Speculation: 2022-23 Sharks Roster Discussion Part 1

[STL Shark]

Ferraro is a guy that I'd give the max term for. If you can sign him for 8 years, 32 mil then I'd be alright with that. It's pretty clear that Ferraro's at least a solid 2nd pairing guy. Get him signed until he's 31 then let him go after that.

I could get on board with that. Though feel like it would take closer to $5-5.5 million or so to lock up the full 8 year term on him. Think the Samuel Girard and Brady Skjei contracts would be comps for that full term sort of deal. I'd prefer the shorter 4-5 year at $4 million and if he outplays that salary then extend him again as a 27 or 28 year old when the roster is more setup in Grier's image.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I could get on board with that. Though feel like it would take closer to $5-5.5 million or so to lock up the full 8 year term on him. Think the Samuel Girard and Brady Skjei contracts would be comps for that full term sort of deal. I'd prefer the shorter 4-5 year at $4 million and if he outplays that salary then extend him again as a 27 or 28 year old when the roster is more setup in Grier's image.

I think 5.5 mil is probably too rich for my blood on that sort of term. I'd probably only go as high as 4.5 mil. I see Ferraro as a solid 2nd pairing guy but not a top pairing guy even with a little more experience. I don't think he can cover on the top pairing for guys like Burns and Karlsson but I think he'd be a fine anchor for his own pairing with a more conservative offensive defenseman on the right. I would understand bridging Ferraro or going short term if Grier doesn't have the same confidence in him. Ferraro is pretty replaceable overall since he's not a top guy sort of d-man.

 

[STL Shark]

I think 5.5 mil is probably too rich for my blood on that sort of term. I'd probably only go as high as 4.5 mil. I see Ferraro as a solid 2nd pairing guy but not a top pairing guy even with a little more experience. I don't think he can cover on the top pairing for guys like Burns and Karlsson but I think he'd be a fine anchor for his own pairing with a more conservative offensive defenseman on the right. I would understand bridging Ferraro or going short term if Grier doesn't have the same confidence in him. Ferraro is pretty replaceable overall since he's not a top guy sort of d-man.

Yeah, I would agree with basically all of that. I think he's a great partner if someone like Laroque hit in his development as a good 2nd pairing. Basically would be great with a prime Justin Braun type of RD on the other side playing some tough minutes. That's how I see Laroque as a player if the development curve continues so I think that could be a nice match.

Issue is more that there isn't a top pairing guy to play with Karlsson right now, but if Karlsson is going to stick around and is making that much money he has to be able to carry a D partner like Knyzhov or someone like that like so many other #1 D-Men around the league do.

 

[gaucholoco3]

I have some hope for Megna as a partner for EK. He put up decent underlying possession stats and is a big body which I think is helpful for a partner for EK.

Megna - EK
Ferraro - Nutivara/Benning
Vlassic - Nutivara/Benning
Simek

Not the best top pair but if EK can carry Megna then the 2nd and 3rd pairs are not complete dumpster fires.

 

[Dicdonya]

Difference between Ferraro and the others is that Ferraro is an inherited piece rather than a piece that Grier sought out for the team. Willingness to pay a guy that you inherit is much different than paying a guy that you're seeking out. The Ferraro deal strictly hinges on term. If they bridge him, he's signing the same 2 year $2.75M deal that everyone else signed (and is comparable for others in his scenario per capfriendly's comparable feature).

If they want to go long-term and buy up some UFA years, they could do a deal similar to what Dillon signed as a 24 year old when he came to SJ at around 4.6% of the cap for 5 years (would be about $3.8 million in Ferraro's circumstance).

My guess is they either bridge him at 2 years $2.75 million or go with a 4-5 year deal for $4 million or so. Ferraro is never going to be a point producer to the point that he gets 5-6 million dollars any time soon. Guy like Mattias Ekholm is the absolute ceiling for Ferraro and he played 6 years on a $3.75 million contract (and averaged 35 points per 82 games during that stretch) before getting his pay day that kicks in this coming season at age 32.

Just to be clear, I’m not saying I want to sign him to 4+, just that I feel it will happen. I’ll be happy if I’m wrong and it’s that 2.75-3 range.

I definitely understand your point about Ferraro not being someone that Grier specifically sought after. However I still think Ferraro is precisely who Grier would go after if he wasn’t already on the team. Thus expect an overpay to some degree, and I just hope it’s on a short term deal.

Basically I’m expecting the worst and hoping for the best. That way I won’t be as upset about it, or thrilled when im wrong haha.

 

[Barrie22]

Difference between Ferraro and the others is that Ferraro is an inherited piece rather than a piece that Grier sought out for the team. Willingness to pay a guy that you inherit is much different than paying a guy that you're seeking out. The Ferraro deal strictly hinges on term. If they bridge him, he's signing the same 2 year $2.75M deal that everyone else signed (and is comparable for others in his scenario per capfriendly's comparable feature).

If they want to go long-term and buy up some UFA years, they could do a deal similar to what Dillon signed as a 24 year old when he came to SJ at around 4.6% of the cap for 5 years (would be about $3.8 million in Ferraro's circumstance).

My guess is they either bridge him at 2 years $2.75 million or go with a 4-5 year deal for $4 million or so. Ferraro is never going to be a point producer to the point that he gets 5-6 million dollars any time soon. Guy like Mattias Ekholm is the absolute ceiling for Ferraro and he played 6 years on a $3.75 million contract (and averaged 35 points per 82 games during that stretch) before getting his pay day that kicks in this coming season at age 32.

We have all seen what happens when you pay for only defensive contributions. It does not end well. If you are paying defensemen big money they better be offensively inclined as that stuff lasts longer then just purely defensive players. And they are easier to trade.

 

[STL Shark]

We have all seen what happens when you pay for only defensive contributions. It does not end well. If you are paying defensemen big money they better be offensively inclined as that stuff lasts longer then just purely defensive players. And they are easier to trade.

We saw it as a remarkable success with Vlasic for 10 years where he was signed to great value at $3-4 million for most of that time. I'm all for locking up a 23 year old Ferraro if it could be done on a deal like what Marino got (6 years $4.4 million per year) or something like that.

When you get into the $5.5 million range, things get a little dicey though. But if you can lock in a 2nd pairing D-Man that is 23 for the best 6 years of his career most likely at a reasonable rate (which anything below $4.5 on a 5+ year deal would be) then I am all for it. It is giving the big money after the player is already through his prime (like Vlasic) where you get in trouble.

 

[Barrie22]

We saw it as a remarkable success with Vlasic for 10 years where he was signed to great value at $3-4 million for most of that time. I'm all for locking up a 23 year old Ferraro if it could be done on a deal like what Marino got (6 years $4.4 million per year) or something like that.

When you get into the $5.5 million range, things get a little dicey though. But if you can lock in a 2nd pairing D-Man that is 23 for the best 6 years of his career most likely at a reasonable rate (which anything below $4.5 on a 5+ year deal would be) then I am all for it. It is giving the big money after the player is already through his prime (like Vlasic) where you get in trouble.

Yeah most of the suggestions for ferraro has all been short term higher salary and that is bad idea.

 

[Hodge]

Mario Ferraro is just a younger Matt Benning with a better PR team.

 

[TheBeard]

Sharks should sign Subban to a one year deal and see what he brings

 

[Gecklund]

Sharks should sign Subban to a one year deal and see what he brings

Why? We already have 4 RDs.

 

[TheBeard]

Why? We already have 4 RDs.

Why not? We have 12 goalies.

 

[STL Shark]

Why? We already have 4 RDs.

Who are the 3rd and 4th because right now it is Karlsson and Benning? And please don't pretend that Merkley should be in the NHL because he's not even proven to be a decent AHLer yet.

 

[Gecklund]

Who are the 3rd and 4th because right now it is Karlsson and Benning? And please don't pretend that Merkley should be in the NHL because he's not even proven to be a decent AHLer yet.

Lol. Merkley for sure is ALREADY better than Benning and Nutivaara plays exclusively on the right.

 

[Reggae Shark]

Lol. Merkley for sure is ALREADY better than Benning and Nutivaara plays exclusively on the right.

 

[Gecklund]

He can say what he wants. I’m telling you where he played.

 

[Alaskanice]

I almost feel bad for Calgary. Losing both Gaudreau and Tkachuk. That is brutal.

