I agree with trying to fix at least some of the defense. I'm just not sure what the answers really are. There doesn't seem to be much available this offseason that would do anything but help on the second and third pairs. Top end stopgaps or legitimate answers don't seem to be on the table for now but hopefully Mukhamadullin and a draft pick this year helps long term.
Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion
- Thread starter WTFetus
- Start date
-
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
STL Shark
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2013
- 4,548
- 5,832
Could see some sort of a prospect for prospect type of trade to get a defenseman. Agree that I don't think that there are a lot of good UFA options to just throw money at in order to make a deal. Maybe swing a deal for Hronek if Vancouver needs cap space for the rest of their roster (lots of holes to fill and only about $25M of cap space right now to do so - not sure they can afford to allocate $6M+ to Hronek with needing to fill 10 roster spots to ice a lineup next year).
Hronek, Liljegren, Fabbro, and Jiricek are guys that I could see making sense to make a move for if you're Grier. Have ample pick/prospect capital to make a deal like that if you find the right guy.
- Jul 25, 2007
- 5,204
- 7,582
I'm no expert on UFA and others say that there's not much out there on the D side this offseason that could help us. Tyler Myers could be a short-term contract depending on what happens in VAN this offseason. Other on-the-downhill vets like Alec Martinez are likely to be available. I don't know much about Skjei but depending on what happens out in CAR... anyway there are a fair few D that will likely be on the market. We don't need someone to be a top pairing NHL leader, we just need let's call it two second pairings instead of 4-5 third pairing D's and 2 who could probably play 2nd pairing with a really strong partner (Emberson/Ferraro).
However it could also be trades for pending UFAs rather than FA signings. So if you sort by 2025-26 FA rather than 2024-25 FA, there are a few more names... we won't be shopping at the top end because we won't/shouldn't want to give up top prospects or good draft picks for rentals, but there are names like ... Ceci, Savard, Maatta, basically a bunch of Ruuta lookalikes.
Basically we are still in survival mode and building through the draft for another few years. But we don't need a huge amount of top end players to take Grier's "step forward," we just need 2-3 mid-depth D and we can hopefully compete in games a bit more while still ending in the bottom 5.
However it could also be trades for pending UFAs rather than FA signings. So if you sort by 2025-26 FA rather than 2024-25 FA, there are a few more names... we won't be shopping at the top end because we won't/shouldn't want to give up top prospects or good draft picks for rentals, but there are names like ... Ceci, Savard, Maatta, basically a bunch of Ruuta lookalikes.
Basically we are still in survival mode and building through the draft for another few years. But we don't need a huge amount of top end players to take Grier's "step forward," we just need 2-3 mid-depth D and we can hopefully compete in games a bit more while still ending in the bottom 5.
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
I think Quinn’s quote means exactly what I have always maintained: this year was intended to be rock bottom. The tear down is fully complete.
Next year we’ll still be bottom-3 in the league, but Grier will improve the team enough that we’ll be “regular” bad, not “an insult to seeing people” bad. You can be bad and competitive, but this team ain’t it. I think Grier will be somewhat active in the UFA/trade market to make some improvements.
Next year we’ll still be bottom-3 in the league, but Grier will improve the team enough that we’ll be “regular” bad, not “an insult to seeing people” bad. You can be bad and competitive, but this team ain’t it. I think Grier will be somewhat active in the UFA/trade market to make some improvements.
I love stat watching, that lineup would be so much more fun to watch compared to what we are icing this year,
Bring the kids up, if Celebrini is NHL ready, chances are Smith and Musty are too.
- Jun 23, 2020
- 6,268
- 9,119
Yeah, being anywhere even approaching mediocre would be a miracle. With the teardown complete (we still have Vlasic and Couture, but they're valueless and will be gone by the time we're ready to think about competing), now we can start building. It's just going to take a while.
I think we might easily be as bad next year as this year, though.
With how the blue line is constructed and numerous contracts signed still, yeah they probably will be as bad next year. But if they beef up the forwards to where they have a legitimate group of three lines able to put up some offense, they can at least be fun to watch but they're only carrying with them about four guys worth slotting into next year's lineup before we talk about signing Smith or drafting Celebrini. There's a lot of openings up front and cap space to spend with options there.
It seems like Grier is well aware of timing and the impacts a lottery win should have on direction.
Last season the team was lottery bad but also had enough pieces that a lottery win would have given them a fast track rebuild where playoffs this season wouldn't have been a crazy idea. That didn't happen so Grier continued with the teardown.
This draft, I see two paths that will be determined by the ping pong balls. If they get the 1OA, I think they look to noticably improve by upgrading the D to a significant degree with a stretch goal of playing meaningful games into Feb/March.
If they don't win the draft I think Grier only look at to improve in the margins and the Sharks will again be a bottom-3 team by design.
- Jul 25, 2007
- 5,204
- 7,582
You think Bedard would have helped our team compete for the playoffs?! I guess in that alternate universe you don't trade EK65, but how do you shore up the rest of the defense? I don't see a world in which Bedard helps this team be a playoff team this year no matter what moves we could have made.
Similarly this offseason, even if we win Celebrini, the players just aren't out there to "shore up the defense" nor do we have the assets to trade for them. I think they knew this was going to be a long rebuild. I think the lottery results last year had no bearing on this year, but I think the lottery results this offseason definitely have a bearing in terms of whether we try to take a "step forward" or a "BIG step forward."
If we win Celebrini, I could see them making a pitch to e.g. Stamkos and a handful of other high-profile guys to try to come here, but there's still not a lot out there in terms of D. Maybe Myers, Stamkos, Martinez, Skjei, Hanafin if he hits the open market (not likely...) and we try to compete for the playoffs, but that's a serious long shot.
I think that the following offseason is when we could really start rebuilding harder/faster, Celebrini or no. We will have had 2 more 1RD picks in 2025, possibly 3... and at least another high 2nd rounder. prospects to move, or prospects to keep filling the pipeline and building to something more exciting.
This fits my/many of our timeline of "2027 playoff contenders at earliest." Still think it's more likely that we're like Detroit and we kind of struggle to put it together for a few years beyond that as our prospects actually mature into their peaks aged 25-30.
Jargon
Registered User
Totally agree. I think without Celebrini he’ll still bring in help because no one wants to see this atrocity again, but with Celebrini I can see a legitimate attempt to build an okay team.
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
Adding Celebrini and/or Smith to this roster really wouldn’t change the team all that much alone… but if we added both and Musty, promoted Mukhamadullin and Thompson, made some huge UFA signings (say, Stamkos and Pesce), and Couture was magically completely healthy, we might have something worth cooking. Fun to think about, despite how absolutely insanely ridiculously unrealistic it is. 
Eklund-Celebrini-Stamkos
Couture-Smith-Zetterlund
Musty-Granlund-Graf
Kostin-Sturm-Smith
Bordeleau
Mukhamadullin-Pesce
Ferraro-Emberson
Thrun-Thompson
Rutta
Blackwood
Vanacek
That team only returns like seven guys who played regular minutes this season, which is how much turnover there’d need to be to make any kind of standings impact.
Eklund-Celebrini-Stamkos
Couture-Smith-Zetterlund
Musty-Granlund-Graf
Kostin-Sturm-Smith
Bordeleau
Mukhamadullin-Pesce
Ferraro-Emberson
Thrun-Thompson
Rutta
Blackwood
Vanacek
That team only returns like seven guys who played regular minutes this season, which is how much turnover there’d need to be to make any kind of standings impact.
Patty Ice
Mighty Luca
This is where Halttunen having a strong season next year would be helpful. His size and shot could inflate his value to bring in a better defensive prospect.
Jargon
Registered User
Adding Celebrini and/or Smith to this roster really wouldn’t change the team all that much alone… but if we added both and Musty, promoted Mukhamadullin and Thompson, made some huge UFA signings (say, Stamkos and Pesce), and Couture was magically completely healthy, we might have something worth cooking. Fun to think about, despite how absolutely insanely ridiculously unrealistic it is.
Eklund-Celebrini-Stamkos
Couture-Smith-Zetterlund
Musty-Granlund-Graf
Kostin-Sturm-Smith
Bordeleau
Mukhamadullin-Pesce
Ferraro-Emberson
Thrun-Thompson
Rutta
Blackwood
Vanacek
That team only returns like seven guys who played regular minutes this season, which is how much turnover there’d need to be to make any kind of standings impact.
My god this team would be so much more fun to watch than anything we’ve fielded in years.
timorous me
Gristled Veteran
- Apr 14, 2010
- 2,576
- 4,402
Even if we don't bring in a defenseman like Pesce, having Mukhamadullin on D plus a healthy Benning and a healthy Emberson--plus Thompson if he can make the jump--would lead to, well, far from a good D, but at least a D comprised of cromulent parts. So I would say that if a signing or trade doesn't make sense or materialize, there's no need to force it over the summer, since you'd already have an improvement over this year's.Adding Celebrini and/or Smith to this roster really wouldn’t change the team all that much alone… but if we added both and Musty, promoted Mukhamadullin and Thompson, made some huge UFA signings (say, Stamkos and Pesce), and Couture was magically completely healthy, we might have something worth cooking. Fun to think about, despite how absolutely insanely ridiculously unrealistic it is.
Eklund-Celebrini-Stamkos
Couture-Smith-Zetterlund
Musty-Granlund-Graf
Kostin-Sturm-Smith
Bordeleau
Mukhamadullin-Pesce
Ferraro-Emberson
Thrun-Thompson
Rutta
Blackwood
Vanacek
That team only returns like seven guys who played regular minutes this season, which is how much turnover there’d need to be to make any kind of standings impact.
