Sharks Trade Granlund! Right or Wrong Move?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 лют 2025
- The San Jose Sharks have traded Mikael Granlund and Cody Ceci to the Dallas Stars. Was it the right move?
Spoiler: Sheng and Keegan don't agree! (2:30)
Speaking of Granlund's leadership, there are different types of leadership. How does Granlund compare to recently-dealt J.T. Miller in that regard? (22:43)
Are there more moves to come for the San Jose Sharks, could they do something with the Stars' first-round pick? (25:15)
More on Granlund's influence on the younger Sharks. (38:30)
Keegan worries about how a San Jose contract with Granlund would've aged. (45:30)
How is this different than the Mackenzie Blackwood situation? (1:01:22)
What does the rest of the season look like for San Jose Sharks fans? (1:13:30)
All that, and more on this EMERGENCY San Jose Hockey Now Podcast.
Couldn’t disagree more w Sheng here.
I love the trade and think it was good value for both teams.
Now if Mike G can turn that Dal 1st, Ferraro, & Kunin/Sturm into Nemec this off-season.. that’d be the cherry on top.
Mike G couldn’t be nailing this rebuild any better. He’s basically flawless so far.
What I remember hearing was that NJ needed scoring depth. They don't need dmen hence why Nemec can't find a way onto the roster. Ironically Granlund fits what they're looking for other than being old, so they'll additionally want a piece for the future for Nemec along that same vein.
I doubt they get Nemec for just that, but it sure would be sweet if they did.
Flawless is an obvious overstatement. He's done very well since the first couple of deals. The Burns deals was a below par deal at the time and of course now, it looks even worse. But the reality is GMs are not going to be flawless. They'll win some, lose some.
You are absolutely out of your mind if you think a late 1st and awful players like Ferraro and Kunin would fetch Nemec lmfaooooooo
@@Ualaabro thinks a team will trade a top 4 D prospect for a late 1st and pure crap lmaoooooo
#1: Sheng you need to allow Keegan to talk. over 20 minutes straight where dialogue is 95% sheng 5% keegan. This isn't the Sheng Peng Podcast, we enjoy Keegan's input.
#2: This trade was incredible value for a guy that is 32 on the worst team in the league. This trade doesn't exist in a vacuum. We have the opportunity to use these 28 games to let Thompson and more cuda guys take up lineup spots to see if they belong. We have all the cap space in the world to find scoring veteran wingers to help Macklin, although the moves in the offseason are really going to help Will more than Mack. Another Veteran Center if Cooch doesn't come back is priority. But that 2nd line center is NOT going to be more valuable than another 1st round pick. We are the worst team in the league 2 years in a row, TO HELL WITH VETERAN LEADERSHIP
Couldn't disagree with Sheng more here. I figured we'd get a 2nd for granlund. Pulling a 1st that will probably be a part of another deal? Absolutely. Highly doubt Granlund was staying unless we drastically overpaid him and screw ourselves for the future. 28 more games of leadership doesn't outweigh that pick.
Not much difference between a late 1st and 2nd dude. Ozzy Wiesblatt or Thomas Bordeleau? Turns out both suck.
I agree with you. They needed a first round pick, not their own to pick up the young disgruntled defenseman whose name escapes me.
Graceland is a very small piece of the puzzle. Turn the page Sheng. He may flame out in Dallas under the big spotlight. I don't think the Stars are picking him up at the airport with a Brinx truck.
*Granland
@@GregH-g4n - autocorrect has a soft spot for Elvis Presley if we're anthropomorphizing here.
I liked:
Celebrini + Eklund + Toffoli
Granlund + Zetterlund + Smith
A veteran player per line, and both lines were getting chances.
---
I feel that the Sharks are probably #32 and the Hawks are probably #31, after today's trade (as in final standings).
That means they have the #1 and #2 seed.
In the draft lottery, it is possible that neither wins 1st or 2nd pick, but that still guarantees at worst #3 and #4.
Personally, given the number of top defense prospects that Chicago already has, I don't see them wanting Schaefer even if they have the first pick.
I could see Chicago wanting one of Misa/Hagens/Martone and trading the #1 pick to one of the teams who has #2-#4.
