Speculation: Sharks 2015-2016 Roster Talk: Rumors, Roster, Proposals. Part III ‎

[Pinkfloyd]

Our forward group would be in a lot of trouble without Couture up there. Even with Subban and Burns, it won't cover that up. Even with the inevitable suggestion of moving Burns up front doesn't make up for Couture's absence.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

I would offer Couture, Jeremy Roy, Timo Meier, and a 2nd for Subban and Eller.

I understand that is a hefty price, but it is relatively in line with other offers being made in the Subban thread.

Vlasic-Braun
Dillon-Subban
Martin-Burns

I highly doubt he is actually available but if he is I would do pretty much everything to go out and get him. He is a legitimate Norris #1D and would make our defense easily the best in the NHL.

I wouldn't do that at all.

 

[corbanSOG]

There's no point in even dreaming about Subban. There's nothing the Sharks can offer that would match a team like Edmonton who desperately needs a stud defenseman and has the surplus of young talent needed to overpay for Subban. To compete with an offer like Draisatl + Nurse/Klefbom + a 2016 1st rounder that will probably end up top 3, the Sharks would have to offer up something starting with Vlasic/Burns + Hertl + multiple 1sts, and I'd argue that's not a trade that makes them better now or in the future.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Trading Couture, Roy and Meier would kind of bone the Sharks in the now and future.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

I would offer Couture, Jeremy Roy, Timo Meier, and a 2nd for Subban and Eller.

I understand that is a hefty price, but it is relatively in line with other offers being made in the Subban thread.

Vlasic-Braun
Dillon-Subban
Martin-Burns

I highly doubt he is actually available but if he is I would do pretty much everything to go out and get him. He is a legitimate Norris #1D and would make our defense easily the best in the NHL.

Oh hell no. I am not giving that much for Subban. No way. Subban is a #1D for sure but Couture is a #1C as well.

Not only is Roy our top-D prospect, he was also as close to a 1st round pick you can get. So basically you are giving up a #1C + 2 recent 1st round picks + a 2nd round pick (2016/2017) for Subban.

I don't think so.

 

[Led Zappa]

When is the last time a Cup winning team traded a top 2 D or Top forward like Couture, Pav's, Marleau at the deadline?

 

[hockeyball]

Guys, we don't need Subban. We already have Burns AND Vlasic, both playing like #1D this season (especially Vlasic). We already have a 60 point and 50 point d-man, getting another 60 point d-man is only going to leach points from someone else. Sure you could move Burns to forward at that point, but do you really want to do that after he just finally got his defensive game together again? Talk about completely screwing up a player.

What the Sharks need is a 30p guy on the 3rd pairing, someone like Demers.

 

[Led Zappa]

Guys, we don't need Subban. We already have Burns AND Vlasic, both playing like #1D this season (especially Vlasic). We already have a 60 point and 50 point d-man, getting another 60 point d-man is only going to leach points from someone else. Sure you could move Burns to forward at that point, but do you really want to do that after he just finally got his defensive game together again? Talk about completely screwing up a player.

What the Sharks need is a 30p guy on the 3rd pairing, someone like Demers.

Agreed. That on top of the likely cost makes this a non-starter.

 

[hohosaregood]

In my eyes, we got 6 top 6 forwards right now. You lose one, and we're gonna have a butt of a time trying to score.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

There's no point in even dreaming about Subban. There's nothing the Sharks can offer that would match a team like Edmonton who desperately needs a stud defenseman and has the surplus of young talent needed to overpay for Subban. To compete with an offer like Draisatl + Nurse/Klefbom + a 2016 1st rounder that will probably end up top 3, the Sharks would have to offer up something starting with Vlasic/Burns + Hertl + multiple 1sts, and I'd argue that's not a trade that makes them better now or in the future.

I would laugh if Edmonton pays through the nose for Subban. While they certainly need a stud d-man, they can mess up a lot of what they have if they overpay for him. There's an argument that the proposal you put there for Edmonton would make them worse. Draisaitl is a very good young player. Nurse has the tools but we'll see if he puts it together. If he does, he'll be a stud. And the possible Matthews pick. That's a lot to give up and a lot of future given up. Plus, even with Subban, they still have a lot of holes in their lineup.

 

[RammsteinGT]

Oh hell no. I am not giving that much for Subban. No way. Subban is a #1D for sure but Couture is a #1C as well.

Not only is Roy our top-D prospect, he was also as close to a 1st round pick you can get. So basically you are giving up a #1C + 2 recent 1st round picks + a 2nd round pick (2016/2017) for Subban.

I don't think so.

Counterpoint: the Burns trade.

Couture (#9 overall) > Setoguchi (#8 overall)
Roy (#31 overall) = #28 overall
Meier (#9 overall) => Coyle (#28 overall)
+2nd (likely 50-60 OA)

1. I'll give you the fact that Couture is better than Seto was at the time, but he was also coming off a 41p in 72game campaign with 3 years remaining on his contract in 2011.

2. Roy and the 28th overall are a wash.

3. Meier is arguably more valuable than Coyle, but Coyle was also known to be a steal and showed great potential (and has delivered to date). This is a lot more equal than one may think in terms of value.

4. A 2nd to sweeten the pot isn't even worth worrying about when you consider how we've traded early-round 2nds in the past for the right to select Mueller and Roy in recent drafts.

Now, in hindsight, who won the Burns trade? We did in a landslide. Any time you're getting a superstar, it tends to work out for the team acquiring him; not the team receiving quantity in return. Also, Subban is unquestionably more valuable than Burns was at the time, so we'd need to pay more anyways.

With all this said, I'm still not sure I'd trade this package for Subban - but it would be worth considering. Hertl slides up the depth chart, as does Tierney - and we backfill with the hope that Goldobin develops and produces ASAP. To offset the loss of Couture, we posess likely the best D-corps in the league:

Vlasic-Subban
Martin-Burns
Dillon-Braun

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Yeah, we're trading for a superstar but Couture is no slouch in that department either. He may not have the pub that Subban or even Thornton and Marleau have but he is a very high-quality player that this team can't afford to lose. Subban, while ridiculously awesome, is not a level of player we really need at that kind of cost.

 

[magic school bus]

We need Subban. We need to do this ASAP, before they come to their senses. This would be the best move this team has made since Thornton. THORNTON. A true franchise player to carry us through the next decade.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

Counterpoint: the Burns trade.

Couture (#9 overall) > Setoguchi (#8 overall)
Roy (#31 overall) = #28 overall
Meier (#9 overall) => Coyle (#28 overall)
+2nd (likely 50-60 OA)

1. I'll give you the fact that Couture is better than Seto was at the time, but he was also coming off a 41p in 72game campaign with 3 years remaining on his contract in 2011.

2. Roy and the 28th overall are a wash.

3. Meier is arguably more valuable than Coyle, but Coyle was also known to be a steal and showed great potential (and has delivered to date). This is a lot more equal than one may think in terms of value.

4. A 2nd to sweeten the pot isn't even worth worrying about when you consider how we've traded early-round 2nds in the past for the right to select Mueller and Roy in recent drafts.

Now, in hindsight, who won the Burns trade? We did in a landslide. Any time you're getting a superstar, it tends to work out for the team acquiring him; not the team receiving quantity in return. Also, Subban is unquestionably more valuable than Burns was at the time, so we'd need to pay more anyways.

With all this said, I'm still not sure I'd trade this package for Subban - but it would be worth considering. Hertl slides up the depth chart, as does Tierney - and we backfill with the hope that Goldobin develops and produces ASAP. To offset the loss of Couture, we posess likely the best D-corps in the league:

Vlasic-Subban
Martin-Burns
Dillon-Braun

Back then the trade made more sense because Thornton and Marleau were 5 years younger. We are not rebuilding now but we are definitely in the midst of a 'refresh' and our window to win the SC is a lot smaller than it was 5 years ago. Giving up so much youth (Couture is only 26) makes little sense. I know you are undermining the 2nd round pick but given the fact that we dont have our 1st round pick for this year, it makes it that much more important given we are trying to 'refresh'.

Also, serious question, how much do you really think getting Subban over Couture helps us in this years playoff run. For the last few weeks our bottom-6 has been extremely productive. Most of that is to do with us being able to put Couture as the #3C since his return from injury. Plus, it also breaks the chemistry of the team by trading such a core piece away.

Subban for us, is a bonus given we have Burns as a premier offensive D-man and also Vlasic who is contributing at such a high level this year. This bonus is costing us our C depth and future both.

 

[magic school bus]

Brent Burns is 30 and a free agent after next season, he's not a reason to pass on PK Subban.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

Brent Burns is 30 and a free agent after next season, he's not a reason to pass on PK Subban.

But there are many other reasons to pass on this trade.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

Brent Burns is 30 and a free agent after next season, he's not a reason to pass on PK Subban.

In the context of now, yes he is.

And Burns re-signed here once. It's not unreasonable to expect him to do it again.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Brent Burns is 30 and a free agent after next season, he's not a reason to pass on PK Subban.

He's not a reason to pass on Subban but there are 9 million reasons and whatever assets we'd have to give up that would be a reason, at least for this franchise, to pass. Can we honestly see DW and ownership being okay with a nine mil price tag for the next six years? They have long used the top guy being so low on the cap as a way to hold down the salaries of others. Subban completely wrecks that.

 

[magic school bus]

He's not a reason to pass on Subban but there are 9 million reasons and whatever assets we'd have to give up that would be a reason, at least for this franchise, to pass. Can we honestly see DW and ownership being okay with a nine mil price tag for the next six years? They have long used the top guy being so low on the cap as a way to hold down the salaries of others. Subban completely wrecks that.

What is your deal with salary constraints? Who cares if Subban makes $9M (which he's worth btw)? Vlasic makes only $4M. Pavelski $7M. There's many others on the team making below market value too. Not to mention the mystery cap space that's disappeared into the minors or playing for another team. Chicago has two guys making $10M a season. They're doing fine. It's not an issue.

 

[Timos Death Stare]

In the context of now, yes he is.

And Burns re-signed here once. It's not unreasonable to expect him to do it again.

He did sell his house this year though....

 

[Lebanezer]

I'd take Subban if we could get him. There's no good reason to turn your nose up at a player like that.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

What is your deal with salary constraints? Who cares if Subban makes $9M (which he's worth btw)? Vlasic makes only $4M. Pavelski $7M. There's many others on the team making below market value too. Not to mention the mystery cap space that's disappeared into the minors or playing for another team. Chicago has two guys making $10M a season. They're doing fine. It's not an issue.

My deal? Nothing. I'd have no problems with that contract. DW and Hasso seem to have a different philosophy on those things. Dollars and term seems to be a real issue with the people in charge of signing and/or acquiring those contracts. Which is what I specifically asked about and you seemed to ignore to focus on me.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

He did sell his house this year though....

Could be strictly a business move. Who knows.

 

[Sharksrule04]

Tell me how many games another backup will guarantee us we win. How do you know another backup won't also lose a bunch of his games for us, coming to a new team, at the end of the year.



Your first paragraph is exactly why I can't stand all the hate stalock is getting this year. You're using a 13(9 starts) games sample size as your proof, or argument, or whatever you want to call it, and completely ignoring the larger sample of 48 games he's played before this year. If you exclude this years stats, stalock has 2.24 gaa and .917 sv%. That's great for a backup. Even with this years stats, stalock has 2.39gaa and .911 sv% over the last three years. Keumper has 2.47gaa and .912 sv% over the same period.

So seeing as how they are basically identical, I'd love to know why everyone, and you, are so certain a backup of keumpers ability is going to provide long term benefit over stalock. Why did just about everyone give jones a pass when he had a rough stretch this year, because he "earned it" by playing well early in the year, but no one gives stalock a pass for his horrible 9 starts this year, despite having FAR more games with above average to great stats in years past

Another fun stat, Stalock as a shark 46 starts- 2.37gaa .911sv%, jones in 46 starts as a shark 9.34gaa .916sv%. Sure different situations and circumstances, but its actually a better comparison, simply due to sample size then you're attemp to compare keumper and stalock this year.

Just for some more reasons why everyone is irrationally hating stalock, based on insanely small sample sizes, let's look at several potential goaltenders I've seen suggested we should trade for and see how they compare to stalock over the last three years.

Stalock- 2.37gaa .911sv%
Keumper- 2.47gaa .912sv%
Scrivens- 2.92gaa .904sv%
Bernier- 2.83gaa .915sv%
Khudobin- 2.52gaa .914sv%
Hiller-2.55gaa .910sv%
Johnson- 2.50 .913sv%
Ramo- 2.63gaa .911sv%
Berra- 2.82gaa .906sv%

So please, can everyone shut the hell up about how bad stalock is, he's having a horrible year, that's it, he's just fine overall as a backup, if you back the **** up and actually look at more than a 13 game sample size. The fact everyone except PF is ready to throw money and picks/prospects away for someone who will affect basically 6 games this year, simply because stalock's having a bad year, just proves how little some people look ahead, and behind and only focus on what makes them feel best right now.

Stalock has just as good a chance as any of those backup goaltenders to string together 6 good games to end the year.

Agreed. I dislike him as our backup but I don't see many "cheap" options that would be a terrible improvement. I'd rather bring up Grosenick or Dell and give them a shot.

In no way is it worth trading valuable players/picks/prospects for the little gain the team will see. Despite Stalock having a crappy year the team can win with him in net against the right opponents.

 

[Barrie22]

He did sell his house this year though....

Marleau sold his house 5 years ago, i am still waiting on that trade every one was expecting.