Speculation: Sharks Roster Discussion Part VI

[CrypTic]

They're saying both guys want 3 year deals (Marleau possible 3+).

Would anyone be opposed to something like 3 years at 4-3-2 (AAV of 3 million) with likely NMC/NTCs?

I'd be fine with that but I can't see them taking that. They'd get more money from taking a 5M x 2, and I'm sure they'll get offered that and probably more.

I think the Sharks, from a business perspective, would have a really hard time with a multi-year rebuild. It would have to take serious buy-in from Plattner on eating big financial losses for a few years because attendance will plummet.

Sadly, I agree. I don't think Hasso wants to eat annual losses even if he comes out ahead with valuation or over the long run in terms of ticket (and related) revenue. He seems pretty sensitive to cash flows.

 

[Winky]

I'd be fine with that but I can't see them taking that. They'd get more money from taking a 5M x 2, and I'm sure they'll get offered that and probably more.



Sadly, I agree. I don't think Hasso wants to eat losses even if he comes out ahead with valuation or over the long run in terms of ticket (and related) revenue.

You think so? Even with the knee surgery on Jumbo?

 

[CrypTic]

You think so? Even with the knee surgery on Jumbo?

I do. I said earlier that I'd be fine if they took 3rd liner money for 3 years, and was thinking of about $3M/year or so. But I think that at least a couple of teams are desperate enough for scoring, especially centers, that they'd roll the dice, assuming that, at worst, they can LTIR Thornton. Why take 3 x 3M if you can get 2 x 5 or even 2 x 4M?

I guess we'll see.

 

[DrFeelgood]

I do. I said earlier that I'd be fine if they took 3rd liner money for 3 years, and was thinking of about $3M/year or so. But I think that at least a couple of teams are desperate enough for scoring, especially centers, that they'd roll the dice, assuming that, at worst, they can LTIR Thornton. Why take 3 x 3M if you can get 2 x 5 or even 2 x 4M?

I guess we'll see.

I don't see Jumbo splitting hairs over that small amount of money unless it is to a legit cup contender. He's already made a ton of money over his career and doesn't seem like one to be chasing dollars unless it gets him closer to a cup.

Sadly, I agree. I don't think Hasso wants to eat annual losses even if he comes out ahead with valuation or over the long run in terms of ticket (and related) revenue. He seems pretty sensitive to cash flows.

He's worth a ton of money (~$10 billion) so he could at least afford it, it's really about how much of a loss he's willing to take and for how long. Also how many fans they think they'd lose for good in the process.

If they were somehow able to get out from under their horrific TV deal it would be a bit more likely but I don't really see it happening. I think they'd rather be a bubble team that is profitable (or close to it) than a full on rebuild team that is taking big money losses.

 

[CrypTic]

I don't see Jumbo splitting hairs over that small amount of money unless it is to a legit cup contender. He's already made a ton of money over his career and doesn't seem like one to be chasing dollars unless it gets him closer to a cup.

You don't think Doug would match a 2 x5 or especially a 2 x 4? Maybe he's firm on not going over one year but I'd think he'd go two years if that's what other teams were offering.

He's worth a ton of money (~$10 billion) so he could at least afford it, it's really about how much of a loss he's willing to take and for how long. Also how many fans they think they'd lose for good in the process.

If they were somehow able to get out from under their horrific TV deal it would be a bit more likely but I don't really see it happening. I think they'd rather be a bubble team that is profitable (or close to it) than a full on rebuild team that is taking big money losses.

I know he's worth a lot of money but he's said before that he didn't want to lose money. That was vague bc it could have been that he was willing to lose revenue as long as he made it up on valuation. But his later comments were to the effect that he wanted to be at least revenue neutral each year. That's a lot more restrictive.

I think SAP was having cash flow problems which probably added to that.

I don't see them getting out of that contract either. AFAICS Comcast has no incentive to do that.

 

[Sysreq]

The thing about 3 years, is the Couture and Pavelski extensions. If you did three years, you would risk not having the cap for those two or having to spend to free cap space. You have to get tricky - like a bonus heavy contract or something.

 

[CrypTic]

The thing about 3 years, is the Couture and Pavelski extensions. If you did three years, you would risk not having the cap for those two or having to spend to free cap space. You have to get tricky - like a bonus heavy contract or something.

It has to be a one year contract to use performance bonuses (which are the ones you can carry over). That's why many posters here were hoping that they'd take one-year contracts.

 

[DrFeelgood]

You don't think Doug would match a 2 x5 or especially a 2 x 4? Maybe he's firm on not going over one year but I'd think he'd go two years if that's what other teams were offering.

I think he would for a 2x4, would probably have to really think about a 2x5 because that's a lot to commit to a guy his age coming off of a major knee injury. I was more speaking towards what Thornton wants rather than what Doug would offer. If Doug offered something like 3x3 and another team offered 2x4 or 2x5, I think Jumbo would stay because I don't see him splitting hairs over that small amount of money unless it's to a legit cup contender.

I know he's worth a lot of money but he's said before that he didn't want to lose money. That was vague bc it could have been that he was willing to lose revenue as long as he made it up on valuation. But his later comments were to the effect that he wanted to be at least revenue neutral each year. That's a lot more restrictive.

I think SAP was having cash flow problems which probably added to that.

I don't see them getting out of that contract either. AFAICS Comcast has no incentive to do that.

Agreed 100% which is why I don't see a multi-year rebuild being likely unless they really convince Plattner to get on board. I don't see that happening unless they get out from their TV deal which I really don't see happening. Not only does it not make sense for Comcast to cancel it but even the NHL tried to intervene with no success.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

The thing about 3 years, is the Couture and Pavelski extensions. If you did three years, you would risk not having the cap for those two or having to spend to free cap space. You have to get tricky - like a bonus heavy contract or something.

There's nothing tricky to it at all. Couture and Pavelski are at or very close to their peaks in terms of their cap dollar command capability. However, even if we say that they're worth 7 mil after the next two seasons, at this point, you have Paul Martin making more than enough to cover what would be needed to account for their raises. And when it comes to Thornton and Marleau on three year deals, you can't do a bonus heavy contract in the manner of speaking that it influences your overall team cap figure. Bonuses only matter to the team cap figure on one year deals for players that qualify for said deals.

 

[CrypTic]

I think he would for a 2x4, would probably have to really think about a 2x5 because that's a lot to commit to a guy his age coming off of a major knee injury. I was more speaking towards what Thornton wants rather than what Doug would offer. If Doug offered something like 3x3 and another team offered 2x4 or 2x5, I think Jumbo would stay because I don't see him splitting hairs over that small amount of money unless it's to a legit cup contender.

Agreed 100% which is why I don't see a multi-year rebuild being likely unless they really convince Plattner to get on board. I don't see that happening unless they get out from their TV deal which I really don't see happening. Not only does it not make sense for Comcast to cancel it but even the NHL tried to intervene with no success.

Jumbo might but I think he'd ask DW to match the two year deal. I think that Doug would, though I agree that he might not with 2 x 5. But I think he'd at least go 2 x 4.5 (if an attractive 2 x 5 was on the table from another team). I think Jumbo would go for that. So we're basically agreeing here, whether looking at it from Thornton's or Wilson's POV

I didn't think the Comcast deal would be changed even when the NHL intervened bc it didn't sound like they were doing much. I don't blame them bc a team can't expect the NHL to come rescue it when they negotiate an awful deal. (It would encourage teams to not be careful with their deals for one and the NHL isn't that rich for another.) Someone would need to offer a big incentive for Comcast to re-negotiate (roughly equal to the value of the current contract less the value of the new contract) and then all you're doing is shifting money either from later years to earlier ones or from one party (e.g., the NHL) to another (e.g,the Sharks).

 

[Satastic]

What do you guys think of Del Zotto? He could add some offense on the blue line and play third pairing, #2 PP minutes

 

[hockfan1991]

Jumbo might but I think he'd ask DW to match the two year deal. I think that Doug would, though I agree that he might not with 2 x 5. But I think he'd at least go 2 x 4.5 (if an attractive 2 x 5 was on the table from another team). I think Jumbo would go for that. So we're basically agreeing here, whether looking at it from Thornton's or Wilson's POV

I didn't think the Comcast deal would be changed even when the NHL intervened bc it didn't sound like they were doing much. I don't blame them bc a team can't expect the NHL to come rescue it when they negotiate an awful deal. (It would encourage teams to not be careful with their deals for one and the NHL isn't that rich for another.) Someone would need to offer a big incentive for Comcast to re-negotiate (roughly equal to the value of the current contract less the value of the new contract) and then all you're doing is shifting money either from later years to earlier ones or from one party (e.g., the NHL) to another (e.g,the Sharks).

