The San Jose Sharks are horror-bad

[weastern bias]

If we're going to be snippy about it, you do grasp that there's a relative scale to teams selling off assets to rebuild vs choosing to ice an AHL roster and passing it off as an NHL product like Grier has done with the Sharks this season?

There really isn't a difference in scale, the Sharks were just so poorly managed in the last gasp of the Doug Wilson era that when they sold off the only 3 assets they could get any value for (Burns, Meier, Karlsson) THIS is the result

The Sharks didn't perform some extraordinary tear down, there was just so little available to actually liquidate that the result of 3 trades looks this catastrophic

 

[Chainshot]

If we're going to be snippy about it, you do grasp that there's a relative scale to teams selling off assets to rebuild vs choosing to ice an AHL roster and passing it off as an NHL product like Grier has done with the Sharks this season?

And that Grier's hand being played was influenced by years of trump cards being frittered away well in advance of him ever sitting down at the table? The Sharks are at where they are at. The only way forward is for them to draft and develop well. That's the path. And you want to hamper them even further because you don't like where they are at today because of focusing on the moment. Zoom out a bit.

 

[Cas]

If we're going to be snippy about it, you do grasp that there's a relative scale to teams selling off assets to rebuild vs choosing to ice an AHL roster and passing it off as an NHL product like Grier has done with the Sharks this season?

The Sharks were going to ice an AHL roster no matter what they did or who was in charge.

 

[Romang67]

There really isn't a difference in scale, the Sharks were just so poorly managed in the last gasp of the Doug Wilson era that when they sold off the only 3 assets they could get any value for (Burns, Meier, Karlsson) THIS is the result

The Sharks didn't perform some extraordinary tear down, there was just so little available to actually liquidate that the result of 3 trades looks this catastrophic

I don't understand how people don't get this. If Meier walks in FA and Karlsson stays with the Sharks and goes back to being a good, but not elite, D-man, the franchise is so much more f***ed than they currently are. They would have been crucified for not getting value for those players when they had a chance.

The Sharks didn't tear the team down and trade all their decent players for draft picks. They had 9 draft picks in the latest draft, the first of their rebuild. They had 7 picks walking into the 2022 draft before trading down. They have 9 draft picks in the upcoming draft. This is AFTER getting draft capital from trading Meier and Karlsson. They had nothing in the cupboards. They had next to no players to trade. The plan in 2020-2022 was to win. They were just among the worst in the league at it despite trying.

What the hell were they supposed to do? Which free agents should they have gone out to sign this summer for presumably outrageous deals because why would a FA sign with a team bound to finish last in the league? Should they have called up more young players to lose with the Sharks? Is that good for their development? Should they NOT have traded Karlsson and Meier? Would you, straw man in the back I'm arguing against, have applauded their effort to finish last in the league with no extra draft picks to show for it, but doing so honorably with Karlsson and Meier on the team?

What, other than ad-hoc punishments to satisfy the angry masses, was the actual solution here? This is literally the scenario that the draft was made for. The Sharks sucked. They got a little extra draft capital for the only worthwhile veterans on their team. And they will finish last or near last in the league. They may break the record for fewest wins or points. At least now they haven't put all their eggs in the win-the-draft-lottery-and-hope-Celebrini-works-out basket.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

If it were easy to dig yourself out of the grave by tanking for draft picks Edmonton would have more than 4 series wins after drafting 1st 4 times in the last 15 years, a Toronto would have more than 1 series win in the last 7 years since winning the lottery and it wouldn't have taken Colorado a decade to make it out of the second round after winning their lottery

Winning lotteries for high picks doesn't guarantee winning will follow, it only aides talent barren franchises in reestablishing a more respectable foothold above the basement of the league, it still takes skillfully and competent management to forge a winning roster around that high end talent, not to mention to identify and select the correct players in the first place

Also, yes, the Sharks DID naturally get bad due to poor asset management and players aging, they tried to make the playoffs in 2020 and finished last in the west when they didn't own their own draft pick, now they've just applied an accelerant to the fire.

Agree 100% with this. There is no "easy" way out. You have to draft and develop well.

Look at the Maple Leafs because they show both sides of the challenge. They did an amazing job of hitting on all of the high firsts over the last 15 years , Schenn (=>JVR 5OA), Kadri (7OA), Reilly (5OA), Nylander (8), Marner (4), Matthews (1). Where they have failed for the most part is turning the other picks into productive NHL players who are pushing for roster spots. If they had been successful in this regard, they don't have to take chances on guys like Domi, Bertuzzi, and Klingberg.

And I don't say that to kick the Leafs when they're down, because they've really had some great "hits" from draft/development perspective. There are a bunch of organizations that have failed to hit on those high first and it's put the organization into an extended nose-dive. Think of how much better off the Rangers/Islanders/Devils would be if Andersson/Kravtsov, Wahlstrom/MDC, and Zacha/McLeod had turned into legit NHL talents?

 

[Skeksis25]

Sharks went all in for years, mortgaging picks and assets for years, trying to win a Cup. Re-signed people to questionable contracts, signed free agents to bad contracts just to try to do what people on this board say every team should be doing. Now, they are paying for it and will continue to do so for a few more years at least. Every ridiculous contract they gave out had people saying that it was going to suck in a few years.

Well here they are. Here is the suck. I don't get why so many of you are so surprised or are acting like suddenly, the year after they missed out on a generational player for not losing intentionally, they have decided to do so. The team is simply terrible, not because of decisions made in 2023, but years before.

Instead of your nonsense outrage at how embarrassing it is for the league to have a terrible team for the first time in its entire history, how about you just kindly enjoy your players stat padding against us and move on?

 

[Lt Dan]

Sharks went all in for years, mortgaging picks and assets for years, trying to win a Cup. Re-signed people to questionable contracts, signed free agents to bad contracts just to try to do what people on this board say every team should be doing. Now, they are paying for it and will continue to do so for a few more years at least. Every ridiculous contract they gave out had people saying that it was going to suck in a few years.

Well here they are. Here is the suck. I don't get why so many of you are so surprised or are acting like suddenly, the year after they missed out on a generational player for not losing intentionally, they have decided to do so. The team is simply terrible, not because of decisions made in 2023, but years before.

Instead of your nonsense outrage at how embarrassing it is for the league to have a terrible team for the first time in its entire history, how about you just kindly enjoy your players stat padding against us and move on?

Well said

I am not a Sharks fan, I am actually a fan of one of their biggest rivals. Like the Wings, the Sharks went on a very prolonged run and all of those years of drafting lower, trading futures to win now, etc is going to take it's toll on any organization.



And since I always believe that laughter is the best medicine, this is for you Sharks fans

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

The most simple and elegant solution is to give the worst team the best draft pick. Any 'innovation' on this strategy is just a fancy way to give better picks to teams which aren't as bad.

Any model with that as the result has the possibility to death spiral a team. The NHL has no interest in creating an existential crisis to its MEMBERS. The teams are the NHL.

Disagree on the bolded. In most cases - the teams at the very bottom are close to "equivalently bad". Was there that much difference last year between ANA, CLM, CHI, or SJ? The lottery was instituted to reduce the "incentive" to be very bad in a draft year with a potential generational player. This year is obviously an outlier with the Sharks, but that is due to the decisions the team has made for the last 10-15 years and not due to Grier deciding to rebuild.

I challenge anyone (EDIT - especially Tasty Biscuit) to come up with a realistic plan that Grier could have followed in the off-season that had them anything other than the worst team in the league.

 

[TheTotalPackage]

Heading into the season, were the Sharks expected to be this bad? Their roster is certainly underwhelming when looking at it more carefully, but I didn't expect expansion-level type of results.

Sharks went all in for years, mortgaging picks and assets for years, trying to win a Cup. Re-signed people to questionable contracts, signed free agents to bad contracts just to try to do what people on this board say every team should be doing. Now, they are paying for it and will continue to do so for a few more years at least. Every ridiculous contract they gave out had people saying that it was going to suck in a few years.

Well here they are. Here is the suck. I don't get why so many of you are so surprised or are acting like suddenly, the year after they missed out on a generational player for not losing intentionally, they have decided to do so. The team is simply terrible, not because of decisions made in 2023, but years before.

Instead of your nonsense outrage at how embarrassing it is for the league to have a terrible team for the first time in its entire history, how about you just kindly enjoy your players stat padding against us and move on?