The Sharks could conceivably give the Hawks a pick to get a player they want anyway and maybe the #20 or a prospect.
For the Sharks, with Dickinson in the system.
I think Schaefer would be a much better choice than the three forwards.
That would likely give them two defense pairings that are very solid.
Personally, if we don't get to select Schaefer, I'd like to select Misa.
I feel Misa/Smith and Celebrini/Eklund is the basis for two solid lines, with a very strong defensive player on each.
But I'd prefer Schaefer to anyone else in this upcoming draft.
Agreed with absolutely everything you just said regarding the draft if we don’t get Schaefer grab misa
I agree, if it's not Schaefer then Misa is the guy for me. Can have Eklund, Celebrini on one line with Musty, Smith and Misa on the other line. If we pick Schaefer then we can have a Pairing of Schaefer and Mukh(playing off hand), Dickinson and Pohklamp and then Cags and another RHD as your defensive core. Either way, if we get Misa or Schaefer then we are going to be very happy.
@@previnsnaidu1 having smith Misa and Igor (Igor and misa on same ohl team and have had great chemistry since Igor started playing) that’d be wicked
@ that would work too, have Eklund - Celebrini - Musty on the 1st line with Igor - Misa - Smith on the 2nd would be elite
Love the podcast. Understand where Sheng is coming from, but his arguments seemed fueled by feels and narratives. Granlund did well during his time here, no question, much better than could be expected when the Karlsson trade was made. Good luck to Granlund and Ceci in Dallas.
Ultimately, Grier's guiding light is "what is going to best serve the Shark's rebuild?" In this case, the two main scenarios were 1) Putting resources into keeping Granlund around after this season or 2) Finding a Granlund deal that meets Grier's asking price. And while I think the "MG should have waited and gotten more!" arguments have some merit, in Granlund's case his injury history and the fact that he'll play in the 4 Nations made a deal now more sensible than a deal closer to the deadline.
In any case, Grier armed with an extra first rounder is exciting, because he now has the flexibility to jump on whatever opportunities arise. The Pittsburgh first to get a falling Dickinson, the Vegas first to take Askarov off of Nashville's hands. Neither opportunity were likely at the times Grier acquired the picks, but now Askarov is clearly a huge part of the Sharks' future and hopefully Dickinson develops into a core piece too or is part of a package to acquire one. Building the asset pool to take advantage of opportunities > than keeping Granlund around.
I think Sheng's view is a lot more than feelings (not feels..that's a textbonics 'word') and narratives. Sheng is a reporter, meaning he has access to the team locker room. He has a far better understanding of the locker room dynamic and insight from his contacts than any of us do. While I'm not altogether upset about the return, I did have some reservations about moving Granlund, because as Sheng said, he was a unique veteran in that he was still young enough to play a high level game and go to a playoff contender but he actually embraced and relished his role as a mentor to the Sharks' up and coming stars. I doubt you, nor most fans, whom many have never played hockey let alone at the highest levels, truly understand how important that is your young players. It's the toughest league in the world and a grind where young players have to weather the mental grind. To have a highly skilled vet (as opposed to just a Kunin grinder) is more valuable than you understand. That said, it's not a shock that they traded Granlund. It was expected. Celebrini will likely be fine and adapt but Smith, I think is perhaps more dependent on a mentor at this stage.
I don't work off "feels and narratives", especially for an opinion like this where I'm putting myself on the line...I've talked with multiple sources, and in private settings (like not public with a camera in their face), some biased, some not so biased, who tell me specifically about Granlund's value to the young players and the room.
Of course, he's not untouchable or irreplaceable, but my price was simply higher than a likely late 1st, and I do think a shorter-term, higher AAV extension should've been a more serious discussion
@@ShengPeng Hi Sheng! Longtime SJHN subscriber, apparently first-time basher. Perhaps my phrasing was unfair. I have no doubts on your reporting, hence why I'm a subscriber. Like I said, I understand your arguments and reasonable minds can come to different conclusions based off the information we're privy to.
