They have no need to be concerned with dead cap space next season or in 2026-27 either. You do it to let him move on and let the team move on and improve its blue line depth. I'm not certain how the team feels about Dickinson or Schaefer but I doubt Schaefer goes back to junior. But you absolutely can pencil in one of those two and deal with the issues of them not hanging. If you keep a cheap depth option like Thrun around to be the #7, he can step in that 3rd pair spot if a rookie teenager needs time. And if you end up sending them back to juniors, there's always depth defensemen available during the season. As for Pohlkamp, his odds are long but they aren't zero.
GDT: Game 63: Sharks @ Sabres 4:00pm NBCSCA
- Thread starter Lebanezer
- Start date
If the plan B is we can go through the scrap heap after the season starts that is not going to cut it next season.
That isn't plan B really but even if we do get to the scrap heap, it's not going to make much of a difference on how next season goes. We're still not going to be above taking shots with the scrap heap if circumstances make it necessary.
The plan is to improve the team. Next season this team should be playing meaningful hockey into April. Having plan A as a teenage D on the roster with no plan B on the roster is not setting up the team towards meaningful improvement.
If they go in with:
Walman - Dobson/Ekblad/Gavrikov/UFA
Ferraro - Mukamadulin
Thrun - Liljegren
Vlassic
And then let Dickinson or Schaefer get 9 games by running 8 D to start the season if everyone is healthy that would at least allow for the above listed to be the D for next season in the event the teenagers can’t play at an NHL level. Even that D is the bare minimum I would expect and one I would not be happy with going into the season.
Ideally I would move 1 of Walman, Ferraro, or Thrun and run:
Walman/Ferraro - Ekblad
Mukamadulin - Dobson/Nemec
Thrun - Liljegren
Vlassic.
This would assume Ferraro or Walman are included in the deal for Dobson/Nemec. If Thrun is traded then drop Muk down to 3rd pair. They could still have 8 D to start the season to give Dickinson or Schaefer an extended look. This would raise the bar for them to be included in the lineup. If they can outplay Thrun or Ferraro/Walman then just waive or trade Thrun, if not then they don’t deserve to be on the NHL team that is no longer tanking.
Yeah, that top set of pairing is not going to be enough to truly expect to play meaningful hockey into April. Maybe the second one does but it seems pointless to have Thrun and Vlasic for next season when you still have Cagnoni to provide an opportunity to if neither Dickinson or Schaefer work out. But in reality, there is no meaningful difference between a Thrun/Vlasic-Liljegren pairing and any of the LHD prospects we're talking about because in the scenario where all the prospects fail to hang, you're relying on Thrun and/or Vlasic to play the spot and they can't hang as it is now.
If you want to make meaningful blue line improvements, we need to get rid of both Ferraro and Walman, find one LHD that can eat top pairing minutes effectively, two top four RHD's, and still keep that 3rd pairing spot open expecting a young defenseman to earn that spot. Because even if they don't, you can still lean on that top four to make you competitive on most nights and buy you the time needed to find a reasonable stop gap. You can't really do that if either Ferraro or Walman are in that top four.
My ideal blue line is more like...
Chychrun-Dobson
Mukhamadullin-Fabbro
Schaefer-Liljegren
Thrun as the extra
I'd still much prefer any of Dickinson or Cagnoni in Schaefer's spot if he doesn't hang for whatever reason than Thrun or Vlasic who are proven to be worthless filler.
- Jun 23, 2020
- 6,303
- 9,160
We're not even in the ballpark of that being possible, without multiple miracles. We are going to be clearly out of the playoff hunt from opening night.
Realistic improvement for next season is finishing seventh in the division, somewhere in the 60-70 points range and around a -50 goal differential.
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
Per Natural Stat Trick, here's numbers for the last 9 games (post-Granlund trade), 5v5 score-adjusted:
I don't see any way we can let Thrun back into this lineup. Toss Dellandrea in the scrap heap too. Pretty much everyone else is killing it, but especially the top two lines and top two pairs. Very genuinely, Walman-Liljegren and Ferraro-Mukhamadullin might be a great bottom-4 on a solid team. Vlasic and Thompson haven't been great but they haven't been horrible either.
The best thing we could do this summer is jettison Thrun. He's shockingly bad by both metrics and visually.
Also: Macklin Celebrini is ridiculous. I may have to redact my "teenagers never have good metrics" statement from before.
I don't see any way we can let Thrun back into this lineup. Toss Dellandrea in the scrap heap too. Pretty much everyone else is killing it, but especially the top two lines and top two pairs. Very genuinely, Walman-Liljegren and Ferraro-Mukhamadullin might be a great bottom-4 on a solid team. Vlasic and Thompson haven't been great but they haven't been horrible either.
The best thing we could do this summer is jettison Thrun. He's shockingly bad by both metrics and visually.
Also: Macklin Celebrini is ridiculous. I may have to redact my "teenagers never have good metrics" statement from before.
I think it is extremely pessimistic to think this team has no chance of playing meaningful games in April.
It is impossible not to look at the Sharks goaltending after the Blackwood trade and not see how it has effected this team.
Before the Blackwood trade the team had a .416 pt%. That would equate to 68 points over a whole season.
In close games (1 goal margin excluding EN goals) the Sharks had a .475 pt% before Blackwood was traded and a .304 pt% since Blackwood was traded. If the Sharks had a .475 pt% on close games through the whole season they would have 8 additional point which would have them on a 66 point pace.
This is also a young team whose top players are showing incredible development and growth throughout the season so it is likely they will be even better next season. Then you add in getting help in free agency and this team could see a 20 point improvement even if they get Blackwood level goaltending through the whole season.
Here is a plausible offseason where I think they could push for 85 points.
Sign 1 top 6 FW
Marner, Rantanen, Bennett, Ehlers, Granlund, Boeser
Sign 1 top 4 D (preferably RH)
Ekblad, Pionk, Gavrikov, Kovacevic, Fabbro
Trade for 1 top 4 D
Dobson, Byram, Nemec
Sign a bottom 6 wing (Kunin level)
Eklund - Celebrini - Toffoli
Ehlers - Smith - Zetterlund
Graf - Wenberg - Kunin
Goodrow - Dellandrea - Kovalenko
Grundstrom
Walman - Ekblad
Mukamadulin - Dobson
Thrun - Liljegren
Vlassic
Askarov
Backup G
Obviously the Sharks will be between 60-70 points if they don’t improve the roster but they could easily build a 85 point team without sacrificing their future long term outlook.
Those acquisitions in one offseason is not realistic. It's possible but it's not realistic. Too many good players have other appealing options or have our team on their no-trade list or cost more than we can really afford on the trade market or just aren't available. Even with an obvious need for at least one top four RHD, there isn't much out there and lots of competition for them. We're also still heavily relying on a very young team to not just keep their level of play this year but do better and that isn't always easy in your 2nd year with pretty good odds that more rookies will be added to the lineup in front of a rookie goalie.
If they don't sacrifice their future outlook in the process of making additions in this offseason, they should be thanking their lucky stars regardless of how many points they get next year. But chances are that they very much will sacrifice some of it.
Yes it’s unlikely the Sharks will land a top FA because they never have in their history. This offseason might be different. The Sharks have an energy about them that is getting national attention. They have possibly the best 10 year outlook of any team in the league. They have an emerging superstar that plays the right way.
They also have insane cap space. They could offer Marner 7x$15 mil and Ekblad 7x$10 mil and still not do any long term damage to their cap sheets. The Sharks have the ability to out bid any other team which has not always been the case.
I’m not saying it’s highly likely but it’s definitely possible they can build an 85 point team this offseason.
Maybe but I think their path towards being an 85 point team is to continue to lean into the young players we’ve traded for and drafted.
Chernyshov-Celebrini-Toffoli
Eklund-Smith-Zetterlund
Kovalenko-Wennberg-Graf
Grundstrom-Dellandrea-Cardwell
Chychrun-Dobson
Mukhamadullin-Fabbro
Schaefer-Liljegren
Askarov-Mrazek or whoever
While that team has the possibility of getting 85 points based on their potential, it is much more likely that a team like that built on so many rookie or second year is a 50-60 point team.
Considering they’re currently on the path to being a 50-60 point team, I think you’d be underestimating their potential for improvement. They’ve been in a lot of games where slight improvement would likely flip a great many of those losses into wins. Another year of Celebrini where he gets better is probably five wins more on his own.
But then why not get a top 6 forward and top 4 D in FA to increase the floor and ceiling of the team.
Star Platinum
Registered User
- May 11, 2024
- 2,120
- 3,246
JoeThorntonsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
This is like saying a 20 year old could take up smoking, knock 10 years off their life span, and still not do any long term damage to their health.
Having a lot of runway doesn’t exempt you from seriously damaging yourself by pissing away a substantial percentage of that runway.
The Sharks are not in danger of cap he’ll even if the sign multiple big deals this offseason. The Sharks have 1 player signed after 26-27 season. The have the cleanest long term cap situation in the league. It can afford them to overpay if it allows them to get a top 6 or top 4 asset for free. This is what can really help a rebuild which hurts Buffalo since no FA wants to go there. If top 6 or top 4 players want to sign with the Sharks then they absolutely should make those deals.
Star Platinum
Registered User
- May 11, 2024
- 2,120
- 3,246
Last thing the Sharks want to do is have more Burns, Karllson, Hertl, and Vlasic deals on the books after they just cleared them all out. It would be better for the Sharks to take not quite as good players for less term and ride out a few more years than to pay a 30 year old free agent 7 years into the future.
Marner, even though he would almost assuredly never come, would be a good gamble given his age if you don't pay him too much per year. Ekblad would almost assuredly be a horrid gamble at 7 years because you're paying for the downside of his career.
Good players don’t take 4 or 5 year deals in FA. They take 7 year deals and unless you want to not supplement a roster with FA’s you have to be comfortable handing out 7 year deals.
The sharks are 10-7-4 when leading after 2 periods, a .476% win percentage. We are the only team in the league that has a sub .600% win percentage. Bring that up to a .600% mark and we gain an extra 4 wins.
The team is also 11-12-9 in 1 goal games, winning just at a .500%, that would be a difference of 5 more wins.
Just being slightly better at those 2 things and the sharks are looking at an extra 18 points as of today. So that would be 61 points as of today and tied with anaheim and only 6 points out of a wild card spot.
Doesn't take much progression to get this team to being a middle of the pack team.
The team is also 11-12-9 in 1 goal games, winning just at a .500%, that would be a difference of 5 more wins.
Just being slightly better at those 2 things and the sharks are looking at an extra 18 points as of today. So that would be 61 points as of today and tied with anaheim and only 6 points out of a wild card spot.
Doesn't take much progression to get this team to being a middle of the pack team.
