sharski
Registered User
- Jun 4, 2012
- 5,839
- 5,080
Speculation: 2022-23 Sharks Roster Discussion Part II
- Thread starter WTFetus
- Start date
- Status
No, the opposite. I'm still waiting for him to start the rebuild correctly and start moving dead weight and stop treading the water like he did this year. That's why in the end, I wasn't upset about the Meier trade that he clearly lost because it was a necessary move. Grier needs to stop worrying about taking waiver trades on guys like Thrun/Kunin (which again, could be positive or not in the future) and start selling.
Last edited:
- Oct 12, 2020
- 1,820
- 3,156
I would call MG's moves more ''under the radar'' moves rather than just basic moves. I think he has a plan to find valuable players from other franchises that aren't getting enough ice time or aren't getting their chance. Of course not all of them will pan out, but Peterson and Thrun have been already been very positive suprises. Low risk high reward (for a non playoff team).
EDIT: MG just needs to keep adding these until he finds a perfect match, it will take time but I feel he is doing everything to get it done. I'm not going to judge MG until after year 4 or something, that's when there needs to be some real results (team being better, FA usage and playoffs on the horizon)
EDIT: MG just needs to keep adding these until he finds a perfect match, it will take time but I feel he is doing everything to get it done. I'm not going to judge MG until after year 4 or something, that's when there needs to be some real results (team being better, FA usage and playoffs on the horizon)
one2gamble
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2007
- 17,539
- 8,853
He moved Meir and Burns
The team was the worst hockey team in the NHL and was only not dead last because Karl was in god mode. He is clearly actively trying to move some of the older long term contracts but trades take two parties. Im not sure what more you expect from him at this point.
I dont agree with the bottom six signings and I would have weaponized the cap space saved by not doing some of those moves but really, he did not make the team any better and its currently pretty terrible. Hes going to move a few of those players this year for mid round picks.
I think it's certainly easier than most people think when you have even just one party that wants to make it happen. Trades very often get labled as "too hard to make the cap work" when it's really just one, maybe both of the GMs not really wanting it enough to make it work. That goes for most things in life as well.
Sounds like you just want to dump guys basically for free and pay half their salaries to entice teams to “make it work”. How does that help the rebuild?
Since the talks are that they're trying to get a Karlsson trade done, I'm not concerned about the direction. They know where they're going and it's further into the rebuild. Nothing Grier has done has really gone counter to that mode. Calling the Meier trade a clear loss is almost contradictory when you claim it as necessary and wanting to 'start the rebuild correctly'. The Meier trade is a clear win for a team starting the rebuild. He got a highly valued prospect, a 1st, and a 2nd at worst. Three meaningful future assets towards the rebuild is a win. Just because you're selling doesn't mean that you can sell everything all at once and it also doesn't mean you can't take fliers on guys at the expense of mid-to-late draft picks. Thrun is a good example of someone Grier should take chances on. So was Eyssimont.
In terms of filling the gaps that we're going to have from the selling, Grier has done well to bring in solid players that won't really help the team win games but guys they can probably extract value out of which is going to be necessary moving forward because they aren't going to get extra draft capital after Karlsson is dealt. Everyone else we're stuck with for a little while. Barabanov is the only asset we have that makes any sort of sense to sell off between now and the deadline for extra capital. Nobody else is easily movable or going to return anything of value.
Well for some (Labanc, Vlasic, Ferraro) it's addition by subtraction. Sure they make the team worse which helps with the rebuild, but also takes spots from players. and if using your line of thinking, gives Grier actually less opportunities to make Thrun-like trades, not to mention the cap benefits. 2m dead cap + 2m free cap = better than 4.6m wasted on someone like Labanc.
In the case of Couture/Karlsson, how does it help the rebuild that they sit and get older on a bad team, again while taking up cap that could be used for future "positive" moves? If they can get multiple positive assets for them, who the f*** cares about paying salaries? Are you Hasso? You end up paying more in the long run paying these bad contracts off while not improving.
I don’t necessarily think Labanc and Ferraro are addition by subtraction. I think they’re ok players but certainly not playing up their salary expectations. Ferraro is still young and Labanc I’m sure they’d love to move but it’s almost not even worth buying him out at this point. Vlasic would require an arm and a leg to move.
I think with Logan and Erik they’re trying to move em but keep in mind they’re older, make a lot and have no trade clauses. In terms of paying salaries, remember we only have three retention slots and one is already going to Burns. Wasting the other two on long term contracts means we can’t be brokers or retain on our own guys in their last year at deadlines, when teams are willing to give up more for pieces if they’re cheap enough. Imagine not being able to retain 50% on Sturm next year for a second round pick because we have no slots open?
Worrying about spots for players only makes any sense if you think that it's impossible to move things around to give a guy an opportunity. I don't think that's the case here. None of those guys are truly in the way because of someone like Mukhamadullin shows that he's the real deal, you can make any sort of movement on the blue line to get him a spot because none of what's left after Karlsson is gone is any good and they all know it.
The entire reason why Karlsson didn't get last season was because nobody wanted him. That has changed now so something should get done this offseason. Couture doesn't want to go it seems so unless he changes his mind or someone on his three team trade list wants him, there's not much you can do there. The team still needs veterans to help make it easier on the kids to deal with all the losing. The team has the cap space to make future positive moves if they want before worrying about the vets you'd like to dump.
Chances are they're not going to improve any during the timeframe of these contracts getting to their expiration date. They simply don't have the talent and don't have the assets to acquire the sort of talent that they'd need to improve so they have to kind of wait it out while they hopefully draft well enough to backfill the vacancies when contracts expire.
STL Shark
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2013
- 4,408
- 5,476
Probably the same type of person that threw a tantrum in the Meier trade thread.
I just think people either play too much Nhl2k23 or play too many fantasy leagues if they think it’s that easy to just completely overhaul a roster like ours in one season.
STL Shark
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2013
- 4,408
- 5,476
Agreed. We also live in a world where your past follows you. If you’re a pushover and don’t extract value where it’s there, you’re not going to last as teams take advantage of you and then beat you with your own assets for years to come.
Grier is establishing his persona and reputation as a GM in this league by how he goes about this off-season. Sure, he might (hopefully) only go through this stage of selling off once in his tenure here, but it all trickles down.
Same people pissed about Labanc being here would be the same ones pissed at Grier if he rekindles 2018-19 form and puts up 50 points after being bought out or given away for nothing.
All that and also, from a morale perspective you can’t just dump every good player. You do need some skill and leadership to help the younger players. At this point Noah Gregor and Gadjovich are gonna be our elder spokesmen.
LadyStanley
Registered User
hohosaregood
Banned
- Sep 1, 2011
- 33,191
- 13,891
You realize 2/3s of the league was over the cap this season and the guys we need to move are all making 6m+. Really the only guys we have to move are a just now resurgent Karlsson(probably on his way out), Vlasic(an unmovable contract), and Couture(an okay top 6 player who is making 1st line money until he's 38). This was not going to be an easy teardown outside of outright buyouts
tiburon12
Registered User
- Jul 18, 2009
- 5,114
- 5,208
You called out the culture improving, but i seem to remember a few times the team talking about how much better the room was this year over the past few. Here's Benning recently saying it was good: Benning reveals how losing season impacted Sharks' locker room
Others have already pushed back about nepotism, though it's only about family. Either way, Grier put in his work in other organizations before this.
IDK man, i jsut see you lob these criticisms at Grier (another being moves he made, in a different thread) that aren't fully grounded in reality, so much so that it seems like a bias is getting in the way of seeing the truth. His good move - bad move ratio is heavily good
If you look at the totality of Grier's moves last summer, it is easy to see what he is trying to do. First, create competition for jobs so players have to earn their spot, particularly the prospects. In the last three years of the Wilson regime, Wilson filled the bottom half of the lineup with guys with little to no NHL experience, and that failed. Grier went out and got guys (Kunin, Lindblom, Benning, Sturm) who were NHL players (albeit as 4th liners or 6/7 dmen). This created competition and meant that the prospects would not play in the NHL until they earned it.
Second, target younger veterans for these slots who might still be useful to the team say five years from now when the team might be competitive. Compare Wilson's signings of Bonino and Cogliano in summer 21 to the guys Grier signed last summer. The latter are all younger and could become long-term players for the team unlike Bonino and Cogliano.
Third, try to accumulate a deeper pool of prospects because Wilson didn't leave much in the cupboard. Grier may not say so publicly, but the organization acts as if it understands how deep a hole the organization is in.
If you want to understand Grier, you should read an article about the 06 Sabres that was on The Athletic last summer (I would post a link except the search function at The Athletic is so bad I cannot find the article now). Grier was one of the players interviewed; the article is about how those players thought they were going to win the cup that season until injuries derailed them in the ECF. The main point was how close the team was, how much they played for each other, and how special it was. Grier recognizes that the Sharks cannot be competitive in the short run so he wants to build that same culture of closeness in the team because it is one thing he can do now.
Second, target younger veterans for these slots who might still be useful to the team say five years from now when the team might be competitive. Compare Wilson's signings of Bonino and Cogliano in summer 21 to the guys Grier signed last summer. The latter are all younger and could become long-term players for the team unlike Bonino and Cogliano.
Third, try to accumulate a deeper pool of prospects because Wilson didn't leave much in the cupboard. Grier may not say so publicly, but the organization acts as if it understands how deep a hole the organization is in.
If you want to understand Grier, you should read an article about the 06 Sabres that was on The Athletic last summer (I would post a link except the search function at The Athletic is so bad I cannot find the article now). Grier was one of the players interviewed; the article is about how those players thought they were going to win the cup that season until injuries derailed them in the ECF. The main point was how close the team was, how much they played for each other, and how special it was. Grier recognizes that the Sharks cannot be competitive in the short run so he wants to build that same culture of closeness in the team because it is one thing he can do now.
jMoneyBrah
Registered User
I feel like some here are forgetting the absolute tire fire of a situation Grier inherited. No GM was going to come in and simply snap the organization into shape on the strength of a draft and UFA period with the little time he had to prepare. I’m personally of the opinion he’s on the right course so far; I think this is going to be a long road back to relevancy.
Kunin: the value of a third round pick is well illustrated by the sharks not accidentally tripping into better results than Griess from that round in their entire history. Spending that pick on a bonafide, if flawed, NHL player is fine in my book. Kunin has better odds of rebounding into a serviceable middle six winger than that pick ever suiting up in the NHL.
The positives in my eyes:
1. Simply recognizing the state of the org and not rushing out in an attempt to turn everything around with panic moves, a slew of ill advised trades, or long term signings.
2. Trading back in the first round for the Bystedt, Lund, and Havelid picks.
3. The Meier trade. I, like many, was hoping for a little bit more. Maybe a slightly more premium prospect or one more premium pick, though he still could get that additional 1st. I like what I’m hearing about Mukhamadullin. Early results are a little shaky, but Zetterlund might end up a nice depth piece; there’s a little time on that clock. Considering that Meier and the Devils are going to arbitration, it’s probably safe to say a team friendly $8.5Mish x 8yr contract was never in the cards for the Sharks. Grier made the right move and made it at the right time.
4. Thrun, Peterson, Kaut, and a 4th for, like, nothing. I like all of these additions, Thrun especially. Eyssimont → Namestnikov→ 4th in particular was fun.
5. Sturm signing. Perfect identity player for the bottom 6. He’s a little above his head being asked to drive a third line with such a void of winger talent. With better linemates or as a 4C he’s a fantastic piece. I suspect he’ll be a valuable trade deadline piece, the type that could get an otherwise outsized return, as soon next season.
6. Knyzhov signing. He’s got potential and I like that Grier rewarded his hard work with a contract. There might be a legit middle pairing dman there. If not for the Sharks in the long term possibly as a trade asset.
