Speculation: 2013 Armchair GM Thread Part VI

[FeedingFrenzy]

For others,
The PR move that PF is referring to is not just with the fans but with his fellow Sharks.

I don't think his fellow Sharks would have an issue.. This is a business and if Player A wants more money than the team is willing to spend, that player moves on.. Its not like Nemo would be getting low-balled.. Low-balling would be a concern to the players, but DW is known to offer fair market value deals..Nabby comes to mind here. He wanted the moon and DW said sorry, no go...Don't recall the players having any issues.

 

[Barrie22]

I don't think his fellow Sharks would have an issue.. This is a business and if Player A wants more money than the team is willing to spend, that player moves on.. Its not like Nemo would be getting low-balled.. Low-balling would be a concern to the players, but DW is known to offer fair market value deals..Nabby comes to mind here. He wanted the moon and DW said sorry, no go...Don't recall the players having any issues.

It would be low balling in the scenario talked about in this thread. A vezina season, with winning the cup, ( and not sure but also a hart was said to i believe). Letting that walk is bad for PR. Especially with a player that is loved by the players.

That is telling the team, thanks for being the best that you can be, but you aren't what we need on the team.

About the players not saying or caring what happened to nabby. Could be because he just wasn't that liked by his team mates. How many players did he litterally throw under the bus for bad goals that he allowed in? I do not think i had ever heard nabby take blame for bad goals or games. It was always the team/players in front of him.

 

[do0glas]

cap is going up enough that we should be able to pay niemi with no problems. but if we dont win the cup or hell even make it to the WCF again, i see no reason for an extension.

 

[FeedingFrenzy]

You weren't the only one suggesting that but it's a bad PR move to trade Niemi if the scenario played out like I prefaced that with. If he's a Vezina winner or taking us to the Cup Finals, it's not going to look good for the team to trade him or not re-sign him after that. This isn't like Niemi when he left Chicago after a Cup win. He wasn't even a starter there and they were in the worst cap hell because of the team winning it all.

Tim Thomas was making 6 million when he won the Cup but the point you have is one I share. High-priced goaltending isn't necessary. However, people are justifiably concerned about it when it's a position where the backup gets very few opportunities to prove himself and it's a large risk making a switch when you heavily rely on a particular guy without something definitive waiting in the wings.

Ya but when DW cut ties with Nabby, we went the route of Nitty(NHL vet) and Nemo(rookie goalie)..Chances were taken and neither of those 2 players were considered definitive, Nitty was injury prone, Nemo unproven due to the Hawks being stacked.
If Nemo has another outstanding year, DW could get a sweet return come next summer, restock the cupboards and go the same route as they did when Nabby was shown the door..I love Nemo and hope he does well and doesn't ask for the moon..3yr/15mil would be my max if he leads us to the promise land this year. His agent may suggest otherwise though

 

[FeedingFrenzy]

It would be low balling in the scenario talked about in this thread. A vezina season, with winning the cup, ( and not sure but also a hart was said to i believe). Letting that walk is bad for PR. Especially with a player that is loved by the players.

That is telling the team, thanks for being the best that you can be, but you aren't what we need on the team.

About the players not saying or caring what happened to nabby. Could be because he just wasn't that liked by his team mates. How many players did he litterally throw under the bus for bad goals that he allowed in? I do not think i had ever heard nabby take blame for bad goals or games. It was always the team/players in front of him.

So according to your logic, Nemo wins the Vezina and the Cup, he then asks for 7mil a year and you pay it???? Sorry I don't agree with you there.

As for thre bolded part, how is not paying a guy 6.5-7mil telling that player you are not what we need on this team??? It tells the player, imo, we are not going to spend that kind of coin on a goalie. What if Patty wins the Rocket and the Cup this year? Should we pay him 7mil???

 

[Barrie22]

So according to your logic, Nemo wins the Vezina and the Cup, he then asks for 7mil a year and you pay it???? Sorry I don't agree with you there.

As for thre bolded part, how is not paying a guy 6.5-7mil telling that player you are not what we need on this team??? It tells the player, imo, we are not going to spend that kind of coin on a goalie. What if Patty wins the Rocket and the Cup this year? Should we pay him 7mil???

Yes the sharks should pay 7 mil for someone who wins a major individual award and also the biggest team award possible. Still has to be a shorter contract for marleau, but yes it will need to be paid. Same goes for thornton also.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I don't think his fellow Sharks would have an issue.. This is a business and if Player A wants more money than the team is willing to spend, that player moves on.. Its not like Nemo would be getting low-balled.. Low-balling would be a concern to the players, but DW is known to offer fair market value deals..Nabby comes to mind here. He wanted the moon and DW said sorry, no go...Don't recall the players having any issues.

By my recollection, they didn't even talk to Nabokov about an extension. There wasn't even a discussion of price or term. They had already decided they were moving on. And there's a difference between what I'm talking about and just run-of-the-mill free agency concerns. This is under a specific scenario where he wins the Vezina or takes the team to the Finals. The players would inevitably get over it but they will remember the team that got damn near everything they could want out of a player and then didn't want to pay him for it. In Nabokov's case, even if they had gotten to the stage of talking about a new contract, he wasn't considered Vezina caliber nor did he take the team to the Finals so it's different than the above scenario.

 

[do0glas]

since our highest F contract should hopefully be 6 mill next year

and our highest D contract wont even hit 6

if nemo helps us to a cup, 7 mill isnt the worst idea in the world. we arent going to bring in any skaters that will make more than that, and given the contracts around now he wont even be untradeable. not really an issue in my book if we have a cup.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Forget about "PR". Think about it from the GMs point of view, provided Niemi wins the cup/Vezina. For that 6-million a year, he gets relative piece of mind. He knows that he has a player in a vital important position that is not only in the top-of-his-class (by the Vezina win), but is also someone his team could win a cup with. Even if you say that goaltending is heavily reliant on the system, DW would know that with Niemi, the team can play (nay, is already playing) a game that can win a cup.

If replacing Niemi, questions come to mind. How does the team need to change its system to win with that new goalie? Is that system one they can win with? If the team doesn't need to change its system, will the new goalie be able to replace Niemi talent-wise? How much do other parts of the team need to compensate?

Lastly, I have been very impressed by Niemi's big-game readiness. He plays with calm, is able to shake off bad goals with no problem, and is great in the clutch. Those little things are everything when it comes to the playoffs. Goalies like Bryzgalov and Nabokov do not inspire that confidence. Not every goalie has it.

Moreover, if the goalie is not up to snuff, it is almost assuredly a lost season. Very, very few teams have managed to overcome non-clutch playoff goaltending.

 

[Mafoofoo]

What if Patty wins the Rocket and the Cup this year? Should we pay him 7mil???

Um hell yes if he does that lol. Just not long term.

 

[WantonAbandon]

I don't think his fellow Sharks would have an issue.. This is a business and if Player A wants more money than the team is willing to spend, that player moves on.. Its not like Nemo would be getting low-balled.. Low-balling would be a concern to the players, but DW is known to offer fair market value deals..Nabby comes to mind here. He wanted the moon and DW said sorry, no go...Don't recall the players having any issues.

I agree overall. The Hawks seemed to have recovered just fine after trading Niemi. The Sharks are in a transition phase. The team 3 to 4 years from now will likely look vastly different.

 

[SJeasy]

Forget about "PR". Think about it from the GMs point of view, provided Niemi wins the cup/Vezina. For that 6-million a year, he gets relative piece of mind. He knows that he has a player in a vital important position that is not only in the top-of-his-class (by the Vezina win), but is also someone his team could win a cup with. Even if you say that goaltending is heavily reliant on the system, DW would know that with Niemi, the team can play (nay, is already playing) a game that can win a cup.

If replacing Niemi, questions come to mind. How does the team need to change its system to win with that new goalie? Is that system one they can win with? If the team doesn't need to change its system, will the new goalie be able to replace Niemi talent-wise? How much do other parts of the team need to compensate?

Lastly, I have been very impressed by Niemi's big-game readiness. He plays with calm, is able to shake off bad goals with no problem, and is great in the clutch. Those little things are everything when it comes to the playoffs. Goalies like Bryzgalov and Nabokov do not inspire that confidence. Not every goalie has it.

Moreover, if the goalie is not up to snuff, it is almost assuredly a lost season. Very, very few teams have managed to overcome non-clutch playoff goaltending.

Critical questions. They changed the system to extreme defense from which Nemo garnered benefit. They came up short, not just in the playoffs but in the type of record that traditionally garners playoff success with a defensive team. Boston plays extreme defense, but has put up those numbers. Same for NJ and Dallas in their heyday. The Sharks defense did not push to top 3 in goals against and their goal differential was pathetic. It was an easy prediction to say that the silver thingy was out of reach even before the playoffs started.

IMO, they aren't getting a #1 shutdown dman (Suter, Chara), critical for the defensive route to the silver thingy. That means they need to go the goal differential route and it is important that the differential needs to come more from the 5on5 side.

The narrative about goalies is old. For a long while, no Euro goalie "could" win the cup because of the "confidence" issue. That has long been disproven. Then it was no Russian goalie until the Wall won the cup. All of a sudden Euro and "no confidence" were no longer synonymous for goalies.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Forget about "PR". Think about it from the GMs point of view, provided Niemi wins the cup/Vezina. For that 6-million a year, he gets relative piece of mind. He knows that he has a player in a vital important position that is not only in the top-of-his-class (by the Vezina win), but is also someone his team could win a cup with. Even if you say that goaltending is heavily reliant on the system, DW would know that with Niemi, the team can play (nay, is already playing) a game that can win a cup.

If replacing Niemi, questions come to mind. How does the team need to change its system to win with that new goalie? Is that system one they can win with? If the team doesn't need to change its system, will the new goalie be able to replace Niemi talent-wise? How much do other parts of the team need to compensate?

Lastly, I have been very impressed by Niemi's big-game readiness. He plays with calm, is able to shake off bad goals with no problem, and is great in the clutch. Those little things are everything when it comes to the playoffs. Goalies like Bryzgalov and Nabokov do not inspire that confidence. Not every goalie has it.

Moreover, if the goalie is not up to snuff, it is almost assuredly a lost season. Very, very few teams have managed to overcome non-clutch playoff goaltending.

6 million is underestimating what he will get if he continues last year's play into this season and/or next season. If he gets another Vezina finalist type season under his belt, he's likely commanding closer to 7 million. That in itself isn't necessarily a problem, certainly not my preference, but the term at that price can be even at 4 years because he will be 32 by the time that new deal starts and will start a decline very shortly into that contract. And I suspect that when it happens, it will be rapid for Nemo who isn't the quickest in the net to begin with.

And your last point, Chicago was a team that managed to do that very thing with Nemo who was not clutch save for one series against the Sharks. It's certainly doable especially if you invest well into the depth of your team rather than the goaltending. For a team like the Sharks, it should be developed, used while controlled, and moved out before it gets too pricey. Then repeat the process but they've gone away from being strong in net. They're abundant but they're not really strong.

I agree overall. The Hawks seemed to have recovered just fine after trading Niemi. The Sharks are in a transition phase. The team 3 to 4 years from now will likely look vastly different.

The Hawks never relied on Niemi and he wasn't anywhere near as good as he is now. This is a completely different situation.

 

[do0glas]

6 million is underestimating what he will get if he continues last year's play into this season and/or next season. If he gets another Vezina finalist type season under his belt, he's likely commanding closer to 7 million. That in itself isn't necessarily a problem, certainly not my preference, but the term at that price can be even at 4 years because he will be 32 by the time that new deal starts and will start a decline very shortly into that contract. And I suspect that when it happens, it will be rapid for Nemo who isn't the quickest in the net to begin with.

And your last point, Chicago was a team that managed to do that very thing with Nemo who was not clutch save for one series against the Sharks. It's certainly doable especially if you invest well into the depth of your team rather than the goaltending. For a team like the Sharks, it should be developed, used while controlled, and moved out before it gets too pricey. Then repeat the process but they've gone away from being strong in net. They're abundant but they're not really strong.



The Hawks never relied on Niemi and he wasn't anywhere near as good as he is now. This is a completely different situation.

i really dont pay enough attention to goalies, but given that he doesnt really use his speed now, why would his age be a factor? hes more of an anticipation guy from what i can see, and is very good down low. i could see his glove side losing reaction time, but im not sure how "sharp" a decline he will really face, other than durability for being a work horse goalie.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

i really dont pay enough attention to goalies, but given that he doesnt really use his speed now, why would his age be a factor? hes more of an anticipation guy from what i can see, and is very good down low. i could see his glove side losing reaction time, but im not sure how "sharp" a decline he will really face, other than durability for being a work horse goalie.

Speed matters regardless of if it's the highlight of your game. Speed wasn't a big deal in Murray's game and we saw the decline occur with him as well. For goalies, speed is what he uses for his post-to-post reactions and as you said the glove as well as the blocker. Every goalie needs to have quick reactions which is in part the speed I'm referencing.

When you don't have speed or quickness as a big part of your game, it only makes the hypothetical small loss in that aspect more dramatic. More often than not, it makes the line between having enough to play and not very thin.

 

[SJeasy]

i really dont pay enough attention to goalies, but given that he doesnt really use his speed now, why would his age be a factor? hes more of an anticipation guy from what i can see, and is very good down low. i could see his glove side losing reaction time, but im not sure how "sharp" a decline he will really face, other than durability for being a work horse goalie.

Luongo and Giggy are comparisons for what aging does for a slow goalie. They were noticeably not as good as they hit that age barrier. They are still within NHL standards. The way he beats the aging thing is not being so dependent on pure butterfly; he still uses what speed he has. I would be more worried about Nemo's posture taking a dive. He has issues when he slips a little on being upright (hunched shoulders). Part of that is core strength which is hip and groin.

 

[Dicdonya]

Yeah I don't think not wanting to pay a goalie 5.5-7+mil is really bad pr at all. It's not taboo to want more money to sign depth and forwards/defense instead of tying up a huge amount of cap into a goalie.

Sure we might be able to fit him under the cap, that doesn't mean it's the best use of our cap.

Also let's not forget this is the first year that nemo has actually earned a 5-6 mil contract. He's been...shaky the other years. Maybe he turned a corner and will play vezina caliber til he falls off, but what if he goes back to his old ways one or two years into a huge contract?

 

[Nolan11]

Yeah I don't think not wanting to pay a goalie 5.5-7+mil is really bad pr at all. It's not taboo to want more money to sign depth and forwards/defense instead of tying up a huge amount of cap into a goalie.

Sure we might be able to fit him under the cap, that doesn't mean it's the best use of our cap.

Also let's not forget this is the first year that nemo has actually earned a 5-6 mil contract. He's been...shaky the other years. Maybe he turned a corner and will play vezina caliber til he falls off, but what if he goes back to his old ways one or two years into a huge contract?

Let us all hope he can continue last year's performance for the next 3-4 years, while we also change our system to generate a bit more 5-5 scoring differential. If Niemi does, 6 M would be something we would have to all agree (except Vassa ) was fine value. @ 7 M, I would be happier trading him for a Vezna caliber RETURN and finding a serviceable free agent to tandem with Stalock.

With Greiss leaving, Stalock up and Sateri not looking as good as he once did, anyone else wondering if we should try to pry Scott Wedgewood away from NJ? They may be willing to listen to offers now that they have Schneider. Something like that may help us 1-2 years down the road(In my mind, we have gone from our goalie farm being our strenth to an unknown).

From hockeysfuture, he rates a 7.5C:

Talent Analysis
A technically sound, hybrid style goaltender with great down-low net coverage and reflexes, Wedgewood often plays like he has ice in his veins. In his first year in the ECHL, Kinkaid faced the unenviable task of getting barraged with shots on a nightly basis. He does however seem to thrive under that type of heavy pressure. Wedgewood has the makings of a big-game goaltender and has shown the ability to be a dominant workhorse, often carrying the team on his back for large stretches of time. As a bonus, he also has great puck-handling skills, often acting as a third defenseman.



Future
Wedgewood played pretty well in his first season of professional hockey between Trenton and Albany. He’ll likely be promoted to the AHL to split time with Keith Kinkaid.

 

[Hobocop]

With Greiss leaving, Stalock up and Sateri not looking as good as he once did, anyone else wondering if we should try to pry Scott Wedgewood away from NJ? They may be willing to listen to offers now that they have Schneider. Something like that may help us 1-2 years down the road(In my mind, we have gone from our goalie farm being our strenth to an unknown).

For what purpose? Also in the system are J.P Anderson, Bergvik, Grosenick, etc. Using assets to acquire a new goalie prospect seems like the absolute last thing the Sharks should be doing.

 

[Dicdonya]

Nolan. I hope he keeps his good play up too. Yet Im actually closer to siding with Vaasa then others, I'd go 5mil and no more for my goalie, with the rising cap it's not what 5 mil is now, 6-7mil would be a deal breaker for me, as I think solid goalies can win cups, and id like to spend the extra mil or two on an elite forward or some better depth over a great goalie.

Now obviously if we have no solid goalies ready to step up, which we don't know because we never get to see our backups, or if there are none to be had via fa when his contract is up, then the decision would be a lot harder to let him go.

 

[hockfan1991]

Nabokov deserved this vezinas in 2008 more wins lower ga more shutouts then brodeur. He piled up a 130 plus wins and only 40 ish loses in 3 seasons. Could never get it done but he was vezinacaliber during those years. Doesn't mean the sharks didnt need to move on because even at his best he couldn't get us over the hump.

 

[do0glas]

regardless, i think the staff learned alot about what is working and what isnt.

im glad they shed some dead weight and tried to get faster. I hope that trend continues, and they loosen the reigns a bit on these guys and see what they can do.

 

[hohosaregood]

At this point in time, I think the going rate for a starting goaltender is probably at the very minimum $5 mil. If you don't want to pay that then you have to go find unproven talent and take a risk.

>$6 mil: Rask, Price, Crawford(after next year), Lundqvist, Rinne, Miller, Ward
>$5 mil: Fleury, Howard, Quick, Bobrovsky, Luongo, Lehtonen, Smith

So about half the league pays over $5 mil for their starting goalies while a good chunk are ELC/unproven goalies or older goalies with New Jersey having a $8 mil tandem. Then about 6 established goalies below $5 mil.

I think that if Niemi has another Vezina quality season then you'd be in a great position if he only got $6 million and you're risking trouble if you want to go with someone cheaper because you're either going to get an older goalie, a back up, or an unproven goalie.

 

[Hatrick Marleau]

regardless, i think the staff learned alot about what is working and what isnt.

im glad they shed some dead weight and tried to get faster. I hope that trend continues, and they loosen the reigns a bit on these guys and see what they can do.

Tmac: "The correct way to say it is irregardless!"

You are in offseason form do0glas

 

[SJeasy]

At this point in time, I think the going rate for a starting goaltender is probably at the very minimum $5 mil. If you don't want to pay that then you have to go find unproven talent and take a risk.

>$6 mil: Rask, Price, Crawford(after next year), Lundqvist, Rinne, Miller, Ward
>$5 mil: Fleury, Howard, Quick, Bobrovsky, Luongo, Lehtonen, Smith

So about half the league pays over $5 mil for their starting goalies while a good chunk are ELC/unproven goalies or older goalies with New Jersey having a $8 mil tandem. Then about 6 established goalies below $5 mil.

I think that if Niemi has another Vezina quality season then you'd be in a great position if he only got $6 million and you're risking trouble if you want to go with someone cheaper because you're either going to get an older goalie, a back up, or an unproven goalie.

You should break the categories into 5, 6 and 7. Any guy who is pulling $6.8mil should be in the $7mil category. Quite a few of your 6's are 7's. Most of the 7's have Vezina nominations at least. Effectively $4mil is a prove it contract for a guy with a full year's experience.