 

[STL Shark]

Lol. Merkley for sure is ALREADY better than Benning and Nutivaara plays exclusively on the right.

Merkley scored at a 12.6 points per 82 game pace last season in the NHL getting 56.6% OZ starts. All while being a bum on defense. Benning scored at a 13.9 points per 82 game pace getting 36.9% OZ starts while being solid-ish on defense (depending which site's underlying date you prefer to believe).

Sadly, the one aspect of hockey that Merkley is supposed to be good at (offense) is still behind Benning's production with more advantageous zone starts AND power play time. Benning had two seasons in Edmonton (his first two in the NHL) getting the same zone starts and PP time that Merkley got this season. He scored at a 21.9 points per 82 game pace.

So with all of that said, you can go ahead and recant your point on Merkley being better than Benning. Not to say that Benning is a world beater, but he's objectively better than Merkley right now given he produces offense better than a one trick pony whose only redeemable trait is supposed to be has ability to generate offense. Maybe he goes through a magical transformation this offseason and turns into a Shayne Gostisbehere that's a nightmare in his own end but can be a PP specialist as a 3rd pairing D-Man, but Merkley is for sure NOT already better than Benning.

 

[Gecklund]

Merkley scored at a 12.6 points per 82 game pace last season in the NHL getting 56.6% OZ starts. All while being a bum on defense. Benning scored at a 13.9 points per 82 game pace getting 36.9% OZ starts while being solid-ish on defense (depending which site's underlying date you prefer to believe).

Sadly, the one aspect of hockey that Merkley is supposed to be good at (offense) is still behind Benning's production with more advantageous zone starts AND power play time. Benning had two seasons in Edmonton (his first two in the NHL) getting the same zone starts and PP time that Merkley got this season. He scored at a 21.9 points per 82 game pace.

So with all of that said, you can go ahead and recant your point on Merkley being better than Benning. Not to say that Benning is a world beater, but he's objectively better than Merkley right now given he produces offense better than a one trick pony whose only redeemable trait is supposed to be has ability to generate offense. Maybe he goes through a magical transformation this offseason and turns into a Shayne Gostisbehere that's a nightmare in his own end but can be a PP specialist as a 3rd pairing D-Man, but Merkley is for sure NOT already better than Benning.

I’m not recanting anything. Benning is shit and barely an NHLer. A guy who is supposed to be a good defensive player was a -24 on a team where the next closest was -11 against bottom of the lineup competition. Dude is bad. Merkley at least has potential.

 

[STL Shark]

I’m not recanting anything. Benning is shit and barely an NHLer. A guy who is supposed to be a good defensive player was a -24 on a team where the next closest was -11 against bottom of the lineup competition. Dude is bad. Merkley at least has potential.

So Merkley has potential to be better. He's assuredly not "already" better. Also, +/- is still a useless stat even when you try and contextualize it.

 

[Gecklund]

So Merkley has potential to be better. He's assuredly not "already" better. Also, +/- is still a useless stat even when you try and contextualize it.

Lol. “This stat disagrees with me so it’s bad even though you provided all the context needed.” You’re arguing as poorly as Hodge. Benning is a shit player that shouldn’t make more than league minimum.

 

[Lebanezer]

I almost feel bad for Calgary. Losing both Gaudreau and Tkachuk. That is brutal.

Based on the list of teams that Tkachuk is interested in playing for, it's pretty clear it's just about the money. New York and New Jersey are mentioned as expressing interest, they aren't on his list of preferred destinations.

 

[TheBeard]

Especially after such a great season and then losing to your provincial rivals.

I almost feel bad for Calgary. Losing both Gaudreau and Tkachuk. That is brutal.

 

[Mattb124]

He can say what he wants. I’m telling you where he played.

Shoots left too.

 

[PacificOceanPotion]

Based on the list of teams that Tkachuk is interested in playing for, it's pretty clear it's just about the money. New York and New Jersey are mentioned as expressing interest, they aren't on his list of preferred destinations.

I have zero feelings of sympathy for division rivals. I remember the days of the reverse sweep and fans from all our rivals giving us maximum shit. Oh well..But hey, if you wanna send us Monahan for a Carolinas 3rd and a 1st in 2030. I’d listen.