Toggle sidebar

Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
A Tkachuk trade would only occur in the offseason after the lottery.

I would be hesitant to give up Eklund, Muk, and the Pens pick but if you can aquire a player of Tkachuk’s caliber you do.

I would want to somehow keep one of Muk or the Pens pick because I think it is likely that the BPA at that pick is a similar D prospect to Muk and they need to eventually fix the D.
 
Hodge said:
IMO a core of Tkachuk, Smith and Celebrini or Levshunov is one you can immediately start building a contender around.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's enough.

Tkachuk/Smith/Celebrini -- Celebrini is going to need 3-6 years to get up to his peak where he will be a contender-driving player. Smith 3-6 years to get to a complementary winger or strong 2C. And we are short at least one high-end D, and at least 2 more solid top 2-4 D.

Tkachuk/Smith/Levshunov: Lev is gonna need at least 4-6 years to become a contender-leading 1D if he ever does (same for any of the D prospects). We are still short a top 3 elite winger in this scenario, plus basically an entire second line, and 1-3 top 4 D men.

I think we need 2-3 more top 10 draft pick years to even sniff at a core to build around.
 
coooldude said:
I don't think that's enough.

Tkachuk/Smith/Celebrini -- Celebrini is going to need 3-6 years to get up to his peak where he will be a contender-driving player. Smith 3-6 years to get to a complementary winger or strong 2C. And we are short at least one high-end D, and at least 2 more solid top 2-4 D.

Tkachuk/Smith/Levshunov: Lev is gonna need at least 4-6 years to become a contender-leading 1D if he ever does (same for any of the D prospects). We are still short a top 3 elite winger in this scenario, plus basically an entire second line, and 1-3 top 4 D men.

I think we need 2-3 more top 10 draft pick years to even sniff at a core to build around.
Click to expand...
The only way we turn this team into a playoff team within three years is if we benefit from a miracle - like if every single one of our picks this year turns into a legitimate NHL player (and all of the high picks turn into stars).

This team is far too far away to even sniff a winning record before 2027 unless our management is consistently better than any other team has been in recent years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: coooldude, Groo and landshark
Hodge said:
Karlsson is 10 years older than Tkachuk. It doesn't make any sense to build around those two players on the same timeline.

Eklund and Shak are going to be good NHL players but I wouldn't call them building blocks. Tkachuk is a building block. You can typically sign a second line winger and second pair defenseman in free agency every summer without breaking the bank. Big power forwards who can consistently score 35+35, lead the league in hits and intimidate opponents/drop the gloves when necessary are one of the rarest and most valuable player types in the sport.

Connor McDavid wouldn't make the Sharks better overnight either but that doesn't mean we shouldn't pursue an opportunity to acquire him. The purpose of a rebuild is just to acquire great players and that doesn't necessarily need to be done through the draft.
Click to expand...
EK and Muk are building blocks
Players such a B. Tkachuk are cornerstone pieces
 
Hodge said:
You think he's going to fall off a cliff before he turns 30? I mean, a career ending injury is always possible with his playing style but this is a unicorn power forward whose dad was an effective top six scorer until age 38.

Brady is 3 years younger than Meier, a better player and a legit Owen Nolan type leader. Eklund and Mukhamadullin along with some mediocre picks is a pretty small price to pay IMO assuming Brady's willing to play for the Sharks. Probably depends on his relationship with Quinn and how much the Tkachuk family trusts Quinn and Grier. It's very easy to replace 90% of what a player like Eklund does through free agency but almost impossible to find a Brady Tkachuk.

I understand the timing argument but you don't get to choose when players like this become available. And, again, he's still very young and can help players like Smith and our 2024 1st develop.
Click to expand...
So why would the Tkachuk family be on board with your plan of going to San Jose and waiting out two more tank seasons in 2024-2025 and 2025-2026 (+ those guys having to develop over the span of a couple years unless it's Macklin this year) to be on a contender?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shark Finn and Sandisfan
coooldude said:
I don't think that's enough.

Tkachuk/Smith/Celebrini -- Celebrini is going to need 3-6 years to get up to his peak where he will be a contender-driving player. Smith 3-6 years to get to a complementary winger or strong 2C. And we are short at least one high-end D, and at least 2 more solid top 2-4 D.

Tkachuk/Smith/Levshunov: Lev is gonna need at least 4-6 years to become a contender-leading 1D if he ever does (same for any of the D prospects). We are still short a top 3 elite winger in this scenario, plus basically an entire second line, and 1-3 top 4 D men.

I think we need 2-3 more top 10 draft pick years to even sniff at a core to build around.
Click to expand...
This timeline demonstrates why it's too early for the Sharks to trade for Brady Tkachuk this offseason. Like I said before, if it was the 2026 offseason, the Sharks would be a lot closer to being contender ready (presumably could trade Musty + 2026 top-10 pick + B pieces for Tkachuk at that point). You hopefully have Smith, Mukh, Eklund, and 2024 top-3 pick in the NHL at that point + 2025 top-3 pick ready to go starting in 2026. Add a few pieces in FA or via trade that summer, and Tkachuk fits like a glove.
 
DG93 said:
So why would the Tkachuk family be on board with your plan of going to San Jose and waiting out two more tank seasons in 2024-2025 and 2025-2026 (+ those guys having to develop over the span of a couple years unless it's Macklin this year) to be on a contender?
Click to expand...
He doesn’t have a nmc until 2025
 
Juxtaposer said:
If Stutzle and Sanderson isn’t enough for Tkachuk, then why would Smith and Levshunov be?
Click to expand...
Tkachuk, Stutzle and Sanderson are obviously not the reason the Senators are so bad. The reason the Senators are so bad is those are literally their only three impact players on fair contracts (Chabot is good but overpaid, Norris is a solid 2C but constantly injured). We would need to be much more efficient in how we spend cap space and assets to construct the rest of the team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DG93
Alaskanice said:
He doesn’t have a nmc until 2025
Click to expand...
Yeah, but it's a bad trade to make unless Tkachuk is on board with the "we're going to have to keep building the team before we stop sucking" plan for the next few seasons...regardless of whether he officially has a trade clause.
 
Our needs for a playoff team that could make some noise.

F:
Musty - C - RW
Eklund - Smith - RW
LW - Couture/Hertl - Halttunen
LW - Bystedt - RW

D:
LD - RD
Mukhamadullin - RD
Cagnoni (2PP) - Emberson

G:
1A/Starter
Kähkönen/Blackwood
 
  • Like
Reactions: Groo and Sandisfan
Hodge said:
Karlsson is 10 years older than Tkachuk. It doesn't make any sense to build around those two players on the same timeline.

Eklund and Shak are going to be good NHL players but I wouldn't call them building blocks. Tkachuk is a building block. You can typically sign a second line winger and second pair defenseman in free agency every summer without breaking the bank. Big power forwards who can consistently score 35+35, lead the league in hits and intimidate opponents/drop the gloves when necessary are one of the rarest and most valuable player types in the sport.

Connor McDavid wouldn't make the Sharks better overnight either but that doesn't mean we shouldn't pursue an opportunity to acquire him. The purpose of a rebuild is just to acquire great players and that doesn't necessarily need to be done through the draft.
Click to expand...
It's the fact that Tkachuk is highly unlikely to sign here for the rest of his career. So if you're riding out his current contract, you would have kept Karlsson and gone in with that group to turn things around rapidly rather than dedicate the first year of your GM tenure to doing everything you can to tear this thing down to the studs.

If the Sharks are a playoff team in the next 5 years, it is going to be because Eklund and Muk are top 4/6 players, to go along with Smith, Celebrini (hopefully), and a surprise prospect or two. While you can get UFAs to fill some spots, we're not a UFA destination when we've been a great franchise. We're going to be even lower down the list with the current state of the org so relying on that path to build out the 2nd line and entirety of the defense is going to cost a ton in $$ and term while not getting you the caliber of player that you truly need to get to the eventual goal of competing for a Cup.
 
