Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Yeah, my fear is that the Isles seem to want a ready to go young player and ours are still cooking and I’m not sure I’d be willing to give up Eklund.
I'd probably bite the bullet and trade Eklund if that's what it takes, especially if the trade happens after the lottery and we know we're getting a forward with our 1st instead of Schaefer. Dobson needs to be willing to sign an 8 year extension with us of course.
 
The Sharks pro scouting staff has earned my trust so far. If they nab Dobson, I'll be stoked. If we don't and the price isn't that high, I'll assume they didn't think he's the right piece/timing. Just like Jiricek.
With Jiricek, we also just did not have the right assets to do that deal. With an extra 1st rounder for 2025 and 2nd rounder for 2026, we have a lot more ammunition for whatever sort of deal we want to make on the backend.
 
From the main boards thread, it seems like most folks think a deal has to center around a top 6 forward. In which case, only really Eklund is a piece we can offer. Feels like unless Grier pulls off a miracle (if they even want it) it's not likely the Sharks can get it done.
 
From the main boards thread, it seems like most folks think a deal has to center around a top 6 forward. In which case, only really Eklund is a piece we can offer. Feels like unless Grier pulls off a miracle (if they even want it) it's not likely the Sharks can get it done.
I honestly don't think the sharks can afford to give up a top 6 player.

Does Graf count lol
 
Yep the Isles ask is a “top end scoring forward”. Assuming that roughly means a top 6 forward the ask would definitely start with Eklund+. Any shot the Isles would be interested in Zetterlund? Maybe we could sell them on Zetterlund+Ferraro+Dallas first… could even add on our second round pick

 
From the main boards thread, it seems like most folks think a deal has to center around a top 6 forward. In which case, only really Eklund is a piece we can offer. Feels like unless Grier pulls off a miracle (if they even want it) it's not likely the Sharks can get it done.
I just don't see Grier putting his biggest trade chip(s) into a 25 year old that is going to instantly require a big deal. If Dobson was a legit #1 or brought a physical element to his 6'4 frame, maybe. But the profile just doesn't scream like a guy that I think Grier will screw with the vibes for with the young core.

That's not to say Eklund can't be moved ever, just doesn't seem like the right time to make that move with the development process of Celebrini/Smith.
 
Yep the Isles ask is a “top end scoring forward”. Assuming that roughly means a top 6 forward the ask would definitely start with Eklund+. Any shot the Isles would be interested in Zetterlund? Maybe we could sell them on Zetterlund+Ferraro+Dallas first… could even add on our second round pick


That would be such a massive overpay. If you put Zetterlund's value at around Hagel level when he was dealt (which it should be), that returned 2 1sts, and two prospects.

That means you're giving basically the value of 3 1st rounders, Ferraro, and another 2nd. That is a ton of value to give at this juncture for a merely good, not elite, player that you're about to pay a significant sum on top of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
I just don't see Grier putting his biggest trade chip(s) into a 25 year old that is going to instantly require a big deal. If Dobson was a legit #1 or brought a physical element to his 6'4 frame, maybe. But the profile just doesn't scream like a guy that I think Grier will screw with the vibes for with the young core.

That's not to say Eklund can't be moved ever, just doesn't seem like the right time to make that move with the development process of Celebrini/Smith.
I think in a vacuum Eklund for Dobson is not too big a price to pay for the Sharks but I wouldn’t like it. Eklund is more replaceable and Dobson fills the biggest hole on the roster and would allow Grier to try and build a competitive team next season. Eklund could be replaced in some capacity through FA but Dobson is likely only available at the draft.

I hope Grier could get him without moving Eklund but it that’s the price I would accept it.

I see a Dobson trade more likely after the draft. If the Sharks get Schaefer then they could move Dickinson or would not need Dobson as much. If they get one of the top FWs then losing Eklund would not sting as much.

The other option is Nemec who should cost less and not need a big contract. The only thing is that the ceiling for Nemec is Dobson and not a sure thing.
 
From the main boards thread, it seems like most folks think a deal has to center around a top 6 forward. In which case, only really Eklund is a piece we can offer. Feels like unless Grier pulls off a miracle (if they even want it) it's not likely the Sharks can get it done.
Honestly, I have no idea what the Isles are doing. They should be rebuilding, but they won't. So with that, I kinda feel like putting Dobson on the block is an admission that he isn't that good, because they don't see him as valuable to trying to complete now.

I'd fork over a good package of picks and prospects for him, but if the Isles don't see him as a core piece, then I'm not interested in giving up a core piece (71/2/72/Dick/Asky/2025 1st/2026 1st) for him.

Zetterlund with a smallish plus might. E a decent offer, but frankly I have no interest in trading Zetterlund.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jargon
The DAL 1st is great ammo for packaging with someone to get Nemec. Similar to the Jiricek deal yeah?
Problem is Devils would probably prefer to bring in pieces to help the team now as opposed to a lotto ticket for 4 years down the road. Musty or Halt + Zetts and someone would be the most logical for them.
 
That would be such a massive overpay. If you put Zetterlund's value at around Hagel level when he was dealt (which it should be), that returned 2 1sts, and two prospects.

That means you're giving basically the value of 3 1st rounders, Ferraro, and another 2nd. That is a ton of value to give at this juncture for a merely good, not elite, player that you're about to pay a significant sum on top of it.
I think Zetterlund is great but he is a middle 6 wing who will be making around $5 million per year and should ideally be on the 3rd line. That would definitely not be worth 2 1st round picks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vortexy
Making a play for Dobson only really makes sense if we're legitimately trying to fill all the roster spots with players capable of filling their roles. That means having a 2C if Smith isn't ready or a 2W if he is, an entirely made over bottom six except for Wennberg, practically an entirely new blue line around Dobson except maybe one or two guys, and a backup goalie. It's doable in one offseason but the D makeover can be an issue. Though in Dobson's case with the Islanders, we're probably looking at Dickinson, Musty, and the Dallas 1st and I don't think the Sharks are ready for that sort of trade yet nor that Dobson's the guy we want to make the #1.
Sign me up for everything but your last sentence.

When is the last time a player like Dobson got a return like that? I know it was a while ago, but I would think he is worth closer to what we paid Minnesota for Burns. Something in the Zetterlund + Muk + Dallas 1st range? Or maybe we can swap Ferraro in there, he seems like a Lou kind of player. Something like Ferraro + Musty + Dallas 1st?

Then, you're right, we'd have to really rework out defense around Dobson, but if we land 1OA, that's a great start.
 
That would be such a massive overpay. If you put Zetterlund's value at around Hagel level when he was dealt (which it should be), that returned 2 1sts, and two prospects.

That means you're giving basically the value of 3 1st rounders, Ferraro, and another 2nd. That is a ton of value to give at this juncture for a merely good, not elite, player that you're about to pay a significant sum on top of it.
I mean, you were willing to give up the value of 2 late 1sts, a 2nd and Thompson for the completely unproven Nemec a couple of pages ago. I don't understand how giving up an additional late 1st and the delta in value between Ferraro and Thompson is a massive overpay for an established 25 year old top pair RD.

Also I love Zetterlund and don't want to trade him but he absolutely does not have the value of Brandon Hagel signed for 3x1.5M when the Lightning traded for him. Hagel's value was driven entirely by the insane contract he was on while Zetterlund will need to get paid this summer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vortexy
I think in a vacuum Eklund for Dobson is not too big a price to pay for the Sharks but I wouldn’t like it. Eklund is more replaceable and Dobson fills the biggest hole on the roster and would allow Grier to try and build a competitive team next season. Eklund could be replaced in some capacity through FA but Dobson is likely only available at the draft.

I hope Grier could get him without moving Eklund but it that’s the price I would accept it.

I see a Dobson trade more likely after the draft. If the Sharks get Schaefer then they could move Dickinson or would not need Dobson as much. If they get one of the top FWs then losing Eklund would not sting as much.

The other option is Nemec who should cost less and not need a big contract. The only thing is that the ceiling for Nemec is Dobson and not a sure thing.
I just don't see Dobson as the missing piece. I don't think he's an elite offensive player from the backend and I think he's pretty weak in his own end. He needs a super physical partner to work (i.e. Romanov in NYI) and just doesn't really feel like a match for the way that our D prospects are setup. I don't see him being a guy that fits with Dickinson or Muk.

If you're giving up that price to get him, I just want to see a more cohesive fit as opposed to just "this is a RHD and therefore he fits because we need those". Feels like it just creates other holes and requires moves to even get the best version of him.
 
I mean, you were willing to give up the value of 2 late 1sts, a 2nd and Thompson for the completely unproven Nemec a couple of pages ago. I don't understand how giving up an additional late 1st and the delta in value between Ferraro and Thompson is a massive overpay for an established 25 year old top pair RD.

Also I love Zetterlund and don't want to trade him but he absolutely does not have the value of Brandon Hagel signed for 3x1.5M when the Lightning traded for him. Hagel's value was driven entirely by the insane contract he was on while Zetterlund will need to get paid this summer.
Because Nemec has immense pedigree, much younger, higher ceiling, and you get a hand in developing him with the rest of your core group as opposed to immediately paying him $9M a year and hoping the fit is there (it likely won't be given we don't have a Romanov to do all of the hard work).

To Zetterlund, that's why I'm not including 2 prospects with him like Hagel. Worst case, Zetterlund fetches a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd if he were on the market right now.
 
Because Nemec has immense pedigree, higher ceiling, and you get a hand in developing him with the rest of your core group as opposed to immediately paying him $9M a year and hoping the fit is there (it likely won't be given we don't have a Romanov to do all of the hard work).

To Zetterlund, that's why I'm not including 2 prospects with him like Hagel. Worst case, Zetterlund fetches a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd if he were on the market right now.
NJ foolishly reaching for him at 2nd overall shouldn't impact his trade value 3 years later. Nemec hasn't done anything in the NHL or AHL so far to suggest he has a higher ceiling than a 25 minute per night 70 point defenseman. He's an offenseman being outscored by the younger Luca Cagnoni in the same league.

I highly doubt Zetterlund on an expiring contract has the trade value of a 1st, 2nd and 3rd but let's assume he does and assume Ferraro's trade value is roughly a 2nd and maybe a Thompson-level defense prospect. So the trade @vortexy proposed would come out to two late 1sts and two late 2nds in a bad draft, a 3rd and Thompson for Dobson. It seems like a no-brainer to swap those assets for Dobson no matter where your team is in the competitive cycle as long as he's willing to sign a long term extension.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vortexy
lets think outside the box. If the Isles want a viable youngish top 6er, whos available that we could get and flip? Whatd be the cost?

And then what would be add to that player for Dobson. Could be get a young top6er for Musty and Muk and then flip them?
 
lets think outside the box. If the Isles want a viable youngish top 6er, whos available that we could get and flip? Whatd be the cost?

And then what would be add to that player for Dobson. Could be get a young top6er for Musty and Muk and then flip them?

Not exactly young but Ferraro + to the jets for Ehlers and flip him plus the Dallas 1st for Dobson?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad