Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[OrrNumber4]

I don't know 100%, but my feeling is that Grier traded down because he was going for quantity over quality. New to the team, he wanted to get as many of his type of guys in as soon as possible.

 

[Hodge]

I don't know 100%, but my feeling is that Grier traded down because he was going for quantity over quality. New to the team, he wanted to get as many of his type of guys in as soon as possible.

It was also just an objectively correct trade to make regardless of what anyone says. The historical value of the picks we acquired far exceeds what we gave up.

 

[weastern bias]

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.

The difference is not only in the availability of assets, but also the starting point

Vegas began supplementing a team that won their division and their conference, they had lots of expendable future assets to use in order to add those supplemental pieces, they didn't add the middle sixers, they picked them up in the expansion draft, they added their top-end players through trade and UFA using their surplus of assets

Toronto was a bottom dweller that lost a 2nd overall pick in an ill-conceived trade of a future 1st for a win-now player and was consistently finishing at or near the bottom of their division, they added their top-end players by drafting 1st overall, 4th overall and 8th overall and by signing a big ticket UFA, they trade for and sign their supplemental players

Our situation is comparable to Toronto at the beginning of their rebuild, it is not comparable to Vegas who never had to rebuild, they were a competitive team from the beginning and continued to add to their already competitive roster

 

[coooldude]

The difference is not only in the availability of assets, but also the starting point

Vegas began supplementing a team that won their division and their conference, they had lots of expendable future assets to use in order to add those supplemental pieces, they didn't add the middle sixers, they picked them up in the expansion draft, they added their top-end players through trade and UFA using their surplus of assets

Toronto was a bottom dweller that lost a 2nd overall pick in an ill-conceived trade of a future 1st for a win-now player and was consistently finishing at or near the bottom of their division, they added their top-end players by drafting 1st overall, 4th overall and 8th overall and by signing a big ticket UFA, they trade for and sign their supplemental players

Our situation is comparable to Toronto at the beginning of their rebuild, it is not comparable to Vegas who never had to rebuild, they were a competitive team from the beginning and continued to add to their already competitive roster

Agreed we're not comparable to Vegas. I'd say we're perhaps closer to comparable to either the FLA or the TBL rebuild or original LAK rebuild when they drafted Doughty and Kopitar. Current ANA rebuild. Non-traditional market teams that had to do it through the draft. Unfortunately we probably had the worst starting point of anyone.

FLA made the playoffs only 3 times in 20 years from 1998-2018. You could argue their comparable rebuild started in 2012 with the 2OA draft of Barkov. Then Ekblad (1OA), Crouse (11OA) in the next 2 years.

 

[Hodge]

Our closest analogous rebuild is Detroit. Lots of lessons to be learned there, primarily don't go on a spending spree to bring in tons of mediocre veteran free agents...

 

[Herschel]

The difference is not only in the availability of assets, but also the starting point

Vegas began supplementing a team that won their division and their conference, they had lots of expendable future assets to use in order to add those supplemental pieces, they didn't add the middle sixers, they picked them up in the expansion draft, they added their top-end players through trade and UFA using their surplus of assets

Toronto was a bottom dweller that lost a 2nd overall pick in an ill-conceived trade of a future 1st for a win-now player and was consistently finishing at or near the bottom of their division, they added their top-end players by drafting 1st overall, 4th overall and 8th overall and by signing a big ticket UFA, they trade for and sign their supplemental players

Our situation is comparable to Toronto at the beginning of their rebuild, it is not comparable to Vegas who never had to rebuild, they were a competitive team from the beginning and continued to add to their already competitive roster

Yes, our current position is comparable to Toronto and not comparable to Vegas. I don't believe there is any viable path forward for the next 2-3 seasons that isn't primarily focused on the draft. The potential issue is that with the lottery you could spend the next 3 years living in the basement and Will Smith could still be your best prospect

What I am wondering is instead of depending on finding our Matthews, Marner, Nylander and Morgan via the draft could they be added via trades/UFAs more in the manner in which Vegas operates. Or is it not possible to build up enough of a foundation in 3 years that is makes sense.

Again, my curiosity stems from the idea that Grier presented something different to Hasso than the standard teardown and draft. That might might be a faulty starting point.

 

[TheBeard]

FLA made the playoffs only 3 times in 20 years from 1998-2018. You could argue their comparable rebuild started in 2012 with the 2OA draft of Barkov. Then Ekblad (1OA), Crouse (11OA) in the next 2 years.

Again, I think a lot of people seem to have a hard time differentiating a rebuild from a bad stretch. Florida was literally picking up big names during that time, from Brian Campbell to Roberto Luongo. They just weren't a good hockey team. Their success now seems to be more because of the guys they acquired from other teams (Tkachuk, Bobrovsky, Reinhart, Bennett, Verhaeghe) than the guys they drafted.

 

[TheBeard]

What I am wondering is instead of depending on finding our Matthews, Marner, Nylander and Morgan via the draft could they be added via trades/UFAs more in the manner in which Vegas operates. Or is it not possible to build up enough of a foundation in 3 years that is makes sense.

I don't think so. The league and the teams learned their lesson with Vegas. The amount of ammo they had to operate and make mistakes meant they could just dump a Suzuki for a Patches and then still have two other firsts from their first year to either trade (Brannstrom) or play (Glass).

Vegas was given the luxury of bringing in younger talent and it was fairly hit and miss. Karlsson and March were great while others like Pulkkinen and Brickley were not. But the team was mostly build around the equity they had and their devil-may-care longterm vision.

 

[coooldude]

Again, I think a lot of people seem to have a hard time differentiating a rebuild from a bad stretch. Florida was literally picking up big names during that time, from Brian Campbell to Roberto Luongo. They just weren't a good hockey team. Their success now seems to be more because of the guys they acquired from other teams (Tkachuk, Bobrovsky, Reinhart, Bennett, Verhaeghe) than the guys they drafted.

There is a difference between a stripped-to-the-studs rebuild, and a rebuild. Yes, I understand that and I am guessing/hoping others do too. However, I think it's hard to say that 3 playoffs in 20 years is simply "a bad stretch." And your list of players who have made a difference is missing arguably the two biggest pieces of their team -- their all-world 2 way 1C who NHL players consistently vote "most underrated" by a lot (Barkov, 2OA) and Ekblad (1OA), their top-paid minute-munching defenseman.

Only after putting two absolutely key pieces in place, and a bunch more years of futility, could/did they start adding pieces like Tkachuk (2022), Forsling (2020), Reinhardt (2020), Bobrovsky (2019), Bennett (2020), and Verhaeghe (2020).

If we try to follow their model, which very well may work for us, we should do it starting in like 2027. 4 years after drafting Will Smith, 3 after drafting this year's player, 2 years after next year's top player(s).

 

[TheBeard]

their top-paid minute-munching defenseman.

When he plays, which is only about 2/3rds of the time. Also, he’s their top paid but third most TOI d-man closer to the minutes Niko Mikkala gets than Forsling or Montour.

Florida has also been an over .500 team for ten years now save for one season where they finished one game under. Most of their players weren’t just marquee free agents either. Bennett and Verhaghe and Reinhart and Montour and even Lomberg were shrewd low risk signings for minimums or ballsy trades. Bob was the only big name signing and they probably had to overpay for his services.

 

[weastern bias]

Yes, our current position is comparable to Toronto and not comparable to Vegas. I don't believe there is any viable path forward for the next 2-3 seasons that isn't primarily focused on the draft. The potential issue is that with the lottery you could spend the next 3 years living in the basement and Will Smith could still be your best prospect

What I am wondering is instead of depending on finding our Matthews, Marner, Nylander and Morgan via the draft could they be added via trades/UFAs more in the manner in which Vegas operates. Or is it not possible to build up enough of a foundation in 3 years that is makes sense.

Again, my curiosity stems from the idea that Grier presented something different to Hasso than the standard teardown and draft. That might might be a faulty starting point.

I don't think Grier presented any sort or radical new approach to Hasso in his pitch, and if he did he lied because he isn't reinventing the wheel, he's running a pretty standard tear down right now

3 years simply isn't enough to build a foundation like what Vegas started with, it would be interesting if they had a last place team after the expansion and turned them into a champion in 6 years through trades and free agency, but that's not at all what happened

They had the skeleton of a playoff team and many bonus draft picks through side deals in the expansion draft and were so successful out of the gate that they looked at their own prospects as entirely expendable

They drafted Glass, Suzuki and Brannstrom in the 1st round in 2017 and traded all of them because they were either flipping them for win now players like Stone and Pacioretty or because they had such a dearth of assets to work with they could excise some of them at depreciated value in order to gain cap space to sign free agents, that's how they turned Schmitt into Pietrangelo

It was a lot more than spending 3 years building a team from scratch, they spent 6 years and a surplus of assets turning a finals team into a champion, it's not a model that makes sense for any basement team to follow

 

[TheBeard]

3 years simply isn't enough to build a foundation like what Vegas started with, it would be interesting if they had a last place team after the expansion and turned them into a champion in 6 years through trades and free agency, but that's not at all what happened

Vegas’ foundation wasn’t really that strong. I’d say what we have now on the roster is fairly similar to what they started with and the draft capital we have along with the prospects in the pipeline I’d say we’re more stocked. The difference is they overachieved in year one and then Foley and co just went for it. If it never worked out (meaning a cup) it would have looked bad.

 

[weastern bias]

Vegas’ foundation wasn’t really that strong. I’d say what we have now on the roster is fairly similar to what they started with and the draft capital we have along with the prospects in the pipeline I’d say we’re more stocked. The difference is they overachieved in year one and then Foley and co just went for it. If it never worked out (meaning a cup) it would have looked bad.

What are you talking about?

The 2018 Knights finished with 109 points which was 5th in the league and made the Cup Final

The 2024 Sharks can absolutely max out at 53 points and 31st in the league

There is a massive chasm between these two teams, it's absurd to pretend our team right now is anything close to that team then

Sure, on paper the expansion Knights were an underwhelming roster that appeared to overachieve, on paper the 2024 Sharks are the worst team since the salary cap, these situations are not comparable

 

[Stewie Griffin]

It's silly to compare us to any rebuild. Our closest comparable is the current Ducks or Red Wings.

We're not a no-tax state like Vegas, Florida, Tampa, etc. that alone plays a huge factor in players wanting to come here either by trade (Tkachuk, Eichel) or free agency (Pietrangelo).

We're also not a huge hockey market like Toronto who got Tavares and a million others who want to play for the leafs every year.

Just like the Ducks and Wings, we were successful for years and our new GM was left with nothing (the Ducks had some alright pieces). It will take us longer to rebuild because of the factors I listed above. But it is the reality of not being an original 6/no tax/big market team.

 

[Herschel]

Vegas’ foundation wasn’t really that strong. I’d say what we have now on the roster is fairly similar to what they started with and the draft capital we have along with the prospects in the pipeline I’d say we’re more stocked. The difference is they overachieved in year one and then Foley and co just went for it. If it never worked out (meaning a cup) it would have looked bad.

I am firmly in the first year VGK significantly overachieved and that roster was no where near a true cup contender but they were still way beyond the Sharks current roster... mostly on the blueline.

 

[TheBeard]

What are you talking about?

The 2018 Knights finished with 109 points which was 5th in the league and made the Cup Final

The 2024 Sharks can absolutely max out at 53 points and 31st in the league

There is a massive chasm between these two teams, it's absurd to pretend our team right now is anything close to that team then

Sure, on paper the expansion Knights were an underwhelming roster that appeared to overachieve, on paper the 2024 Sharks are the worst team since the salary cap, these situations are not comparable

They overachieved. Plain and simple. Fleury was dominant and Karlsson had a monster year but outside of that they weren’t a strong time. Just played smart foundational hockey with strong seasons from average at best guys like David Perron and Eric Haula. Their team was deeper than ours but on paper they weren’t expected to be much.

I am firmly in the first year VGK significantly overachieved and that roster was no where near a true cup contender but they were still way beyond the Sharks current roster... mostly on the blueline.

I’ll agree with the blue line aspect and even up front they were probably better, but the difference between their talent that years and ours this certainly isn’t 50 points.

 

[weastern bias]

They overachieved. Plain and simple. Fleury was dominant and Karlsson had a monster year but outside of that they weren’t a strong time. Just played smart foundational hockey with strong seasons from average at best guys like David Perron and Eric Haula. Their team was deeper than ours but on paper they weren’t expected to be much.


I’ll agree with the blue line aspect and even up front they were probably better, but the difference between their talent that years and ours this certainly isn’t 50 points.

They had Shae Theodore and Nate Schmitt who are both an order of magnitude better than any defenseman we iced this year, hell, we didn't have anyone as good as Brayden McNabb this year

They overachieved their talent, sure, but they had legitimate NHL players at every position, we simply don't at a lot of slots on our roster

On paper the Knights had a 2nd line, 2 3rd lines, and a 4th line along with a good second D pair, 2 good bottom D pairs and a legit starting goalie

On paper, including Hertl and Couture, we had 2 top 6 players, a 21 year old prospect winger, a 22 year old prospect center, a 3 3rd liners, a 2 4th liners, and a sea of AHL forwards along with 9 bottom pair defensemen and 2 washout goalies

It can be true that those Knights overachieved and also true that they were far more talented than this Sharks team, it's insane to compare us now to them at that point, we're going to finish with less than half their win total and point total, that isn't just overachieving, it's a reflection of the talent on display

 

[TheBeard]

They had Shae Theodore and Nate Schmitt who are both an order of magnitude better than any defenseman we iced this year, hell, we didn't have anyone as good as Brayden McNabb this year

They overachieved their talent, sure, but they had legitimate NHL players at every position, we simply don't at a lot of slots on our roster

On paper the Knights had a 2nd line, 2 3rd lines, and a 4th line along with a good second D pair, 2 good bottom D pairs and a legit starting goalie

On paper, including Hertl and Couture, we had 2 top 6 players, a 21 year old prospect winger, a 22 year old prospect center, a 3 3rd liners, a 2 4th liners, and a sea of AHL forwards along with 9 bottom pair defensemen and 2 washout goalies

It can be true that those Knights overachieved and also true that they were far more talented than this Sharks team, it's insane to compare us now to them at that point, we're going to finish with less than half their win total and point total, that isn't just overachieving, it's a reflection of the talent on display

I think what I meant is on paper going into that season. Not what they ended up doing. Theodore had played all of 50 games and Schmidt was a 6th d-man in Washington, but I’ll concede they were probably better than I give them credit for, just not 50 points better. Point is if we wanted to go the same route as Vegas we’re in position to do so, but I’d rather they not. They were a deeper team because McPhee opted to go that route of older talent (as in late 20s) to fill the lineup and not super young lotto tickets like we’ve done this year.

 

[Herschel]

After this massively depressing exercise in exploring the Sharks short term future I decided to seek out something more optimistic and re-visited the Dallas Star and how the 2017 draft laid the foundation for their current up and coming core.

They hit with three straight pick in Heisknen, Oettinger, and Robertson all inside the top 40 of the draft.

Hopefully the 2023 & 2024 drafts work out as well for the Sharks... 2023 looks like it could albeit without the positional balance the Stars had in 2017.

 

[Herschel]

I think what I meant is on paper going into that season. Not what they ended up doing. Theodore had played all of 50 games and Schmidt was a 6th d-man in Washington, but I’ll concede they were probably better than I give them credit for, just not 50 points better. Point is if we wanted to go the same route as Vegas we’re in position to do so, but I’d rather they not. They were a deeper team because McPhee opted to go that route of older talent (as in late 20s) to fill the lineup and not super young lotto tickets like we’ve done this year.

When you say super young are you referring to the 2017 & 2018 draft guys like Zetterland?

 

[weastern bias]

I think what I meant is on paper going into that season. Not what they ended up doing. Theodore had played all of 50 games and Schmidt was a 6th d-man in Washington, but I’ll concede they were probably better than I give them credit for, just not 50 points better. Point is if we wanted to go the same route as Vegas we’re in position to do so, but I’d rather they not. They were a deeper team because McPhee opted to go that route of older talent (as in late 20s) to fill the lineup and not super young lotto tickets like we’ve done this year.

Theodore and Schmitt were analytical darlings that were plucked from competitive teams because they could only protect so many defenseman in the draft, they looked like a credible 2nd pair on paper at the time the puck dropped

I'm sorry, but there is no rational argument that we are in a position to proceed the way Vegas did after their inaugural season, they were a competitive team with a war chest of expendable assets, we are the worst team the league has seen in years with no expendable future assets, these situations are not the slightest bit comparable unless you want to argue they lucked their way into between 64 and 56 more points than us, it's an absolutely absurd claim that our situation is similar in any way

 

[TheBeard]

When you say super young are you referring to the 2017 & 2018 draft guys like Zetterland?

I meant guys like Addison and Zadina and Kostin. More the FA pickups or buy low trade guys. I don’t mind the thought process.

Theodore and Schmitt were analytical darlings that were plucked from competitive teams because they could only protect so many defenseman in the draft, they looked like a credible 2nd pair on paper at the time the puck dropped

I'm sorry, but there is no rational argument that we are in a position to proceed the way Vegas did after their inaugural season, they were a competitive team with a war chest of expendable assets, we are the worst team the league has seen in years with no expendable future assets, these situations are not the slightest bit comparable unless you want to argue they lucked their way into between 64 and 56 more points than us, it's an absolutely absurd claim that our situation is similar in any way

Any team with prospects and picks can proceed the way Vegas did, whether it’s smart or not is a different story. Vegas didn’t necessarily have “expendable” assets as they had absolutely no farm system going into year one. They still don’t. But they chose to be aggressive and it’s worked out for them. There’s, what, three players left over from that inaugural season?

 

[TheBeard]

After this massively depressing exercise in exploring the Sharks short term future I decided to seek out something more optimistic and re-visited the Dallas Star and how the 2017 draft laid the foundation for their current up and coming core.

They hit with three straight pick in Heisknen, Oettinger, and Robertson all inside the top 40 of the draft.

Hopefully the 2023 & 2024 drafts work out as well for the Sharks... 2023 looks like it could albeit without the positional balance the Stars had in 2017.

It’s funny, Dallas would probably be a bottom feeder if it wasn’t for that one draft.

 

[PattyLafontaine]

Easily. If you have a an entire roster that knows nothing but losing in the NHL then you have a rudderless ship. Bringing in old, washed-up farts with experience helps perhaps off the ice, but doesn't really do much on the ice. My point is just tanking year after year isn't a simple fix. There are consequences. You see it in teams like Anaheim. They should be miles better than they are, but instead they have a high-priced goalie that's checked out, a once-future star in Zegras that seems as if he wants nothing to do with the organization and a 6th straight year finishing no higher than 6th in their division and on pace for what may be their third worst season in their history. All that despite what should be a decent roster with Carlsson, Mactavish, Terry etc.

There's a reason why some of these teams never get up off the mat and it's about their ownership and GMs.

The Sharks are in year 2 of a 10 year rebuild. Having leadership does little now if that leadership is gone in year 5 or 6.

This team needs to keep finishing last to ensure the best possible chance of developing player pool to see what shakes out.

 

[Hodge]

Easily. If you have a an entire roster that knows nothing but losing in the NHL then you have a rudderless ship. Bringing in old, washed-up farts with experience helps perhaps off the ice, but doesn't really do much on the ice. My point is just tanking year after year isn't a simple fix. There are consequences. You see it in teams like Anaheim. They should be miles better than they are, but instead they have a high-priced goalie that's checked out, a once-future star in Zegras that seems as if he wants nothing to do with the organization and a 6th straight year finishing no higher than 6th in their division and on pace for what may be their third worst season in their history. All that despite what should be a decent roster with Carlsson, Mactavish, Terry etc.

I'm calling bullshit on the idea that a team with this defense should be "miles better" than 30th place:

Zegras stinks. The core they're actually building around is Carlsson, McTavish, Gauthier and Mintyukov, all of whom are 18-21 years old. By the time those guys are in their primes the Ducks will likely add some top 4 defensemen and emerge as a force.