Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[STL Shark]

Isles have a bad prospect pool. The only way I can see this trade working is #1oa for Dobson and their #1 pick (depending on where it is obviously)

And even then, would still have to be more from NYI for the sheer cost of what Dobson's contract is going to cost. It's why that deal would never be something that happens.

More likely would be something where we'd probably deal with Columbus/Montreal assuming one of them is in the top 3 and give them 1st overall for their 2025 top 3 pick, Jiricek/Reinbacher, and next year's 1st rounder (top 5 protected).

Chicago offered Columbus a 2025 unprotected 1st, and 2025 2nd for 4th overall this year to try and move up for Demidov and was told no. Given Chicago is very likely in the top 5 picks this year, I used Perri's 1-5 average value for the 1st, and 35th overall for the 2nd meaning they gave up surplus value equivalent to the 17th overall pick and still got turned down.

So if you factor in a 1st overall pick, it is going to cost quite a premium to move up. Probably all for nothing though as I would be sort of surprised if the Sharks somehow rattle off back to back 1st overall picks after waiting over 30 years for their first one.

 

[sampler]

Dobson is an obvious #1Dman, but hes not THAT young. By summer 2025, he'll be 25 1/2. He'll cost 10M per year as well.

The sharks would be better off keeping the number one pick and shopping for a similar UFA with the cap savings.

The key thing to recognize with trading guys with big salaries is that we mistakenly see deals as This guy for that return, like Hertl for askarov, which many people would see as a so so move. But what about hertl for Askarov and Toffoli. Woah, totally different mentality, but also far more accurate.

There are two major reasons why picks/prospects are valuable:

1. They can get good talent into the org that might be hard to get from simply UFA signings or trades. Talent is not an bottomless, nameless commodity so even with ample cap space, it can be hard to add, and if there is noone on the UFA market with similar talent, then it's tough to add.

2. However, much more importantly, teams own the first 7 years of a guy's pro career. The first three years are practically free, but the next 4 years are almost always at a significant discount (especially the next 2-3 years or so... Dobson's 3 years at 4m per are a perfect illustration.). It is this ELC/RFA discount that makes those players so key to a winning team ,and it's why a #1 pick is not only a possible equivalent player to dobson, but that equivalent player at 9M less on the cap.

That means dobson for a #1oa is bascially like a top line player + what you can buy for 9M on the UFA market. Now it's something like Celebrini+Brady Skjei for dobson. Celebrini for Dobson might be intriguing. But celebrini and Skjei for dobson? Far less atrractive.

Cap management is SOOO key to building a winner. We need to judge any potential trade by the swapped assets +cap savings equivalent player, as we need to look at Hertl for Askarov as actually Hertl for Askarov and Toffoli.

As mentioned by someone above, I would consider a swap of 1OA for isles pick+Dobson, as we will have the cap space and it's unclear what kind of D talent will be availalbe next summer.

All this said, I have no clue how the sharks D prospects will develop and SO much could depend on how Mukh plays along with the development strides of dick, cagnoni, pohlcamp, roberts, misskey, LSW, and Thompson. If a few of those guys really take big strides forward, it might change the calculus about how much Grier needs to shop for a #1 D vs. simply graduate whats in house. Not to mention, if some of the O also take big strides, then he can continue to unload that position of strength to boslter the NHL level D. Nothing is happening now, so it all depends on the developmental year, and the performance of the largely brand new sharks roster and coach.

 

[Star Platinum]

There aren't nearly as many UFAs on this team as you would think, and the ones here have pretty sizable contracts. The fact the we don't have any retention spots tells me we're not gonna be as big a seller as you think:

Kunin (UFA) - 2.75
Granlund (UFA) - 5
Ruuta (UFA) - 2.75
Ceci (UFA) - 3.25
Kostin (UFA) - 2
Sturm (UFA) - 2

The two goalies

Retention is not going to be a factor in our ability to move any of those guys.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Dobson is an obvious #1Dman, but hes not THAT young. By summer 2025, he'll be 25 1/2. He'll cost 10M per year as well.

Sure, the ages don't exactly line up. But the Sharks's core is already very young. Having one 25+ year-old is not only not a big deal, but is probably a positive.

The sharks would be better off keeping the number one pick and shopping for a similar UFA with the cap savings.

This I would agree with; keep the first overall and try and get a player like Dobson with something else (or in free agency).

 

[coooldude]

Chicago offered Columbus a 2025 unprotected 1st, and 2025 2nd for 4th overall this year to try and move up for Demidov and was told no. Given Chicago is very likely in the top 5 picks this year, I used Perri's 1-5 average value for the 1st, and 35th overall for the 2nd meaning they gave up surplus value equivalent to the 17th overall pick and still got turned down.

You're probably right about Dobson being a hard path to follow, and of trade ups at the very top being super rare and expensive, but on the "market value" of moving up from 4 to 2, I think it's so particular to the top 5 this year that it's maybe not applicable to 2025.

For all we know, there might be a slug of top 5 who all have similar value but different profiles (like 2-6ish last year) therefore making a trade up/down less likely. Or, maybe a few of the C's really separate themselves like 2023 and we have a situation where someone really wants Hagens/Frondell/Ryabkin and is willing to move off of McQueen/Hensler/Schaefer/Martone at 4-6 to get them. Meanwhile we need 1D and would love 1C/W if the player is head and shoulders above what else is out there. There could be trades possible, but we have no idea how the dynamics are going to evolve yet.

 

[weastern bias]

Retention is not going to be a factor in our ability to move any of those guys.

I assume we'll be willing to take back bad money in a deal in order to simulate retention when we sell at the deadline, hopefully on expiring deals but if we take back a contract that runs through next year we'll be able to retain on a deal we need to trade starting that next season anyway

 

[sampler]

There aren't nearly as many UFAs on this team as you would think, and the ones here have pretty sizable contracts. The fact the we don't have any retention spots tells me we're not gonna be as big a seller as you think:

Kunin (UFA) - 2.75
Granlund (UFA) - 5
Ruuta (UFA) - 2.75
Ceci (UFA) - 3.25
Kostin (UFA) - 2
Sturm (UFA) - 2

The two goalies

This is a significant X factor. Its very concievable that the sharks do end up sellers, but that some of those guys have some significant value. Based on last year's performance, I would say the rental value at the deadline for each would be:

1. Kunin: 4th rounder.
2. Granlund: 1st rounder.
3. Ruuta: 4th rounder.
4. Ceci: 2nd rounder (he was worth a third now with another year left on his contract, so as an expiring UFA costing less than 1M in cap space, he's worth more then)
5. Kostin: 6th rounder.
6. Sturm: 5th rounder.
7. Goalies: maybe a 4th rounder

That's a 1st, a 2nd, three 4ths, a 5th, and a 6th. In other words, pretty much an entire drafts worth.

And whats amazing is that even without those guys, the sharks still have Eklund, Zetterlund, Toffoli, Smith, Celebrini, Wennberg, Dyllandrea, Goodrow, and Grundlund, along with Walman, Ferraro, Mukh, Thrun, and Benning, and Askarov. In other words, the sharks still have a reasonable group around which to add, along with 40M in space. Not to mention the likely graduation of a few other players like Musty, Haltunnen, or Bystedt.

The sharks will be set up during summer 2025 to become a real buyer. Depending on this year's development, I would expect Grier to leverage some of those assets (just like the VGK 1st) to begin stocking up talent. We would be approximately 1-2 top D and 2-3 top 6 forwards away from being a very solid team. Even if each of those spots costs 8-9M per, they can fit it in. two more toffoli-like guys, two more montour/skjei type guys and the sharks would be legitimately competing.

 

[TheBeard]

I assume we'll be willing to take back bad money in a deal in order to simulate retention when we sell at the deadline, hopefully on expiring deals but if we take back a contract that runs through next year we'll be able to retain on a deal we need to trade starting that next season anyway

That's the only way it can work. No one is taking any of those guys without retention or salary coming back. Most competitive teams are already up against it. I would expect Grier will work with Vegas again.

 

[sampler]

You're probably right about Dobson being a hard path to follow, and of trade ups at the very top being super rare and expensive, but on the "market value" of moving up from 4 to 2, I think it's so particular to the top 5 this year that it's maybe not applicable to 2025.

For all we know, there might be a slug of top 5 who all have similar value but different profiles (like 2-6ish last year) therefore making a trade up/down less likely. Or, maybe a few of the C's really separate themselves like 2023 and we have a situation where someone really wants Hagens/Frondell/Ryabkin and is willing to move off of McQueen/Hensler/Schaefer/Martone at 4-6 to get them. Meanwhile we need 1D and would love 1C/W if the player is head and shoulders above what else is out there. There could be trades possible, but we have no idea how the dynamics are going to evolve yet.

This is avery true concept. Some years, #1 is clear. Sometimes its not. Some years, the draft order of the top 5 is almost predetermined, sometimes its not.

This past draft was a weird one in which #1 was clear, but 2-12 was COMPLETELY open. Dick coulda gone anywhere from 2-12. Silayev too. Nobody knew who was gunna go when and it played out shockingly with Dick and Buium being the last of the big 6 D to be picked when many had them at the first two or at least both in the top 4.

The value of picks is definitely specific to a given year. Crosby, Mcdavid, Bedard... these guys were absolutely obvious and the #1 was worth way more than #2. Celly too. But salvkovsky over Wright or Nemec or Cooley? Who knows! that top 4 coulda gone any which way, so that #1 pick vs. #3 or 4 was way less of a gap.

 

[sampler]

That's the only way it can work. No one is taking any of those guys without retention or salary coming back. Most competitive teams are already up against it. I would expect Grier will work with Vegas again.

agreed. And no skin of Grier's back. Thats how the EK deal worked out, or there will be a third team to act as a broker that could retain just for the rest of that season. Lowers the sharks return slightly, but if you were a team that was out of it and had 3 retention slots, its a no brainer to act as broker to retain deadline salary just for that year. Bascially you rent a retaining slot and a few bucks for whatever return you can get. Its a Win-Win-Win for everyone in the event the buying team as no clear dead cap suckers to unload.

 

[TheBeard]

agreed. And no skin of Grier's back. Thats how the EK deal worked out, or there will be a third team to act as a broker that could retain just for the rest of that season. Lowers the sharks return slightly, but if you were a team that was out of it and had 3 retention slots, its a no brainer to act as broker to retain deadline salary just for that year. Bascially you rent a retaining slot and a few bucks for whatever return you can get. Its a Win-Win-Win for everyone in the event the buying team as no clear dead cap suckers to unload.

Yeah. I'd prefer to just take salary back on someone with multiple years left (no more than 1 additional preferably). By then we can start weaponizing retention slots again.

This is avery true concept. Some years, #1 is clear. Sometimes its not. Some years, the draft order of the top 5 is almost predetermined, sometimes its not.

This past draft was a weird one in which #1 was clear, but 2-12 was COMPLETELY open. Dick coulda gone anywhere from 2-12. Silayev too. Nobody knew who was gunna go when and it played out shockingly with Dick and Buium being the last of the big 6 D to be picked when many had them at the first two or at least both in the top 4.

The value of picks is definitely specific to a given year. Crosby, Mcdavid, Bedard... these guys were absolutely obvious and the #1 was worth way more than #2. Celly too. But salvkovsky over Wright or Nemec or Cooley? Who knows! that top 4 coulda gone any which way, so that #1 pick vs. #3 or 4 was way less of a gap.

Yak going I believe 6th made it clear things we're gonna be wonky.

 

[Juxtaposer]

There aren't nearly as many UFAs on this team as you would think, and the ones here have pretty sizable contracts. The fact the we don't have any retention spots tells me we're not gonna be as big a seller as you think:

Kunin (UFA) - 2.75
Granlund (UFA) - 5
Ruuta (UFA) - 2.75
Ceci (UFA) - 3.25
Kostin (UFA) - 2
Sturm (UFA) - 2

The two goalies

I'll take a guess that Kunin, Ceci, Sturm, and Vanecek go at the deadline. Should get us a few 3rds and 4ths.

 

[Star Platinum]

Yeah. I'd prefer to just take salary back on someone with multiple years left (no more than 1 additional preferably). By then we can start weaponizing retention slots again.


Yak going I believe 6th made it clear things we're gonna be wonky.

It was 7th and I'm still amazed that I didn't crash the car when my wife relayed that pick to me from her cellphone. I'd barely gotten over the shock of Sennecke going third, which even though it had been rumoured I never took seriously. Clearly right-handedness mattered a lot for a couple of teams.

 

[gaucholoco3]

Dobson is an obvious #1Dman, but hes not THAT young. By summer 2025, he'll be 25 1/2. He'll cost 10M per year as well.

The sharks would be better off keeping the number one pick and shopping for a similar UFA with the cap savings.

The key thing to recognize with trading guys with big salaries is that we mistakenly see deals as This guy for that return, like Hertl for askarov, which many people would see as a so so move. But what about hertl for Askarov and Toffoli. Woah, totally different mentality, but also far more accurate.

There are two major reasons why picks/prospects are valuable:

1. They can get good talent into the org that might be hard to get from simply UFA signings or trades. Talent is not an bottomless, nameless commodity so even with ample cap space, it can be hard to add, and if there is noone on the UFA market with similar talent, then it's tough to add.

2. However, much more importantly, teams own the first 7 years of a guy's pro career. The first three years are practically free, but the next 4 years are almost always at a significant discount (especially the next 2-3 years or so... Dobson's 3 years at 4m per are a perfect illustration.). It is this ELC/RFA discount that makes those players so key to a winning team ,and it's why a #1 pick is not only a possible equivalent player to dobson, but that equivalent player at 9M less on the cap.

That means dobson for a #1oa is bascially like a top line player + what you can buy for 9M on the UFA market. Now it's something like Celebrini+Brady Skjei for dobson. Celebrini for Dobson might be intriguing. But celebrini and Skjei for dobson? Far less atrractive.

Cap management is SOOO key to building a winner. We need to judge any potential trade by the swapped assets +cap savings equivalent player, as we need to look at Hertl for Askarov as actually Hertl for Askarov and Toffoli.

As mentioned by someone above, I would consider a swap of 1OA for isles pick+Dobson, as we will have the cap space and it's unclear what kind of D talent will be availalbe next summer.

All this said, I have no clue how the sharks D prospects will develop and SO much could depend on how Mukh plays along with the development strides of dick, cagnoni, pohlcamp, roberts, misskey, LSW, and Thompson. If a few of those guys really take big strides forward, it might change the calculus about how much Grier needs to shop for a #1 D vs. simply graduate whats in house. Not to mention, if some of the O also take big strides, then he can continue to unload that position of strength to boslter the NHL level D. Nothing is happening now, so it all depends on the developmental year, and the performance of the largely brand new sharks roster and coach.

The problem is a guy like Dobson is unlikely to be available as a UFA or willing to sign with the Sharks. Also if you are hoping Dobson is what the 1st overall becomes that is where given the absolutely clean cap sheet in the future I think it would be beneficial to the Sharks to make a 1 for 1 swap of Dobson for 1st overall. I say that fully acknowledging that the 1st overall is way more valuable than Dobson even if I think it still benefits the Sharks to make that swap. Of the Sharks have #1 and the Isles are open to trading Dobson I would with have the Isles include their 1st in the deal or I would find a team that wants to move up for the first overall pick to pay the kings random and then use some of that draft capital to trade for Dobson.

I think Grier being more aggressive for Dobson is dependent on the Sharks over performing making the #1 overall a moot point. If the Sharks are just outside the playoff picture it shows that Celebrini and Smith are the real deal and getting an established #1 RD instead of a top 5 pick would speed up the rebuild dramatically.

 

[TheBeard]

It was 7th and I'm still amazed that I didn't crash the car when my wife relayed that pick to me from her cellphone. I'd barely gotten over the shock of Sennecke going third, which even though it had been rumoured I never took seriously. Clearly right-handedness mattered a lot for a couple of teams.

Man I love Sennecke. I ran into him just meandering around leaving the sphere and we talked for a couple minutes before I told him I looked forward to hating him for the next 15 years. Him and his agent laughed at that.

 

[Hodge]

The problem is a guy like Dobson is unlikely to be available as a UFA or willing to sign with the Sharks. Also if you are hoping Dobson is what the 1st overall becomes that is where given the absolutely clean cap sheet in the future I think it would be beneficial to the Sharks to make a 1 for 1 swap of Dobson for 1st overall. I say that fully acknowledging that the 1st overall is way more valuable than Dobson even if I think it still benefits the Sharks to make that swap. Of the Sharks have #1 and the Isles are open to trading Dobson I would with have the Isles include their 1st in the deal or I would find a team that wants to move up for the first overall pick to pay the kings random and then use some of that draft capital to trade for Dobson.

I think Grier being more aggressive for Dobson is dependent on the Sharks over performing making the #1 overall a moot point. If the Sharks are just outside the playoff picture it shows that Celebrini and Smith are the real deal and getting an established #1 RD instead of a top 5 pick would speed up the rebuild dramatically.

Is the #1 pick really that much more valuable than Dobson? Let's say Hagens has a similar freshman season to Will Smith at BC. Is an even smaller version of Smith more valuable than a 25 year old 6'4" RH defenseman who can play 25 minutes a night in all situations and brings a ton of offense?

 

[Juxtaposer]

It was 7th and I'm still amazed that I didn't crash the car when my wife relayed that pick to me from her cellphone. I'd barely gotten over the shock of Sennecke going third, which even though it had been rumoured I never took seriously. Clearly right-handedness mattered a lot for a couple of teams.

Said it on draft night and I'll say it again: the D went literally in order of RHD/size. Levshunov is like an inch smaller than Yakemchuk but he's still 6'2". Big RHD > biggest but worse RHD > small RHD > biggest LHD > big LHD > small LHD. Don't think that a coincidence at all. Teams clearly value RHD.

 

[gaucholoco3]

Is the #1 pick really that much more valuable than Dobson? Let's say Hagens has a similar freshman season to Will Smith at BC. Is an even smaller version of Smith more valuable than a 25 year old 6'4" RH defenseman who can play 25 minutes a night in all situations and brings a ton of offense?

Oh I completely agree with you which is why I would personally make that 1-for-1 trade. I’m saying it is more valuable to organizations.

I think the allure of 1st overall and the marketing appeal that comes with it is what can push the pick to have more value to a franchise.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

It would take more than just Dobson assuredly. I know the NFL and NHL are not the world's best comps in league, but that is the last league that had a #1 overall pick traded in recent memory. The Bears got 9th overall in 2023, 1st rounder in 2024, 2nd rounder in 2023, 2nd rounder in 2025, PLUS they got DJ Moore (who is very much the Noah Dobson equivalent in this deal).

So if we're moving the #1 pick with Dobson in mind, it has to include a lot of other stuff too from NYI to go along with him. I don't see Lou being the type to trade anything from now for the future, so I doubt that would happen. Dobson is a good point producer, but that isn't a must have skillset in my opinion and is somewhat empty calorie spending in my opinion unless they're also very good at actually defending.

It may not be a must have skillset but I think it helps a team become a lot more of a contender having someone that is a real threat to produce from the point. Another location on the ice to be a threat from would only help the forwards that are going to have to carry a lot of the load as it is. Edmonton took a pretty solid step towards championship contention when Bouchard was able to step into Barrie's old role on that team and give those great players another option as an offensive threat.

 

[jMoneyBrah]

I mean considering we scored only 180 goals (2nd last) only 2 above last and 23 away from 30th. I would say scoring was just as big of an issue as defense.

When the team is spending 40+ minutes a night in their own end, shift after shift getting hemmed in for minutes at a time the offensive production is gonna massively suffer regardless of the talent and capability of the players. I’m not saying the Sharks were world beaters; but if they get even middling defensive play they probably put up way more than 180 goals.

 

[Hodge]

Oh I completely agree with you which is why I would personally make that 1-for-1 trade. I’m saying it is more valuable to organizations.

I think the allure of 1st overall and the marketing appeal that comes with it is what can push the pick to have more value to a franchise.

Another option could be to draft Hagens or Martone then trade Smith and a protected 2026 1st for Dobson.

 

[coooldude]

Another option could be to draft Hagens or Martone then trade Smith and a protected 2026 1st for Dobson.

We'll learn a ton in the next 8 months about the right option, but I think it's clear that we will have value at the draft pick and/or value in the system to trade away for need at a position of greatest weakness. I do think Grier will be looking to possibly make this kind of move.

Could be Smith has a stellar year and he's core, so instead we trade down to give someone a top 5 F pick and get ourselves an older D roster player or prospect... could be Smith has a decent year but management is no longer sure he's the 2C we want to bank on, we draft one of the top 5 F's, and trade him. Maybe it's Eklund who is on the move, or Musty. Hopefully everyone has a good year and options abound.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Another option could be to draft Hagens or Martone then trade Smith and a protected 2026 1st for Dobson.

Unless Smith flops terribly, this would be a big overpayment.

This is a significant X factor. Its very concievable that the sharks do end up sellers, but that some of those guys have some significant value. Based on last year's performance, I would say the rental value at the deadline for each would be:

1. Kunin: 4th rounder.
2. Granlund: 1st rounder.
3. Ruuta: 4th rounder.
4. Ceci: 2nd rounder (he was worth a third now with another year left on his contract, so as an expiring UFA costing less than 1M in cap space, he's worth more then)
5. Kostin: 6th rounder.
6. Sturm: 5th rounder.
7. Goalies: maybe a 4th rounder

Just remember that in the 2023 offseason, Sharks fans were doing this exercise with Duclair/Barabanov/Hoffman/Labanc/Kahkonen/Zadina and it didn't really play out.

Biggest factors:
1) Who do the Sharks keep? For example, Granlund or Ceci might be nice veterans to have.
2) How good will the goaltending be? If either goaltender has a very good season, the Sharks could move him for a haul, or even decide to keep him.
3) How much regression/progression is there? Guys like Sturm and Ruuta have probably earned their chops around the league; unless they fall of a cliff they could probably get a decent return. But other teams won't want to pay a premium price for Granlund or Ceci if he crashes.

 

[sampler]

Unless Smith flops terribly, this would be a big overpayment.


Just remember that in the 2023 offseason, Sharks fans were doing this exercise with Duclair/Barabanov/Hoffman/Labanc/Kahkonen/Zadina and it didn't really play out.

Biggest factors:
1) Who do the Sharks keep? For example, Granlund or Ceci might be nice veterans to have.
2) How good will the goaltending be? If either goaltender has a very good season, the Sharks could move him for a haul, or even decide to keep him.
3) How much regression/progression is there? Guys like Sturm and Ruuta have probably earned their chops around the league; unless they fall of a cliff they could probably get a decent return. But other teams won't want to pay a premium price for Granlund or Ceci if he crashes.

Thats a good point. Sharks didnt get a whole lot with that group did they . They did get a bit for duclair but thats about it.

That said, I feel like this year's crop is better. Lebanc, hoff, zadina were predictably worthless, or nearly so. However, Barabanov was most disappointing....

1. I dont expect the sharks to keep anyone. If the player plays well enough to be worth keeping, then deal them for good value at the deadline, collect an asset, and then sign them in the offseason. Makes little sense to forgo an asset to have them play the last 20 meaningless games, when you could just resign them after the season. Just have a "gentlemens agreement" in place. Player gets to play for a cup chance, team gets asset, and they meet up again on July 1.

2. Dont think it matters that much about the goaltending in terms of keep v. trade. its Askarov's net next year unless something really changes. Hopefully the goaltending is good enough to have positive value and get assets. Not sure that will happen, but thats my hope. if its very good and Askarov just poops the bed, then you have a strange nashville like scenario. I dont expect this...

3. of course the return depends on the play. Good play = good return. Sure. I expect Granlund to regress statistically. He had a great year last year, but he also got all the grade A opportunities as the clear #1C. He got the PP time. He got the O-zone starts. He was the guy. he was the driver of the Lund line. This year, the C position is deeper and he may not get all the premier time. I expect closer to 45-50 pts, so he may or may not fetch a 1st. I still expect a 2nd... Sturm, Ruuta, Ceci, Kunin, Kostin, the goalies.... all question marks that could be untradable or could be valuable. Who knows? Ironically if a few of them have great years, that likely means the sharks are not necessarily such clear sellers. So, who knows...

All in all, the sharks are better off collecting as many assets as they can. They have a nice cupboard and ample cap space, so keeping replacable older guys who could return assets makes little sense. they also need to upgrade key positions next summer and beyond and get guys in the right age range to be effective along side the kids (like toffoli). I guess they could keep granlund (he'll be 33, same as toffoli), but again if they keep him it should be after getting a good asset at the deadline first.

 

[sampler]

We'll learn a ton in the next 8 months about the right option, but I think it's clear that we will have value at the draft pick and/or value in the system to trade away for need at a position of greatest weakness. I do think Grier will be looking to possibly make this kind of move.

Could be Smith has a stellar year and he's core, so instead we trade down to give someone a top 5 F pick and get ourselves an older D roster player or prospect... could be Smith has a decent year but management is no longer sure he's the 2C we want to bank on, we draft one of the top 5 F's, and trade him. Maybe it's Eklund who is on the move, or Musty. Hopefully everyone has a good year and options abound.

This is spot on. Simply put, we dont know what we have. Tons of prospects, very little known commodities. After this season, we will have a WAY better feel for what we have. Smith and celly will show their early chops. Bystedt, Haltunnen, Thompson, Gushkin, Cardwell, Bordy, Graf, and Cagnoni will show what we have the AHL playing against men. Pohlcamp, Lund, Svoboda, and Klee will show if they can cut it in the NCAA and make the jump. Pohlcamp is the most intriguing for me in that group...

LSW and Havelid will show if they can cut it against men in sweden.

Musty may surprise and find himself with an NHL tryout for at least 9 games (I actually fully expect this as he is in no mans land: too good for sudbury again, but not allowed to go AHL).

We'll see about the CHL D: Dick, Misskey, and Roberts. We'll also see if Wetsch is worth anything and of course if Cherny can destroy it in Saginaw (and if he is healthy).

And of course, we'll see if Askarov is indeed the goalie of the future...

Not to mention whether some of the young NHL depth adds like Dyllandrea or Grundstrom can show upside.

Until all these questions are answered, we just dont know what we have. If the prospect pool has a spectacular year and it appears set for 3-4 NHL players to be in 2025-6, then Grier can take a swing on top NHL talent knowing that he has young players to compliment them and that the time to compete is upon us. If the pool falters, then Grier knows we are still a few more years away and would be wiser to continue collecting assets, drafting as high and often as possible, and patiently waiting. This year is the great tell tale year whether the rebuild is over and the Build is on, or whether we are still in the rebuild process of stacking the future deck.