Value of: A goal-scoring winger to SJ

[PAZ]

It's kinda hilarious how often Sharks fans forget a good forward when they create rosters.

Us Avs fans often forget a good forward when we create our rosters as well. Until we realize we didn't and have the likes of Iginla, Grigorenko, and Soderberg in our top 6

 

[jMoneyBrah]

I don't think Nash is the kind of player we need. Signed for way too long. He would take a spot from players like Meier, Labanc, and Goldobin

Nash is signed through next season. It's not really that big of a commitment. He still performs and would be a bargain next year at $3.9M

And I don't think he'd be taking spot from players like Meier, Labanc or Goldobin so much as pushing them down to third line roles to play with Hertl. Honestly, both have been okay this season (Labanc has been putting up points decently for a rookie) but nothing shows me they either will produce at the level Nash can over the next season and a half.

Also a third line of Meier-Hertl-Labanc could be something that could be dangerous against opponents bottom 6.

Also Goldobin being blocked by Nash is not nearly as worrisome as Heed and Ryan being blocked by Dillon. Heed has put up a ton of points this season and is 25. We should find out what he have in him and Ryan has been owning his minutes for over a season on the Barracuda.

I think of all the wingers conceivably available Nash is the most likely to step in and provide great 5v5 scoring and add solid 2 way play.

Lastly getting a legit top line winger allows Hertl to center the third line (with by far the most talent we ever had to put on his wings, not Karlsson and Wingels like last time he was at 3C) while not hurting the effectiveness of the top line.

/end rant

 

[Vaasa]

This Nash deal wouldn't preclude us from trading for a 3rd pairing / depth dman not named Polak... We'd have plenty of cap space.

Would we? Nash would cost a bit more than Tierney and Dillon combined. So you add his salary and add Carpenter's salary on top of it (assuming he's the Tierney replacement on the roster) to assess the cap hit change. Don't forget the retention on Wingels and the last bit of the Burish buyout and the Sharks have to be at $1 million or less in cap space. Factor in the carryover bonus impact from last year and potential bonuses this year and I would not be surprised if the Sharks have no real cap space at all if you carry the current roster out to the end of the year.

When you factor in the moves they made (Wingels and Nieto) just to clear enough cap space to keep up youngsters who all earn less than $1 million, and to bring Hertl back off LTIR, and that argument seems more likely to me. So, 'plenty of space'? I seems unlikely.

 

[jMoneyBrah]

Would we? Nash would cost a bit more than Tierney and Dillon combined. So you add his salary and add Carpenter's salary on top of it (assuming he's the Tierney replacement on the roster) to assess the cap hit change. Don't forget the retention on Wingels and the last bit of the Burish buyout and the Sharks have to be at $1 million or less in cap space. Factor in the carryover bonus impact from last year and potential bonuses this year and I would not be surprised if the Sharks have no real cap space at all if you carry the current roster out to the end of the year.

When you factor in the moves they made (Wingels and Nieto) just to clear enough cap space to keep up youngsters who all earn less than $1 million, and to bring Hertl back off LTIR, and that argument seems more likely to me. So, 'plenty of space'? I seems unlikely.

Yeah, plenty of space is pretty inaccurate. This is the breakdown from capfriendly:

BUYOUTS
A. Burish ($616,667)

DETAILS
Roster Size: 23
NHL Salary Cap: $73,000,000
Bonus Overages: $617,000
Cap Hit: $72,789,501
Cap Space: $210,499

https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/252271

 

[bernmeister]

Then I am a "No". I think the Sharks need defensive depth more than they need Nash. But Doug Wilson has never listened to me in the past, why should he start now?

your confirmed vote is acknowledged, thank you.
running total remains:
Result is +7, -1

I don't think Nash is the kind of player we need. Signed for way too long. He would take a spot from players like Meier, Labanc, and Goldobin

this is leaning no, but I will see if you respond to....

Nash is signed through next season. It's not really that big of a commitment. He still performs and would be a bargain next year at $3.9M

And I don't think he'd be taking spot from players like Meier, Labanc or Goldobin so much as pushing them down to third line roles to play with Hertl. Honestly, both have been okay this season (Labanc has been putting up points decently for a rookie) but nothing shows me they either will produce at the level Nash can over the next season and a half.

Also a third line of Meier-Hertl-Labanc could be something that could be dangerous against opponents bottom 6.

Also Goldobin being blocked by Nash is not nearly as worrisome as Heed and Ryan being blocked by Dillon. Heed has put up a ton of points this season and is 25. We should find out what he have in him and Ryan has been owning his minutes for over a season on the Barracuda.

I think of all the wingers conceivably available Nash is the most likely to step in and provide great 5v5 scoring and add solid 2 way play.

Lastly getting a legit top line winger allows Hertl to center the third line (with by far the most talent we ever had to put on his wings, not Karlsson and Wingels like last time he was at 3C) while not hurting the effectiveness of the top line.

/end rant

It is objective matter of fact that Nash ends contract next year, arguably a bargain at half price of 3.9m.
It is fact he is in his early 30s, you would have first crack at extending, obviously for less, if he is comfortable, he is well off, it is not a given, but reasonable to speculate he may elect to return w/budd Thonrton at home discount, perhaps 2-3 range.
Of course if Sharks reject this deal and NYR move Nash elsewhere, he may take top $ there.

Italic: balance well said, enlightening.
I'm lacking depth of insight on SJ compared to my Rangers, but this was helpful and reaffirms the 'feel' I had this deal would be a shot at the top, which would bump down in your lineup, so it would be helpful there, and again thread topic is about adding scoring W help to Sharks.
Also good to know Dillon departure would create opportunity for 2 guys eating his minutes, seems like that would work out as well!

 

[Pavelski2112]

I'd probably do that Nash deal, hesitantly. There are guys in the A who can replace Dillon and Tierney and our 1st will probably be a low pick.

Remember when Couture and/or Pavelski were reportedly the asking price for him? Fun times.

 

[Gilligans Island]

Yeah, plenty of space is pretty inaccurate. This is the breakdown from capfriendly:

BUYOUTS
A. Burish ($616,667)

DETAILS
Roster Size: 23
NHL Salary Cap: $73,000,000
Bonus Overages: $617,000
Cap Hit: $72,789,501
Cap Space: $210,499

https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/252271

I assume Heed wouldn't be up once Demelo's off LTIR so that increases cap space by $775K. Cap space is then $985,501. That's on an annual basis so yes, we'd have room to trade for a bottom pairing dman with a decent AAV.

I know it's not ideal to roll with 6 dmen for the remainder of the season but with the Cuda in the same location, it's no big deal to run the AHL shuttle.

 

[jMoneyBrah]

Also good to know Dillon departure would create opportunity for 2 guys eating his minutes, seems like that would work out as well!

Almost hilariously, Dillon is sort blocking Mueller and Bergman as well. The Sharks currently have Dillon as 3LD and Schlemko as 3RD(who is also a LHD, but can play well enough on the right side).

All of Heed, Ryan, Mueller, and Bergman have probably played well enough to get solid looks at the NHL. If/when the Sharks move Dillon they can take their pick on who is the best of the bunch, regardless of handedness, and then pair them with Schlemko.

 

[bernmeister]

I'd probably do that Nash deal, hesitantly. There are guys in the A who can replace Dillon and Tierney and our 1st will probably be a low pick.

Remember when Couture and/or Pavelski were reportedly the asking price for him? Fun times.

running total now:
Result is +8, -1

it's not just value, it's currency and timing, too.

when we got Nash, we needed an impact F
now we need to replenish our D
today is 1 thing
tomorrow it's another

cyclical equilibrium or something like that

 

[ThePlanet]

running total now:
Result is +8, -1

Put me down for a hell no.

 

[Gecklund]

running total now:
Result is +8, -1

it's not just value, it's currency and timing, too.

when we got Nash, we needed an impact F
now we need to replenish our D
today is 1 thing
tomorrow it's another

cyclical equilibrium or something like that

There's -3/4

 

[bernmeister]

Put me down for a hell no.

There's -3/4

that's leaning enough to no I have to mark it as such given your clarification

running total now:
Result is +8, -3

 

[jMoneyBrah]

that's leaning enough to no I have to mark it as such given your clarification

running total now:
Result is +8, -3

I'm interested to hear thoughts from other Rangers fans.

 

[bernmeister]

I'm interested to hear thoughts from other Rangers fans.

by all means, I just thought we should hear first from Shark fans

I'm out til tom.
I'll advise Ranger board of our survey results then, not Monday, and invite feedback here as well as there.

If not soon enough, don't wait for me.

update:
posted it on the Rangers trade board and asked specifically they also come here

 

[bernmeister]

sorry to see no Ranger fans replying here

very quiet on this at NYR trade thread also

1 reply who said/inferred, although not bad/thought NY could do better.

Also, specifically wanted to not retain on Nash, and deal him for the full 7.8 on his last year after this season. Then regardless of return, redeploy that cap space w/best FA options

 

[Shootertooter]

I would do the Nash deal too. I don't think the Rangers are going to make a serious run this season with the d the way it is currently assembled. They certainly can't beat any of Pitts/Wash or CBJ in a 7 game series without a serious revamping. I don't see them getting the #2 they need and at this point trading Miller, who would be the obvious trade fodder, would be stupid.......Nash can and should be moved by the deadline....love the guy, but it is time to move on and not have to protect him as well.

 

[Trxjw]

If the Rangers retain 50% on Nash, they'll be doing it to get the right pieces coming back. I don't see it being a quality for quantity deal.

 

[Nolan11]

If the Rangers retain 50% on Nash, they'll be doing it to get the right pieces coming back. I don't see it being a quality for quantity deal.

I too think it unrealistic to expect Rangers to retain half. I think they would need to retain some to make any deal, but not half (not at a price sharks could pay). I think a more workable deal would be Nash @ 5.55 M. (Retaining 2-1/4M). I can imagine a deal working with this as a basis:

Nash @5.55 + 2018 2nd for Dillon + Ward + Bergman + 1st

Rangers take on a million in cap minus whomever gets pushed off the roster by Dillon. After the expansion, they likely could move ward for picks to help with cap (depending on who vegas takes if they still need room).

 

[Trxjw]

I too think it unrealistic to expect Rangers to retain half. I think they would need to retain some to make any deal, but not half (not at a price sharks could pay). I think a more workable deal would be Nash @ 5.55 M. (Retaining 2-1/4M). I can imagine a deal working with this as a basis:

Nash @5.55 + 2018 2nd for Dillon + Ward + Bergman + 1st

Rangers take on a million in cap minus whomever gets pushed off the roster by Dillon. After the expansion, they likely could move ward for picks to help with cap (depending on who vegas takes if they still need room).

The issue is Dillon doesn't push anyone off the roster, and Ward isn't useful to a team with a ton of forward depth already. Bergman is a nice prospect, and a first would be nice after giving them up for years, but there's not enough impact in that deal to make it worth the Rangers while.

 

[bernmeister]

I would do the Nash deal too. I don't think the Rangers are going to make a serious run this season with the d the way it is currently assembled. They certainly can't beat any of Pitts/Wash or CBJ in a 7 game series without a serious revamping. I don't see them getting the #2 they need and at this point trading Miller, who would be the obvious trade fodder, would be stupid.......Nash can and should be moved by the deadline....love the guy, but it is time to move on and not have to protect him as well.

running total now:
Result is +9, -3

 

[bernmeister]

If the Rangers retain 50% on Nash, they'll be doing it to get the right pieces coming back. I don't see it being a quality for quantity deal.

that's a no
running total now:
Result is +9, -4

 

[bernmeister]

If the Rangers retain 50% on Nash, they'll be doing it to get the right pieces coming back. I don't see it being a quality for quantity deal.

We need D depth
Mueller = a 1st
Bergman = a 2nd
+ a first

we could do a lot worse.

I too think it unrealistic to expect Rangers to retain half. I think they would need to retain some to make any deal, but not half (not at a price sharks could pay). I think a more workable deal would be Nash @ 5.55 M. (Retaining 2-1/4M). I can imagine a deal working with this as a basis:

Nash @5.55 + 2018 2nd for Dillon + Ward + Bergman + 1st

Rangers take on a million in cap minus whomever gets pushed off the roster by Dillon. After the expansion, they likely could move ward for picks to help with cap (depending on who vegas takes if they still need room).

No.
I would consider revised offer, but not at cutting out Muller w/o another 1st to replace him.

The issue is Dillon doesn't push anyone off the roster, and Ward isn't useful to a team with a ton of forward depth already. Bergman is a nice prospect, and a first would be nice after giving them up for years, but there's not enough impact in that deal to make it worth the Rangers while.

Agree as to Ward being substituted for Muller
Dillon, he handles lower end duties, maybe he can turn into a better Holden for us. If not, surely we can flip him somewhere.
He certainly pushes Girardi once he is bought out

 

[Savant]

Nash @5.55 + 2018 2nd for Dillon + Ward + Bergman + 1st

Swap Dillon out for Muller and/or a pick and this is better.

 

[ThePlanet]

The issue I have with this deal, is what it does to SJ's depth. Not just in this season, but moving forward as well. We didn't get bounced in the playoffs due to lack of high end skill. We were eliminated because of Pittsburgh's superior depth. Yes, Nash would move players down our lineup, but at what cost? Ward has outperformed Nash in playoff competition, and has done so with third line ice time, rather than first line. Am I saying Ward is a better player? No. What I'm saying is the bang for the buck you get out of him is phenomenal, and the upgrade to Nash isn't worth the rest of the package.

 

[Nolan11]

Swap Dillon out for Muller and/or a pick and this is better.

Problem is cap hit. Sharks have zero room this year, so swapping out Dillon makes the deal unworkable for cap reasons. Ward and Dillon have nearly identical cap hits: 3.27M/year. Even if you retain 50% we can't swing a deal with just one of them + picks/prospects and make the cap work for this year. Our expendable assets to balance the cap = Dillon and/or one of Boedker/Ward/Karlsson (pending RFA @ 1.65M). I'll take one more stab at this:

Dillon + Karlsson + Mueller + Bergman + 1st for Nash @ 4.8 M + 2018 2nd + 2018 3rd.

If you figure we bring up Heed to play 7th D and Demelo plays bottom pair once he is back from broken wrist, the cap for this year is roughly equal. NYR saves 1-1/2 M on next years cap if they don't choose to extend Karlsson (sure you could swap his rights for picks, he is a pretty good career bottom sixer).