San Jose Sharks looking to trade Martin Havlat?

Jonathan Willis
June 01 2013 09:59AM

With San Jose making their playoff exit on Tuesday, focus has now shifted to the team’s off-season aims. One of them: dealing away veteran winger Martin Havlat.

The Report

From the Mercury News’ Tim Kawakami (via Lyle Richardson):

I presume the Sharks will move on or discard Martin Havlat, who is owed $10 million over the next two seasons -- the Sharks probably will try to trade him to anybody willing to take that money. If there's no deal, they will have to use the amnesty provision and pay out 66 percent of the contract ($6.67 million in Havlat's case) to be done with him.

Kawakami is actually mistaken on the buyout amount – despite his cap hit Havlat is owed $11 million in actual salary over the next two seasons, meaning that a buyout would actually cost $7.33 million.

Havlat’s contract also originally included a no-trade clause which he waived to join the Sharks; it’s unclear whether that clause is still in effect or is negated by that trade.

An Opportunity?

One of the difficulties for the Oilers this summer is what to do with Ales Hemsky. The long-time Oiler has a deserved reputation for being injury prone, is seen as likely on the way out as the Oilers attempt to upgrade their size, and has a contract (paying $5 million next season) that may make it difficult to trade him and get value back.

The big disadvantage to bringing Havlat in to replace Hemsky is the extra year on his contract, but there are some advantages that may offset that. For one, he’s much bigger than Hemsky, being listed at 6’2”, 210 pounds. For another, the left-shooting winger generally plays right wing but has played left wing earlier in his career, so he may be a better positional fit. He has also been relatively healthy the last few years, playing 83% of his team’s games over the last five seasons, though he’s currently on the shelf with a lower body injury.

In a straight 1-for-1 trade, the extra year on Havlat’s contract is too much of a disadvantage to compensate for his advantages over Hemsky. But if San Jose was willing to sweeten the pot a little – perhaps by retaining some of that second year salary or by including something else (they have three second round draft picks), is it a deal that could make sense for the Oilers?

It really depends what other options the Oilers have; likely, this would be too much of a lateral move to make sense, particularly if they have a chance at a player like Nathan Horton in free agency.

Recently around the Nation Network

Justin Azevedo lists Compliance Buyout Candidates for the Western Conference over at NHL Numbers; which three names does he have in mind as potential Oilers buyouts?

 Click the link above to read the whole piece, or feel free check out some of my other pieces here:

74b7cedc5d8bfbe88cf071309e98d2c3
Jonathan Willis is Managing Editor of the Nation Network. He also currently writes for the Edmonton Journal's Cult of Hockey, Grantland, and Hockey Prospectus. His work has appeared at theScore, ESPN and Puck Daddy. He was previously founder and managing editor of Copper & Blue. Contact him at jonathan (dot) willis (at) live (dot) ca.
Avatar
#51 Wäx Män Riley
June 01 2013, 04:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
shea78 wrote:

I truly don't believe that Horton is a possibility. I think he stays out East and most likely he stays with Boston.

I think he stays out east too, but Boston is in some Cap trouble with only 17 players signed and just over $6M in space.

Avatar
#52 Wäx Män Riley
June 01 2013, 04:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Wäx Män Riley wrote:

I think he stays out east too, but Boston is in some Cap trouble with only 17 players signed and just over $6M in space.

Most of Boston's core is locked up though, so it probably is a good possibility he stays in Boston

Avatar
#53 Wäx Män Riley
June 01 2013, 04:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
MKE wrote:

You probably have addressed this already, but is Belov a UFA next summer?

Capgeek says a UFA after next year.

Avatar
#54 MKE
June 01 2013, 04:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Wäx Män Riley

Thank you

Avatar
#55 Racki
June 01 2013, 05:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Czar wrote:

So it's down to us and Minny? Reports say he was looking seriously at 3 teams and Minny was one of them. Hopefully Chabot described just how poor our goaltender depth is,way more hurdles for him in Minny.

The Jets were also one of the teams who were mentioned as possible destinations for Raanta.

Russo from the Minnesota Tribune said something in one of his tweets that made it sound like they weren't the winner. Once Raanta mentioned he made his choice, Russo tweeted saying that the Wild hadn't heard from Raanta at all that day, or something like that. That doesn't necessarily mean much. But I'd guess it's down to the Jets and Oilers now.

God this is taking too long. lol

Avatar
#56 Old Retired Guy (A.K.A. Die-Nasty)
June 01 2013, 06:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Countdown to SEVEN is underway!

