It’s a complicated balancing act and is Eklund even a core piece yet? Best case scenario is Celebrini, Smith, 3rd forward, Dickinson/Other D (1st ‘25?), Askarov. Eklund can be a great complimentary winger, but not necessarily a core piece. Especially considering he’s battling with Musty for that 3rd core forward spot and Musty has a distinct size advantage, which is more important given that neither Celebrini nor smith are particularly tall. Using Tampa as an example, the core was Stamkos, Point, Kucherov, Hedman and Vasilevskiy. The complimentary players like McDonagh, Sergachev, Killorn, Gourde and Palat were important but paid a more market friendly amount and inevitably not retained. To be fair though, they were moved after winning cups, so if they give Eklund 7 I won’t be upset.
Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion
- Thread starter WTFetus
- Start date
As of now Eklund is the ONLY core player on the entire team that’s proven he can play in the NHL.
spintops
Registered User
- Sep 13, 2013
- 1,766
- 1,170
I get what he is saying. Eklund has proven he's a NHL player. He hasn't proven he is a core piece.
weastern bias
worst team in the league
If Eklund breaks out and scores over 60 points this year he's going to get between $7M and $8M on a long term 7 or 8 year extention
The market has spoken, promising young talents coming off their ELC get overpays in the hope it is a steal later in the contract, Jake Sanderson got $8.05Mx8Y after playing a single season of 77 games, if you belive in the player you take the risk on the big deal, if it doesn't work out you weren't gonna win anything anyway so you reset and move on with the next young player to emerge afterwards
The market has spoken, promising young talents coming off their ELC get overpays in the hope it is a steal later in the contract, Jake Sanderson got $8.05Mx8Y after playing a single season of 77 games, if you belive in the player you take the risk on the big deal, if it doesn't work out you weren't gonna win anything anyway so you reset and move on with the next young player to emerge afterwards
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
If Eklund breaks out and scores 60 points this season, then I'm perfectly happy to give him $7M long-term.
Frankly, I'd be disappointed if he didn't. He was on a 68 point pace last year in March and April once there was chemistry formed with the Lunds. It's not as if he was doing most of his damage on the PP either so the worry he'll lose time on PP1 shouldn't affect his totals.
I think a lot of people forget that the cap was essentially frozen for a few years and now that it's going up pretty substantially for the next few years so too will salaries.
Jargon
Registered User
I have high hopes for Eklund. My production at the top of last season was that Eklund would have a steep improvement in the latter half of the season — I think he’s a little robot that processes the game at a high level and adds skills to constantly get better. I predict he’ll hit 60 this year.
Even if Eklund isn’t a core piece, it still makes cap sense to commit. Plenty of wingers that aren’t core to their team make around 8 mil and that number is going to go up as the cap goes up. The way you stay ahead of it is to throw long contracts that keep wingers for cheaper in their prime.
STL Shark
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2013
- 4,397
- 5,459
Wouldn't be having to pay Schaefer $8M+ the day that we acquire him, so I don't see the situations all that similarly because of that and the massive age gap. Schaefer also profiles as a guy that could be a #1, while Miller, Harley, and Byram all look much more like 2/3's. Can put them on a top pairing with a super high end partner and they keep up nicely, but unlikely to be able to be the best D-Man on a top pairing.
That sounds too similar to what Muk/Dickinson profile to be to me to be willing to give the haul of assets needed to acquire one of them at this stage of the rebuild. If you're moving valuable assets right now, it should be to get something that you don't have as opposed to something that you project to have. If Muk/Dickinson flop, then go and get the next version of Miller, Harley, Byram in 3 years when we're actually ready to compete.
If at the end of the ELC Celly-Smitty reaches the expected level, what would their contracts be like? Something around 11/10 million for 8 years respectively?
I'm not sure what the expected level is for Smith but Celebrini will probably break that 10 mil mark by then. Smith probably has a wider range of possible results but he's probably around 8 mil as a Couture-like replacement.
Realistically? I’d say about 12 for smith, 14 for Celebrini. Sounds like a lot but the cap will probably be closer to 98-100 million by then, Connor McDavid will have reset the market at 16-17 and who knows what Bedard will be earning.
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 16,786
- 6,252
I agree. I think a lot of people have a hard time realizing that because the cap was frozen salaries more or less remained in the same range for the production, but now that the cap is rising almost 4-5 mil a year for the next few, so will AAVs. The idea of a player on an 8million dollar hit now isn't as backbreaking or excessive as it was even as recently as a couple years back. If Bedard breaks 90-100 points in the next couple seasons (which I don't think would be a huge shock), the hawks will have no problems foregoing a bridge deal and pay him as one of the top 5 highest paid players in the league already. And with Leon and Matthews already over 13.5 and McDavid needing a contract as soon as next year, by the time the next generation of elite are able to they'll get paid what we'll initially declare as an absurd amount but ultimately will just be new benchmarks.
I think 8 million for Smitty is too little considering that most are in the 7 million range for Eklund and in 3 years the cap will increase a lot. 10 for Celebrini will also seem too little to me, when the best in the league will be at least in the 12+ range.
I think what Bedard signs for will help provide a baseline for Macklin.
Possibly. It depends on what their comparables are and what the cap projections look like. I would be looking to give them eight years after their 2nd year of their ELC's. But with a rising cap and likely expansion, the figures could inflate from that figure. Right now, there are only three players in the 12+ range. The closest comparable to Celebrini in this context is McDavid who had a 30-70-100 season when he signed that contract. That put him at about 15.7% of the cap when the extension kicked in. If Celebrini is to make in that range, that's what he'll need to do in year two. I have high hopes for Celebrini but I don't think his production will skyrocket to that degree that early. Smith is a whole different animal because his situation likely includes a lot more variables that will impact his cap hit than Celebrini. It's possible his numbers get him into the 10 mil range if the cap goes up enough and he produces well enough but he has to put up for that and we don't know what he's actually capable of and even promising players sometimes take a while to put up big numbers. We'll see.
If he does all that and the cap continues to rise by 4 mil approx. then 15.7 of 96 would be just a little of 16 per.
Yeah, it's just a shade over 15 mil and people may want to start wrapping their brains around that one now considering how people reacted to Karlsson's 11.5 mil contract extension that was pretty well in line with the market due to the consistent cap rises that were happening. 15 mil for Celebrini after his ELC is not out of the question.
JoeThorntonsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
The most reasonable assessment of Celebrini seems to be that he is an Eichel-level prospect and a reasonable forecast could see him doing about as well as Eichel did in his first 2 seasons. Eichel got an 8-year extension at 12.58% of the cap. That should be right around $12M/Y based on reasonable cap growth.
If Celebrini is earning $15M on his second contract, then he’s a borderline generational talent, second only to McDavid and perhaps Bedard.
If Celebrini is earning $15M on his second contract, then he’s a borderline generational talent, second only to McDavid and perhaps Bedard.
It's more or less how I think. I put Celebrini at around 11 million, but I think he's in the 11 to 13 range. More than that, I think he'd be in Bedard territory and I don't think he'll reach it. In Smith's case, I mentioned 10 because he has a very high potential, but depending on the GM's confidence in his potential and how much he can blossom in these 3 years, I can see him around 9 to 12 million, because in my view, Will's potential may take longer to be reached and by the time his second contract comes around, he still hasn't reached where he's expected to be, which could make him sign for 9 and in the long run be a bargain.
Shark Finn
∀dministrator
I regret to inform you that after our first pre-season game, he gone busted. Gone. A damn shame, but we are moving on. You should too.