7. Keeping all of the interesting forward prospects: Guschin, Bordeleau, Robbins; even if they don’t fit his ideal mold. I like that they, and Eklund, all got late season NHL ice time on merit.
Things I’m meh about:
1. Guschin, Bordeleau, Robbins getting NHL ice time and combining with new blood Thrun and Peterson; and all of them vibing with Noah Gretzky to ruin the tank job!!!!
2. Burns trade: it was the right thing to do to let Burns chase a cup annd not hold him hostage if he didn’t want to be here. Burns earned that. Even acknowledging that Grier had literally next to no leverage, the return was extremely underwhelming considering what Burns provides and the amount and term of salary retained.
3. Karlsson. If we are to believe the reported Edmonton offer was really on the table (Barrie, Bouchard, a 1st, and some throw ins) that could sting down the road. On the other hand if Karlsson continues his resurgence there’ll be other opportunities to find a deal. We’ll see.
4. Benning’s contract is probably longer than needed; but it’s super cheap and if he provides any value beyond a third pairing RD (which I’d say he did for significant stretches over the last season) it’s house money.
5. Couture, Vlasic, Lebanc. To varying degrees for each player I don’t think there was much opportunity or value to be gained for trading them. Couture has all the leverage, has been pretty vocal about staying in San Jose, and a contract that would be hard to move for a net positive. Labanc is far too expensive for what he brings, though I thought he made some positive adjustments to his game towards the end of last season. He seemingly has a shot to work himself into a healthy dose of top 6 minutes this year, and an extremely outside chance of being an interesting player at the deadline. Vlasic continues to be vastly overpaid for his one-ice perfomance, holds all the leverage, and the Sharks benefit neither from buying him out (what would they even do with the cap space) or paying assets for him to be someone else cap problem (not that they could do that if they wanted to due to Vlasic’s NMC).
Things I don’t like:
1. Lindblom signing. I sort of got the theory, maybe you could buy low on a player a year and change removed from recovery. But, ultimately, Lindblom hasn’t really put up that impressive results at any point of his career, and what the Sharks received was a $2.5M piece of empty ice that wears a jersey. At no point during the season did Lindblom make any impact on a game. One of the most ineffectual players I’ve ever watched. And we have him for another season.
For me the positives greatly outweigh the negatives. While I’m far from over the moon about Grier, I get what he’s doing and it generally seems very sensible. I think he has an opportunity to put his stamp on the org and fully kickoff the rebuild starting this draft and offseason. I’m hopeful that he continues to take the long view and doesn’t attempt to accelerate anything other than the org’s trajectory towards more top 5 picks.
Kunin: the value of a third round pick is well illustrated by the sharks not accidentally tripping into better results than Griess from that round in their entire history. Spending that pick on a bonafide, if flawed, NHL player is fine in my book. Kunin has better odds of rebounding into a serviceable middle six winger than that pick ever suiting up in the NHL.
The positives in my eyes:
1. Simply recognizing the state of the org and not rushing out in an attempt to turn everything around with panic moves, a slew of ill advised trades, or long term signings.
2. Trading back in the first round for the Bystedt, Lund, and Havelid picks.
3. The Meier trade. I, like many, was hoping for a little bit more. Maybe a slightly more premium prospect or one more premium pick, though he still could get that additional 1st. I like what I’m hearing about Mukhamadullin. Early results are a little shaky, but Zetterlund might end up a nice depth piece; there’s a little time on that clock. Considering that Meier and the Devils are going to arbitration, it’s probably safe to say a team friendly $8.5Mish x 8yr contract was never in the cards for the Sharks. Grier made the right move and made it at the right time.
4. Thrun, Peterson, Kaut, and a 4th for, like, nothing. I like all of these additions, Thrun especially. Eyssimont → Namestnikov→ 4th in particular was fun.
5. Sturm signing. Perfect identity player for the bottom 6. He’s a little above his head being asked to drive a third line with such a void of winger talent. With better linemates or as a 4C he’s a fantastic piece. I suspect he’ll be a valuable trade deadline piece, the type that could get an otherwise outsized return, as soon next season.
