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
Hodge said:
I mostly question whether Stutzle can ever be the guy. Tkachuk and Sanderson are legit.
Click to expand...
Sure, Stutzle is definitely the most questionable guy among them, he doesn’t give a crap about anything that isn’t scoring, but I don’t know if Tkachuk is a top-15 winger in the league, which is the only way you could justify trading for him IMO.

One of the most underrated aspects of having a quality team is the defensive and neutral zone play of your wingers. Watching old Sharks teams, you can really see the value of guys like Marleau, Pavelski, Clowe, Ward, Donskoi, Meier, early Hertl, etc. They were fundamental to the cohesive team play by initiating breakouts and making the small passes in the neutral zone it takes to definitively keep possession. They defended the points and were tough to play against even if some of them weren’t overly physical.

The only wingers on this team worth a damn are Eklund, Zetterlund, and Duclair when he’s on. We have too many soft, passive, slow-thinking, clumsy wingers, which makes it hard to compete for and maintain possession. Zadina, Barabanov, Hoffman, Labanc, Kunin, all these guys are as much of a problem as our disgusting defense group in my opinion.

All this to say: unless a winger is legitimately elite, I think that you can build a good group of wings without trading for big names so long as you prioritize the right attributes. And I don’t think Brady Tkachuk is elite. He’s physical, sure, but he’s not great defensively. More Dany Heatley than prime Ryane Clowe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Great Makohead Shork, stator, Shark Finn and 2 others
LadyStanley said:


#22 traded tonight.


#19 Granlund
#23 Duclair
#27 Hoffman
#42 Labanc
#43 Kunin

And Kahkonen
Click to expand...

My guess is Duclair goes and maybe Granlund, but not much else happens. Would love to see a Ferraro deal come together with the prices for D-Men looking STEEP right now, but would have to see the Hanifin market play out first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
spintops said:


Bye Ferraro
Click to expand...

Ferraro + Kahkonen for Campbell + Kulak + 1st + Broberg?

Not sure it's enough with the Campbell contract, but the salaries would workout with EDM still dollar in dollar out and needing defense and goaltending upgrades.

Plus, we only have Blackwood in net for next year and there are not many UFA goalie options that are probably clamoring to come play for a rebuilding club to see their stats obliterated. I'd be fine taking a gamble on Campbell compared to probably spending $3M on a UFA to probably give you similar results. Issue is just the compensation for taking on a bad contract from a fellow division team.
 
  • Wow
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan and Cas
STL Shark said:
Ferraro + Kahkonen for Campbell + Kulak + 1st + Broberg?

Not sure it's enough with the Campbell contract, but the salaries would workout with EDM still dollar in dollar out and needing defense and goaltending upgrades.

Plus, we only have Blackwood in net for next year and there are not many UFA goalie options that are probably clamoring to come play for a rebuilding club to see their stats obliterated. I'd be fine taking a gamble on Campbell compared to probably spending $3M on a UFA to probably give you similar results. Issue is just the compensation for taking on a bad contract from a fellow division team.
Click to expand...
The three years left on Campbell's deal after this season make it really rough. But of course you don't say no just on that basis--it's just a question of if the Oilers would be willing to make it worth the Sharks' while to take on such an onerous deal.
 
timorous me said:
The three years left on Campbell's deal after this season make it really rough. But of course you don't say no just on that basis--it's just a question of if the Oilers would be willing to make it worth the Sharks' while to take on such an onerous deal.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I look at the Campbell situation as we're going to be spending ~$3M on a goalie in whatever 1A/1B tandem we run based on the last 3-4 years (Hill, Reimer, Kahkonen, and Blackwood all in the $2.5M to $2.75M range). So with that in mind, the additional $2M isn't that big of an issue because we're rebuilding and not expecting to need that cap space for anything meaningful.

The issue is more around appropriate compensation for taking on that extra couple million from a division foe for 3 years. Using the cap relief tool, taking on Campbell alone is worth basically the Pittsburgh 1st rounder (14th overall pick). So then it comes down to how much is Edmonton willing to give up to rid themselves of that money. I don't see them moving multiple first rounders, but they also are low on prospects to trade outside of Broberg. So how you get appropriate value there is a bigger issue than being saddled with Campbell's money for 3 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Great Makohead Shork, timorous me, Sandisfan and 1 other person
STL Shark said:
Ferraro + Kahkonen for Campbell + Kulak + 1st + Broberg?

Not sure it's enough with the Campbell contract, but the salaries would workout with EDM still dollar in dollar out and needing defense and goaltending upgrades.

Plus, we only have Blackwood in net for next year and there are not many UFA goalie options that are probably clamoring to come play for a rebuilding club to see their stats obliterated. I'd be fine taking a gamble on Campbell compared to probably spending $3M on a UFA to probably give you similar results. Issue is just the compensation for taking on a bad contract from a fellow division team.
Click to expand...

