one of the youngest, but biggest players in the draft wouldn’t make me cry. It’s just that at 22 and with this draft group, someone in the Sens top 15 should be available and I don’t think Noel should be or is in their top 15.

And when you list all our young players, I salivate. That’s why I don’t think we need to make huge rebuilding changes.

What I am saying about Karlsson is equivalent to Ontario raising the minimum wage. Just because you increase the minimum wage fro $10/hour to $14/hour doesn't mean the quality of service is going to be better. It means you're paying more for what you already have. Ottawa is what they are now with Karlsson and they won't win a cup with Karlsson. I feel the same way with Hoffman - he's got a good contract now but when Ottawa is ready to compete he'll be up for a new deal and we'd in theory have an internal replacement by then.  

Why is Noel a reach at 22nd? Too high or too low? I think he fits what this team needs like a glove.

I completely disagree with not only your opinion, but also your analogy. If Ottawa can’t win a Cup building around Karlsson, than Crosby shouldn’t have won a Cup either. I don’t understand that comment of yours at all, which makes my reply not make much sense either because the basic logic is flawed in my opinion. And basically what you are saying is nobody deserves a raise because they already played and had success at a lower wage. I just don’t agree with anything you’ve said basically. Maybe I’m just not getting it?

Noel at 22 is a slight reach I think I said, slight. He’s in that tier of players. I’m all for the Sens taking him. Like I said, he’s one of the youngest yet biggest players eligible. He’s a project, but one worth gambling on. I do prefer drafting for upside at 22 and he has that. Take the project, especially if we can somehow draft at 4 and 10 and take sure things like Hughes and Farabee/Kotkamiemi. I had Noel going at 25. Slight. He’s growing on me. I love how he isn’t afraid to bull-rush the net.
My mock has him at 26. That’s all. At 22, I have the Sens taking Jonatan Berggren.

tim1_2 wrote:Saying we couldn't win a cup with Karlsson is such BS.  Remember last year's playoffs?  We were essentially one goal away from that Cup, and EK put the team on his back...he was incredible, and on a damaged foot.

It's hard to say with 100% certainty what EK we would get going forward...he did say that this past season was the most difficult of his career.  He went through a lot and I bet when all the contract/trade nonsense is behind him, he goes back to being an annual Norris candidate.

Yeah, I have a hard time absorbing what he said. The people that bash Karlsson for his play for small portions of this year have very short memories in my opinion. Karlsson is everything to me and I say loosely, the Sens too.

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:If the Bruins weren't decimated by injuries we very well could have lost that series. They are practically the same team this year and showed just how good they could be when healthy. The Rangers were weren't very good last year and they still gave us a run for our money. Everyone talks about being on the wrong side of a Game 7 one-goal game. Here are the results of all the playoff games last year which would provide more context to my argument that last year's run could have gone anyway, which includes a first rd loss to Boston.

I apologize for the long email but when I make this argument I try to provide facts because it's the only way to really backup my argument.

6 Games vs Boston:
1. 2-1 loss
2. 4-3 OT win
3. 4-3 OT win
4. 1-0 win
5. 3-2 OT loss
6. 3-2 OT win

Ottawa wins series 4-2 with 4 of 6 games going to OT, and the other two games 1 goal difference.

6 Games vs Rangers:
1. 2-1 win
2. 6-5 OT win (Pageau with 4 goals, 3 goal comeback in 3rd period)
3. 4-1 loss
4. 4-1 loss
5. 5-4 OT win
6. 4-2 win
Two OT wins (one of which was a huge comeback), 1 goal win, 2 goal win. Two lopsided losses.

7 Games vs Pens:
1. 2-1 OT win
2. 1-0 loss
3. 5-1 win
4. 3-2 loss
5. 7-0 loss
6. 2-1 win
7. 3-2 OT loss
All close games with the exception of games 3 & 5.

So yes, we did come within one goal but we narrowly escaped the Bruins (injured) and Rangers (overrated) while Pitt had to go through Columbus and Washington. I guess what I am arguing is that we could have just as easily gone to the cup final or lost in the 1st or 2nd rounds. We got lucky with our opponents and scored key goals at key times.  

I appreciate the time you put into this post, but I don’t think it proves your point or will sway people towards your opinion. You say Boston was healthy this year and look how good they were, but ignore how depleted the Sens were this year versus their success last season when they had a full roster minus one of Karlsson’s ankles. Yup, we sure did score big goals at big times last playoffs, because the team was good enough to put themselves in that position. 

I just don’t see what you see, especially when it comes to wanting Karlsson gone and this potential full rebuild.

There are several differences between the Pens winning with Crosby and the possibility of the Sens winning with Karlsson:

1. Karlsson's high-end price tag (on his next contract) would be paired with Ryan's high-end price tag, whereas Crosby's was complemented with Malkin's.

2. Melnyk is done spending to the cap ceiling, and we didn't have Karlsson in those days (we had Spezza and Heatley and, of course, Alfie, and that got us as far as the Finals.

3. Crosby has long been considered #1 (with Malkin usually #2), whereas Karlsson has been considered top-three (with Ryan, well, not considered at all).

1) I don’t know what Karlsson’s next contract will be and I don’t know if Ryan will still be a Sen. All I know is moves could be made to improve us.

2) Who said spending to the cap is the only way to win a Cup?

3) We aren’t Pittsburgh, I get it.

Lagoon wrote:1) I don’t know what Karlsson’s next contract will be and I don’t know if Ryan will still be a Sen. All I know is moves could be made to improve us.

2) Who said spending to the cap is the only way to win a Cup?

3) We aren’t Pittsburgh, I get it.

Regarding #1: The speculation is that Melnyk has no appetite to buy out Ryan and the only other way he goes would be as a salary dump in a Karlsson trade.

#2: No-one said it is the only way but when you have a $7M going to Ryan and another $5+ to Gaborik and you're in the lower third of the league in total spending then it makes a large difference.