Speculation: 2017-18 Sharks roster discussion II

Status
Not open for further replies.

jarr92

Registered User
May 7, 2013
802
937
Here's a discussion point:

What you guys think the sharks top 6 looks 5 years from now?

I assume Thornton and Pavs will be gone, so what does that leave?
In their current form I think the top 6, barring any trades (which I'm sure will occur), would look something like this:

Meier - Couture - Labanc
Donskoi - Hertl - Gambrell

I personally believe that roster needs at least 2 top 6 players added to it. With that being said, what can be done to make that top 6 into a cup contender with their current assets?
 

rangerssharks414

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
32,311
1,648
Long Island, NY
Here's a discussion point:

What you guys think the sharks top 6 looks 5 years from now?

I assume Thornton and Pavs will be gone, so what does that leave?
In their current form I think the top 6, barring any trades (which I'm sure will occur), would look something like this:

Meier - Couture - Labanc
Donskoi - Hertl - Gambrell

I personally believe that roster needs at least 2 top 6 players added to it. With that being said, what can be done to make that top 6 into a cup contender with their current assets?

I would hope that someone else that was drafted early is there somewhere. Five years from now is a long time, though.
 

hohosaregood

Banned
Sep 1, 2011
32,380
12,574
Here's a discussion point:

What you guys think the sharks top 6 looks 5 years from now?

I assume Thornton and Pavs will be gone, so what does that leave?
In their current form I think the top 6, barring any trades (which I'm sure will occur), would look something like this:

Meier - Couture - Labanc
Donskoi - Hertl - Gambrell

I personally believe that roster needs at least 2 top 6 players added to it. With that being said, what can be done to make that top 6 into a cup contender with their current assets?
Nothing you can do with it. No elite scoring there. Only hope is for DW to luck his way into a trade seeing how drafting won't get you anything and DW and Burke are gonna die before they're fired.
 

Juxtaposer

Outro: Divina Comedia
Dec 21, 2009
47,587
16,317
Bay Area
It’s always fun to project rosters five years out and have like six of the players still be there by the time five years actually passes.

Trades will happen. Prospects will happen. FA signings will happen. It’s impossible to even come close.
 

Vaasa

Registered User
Aug 23, 2006
8,937
23
Sacramento, CA
I'd rather not keep Boedker. Infact he is the one player I would buyout at the end of this year if we cannot get any trade partner. This deal seems ideal even though we do give up the best player in the deal, we still get back 2 really good players back.

Plus I am really hoping that all that extra cap space makes DW go really hard for Tavares.

With Thornton ($8 mil), Ward ($3.25 mil), and Hansen ($2 mil) coming off the books they have more than enough to pay Tavares $10 mil per year (which is what it will likely take) and still have Wards full $3.25 mil left over which would cover guys like O'Regan, Sorenson, Goodrow, and Labanc as full time replacements. All that without moving Boedker. So I don't think moving Boedker is a requirement for going for Tavares. And if they manage to move Martin that another nearly $5 mil freed up for another 1-year deal for JT. Not to mention the $10 mil + in free cap space they already have.
 

jarr92

Registered User
May 7, 2013
802
937
It’s always fun to project rosters five years out and have like six of the players still be there by the time five years actually passes.

Trades will happen. Prospects will happen. FA signings will happen. It’s impossible to even come close.

Thanks for the input captain obvious. God forbid some discussion is done on a discussion board :huh:

Is the future core really that outlandish to talk about? Or shall we discuss why Schlemko is better then (insert player) for the 1000th time?
 

Juxtaposer

Outro: Divina Comedia
Dec 21, 2009
47,587
16,317
Bay Area
Thanks for the input captain obvious. God forbid some discussion is done on a discussion board :huh:

Is the future core really that outlandish to talk about? Or shall we discuss why Schlemko is better then (insert player) for the 1000th time?

Interestingly, I never said it was wrong to discuss, nor did I say it was outlandish. But I do know that the only people still talking about Schlemko are his detractors.
 

The Ice Hockey Dude

Ack! Thbbft!
Jul 18, 2003
7,070
350
Lost in the SW!
Ok, in looking at teams that are out of it, e.g. the Habs. Which do you think a better fit in teal? Pacioretty (1 year left after this one at a cap hit of 4.5m), Gallagher (3 years at 3.75m per) or Galchenyuk (2 yrs at 4.9m).

I'm thinking Martin (1 more year at 4.25m) + hansen (ufa) +- cap to make it cap neutral for Pacioretty (or another from above)!

:popcorn:
 

TomasHertlsRooster

Don’t say eye test when you mean points
May 14, 2012
33,360
25,417
Fremont, CA
With Thornton ($8 mil), Ward ($3.25 mil), and Hansen ($2 mil) coming off the books they have more than enough to pay Tavares $10 mil per year (which is what it will likely take) and still have Wards full $3.25 mil left over which would cover guys like O'Regan, Sorenson, Goodrow, and Labanc as full time replacements. All that without moving Boedker. So I don't think moving Boedker is a requirement for going for Tavares. And if they manage to move Martin that another nearly $5 mil freed up for another 1-year deal for JT. Not to mention the $10 mil + in free cap space they already have.

We'll also have Vlasic and Jones' extensions kicking in. But we also have the money from Marleau's contract that we never spent and money from the cap probably going up that we never spent. I have no idea where we stand, cap wise, tbh.

I'd like to get Tavares among a bunch of other impact forwards we could probably get. I'm of the opinion that if they're not clearly rebuilding (and they sure as hell aren't with Burns/Vlasic/Jones' extensions), they might as well just try to win the Cup every year and maybe they'll get lucky. Hoffman, Pacioretty, Kane, Tavares; lot of guys available who could push us toward potentially being contenders.

Ok, in looking at teams that are out of it, e.g. the Habs. Which do you think a better fit in teal? Pacioretty (1 year left after this one at a cap hit of 4.5m), Gallagher (3 years at 3.75m per) or Galchenyuk (2 yrs at 4.9m).

I'm thinking Martin (1 more year at 4.25m) + hansen (ufa) +- cap to make it cap neutral for Pacioretty (or another from above)!

:popcorn:

They wouldn't take that offer for Pacioretty in a million years.
 

DarrylshutzSydor

Registered User
Aug 9, 2007
2,411
547
California
The Isles would be morons if they did not match an offer of $10 mil for Tavares, and Tavares would be stupid to sign with SJ of all the teams that offered that much for him.
 

Gecklund

Registered User
Jul 17, 2012
25,244
11,818
California
Everyone bashing on Vlasic and Jones when the extensions haven’t even kicked in and Burns when he’s been fine this year.
 

The Nemesis

Semper Tyrannus
Apr 11, 2005
88,246
31,622
Langley, BC
I said this in the NHL news/notes thread, but this feels like what everyone else must've felt like with the Thornton trade. Like Arizona just went to the first team they talked to and took what was on the table instead of shopping around at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad