Speculation: 2021 Expansion draft

[Pinkfloyd]

Quick question what do you think the Sharks would get for Burns in a trade? If you don't understand why Simek has higher trade value then the whole conversation is pointless. What does provide for the future of the franchise? His numbers are falling off a cliff.

During his peak with the Sharks Burns Corsi was reached a high of 61.7% and was usually in the upper fifties. This year it is currently 46.8 % which is the lowest of his career. His Corsi Rel during his prime peaked at 11.3% and was 8+% during his prime. He's now a -0.9% in Corsi Rel.

His Fenwick peaked at 61.9% and was in the middle to upper fifties during his prime, an he's now 46.5% a with a negative Fenwick Rel of 1.9 (also happens to be the first time in his career).

All of his scoring numbers are down to the levels during his first year as a Shark. His shots are way down. His C/60 peaked at 29.3 and was often in the high teens/low twenties during his prime and he's currently a negative 7.2. Same with his F/60 which is also negative for the first time in his career.

He and Simek have similar per 60 stat stats save for goal rate shot attempts.

So, explain to me how a player who is clearly falling off a cliff and has similar stats while being paid nearly 4x as much more valuable than an asset that has a shorter term and whose value isn't deteriorating with anywhere near the same velocity?

The Sharks would have to take on bad money or give pick(s)/prospects to get rid of Burns. The Sharks might be able to wrangle a late round pick for Simek and could easily expose him in expansion.

[Mod edit] The facts remain the Sharks have one of the worst prospect pools in the NHL and they are nailed to the wall with hjgh-dollar value contracts of which only Kane and Couture are living up to...

24 out of 31 here https://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-farm-system-rankings/
26 out of 31 here https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2911430-nhl-farm-system-rankings-which-team-has-the-best-group-of-prospects

78% of the salary cap max is being spent on big contracts (Couture, Kane, Meier, Hertl, Labanc, Karlsson, Burns, Vlasic, Jones) and Meier's contract, which puts the Sharks on the hook for a 10 million dollar cap hit for an additional year if they elect to make a QO.

So, knowing all of this what are you going to pay Hertl in 2022-2023 and for what term? -7-8+ million for 7-8 years? What about Ferraro when his he needs a new contract as well in 2022-2023, or what about Donato at the end of this year? Balcers? Gambrell?

There's nothing sensational about what I've put to paper. It's all factual data with reasonable analysis. I'm sorry that it's upsetting that the Sharks are currently a giant disaster from a player personnel perspective, but burying your head in the sand isn't going make it any better.

While Doug Wilson did an admiral job of keeping this franchise competitive for a long period, his ego royally f***ed this franchise and the bill is coming due.

[Mod edit] I don't care how people view prospect pools. It's irrelevant on the whole because they're guessing and building a team is more than just your prospect pool. There's nothing reasonable about saying they are 5+ years away from competing based on a very limited set of data. [Mod edit]

 

[Lebanezer]

Reopening now. Keep it civil.

 

[stator]

I don't see much help in this year's draft unless the Sharks win the lottery. Outside of Beniers, there doesn't appear to be much in the 1st round that fit the Sharks need.

Drafting a goalie in the 1st, like Wallstedt seems more like a risky pick for a 1st round draft. Much like Merkley was in 2018. I think only Fluery made his NHL team right out of the draft, if I'm not mistaken. The rest of the 1st round goalies have taken a couple of years to develop.

 

[Barrie22]

I don't see much help in this year's draft unless the Sharks win the lottery. Outside of Beniers, there doesn't appear to be much in the 1st round that fit the Sharks need.

Drafting a goalie in the 1st, like Wallstedt seems more like a risky pick for a 1st round draft. Much like Merkley was in 2018. I think only Fluery made his NHL team right out of the draft, if I'm not mistaken. The rest of the 1st round goalies have taken a couple of years to develop.

Any one we take should not be expected to jump in 1st year. Just look at the 1st overall this year, that kind of player would be much help to this team even if we won the lottery last season.

 

[fasterthanlight]

Maybe we can trade this year's first for one next year for extra odds at wright?

 

[Barrie22]

Maybe we can trade this year's first for one next year for extra odds at wright?

If the plan changes to a rebuild that is what i would do, if we are not in range of the top 5.

 

[themelkman]

If the plan changes to a rebuild that is what i would do, if we are not in range of the top 5.

Its a huge risk. What if that pick is like 2oth and we pick 10th this year, thats not worth it to me.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I don't see much help in this year's draft unless the Sharks win the lottery. Outside of Beniers, there doesn't appear to be much in the 1st round that fit the Sharks need.

Drafting a goalie in the 1st, like Wallstedt seems more like a risky pick for a 1st round draft. Much like Merkley was in 2018. I think only Fluery made his NHL team right out of the draft, if I'm not mistaken. The rest of the 1st round goalies have taken a couple of years to develop.

This depends on what you see as help and what timeframe you’re talking about. Anyone in the top ten will be useful in time. We can definitely use another top four defenseman whether right or left-handed. They can certainly use a playmaking forward like Johnson or Eklund.

 

[Barrie22]

Its a huge risk. What if that pick is like 2oth and we pick 10th this year, thats not worth it to me.

I just keep hearing there is more depth in next years and also top heavier in next one. So if the goal is to rebuild completely, then 2 near for sure players is better then 1 50/50 player.

If the goal stays the same and it is just a quick refresh, then keep it and pick it for needs.

 

[fasterthanlight]

An extra 10 percent chance of wright is probably worth it

 

[tealzamboni]

Its a huge risk. What if that pick is like 2oth and we pick 10th this year, thats not worth it to me.

IMO one way to look at it is: A 2021 top 10 pick will be a solid top-6 F/top-4 D in X years. If the Sharks have the ammo to get a 2022 top 10 pick, that pick has a higher ceiling and could be ready sooner than the 2021 counterpart.

But, I'm okay either way. Besides tanking, there are other angles they can try to improve on as well.

 

[seroes]

IMO one way to look at it is: A 2021 top 10 pick will be a solid top-6 F/top-4 D in X years. If the Sharks have the ammo to get a 2022 top 10 pick, that pick has a higher ceiling and could be ready sooner than the 2021 counterpart.

But, I'm okay either way. Besides tanking, there are other angles they can try to improve on as well.

The issue is if that 2022 pick could turn out to be a pick in the back half of the 1st round and would a team give us an unprotected pick for what almost everyone agrees is an underwhelming draft class. Its an interesting thought though.

 

[LadyStanley]

Entry draft discussion in EXPANSION DRAFT thread. Par for the course.

Right now, I'm thinking the Sharks expose Jones, Simek, Gambrell, and probably Donato. (Lots of other options that could be taken from available list, but these have the contract AND experience requirements met.)

If they want to get rid of Burn's cap hit for flexibility, they could swap him for Simek.

 

[Cas]

Entry draft discussion in EXPANSION DRAFT thread. Par for the course.

Right now, I'm thinking the Sharks expose Jones, Simek, Gambrell, and probably Donato. (Lots of other options that could be taken from available list, but these have the contract AND experience requirements met.)

If they want to get rid of Burn's cap hit for flexibility, they could swap him for Simek.

I don't see the Sharks exposing Donato. He's young enough and good enough to protect and they'd still have a spot to protect Balcers.

Gambrell better be exposed. If they waste a slot on him to expose Donato or Balcers, they should all be fired.

 

[LadyStanley]

@Cas -- you HAVE to expose two forwards either under contract for next season, or RFA and QO'd, AND have 56+ games experience in the last two seasons.

Excluding pending UFAs Nieto, Marleau, and Sorenson, there aren't many that meet the experience criteria (that aren't already set aside on protected list). Which of those pending UFA players would you sign to extension to expose?

Gambrell and who?

Gregor MIGHT make the experience criteria, but isn't there yet.

 

[Cas]

@Cas -- you HAVE to expose two forwards either under contract for next season, or RFA and QO'd, AND have 56+ games experience in the last two seasons.

Excluding pending UFAs Nieto, Marleau, and Sorenson, there aren't many that meet the experience criteria (that aren't already set aside on protected list). Which of those pending UFA players would you sign to extension to expose?

Gambrell and who?

Gregor MIGHT make the experience criteria, but isn't there yet.

Gambrell and Nieto. Neither are so terrible that the Sharks couldn't use them next year at a low salary (ideally Gambrell never sees anything higher than the fourth line, though, or Nieto the third line), and both are eligible and meet the exposure requirements.

 

[DG93]

Gambrell and Nieto. Neither are so terrible that the Sharks couldn't use them next year at a low salary (ideally Gambrell never sees anything higher than the fourth line, though, or Nieto the third line), and both are eligible and meet the exposure requirements.

Yep, it really should be those two. If neither gets picked, they can both be solid 4th line options who can PK, and if one does get picked, that's fine.

 

[STL Shark]

Gambrell and Nieto. Neither are so terrible that the Sharks couldn't use them next year at a low salary (ideally Gambrell never sees anything higher than the fourth line, though, or Nieto the third line), and both are eligible and meet the exposure requirements.

That's fine and all, but Nieto isn't under contract for next year so he'd have to be signed to meet the criteria. His injury may not allow him to be dealt at the TDL which could help facilitate that signing, but prior to that happening he was going to be dealt. Regardless, they're going to have to lock him into a roster spot next year to expose him.

