Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[Hodge]

The team can do that virtually every year. Buy low on reclamation projects in the hope of flipping at the deadline.

Doesn't always work out or else we'd be preparing to trade Zadina and Lindblom for picks.

 

[Hodge]

And if all you can get from New York for taking on Goodrow is that then either don't do it or make them take money back. We're not that desperate for picks.

We should be. Currently we only have 22 picks over the next 3 years when every team starts with 21. Successful rebuilds typically require a much larger surplus of picks.

 

[TheBeard]

Doesn't always work out or else we'd be preparing to trade Zadina and Lindblom for picks.

It doesn't but the money for guys like Zadina is significantly less than what you'd pay for Goodrow.

 

[coooldude]

Hasso is nearly 80 years old and has a net worth of $18 bil. Hasso spending $20 million is like someone who makes $250k/year spending $300. The question is simply does he want to win before he dies/sells the team. If he wants to win, the biggest mistake the Sharks could make is not weaponizing cap space.

By all means get as much as you can for the cap space, but don't walk away from deals that trade cap space for picks.

Yes, but all I'll say is *normal* billionaires don't get there by wasting money. Elon notwithstanding, a lot of these folks are extremely thoughtful with money and more miserly than we'd expect. For example, why didn't we retain way more of Karlsson's salary? It's not like Hasso can't afford it, per your math. But he set a limit and Grier publicly stated that. There's evidence that he's not just gonna spend for any reason.

 

[TheBeard]

Yes, but all I'll say is *normal* billionaires don't get there by wasting money. Elon notwithstanding, a lot of these folks are extremely thoughtful with money and more miserly than we'd expect. For example, why didn't we retain way more of Karlsson's salary? It's not like Hasso can't afford it, per your math. But he set a limit and Grier publicly stated that. There's evidence that he's not just gonna spend for any reason.

I think Has understands there's no need to overspend now. Team is still making money regardless of attendance and unless he's told the team needs to spend more to compete he's going to be perfectly content being stingy. I also don't think there's a correlation between an unwillingness to retain more for other teams' players and financial troubles.

 

[Hodge]

It doesn't but the money for guys like Zadina is significantly less than what you'd pay for Goodrow.

Great, we'll also get zero draft picks for him and he will be of no value to the rebuild in any way.

Young reclamation projects are worth taking on to see if they can be turned into useful pieces of the next good Sharks team. Expecting to recoup significant draft picks from players other teams have given up on just 1-2 years later is unrealistic.

 

[OffSydes]

What SAP doesnt spend on UX designers the Sharks can spend on taking on cap dumps.

 

[coooldude]

Great, we'll also get zero draft picks for him and he will be of no value to the rebuild in any way.

Young reclamation projects are worth taking on to see if they can be turned into useful pieces of the next good Sharks team. Expecting to recoup significant draft picks from players other teams have given up on just 1-2 years later is unrealistic.

Yep, these reclamations are like "live draft picks." Addison, Zadina, Emberson, even Duke, Granlund, etc. Misfit toys that might actually hit. None of them (except maybe Duke) would likely get moved for low picks, at least not in 2024... maybe for a prospect.

Grier has been very consistent. He's giving younger prospects time to marinate (Gushchin, Bords, Thrun, and Mukh), he's bringing up guys who are probably lifer bubble players and hoping they can grow into more, but who cares if they don't (Okhotiuk, Knyzhov, Bailey), He's plugging holes in the lineup with career mid-to-low tier players who can play at the NHL level and don't need to be sent down to AHL but aren't that expensive (or are cap dumps) -- Burroughs, Benning, Rutta, Hoff, Lindblom, even Carpenter... And the real youngsters we need to develop and have truly exciting ceilings, he has them with the big club (Zetterlund, Ek) and Quinn is finally putting them with Hertl (when healthy). It's a pretty coherent navigation of the situation we're in.

I would be surprised if we move folks at the deadline for spare parts/low draft picks... anyone who gets moved will be because they earned better upside to be a role player on a bubble or contender, like a 2nd+. Just my 2c, and liable to change my mind with new info.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

We should be. Currently we only have 22 picks over the next 3 years when every team starts with 21. Successful rebuilds typically require a much larger surplus of picks.

Nah, I don't think they should be. The quantity of picks don't really matter for a rebuild. It's the quality of picks. The 2nd round pick is fine if it's in line for what it's worth. The 3rd round pick is maybe a 5% odds of being an impact player. The 2nd is maybe 15%? You want to spend an extra 11 mil on those odds and I think that's a wildly ineffective use of cap space. I'd rather spend it on useful assets in the free agent market over significantly longer odds.

 

[TheBeard]

Great, we'll also get zero draft picks for him and he will be of no value to the rebuild in any way.

Young reclamation projects are worth taking on to see if they can be turned into useful pieces of the next good Sharks team. Expecting to recoup significant draft picks from players other teams have given up on just 1-2 years later is unrealistic.

And you've basically deprived yourself of 2-3 of these guys annually for Barclay's contract and the 2nd and 3rd (which I don't think you'd get anyways). That's 6-9 opportunities.

 

[Hodge]

Nah, I don't think they should be. The quantity of picks don't really matter for a rebuild. It's the quality of picks. The 2nd round pick is fine if it's in line for what it's worth. The 3rd round pick is maybe a 5% odds of being an impact player. The 2nd is maybe 15%? You want to spend an extra 11 mil on those odds and I think that's a wildly ineffective use of cap space. I'd rather spend it on useful assets in the free agent market over significantly longer odds.

And you've basically deprived yourself of 2-3 of these guys annually for Barclay's contract and the 2nd and 3rd (which I don't think you'd get anyways). That's 6-9 opportunities.

We will have over $35 million in cap space next season before buying out Vlasic. That's more than enough room to add Goodrow, several free agents, reclamation projects and anything else we want. I think it's crucial to spend some of this space buying draft picks because we simply do not have enough and we lack trade value on the roster in order to get some.

 

[TheBeard]

We will have over $35 million in cap space next season before buying out Vlasic. That's more than enough room to add Goodrow, several free agents, reclamation projects and anything else we want. I think it's crucial to spend some of this space buying draft picks because we simply do not have enough and we lack trade value on the roster in order to get some.

I'd honestly rather just facilitate by taking on cap space from deals this year instead of taking on longer contracts. Now, if NY wants to give up a first then I'm down.

 

[Groo]

We have nothing else to spend that cap space on. Goodrow is someone worth having around during a rebuild even if he's probably overpaid by about $2M/year. If we acquire him in the offseason that's only ~$6M in excess cap space over 3 years. 2nd+3rd seems reasonable for taking that on, maybe another later round pick on top of that. I would love to get someone like Will Cuylle instead but I don't think the Rangers would trade him just to dump cap.


Maybe a 4th for each of Duclair, Barabanov, Kahkonen and Hoffman if we're lucky? Can't see anyone else having value.

I'd also like to see Cuylle in teal

 

[Pinkfloyd]

We will have over $35 million in cap space next season before buying out Vlasic. That's more than enough room to add Goodrow, several free agents, reclamation projects and anything else we want. I think it's crucial to spend some of this space buying draft picks because we simply do not have enough and we lack trade value on the roster in order to get some.

This isn't a persuading argument for taking significantly less than market value. Those draft picks simply aren't worth what you'd be paying for it. We're talking about a late 2nd and a 3rd in 2026 and you want to just eat an extra 10-12 mil for the picks. You would only do something like this if insurance is covering most of the contract. You want to do this sort of thing with Montreal for Carey Price then I'd be on board with it. Not for Goodrow.

 

[Sendhelplease]

Sure, but signing those free agents isn't guaranteed to yield a 2nd and 3rd round pick (or whatever the cost to dump Goodrow ends up being).

We have a severe lack of draft picks for a rebuilding team and not many assets on the roster we can trade to get more. It's time to start weaponizing our cap space for that purpose even if that means underbidding a bit.

I fully agree with the idea of taking on Goodrow's contract and other cap dumps in exchange for picks but is it really true that we are lacking in picks recently? Under Grier we have a could have 3 first round picks or two firsts and two seconds this year or worst case scenario for this year one first and two seconds and then two firsts next year. Last year we had two first round picks. In Grier's first draft he traded down and picked up two extra seconds. It seems like we have had a lot of picks in the first two rounds. I suppose we've lacked in lottery picks compared to rebuilding teams but taking on salary dumps likely would not address this problem either.

 

[Sendhelplease]

Something I realized about Vlasic this year. He actually had a pretty good year and was a NHL caliber defenseman even though he was overpaid and his main defensive partner was Benning. This year Benning has been hurt for most of it and Vlasic's play declined substantially. I wonder if Vlasic's play could improve if he's paired with Benning again?

 

[hohosaregood]

Something I realized about Vlasic this year. He actually had a pretty good year and was a NHL caliber defenseman even though he was overpaid and his main defensive partner was Benning. This year Benning has been hurt for most of it and Vlasic's play declined substantially. I wonder if Vlasic's play could improve if he's paired with Benning again?

it'll help a little just cuz Benning can move the puck but the issue with Vlasic this year, more so than in previous years, is that he can't keep up with the pace of play and the happy feet of modern forwards anymore.

 

[Cas]

Something I realized about Vlasic this year. He actually had a pretty good year and was a NHL caliber defenseman even though he was overpaid and his main defensive partner was Benning. This year Benning has been hurt for most of it and Vlasic's play declined substantially. I wonder if Vlasic's play could improve if he's paired with Benning again?

I'm going to disagree somewhat - Vlasic only had a relatively good year by his recent standards. He was still bad and wouldn't start on any playoff teams.

Not only that, but I do agree to an extent that he was being carried by Benning. If you have to be carried by Matt ******* Benning, you don't belong in the NHL, because Benning wouldn't have started on any playoff teams either.

On top of that, Vlasic is another year older (so is Benning), which means his legs and hips are another year more decrepit than they already were. I don't think he can be carried at even a replacement level by Benning anymore, and it seems Quinn agrees. He's just done, can't keep up and does nothing else on the ice to help mitigate that.

 

[mogambomoroo]

I'm going to disagree somewhat - Vlasic only had a relatively good year by his recent standards. He was still bad and wouldn't start on any playoff teams.

Not only that, but I do agree to an extent that he was being carried by Benning. If you have to be carried by Matt ******* Benning, you don't belong in the NHL, because Benning wouldn't have started on any playoff teams either.

On top of that, Vlasic is another year older (so is Benning), which means his legs and hips are another year more decrepit than they already were. I don't think he can be carried at even a replacement level by Benning anymore, and it seems Quinn agrees. He's just done, can't keep up and does nothing else on the ice to help mitigate that.

Agree 100%.

Also Quinn has already given Vlasic a lot of chance to try to turn his game, but it just doesn't work.
Happy that Quinn keeps him responsible.

 

[Bizz]

I'm going to disagree somewhat - Vlasic only had a relatively good year by his recent standards. He was still bad and wouldn't start on any playoff teams.

Not only that, but I do agree to an extent that he was being carried by Benning. If you have to be carried by Matt ******* Benning, you don't belong in the NHL, because Benning wouldn't have started on any playoff teams either.

On top of that, Vlasic is another year older (so is Benning), which means his legs and hips are another year more decrepit than they already were. I don't think he can be carried at even a replacement level by Benning anymore, and it seems Quinn agrees. He's just done, can't keep up and does nothing else on the ice to help mitigate that.

This may sound cold, but I would want Quinn to keep playing Vlasic in hopes he gets injured so they could stash him on LTIR for the remainder of his contract. That would be the best case scenario in both the short and long term of the team. Because let's face it, nobody is going to trade for him and he'd refuse to waive his NMC anyways.

Or just be the Blackhawks and "find" some sort of "allergic reaction" to something.

 

[Hodge]

This may sound cold, but I would want Quinn to keep playing Vlasic in hopes he gets injured so they could stash him on LTIR for the remainder of his contract. That would be the best case scenario in both the short and long term of the team.

Or just be the Blackhawks and "find" some sort of "allergic reaction" to something.

Just buy him out. It doesn't need to be that complicated.

 

[YUPPY 2 7 10 11]

Just buy him out. It doesn't need to be that complicated.

Buyout Period

Buyouts can start on the later of June 15 or 48 hours after the Playoffs end, and the buyout period ends June 30 at 5pm Eastern.

Teams may receive an additional Buyout window. If a team has a player go to arbitration and it is either settled or awarded, the team receives a new 48 hour buyout window beginning 3 days after the arbitration settlement or award. The only contracts that are eligible to be bought out in this window are for player with Cap Hits greater than $4M AND they were on the team's roster at the last trade deadline.

 

[Hodge]

Buyout Period

Buyouts can start on the later of June 15 or 48 hours after the Playoffs end, and the buyout period ends June 30 at 5pm Eastern.

Teams may receive an additional Buyout window. If a team has a player go to arbitration and it is either settled or awarded, the team receives a new 48 hour buyout window beginning 3 days after the arbitration settlement or award. The only contracts that are eligible to be bought out in this window are for player with Cap Hits greater than $4M AND they were on the team's roster at the last trade deadline.

In the offseason, obviously. Just scratch Vlasic until then like Quinn has been doing.

 

[Shark in Hockeytown]

We're going to have a tough time reaching the cap floor next season without taking on contracts like Goodrow's. That's money Hasso needs to spend regardless.

According to CapFriendly, the Sharks have $52M in cap hits next season. They have 7 forwards, 6 dmen, and 1 goalie under contract, and so need to add 9 players (some could be current prospects). The cap floor will probably be $62-64M. If they sign some of their RFAs, they will make the floor without adding anyone outside the current roster.

 

[Shark in Hockeytown]

Hasso is nearly 80 years old and has a net worth of $18 bil. Hasso spending $20 million is like someone who makes $250k/year spending $300. The question is simply does he want to win before he dies/sells the team. If he wants to win, the biggest mistake the Sharks could make is not weaponizing cap space.

By all means get as much as you can for the cap space, but don't walk away from deals that trade cap space for picks.

The current regime has made multiple moves--buying out Balcers and the structure of the Karlsson trade--that suggests they are sensitive to the amount of salary they are paying out during the tank. They would have gotten a lot more for Karlsson if they were willing to retain 50% of his salary.