Dec 1, 2011; San Jose, CA, USA; San Jose Sharks right wing Martin Havlat (9), left wing Brad Winchester (10), center Andrew Murray (28) and left wing Jamie McGinn (64) celebrate after the game against the Montreal Canadiens at HP Pavilion. San Jose won 4-3 in a shootout. Mandatory Credit: Jason O. Watson-US PRESSWIRE

BoT Roundtable - Steals and Deals

Not every deal is a good one, sometimes you think you’re getting a Brodeur and you wind up with a DiPietro.  But for every good side that gets a bad deal, the other side could get a worse one.  Take the Heatley/Havlat deal for instance: Heatley was not the most popular person in San Jose, and many people didn’t shed a tear when the trade was announced.  In fact it seemed like a huge win for the Sharks, but then Havlat took a wrong step and was sidelined for a major part of the season.  Heatley continued his downward trend for a third straight season, so both teams wound up not getting much from the deal.  Taking a look back at the dealings of this season, the question to today’s roundtable was this:

With all the trades this season, which former Shark(s) would you have liked back?

Darryl voices what seems to be the prevailing sentiment of Sharks fans.
Jamie McGinn I feel was only dealt because the Sharks had little else to deal but still gave up enough to get defensive stability from Daniel Winnik and TJ Galiardi. Mostly I wish we kept a few more of the farm hands such as Charlie Coyle and Michael Sgarbossa. I feel DW was doing what he could to plug some holes but maybe he dug too deep there. I like the way McGinn played and just wish the Sharks had another route to could have taken there. My concern is more with the farm system because to me it’s a lot more satisfying to succeed with homegrown talent, and it’s tough as a hockey fan to see that talent get dealt away for someone who may or may pan out long term. Could the Sharks have kept Setoguchi and made the Burns deal? Possibly, and if they had done so thru this year they may have had an easier time getting a trade done for Rick Nash this summer. If Coyle cracks the Wild’s line up this next season and Setoguchi continues to slide, Seto will look for like a “throw in.” However, keep in mind that hindsight is always 20/20 and the full impact of most trades is now known for at least a few seasons…

Mike brings back a name that many people were quick to forget.
The guy I wish Wilson had brought back was Kyle Wellwood.  Wellwood had a bad rep coming in for being out of shape and not willing to work, but the guy had magic hands and Wilson picked him up as a late season addition for a song.  And then he goes ahead and does this.  With one of the big slams most people put on the Sharks being their lack of secondary scoring, you’d have thought that Welly might have at least been able to help out on that front.  He certainly did in Winnipeg this year, one of his best as a pro (47 points in 77 games).

Gordon looks at more than one of the deals.
I’m torn on this one.  As much as I like Burnsie, I think that (essentially) three consecutive 1st round picks was too high a price.  I know wholeheartedly that Seto was prone to be streaky, and that our defense needed some bolstering, but I don’t know why we had to pay through the nose initially.  On a player v player basis over the season, I think we came out on top: Burns put up a stellar performance for us and showed himself to be outstanding with fans, where Seto seemed to have a difficult time this season both on and off the ice.
But the real person I wish we had back was McGinn.  Whereas the trade for Galiardi and Winnik was more balanced than the one for Burns, I can’t shake the feeling that we traded for quantity over quality.  Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against our new players, I just feel like we had other players who could’ve been dealt instead.  Ginner was, and continued to be a terrific on ice presence.  I’m not saying he would’ve turned the tide through the rest of the season, but I just feel like the team was missing something without him.

Erik brings up some more good points.
Agreeing with Gordon here.  Burns was a player this team needed, I expect next season he will have a better season.  Giving up essentially three first rounders might be the signal of the demise of this team.  Seto can be streaky, but played well in the postseason where he shined.  Coyle could be one that will be missed in the years to come, with the lack of offense down in Worcester.  The McGinn trade still boggles my mind.  This looks to be a quantity trade and might haunt us in the years to come ala the Guerin trade (Perron was picked with our draft selection we traded to St. Louis.)  #GaliardiDown might be a new trend among Sharks fans on twitter next season, if he comes back.  Winnik shows that hunger but the team needed secondary scoring with a punch and that’s what McGinn brought.

Benny goes right round, round, round.
I mean, this is basically a broken record playing on repeat… But…
Ginner is definitely a player the Sharks should never have gotten rid of. Before being traded, he was one of a few players on the ice I saw that played with grit, passion, and tenacity. Not that I don’t like Galiardi and Winnik, I just don’t think they fit in as well for the team as a whole. They did play well and had their high light moments. Especially Winniks shot from the corner scoring top shelf. That’s skill. But McGinn is definitely an up and coming star that will shine given a few more years. Just like Ehrhoff with the Canucks and Carle with the Flyers, develop them well and give them time, they can be a star.
On Burns, I completely agree with this trade, and the rest of you. We were definitely trying to build our defense at the time. The price of a streaky goal scorer, Coyle (another star to be in my eyes), and a first round pick was high, but (hopefully) we get Burns on the long run and it will turn out to become a great trade. We obviously need to strengthen our defense up, and this was one of the moves to get that done. Burns did not shine as bright as everyone hoped, but, let’s judge him after next season to see if he’s consistently the player we want, or the player we’ll hate. Now, we need to get a few more quality defensive men, and we could have a great team. That and change our goalie, but that’s another rant on it’s own.

Amy seems to have had enough of our McGinn lovefest.
Let me start by saying I DO NOT WANT McGinn back. I know that’s like blasphemy in this roundtable discussion but I have to be honest. I think that trading him was a pretty wise decision. I think that Couture played better after McGinn left and I think McGinn played better in Colorado. I really didn’t care for them both being on the team and think they were more of a distraction to each other if anything. The McGinn trade also opened up some room for Wingels to work on his game and shine, and Pavs really stepped up as well! So I’m sorry, I don’t want McGinn back. Who I do want back is actually another player who went to the Avs from our development system, Mike Connolly. The kid has a lot of potential and I hated seeing him go in the massive trade. I can honestly say though, we could probably use Seto’s speed back at the tank…granted he doesn’t lose his edge in a shootout again…


If you’d like to see your question answered, simply post it in the comments or on our Facebook, and we’ll work it into the rotation!

 Blades of Teal ~ The Final Word On Sharks Hockey.

Be sure to follow all of your BoT staff on twitter!!!

comments powered by Disqus