Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[Pinkfloyd]

Read Hodge's posts.

Hodge doesn't get to answer what you view as repeating the same process.

 

[TheBeard]

I actually want to hear your thoughts on how we can not be bottom 10 in such a short span? Have you seen how long Anaheim has been bottom 10? Ottawa?

Both are perfect examples of how tanking for picks isn't always the way. Ottawa for over a decade has been a bad organization top to bottom and I hope to god we have a more committed ownership group and stability than they do.

Anaheim feels like they're on the verge of a full-blown player mutiny

 

[TheBeard]

Hodge doesn't get to answer what you view as repeating the same process.

Ok, repeating the process is, as I said, what Hodge would prefer. Doing nothing to address the weakness strictly because Grier doesn't want to. He knew the D was going to be godawful this year, we all did. It made sense considering what the intent of the season was. Bringing in Mackenzie Blackwood to play behind the D was strictly meant as a blatant tank move, and, again, one I fully support because I came into this season assuming and anticipating being bad. We succeeded in that regards, perhaps almost a little too well. I can't accept doing the exact same thing next year.

 

[Herschel]

We will be. There isn't enough talent in the system, or veterans on the roster where there is any scenario we're not bottom 10 in 3 years.

We're basically in year 2 of the rebuild. Most guys we draft are at least 3 years away from even coming to the AHL team let alone making the NHL.

I actually want to hear your thoughts on how we can not be bottom 10 in such a short span? Have you seen how long Anaheim has been bottom 10? Ottawa?

There are only really two scenarios I can see

1) Crazy FA signings... something along the lines of Draisaitl deciding he is done in Edmonton and wants to be in SJ. This is obviously unlikely

2) Celebrini plus at least 6 of their existing prospects reaching their projected ceilings. I think getting Leon is more likely.

 

[STL Shark]

What? That is a plan to secure the 1st overall pick (or top lottery odds) because I think that's what we should do. Within the context of the rebuild this season was absolutely a resounding success that we should try to repeat next year barring Celebrini and Smith joining the team.

I don't think anyone would argue against next year being another big rebuilding year if we don't get the top pick this year. It would basically be impossible to be anything but that outside of Couture magically being healthy for 70+ games, Smith being Calder level, and hitting big on a trade/UFA D-Man signing (aka all things that are not going to happen).

That said, there is still a wide chasm between trying to get out of the rebuild and also showing some sort of proof of concept as it relates to Quinn/Grier and their vision for the team moving forward. It's wholly unfair to Quinn to give him another turd burger roster next year and ruin his NHL coaching career and it also puts a lot of blind trust in Grier to keep letting him ice a turd burger for the third straight year.

Don't think it is beyond the expectations that we should strive to be better than this year, even if that means not trying to come out of the rebuild (with or without Celebrini). Could mean adding a competent D-Man or 2 to help Thrun/Muk in their development. Also allow you to see if your goaltending coaches know anything by getting a real evaluation on what you've got there. It's just overall bad to not try and improve at all when it comes to evaluating the coach, GM, and development staff

 

[coooldude]

I'm tired of having the same old runaround conversation. Fans who expect us to be competitive in 3 years or else Grier has failed -- you are objectively underestimating the regular timeline of a full tank rebuild. Look at every single cup winner or even finalist of the past 5-8 years, look up their top three players (at least one of which will be top 5, probably more), look up their ages / when they were drafted, and realize how long it takes.

The Avs rebuild was under criticism for "failing" when they had to trade away Duchene, who they drafted in 2009. They drafted Cale Makar in 2017, 6 years after drafting Landeskog 2OA, missing 7 out of 8 playoffs. After that, they made 1st round 3 2nd round exits, and won the cup in 2022.

Smith is our Duchene, in terms of timeline. He's not the centerpiece but he's a high pick and he's the first. That means we are currently in 2010 for the Avs. We are hopefully about to draft our Landeskog-ish a year early and we may still be 3 years away from drafting our MacKinnon, then 9 years from a cup win.

That would put a cup win at 2035 after 4 years of playoff disappointment.

Even if we pick Celebrini, plus Musty hits, plus we get the Pens pick and it hits, we may still be 2-3 more top 10-15 draft picks away from actually putting it all together for a run at the playoffs.

This shit takes way too long, and we are way too far away, to be worried about whether we're still bottoming out next year or whether we still suck in 3 years with a bunch of 23-25 year old children on the roster.

 

[LadyStanley]

 

[Gecklund]

If we don't land Celebrini then I would prefer to "tank" although again I'm not suggesting anything dramatic like shipping out our goalies. Just run it back for at least one more season and reassess in summer 2025.

I don’t really agree with running it back. Like I do and I don’t. I don’t want to say trade for Sidney Crosby but adding a top 4 D, maybe an offensive D, and a couple Cs I’m all for.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Ok, repeating the process is, as I said, what Hodge would prefer. Doing nothing to address the weakness strictly because Grier doesn't want to. He knew the D was going to be godawful this year, we all did. It made sense considering what the intent of the season was. Bringing in Mackenzie Blackwood to play behind the D was strictly meant as a blatant tank move, and, again, one I fully support because I came into this season assuming and anticipating being bad. We succeeded in that regards, perhaps almost a little too well. I can't accept doing the exact same thing next year.

The problem I have with this is the premise. They did something to address it but the timing of certain events prevented them from getting a more substantive answer for it. They didn't trade Karlsson until late in the offseason. It sounded like some moves to mitigate the Karlsson loss were contingent when free agency started to Karlsson being traded on free agency day or thereabouts and it didn't happen. Then when they did trade Karlsson and all the real options were gone, they tried to see what they had, saw it was going to be bad, claimed Emberson off waivers and traded for Calen Addison.

They aren't going to do the same thing next year because it's a completely different set of circumstances now. Karlsson is long gone, part of that dump taken back is expiring, and they have better puck-movers going into next season than they did this season. Granted, those puck-movers still aren't good enough but it's not the barren wasteland of puck-movers it was going into training camp this season.

I think next year's team will be an improvement. Personally, I just hope it doesn't lead to better results as it relates to wins and losses. They can add more skill up front realistically and they can make some moves on the backend if they want and it would help them perform better but I need to see someone young be the man and be the leader. It can't be Granlund. It can't be Ferraro. It can't be Kunin. It needs to be someone with a future that has the ability to consistently impact the game in their favor in the manner that Joe Thornton did and it really can't be anything less otherwise we need to really be patient to allow kids to develop and fill out spots in the lineup to be a 3-line, 3-D pairing sort of team in order to compete. You either need top talent to carry you or you need a significant amount of depth throughout the lineup to compete in this day and age.

 

[tahoesharksfan]

Read Hodge's posts.

Never again, thanks....

 

[STL Shark]

I'm tired of having the same old runaround conversation. Fans who expect us to be competitive in 3 years or else Grier has failed -- you are objectively underestimating the regular timeline of a full tank rebuild. Look at every single cup winner or even finalist of the past 5-8 years, look up their top three players (at least one of which will be top 5, probably more), look up their ages / when they were drafted, and realize how long it takes.

The Avs rebuild was under criticism for "failing" when they had to trade away Duchene, who they drafted in 2009. They drafted Cale Makar in 2017, 6 years after drafting Landeskog 2OA, missing 7 out of 8 playoffs. After that, they made 1st round 3 2nd round exits, and won the cup in 2022.

Smith is our Duchene, in terms of timeline. He's not the centerpiece but he's a high pick and he's the first. That means we are currently in 2010 for the Avs. We are hopefully about to draft our Landeskog-ish a year early and we may still be 3 years away from drafting our MacKinnon, then 9 years from a cup win.

That would put a cup win at 2035 after 4 years of playoff disappointment.

Even if we pick Celebrini, plus Musty hits, plus we get the Pens pick and it hits, we may still be 2-3 more top 10-15 draft picks away from actually putting it all together for a run at the playoffs.

This shit takes way too long, and we are way too far away, to be worried about whether we're still bottoming out next year or whether we still suck in 3 years with a bunch of 23-25 year old children on the roster.

And I am equally tired of people like you putting words in others mouths. Nobody is saying that we need to be in the playoffs next year or even remotely close. What people are saying is that we can't be a laughing stock of a team and one of the worst teams of the salary cap era once again. You have to show some sort of proof of concept as a new and first time GM. Otherwise, when is it fair to evaluate?

There also isn't a rule that the entire roster needs to be comprised of homegrown players that were all drafted by your organization before you're allowed to try and be a decent team. We have freaking 40+ MILLION DOLLARS OF CAP SPACE with another $10.5 million coming off in the form of Burns, Granlund, and Rutta in 2025 (plus $5M more of cap ceiling increases).

There is so much capacity to get better and not have to rely strictly on homegrown talent because we're saddled with an abundance of long-term aging contracts. If we hadn't moved the Karlsson, Burns, Meier (extended), and Hertl contracts, then we're for sure sitting in the timeline of waiting until the early 2030's to hit on enough draft picks to be good. The reason we traded those guys is so that we had an avenue to not have to wait on a near perfect drafting record for 5+ years in order to be good.

 

[TheBeard]

The problem I have with this is the premise. They did something to address it but the timing of certain events prevented them from getting a more substantive answer for it. They didn't trade Karlsson until late in the offseason. It sounded like some moves to mitigate the Karlsson loss were contingent when free agency started to Karlsson being traded on free agency day or thereabouts and it didn't happen. Then when they did trade Karlsson and all the real options were gone, they tried to see what they had, saw it was going to be bad, claimed Emberson off waivers and traded for Calen Addison.

I don’t think Grier had any aspirations to do anything to make the team better this year and that’s ok. I doubt what he did in FA was contingent on the Karlsson trade. Grier used this year on lotto ticket reclamation projects like Addison and Emberson and Gawanke and Zadina and Strudnick. One or two is one thing but when pretty much every pickup was a similar kind of boom or bust lotto ticket then it was clearly his plan all along.

 

[Hodge]

I don't think anyone would argue against next year being another big rebuilding year if we don't get the top pick this year. It would basically be impossible to be anything but that outside of Couture magically being healthy for 70+ games, Smith being Calder level, and hitting big on a trade/UFA D-Man signing (aka all things that are not going to happen).

That said, there is still a wide chasm between trying to get out of the rebuild and also showing some sort of proof of concept as it relates to Quinn/Grier and their vision for the team moving forward. It's wholly unfair to Quinn to give him another turd burger roster next year and ruin his NHL coaching career and it also puts a lot of blind trust in Grier to keep letting him ice a turd burger for the third straight year.

Don't think it is beyond the expectations that we should strive to be better than this year, even if that means not trying to come out of the rebuild (with or without Celebrini). Could mean adding a competent D-Man or 2 to help Thrun/Muk in their development. Also allow you to see if your goaltending coaches know anything by getting a real evaluation on what you've got there. It's just overall bad to not try and improve at all when it comes to evaluating the coach, GM, and development staff

I would extend Quinn as soon as this season ends to assure him he won't be judged on short term results, then give him another turd burger roster. Significantly improving the team for next season is not worth the risk of losing out on a top 5 pick as a result. We only finished tearing this thing down a month ago with the Hertl trade. Especially in a year with so much dead money on the books it makes the most sense to just let it ride and reassess a year from now.

Again, this all changes if we win the lottery but I'm not holding my breath over a 25.5% shot.

 

[tiburon12]

That would put a cup win at 2035 after 4 years of playoff disappointment.

you forgot to tag @StanleyCup2035

 

[Shark Finn]

Classic Hodge. Don't ever change.

He already did once.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I don’t think Grier had any aspirations to do anything to make the team better this year and that’s ok. I doubt what he did in FA was contingent on the Karlsson trade. Grier used this year on lotto ticket reclamation projects like Addison and Emberson and Gawanke and Zadina and Strudnick. One or two is one thing but when pretty much every pickup was a similar kind of boom or bust lotto ticket then it was clearly his plan all along.

Well no not when the off-season largely predicated around trading Karlsson. It’s difficult to address weaknesses or get better when you’re working a deal like that out. When you know that deal is going to involve cap dumps, cheap pickups are what you go for. They could only do so much with Karlsson’s trade holding them up.

 

[coooldude]

And I am equally tired of people like you putting words in others mouths. Nobody is saying that we need to be in the playoffs next year or even remotely close. What people are saying is that we can't be a laughing stock of a team and one of the worst teams of the salary cap era once again. You have to show some sort of proof of concept as a new and first time GM. Otherwise, when is it fair to evaluate?

There also isn't a rule that the entire roster needs to be comprised of homegrown players that were all drafted by your organization before you're allowed to try and be a decent team. We have freaking 40+ MILLION DOLLARS OF CAP SPACE with another $10.5 million coming off in the form of Burns, Granlund, and Rutta in 2025 (plus $5M more of cap ceiling increases).

There is so much capacity to get better and not have to rely strictly on homegrown talent because we're saddled with an abundance of long-term aging contracts. If we hadn't moved the Karlsson, Burns, Meier (extended), and Hertl contracts, then we're for sure sitting in the timeline of waiting until the early 2030's to hit on enough draft picks to be good. The reason we traded those guys is so that we had an avenue to not have to wait on a near perfect drafting record for 5+ years in order to be good.

Read TheBeard's posts. Nobody is putting words in anyone's mouth. He said that in 3 years if we are still a losing team then Grier has failed. I disagree.

I personally think we should try to add a few pieces in free agency and that we'll still finish bottom 3 next year. If we draft Celebrini, I'd even be for taking a run at Stamkos, although I don't think he'll bite.

I think you've said roughly the same and I've liked your posts. However I didn't love this sharp tone out of nowhere here. I was in a back and forth with TheBeard and others.

We have cap space, but I still think we need to rely on good drafting for 5+ years (even charitably giving us back to 2022, that means 2 more years after this one), because even if those aren't the players who get you there, they are the assets that get you there. Like I have said consistently in many places, it will be an interesting offseason and draft because the rebuild strategy will start to take shape. That rebuild strategy, if we are lucky and good in the draft and we execute well in trades and free agency, could have us competing for a playoff spot in 2028 not unlike the Red Wings this season or the Devils last year. I'm not sure where you think I'm putting words in anyone's mouth here. I'm using my own words and responding to other people's words.

 

[Stewie Griffin]

I get everyone wants to show a little more signs of life next year, and trust me I don't enjoy watching Sharks games right now either, but realistically that probably won't happen. We finished 4th last 2 years ago with Hertl, Karlsson, and half a season of Meier...who do we have even near that calibre of a player on our roster next year? Granlund maybe....who will probably be traded at next years deadline. and a 25.5% chance of a rookie Celebrini. Even Chicago added Bedard, along with Hall, Perry, etc. plus a ton of other rookies and are going to finish 31st. We're basically following their footsteps next year, but we don't have a Bedard, and I'm not sure if there will be a team as bad as the Sharks this year who will finish below us next year.

Then you have to consider who we can add in FA...well the top free agents will not sign on a team this bad, in a smaller hockey market, in a high tax state unless we massively overpay in AAV or term. Obviously that part will happen due to needing to reach the cap floor, but we're not going to get a difference maker that all of a sudden makes us significantly better.

I think our next evaluation of Grier and what he's done needs to happen after the 2025 draft. That will be 4 years of Grier drafting, and (unless we add more) 7 1st round picks and 6 2nd rounders. Not to mention we'll have an unlimited amont of cap space at that point...the only players currently on the roster signed for the 2026 season are Eklund, Graf, Couture (is he going to play?), Vlasic, Ferraro, and just under 3M in retained salary on Hertl and Karlsson. The Free agents that summer include, Tavares, Marner, Draisaitl, Rantanen, Ekblad, Buchnevich, Theodore, Slavin, Ullmark, and many more.

 

[sharski]

are we all just gonna ignore the possibliity that blackwood pulls a tim thomas and just drags the sharks to a cup

 

[Herschel]

I'm tired of having the same old runaround conversation. Fans who expect us to be competitive in 3 years or else Grier has failed -- you are objectively underestimating the regular timeline of a full tank rebuild. Look at every single cup winner or even finalist of the past 5-8 years, look up their top three players (at least one of which will be top 5, probably more), look up their ages / when they were drafted, and realize how long it takes.

The Avs rebuild was under criticism for "failing" when they had to trade away Duchene, who they drafted in 2009. They drafted Cale Makar in 2017, 6 years after drafting Landeskog 2OA, missing 7 out of 8 playoffs. After that, they made 1st round 3 2nd round exits, and won the cup in 2022.

Smith is our Duchene, in terms of timeline. He's not the centerpiece but he's a high pick and he's the first. That means we are currently in 2010 for the Avs. We are hopefully about to draft our Landeskog-ish a year early and we may still be 3 years away from drafting our MacKinnon, then 9 years from a cup win.

That would put a cup win at 2035 after 4 years of playoff disappointment.

Even if we pick Celebrini, plus Musty hits, plus we get the Pens pick and it hits, we may still be 2-3 more top 10-15 draft picks away from actually putting it all together for a run at the playoffs.

This shit takes way too long, and we are way too far away, to be worried about whether we're still bottoming out next year or whether we still suck in 3 years with a bunch of 23-25 year old children on the roster.

Since Grier was hired I have wondered what set him apart from other candidates and how did he seemingly get Hasso on board for a rebuild when all reports were that wasn't the direct he wanted to go. Perhaps he presented a different path then the standard one you layout above.

Out of curiosity is there any merit to attempting to do a re-build using more of the Vegas model. Could that have been what Grier presented?

Also, I agree entirely that full rebuild take forever and if that is the path forward we are in for at least 2-3 more seasons of pain before we ice anything that might be considered playoff competitive.

 

[weastern bias]

I think our next evaluation of Grier and what he's done needs to happen after the 2025 draft. That will be 4 years of Grier drafting

I completely agree with your post, but I think there's even more leeway to be given because Grier was hired 2 days before the 2022 entry draft, he wasn't really running that draft, he was operating on the knowledge base from the previous regime's scouting intelligence

Grier's first real draft was last year, we're going into his second draft this summer, we're at the very beginning of his rebuild right now

 

[Herschel]

I completely agree with your post, but I think there's even more leeway to be given because Grier was hired 2 days before the 2022 entry draft, he wasn't really running that draft, he was operating on the knowledge base from the previous regime's scouting intelligence

Grier's first real draft was last year, we're going into his second draft this summer, we're at the very beginning of his rebuild right now

I'd love to know if the trade down decision was due to Grier's philosophy or if it was more the scouting groups idea.

 

[weastern bias]

Since Grier was hired I have wondered what set him apart from other candidates and how did he seemingly get Hasso on board for a rebuild when all reports were that wasn't the direct he wanted to go. Perhaps he presented a different path then the standard one you layout above.

Out of curiosity is there any merit to attempting to do a re-build using more of the Vegas model. Could that have been what Grier presented?

Also, I agree entirely that full rebuild take forever and if that is the path forward we are in for at least 2-3 more seasons of pain before we ice anything that might be considered playoff competitive.

The Vegas model is not replicable

They operate off a surplus off assets acquired in the first expansion draft in the history of a hard salary cap league, they had a treasure trove of expendable picks and prospects to spend on win-now players, we have no future assets in picks or prospects that we can afford to trade because we don't have a winning team to supplement with win-now talent

We're not looking at Vegas, we're looking at Toronto, they turned a bad team with no foundational pieces into a perennial competitor (in the regular season, at least) on the back players they drafted and developed, outside of a starting goalie they didn't start acquiring supplemental pieces through trade until AFTER the core was drafted and graduated to the big club

I'd love to know if the trade down decision was due to Grier's philosophy or if it was more the scouting groups idea.

We'll probably never be told for sure, but I seriously doubt any of the moves or picks in that draft were Grier's decision, the entry draft is one of the most important events in the NHL season with ramifications that impact teams for years, a smart organization isn't handing that off to someone who's been on the job for less than a week

 

[jarr92]

We're not looking at Vegas, we're looking at Toronto, they turned a bad team with no foundational pieces into a perennial competitor (in the regular season, at least) on the back players they drafted and developed, outside of a starting goalie they didn't start acquiring supplemental pieces through trade until AFTER the core was drafted and graduated to the big club

Yeah Toronto is probably the best case scenario for the current rebuild. If the Sharks luck into Celebrini, a core of him plus Eklund and Smith is fairly comparable to Nylander, Marner, Matthews if they all hit on their potential.

 

[Herschel]

The Vegas model is not replicable

They operate off a surplus off assets acquired in the first expansion draft in the history of a hard salary cap league, they had a treasure trove of expendable picks and prospects to spend on win-now players, we have no future assets in picks or prospects that we can afford to trade because we don't have a winning team to supplement with win-now talent

We're not looking at Vegas, we're looking at Toronto, they turned a bad team with no foundational pieces into a perennial competitor (in the regular season, at least) on the back players they drafted and developed, outside of a starting goalie they didn't start acquiring supplemental pieces through trade until AFTER the core was drafted and graduated to the big club

Vegas added core top end pieces to a solid overall foundation, where as Toronto drafted their top end but hasn't yet been able to add the foundational pieces around them. Edmonton has hand similar struggles.

When I consider following the Vegas model I mean focusing the next 3-4 seasons around building out a foundation that provides the team with a really good middle 6 along with a 4 quality NHL D and then shifting to win-now moves that bring in your "core" players (1st line and top pairing), even if those moves require trading a young piece like Smith, Eklund, etc.