Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[TheBeard]

A team will not risk the week where their money is tied up when the Sharks have all the cap space in the world to match. Also not many teams actually have their unprotected 1st, 2nd, 3rd picks and would be willing to risk them. Besides the offer sheet wouldn’t be till the 2026 off season.

Teams treat unprotected 1st like gold (see Askarov) and only teams that have already traded picks for rentals would feel comfortable trading away an unprotected 1st.

The offer sheet leverage is in the 2nd round pick compensation. Very few teams will offer sheet players for 1st round pick compensation.

The only reason the St Louis offer sheets worked is because Edmonton was incompetent and had zero cap space.

With the cap going up to 95 next year there's quite a few teams that could offer sheet him hypothetically. Not that I think it'll happen, but if you're trending upwards it's possible.

The offer sheet range for a 2nd is between 2.3 and 4.5 million so there is less than a zero chance Eklund would ever sign that, and if he does it would be a gift for us to match.

Also, it's not a question of how much cap space the team has. It's a question of how ready Grier is to make a financial commitment to a player. Right now it doesn't seem like he is. In fact, has Grier ever re-signed any of his own players for longer than a year?

 

[Emperor Joe Thornton]

With the cap going up to 95 next year there's quite a few teams that could offer sheet him hypothetically. Not that I think it'll happen, but if you're trending upwards it's possible.

The offer sheet range for a 2nd is between 2.3 and 4.5 million so there is less than a zero chance Eklund would ever sign that, and if he does it would be a gift for us to match.

Also, it's not a question of how much cap space the team has. It's a question of how ready Grier is to make a financial commitment to a player. Right now it doesn't seem like he is. In fact, has Grier ever re-signed any of his own players for longer than a year?

Thrun and Askarov both got 2 year deals, but nothing longer than that.

(Toffoli and Benning both got 4 deals in UFA)

 

[Barrie22]

With the cap going up to 95 next year there's quite a few teams that could offer sheet him hypothetically. Not that I think it'll happen, but if you're trending upwards it's possible.

The offer sheet range for a 2nd is between 2.3 and 4.5 million so there is less than a zero chance Eklund would ever sign that, and if he does it would be a gift for us to match.

Also, it's not a question of how much cap space the team has. It's a question of how ready Grier is to make a financial commitment to a player. Right now it doesn't seem like he is. In fact, has Grier ever re-signed any of his own players for longer than a year?

Eklund will be the 1st actual worthy piece to give a longer term contracts to. He will be griers first real rebuild deal.

 

[gaucholoco3]

With the cap going up to 95 next year there's quite a few teams that could offer sheet him hypothetically. Not that I think it'll happen, but if you're trending upwards it's possible.

The offer sheet range for a 2nd is between 2.3 and 4.5 million so there is less than a zero chance Eklund would ever sign that, and if he does it would be a gift for us to match.

Also, it's not a question of how much cap space the team has. It's a question of how ready Grier is to make a financial commitment to a player. Right now it doesn't seem like he is. In fact, has Grier ever re-signed any of his own players for longer than a year?

Cap space does matter because Grier is likely to match any offer sheet that is made and I doubt Eklund even entertains offer sheets at risk of the agent upsetting Grier. Granted I don’t know who else the agent represents.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

A team will not risk the week where their money is tied up when the Sharks have all the cap space in the world to match. Also not many teams actually have their unprotected 1st, 2nd, 3rd picks and would be willing to risk them. Besides the offer sheet wouldn’t be till the 2026 off season.

Teams treat unprotected 1st like gold (see Askarov) and only teams that have already traded picks for rentals would feel comfortable trading away an unprotected 1st.

The offer sheet leverage is in the 2nd round pick compensation. Very few teams will offer sheet players for 1st round pick compensation.

The only reason the St Louis offer sheets worked is because Edmonton was incompetent and had zero cap space.

They will for the right player at the right time. At this point, half the teams in the league are capable of offer sheeting Eklund. Of those that aren't capable, six are because of their 1st round picks being dealt. The other 9 can pretty easily reacquire their 2nd or 3rd round picks to position themselves for it if they so choose. Offer sheets are rare because of the inevitable retribution but they are out there and teams are capable. If a team thinks they're a playoff capable team without Eklund, they will toss out 1st round picks as this upcoming draft shows. Over half of the playoff teams moved their 1st rounders.

For the Sharks though, this shouldn't be even remotely a concern because Eklund's status shouldn't be left hanging to even come close to finding out. If he doesn't want to sign long term or the team doesn't want to sign him long term, they should trade him this offseason. Waiting around is pointless. Trying to bridge him is pointless. Either he's one of the core guys or we should move him for the sort of help that makes them a better team.

 

[pappaf2]

Eklund will be the 1st actual worthy piece to give a longer term contracts to. He will be griers first real rebuild deal.

Here is why GMMG really traded Zetts. It shows Eky that MG won’t hesitate to trade him to Hoth “Winnipeg” if he doesn’t play nice in negotiations

 

[TheBeard]

Cap space does matter because Grier is likely to match any offer sheet that is made and I doubt Eklund even entertains offer sheets at risk of the agent upsetting Grier. Granted I don’t know who else the agent represents.

Well, Grier seems like someone with a price in mind and either he'll match or he won't.
Eklund's agents have some pretty prominent names including Barkov and Michael Granlund.

 

[PattyLafontaine]

Eklund deal would seem to be 8yr x 9 mil per = 72 million

 

[Skeksis25]

If things work out ideally with development, Mack, Smith, Dickinson, Askarov and this year's pick will all be 9-10+ percent of the cap type players. If that happens, I wonder if its prudent to devote another similar chunk of the cap to Eklund. I just hope GMMG doesn't do the patented DW move of giving everyone no trade clauses. If things work out well with these guys, Eklund and probably Smith would be the top candidates to use for trade ammo.

I would love to sign him to 8x8 with no NTC, but Eklund might expect more. Who knows. Might be worth exploring trade options if he does. Specially if we can return a decent 25 or younger Defenceman.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

If things work out ideally with development, Mack, Smith, Dickinson, Askarov and this year's pick will all be 9-10+ percent of the cap type players. If that happens, I wonder if its prudent to devote another similar chunk of the cap to Eklund. I just hope GMMG doesn't do the patented DW move of giving everyone no trade clauses. If things work out well with these guys, Eklund and probably Smith would be the top candidates to use for trade ammo.

I would love to sign him to 8x8 with no NTC, but Eklund might expect more. Who knows. Might be worth exploring trade options if he does. Specially if we can return a decent 25 or younger Defenceman.

There shouldn’t be much of a problem giving him trade protection where applicable. Only the latter half of an eight year contract is he eligible for trade protection.

 

[tiburon12]

If things work out ideally with development, Mack, Smith, Dickinson, Askarov and this year's pick will all be 9-10+ percent of the cap type players. If that happens, I wonder if its prudent to devote another similar chunk of the cap to Eklund. I just hope GMMG doesn't do the patented DW move of giving everyone no trade clauses. If things work out well with these guys, Eklund and probably Smith would be the top candidates to use for trade ammo.

I would love to sign him to 8x8 with no NTC, but Eklund might expect more. Who knows. Might be worth exploring trade options if he does. Specially if we can return a decent 25 or younger Defenceman.

w/r/t Askarov, i think those days are far down the line. I bet his next contract is a bridge-y type deal before a whopper contract (provided he earns it with play).

 

[mogambomoroo]

One scenario I'm thinking about is that maybe Grier could entertain to trade for someone that has potential and is signed long term that could be a bargain in the long run. I'm think someone out of Buffalo... Thompson, Power and Samuelsson are signed long term, also Dahlin (but that would take a farm to acquire)

I'm thinking Thompson 7.14 mil or Power 8,3 mil are all in that possibility area, I like the idea of at least one of them in theory. Both contracts end while they are in a good hockey age.

 

[TheBeard]

If things work out ideally with development, Mack, Smith, Dickinson, Askarov and this year's pick will all be 9-10+ percent of the cap type players. If that happens, I wonder if its prudent to devote another similar chunk of the cap to Eklund. I just hope GMMG doesn't do the patented DW move of giving everyone no trade clauses. If things work out well with these guys, Eklund and probably Smith would be the top candidates to use for trade ammo.

I would love to sign him to 8x8 with no NTC, but Eklund might expect more. Who knows. Might be worth exploring trade options if he does. Specially if we can return a decent 25 or younger Defenceman.

Oooooor as I’ve said 100 times, sign Eklund as soon as you can so in three-four years down the road his 9% if the cap is only, like 7.

 

[Barrie22]

There shouldn’t be much of a problem giving him trade protection where applicable. Only the latter half of an eight year contract is he eligible for trade protection.

Of the 8 year contract he would be eligible for 5 years of protection, he will be 24 (basically by the time his new contract kicks in, so 3 years left of rfa).

 

[weastern bias]

I continue to repeat that bridge contracts are bad for rebuilding teams, they only make sense to issue if you are a team in an immediate cup window who needs to suppress costs to keep their already competitive roster intact

For a team at the bottom like the Sharks you need to either commit long term to a young player because you believe they are a legitimate difference maker or you need to move on, you want to sign Makar contacts, not Subban contracts, those screw you over in the end

 

[STL Shark]

Chances are that if he's demanding 9% now to sign his extension, he's going to get traded before we see any results. There's no good reason to not resolve Eklund's status this offseason even with his final ELC year to come. If the team is not willing to sign him long term or his camp is not willing to sign long term, then he should be put on the trading block. You could wait him out until the trade deadline and rent him out at that point but the value shouldn't change all that much from June/July to next March since he's still on the ELC and probably getting a huge deal to follow.

I don't think Eklund's status will at all influence Celebrini's. We have next to nothing committed for when Celebrini's new contract would be needed and he's not getting anything more than 18 mil. We are plenty prepared for that with nobody other than Askarov, Eklund, and Smith needing significant money. We can afford to risk an Eklund contract at this time.

There is good reason from Eklund's camp, which is important to remember in this situation. It's not a one way street where Grier can just wave his GM wand and get the deal done. If Eklund's camp wants to wait until there is more positive data in their favor (which a smart agent should do), then there will not be an extension in place until next offseason.

Given the way that the Sharks toyed with his ELC slide, I can see Eklund's camp playing some hard ball out of principle to claw some of that elongated ELC money back.

 

[matt trick]

Eklund likely has $1-2m in the bank right now, and he”ll 3-400k in each of the next two seasons. The priority for him is securing the biggest bag possible as soon as possible (July 1). Given our cap situation, signing him to eight million for a Guenther-esque contract next year makes a ton of sense.

Why risk two seasons of potential injury when you can take your post tax, post agent earnings from $2M to $40M guaranteed (save buyout) on July 1.

 

[Hodge]

How much better is Eklund than someone like Teravainen (signed 3x5.4M as a UFA last summer) really? I know we're all attached to him because he was the first piece of the rebuild but you can't be paying a guy like that anything close to 9M on a long term deal when he's replaceable for almost half the cost in free agency.

 

[Barrie22]

How much better is Eklund than someone like Teravainen (signed 3x5.4M as a UFA last summer) really? I know we're all attached to him because he was the first piece of the rebuild but you can't be paying a guy like that anything close to 9M on a long term deal when he's replaceable for almost half the cost in free agency.

But what eklund is now is basically as good if not better then teravainen, 9 years earlier. Can't compare a 30 year old 11 year veteran to a 22 year old 2 year player.

Eklund is paying for potential, teravainen was paid for past work.

 

[Hodge]

But what eklund is now is basically as good if not better then teravainen, 9 years earlier. Can't compare a 30 year old 11 year veteran to a 22 year old 2 year player.

Eklund is paying for potential, teravainen was paid for past work.

Do we expect Eklund to get significantly better than he is now? He's been playing at the highest levels of pro hockey for half a decade and is currently getting opportunities with the Sharks that may not last when we acquire or develop other good forwards.

 

[Skeksis25]

Yeah, with Eklund for me, there definitely is some sentimentality involved. IDK, I would be quite happy if we sign him to an 8 year deal at 8 or less this offseason, but I'm also open to the possibility he might be moved for something we need more. I can definitely understand thinking that 8 a year is a bit much for him, but I also don't know if we can easily find replacements in free agency with our noted history of having trouble attracting free agents. Maybe the presence of Mack starts to change that.

Again, maybe I'm letting sentimentality affect it, but I think he is already as good as Teravainen and could be a Jesper Bratt type guy when we are a better team.

 

[one2gamble]

Do we expect Eklund to get significantly better than he is now? He's been playing at the highest levels of pro hockey for half a decade and is currently getting opportunities with the Sharks that may not last when we acquire or develop other good forwards.

I think there is a middle ground here somewhere. I dont think hes going to take another huge offensive step forward. I do think he will round out other parts of his game more.

Age, current scoring rates + cap increases mean you arent signing him for 6m. Is he a 10m dollar winger, no. Id expect somewhere between 8.5 and 9.5.

 

[Barrie22]

Do we expect Eklund to get significantly better than he is now? He's been playing at the highest levels of pro hockey for half a decade and is currently getting opportunities with the Sharks that may not last when we acquire or develop other good forwards.

I do expect him to be closer to a 70 point winger once he gets regular linemates and a little more talented players. Which he should be getting these next 2 years.

 

[jarr92]

I’d used Dylan Guenther as a comp around the same age, same draft. He got 8y at $7.1m for similar effectiveness.

 

[Stewie Griffin]

I’d used Dylan Guenther as a comp around the same age, same draft. He got 8y at $7.1m for similar effectiveness.

Before the increasing cap announcement though. I would argue Guenther is seen as more valuable.

Maybe a 8x7.5-8 could make sense.