LadyStanley
Registered User
From what headlines I've been reading, Price may not play for Montreal this season. So that's LTIR usable space.
Speculation: 2022-23 Sharks Roster Discussion Part 1
- Thread starter Lebanezer
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
seroes
Registered User
The late first for Monahan isn't the issue. It's the dead cap space for 2 extra years is. We already have dead cap from Jones and Burns. We could be adding Vlassic in the next couple of years. We don't need to have Labanc eating up anymore.
A lot of people don't realize that a person signing a $1.5 million cap hit does not take away $1.5 million in cap space. Every roster spot is a minimum of $750k so all these guys that MG signed to deals $2 million or less do not just magically create a lot of cap space if they are gone because every roster spot is a min of $750k. I am very happy that we signed legit NHL players so that we don't have a team of kids who are in over their head.
I don't see that as an issue because we're not competing then either. To me, it's the more effective use of the cap space than just letting Labanc's contract expire and get probably next to nothing for him. As far as I'm concerned, this team is in an indefinite state of not competing until they get their Connor McDavid or Nathan MacKinnon or whoever you put at that level.
one2gamble
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2007
- 17,697
- 9,088
And you actually need 2 of them to win. Makar/MacKinnon. Otherwise Edmonton would have 3 cups in the last 6 years
hohosaregood
Banned
- Sep 1, 2011
- 33,554
- 14,402
You need way more than just 2. McDavid and Draisaitl are the only pieces that matter in Edmonton. They don't have the top 6, the bottom 6, or the defense that Colorado had.
There are others you can throw in that category in terms of being good enough to build around to compete but the Sharks just don't have that. The closest they have is an unreliable Erik Karlsson, Tomas Hertl, and Timo Meier. That sort of core would need to go the Blues model to have a prayer and with so much dead money already committed, the odds of them building such a team are next to none. By the time the dead money expires, Meier may be gone, Hertl will be in decline, and Karlsson will be expiring as well. We're talking about a complete overhaul of the team's current core by then. I don't see what good can come of pretending like a culture change is going to do anything. They lack talent. Talent that this team is going to get predominantly through the draft. The draft is what they need to make their primary focus to have a hope of having a foundation of a team when this current iteration is done. These draft picks will need development which I think they've done a commendable job of addressing thus far but it's still a matter of results after a certain amount of time so we'll see.
I just think that the team needs to spend its resources maximizing their pick and prospect collection rather than waiting out underwater contracts. This team needs to start on the right path now to have a chance at a competitive team in five or six years. Using cap space for depth filler in the short term is going to be a waste even if they get the most out of guys like Kunin, Sturm, Benning, and the rest.
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 17,099
- 6,687
Interesting how Todd Marchant cites Marleau as harder to play against than Joe Thornton...
WTFetus
Marlov
I mean, I get what you're trying to say, but that isn't really true in scenarios like these. Posters arguing for the "suboptimal" use of cap-space are saying things like the 2.75m cap space used on Kunin could have helped accommodate the 6.375m cap space from taking a dump like Monahan. In these cases, it does take away that exact amount of capspace since it's player-for-player, no 750k deduction needed.
Also, I'm not arguing that that's what should have been done. Simply clarifying the cap space argument.
Hodge
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2021
- 7,250
- 8,778
…Except that still leaves you with a 3.625M deficit which can’t be made up even if you replace Lindblom, Sturm and Benning with players making league minimum.
When you're carrying three goalies, 3.625 mil isn't a hard deficit to make up with a little will. The reality is that it's not about that for Grier. He wants to spend his space changing the culture for whatever that will be worth. But let's not pretend Grier isn't capable at all of making the moves needed to accommodate that if he wanted.
LadyStanley
Registered User
one2gamble
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2007
- 17,697
- 9,088
PacificOceanPotion
Registered User
- Jun 19, 2009
- 6,191
- 5,018
Between the two id prefer Viel over Gadjovich.
seroes
Registered User
Stewie Griffin
What the deuce
Gadj isn't all that great and we already have enough depth wingers. Not even sure why he was qualified tbh.
There's a spot for either him or Viel. One of them will get sent down unless they make a move on one of their three goalies.
- Apr 3, 2012
- 12,897
- 12,358
Sounds like they should punch each other for it tbh
Just a 15 round fight in practice for the fighter's spot in the press box.
Unless Gadjovich is just a warm body to be the 13th F in the press box, don't see the point in re-signing him. He sucks...Reedy can fill that role as he doesn't appear to have too much to gain from being on the 'Cuda.
themelkman
Always Delivers
Technically losing fights counts as being tough right?
I wouldn't sign Gadjovich if I was Grier, but I wouldn't have Vlasic on the roster either.
Eklund or other Cudas should be dressed.
Eklund or other Cudas should be dressed.
Last edited:
- Jun 23, 2020
- 6,170
- 8,991
Gadjovich is pretty useless but I think every team has one or two waiver-eligible tough guys who flit between the NHL and AHL rosters and make below the buried cap threshold, so it's not worth really worrying about - as long as Gadjovich doesn't play more than 15-20 games.
- Status