SjMilhouse
Registered User
- Jul 18, 2012
- 2,481
- 3,366
It's a weird balancing act because I think you still want to be bad enough to pick top 10, ideally top 5, for another year or two to build up as much of a foundational prospect pool for the future as you can. With that said, I also don't disagree with Pierre in that you can't just be this bad year after year because I do believe it would be incredibly difficult to attract FA talent (which has been difficult historically) that you need to fill out the roster. Ideally a few guys like Smith, Musty, and Celebrini (if we win the lotto) turn into franchise pieces and we hit on a few others to fill out the roster or at least develop enough to be packaged in trades for young impact players in the next 3-4 years.
I think getting to a point where we are still bad, but show progress and sort of just tread water for a couple years to give guys time to keep developing is the ideal scenario....then you can start getting hyper aggressive
I think getting to a point where we are still bad, but show progress and sort of just tread water for a couple years to give guys time to keep developing is the ideal scenario....then you can start getting hyper aggressive
Right now give the fans something tangible to be excited about on the ice versus our constant need to convince ourselves we'll be good in 5 years.
Grier has also made plenty of comments about staying the course and not giving out long contracts to FAs this summer, so presumably taking a "step forward" this summer will involve young guys taking the next step into the NHL (Graf, Mukh, Musty, Macklin if we're lucky, and Smith?) + adding some FAs on 2-3 year deals. Which is just fine...the Sharks will still finish bottom-5 and get a great 2025 1st round pick while being substantially more fun to watch with a bunch of young guys + some vets sprinkled in including Couture (if healthy), Granlund, Sturm, Rutta, and Benning.
timorous me
Gristled Veteran
- Apr 14, 2010
- 2,576
- 4,402
The question I have is, what players out there can you bring in this offseason--realistically speaking--that would genuinely excite fans and sell a meaningful number of tickets...without removing anyone from the prospect pool (or draft picks)?
I'd say the most exciting thing for fans would, of course, be to win the lottery and have Celebrini come in to play for us next season. Beyond that happening, for me it's the other prospects coming in and playing. It may be a while before the team is good again, but starting to see more prospects in action would, in my mind, be something easier to promote to fans than even a nice free agent signing like a Brett Pesce, if you could even get him.
hohosaregood
Banned
- Sep 1, 2011
- 33,639
- 14,535
just looking at how the league is right now, there's only like 3-4 teams to contend against as bottom feeders. Most of the other teams in the league are pushing for the playoffs right now. Chicago, CBJ, and Anaheim should take a step forward. Montreal and Ottawa might peter out as mid. And NYI, WSH, and CGY might fall off a cliff. But we're really as far out as you can get even with signifcant overhaul to the lineup. I can't imagine us pushing for top 10 let alone out of the top 5.
- Jun 23, 2020
- 6,268
- 9,119
I do not believe bringing in specific players generally sells tickets. It almost never does in baseball and I suspect the same is true in hockey.
What sells more tickets is a materially improved team - as in, playoff contention. We're nowhere near that - no one is going to care if we're a 65 point team next year, instead of a 45 point team this year.
There are exceptions, of course, but nobody cares about signing Brett Pesce or trading for Jeff Petry.
The only guy even remotely capable of moving the needle is probably Stamkos. I'll consider it realistic in the sense that he was at least considering San Jose last time around. Granted, we're in different circumstances now but so is he. It would make a lot of sense for the Sharks to bring him in even if they don't get competitive during his time. It helps the culture either way.
There are a lot of better players than the Kyle Burroughs of the world. Grier purposely brought in the absolute bottom of the barrel options in both trade and FA (Hoffman, Ruuta, Burroughs, Givanni Smith, Zadina, Bailey, Carpenter, Blackwood etc.
He literally only brought in players either who had no other NHL options or guys just looking for an opportunity to rebuild some of their value. I have no aspirations of them bringing in the Guentzels of the world, but there's guys like Victor Arvidsson or Turbo from Carolina - aging guys who probably wont get long term deals because of their age. Hell, bring back Duclair if he's interested as he was quickly a fan favorite.
Are these exciting pick-ups? No, but the prospect of decent FA talent and highly-touted rookies will be something to at least pique interest for the first couple months anyways.
I like Stammer but I honestly don't know why he'd want to waste his last few years on a rebuilding squad. I mean he just turned 34 so the only way he'd come here is if we vastly overpaid him on a two year deal.
I agree regardless of how this draft goes now isn't the time to get hyper aggressive, however, with a legitimate blue-chip first line centre like Celebrini in addition to a strong and growing prospect pool, I think there is a strong case that icing a more competitive team only aids the development both in the NHL and the AHL.
On D, one option might be to target a player who is unpreforming their contract, still has 2-3 years left but is also still playing at a 4th or 5th D level. That would be a big upgrade for this group. The Sharks don't care about the cap and if he has a nice turn around you can look to trade him after a season.
A move or two like this would help the team be more competitive, albeit still not a playoff team. This would provide a better environment for evaluating the 24-28 year olds to see if and where they could fit on a playoff team. It would also push a few players down to the AHL and hopefully get them into the playoffs.
