I think the first option to exhaust is to talk to him about re-signing here in July after renting him to a playoff team. That's a win-win for Granlund and the team. We'll get something like a 2nd and he gets an opportunity to compete for a Cup since he's missed the playoffs the past two seasons and would be looking at three if he stays here the whole season. If he'd prefer to stay without that opportunity then yeah re-sign him for two years. I think they have enough vets outside of Granlund to keep balance. They'll still have Toffoli, Goodrow, and Wennberg in the top nine with Zetterlund becoming a young veteran himself.
Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion
- Thread starter WTFetus
- Start date
67 others
Registered User
You can remember it however you want mate. I know what was said at the time and how it was generally received, and I know you were always Patty's biggest fan lol
You only know what was said by the side that agrees with you. There was never everyone calling that contract crazy like you suggested. That's just a laughably biased revisionist take.
weastern bias
worst team in the league
Reposting from the camp thread:
Jersey numbers for newcomers finally confirmed:
4 - Ceci
21 - Wennberg
23 - Goodrow
53 - Dellandrea
73 - Toffoli
91 - Grundstrom
96 - Walman
Changes by rookies to accommodate:
6 - Dickinson (was wearing 4)
18 - Bystedt (was wearing 21)
Jersey numbers for newcomers finally confirmed:
4 - Ceci
21 - Wennberg
23 - Goodrow
53 - Dellandrea
73 - Toffoli
91 - Grundstrom
96 - Walman
Changes by rookies to accommodate:
6 - Dickinson (was wearing 4)
18 - Bystedt (was wearing 21)
Star Platinum
Registered User
- May 11, 2024
- 871
- 1,249
67 others
Registered User
ok, not EVERY SINGLE person if that wording is making you mad, but it was pretty clear a majority, and not just by Shark fans. Nobody said it was the worst contract in the league, but nobody thought it was cheap or any kind of discount. It was considered overpay and at the time people thought Marleau might be traded. The attitude was "Well, at least Thornton and Cheechoo have cheaper deals than their worth. Grumble Grumble"
I didn't post here then. I posted on Chompboard(A pure Sharks fan Forum back in the day), but feel free to go use the archived logs on the wayback machine for chompboard to read the announcement thread day he signed that contract and the general reactions lol. Its a thread sandwiched somewhere around "Sandis Ozolish in camp on a tryout" and "Mark Bell sentenced to 6 months in jail" and "Blackhawk fans boo Bill Wirtz memorial"
I actually went looking today to see if my memory was playing tricks on me. it wasn't. Maybe it was different here
I would have liked to read the reactions here, but I can't seem to find threads before 2011 because they seem to have been lost in migration. Even on the wayback machine. Unless someone here knows how to locate old threads and can link us up for some together reading?
Have you ever considered the possibility that the majority opinion can be laughably incorrect? If nobody thought it was cheap or any kind of discount then they simply weren't thinking it through very much. Again, I have made the point about what the market was at that time. Plenty of players like guys you brought up were getting longer term on their contracts and Marleau took two years. I seem to remember a lot of people believing for one reason or another that Marleau was around 5.5 mil at that time but that sort of figure doesn't mean much unless you attach a term to it because that affects the asking price of UFA's. It always has. It always will. Consistently leaving that out of the equation is to be incomplete with how to legitimately value a player and his contract.
I think you're just letting your memory of something that happened 17 years ago in your own bubble bias you into some exaggerated thinking. Either way, hindsight should correct that. In a market where 3-6 year contracts are being handed out to UFA's, Marleau asked less of the team by taking two years. Maybe it's a higher AAV than what he deserved at the time but that's a hard argument to support given back-to-back point-per-game seasons at the time as a center. Centers get premium dollars and contracts were going to escalate. I just find it to be a very untenable position to pretend like he couldn't have gotten more on the open market than two years even if he got what you thought he was worth at the time which would have been more than what he got re-signing in San Jose then. The numbers and the market then just don't support your opinion and if the majority held that opinion, they were wrong too.
67 others
Registered User
Hey, I just happened to have agreed with the majority opinion at the time the second I saw that signing. I had a dollar figure in mind for what Patty was worth and would have preferred to ship him if we went over that caphit I had in my mind. 5 million dollar player at 2-3 years was what I saw Patty as. I could live it it went to 5.5. Didn't like seeing the 6.3 million caphit when a significantly better player did the team right by taking way less than his market value.
As I recall we had a large amount of RFA's who needed new contracts and not much wiggle room.
-Ehrhoff's 2 year bridge was done and he was up for a big raise
- Ryane Clowe was done his ELC and looked really good
- Steve Bernier's ELC was up and I still thought he was going to break out eventually because Power forwards take longer to develop and he was a 1st rounder.
- Ill be honest, i didn't feel the same about Marcel Goc, despite him being a 1st rounder. and yeah, his ELC was also up.
- Matt Carle's ELC was up the next year and he had just scored a decent chunk for a rookie Dman
- Milan Michalek's ELC was up shortly the next year and he was already looking great
And for the record, at the time, I did not think the Salary cap would keep increasing as much as it did. A lot of people didn't. It was all still new to us.
39 million to 44 million to 50 million, but then they started talking about pumping the breaks on increases for a few years because Sather was causing complaints by doing Sather things and overspending.
So yeah, there was a real fear. We had already lost Hannan on july 1st and he was considered a top 3 defensive defenseman in the game at the time. I was actually sad to lose Toskala, but that couldn't be helped. Thankfully we were able to eject Bell with him and get the Cooter pick.
At the time all we could see was "wow, we are paying Marleau almost 2 million more a year than Spezza when he isn't as good", or 'wow, Marleau makes more than Sundin or Kovalchuk now and he's just a supporting player"
They lied and let it go up one more year to 56 million before pumping the breaks in 08/09, so the Marleau contract became acceptable to me.
So yeah, sure, in hindsight, its fine. At the time? Marleau was to Thornton what Kadri was to Mackinnon a few years back
Hodge
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2021
- 6,815
- 8,080
Thomas Harley, Bowen Byram, K'Andre Miller...at least one of these young defensemen is getting priced out of his current team once his bridge deal expires. We need to swoop in and acquire him.
Those would be nice….
When constructing a roster, you really need 9 good F, four good D, and one good G. That’s 14 players, and then then rest can be filler….
The cap is approx 90m. The other 9 roster spots should be no more than 15m. Now imagine 5 of those top 14 guys are on Elcs at about 1m each. That leaves 9 established players for approx $70m or about 8m per avg.
Eklund, celly, smith, musty, mukh, and Askarov can be your elcs. This gives the sharks sooooo much cap space to go shopping.
Thus far Grier hasn’t shopped much other than Toffoli. I would be fine beginning to add sub 30 talent for cash.
This year, even after adding goodrow and wennberg for nearly 9m, they still have 10m in cap space. Obviously Grier doesn’t yet see the window as now. However, eklund’s elc has two more years, and I’d loooove to see the sharks utilize those years to actually compete.
ELCs are magic. They fill top nine roles and top four D roles for practically free. They are the wild card of cap management. Grier needs to be smart not to waste those precious years mired in mediocrity with tons of unused space.
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 16,850
- 6,345
In hindsight, when Marleau was unhappy with Ron Wilson, wasn't putting up numbers, and wanted a new shiny contract, the Sharks should have let him walk. They definitely kept him too long; he's not the type of player that a team keeps for nearly his entire career. To me, Marleau is a symbol of the Sharks and Doug Wilson not willing to hold people accountable.
You shouldn't be like Las Vegas and drop players after they've had a bad month. But the Sharks kept their core together much too long given the results.
I can see why they have attached Musty and Smith together with their hockey IQ. I think Zetterlund is the perfect winger for those two.
Eklund - Celebrini - Toffoli
Wennberg - Granlund - Kunin/Dellandrea
Musty - Smith - Zetterlund
Goodrow - Sturm - Kunin/Dellandrea
Grundstrom, Kostin/G Smith
Eklund and Wennberg could switch to make the Granlund line the top line, but I think Eklund would help Celebrini more.
Eklund - Celebrini - Toffoli
Wennberg - Granlund - Kunin/Dellandrea
Musty - Smith - Zetterlund
Goodrow - Sturm - Kunin/Dellandrea
Grundstrom, Kostin/G Smith
Eklund and Wennberg could switch to make the Granlund line the top line, but I think Eklund would help Celebrini more.
- Jul 25, 2007
- 4,574
- 5,680
Musty-Smith-Zetterlund longer term is a great idea to try, but next year I don't think so. Smith is already prone to getting hemmed in in his own zone as the C, Musty as well (happened a few times even at the prospect tourney).
I think if we want to bottle some Smith-Perreault-Leonard magic, we go Eklund-Smith-Zetterlund next year. Eklund is very Perreault comparable, Zetterlund absolutely profiles like Leonard (forechecking, more direct, dense, triggerman). Eklund and Zetterlund are almost certainly more defensively responsible both than Musty will be next year if he makes the big club.
The cool thing about the kids is that they seem to have some flexibility (at least on paper) with different line combos. A hallmark of the Sharks' best top 6's in the past was the flexibility of the forward group, esp as many were drafted as C's. High hockey sense and compete will do that for the top of lineup and although there are still problems futzing around with the lineup on paper, there are a lot of combos that could conceivably work well without causing *too* many problems down lineup.
STL Shark
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2013
- 4,407
- 5,475
So we can then price out Dickinson or Muk on our left side? Left side of the defense is not going to be the problem as we move on with this rebuild. It's the right side that we need to be using assets and cap space to acquire. We shouldn't be the ones offering the best trade package (starts with at least a 1st+) to one of those teams to go out and get LHD until we see what we have in Dickinson/Muk as NHL players.
I suppose you could offer Muk for one of them straight up in a deal to give the other team cap space for a less proven (but heralded) LHD, but beyond that I don't see where a deal for one of those guys is a pressing need in terms of giving up assets that should be used to add on the right side.
Rather give a little runway to let the guys that Grier has targeted in trades and drafts to develop. Muk was the top asset of the Meier deal. Dickinson is someone we targeted to move up for ahead of the draft. I know you love Grier's eye, so let's see his guys before we go and chase a position where we actually have organizational depth and talent. I'm all for chasing a RHD though and think that is the top priority for the next 12 months (outside of Celebrini development).
weastern bias
worst team in the league
I agree it is too early for Musty-Smith, but I think it should probably be locked in with Eklund-Celebrini. Eklund has some Perrault similarities, but he is also a lot more creative and fluid, and I think that will do better with Celebrini, where they will be able to create plays no one else can see.
Plus, I think they will be the two guys you always put out in critical defensive and PK situations, so might as well keep them together in general, too.
Oh I think they should start the season with those lines if Musty isn’t on the team. I just don’t like the idea of Musty playing with low skill players.
I think it is more important to give Celebrini, Smith, and Musty skill players to play with as opposed to sheltering them on lower lines with low skill players.
weastern bias
worst team in the league
Agreed
I think Musty gets his 9 games this year and when he does I hope he's stapled to Smith's hip and they're given a strong vet to play with, I want that time to build his confidence rather than diminish it
Maybe something like:
72-64-20
*FORECHECKER*-71-73
13-2-21
would be a good way to start the year
I don’t know enough about Wennberg’s playstyle to put him there also not that it matters much but Wennberg and Musty are more natural fits on the LW rather than RW. Smith and Musty both have offensive skills that can creat goals in the NHL but need a tenacious forechecker on that other wing. That’s why I thought Zetterlund would be a great fit. Kunin could also be a possibility but not ideal.
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
I like the idea of Eklund-Celebrini-Toffoli a lot, because Celebrini deserves to have wingers who are high hockey IQ players and can keep up with him pace-wise. I like the idea of Zetterlund on Smith's wing a lot because Zetterlund can skate well and is a good forechecker, but I'm not sure who I want on their left wing. A healthy Couture would obviously be ideal, but since that's unlikely maybe Granlund or Wennberg is the best fit. Maybe if Dellandrea takes an offensive step forward, that could work? It'll be interesting to see how Wennberg, Dellandrea, and any other new guy slots in.
Stewie Griffin
What the deuce
Maybe not this year, but next year/2026 I would love to watch:
Eklund-Celebrini-Toffoli
Musty-Smith-Zetterlund
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
Long-term that looks pretty nice. I would still like to have one more high-end forward that can carry the third line, as I don't see Zetterlund as a long-term top-6 scoring forward (even though I have no problem putting him on a top-6 line). Hopefully Chernyshov can fill that role, but I obviously wouldn't turn down someone like Martone if Schaefer/Hensler isn't the play next summer.
weastern bias
worst team in the league
Wennberg is a defensively responsible low-event bottom-6 center with limited offensive upside, I like the idea of pairing him with Smith so that he doesn't have to shoulder all the responsibilities a centerman needs to take on from day one, he'd spend a little bit of time flip-flopping with Wennberg on the RW in that setup
Smith still has some details to clean up on his defensive game that Wennberg is a natural complement to aid him with, but if he can handle top-6 minutes Granlund is the higher end option there, but with more holes in his own defensive game to worry about
Chern on the second line and Zetterlund in the third would be ideal.
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
Well, like I said I have no problem with Zetterlund on the second line, we just definitely need six forwards who are better than him. If Chernyshov develops into a legit second liner (think he has a solid chance) then I have no problem deploying him on the third line.
Short- and medium-term, Toffoli is good on the top line, but probably the ideal long-term solution is something like:
Eklund-Celebrini-[Martone]
Musty-Smith-Zetterlund
Chernyshov-Bystedt-Toffoli
Cardwell-[vet 4C]-[vet 4W]
I just feel like we need one more high-end scoring forward long-term to truly be a contender. That forward could be next year's 1st rounder or a trade target akin to the Devils acquiring a prime-aged Timo Meier.