Good post. It's caught up to them. They were one of the model franchises of consistency for many years. It sucks though they don't have a Stanley Cup to fall on to lessen the blow of going all-in all those years and having to live through some dark years ahead.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Disagree on the bolded. In most cases - the teams at the very bottom are close to "equivalently bad". Was there that much difference last year between ANA, CLM, CHI, or SJ? The lottery was instituted to reduce the "incentive" to be very bad in a draft year with a potential generational player. This year is obviously an outlier with the Sharks, but that is due to the decisions the team has made for the last 10-15 years and not due to Grier deciding to rebuild.

I challenge anyone to come up with a realistic plan that Grier could have followed in the off-season that had them anything other than the worst team in the league.

There might be some noise in record to 'worseness' on a year-year basis but on balance the worst team will have the worst record.

EDM got four 1OA in a row BECAUSE OF THE LOTTERY, not in spite of it.

 

[Strat]

Instead of your nonsense outrage at how embarrassing it is for the league to have a terrible team for the first time in its entire history, how about you just kindly enjoy your players stat padding against us and move on?

How is this the 1st time the Sharks are terrible in their history???

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

How is this the 1st time the Sharks are terrible in their history???

I think the poster is saying the 2023-24 Sharks are the first time the NHL has had a terrible team. Some of the people here are pretty young and don't remember anything prior to the dead puck era.

 

[StreetHawk]

Heading into the season, were the Sharks expected to be this bad? Their roster is certainly underwhelming when looking at it more carefully, but I didn't expect expansion-level type of results.


Good post. It's caught up to them. They were one of the model franchises of consistency for many years. It sucks though they don't have a Stanley Cup to fall on to lessen the blow of going all-in all those years and having to live through some dark years ahead.

Doug Wilson bet on 30 year olds in Burns, Vlasic, Karlson, Couture, E. Kane. That was what like $41 mill of cap for these 5 guys? Missed the PO for 4 seasons straight, but 2020 paid for Karlsson.
Lebanc regressed, but haven't brought anyone new into the organization from within lately. Now, riding out the remainder of the contracts they gave their vets.

No one plans to be this bad, but they were easily a bottom 2/3 team to start the season. Question is how do they turn it around, because the culture is going to be very bad with all of this losing. You don't want young players developing in this, so I'd be cautious about Eklund. Maybe return him to the A is better.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

There might be some noise in record to 'worseness' on a year-year basis but on balance the worst team will have the worst record.

EDM got four 1OA in a row BECAUSE OF THE LOTTERY, not in spite of it.

And they changed the lottery rules so that is no longer possible.

Just IMO, but from a "team quality" perspective, there usually is very little difference between the bottom teams in the league. If that is true - why not include the lottery to reduce the incentive for teams to be embarrassingly bad in a year with a very strong #1 draft candidate?

 

[Divine]

so that's just the thing. there is no hope being promised. this is just a shit sandwich.

There is hope being promised, the hope of picking first overall.

Fans can tolerate a losing team if it means they're getting the best undrafted prospect in the world that year. However, it creates a bad on-ice product for both that fanbase and the competition in the league.

I remember a few years ago someone in the NBA (I think?) proposed a cycle for the draft lottery. Teams alternate between the 32 picks (adjusted for how many teams there are) every 32 years in a cycle. That way - the only focus on the owners minds would be being as competitive as you can, because there is no benefit in losing or having 20M in cap space on any given season.

 

[one2gamble]

Disagree on the bolded. In most cases - the teams at the very bottom are close to "equivalently bad". Was there that much difference last year between ANA, CLM, CHI, or SJ? The lottery was instituted to reduce the "incentive" to be very bad in a draft year with a potential generational player. This year is obviously an outlier with the Sharks, but that is due to the decisions the team has made for the last 10-15 years and not due to Grier deciding to rebuild.

The Sharks were the worst team last year as well, but the loser point pushed them out of the top 3.

There should be a lottery, but it should be limited to the worst teams in each division, each with an equal shot at the top pick. 4 teams, 25% chance each. Everyone else lines up by points. The NHL trying to make it into some kind of show just extends the length of these rebuilds.

 

[Skeksis25]

How is this the 1st time the Sharks are terrible in their history???

There are terrible teams every year. I was being sarcastic.

 

[Romang67]

There is hope being promised, the hope of picking first overall.

Fans can tolerate a losing team if it means they're getting the best undrafted prospect in the world that year. However, it creates a bad on-ice product for both that fanbase and the competition in the league.

I remember a few years ago someone in the NBA (I think?) proposed a cycle for the draft lottery. Teams alternate between the 32 picks (adjusted for how many teams there are) every 32 years in a cycle. That way - the only focus on the owners minds would be being as competitive as you can, because there is no benefit in losing or having 20M in cap space on any given season.

What an incredibly asinine proposal. I can see why that didn't get past the idea stage.

See, this is what we end up with because people are so deathly afraid of bad teams drafting high. Ideas like that.

 

[Divine]

What an incredibly asinine proposal. I can see why that didn't get past the idea stage.

See, this is what we end up with because people are so deathly afraid of bad teams drafting high. Ideas like that.

I don't think it's bad at all.

I think the NHL would adjust accordingly. There's always going to be some teams better than others but we wouldn't have the current system of teams like Buffalo/Chicago/SJ absolutely gutting their team and trading away anything of value to intentionally get the 1st overall pick.

The league would be much more competitive.

 

[TheBeard]

There is hope being promised, the hope of picking first overall.

Fans can tolerate a losing team if it means they're getting the best undrafted prospect in the world that year. However, it creates a bad on-ice product for both that fanbase and the competition in the league.

I remember a few years ago someone in the NBA (I think?) proposed a cycle for the draft lottery. Teams alternate between the 32 picks (adjusted for how many teams there are) every 32 years in a cycle. That way - the only focus on the owners minds would be being as competitive as you can, because there is no benefit in losing or having 20M in cap space on any given season.

This would have been the worst idea in the history of bad ideas.

 

[Divine]

This would have been the worst idea in the history of bad ideas.

Why? Beause we'd lose the worst teams in NHL history?

 

[Tanknation]

The Sharks were going to ice an AHL roster no matter what they did or who was in charge.

At this point, AHL roster players/team would do better as they would be fighting for contracts and roster spots. What we are seeing is more equivalent to a beer league team.

 

[Romang67]

I don't think it's bad at all.

I think the NHL would adjust accordingly. There's always going to be some teams better than others but we wouldn't have the current system of teams like Buffalo/Chicago/SJ absolutely gutting their team and trading away anything of value to intentionally get the 1st overall pick.

The league would be much more competitive.

It's amazingly stupid. Did this person just ignore draft class strength differences? Forget about them?

 

[Divine]

It's amazingly stupid. Did this person just ignore draft strength differences? Forget about them?

Why do you have to correct every problem in the draft? That would be impossible. Are the draft strength differences reflected in the current draft? No. Montreal sucked and got Slaf. The following year Chicago sucks and gets Bedard.

So why does any future proposal have to address all the current issues or nothing?

The problem with the current system is there's essentially a no man's land of 9th to 11th every season. There is nothing worse in the NHL than finishing 9th for the owners. You get the worst possible draft pick of the non-playoff teams, and you get none of the revenue.

Teams positioned to just miss the playoffs start selling to be as bad as they can usually - which doesn't have to happen.

 

[Romang67]

Why do you have to correct every problem in the draft? That would be impossible. Are the draft strength differences reflected in the current draft? No.

So why does any future proposal have to address all the current issues or nothing?

The problem with the current system is there's essentially a no man's land of 9th to 11th every season. There is nothing worse in the NHL than finishing 9th for the owners. You get the worst possible draft pick of the non-playoff teams, and you get none of the revenue.

Teams positioned to just miss the playoffs start selling to be as bad as they can usually - which doesn't have to happen.

Are you... unaware of what happens with a team if they have a run of bad draft picks at the top of the draft?

They don't improve. So they draft high again in stronger drafts.

You know, the thing that wouldn't happen if we just randomly flipped a coin once to determine a draft order and then cycled.

The draft cycle is genuinely the second worst idea I've heard next to just abolishing the draft and letting the players sign with whomever. It is amazingly poorly thought through. I honestly can't believe I even have to spend time explaining why it's a bad idea.