Would prefer it not be Gambrell that gets taken just because I think he's taken big strides as a player this year and we're already scraping the bottom of the barrel at center as it is right now organizationally. Cheap bottom 6 homegrown center that can PK and play a lot of defensive zone shifts would be nice to have with our cap situation and the idea that we're going to need to continue to cut back Couture's defensive zone shifts and PK responsibilities as he continues to get older. Just prefer they take Dahlen for "upside" and move on with it if they're going to take a forward.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

That's fine and all, but Nieto isn't under contract for next year so he'd have to be signed to meet the criteria. His injury may not allow him to be dealt at the TDL which could help facilitate that signing, but prior to that happening he was going to be dealt. Regardless, they're going to have to lock him into a roster spot next year to expose him.

Would prefer it not be Gambrell that gets taken just because I think he's taken big strides as a player this year and we're already scraping the bottom of the barrel at center as it is right now organizationally. Cheap bottom 6 homegrown center that can PK and play a lot of defensive zone shifts would be nice to have with our cap situation and the idea that we're going to need to continue to cut back Couture's defensive zone shifts and PK responsibilities as he continues to get older. Just prefer they take Dahlen for "upside" and move on with it if they're going to take a forward.

I can't see Gambrell getting taken because he simply isn't very good. Honestly, if it weren't for needing expansion draft forwards to expose, I wouldn't even qualify him. But with that being the case, might as well give him another year since we have nothing coming up to take his place next year unless it's an external acquisition.

 

[LadyStanley]

But Gambrell is from Washington, so Seattle may need some "home state" vibes.

 

[Cas]

I can't see Gambrell getting taken because he simply isn't very good. Honestly, if it weren't for needing expansion draft forwards to expose, I wouldn't even qualify him. But with that being the case, might as well give him another year since we have nothing coming up to take his place next year unless it's an external acquisition.

Worst case scenario, he's a 13th forward playing 30 games and making a little more than league minimum. They need to have one anyway, might as well be him.

 

[STL Shark]

I can't see Gambrell getting taken because he simply isn't very good. Honestly, if it weren't for needing expansion draft forwards to expose, I wouldn't even qualify him. But with that being the case, might as well give him another year since we have nothing coming up to take his place next year unless it's an external acquisition.

Yeah, that is just patently absurd re: the non-QO. Guy that is able to play regular minutes (averaging 16 mins a night) in the NHL at center and be average at it while getting next to league minimum gets a QO 10/10 times. He's not a 3C that needs to step into a 2C role when injuries hit like he's being forced to play this year, but he is 100% a valuable piece as a 4C that can jump up to a 3C role when injuries hit. Even last night, he looked fine with Leonard and Donato on a scoring 3rd line that could play with pace and have some offensive skill.

Re: Seattle, for all the reasons pointed out above plus the fact that he is from the suburbs of Seattle makes an appealing case for why he may be selected. Would rather it be Burns or Simek, but could see them going with a cheaper player and saving cap dollars for UFAs with the flat cap like has been rumored the past few weeks.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Yeah, that is just patently absurd re: the non-QO. Guy that is able to play regular minutes (averaging 16 mins a night) in the NHL at center and be average at it while getting next to league minimum gets a QO 10/10 times. He's not a 3C that needs to step into a 2C role when injuries hit like he's being forced to play this year, but he is 100% a valuable piece as a 4C that can jump up to a 3C role when injuries hit. Even last night, he looked fine with Leonard and Donato on a scoring 3rd line that could play with pace and have some offensive skill.

Re: Seattle, for all the reasons pointed out above plus the fact that he is from the suburbs of Seattle makes an appealing case for why he may be selected. Would rather it be Burns or Simek, but could see them going with a cheaper player and saving cap dollars for UFAs with the flat cap like has been rumored the past few weeks.

Being average is overstating his effectiveness, imo.

 

[Mr Fahrenheit]

Gambrell the next William Karlsson guaranteed

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

Yeah, that is just patently absurd re: the non-QO. Guy that is able to play regular minutes (averaging 16 mins a night) in the NHL at center and be average at it while getting next to league minimum gets a QO 10/10 times. He's not a 3C that needs to step into a 2C role when injuries hit like he's being forced to play this year, but he is 100% a valuable piece as a 4C that can jump up to a 3C role when injuries hit. Even last night, he looked fine with Leonard and Donato on a scoring 3rd line that could play with pace and have some offensive skill.

Re: Seattle, for all the reasons pointed out above plus the fact that he is from the suburbs of Seattle makes an appealing case for why he may be selected. Would rather it be Burns or Simek, but could see them going with a cheaper player and saving cap dollars for UFAs with the flat cap like has been rumored the past few weeks.

Just like a standard draft, they should pick the BPA and not worry about where they come from.