In two seasons I could see the Sharks competing for the playoffs with a lineup like this:
For this to happen literally every single one of our high-end prospects have to hit.
I agree with everything you're saying here, but the phrase "and upgrading the blue line" is doing A LOT of heavy lifting here
Outside of the 1st round pick (provided it's in the top-5) we'll be lucky if even 2 of those names have impactful NHL careers, and especially that they would have impact for us, once we secure one more high pick those secondary prospects become much more fungible assets
It's also not like we need to necessarily turnover the reins to Askarov for 60 starts next year either. I'd be holding out for a 2nd or re-signing Blackwood for 2 more years with a pay increase to tandem with Askarov and start 50% of the games.
ive always been high on Dickinson but to say his ceiling is a top pair defenceman is underselling his ceiling, which i think is a top end #1, i think his likely hit is a top pair guy, with his floor being a #4.
Absolutely, we're still really thin on the backend. Pohlkamp and Cagnoni are still total lottery tickets, although both looking great at lower levels, but would be sorta odd ducklings on a second pair imho. We all want Mukh to hit on second pair but... not banking on it until he proves it. Dickinson is all we have. We definitely need 2-3 more guys who have a legit shot at middle pair. Building a contending blue line without 1-2 more hits from the draft is a tricky proposition.
I think our best bet may be to do what we've been doing in trying to find gems that couldn't find a a home. I look at guys like Forsling in Florida and Brannstrom now in Vancouver, and not the Cody Cecis of the world. Liljgren and Walman are great for the team. If two of Dickinson, Cagnoni and Shakir can hit and be legit top 6 guys then we're only one or two guys away. Bring in a Dougie Hamilton from Jersey, who's still only I believe 30 and that leaves one spot. There will be guys like Chychrun (whom I have been clamoring for), Byram, K'andre Miller, Ekblad... hell even Samberg in Winnipeg and Lohrei in Boston.
I'd love to get Lamoreux from Utah. I've watched pretty much all their games and he's been a really nice call up with Durzi and Marino out. He's definitely had some growing pains with penalties and turnovers, but he turns 21 next month and still needs to fill out his frame. Kesselring is another one that is interesting although he can be a bit of an adventure on the ice chasing offense. Not sure what it would cost to acquire because I think Utah sees them both as part of the future.
If they can't get a 2nd for Blackwood then I agree that re-signing him is the way to go but I expect that price to be paid by someone. A playoff team forking over a 2nd to try and address a goalie situation is cheap for them and the market right now for available goalies isn't exactly deep right now. I would, like Granlund, look to sign him in the offseason even if we do rent him off. And I would rather have that extra pick than secure Blackwood for another couple years. That pick can be the difference between landing someone like Dickinson and not getting a player like that in a position of need. We're not sitting on extra picks anymore. We're sitting on a deficit of draft capital currently and we need to address it while we have the opportunities.
I could see it being something like that as well but I think we will bring in at least one forward outside our organization as a part of it. We're basically going to be looking to support our young core with some guys with playoff experience when we're trying to get there too and I don't think Toffoli and Goodrow are enough in that regard especially if they're slotted in the bottom six. That top six is completely inexperienced and it's just a good idea to get someone that is going to play with both Celebrini and Smith that has it until they've gotten a couple kicks at the can. I think the same will apply to the blue line too but at least you've thrown in there the possibility of a UFA that may help cover that. Liljegren is the only one with playoff experience and since it's Toronto, it sure isn't pleasant. lol
You know I've made numerous comments in threads saying that our ability to contend is going to largely depend on how our blue line gets constructed so yeah it's going to do a lot of heavy lifting there because we're still in the very early stages of that. We've swung some deals for guys to be placeholders largely but nobody that is reasonably viewed as a long term fixture at this stage. And given that blue liners tend to take the longest to develop, unless we have some deals down the road to address basically Ceci's spot and Ferraro's spot, we're at their mercy when it comes to competing. Walman and Liljegren seem to be filling their roles adequately but their partners are largely unable to contribute at a similar level. I absolutely agree with you as it relates to the top pairing d-man, its scarcity, and throwing some assets around to acquire it. I just don't see that actually happening anytime soon so I'm really hoping Pohlkamp pulls off a miracle or Liljegren finds another level or we draft someone in this draft that has that ceiling when it isn't going to be expected since none of the RHD's in this draft seem like elite prospects at this stage.
At no point did I advocate bringing in big money vets, I never once suggested that. I was suggesting bringing in established early to mid 20 year olds trending upwards. Almost like an Ozolinsh for Nolan situation or even a Seto for Burns
Blackwood kind of seems to be the new version of Devyn Dubnyk when he went to Arizona and revived his career, I’d like to see him resigned too but sharks still need prospects/draft capital
I’d slot Dickinson with the Barracuda and with Muk unless he shows massive improvements on his decision making
Dickinson can’t play in the AHL next season.
True, but it’s part of what I said in the previous post. When you’re in a position to make the choice to trade a stagnating prospect or picks for a known quantity you do it. No need to rush into it now.
Understood, however a stagnating prospect doesn't have nearly the same value. It's really like stocks or crypto - knowing when to sell high or when to hold.
I’m pretty sure the AHL disagrees with your assessment
Or sell high before the prospect loses value
The NHL-CHL agreement overrides the AHL's age limit. It's the same reason why Musty can't play in the AHL this year.
That may happen, but it won't affect Dickinson - as a pro with a signed contract, he can never play NCAA sports. It's NHL or OHL for him next year, no other choices.
At least with Dickinson, staying with London is not the worst option in the world because there's talent there to play with and stay in the groove. Musty is an unfortunate casualty of being at the wrong place at the wrong time. I would've almost preferred sending Musty to Europe if it's an actual option at this stage with all the agreements in place. If Dickinson can't make the NHL, I'd maybe consider that for him too if it's an option even if it's just for a year. A men's league for some kids is better than juniors but there's typically an adjustment to that sort of assignment that has the potential to make it not worthwhile.
Also true, but that goes both ways. Trading for a known quantity can backfire as well. Even if a prospect stagnates, they will still hold some value based on performance and draft pedigree. And we can package them with picks we expect to be in the middle or back end of each round.