One person who would/should have more intimate knowledge than you is Grier and he felt the compensation for Granlund was sufficient. So, to serve the purposes of this emergency pod (Right or Wrong Move?) perhaps more space should have been given to assessing whether this was the right move since that was Grier's choice. Perhaps re-assessing your priors to understand why Grier's assessment of Granlund's on and off-ice impact rated a first round pick, and not more, might have been a worthwhile exploration. Because based on how I perceived the discussion in this pod and its tone, plenty of room was given for the case that this was the wrong move. Once we know what happens with the Dallas pick, then that'll be the future pod where we can say "Sheng wuz rite!" or "In Grier We Trust" or "WTF, Doncic to the f*#$ing Lakers?"
I gave my own thoughts on Grier's intentions in the OP: Grier has an understanding of what assets he needs to have at hand in case there are opportunities to enhance the rebuild, whether that's at the trade deadline or during the draft. And Grier assessed that the trade compensation was more valuable than keeping Granlund for the remainder of the season. The Granlund trade isn't a deviation from how Grier has been operating since he's taken over and installed his front office team.
@@jasonh9379 No worries, I didn't take it as bashing. I just wanted to be clear that it wasn't an "emotional" take on my end.
And no doubt, Grier has an inside view of the room. And having that asset could certainly be converted into a win-now return. And indeed, this is standard operating procedure for Mike.
I also agree that we could've spent more time on why did Mike make this move? Because just bitching about it, hey, it's over, we can't change that. It was a bit of an unstructured podcast, we could've planned topics better. Partly because of time, we just started recording, without much thought of organization and length. We're usually a bit more organized, but an emergency pod, we basically just started talking, and me, rambling.
Sheng for the love of god, its 24 minutes in of only you talking and you interrupt Keegan 5 seconds into his take
That's fair.
I know I do that, and try not to. That's why, I did catch myself, and Keegan completed his counter-argument.
But anyway, I'll keep working on that. I am argumentative and always try to be "the smartest person in the room" by nature. It's sort of what reporters do too, nature of the job haha.
But I am aware, and I consciously try to work on it, but sometimes, especially in an unstructured debate, my worst habits come back.
@@ShengPeng Fair and good to take responsibility, on a show like this you guys disagreeing is good but use that IVY LEAGUE brain and take a mental note of the things you disagree with him saying then respond once they are done talking. Or use a notebook if you can't remember. Keegan has the patience of a god to just take a deep breath at 24:36 instead of telling you to STFU
@@LC-wv4xi Actually, I took notes after Keegan started talking, after I interrupted him...and it's Keegan with the Ivy League brain, not me, haha
@@ShengPengwe love you for who you are sheng
Sheng comes off really obnoxious here. Constantly cutting off Keegan when he disagrees. Sounds like a butthurt fan who claims to not be a fan.
I agree. Turn the page on Granlund.
So true maybe sheng is having a bad day
He always seems that way but more this video
Painful. Probably could have been a done and dusted conversation of roughly 10-15 minutes. A lot of interrupting for nothing more than redundant gainsaying. The "we can still resign" , "it's unlikely" back and forth was particularly bad.
Let Keegan speak more. It's a two person podcast. Podcasts where one person does 90% of the talking make people wonder why the second person is there. Plus Sheng, you were just re-making an argument that you had already made several times already.
If Granlund wanted to return, he could have signed an extension with the Sharks as Blackwood did. We don't know whether the Sharks wanted to make an offer in-season or not and we don't know whether they would have been able to agree on term and money. I agree that Granlund is more valuable to the Sharks than he is to the Stars or any other team. He's a 3rd line center for the Stars, he's more valuable than that on the Sharks. But as soon as next season, the Sharks 1st and 2nd lines may well be centered by Celebrini and Smith. How much do the Sharks want to pay for a high-end 3rd line scoring center that's good in the locker room and with the kids?
If the Sharks are gonna overpay for something, I'd be looking at a first line wing buddy for Celebrini and two first pairing defensemen much more than a 2nd/3rd line center with good leadership qualities.
In regards to your granlund take. He hasn’t resigned yet. Talks supposedly weren’t much if at all. We’re arguing over hypothetical he may want to stay because he seemed very happy. But with the fact of no contract extension. You’re risking a first for 28 games of leadership. No brainer you trade and look for the easier to obtain leadership player. Maybe you’re happy with Tyler, Alex W, vlassic for now. Plus Joe, patty, nabby, etc off the ice.
My understanding is there's a good chance that he would've re-signed for a team-friendly contract in length (but not AAV), which is a big part of my argument.
Of course if he wants to leave a la Hertl and Karlsson, let him go.
Of course if he contract length doesn't fit the timeline a la Blackwood, let him go.
I totally agree with Sheng on Granlund. The sharks need him way more than the next team. How many “veterans” are they going to take a swing on over the next 3 yrs just trying to replace what Granlund provides? There is a time cost to this as well that needs to be properly weighted in the decision process (which seems to be lacking). The only other idea is if they needed the 1st round pick as part of a mega package for bringing in someone in the offseason like Marner (although I hope not).
I liked the return definitely I also wouldn’t have been mad to keep him for us I thought it would be a win win. I do like though that sheng doesn’t hesitate to voice when he disagrees rather then just agree with everything to help his relationship with the team
Sheng is very passionate ab keeping grandlund bc of how good he was for the room but bro ALWAYS says he’s not a fan lmfao he sounds a lot like a cranky fan rn Keegan couldn’t even talk
Both sides made their points! We’ll either feel great or underwhelmed depending on what Grier does with the pick. Don’t think it will make or break whether or not the rebuild is ultimately successful
As Keegan said, if Granlund REALLY wants to come back... He can come back in free agency lmao. Trading him for a 1st rounder was the only move.
Before listening: I think it’s a good move if the Sharks either use the first on a defenseman that falls, or trade it along with another piece for an established NHL defenseman. We need to improve the team defense now and into the future. Biggest issue
Looking more unlikely as he keeps rising in rankings but using that first round pick and other picks to trade up for Carter Bear would be fire
Hope we can trade up for Blake Fiddler not as much of a jump and a RD. Our RD pipeline is nonexistent
Schaefer or Martone for me. If we can’t get that #1 Dman, get Celebrini a giant highly skilled power forward on his wing.
Happy with the trade. Ceci has been garbage and Granlund has been inconsistent this season. Signing Granlund to a long term contract would have kept me up at night, if I was Grier.
I disagree with a lot of Sheng’s takes. Finding a true number goalie is not easy. If it was easy the sharks would have cups. Look what we did to secure our goalie of the future. Top 6 forwards are on every team. But not every team has a top goalie. Example Colorado this year, they went out and restocked the whole goalie stable. In all honesty I don’t think GMMG is looking at this year. The rest of the year expect a lot of cuda to get their shots. He will restock in off season. Baby steps. This year we are competitive next year we look to start putting wins together and climbing off the bottom. That being said GMMG said adding young vets. Thoughts on adding Mitch ?
Finding a truly elite goalie (like Askarov might be) is hard, but finding an average-to-good goalie to start when you have the proper defensive infrastructure behind him? That's not so hard
You are comparing finding asky a partner ( backup) to finding a top 6 forward that plays every night. Of course that’s harder to find. Every team has goalies that fall under the “average” category. You are viewing Granlund as top 6 player because that’s the value the sharks see him. Other teams see him as two C at best but more than likely at great 3 C on a playoff ready team. There is no chance two years ago Granny commands a 1st. We boosted his value and we received a payoff. Remember Pitt was about to waive Granny. The youth use the term “come up” 😂. Now we have a late 1st and an early 2nd that can be used to trade up or to flip for a player. Great part of this deal is that there is so much time before the deadline. So in fairness you can’t compare the two. And in your defense statement you mention having a competent defense for the goalie. Well the sharks don’t have that either so why hold a top 6 32yr old player. He has far more value to us as a trade asset. The team can last 30 some games without his veteran experience
Here is the thing. Granlund was awesome for the sharks. If MG and Granlund’s team were close, then the gets extended. It is very clear MG didn’t think the AAV and term were friendly.
Let’s be honest about the pick though. Draft picks outside the top 10 maybe 15 are very overrated by fans. The chances of getting a decent 2 or 3rd line winger is very questionable at 25. A star is highly doubtful. They will be cost controlled though.
Lastly, you could overpay Granlund to stay. Or you could over pay someone else to come. Either way we need 2 top 9 forwards, 2 top 4 defensemen, and a 1b goalie next year to take another step forward.
Do you not think Grier feels the room? I think he understands your argument for keeping Granlund. But I am sure he realizes the upside to the draft pick is greater. And btw, you are arguing, and it's been an hour! Move on!
Of course Grier feels the room. But what, I should just say trust in Mike because of that? He is fallible even with his inside knowledge. (Of course, I can be wrong too.)
And yes, we rambled, or I did, which I take responsibility for, and I will try to improve. We probably could've lopped off the last half or so of the pod.
Depending on who you listen to about the upcoming draft, there isn't a lot of difference in quality of prospects after the 10th pick. I thought someone said after 15, which I tend to agree with, but again, you're going to have guys in the late first round and the second round that outperform their draft position. This is where your scouts get paid to deliver. I would think that in this draft Grier may keep the Dallas 1st and the early 2nd rounder for more chances to hit on a player, but he could use them in a trade package for a prospect, or use them to move up in the first round if they like someone. He seems to have a pattern of going that route over keeping and picking. My thinking is that he doesn't really have the assets to package to get much of a return. Granlund was pretty much it. Toffoli is about the only other option to provide a good return as part of a package (without dipping into your younger players) but he would have to agree to be moved, which I doubt happens.
Yes, you are correct that Granlund was an excellent mentor for the European players in particular. I am hoping this is a boomerang trade in which Granlund plays for Dallas until end of this year, and then resigns with Sharks as a UFA. This would mean Sharks "lent" Granlund to Dallas for the second half of season and then got him right back for a late first round pick in 2025. In the UFA market, Granlund will probably get $6.5 million for 4 years to complete his NHL career. Granlund is smaller but feisty and intense player who never gives up. He has had some injuries slow him down but still good at special teams and overtime or shootout. Keeping Granlund for the sake of team chemistry would have been a risk to Mike Grier's plan which requires stocking up on more prospects. If Texas has lower taxes than California, then that could make Granlund move on.
The sad thing for Sharks fans is that Mike Grier has traded away their best player this year and so the rest of season will get much worse. Even missing Ceci will lead to more goals against, which Sharks did not need. Mike Grier just made Ryan Warsofsky's job as coach 10 times harder as he tries to repair team chemsitry and fill gaps left by the trade. I expect Sharks to trade Georgiev, Kunin and Sturm or at least 3 more players before the deadline. The 2024-25 team was improved but still did not have the right chemistry or mix of players, so the GM has to keep juggling players and trying new combinations. While Sharks are getting better, their competition is getting even better faster and keeping Sharks at the bottom of standings.
Sharks have been stuck with older player big contract money; Burns, Vlasic, Couture, Karlson, that needs to burn off. Why add another aging player contract?
If the Sharks were a Cup contender they could have kept Granlin.
In terms of conversion of value then vs now, it's great. But he's played himself out of that valuation completely. Like in your last video about trading for Nemec, I thought signing and trading him with generous retention over the summer would increase his value by even more. I was surprised when Grier said he was the one who determined the price and Dallas matched it. I guess the market isn't as hungry for Granlund as I assumed?
Sheng loves him some Granny. Take the picks and be glad you got them. Telling yourself that Granny loved it so much here that he'd come back is wish casting. Grow up, Sheng. You're not 12 years old.
It's not wish casting, it's reporting
Late-1st round picks are notoriously overvalued by GMs. I'm with Sheng on this one -- it's a fine trade and maybe even an overpay for Granlund but I'd rather see him stay on and continue to mentor the kids. His statement makes me feel like he really would have preferred to stay, too.
True, but I’m sure Grier had an idea of what Granlund would have wanted. No way he’s taking a significantly team friendly deal to stay despite how much he likes it here, when he could get a longer and more lucrative deal with a potential contender. I just can’t see the Sharks giving someone who’s 33 more than 3 years at a likely higher AAV.