I think each will get at least 5 million.

A far as Joe, if not for the injury and fatigue. I think he would have had a fine year. and he probably gets his 3yrx5.5-6 million deal. I didn't expect him to put up PPG at age 36, put he is a generational talent. now with age and injury everyone questions and is hesitant, for good reason. I believe if everything goes accordingly and heals properly he is still somewhere in between production wise. He probably never will be PPG again, at same time with rest, pretty much no playoffs, world cup, which obviously greatly affected him this year. I think he can bounce back and produce at a 60 point level. Will see what happens but before this year i thought joe had at least a few more 60-70 point seasons, and at the back end could still put up 45-50 points. Thats what elite players due. To many ifs and maybes the organization may want to put up with, but he's always been good to them when it was time for negotiating, they could return the favor. I think Joe has got at least another 250-300 Points in him before he hangs them up, will they be here or somewhere else,?

 

[Internazionale]

What do you guys think of Del Zotto? He could add some offense on the blue line and play third pairing, #2 PP minutes

I'd rather have one of the young guys come in and take that pairing.

 

[Juxtaposer]

OTOH, I may be pickier than some bc I think it's almost as depressing to be just above average and know that you're unlikely to make it out of the first round if you do make the dance as it is to just miss the playoffs. That's not much of a difference to me bc we're stuck being mediocre either way, which is the worst kind of team given the way entry draft picks are set up in the NHL.

I agree with you completely but I know who wouldn't: Hasso. One of those scenarios, while still depressing, involves playoff revenue and that's the one he'll choose.

 

[rangerssharks414]

Serious question here. So if they do bounce (whether it is this year or 2 years from now), you guys basically advocate going a full-rebuild as the only solution after their departure?

Pavelski (without Thornton), Couture, Hertl, Vlasic, Burns and Jones as the core is probably a first or second round exit team at best. I would rather them do a full rebuild, but I don't think the fanbase could take it like I've said in the past.

 

[PacificOceanPotion]

So basically we're 2 or 3 lean years away from losing the team to Quebec or something...

 

[Juxtaposer]

So basically we're 2 or 3 lean years away from losing the team to Quebec or something...

If Arizona and Florida haven't been relocated, neither will we be.

 

[CrypTic]

I agree with you completely but I know who wouldn't: Hasso. One of those scenarios, while still depressing, involves playoff revenue and that's the one he'll choose.

*sigh* Now I agree with you completely.

 

[Led Zappa]

Sadly, I agree.

If Thornton and Marleau are leaving, then they need to start a rebuild. And not a half-a**** rebuild like they did a few years ago.

You mean the half-assed rebuild that took us to the STF's? That half-assed rebuild?

 

[CrypTic]

If Arizona and Florida haven't been relocated, neither will we be.

I agree. We joke about but I can't see the NHL not intervening to keep a team in the Bay Area if it ever came to that. Look at what they've done to keep AZ there and it's a much smaller market. Plus, even with our crappy broadcast deal, we're around the middle in revenue (#11), operating income (#14), value (#13), and debt/value (#11). Most NHL teams are doing worse financially than the Sharks.

https://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/#header:operatingIncome_sortreverse:true

 

[Sideshow Raheem]

Hasso has endless money to burn and hasn't had any qualms spending to the salary cap despite the TV deal. We're not gonna move.

 

[DrFeelgood]

Hasso has endless money to burn and hasn't had any qualms spending to the salary cap despite the TV deal. We're not gonna move.

We're not going to move but I also don't see us doing a multi-year rebuild that causes the team to lose lots of money and fans over multiple years.

 

[WTFetus]

You mean the half-assed rebuild that took us to the STF's? That half-assed rebuild?

Solid false equivalence. What part of that "rebuild" helped us get to the SCF the following year?

People say "half-assed" because it wasted a good year of Thornton, Marleau, Burns, Couture, and Pavelski's career and all we got out of it was Timo Meier.

 

[Sysreq]

You could structure the rebuild in a way to be cost-neutral even with decreased fan support and loss of play-off revenue. Look at what the budget teams like Arizona do. Plus Hasso just got 17 million for expansion. That should buy a season or two of mediocre revenue.

 

[lucky0slevin]

What do you guys think of Del Zotto? He could add some offense on the blue line and play third pairing, #2 PP minutes

How about we try heed instead of del Zotto...