6. Knyzhov signing. He’s got potential and I like that Grier rewarded his hard work with a contract. There might be a legit middle pairing dman there. If not for the Sharks in the long term possibly as a trade asset.
7. Keeping all of the interesting forward prospects: Guschin, Bordeleau, Robbins; even if they don’t fit his ideal mold. I like that they, and Eklund, all got late season NHL ice time on merit.
Things I’m meh about:
1. Guschin, Bordeleau, Robbins getting NHL ice time and combining with new blood Thrun and Peterson; and all of them vibing with Noah Gretzky to ruin the tank job!!!!
2. Burns trade: it was the right thing to do to let Burns chase a cup annd not hold him hostage if he didn’t want to be here. Burns earned that. Even acknowledging that Grier had literally next to no leverage, the return was extremely underwhelming considering what Burns provides and the amount and term of salary retained.
3. Karlsson. If we are to believe the reported Edmonton offer was really on the table (Barrie, Bouchard, a 1st, and some throw ins) that could sting down the road. On the other hand if Karlsson continues his resurgence there’ll be other opportunities to find a deal. We’ll see.
4. Benning’s contract is probably longer than needed; but it’s super cheap and if he provides any value beyond a third pairing RD (which I’d say he did for significant stretches over the last season) it’s house money.
5. Couture, Vlasic, Lebanc. To varying degrees for each player I don’t think there was much opportunity or value to be gained for trading them. Couture has all the leverage, has been pretty vocal about staying in San Jose, and a contract that would be hard to move for a net positive. Labanc is far too expensive for what he brings, though I thought he made some positive adjustments to his game towards the end of last season. He seemingly has a shot to work himself into a healthy dose of top 6 minutes this year, and an extremely outside chance of being an interesting player at the deadline. Vlasic continues to be vastly overpaid for his one-ice perfomance, holds all the leverage, and the Sharks benefit neither from buying him out (what would they even do with the cap space) or paying assets for him to be someone else cap problem (not that they could do that if they wanted to due to Vlasic’s NMC).
Things I don’t like:
1. Lindblom signing. I sort of got the theory, maybe you could buy low on a player a year and change removed from recovery. But, ultimately, Lindblom hasn’t really put up that impressive results at any point of his career, and what the Sharks received was a $2.5M piece of empty ice that wears a jersey. At no point during the season did Lindblom make any impact on a game. One of the most ineffectual players I’ve ever watched. And we have him for another season.
For me the positives greatly outweigh the negatives. While I’m far from over the moon about Grier, I get what he’s doing and it generally seems very sensible. I think he has an opportunity to put his stamp on the org and fully kickoff the rebuild starting this draft and offseason. I’m hopeful that he continues to take the long view and doesn’t attempt to accelerate anything other than the org’s trajectory towards more top 5 picks.
Last edited:
sub_zero94
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2007
- 537
- 57
I seem to remember one reason Hertl decided to sign the extension in SJ was he was told they weren't rebuilding.. A little over a year later and Burns is gone, followed by Timo, and Erik is asking to go. Am I missing something or do we all expect Tomas to wanna be moved as well?
tiburon12
Registered User
- Jul 18, 2009
- 5,114
- 5,208
Great post dude. I'd only counter one of your Meh picks (Burns) with the same reality that is around Meier. Once they committed to moving the player, the return was always going to less that what we are used to for a player of that caliber. Until the covid cap is back to normal, i think that's the reality, and unfortunately the Sharks are the biggest offenders in having so many guys on long aging contracts. In other words, Burns was never going to go for more.
I bolded this sentiment because I think it's also important for everyone to realize that there are few scenarios, if any, where a GM comes into the situation the Sharks had and in under a year have fans "over the moon". It's perfectly OK (and bodes well for the futures) that Grier succeeded on his vision and plan with few bad moves. No GM bats 1.000%.
It feels dead horsey to still beat this drum, and i hate calling out good posters like the Melkman, but like idk how it's possible to be down on Grier after everything that's happened with context.
- Status
