Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[STL Shark]

Georgie was a win win for Grier. Either he sucks and it maximizes our chances of finishing last, or he excels, the team has a goalie for next year and then more trade bait.

I 100% think Grier asked for him more than his inclusion was contingent on the deal happening for Colorado.

There is just no basis/logic for that.

Colorado wanted him out and wanted an entirely new goalie tandem (which is why they dealt for Wedgewood prior to the Blackwood deal so they could have a fresh start in net). We only took him because Colorado wasn't carrying 3 goalies, we needed a body, and Colorado couldn't balance the cap of the deal without moving him.

 

[TheBeard]

Or course there are reasons. My point was that there are things that are out of one's control... such as injuries, sophmore slumps.

Hence the reason one needs to observe and assess why things happened and determine if things were handled properly by the management team.

Ok fair. If everything goes wrong, no one develops from the system, our core pieces regress, Celebrini has some injury that keeps him out half the year, Askarov can't handle the workload and we get a Georgie-like performance... sure I suppose it could happen.

 

[TheBeard]

There is just no basis/logic for that.

Colorado wanted him out and wanted an entirely new goalie tandem (which is why they dealt for Wedgewood prior to the Blackwood deal so they could have a fresh start in net). We only took him because Colorado wasn't carrying 3 goalies, we needed a body, and Colorado couldn't balance the cap of the deal without moving him.

Sure all of that is true. The point is Grier wanted Georgiev as part of the package for a plethora of reasons: It maximized the return for Blackwood, it allowed Askarov to continue to simmer in the A, he was a goalie on an expiring contract and someone who, in Grier's words, "is a playoff tested guy who's won a lot of games in this league." I'm sure Grier knew going in to trade talks that Georgiev was going to have to be included since we didn't have a spare retention spot, but I don't think there was ever a question Grier would have taken him as part of the return regardless.

 

[STL Shark]

The problem is that teams like NJ, Ottawa, Utah, Dallas, Detroit, Montreal , etc. already have their young players locked up to long-term deals that will now be bargains under the new cap, allowing them more room to spend on support players. Meanwhile we’ll be paying Celebrini $12M right off his ELC.

That all evens out though. Like NJD has Jack Hughes locked through 2030, but after that he's going to cost a ton. We're unlikely to be fishing in the same pond as them for players until 2028ish, at which point the looming Hughes extension will be part of their calculations. They also have Hischier up for contract in 2 years, Luke Hughes this year, etc. So by the time we're fighting it out for players with those teams, we will be neutral at worst.

Teams on the playoff cusp/in it right now are unlikely to be the ones that we're truly competing with in 4-5 years when it's our time. Out of all of those teams, I can name Sanderson, Johnston, and Seider as deals that are going to turn into massive bargains (and that's mostly due to their age and being elite players locked up for 7-8 years from now - the rest will either be expiring too soon to matter for SJ or the players will be too old by the time we're competing and their contracts end to the point they'll be on the backend of the value curve).

 

[Shark in Hockeytown]

Some comments on this long discussion:

First, there was substantial improvement last season. The Sharks goal differential in 23-24 was -150; it was -105 in 24-25. That's a 45 goal improvement which is big but not massive. Make the same level of improvement in 25-26, and you will see a better W/L record, but still be one of the worst teams in the league.

Second, UFA signings and trades are best to fill specific holes in the team. The issue with any long-term UFA signing is that we do not know where the long-term holes in the team will be. The Sharks have a lot of prospects; some will make it, some won't. Imagine they get Marner by grossly overpaying, but then all the winger prospects pan out: Chernyshov, Musty, Haltunnen, even Lund (not likely but not impossible). Then you would like to have spent Marner's money filling other long-term holes in the team. Until we have a better idea of what we have in our prospects, we don't know what our long-term needs are.

Third, I would make an exception for RD because our system is so bereft at that position. A second-pairing RD acquired with a long-term UFA deal would be fine with me.

Fourth, I suspect Grier will sign UFAs similar in age profile and quality as Toffoli and Wennberg if only to make the prospects earn their playing time with the big team. Grier, unlike Wilson, wants the prospects to learn in the AHL before promoting them.

 

[Star Platinum]

As much as I’d love Granny back, if Dallas doesn’t sign him I’m guessing with his play these playoffs, he’s going to have a lot of teams lining up as a piece for their run. I think he may have played himself off the Sharks.

 

[Skeksis25]

I REALLY don't buy the idea that even if the team is only a 20 win team next year, its still progress because we are supposed to look at how the young guys played. If the young guys played at a level where the team regresses or even stagnates to a 20 win season, then that is a major concern. Smith, Celebrini, Mukh, Askarov and Eklund aren't some complementary pieces playing down the lineup while the team is being carried by vets. Its not just 1 or 2 guys either. They are the team, they are the primary contributors of this team now. Everyone else is spare parts just complimenting them. If they all stagnate or regress, the team stagnates or regresses. If they take another step forward, the team does too. I don't see how the young guys can continue to show promise and bloom, but the team doesn't progress at all.

I just don't get why looking to be just slightly better than a historically godawful team that we have been for 2 years is an unrealistic unfathomable expectation. Its not like I'm asking us to even sniff the playoffs or anything. I'm just looking for us to be last place team, but with 60-65 points instead of 45-50 points. I get that injuries can derail things, but if the literal core of our team plays the majority of the games and don't manage to win just 25 games, then I am going to question the value of the core.

 

[Star Platinum]

I know in your case you just want to see progress, but what does "progress" mean and what does it look like in a functional way?

It's basically impossible to put a realistic projection on next year's results without knowing what we do this offseason, but if we play another year with Mario Ferraro as our #1D we're probably hovering around the 20 win mark again, the D core just lacks fundamental pieces necessary to support any kind of winning at any high level

But even without real improvement we may have a better W/L column next year just by blind luck because we lost 23 games by one goal in 2025, is it really a mark of improvement if the coin flips fall in our favor more often next season?

On top of it all, is anybody really gonna feel better about the team next year if they win 30 games? Going from losing 62 games to losing 52 games still means you're losing almost all the time, it's not going to feel like we moved forward, it's just going to boil down to a lesser draft pick at the end of another crappy year

Measure our progress by the play of our important young players, not by team results, the 2026 Sharks are not built to win so it really shouldn't matter where they finish in the standings, we're just here to watch the tentpoles blossom in the hope they can contribute to an actual winning team in the not too distant future

You pretty much said everything I would have said.

I'd rather win 20 games with Celebrini and Smith taking big steps forward and Askarov establishing himself as an NHL goalie than winning 30 or more games with a bunch of veteran players coming in and making the team better in the short term, but our young guys either stagnate or, worse, bomb. Unless you're Vegas and gifted a ridiculously favorable situation for a brand new team, bad teams turn into good teams on the backs of their young guys becoming stars. If that happens for us, filling in the gaps around those guys won't be hard so long as we don't waste our cap space right now on guys that become cap albatrosses later. If the guys we sign are tradable later, we'll be fine.

I want to win more games next year for sure, but I want them in a way that leads to sustained success for the next 10 years.

 

[Star Platinum]

Goodrow is the worst player in the NHL. However, we cannot measure his intangible impact.

I can.

 

[Star Platinum]

I REALLY don't buy the idea that even if the team is only a 20 win team next year, its still progress because we are supposed to look at how the young guys played. If the young guys played at a level where the team regresses or even stagnates to a 20 win season, then that is a major concern. Smith, Celebrini, Mukh, Askarov and Eklund aren't some complementary pieces playing down the lineup while the team is being carried by vets. Its not just 1 or 2 guys either. They are the team, they are the primary contributors of this team now. Everyone else is spare parts just complimenting them. If they all stagnate or regress, the team stagnates or regresses. If they take another step forward, the team does too. I don't see how the young guys can continue to show promise and bloom, but the team doesn't progress at all.

I just don't get why looking to be just slightly better than a historically godawful team that we have been for 2 years is an unrealistic unfathomable expectation. Its not like I'm asking us to even sniff the playoffs or anything. I'm just looking for us to be last place team, but with 60-65 points instead of 45-50 points. I get that injuries can derail things, but if the literal core of our team plays the majority of the games and don't manage to win just 25 games, then I am going to question the value of the core.

That would be dumb because the "core" of our team right now is only three guys and only Celebrini among them looks like a sure bet to be a dominant player. Mukhamadullin and Eklund really don't even figure in to this equation - if they develop well they are tracking to be complementary players, not stars. For all I know, Askarov may really struggle next year and then be a lot better the year after. We simply don't have enough enough NHL ready young talent on this team yet to say "Well, if the young guys are all looking good, the team will just naturally win more games."

This conversation would be a lot more fruitful if we were having it in September when we have a better idea of what the team around our guys is going to look like. If we end up with more Georgievs and Goodrows filling out the roster, I'm not gonna be very optimistic.

 

[Star Platinum]

Thing is, he hasn't played great if you're actually following it.

He's been the beneficiary of a great Dallas PP, but has 4 ES points in 14 games. His size concerns as a playoff piece are still there given the lack of ES production where the time and space are much less than the PP.

I don't think there are going to be teams running out on 7/1 to give him a 3 year deal at $7M AAV like the Sharks could/likely would.

Man, I just hate scoring power play goals. Every time we score one, I'm always bitter that they didn't wait a little longer for the opposing team's player to come out of the box so it could be an even strength goal.

 

[Skeksis25]

That would be dumb because the "core" of our team right now is only three guys and only Celebrini among them looks like a sure bet to be a dominant player. Mukhamadullin and Eklund really don't even figure in to this equation - if they develop well they are tracking to be complementary players, not stars. For all I know, Askarov may really struggle next year and then be a lot better the year after. We simply don't have enough enough NHL ready young talent on this team yet to say "Well, if the young guys are all looking good, the team will just naturally win more games."

This conversation would be a lot more fruitful if we were having it in September when we have a better idea of what the team around our guys is going to look like. If we end up with more Georgievs and Goodrows filling out the roster, I'm not gonna be very optimistic.

Celebrini is the only one who has shown that he is likely to become a dominant player, yes. But the rest of the guys are the top prospects of the team other than Celebrini. If they all look bad, what do we have left? If after 3 years of rebuilding, all we have is 1 guy who is a solid part of the future and a bunch of question marks, then that is an organizational failure.

And the thing is, more wins is very clearly an organizational objective for next season. Its just here where people are trying to convince themselves that another 20 wins is just fine and everything is on track. The GM himself said that it is time to stop selling and rebuilding, its time to start the turnaround. Eklund, Smith, Celebrini have all said that they are tired of losing and want to win more. Celebrini and Smith at the world championships have said that they want to start playing meaningful games for the Sharks soon. They all looked supremely depressed many times last year with all the losing. Hasso, I'm sure is tired of seeing attendance figures in the 10,000 range.

Are you really telling me that after all that, those guys are going to say that everything is fine, this is expected if we end with another 45-50 point season? Again, no one here is asking the team to suddenly become a playoff contender. But why are we so deathly afraid to even expect a 25 win 60 point season? That is surely not some monumental objective?

 

[Star Platinum]

Celebrini is the only one who has shown that he is likely to become a dominant player, yes. But the rest of the guys are the top prospects of the team other than Celebrini. If they all look bad, what do we have left? If after 3 years of rebuilding, all we have is 1 guy who is a solid part of the future and a bunch of question marks, then that is an organizational failure.

And the thing is, more wins is very clearly an organizational objective for next season. Its just here where people are trying to convince themselves that another 20 wins is just fine and everything is on track. The GM himself said that it is time to stop selling and rebuilding, its time to start the turnaround. Eklund, Smith, Celebrini have all said that they are tired of losing and want to win more. Celebrini and Smith at the world championships have said that they want to start playing meaningful games for the Sharks soon. They all looked supremely depressed many times last year with all the losing. Hasso, I'm sure is tired of seeing attendance figures in the 10,000 range.

Are you really telling me that after all that, those guys are going to say that everything is fine, this is expected if we end with another 45-50 point season? Again, no one here is asking the team to suddenly become a playoff contender. But why are we so deathly afraid to even expect a 25 win 60 point season? That is surely not some monumental objective?

It is time to start the turnaround. But I also didn't stutter.

I'd rather win 20 games with Celebrini and Smith taking big steps forward and Askarov establishing himself as an NHL goalie than winning 30 or more games with a bunch of veteran players coming in and making the team better in the short term, but our young guys either stagnate or, worse, bomb. Unless you're Vegas and gifted a ridiculously favorable situation for a brand new team, bad teams turn into good teams on the backs of their young guys becoming stars. If that happens for us, filling in the gaps around those guys won't be hard so long as we don't waste our cap space right now on guys that become cap albatrosses later. If the guys we sign are tradable later, we'll be fine.

I want to win more games next year for sure, but I want them in a way that leads to sustained success for the next 10 years.

 

[Skeksis25]

And I'm saying that if Celebrini and Smith take big steps forward and Askarov looks like a legit NHL goalie, there is no way we are winning 20 games. If we do, then there are serious issues elsewhere. Players, GM, organization development etc. That would also be a concern. 20 wins is such a historically low number. How often do teams win only 20 or less? And how often do teams come off a 20 win season feeling good about themselves?

 

[Pinkfloyd]

And I'm saying that if Celebrini and Smith take big steps forward and Askarov looks like a legit NHL goalie, there is no way we are winning 20 games. If we do, then there are serious issues elsewhere. Players, GM, organization development etc. That would also be a concern. 20 wins is such a historically low number. How often do teams win only 20 or less? And how often do teams come off a 20 win season feeling good about themselves?

Big steps forward and progress aren't the same thing either. It's absolutely possible for those three to have progressions that aren't major in production while the team around them doesn't do well enough to win at any particular clip. Askarov can look like a legit NHL goalie and still only put in 30-35 games into the season next year. The team still has serious issues elsewhere. We don't have a reliable starting goalie. We have one of the worst blue lines in the league with many of them still under contract like Ferraro, Vlasic, Thrun, Liljegren, and Desharnais. Our bottom six is complete trash as it stands because right now the best six forwards going into next season are Celebrini, Eklund, Toffoli, Smith, Wennberg, and Graf. We can absolutely see improvements from Celebrini, Smith, and Askarov and still end up in a similar position as this past season while it being a positive because of those young progressing players. They will not be able to win games without a substantial amount of help.

 

[TheBeard]

Celebrini is the only one who has shown that he is likely to become a dominant player, yes. But the rest of the guys are the top prospects of the team other than Celebrini. If they all look bad, what do we have left? If after 3 years of rebuilding, all we have is 1 guy who is a solid part of the future and a bunch of question marks, then that is an organizational failure.

And the thing is, more wins is very clearly an organizational objective for next season. Its just here where people are trying to convince themselves that another 20 wins is just fine and everything is on track. The GM himself said that it is time to stop selling and rebuilding, its time to start the turnaround. Eklund, Smith, Celebrini have all said that they are tired of losing and want to win more. Celebrini and Smith at the world championships have said that they want to start playing meaningful games for the Sharks soon. They all looked supremely depressed many times last year with all the losing. Hasso, I'm sure is tired of seeing attendance figures in the 10,000 range.

Are you really telling me that after all that, those guys are going to say that everything is fine, this is expected if we end with another 45-50 point season? Again, no one here is asking the team to suddenly become a playoff contender. But why are we so deathly afraid to even expect a 25 win 60 point season? That is surely not some monumental objective?

Grier did everything in his power last year to minimize our chances of winning. I get why he did what he did, but we didn't win 20 games because of the team we started the season with. If Grier wants a repeat, something he said he doesn't plan on doing, then we'll win 20 again. Otherwise, I'd assume the pick-ups he makes this offseason will be to actually improve the team and not just grabbing guys that have trade value when their contracts are up or low-risk lotto tickets that rarely pan out.

I do think some people have a comfort zone of being in the basement at this point. It's where we've been for a while now. I guess for some it's easier to just shrug off losing because it's the plan than be disappointed in losing.

 

[TheBeard]

This conversation would be a lot more fruitful if we were having it in September when we have a better idea of what the team around our guys is going to look like. If we end up with more Georgievs and Goodrows filling out the roster, I'm not gonna be very optimistic.

This was also my point. The season only goes the way Grier wants it to go.

 

[Skeksis25]

Big steps forward and progress aren't the same thing either. It's absolutely possible for those three to have progressions that aren't major in production while the team around them doesn't do well enough to win at any particular clip. Askarov can look like a legit NHL goalie and still only put in 30-35 games into the season next year. The team still has serious issues elsewhere. We don't have a reliable starting goalie. We have one of the worst blue lines in the league with many of them still under contract like Ferraro, Vlasic, Thrun, Liljegren, and Desharnais. Our bottom six is complete trash as it stands because right now the best six forwards going into next season are Celebrini, Eklund, Toffoli, Smith, Wennberg, and Graf. We can absolutely see improvements from Celebrini, Smith, and Askarov and still end up in a similar position as this past season while it being a positive because of those young progressing players. They will not be able to win games without a substantial amount of help.

Even if its the same team as last year, shouldn't that alone result in a few more wins? Top 2 forwards being even better and even mediocre goaltending for 35 games would be better than the shitshow we got for 65 games last year. Are we expecting the rest of the roster to get even worse to negate the benefits we get from those 3? And if we do, isn't that on Grier and Warso? People who have said its time to start winning more? Wouldn't that be a major concern too?

I saw how depressed Bedard looked this year cause it seems like Chicago stagnated. I've seen how his rep has taken a hit around the league. We are ok with Celebrini going through that? That's still the plan all along?

 

[weastern bias]

And I'm saying that if Celebrini and Smith take big steps forward and Askarov looks like a legit NHL goalie, there is no way we are winning 20 games. If we do, then there are serious issues elsewhere. Players, GM, organization development etc. That would also be a concern. 20 wins is such a historically low number. How often do teams win only 20 or less? And how often do teams come off a 20 win season feeling good about themselves?

We don't have an NHL caliber defense, two forwards taking steps forward and a goalie performing well can't paper over a a D core built around Mario Ferraro leading the team in ice time

I'll repeat that there is no way to forecast team results without seeing who we add this summer (we are $20M beneath the salary floor) but if we can't add a top pair D man then 20 wins is completely realistic, the defense is so bad at both ends of the ice it sewers the rest of the team

 

[CHALUPA]

I don’t really want to improve the roster so that we finish higher in the standings, I want to make sure the environment is is optimal for our young players to develop. I think it’s worth evaluating the tradeoff of a “bad contract.”

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Grier did everything in his power last year to minimize our chances of winning. I get why he did what he did, but we didn't win 20 games because of the team we started the season with. If Grier wants a repeat, something he said he doesn't plan on doing, then we'll win 20 again. Otherwise, I'd assume the pick-ups he makes this offseason will be to actually improve the team and not just grabbing guys that have trade value when their contracts are up or low-risk lotto tickets that rarely pan out.

I do think some people have a comfort zone of being in the basement at this point. It's where we've been for a while now. I guess for some it's easier to just shrug off losing because it's the plan than be disappointed in losing.

Yeah, we kind of did. The team that started the season was every bit as capable of going on extended losing streaks as they were going on what looks like a heater to them pacing out for 26-27 wins. You're putting blinders on because of your disappointment in acquiring Georgiev and how that played out. I agree though that Grier is likely to pick up players to improve the roster. I just don't think it's all that realistic to fill all the gaps we're looking at with solid acquisitions and that things can't happen to where the season bottoms out for the team.

I don't know why you believe it's some comfort zone for losing thing. It's an understanding that it's what is best for the team in their eyes. If you're not a playoff team, getting better odds at a better draft pick gets you the best talent available in the draft and that's the most reliable way for a team like ours with limitations on the open markets to get better down the road. You don't have to like that but it's true even if there are going to be bumps in the road down that way. It should be easy for fans without any actual control in the situation to shrug off losing because it's unproductive to hold on to it. Getting marginally better in the points department is not going to make you feel that much better with the losing either. Losing still sucks but the most productive use out of the losing is the experience and the draft positioning. Everything else is just noise.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Even if its the same team as last year, shouldn't that alone result in a few more wins? Top 2 forwards being even better and even mediocre goaltending for 35 games would be better than the shitshow we got for 65 games last year. Are we expecting the rest of the roster to get even worse to negate the benefits we get from those 3? And if we do, isn't that on Grier and Warso? People who have said its time to start winning more? Wouldn't that be a major concern too?

I saw how depressed Bedard looked this year cause it seems like Chicago stagnated. I've seen how his rep has taken a hit around the league. We are ok with Celebrini going through that? That's still the plan all along?

God no. Have you seen our blue line? That blue line same as last year is enough to sink a team regardless of who is up front and who is in net. Mediocre goaltending behind a trash blue line is a good recipe for losing hockey. I'm plenty capable of accepting that we may not find the sort of improvements there that we'd need to even be as good as we were this season. We started this past season with Walman and Ceci as the top pair. Now it's looking like Ferraro and Mukhamadullin who has been injured frequently here. I don't think not having great options externally to make that better is necessarily on the coach or the manager but they will take the heat for it anyway. I'm not one of those people who have said it's time to start winning more. I'm for improvement but it doesn't have to reflect in the win/loss/points department.

As for Bedard and the Blackhawks, I'm not worried about Celebrini going through that or being like that. They're completely different situations with completely different hockey players. Chicago can afford to be less patient with how they do things than we can. People will still want to play there even when they suck a lot more than they will San Jose. I would expect Grier to talk to Celebrini about what he's planning on doing and ask him to be patient with building around him. Our main path forward is still through the draft as much as people hate that they've endured as much losing the past six years as we have. We're just now starting to see players step into the league from their drafting and we're already looking at next season as a disappointment if we don't do this, that, or the other. We are just now entering the seeing what we got phase and we like what we got with Celebrini but everyone else is still a pretty decent-sized question mark.

 

[Hodge]

There's a difference between losing on accident because the GM signed a bunch of 30 year olds to retirement contracts then f***ed off to Scottsdale while leaving his idiot son in charge and losing as part of a concerted strategy to accumulate high-end young players and reconfigure your cap structure.

 

[SJS1991]

Grier did everything in his power last year to minimize our chances of winning. I get why he did what he did, but we didn't win 20 games because of the team we started the season with. If Grier wants a repeat, something he said he doesn't plan on doing, then we'll win 20 again. Otherwise, I'd assume the pick-ups he makes this offseason will be to actually improve the team and not just grabbing guys that have trade value when their contracts are up or low-risk lotto tickets that rarely pan out.

I do think some people have a comfort zone of being in the basement at this point. It's where we've been for a while now. I guess for some it's easier to just shrug off losing because it's the plan than be disappointed in losing.

I mean maybe… but I think it’s mostly people don’t want to rush a rebuild if it’s going to fall flat. That’s the concern.

This type of deal can’t be made… but I think most would say if we come out of the rebuild and have a Tampa bay style run or Penguin style run and it only take us suffering thru 2 more season of bottom 10 even 5 finishes to get a few more premium assets, fans would do that all day.

My point is people don’t want to get caught in this middle ground like Detroit etc. If the sharks need to lose more to secure a 10 + year run… so be it. People don’t want to rush it to just get alittle pain relief next season or the season after. Let’s just do all this losing at once and when we put it behind us…. It’s behind us.

 

[STL Shark]

You pretty much said everything I would have said.

I'd rather win 20 games with Celebrini and Smith taking big steps forward and Askarov establishing himself as an NHL goalie than winning 30 or more games with a bunch of veteran players coming in and making the team better in the short term, but our young guys either stagnate or, worse, bomb. Unless you're Vegas and gifted a ridiculously favorable situation for a brand new team, bad teams turn into good teams on the backs of their young guys becoming stars. If that happens for us, filling in the gaps around those guys won't be hard so long as we don't waste our cap space right now on guys that become cap albatrosses later. If the guys we sign are tradable later, we'll be fine.

I want to win more games next year for sure, but I want them in a way that leads to sustained success for the next 10 years.

Thing is, if those things happen (Celebrini/Smith/Askarov) then it's basically impossible to win only 20 games as it targets scoring and goaltending. If both of things improve, I don't see a way to get worse.

We should be targeting closer to the 75 point mark for next year. Take another leap of 20-30 goals scored to get into the bottom 10 instead of dead last, and shave another 15-20 goals against from last year (like we did from 2023-24 to 2024-25). If you improve your goal differential by 40-50 goals, that should mean a marked improvement. Can't get better play from the guys mentioned and not get markedly better. Doesn't compute/work.

Man, I just hate scoring power play goals. Every time we score one, I'm always bitter that they didn't wait a little longer for the opposing team's player to come out of the box so it could be an even strength goal.

It's the fact that they're not indicative of your play as much as very circumstantial. There's a reason the main evaluation metrics are all ES based and not PP based. He's been pretty mediocre at ES and has benefited from being on a red hot power play.

He's given up more shot attempts, scoring chances, and high danger chances than he's generated by a good sized margin, but is riding an insane .965 on ice save percentage at ES to keep him afloat. He has been a PP merchant and not much else.