@@airsuzukiyeap. GMMG even said he had a sense of what the pending UFAs want to resign
I agree with Sheng. But if Dallas gets bounced early in 2nd round or whatever, Grier could stack pick 25'ish with pick 33 and move up in the draft to snag a target he likes
Yep. Late 1sts get you an “Ozzy Wiesblatt” lmfao
@@SfGiantsRants which is why Keegan correctly points out that the asset itself is better than the pick. This gives us the opportunity to move it plus prospects for a top 6 player whos younger and fits the timeline better than 32 year old Granlund.
Ceci ate some tough minutes.
And was terrible
Who else is moving? Kunin? Mario? Rutta? Sturm?
I'm still shaking my head, Grier had a couple seasons to move Barabanov for a 3rd or so and took too long
I’m in agreement with Shengs argument. If (a big if) Granny would have been okay with a three year deal, I think the Sharks would have been better off having a competitive “bridge” team around Mack and Will instead of continuing a tear down and hoarding draft picks that are not going to give you immediate (or guaranteed) help. I don’t think Grier should subject the future core to a shitty environment.
granny gave you a leader and competitive line to unload some of the pressure on Mack. He was a leader in PK, PP and EV ice time. Who’s going to fill those minutes? Wenneberg is not a top 2 center man. kunin? Please!
The remaining 30 games are going to be very hard to watch. Even harder on Mack, Will, and the rest.
This is a huge step back for the fans willing to stick around and tolerate watching this team through the rebuild.
SSSSSSSHHHHH (SHarks SHitting for Schaefer)
Kind of side with Sheng
Doesn't look like Logan is coming back. If he does,.. great.
This puts too much pressure on 18 year old Macklin up the middle.
Will they give Eklund some time at C?
Other options are Kunin 🤦🏽.. or Wennberg, who sometimes looks like maybe, yes, he can. Sometimes he looks like a face-off specialist that should be centering a 4th line
Does Will go back to the middle? Does Bords come up?
28 more games of this lack of help. Full offseason upcoming with more vets to ease the burden. Either way, this teams timeline is 2027 and on, and granlund's value was obviously too high to pass up. When this team starts to grow up and turn into something, granlund would be 34+ with top 9 value. We can get that elsewhere through free agency or via trade thanks to the amount of assets we have stockpiled.
It just made too much sense IMO.
Too many goober online fans get so sucked into “+EV valueeeee and assetssss”. Granlund should have been re-signed. The stars are going back to the WCF which means this is a pick in 28-30 range. THERE ARE NOT ANY IMPACT PROSPECTS IN THAT RANGE! You’re “hoping” to find a 3rd line forward or a solid 5D that can carry a 3rd pair. You can find the same caliber player in the 2nd round. The only “picks” that are significant are top 15 picks.
The only positive to this deal is we don’t have to watch Cody Ceci anymore.
Saying there aren’t impact players late in the first round of drafts this early is preposterous. I definitely hear where you’re coming from but you can’t just write the players off this early lol. Pavs and Demers were late round players
@@mattgrassi5293 Pavs and Demers were late round players? Yea they were. So does that mean a 6th round pick would have been an acceptable return? Or maybe they were absolute steals that are extremely rare?
More often than not, the back of round 1 is full of Wiesblatt’s. The whole point is that “1st round pickkkk” is now this blanket term that doesn’t accurately describe the value of said asset. There’s a whole world of difference between the 11th pick where you pick up a Dickinson and the back of round 1 where it’s a completely different bucket of player.
@ I hear you, I do agree with Keagan here that I doubt we’ll end up drafting a player there. It might just be used for a bigger trade for a nemec, to trade up, OR offer to get picks in 2026, use at trade deadline, I cannot see us using this draft pick and drafting a player
@@mattgrassi5293 Nemec isn’t happening dude. Devils do not give a shit about a late 1st in regards to Nemec. Get that through your head.
@@SfGiantsRants I was just using that as an example?? I’m not saying it would happen. I gave several examples. Seems like you’re having a bad day today lmfao don’t know why you’re so sassy about it. Hope tomorrow is better for ya