1) Belov

2) Raanta ??

Avatar
#57 stretch14
June 01 2013, 10:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

no, NO, NO! Stupid idea, stupid article

Avatar
#58 Mr common sense
June 01 2013, 10:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Oiler Al wrote:

You might as well keep Hemsky, for the sake of a few pounds.. there is no advantage. In fact I sooner keep Hemsky vs Havlat.

Havlat though talented , dosen't come to play every shift.

Spend your time and money chasing Bicknell, who is a UFA, brings some much need grit to his game.

I woiuld also target guys like Torres and Ott. This is what the Oilers need, not another Euro slick player without heart.

Think play offs.. you see what kind of players this team is missing.

Wow finally someone who gets it. Steve Ott is what we need not more perimeter dancers

Avatar
#59 Smokey
June 01 2013, 11:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Walter Sobchak wrote:

I'll go by paragraph.

No.no.no. Hemsky was the best player on the ice in maybe 4 or 5 games....might have been! You could argue that the players around Hemsky made him better! You could also argue that Hemsky was ONE of the reasons that the second line bleed chance after chance.

No. He's not a 50 to 60 point guy anymore, you can't give ice time to a player that MIGHT stay healthy or MIGHT score 50 points. Yakupov is a superior player to Hemsky and your willing to cut his development and ice time on the off chance Hemsky MIGHT stay healthy or MIGHT score 50 points.

Comparing Gagner production to Hemsky being injured is ridicules, Yakupov was still scoring and Gagner production slowed because the PP dried up on him, not because Hemsky was injured! Gagner still produced despite Hemsky being injured for the last 3 years.

This is a business and as much as we as fans have attachments to certain players, it's what's best for the team and the players on the team, and in some cases best for the player on the way out. Hemsky position has been filled, with a better player, so use Hemsky to fill a position that needs a better player down the roster.

I agree that he was a great player for this team, but keeping him is not filling a role on another spot in the line up that needs an upgrade.

You could argue that Hemsky linemates made him better. But Hemsky historically carried weaker linemates. Hemsky was at times the Oilers best player on some aweful nights.

50-60 point player. He would of been close if he wasn't injured for the last month he played. The only arguement you can logically make is he is made of glass and gets injured.

Gagner is largely effective dependant upon linemates as any player. As Hemsky went he went tthe earlier part of the year so did Gagner. What exactly happened when Hemsky was finished for the season. Some media types talked glowingly about Horcoff importance and record when he got hurt. No one said nothing about how this team tanked, and was completely lifeless for what ten games after left. Not the first time this team fell apart after he got injured. Its been a recurrect theme, facts are facts. Really we should argue are the Oilers better with Hemsky or not. I believe they are. not and letting his ship sail without filling th gigantic hole he will leave is stupid. You can't replace talent easily, haven't we learned how difficult it is to aquire effective players who csan contribute. We need more elite talent not less. We need effective grinders which are non existant. Having two many of the same type is the media's perception of what the problem was. The problem was the Oilers have 6 forwards that need to retire or go to the AHL.

Trading Hemsky for nothing but draft picks is creating a hole. This team is multiple players from being elite. Yak never filled his hole, they still have holes if the retained both. Elite talent just doesn't come easy. Look at Pittsburgh, the more elite talent the better. You can never have enough.

Avatar
#60 OilClog
June 01 2013, 11:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

The idea of trading Hemsky for Havlat is ridiculous!! Havlat is hurt just as much as anyone in the league!! At a bigger cap hit then Hemmer! This article is a waste.

Avatar
#61 Walter Sobchak
June 02 2013, 12:01AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
OilersBrass wrote:

I couldn't disagree more with everything you just said. Yakupov will be better than Hemsky yes, but there's no way he is better than Hemsky now.

Who do you suggest upgrading Hemsky with? Keep in mind before suggesting a ridiculous (ps. that's how ridiculous is properly spelt) trade, that teams don't want to give up a player that is better than Hemsky.

Actually he is better, better defensively, better offensively, younger, faster, stronger his Corsi is better, his shooting percentage is better and his 5x5 is better.

I'm not sure what you constitute a better player but Yakupov is already better.

I never said upgrade Hemskys position, I said Hemsky position is redundant and he COULD be used to upgrade a position of need.

I'll go slow.

Trade Hemsky to fill Jones or Petrel spot in the line up, that would equal an upgraded position of need.

Also I use an apple I-pad most of the time so if its spells a word wrong I apologize and beg you for forgiveness.

Avatar
#62 Walter Sobchak
June 02 2013, 12:14AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Smokey

Good points smoke.

I agree he will be missed somewhere in the line up, but his position is forever filled.

He can't play on the first line and was bleeding chances on the second line.

He is still very effective on the PP but would be a waste on the third line.

If he's not going to play in the top two lines then he should be moved to a team that could still use his skills.

In return he could help the Oilers fill a role somewhere in the line up, somebody recently said the Oilers could ship Hemsky for Ott or Torres, this is exactly what I meant by saying he could help fill another need in the lineup.

I don't use Hemsky injuries as a crutch or an excuse to justify my point.

I just think its time for Hemsky to be moved where he can still be useful, in return, I would hope the Oilers get a player of need in return.

Avatar
#63 Maddog
June 02 2013, 12:56AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Smokey wrote:

You could argue that Hemsky linemates made him better. But Hemsky historically carried weaker linemates. Hemsky was at times the Oilers best player on some aweful nights.

50-60 point player. He would of been close if he wasn't injured for the last month he played. The only arguement you can logically make is he is made of glass and gets injured.

Gagner is largely effective dependant upon linemates as any player. As Hemsky went he went tthe earlier part of the year so did Gagner. What exactly happened when Hemsky was finished for the season. Some media types talked glowingly about Horcoff importance and record when he got hurt. No one said nothing about how this team tanked, and was completely lifeless for what ten games after left. Not the first time this team fell apart after he got injured. Its been a recurrect theme, facts are facts. Really we should argue are the Oilers better with Hemsky or not. I believe they are. not and letting his ship sail without filling th gigantic hole he will leave is stupid. You can't replace talent easily, haven't we learned how difficult it is to aquire effective players who csan contribute. We need more elite talent not less. We need effective grinders which are non existant. Having two many of the same type is the media's perception of what the problem was. The problem was the Oilers have 6 forwards that need to retire or go to the AHL.

Trading Hemsky for nothing but draft picks is creating a hole. This team is multiple players from being elite. Yak never filled his hole, they still have holes if the retained both. Elite talent just doesn't come easy. Look at Pittsburgh, the more elite talent the better. You can never have enough.

All Hemsky is is an elite NHL zone entry specialist,not much else.He is probably top ten in that dept in terms of impact and consistancy.

The 2nd line didnt need Hemsky at all last year,the 3rd line needed his zone entry and penetration ability.Our first two lines have that capability withiut Hemmer for the first time in his career.

Hemsky didnt historiclly carry weaker linemates,he has always been and always will be a one dimensional player,elite at what he does,that is his true value right there,his puck possesion time makes it seem like he is carrying linemates but 50% of the time his habit of keeping the puck screws with them to much if they are creativerly talented as well,Hemmer needs snipers he can set up that dont need to be creative at all just shoot,big men who can get into position for his feeds from behind the net.

A smart Vancouver team would trade Louongo for him straight across.

Gagner dynamiclly managed his line the best last year by a large margin,making the absolute best of the opportunitys he had.We had a playoff caliber 2nd line all season and the 4th line showed potential at times,but the 1st and 3rd sunk us totally.1st being mismanaged for 2/3 of the season and the 3rd for giving us next to no offense at all.

I agree we need Hemsky and his zone entry and penetration abilitys for the 3rd line to play with Smyth and Horcoff,that gives us an NHL playoff caliber 3rd line,this means only our 1st line needs to be managed better earlier for us to be in the right position to make the post season.

I wouldnt trade Hemsky but he wouldnt regularly crack my top 6 unless he starts crapping goals like a seagull binge eating in the Macdonalds parking lot on a Sunday afternoon.

I wouldnt accept another repeat of last year,nope,to the 3rd line with you and score your way out of it,and if you whine we need to plant you on the bench ASAP.Put it this way if the 1st line starts like it did last year,Hemmer will get Halls zone entry job quickly and taylor may find himself working his way back up from the 3rd line,because its just the zone entry ability we need in both spots.Our 3 top zonr entry guys are MPS,Hemsky,Hall,put em where you want em,but one per line please.If Ralph really wanted his pairs idea to work it could have he just had to identify these zone entry specialist and rotate them up and down to present different tactical looks and power projections,it is just these 3 that need to be moved,the pairs on the top 3 lines need to stay the same.Ralph refused to drop Hemmer to the 3rd and put and keep MPS on the 2nd early enough and properly manage Hall early enough,he corrected but to late,that is the season in a nutshell.Most else was acceptable last year.

Avatar
#64 nunyour
June 02 2013, 10:53AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Jonathan Willis wrote:

I'm not saying don't trade him.

I'm saying that I will never understand the contempt certain people hold the guy in.

Hemsky has the most skill on the team,we have all seen it,but it is a rare site.I would love to is what he could do with the twins in van,or even in pitts. maybe he would bring his A game more,and it would be fun to watch.

Avatar
#65 Smokey
June 02 2013, 11:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Maddog wrote:

All Hemsky is is an elite NHL zone entry specialist,not much else.He is probably top ten in that dept in terms of impact and consistancy.

The 2nd line didnt need Hemsky at all last year,the 3rd line needed his zone entry and penetration ability.Our first two lines have that capability withiut Hemmer for the first time in his career.

Hemsky didnt historiclly carry weaker linemates,he has always been and always will be a one dimensional player,elite at what he does,that is his true value right there,his puck possesion time makes it seem like he is carrying linemates but 50% of the time his habit of keeping the puck screws with them to much if they are creativerly talented as well,Hemmer needs snipers he can set up that dont need to be creative at all just shoot,big men who can get into position for his feeds from behind the net.

A smart Vancouver team would trade Louongo for him straight across.

Gagner dynamiclly managed his line the best last year by a large margin,making the absolute best of the opportunitys he had.We had a playoff caliber 2nd line all season and the 4th line showed potential at times,but the 1st and 3rd sunk us totally.1st being mismanaged for 2/3 of the season and the 3rd for giving us next to no offense at all.

I agree we need Hemsky and his zone entry and penetration abilitys for the 3rd line to play with Smyth and Horcoff,that gives us an NHL playoff caliber 3rd line,this means only our 1st line needs to be managed better earlier for us to be in the right position to make the post season.

I wouldnt trade Hemsky but he wouldnt regularly crack my top 6 unless he starts crapping goals like a seagull binge eating in the Macdonalds parking lot on a Sunday afternoon.

I wouldnt accept another repeat of last year,nope,to the 3rd line with you and score your way out of it,and if you whine we need to plant you on the bench ASAP.Put it this way if the 1st line starts like it did last year,Hemmer will get Halls zone entry job quickly and taylor may find himself working his way back up from the 3rd line,because its just the zone entry ability we need in both spots.Our 3 top zonr entry guys are MPS,Hemsky,Hall,put em where you want em,but one per line please.If Ralph really wanted his pairs idea to work it could have he just had to identify these zone entry specialist and rotate them up and down to present different tactical looks and power projections,it is just these 3 that need to be moved,the pairs on the top 3 lines need to stay the same.Ralph refused to drop Hemmer to the 3rd and put and keep MPS on the 2nd early enough and properly manage Hall early enough,he corrected but to late,that is the season in a nutshell.Most else was acceptable last year.

The idea that historically Hemsky doesn't make linemates better is one of most nonsensical things I've read here. I wouldn't normal touch an obscure statment. My responce is simple. Ill mention a name or two you can figure out the rest. Smyth, Penner, Horcoff,, do I need to keeep going

Why would Vancouver trade for a top six forward from us. Do we have a plethera of top flight forwards or something. Last time I checked this team can't score. They got more depth then Oilers? My calculation is this. We need 5 contributing forwards for next year. Why make it six. Why trade a guy for nothing if thats what he worth. He wants to be here. He competes more then many players here and always has, and he has one year left. You can't replace his skill and the team is not better going forward when you have to replace yet another relatively young skilled forward who made a committment to be here.

If you want to make an logical argument then say hes a one man band some nights. He has to be many nights, and he turned into that. He wasn't that with Horcoff Smyth, or Nedved, Dvorak in the early years. He goes offside too much, he is not hard in the corners no more, and hes not an outspoken leader. But one thing for sure is trading Hemsky for picks and not replacing him (remember you have 5 spots open for NHL forwards and Yak is not his replacement) all you've done is gotten cap space, and changed direction slightly.

Avatar
#66 Quicksilver ballet
June 02 2013, 02:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Jonathan Willis wrote:

If you think Hemsky was the guy he was talking about, you heard him a lot different than I did.

Edit to add:

Here's the quote:

In today’s NHL you really have to be a threat to score at some point, even marginally. We had a lot of guys who really, the best they were going to be in any given game was a non-factor. There wasn’t a lot of upside for our guys, our role players to significantly help us, but the few times we did we ended up winning those games.

How you read that and get "Hemsky" I don't know.

Outside of 3 or 4 nights last yr, there's no doubt Hemsky fell into that category.

Comments are closed for this article.