I’d do it. Seems like a complicated trade mid season but maybe not!
 
STL Shark said:
Ferraro + Kahkonen for Campbell + Kulak + 1st + Broberg?

Not sure it's enough with the Campbell contract, but the salaries would workout with EDM still dollar in dollar out and needing defense and goaltending upgrades.

Plus, we only have Blackwood in net for next year and there are not many UFA goalie options that are probably clamoring to come play for a rebuilding club to see their stats obliterated. I'd be fine taking a gamble on Campbell compared to probably spending $3M on a UFA to probably give you similar results. Issue is just the compensation for taking on a bad contract from a fellow division team.
Click to expand...
Edmonton should be offering a first just to take Campbell. So basically you're trading Ferraro and Kap for Broberg. No thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan and CupfortheSharks
STL Shark said:
Yeah, I look at the Campbell situation as we're going to be spending ~$3M on a goalie in whatever 1A/1B tandem we run based on the last 3-4 years (Hill, Reimer, Kahkonen, and Blackwood all in the $2.5M to $2.75M range). So with that in mind, the additional $2M isn't that big of an issue because we're rebuilding and not expecting to need that cap space for anything meaningful.

The issue is more around appropriate compensation for taking on that extra couple million from a division foe for 3 years. Using the cap relief tool, taking on Campbell alone is worth basically the Pittsburgh 1st rounder (14th overall pick). So then it comes down to how much is Edmonton willing to give up to rid themselves of that money. I don't see them moving multiple first rounders, but they also are low on prospects to trade outside of Broberg. So how you get appropriate value there is a bigger issue than being saddled with Campbell's money for 3 years.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I would expect both the 2024 and 2025 1sts coming back if we're both taking Campbell (worth a 1st round pick alone given cap hit and term) and trading Ferraro
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan and Gecklund
So, Tanev at 25% for - essentially - a high 2nd and a conditional 3rd? So, what's the value proposition on Ferraro?
 
Shark Finn said:
So, Tanev at 25% for - essentially - a high 2nd and a conditional 3rd? So, what's the value proposition on Ferraro?
Click to expand...
He's a rough one because he's a fan favorite of many here. Obviously they'd rather keep him, but I'd be pissed if my team traded a 3rd for Ferraro because he just straight up isn't good and doesn't really have a fixable type of game unless he goes to Tampa or something and gets re-coached. Great energy but obviously having Kris Russell 2.0 playing 20 minutes a night is gonna get you probably destroyed in the playoffs, especially at 3.5m. Tanev is much better.
 
Sharkz4Fun said:
They are in Y1 of the rebuild, so no, at least not Sharks-wise. I'm actually surprised I've seen so many people optimistically turn it around here from the offseason lol. You should all save it for 2-3 more years down the line when these guys are in the league for a year or two.
Click to expand...
Ferraro has been a fine second pairing D by every metric this season. It’s stupid to say that everything is negative around the sharks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alaskanice and Sandisfan
Sharkz4Fun said:
And much, much worse.....

Just now realizing they don't have their own 3rd, 4th, 5th, or 6th round picks in Y1 of the rebuild. lol. Good bit of work by MG.
Click to expand...
Oh no what will we do without our own 6th round pick? The rebuild is ruined!

You can thank Dougie boy for giving the 4th away for Lane Pederson. 3rd for Thrun was a great trade even if he never develops beyond being a third pair dman.

This deadline should replenish most if not all of those picks anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan, Sendhelplease and Gecklund
Hodge said:
Oh no what will we do without our own 6th round pick? The rebuild is ruined!

You can thank Dougie boy for giving the 4th away for Lane Pederson. 3rd for Thrun was a great trade even if he never develops beyond being a third pair dman.

This deadline should replenish most if not all of those picks anyway.
Click to expand...
Dude also failed to mention that despite not have 4 mid to late round picks of our own, we have an extra 2nd and 1st and we still have a 4th and 5th.

Duclair alone should replace the 3rd at least. Then you got guys like Kahkonen, Barabanov, Kunin who are rentals that I think teams might be interested in and guys like Sturm, Granlund, Ferraro who could all be moved as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sendhelplease and Hodge
Gecklund said:
Dude also failed to mention that despite not have 4 mid to late round picks of our own, we have an extra 2nd and 1st and we still have a 4th and 5th.

Duclair alone should replace the 3rd at least. Then you got guys like Kahkonen, Barabanov, Kunin who are rentals that I think teams might be interested in and guys like Sturm, Granlund, Ferraro who could all be moved as well.
Click to expand...
Dude, when the Bruins went through their "retool" they had 3 1st rounders. This decade so far has gotten some Sharks fans so down bad we're celebrating an extra 1st rounder when that's the LEAST that should be accumulated. You're gonna be so disappointed when 2 of those guys are traded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom