How do you, GM of the San Jose Sharks, fix the Sharks?

[Pinkfloyd]

Burns, Couture, Kane, and Karlsson should all be moved. Issue is who the hell has that kind of cap space to take them on, especially for at minimum 5 years. We're guaranteed to take salary back, and I'd be open on any contract that was in the 2-3 year range.

Use Labanc as a sweetener at the expansion to move Jones or Vlasic.

Then just buckle down and suck for 3 years, and be a cap floor team. In 3 years when we hopefully have some elite prospects coming in, and have a ton of cap space, throw the f***ing bank at Mackinnon.

We would take back a contract and/or retain. Problem is we don't know what three teams these players other than Karlsson are willing to go to. For instance, I think Dallas is an easy bet to say Burns has them as a team he'd go to. We could do a deal with them where we take back Bishop and they add some futures and call it a done deal. Kane and Couture though? Who knows? Buffalo seems like a reasonable team to be on Couture's list but they're a fringe playoff team rather than a solid one so it's possible that being in a more stable competitive environment is preferred to him. If that's the case, who the hell knows where he'd go? If we're talking about moving him to Buffalo, we could take back Okposo and futures but that future would have to include a 1st round pick. I would think Kane would have Vancouver and Vegas on his list. If it were Vancouver, we'd probably take back Myers. If it's Vegas, we may be adding to get Pacioretty. Then again, Kane could up and change his mind and only want to go to a place like Florida for tax purposes. We'd be looking at someone like Yandle or Connolly.

Without knowing who is on their trade list, we'll never know entirely.

I hope there's some push for Vlasic to move on internally. I hope that DW approaches him in the off-season to tell him you either accept this trade to wherever for whatever or we're buying you out. Buyout seems more plausible to me than getting him to waive his NMC to be exposed for Seattle. Hell, buyout seems more plausible than trading him but these are just guesses. I just want to see movement on this front this off-season. I don't want us to go through the expansion draft process and just lose Simek or Gambrell and not move any of our big-ticket contracts. We're probably going to pick in the top five and get a solid LHD but not someone that is elite. Maybe to probably top pairing but it's not going to be a Miro Heiskanen or Cale Makar type. That's going to be in 2022. The Sharks are going to want to get as many 2022 picks as they can get.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

The team is not great but it is underperforming relative the talent it has. I don't want to blame the coaching anymore because it could potentially just be a leadership/culture issue too. Before this season I thought that getting a true starting goalie and top-6 forward would pretty much guarantee us a slot in the playoffs. It would have been a band-aid to mask other issues but I am not quite sure because I feel there is more it than just the talent on this team.

DW has pushed himself in a corner by handing out a lot of long term contracts and some of them with NMC/NTC to boot. Some people here think that Seattle will take Vlasic or Jones in the expansion draft. I see little reason for them to do that. They have massively negative values at this time.

These are the things we can do to get a 'refresh' started:

Buy out one of Jones/Vlasic next season. Try your hardest to move the other. If not, buy out the one left the following season. Once both are gone, the team will have the cap space to potentially make some moves in FA.

For a rebuild it really comes down to who you want to keep. Moving both Jones and Vlasic is critical. Then you basically move everyone who has value out but not part of the future. Couture, Burns should be moved. Basically build around Hertl, Meier, Labanc, Donato, Karlsson and Ferraro.

Realistically though, I still expect seeing more of a refresh. Being able to move Jones and Vlasic within the next 2 years, getting some help from our current prospects and using the extra $ in FA should make the team competitive. Also, swapping out Boughner for a more experienced coach could help. Its not going to be a full rebuild but could work.

 

[hockeyCEO]

The missing piece is a 1st line center who drives play. We don't have one. Taking Meier over Barzal ended the Burke era. It's the most glaring weakness of the sharks.

Making the playoffs would be considered a successful season. How to do it? Slow the other team down - a Marchment-type player. Raffi Torres would help. Simik had the ability, but it hasn't come back yet. Jaros maybe?

Watching Colorodo swarm us, wave-after-wave, really showed how we have a lot of middle-level talent up front and some great puck-moving defensemen. But we're not going to drive play against elite teams. Not for a long time

 

[Pinkfloyd]

The missing piece is a 1st line center who drives play. We don't have one. Taking Meier over Barzal ended the Burke era. It's the most glaring weakness of the sharks.

Making the playoffs would be considered a successful season. How to do it? Slow the other team down - a Marchment-type player. Raffi Torres would help. Simik had the ability, but it hasn't come back yet. Jaros maybe?

Watching Colorodo swarm us, wave-after-wave, really showed how we have a lot of middle-level talent up front and some great puck-moving defensemen. But we're not going to drive play against elite teams. Not for a long time

This is why 2022 is super important to actually tank properly. They can get that center then. They can't get it in 2021.

 

[landshark]

EK65 to forward since he cannot pivot any more?

 

[fEyD08]

The 2020 Draft went pretty good for the sharks. Thats a good setup for a rebuild.
Don't trade future 1st round picks.
Get extra 1st round picks in 2021 and 2022.
Build from within.
Create a better culture.

 

[themelkman]

Heres whatI would have the 2021-2022 roster look like. Just try a million young guys to see whos worth keeping. Someone

If we can find a deal for Burns take it. I honestly think we could find one because hes still good.

 

[FunkyPhin]

This is why 2022 is super important to actually tank properly. They can get that center then. They can't get it in 2021.

Yeap, might be better to try and get those picks for 2022 now then in the off-season. I’ve noticed that GMs tend to have shorter attention spans when trading future picks. While they’re still stingy it seems like they put less mind to picks in future drafts then the ones in the present.

ive read about the strength of the 2022 draft so if we’re able to get a pick in the top 5 and hopefully another one in the top 15, it’d go a long way for our rebuild.

 

[tealzamboni]

Step 1 - Establish an identity and playing style that matches the talent on the roster. This roster is soft, has averagish quickness, and good top end speed. I'd expect there to be constant movement, quick shots, and (coordinated) rushes. Not a spread out defense, cycle-n-tip offense, and stretch-pass-only breakout. If the coaching/analytics/scouting finds a more promising option that I find to be sane, then I'd try to acquire (cheap) players that fit that scheme.

Step 2 - Understand what promises DW made to the players and consider all "exit plan" options. If it comes down to buyouts or shouldering a cap hit in a trade, then it can be greenlighted once an identity starts to take shape (step 1). No reason to execute until there's hope that the team can effectively employ the roster it has. If an identity doesn't take shape, go back to step 1 and consider something involving new personnel (cheap pickups) and/or coaching and/or analytics.

Once the new system starts gelling (not necessarily wins, but something that look reasonably competitive), identify the core + affordable depth and begin initiating exit plans for the others. If the exit plan involves a trade or has to wait until the offseason, be frank with the player and provide a choice if possible.

Step 3 - Evaluate and consider reorganizing the personnel department (contracts, scouting, and development). I get the feeling that the current system is running on a shoestring budget. Scouting seems limited to Sweden/Switzerland/USHL/Memorial cup/WJC + whatever DWjr is interested in. And they seem to mostly target refined players or players that still have some development opportunity before they reach the pros (in other words - someone else will do the development for the Sharks). Then, Sommer just indoctrinates them on how the big club expects them to play.

I understand this is how many professional clubs are running their operations. And I understand that it's probably meant to be cheap/targeted by design.

Assuming the budget won't change, I'd have scouting/analytics give more weight to raw tools and hire a better capologist. I'd rather have prospects fail to a 4th line role than fail out of the league. At least there would still be some value. And the capologist would be there to get the contracts in order and help structure future contracts with less risk. IIRC Wilson has always had a close relationship with the 49ers and other Bay Area teams. I'm surprised he hasn't adopted the 49ers' contract methods (though he does seem to mirror them in analytics and scouting).


Step 4 - I know this may be outside the scope of GM, but consider changing the franchise culture/business model. Are the Sharks a classy coworker club with a great communications team, bad contracts, long tenures, good retirement jobs, and houses in Los Gatos? Or is it a franchise that plays and sells great hockey and is a preferred destination, regardless of state taxes? They can't always use bad contracts and job security to convince players to stay.

 

[Gecklund]

Go find a 3C that isn’t bad.

 

[hohosaregood]

Go find a 3C that isn’t bad.

Seriously, build a real f***ing roster. Wtf has DW been doing the last two years

 

[Pavelski2112]

Seriously, build a real f***ing roster. Wtf has DW been doing the last two years

I honestly don't think that building much of a roster is going to do this team much good if the rest of the team doesn't give a shit.

This team already on paper shouldn't be a bottom-5 team but here we are.

 

[Cas]

IIRC Wilson has always had a close relationship with the 49ers and other Bay Area teams. I'm surprised he hasn't adopted the 49ers' contract methods (though he does seem to mirror them in analytics and scouting).

I know literally nothing about football, so I was wondering if you could elaborate on this a bit. I do know the Giants and A's.

 

[hohosaregood]

I honestly don't think that building much of a roster is going to do this team much good if the rest of the team doesn't give a shit.

This team already on paper shouldn't be a bottom-5 team but here we are.

I can't argue with that either. Watching these guys casually poking at pucks in the crease is so infuriating. They seriously look like they're scared of getting hurt with the way they refuse to block shots and avoid contact. It's really pathetic to call them pro athletes.

 

[Nolan11]

I’ve never agreed with the tear it down and do a complete rebuild crowd until this year. I don’t think we can become contenders with the current core and most are older and will only get worse as the years pass. So, I would do what I could to jump start a rebuild.

Shop Karlsson, Vlasic, Burns, Couture, Kane, and Jones immediately. I would explain to these vets that I plan to start building towards the future and see who is open to waiving contract clauses to move to a more competitive team. I would try to avoid retention as much as possible. Instead, I would look to take back bad players on shorter term contracts to accommodate cap space for other teams. Some examples, Kane to Vancouver for Ericsson and futures or Couture to Buffalo for Okposo and futures. I would avoid adding futures, unless nominal, to get rid of these contracts and I would not buy anyone out. We are going to be bad. Might as well let the big dollar players that I’m stuck with burn a year off their bad contracts while we are bad.

I would listen to offers on Hertl, Meier, and Labanc. Theses players are young enough that I could keep them to help with the transition but I would trade them for a good enough offer.

I would focus the coaching staff on player development. Use the vets we have to take the tough minutes while allowing the young players to play in a role they are ready for. I would make adjustments to the coaching staff as needed. Bring in good character UFAs as needed.

Pick up futures where available. Sell what I can at the deadline, take cap dumps, try reclamation projects.

Focus on drafting and developing the next core.

Basically, everything Cup said, except shopping Karlsson (I dont see that happening until he asks, which he might given the pain that we would go through to build a better team). What I think the steps would be:

1. Buy-in from ownership that this year, and next season are lost to us.
2 Shop Couture now... I agree Buffalo is a likely first call, Okoposso plus at least a 1st (or Cousins if he doesn't take off right away this season)
3. Talk to Vlasic about Habs, if he will waive ask for Byron + Kulak for Vlasic (with 20% retention) + a prospect/2021 3rd. If Vlasic wont waive, hold him until 2023 (Buying him out earlier is useless, as we don't plan on contending until then).
4. See if we can get Seattle's 1st to expose Burns (They will need Star power and he brings fans in). If not, talk to Dallas about Burns for futures (and some form of short term cap dump) after the expansion (so we likely lose Simek unless we pay Seattle off).
5 Extend Hertl for 5-6 years @ 9 M. If he demands 7-8 years, shop him this off season.
6. Dubnyk walks, we pick up a younger/better goalie in FA or trade around 3 by 3 (possibly bit less in this market, maybe 2 x 2)
7. If Jones doesn't turn it around this season or next, buy him out. Taking 2 years off his current contract before buying him out means we pay him for 4 years instead of 8. If he sucks for two years, that only helps our tank.

Keep Kane, but bring in a coach to help his penalty situation (WARD?), drop him to third line next game if he ends up in the box twice or gets ejected, something. He is a solid player if he could play a little crisper (i also think he gets bad calls against him, but we cant change that overnight, he has to change something in his play if he expects the situation to change).

Kick tires on Landeskog (if he makes it to FA this off-season). Longshot but worth a look (and creative financing).

 

[tealzamboni]

I know literally nothing about football, so I was wondering if you could elaborate on this a bit. I do know the Giants and A's.

The 49ers tend to structure contracts so that they pay more in the beginning and less at the end. So, it makes it easier to not get tied down to players. Not sure if NHL rules allows for this. But, I figured maybe there's room to be more shrewd than offering huge, unmoveable contracts.

 

[Barrie22]

The 49ers tend to structure contracts so that they pay more in the beginning and less at the end. So, it makes it easier to not get tied down to players. Not sure if NHL rules allows for this. But, I figured maybe there's room to do something other than huge, unmoveable contracts.

That is how the big teams do it. Go look at mathews or one of the big 3's contracts.

5 years 58.195 million.

Year 1. Base salary 700,000, signing bonus 15.2 million. Total salary 15.9 million.

Year 2. Base salary 700,000, signing bonus 15.2 million. Total salary 15.9 million.

Year 3. Base salary 750,000, signing bonus 9.72 million. Total salary 10.47 million.

Year 4. Base salary 750,000, signing bonus 7.2 million. Total salary 7.95 million

Year 5. Base salary 775,000, signing bonus 7.2 million. Total salary 7.975 million.

 

[Cas]

The 49ers tend to structure contracts so that they pay more in the beginning and less at the end. So, it makes it easier to not get tied down to players. Not sure if NHL rules allows for this.

I think that's pretty standard. All of the Sharks large UFA-age contracts do that (Burns, Vlasic, Karlsson, Couture, Kane, Jones), though the distinction between bonuses and salary does throw an extra wrinkle in (Couture, for instance, is all salary from 23-24 on).

 

[Coily]

This idea is fun, but realistically nothing will change because all of our players fit three categories.

One, they're paid too much and have a no-something clause.

Two, they're not any good and paid too much.

Three, they're young or on a team friendly contract so why move them unless you're getting an upgrade which is unlikely.

Wilson cooked the team with contracts that will not expire for 4-7 years. We have no depth because of these contracts and our team is full of attitude problems.

Either you nuke the roster or you patch it together year after year until you nuke the roster. Doesn't matter because the playoffs aren't happening since our division isn't the NFC East.

 

[tealzamboni]

That is how the big teams do it. Go look at mathews or one of the big 3's contracts.

5 years 58.195 million.

Year 1. Base salary 700,000, signing bonus 15.2 million. Total salary 15.9 million.

Year 2. Base salary 700,000, signing bonus 15.2 million. Total salary 15.9 million.

Year 3. Base salary 750,000, signing bonus 9.72 million. Total salary 10.47 million.

Year 4. Base salary 750,000, signing bonus 7.2 million. Total salary 7.95 million

Year 5. Base salary 775,000, signing bonus 7.2 million. Total salary 7.975 million.

Oh that's right. I checked and the 49ers are/were frontloading the signing bonuses. So, year1 had a huge bonus, then no bonus after that. Does NHL collective bargaining permit that?

49ers' spending methods require a second look


EDIT: Thinking about it more, I recant putting the frontloaded signing bonuses in my "plan." Even if the NHL allowed it, it seems as risky/irresponsible as the long contracts DW's already signed.

 

[Barrie22]

Oh that's right. I checked and the 49ers are/were frontloading the signing bonuses. So, year1 had a huge bonus, then no bonus after that. Does NHL collective bargaining permit that?

49ers' spending methods require a second look

There is a limit to how steep the last year can drop from year 1. So a team can't go 80 million year 1 and then do 1 million the last 7 years for a 87 million 8 year contract.

But i am not sure if that is total salary, base salary.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

There's too many scenarios for me to pinpoint what to do and what would be reasonable in the context of this thread but I'd rebuild, I'd tell everyone on the team I'm rebuilding, and I'd oblige anyone who wanted out due to that. If I was given certain parameters, I'd make decisions based off of that but I don't think you can continue to try and compete with this pool of talent.

 

[FunkyPhin]

There's too many scenarios for me to pinpoint what to do and what would be reasonable in the context of this thread but I'd rebuild, I'd tell everyone on the team I'm rebuilding, and I'd oblige anyone who wanted out due to that. If I was given certain parameters, I'd make decisions based off of that but I don't think you can continue to try and compete with this pool of talent.

My fear is that DW is going to triple down trying to compete next year as well, in the fear of losing his job. This entire team has been built by DW and he's gonna live and die by its performance. If he admits he's cooked this team and it needs to be nuked, I think that might be enough to finally see him let go. He could have sold this year as a mulligan to Plattner as it's a shortened season, no attendance and that next year they'd be back into the thick of things, with some cap space becoming available.

I think Plattner has a lot of faith in DW to turn it around whether warranted it or not, and they're going to try and push the rebuild further out.

 

[WSS11]

I agree with the vast majority on the board when it comes to the consensus on the Sharks. Unfortunately, Wilson has backed himself into a corner. Hasso seems like the type of owner that wants to win now and has given DW the unlimited resources, support, and tanning hours he needs to bring a cup to SJ. If he goes to Hasso two years after signing Karlsson to a near $100M deal and says he wants to rebuild he’ll be fired on the spot. I’m afraid Doug will keep doing anything and everything to avoid going into a much needed full rebuild.

 

[The Nemesis]

Pay Seattle to take Vlasic. If we don't want to give up a first, give up a prospect and a pick.

Not going to go through the whole post, just wanted to point out the flaw with what I left quoted above:

Vlasic has an NMC. If the Seattle expansion draft rules remain relatively consistent with the Vegas ones regarding teams' protected lists (and the evidence so far suggests this is the case) this potentially won't be possible.

Vlasic has a full NMC. Teams are beholden to reserving a spot on the protected list for NMC players unless they agree to waive the clause prior to the expansion draft. Thankfully for the Sharks this only includes Karlsson and Vlasic. Everyone else on the team with a restrictive clause has an NTC and would not be exempt from selection/require protection (Burns, Jones, Couture, Kane, Hertl)

The 49ers tend to structure contracts so that they pay more in the beginning and less at the end. So, it makes it easier to not get tied down to players. Not sure if NHL rules allows for this. But, I figured maybe there's room to be more shrewd than offering huge, unmoveable contracts.

It is allowed so long as the team isn't doing it in an obvious attempt to circumvent the cap rules, usually in the form of tacking on ridiculously low-value end years on a deal so as to artificially deflate the AAV of the contract (like that rejected New Jersey Kovalchuk contract years ago that had him apparently intended to be playing for the Devils for like $1m a year from his late 30s through almost mid-40s just to offset the stupid high value early years of the deal).


************


I might try my hand at this exercise a little later on when I've got some free time.