Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[weastern bias]

I've been trying to reimagine the forward lines, I've been conservative in my approach and leaned toward insulation and keeping the young guys in suppressed roles:

Eklund-Granlund-Zetterlund
Kostin-Celebrini-Toffoli
Grundstrom-Smith-Dellandrea
Wennberg-Sturm-Goodrow
Kunin

But if I'm being more optimistic about the immediate impact we see from 71 and 2 we have the potential to ice something a lot more interesting:

Eklund-Celebrini-Toffoli
Granlund-Smith-Zetterlund
Grundstrom-Wennberg-Dellandrea
Goodrow-Sturm-Kunin
Kostin

This team actually has a multiplicity of looks right now, this team will be bad but this year will be fun

 

[coooldude]

I've been trying to reimagine the forward lines, I've been conservative in my approach and leaned toward insulation and keeping the young guys in suppressed roles:

Eklund-Granlund-Zetterlund
Kostin-Celebrini-Toffoli
Grundstrom-Smith-Dellandrea
Wennberg-Sturm-Goodrow
Kunin

But if I'm being more optimistic about the immediate impact we see from 71 and 2 we have the potential to ice something a lot more interesting:

Eklund-Celebrini-Toffoli
Granlund-Smith-Zetterlund
Grundstrom-Wennberg-Dellandrea
Goodrow-Sturm-Kunin
Kostin

This team actually has a multiplicity of looks right now, this team will be bad but this year will be fun

I continue to agree with this take. I think we start with your top lineup and I think we migrate to your bottom lineup with good development from Smith and Celebrini. The only quibble is we're not paying $5MM to Wennberg to play 4th line wing. I bet he's going to play C or W on the third line, or even potentially the 2nd line, and Grundstrom/Dellandrea will swing down.

However also I am sure we'll have some bad stretches where Smith finds himself where Eklund did last season -- on the 3rd and 4th lines.

Either way we basically upgrade from last year where we had one 2nd line playing 1st, a third line playing 2nd, and two fourth lines /AHL playing 3/4th line... we now have about 2 2nd lines, a third line that might actually be as good as some 2nd lines, and a fourth line that might be a decent/passable 3rd line at times.

 

[gaucholoco3]

Regarding Askarov the leverage that Grier has is that he can sign him to an offer sheet at max 2nd round compensation next offseason. This can limit the ability for Trotz to play hardball when he will lose him for a 26 2nd next offseason. Sharks can add Bordeleau as a sweetener or Bystedt if that gets it done now.

Also for Askarov if he is traded now he can be signed to that extension now as a way to encourage him to play for the Cuda this season. He gets the bigger contract he wants for next season and won’t have to move by playing with the Cuda. He also can play with his buddy Muk.

I think a 2nd + Bords + Romanov should get it done now. If they want current roster players or Sharks to take salary back they shouldn’t be too difficult.

 

[coooldude]

I think a 2nd + Bords + Romanov should get it done now. If they want current roster players or Sharks to take salary back they shouldn’t be too difficult.

If this is the deal, I'm all for it. If instead it's just Romanov+Bystedt/Edstrom then I'm OK with it. If it's a 2nd + Romanov + Bystedt/Edstrom that's prob my absolute ceiling and I'd be nervous. Anything more I would knee-jerk to "that's too much".

 

[gaucholoco3]

If this is the deal, I'm all for it. If instead it's just Romanov+Bystedt/Edstrom then I'm OK with it. If it's a 2nd + Romanov + Bystedt/Edstrom that's prob my absolute ceiling and I'd be nervous. Anything more I would knee-jerk to "that's too much".

I personally would be willing to pay a lot more but there is no point when he can be offer sheeted at an unmatchable contract and only cost a 26 2nd.

 

[TheBeard]

Their defense sucks though, and they play in a very competitive division, I don't see an avenue towards making the playoff for them this year

It wouldn't be easy, but it woldn't surprse me. Also, I like their defense. Matheson and Savard are good vets while Guhle, Hutson, Barron and Xer have a good amount of upside.

 

[Star Platinum]

Does Grier really want a guy who's refusing to report to the AHL?

Do we really have two guys more deserving of playing time than him? Kid's put up good numbers and already has two full season with Milwaukee. No reason to put him in a third season in the AHL. If you're going to trade for him, you play him in the NHL.

 

[WSS11]

I'm okay with anything being on the table for Askarov outside of Celebrini, Eklund, Smith, and any 1st round picks we have.

Dickinson?

 

[TheBigDrunkPanda]

Trade the Vegas 1st, efff ittt


That would be tight. As long as the Sharks being garbage doesn't ruin this guy. He's probably 2 years early

Vegas first and Chrona? If Grier pulls that off I’ll shut up about his trade ineptitude

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Dickinson?

I'd have him on the table because I don't view Dickinson as a potential top pairing guy. I don't see elite potential there like I do with Askarov but goalies will always be a tough sell for me to invest in. Unless they actually prove themselves to be elite, they're largely replaceable.

 

[Hodge]

Vegas first and Chrona? If Grier pulls that off I’ll shut up about his trade ineptitude

Elite starters like Ullmark and Markstrom can barely return a 1st. Why would we trade an unprotected 1st round pick for an unproven goalie prospect?

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Elite starters like Ullmark and Markstrom can barely return a 1st. Why would we trade an unprotected 1st round pick for an unproven goalie prospect?

We shouldn't but it's not like Ullmark and Markstrom are apples to apples. It's also difficult to call them elite starters.

 

[TheBigDrunkPanda]

Elite starters like Ullmark and Markstrom can barely return a 1st. Why would we trade an unprotected 1st round pick for an unproven goalie prospect?

See how Ullmark does Ottawa first before calling him an elite starter, Markstrom is a step below Elite he’s not Shesterkin, Vasilevskiy, or Hellybuck. He’s in the same category as Otter in Dallas. If he can make the trade without giving up the first even better

 

[Barrie22]

Askarov sounds like the martin jones trade, just for a less experienced goalie then jones was.

 

[timorous me]

I'd have him on the table because I don't view Dickinson as a potential top pairing guy. I don't see elite potential there like I do with Askarov but goalies will always be a tough sell for me to invest in. Unless they actually prove themselves to be elite, they're largely replaceable.

Feels really premature to come to this conclusion about Dickinson--someone with a really outstanding skillset and already good juniors experience who was highly rated coming into the draft as a kid who just turned 18.

Askarov is appealing but for a team that needs potential impact defensemen there's no way I'd give up Dickinson for him right now, even if the odds are more likely that Dickinson ends up a good 2nd pairing d-man instead of a top pairing guy.

 

[Hodge]

Either we get Askarov for 50 cents on the dollar or we move on and deal with the goaltending question later. A goalie prospect, no matter how allegedly good, is the last type of player we should be moving serious assets for.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Feels really premature to come to this conclusion about Dickinson--someone with a really outstanding skillset and already good juniors experience who was highly rated coming into the draft as a kid who just turned 18.

Askarov is appealing but for a team that needs potential impact defensemen there's no way I'd give up Dickinson for him right now, even if the odds are more likely that Dickinson ends up a good 2nd pairing d-man instead of a top pairing guy.

I have no problems saying it's premature. I think Dickinson is a great pick even if he does settle in as a #3 anchoring a second pair. That's still a great asset and a great outcome for that pick. The issue as it relates to comparing it to someone like Askarov is that Askarov conceptually has elite goalie potential and is already knocking at the door of an NHL job. Dickinson is probably going to need five years to get to the seemingly most likely spot of the #3 d-man. We would also need a whole group of Dickinson-like players to be playoff competitive. An elite goalie can drag a team like ours to the playoffs. Also, I look at Dickinson in this context as a sort of last resort. If we can't get Askarov w/o Dickinson, I would at least consider it 1-for-1. They should be able to get Askarov w/o offering Dickinson considering nobody was willing to move a similar pick for him at the draft.

 

[gaucholoco3]

Either we get Askarov for 50 cents on the dollar or we move on and deal with the goaltending question later. A goalie prospect, no matter how allegedly good, is the last type of player we should be moving serious assets for.

Exactly. If the cost is too high now just offer sheet him in the offseason for 2nd round compensation. If the contract is 2 years the cap hit doesn’t matter even if he busts, but also the buyout for sub 26 yr olds is only 1/3.

 

[TheBigDrunkPanda]

Elite starters like Ullmark and Markstrom can barely return a 1st. Why would we trade an unprotected 1st round pick for an unproven goalie prospect?

See how Ullmark does Ottawa first before calling him an elite starter, Markstrom is a step below Elite he’s not Shesterkin, Vasilevskiy, or Hellybuck he’s more on bar with Otter in dallas

 

[weastern bias]

See how Ullmark does Ottawa first before calling him an elite starter, Markstrom is a step below Elite he’s not Shesterkin, Vasilevskiy, or Hellybuck he’s more on bar with Otter in dallas

The point stands that those are proven and established starters and they returned a single 1st round pick

I don't care how highly touted Askarov is, he's played 3 NHL games, trading a 1st rounder for him after a public trade request is insane, especially considering what a bad environment our team currently is for a goalie to enter

 

[Dicdonya]

I've been trying to reimagine the forward lines, I've been conservative in my approach and leaned toward insulation and keeping the young guys in suppressed roles:

Eklund-Granlund-Zetterlund
Kostin-Celebrini-Toffoli
Grundstrom-Smith-Dellandrea
Wennberg-Sturm-Goodrow
Kunin

But if I'm being more optimistic about the immediate impact we see from 71 and 2 we have the potential to ice something a lot more interesting:

Eklund-Celebrini-Toffoli
Granlund-Smith-Zetterlund
Grundstrom-Wennberg-Dellandrea
Goodrow-Sturm-Kunin
Kostin

This team actually has a multiplicity of looks right now, this team will be bad but this year will be fun

Option 2 looks significantly better to me.

We can always move guys around the lineup if they are not able to hang in their original assignments, but to start the year we might as well start seeing if we can find some chemistry between guys like Celebrini and Eklund, or Smith and Eklund. There is not really any pressure on this team to be good this year, so if they do struggle a little with top end opponents its ok.

Also giving Celebrini and Smith better teammates might actually be more beneficial in the long run to help ensure that they are not losing confidence from having their efforts to make plays negated by making those plays to guys like Grundstrom and Dellandrea.

Also specifically for Celebrini (maybe smith too I just haven't specifically seen/heard it with him) it seems like he has the sort of work ethic and mindset to not only mentally handle tougher assignments even if he struggles with them a bit, but potentially thrive in a situation where he is going to be tested and challenged by players currently better than him. I would foster that competitiveness and drive, instead of telling him we think he isn't good enough to even get the chance to prove whether he can play with the big boys in his rookie year.

 

[Lebanezer]

I've been trying to reimagine the forward lines, I've been conservative in my approach and leaned toward insulation and keeping the young guys in suppressed roles:

Eklund-Granlund-Zetterlund
Kostin-Celebrini-Toffoli
Grundstrom-Smith-Dellandrea
Wennberg-Sturm-Goodrow
Kunin

But if I'm being more optimistic about the immediate impact we see from 71 and 2 we have the potential to ice something a lot more interesting:

Eklund-Celebrini-Toffoli
Granlund-Smith-Zetterlund
Grundstrom-Wennberg-Dellandrea
Goodrow-Sturm-Kunin
Kostin

This team actually has a multiplicity of looks right now, this team will be bad but this year will be fun

Celebrini and Smith should play with Toffoli because 71 + 2 = 73. This only appeared to me now because you wrote their numbers instead of their names.

 

[weastern bias]

Celebrini and Smith should play with Toffoli because 71 + 2 = 73. This only appeared to me now because you wrote their numbers instead of their names.

While you are correct, have you considered:

72-71-73

 

[tiburon12]

While you are correct, have you considered:

72-71-73

now you're being ridiculous

 

[Lebanezer]

While you are correct, have you considered:

72-71-73

Yes I have, but it’s mathematically unsettling.