Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[CHALUPA]

My whole problem with the idea of trading for a guy like Dobson is that I think we would make far more hay trading less valuable assets to get solid defensive, but offensively unspectacular defensemen and sprinkle them all throughout our three defense pairs than to blow a lot of future assets on an imperfect offensive defenseman. The most important thing the Sharks need to do right now is to deal with the gaping wound in their own zone so that they can start finishing the games where they have leads in the third period better.

I know we use the term “offensive” and “defensive” defensemen, but that feels a bit reductive. Sprinkling decent defensive d-men through our lineup doesn’t actually help much if they can’t move the puck out of our zone.

 

[Grinner]

And so I question why they don't want to meet the contract demands of a 25 year old 6'4" defenseman who scored 70 points last season.

Either he's asking for something insane (>$10M), in which I don't want to trade for him because I don't want to pay him something insane and/or he can elect arbitration and send himself straight to UFA, or he's asking for something reasonable ($8Mish) for a top-pairing RHD his age and they don't think he's a top pairing defenseman. Either way, it's a red flag to me.

Or perhaps he's let them know he intends to test free agency. Or at the least that he doesn't wis to resign with the NYI

 

[Star Platinum]

I know we use the term “offensive” and “defensive” defensemen, but that feels a bit reductive. Sprinkling decent defensive d-men through our lineup doesn’t actually help much if they can’t move the puck out of our zone.

I don't believe there's such a thing as a decent defenseman that can't move the puck out of the defensive zone. Moving the puck out of the defensive zone is one of the basic non-negotiable skills for being called a good defenseman. If you can't do that, it doesn't really matter what else you do well.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Lamiorello isn't gonna meet the demands of a guy who asks for something reasonable given his production if it goes against Lou's antiquated concept of value.

So we're just banking on Lou being a dunce? I do believe that to be true, but not confidently enough to give up premium assets for Dobson.

Or perhaps he's let them know he intends to test free agency. Or at the least that he doesn't wis to resign with the NYI

In which case we also shouldn't be trading for him. See my point?

 

[Lebanezer]

So we're just banking on Lou being a dunce? I do believe that to be true, but not confidently enough to give up premium assets for Dobson.

Personally I don’t think it’s worth it to trade for him. If some similar player to him is available in 2 years then make the deal. Now it seems premature.

 

[Eklund72]

If we land Schaefer, that gives us Schaefer, Dickinson, Mukhamadullin and Cagnoni as LD’s for the future. I’d assume that would make one of Cagnoni and Mukhamadullin expendable.

Who would we keep, Muk or Cagnoni? I’d probably lean Cagnoni at this point in time

 

[Hodge]

If we land Schaefer, that gives us Schaefer, Dickinson, Mukhamadullin and Cagnoni as LD’s for the future. I’d assume that would make one of Cagnoni and Mukhamadullin expendable.

Who would we keep, Muk or Cagnoni? I’d probably lean Cagnoni at this point in time

I don't think this is a decision we will ever need to worry about. Odds of landing Schaefer are 25% even if we finish last and odds of Cagnoni surviving in the NHL are probably even lower than that.

 

[HockeyScout1425]

I had a thought that if we do land Schaefer, all of a sudden I'm a lot more comfortable in moving Dickinson in a package for Nemec in the offseason.

 

[HockeyScout1425]

I don't think this is a decision we will ever need to worry about. Odds of landing Schaefer are 25% even if we finish last and odds of Cagnoni surviving in the NHL are probably even lower than that.

Yeah. The points-obsessed content guys seem convinced Cagnoni is some epic sure-fire prospect, when in reality, you're basically hoping for a Sam Girard outcome. And he's certainly not even as quick as Girard is.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Personally I don’t think it’s worth it to trade for him. If some similar player to him is available in 2 years then make the deal. Now it seems premature.

I can't shake the feeling that the Sharks's best window is going to open up very soon. Think of Jonathan Toews (the Celebrini comparable); his peak was his 20-22 age seasons. While I expect that Celebrini will have a great career and a long prime, he might be playing the best hockey of his career relatively soon.

At that point, Askarov will likely be at his peak, as will complementary players like Eklund, and maybe even physical players like Musty. But Dickinson or even Schaefer are unlikely to be in that same sweet spot. Trading for someone like Byram, Dobson, etc. who could be legitimate top-pairing guys would solidify that team as a SC contender.

A strong counterpoint would be that maybe Dickinson and Schaefer won't be in their prime, but they'd still be great defensemen ala Makar or Hughes...

 

[Pinkfloyd]

If we land Schaefer, that gives us Schaefer, Dickinson, Mukhamadullin and Cagnoni as LD’s for the future. I’d assume that would make one of Cagnoni and Mukhamadullin expendable.

Who would we keep, Muk or Cagnoni? I’d probably lean Cagnoni at this point in time

It's quite possible it makes them expendable but I'd probably move Cagnoni. The odds favor Mukhamadullin to be something at the NHL level. If you have Schaefer and Dickinson in your prospect pools, those are going to be your top two defensemen eventually. Cagnoni's types don't tend to fare very well at the depth level but Mukhamadullin's type does. But I don't see how most teams wouldn't value Mukhamadullin in a trade much more than Cagnoni at this stage. I would prefer not to move anyone with promise on defense. Next year should be a fairly open opportunity for Cagnoni and Mukhamadullin to make the Sharks if they're going to slow play Schaefer and Dickinson which is a reasonable possibility.