I don't think we should be trading picks/prospects yet, but if we got Brady for "just" Muk/Eklund/devils pick it would be an easy yes for me. Penguins pick is tougher because maybe it is a lottery pick next year.

>>We also have 0 chance of getting him and it's not going to happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
Hodge said:
Tkachuk, Stutzle and Sanderson are obviously not the reason the Senators are so bad. The reason the Senators are so bad is those are literally their only three impact players on fair contracts (Chabot is good but overpaid, Norris is a solid 2C but constantly injured). We would need to be much more efficient in how we spend cap space and assets to construct the rest of the team.
Click to expand...
Sure, but to me they obviously aren’t good enough to be a Stanley Cup-winning core.
 
STL Shark said:
It's the fact that Tkachuk is highly unlikely to sign here for the rest of his career. So if you're riding out his current contract, you would have kept Karlsson and gone in with that group to turn things around rapidly rather than dedicate the first year of your GM tenure to doing everything you can to tear this thing down to the studs.

If the Sharks are a playoff team in the next 5 years, it is going to be because Eklund and Muk are top 4/6 players, to go along with Smith, Celebrini (hopefully), and a surprise prospect or two. While you can get UFAs to fill some spots, we're not a UFA destination when we've been a great franchise. We're going to be even lower down the list with the current state of the org so relying on that path to build out the 2nd line and entirety of the defense is going to cost a ton in $$ and term while not getting you the caliber of player that you truly need to get to the eventual goal of competing for a Cup.
Click to expand...
It's not my advice but I'll co-opt it for this discussion anyway:

patience-you-must-have-my-young-padawan_470696_1.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan and DG93
mogambomoroo said:
Our needs for a playoff team that could make some noise.

F:
Musty - C - RW
Eklund - Smith - RW
LW - Couture/Hertl - Halttunen
LW - Bystedt - RW

D:
LD - RD
Mukhamadullin - RD
Cagnoni (2PP) - Emberson

G:
1A/Starter
Kähkönen/Blackwood
Click to expand...
Good thought exercise. My thoughts:

1) Trade Hertl this offseason to NYR for Perrault + Goodrow with Perrault filling that RW spot alongside Smith and Musty (I have Eklund on the 1st line).
2) In terms of pure logistics, I have Bystedt at 3C and Zetterlund as the 3rd line RW instead of Haltunnen. I feel that the bottom-6 will be easier to fill out with other depth via FA or non top of the 1st round picks (Lund, Havelid, maybe Haltunnen, etc)
3) That leaves the predictable huge holes of 1C, 1D, and another very good top-6 forward. Those holes will hopefully be filled via top-3 picks in 2024 and 2025 as well as a 2026 top-10 pick.
4) At that point, you can start adding via trades and FA to fill the starting goalie spot + a couple defensemen to fill out the top-4
5) Assuming this all works out, maybe you start making playoff noise in 2027 or at least come close with the goal of making it in 2028.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sharks_dynasty and mogambomoroo
Juxtaposer said:
Sure, but to me they obviously aren’t good enough to be a Stanley Cup-winning core.
Click to expand...
Idk if that's obvious. First of all this is only Sanderson's second full season so the core hasn't really been in place long enough to judge. But even beyond that, I think just 1-2 years of sensible management decisions instead of whatever the hell Pierre Dorion was trying to do will get the Sens back on track as a legit contender.
 
Hodge said:
Idk if that's obvious. First of all this is only Sanderson's second full season so the core hasn't really been in place long enough to judge. But even beyond that, I think just 1-2 years of sensible management decisions instead of whatever the hell Pierre Dorion was trying to do will get the Sens back on track as a legit contender.
Click to expand...
Sanderson is fantastic. It’s the other two I question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom