I will not argue that European traffic must be based on a hub operation. I am only thinking of the troubled Intercontinental operation.
Clearly with only around 70 Intercontinental flights a week SAS does not have critical mass. From an operational point of view it is clearly an advantage with as few hubs as possible (read one hub). You simply have the scale advantage - both on ground services, on feeder flights and on optimising the capacity on any given route. If there is room for several flights these can be spread over the day or adding destinations thereby serving a wider audience and providing more options to your customers.
If for examples all SK intercontinental routes were at OSL, imagine daily flights to NYC (hopefully not EWR), IAD, ORD, SEA, MIA/SFO/evening departure to NYC, NRT, PEK, BKK, PVG, SZX/XMN/CAN
The big question is would SAS's (potential) customers feel they are better served if they would potentially have to go via OSL (as an examples) - but in exchange get a wider selection of departures and/or destinations. Or would a majority jump ship to the alternatives.
I realise that just the mere impact of change in itself and the national/political issues will play an important role here, but apart from that.