Confirmed with Link: Karlsson(1.5 retained), Hamaliuk, 2026 3rd for Granlund, Hoffman, Rutta and Pens 2024 1st(top-10 protected)

[Gecklund]

The word “perennial” has a meaning. You should check it out.

Depends on what winning is to you but it’s accurate in a lot of ways.

 

[weastern bias]

The word “perennial” has a meaning. You should check it out.

From Google:

"lasting or existing for a long or apparently infinite time; enduring or continually recurring."

Infinite would obviously be hyperbolic, but what about that is an incorrect assessment of a team that hasn't sniffed the playoffs for 4 years and won't again for a 5th?

I stand by my assessment

 

[one2gamble]

From Google:

"lasting or existing for a long or apparently infinite time; enduring or continually recurring."

Infinite would obviously be hyperbolic, but what about that is an incorrect assessment of a team that hasn't sniffed the playoffs for 4 years and won't again for a 5th?

I stand by my assessment

Taking the last 25 years into account, they make the playoffs more than they don't so your assessment needs work. They aren't Arizona.

 

[weastern bias]

Taking the last 25 years into account, they make the playoffs more than they don't so your assessment needs work. They aren't Arizona.

The last time the San Jose Sharks played a playoff game none of us had ever heard of Covid

I think that is a long enough track record of sustained failure to look at this team as being in a long term rut, but if we need to devolve into pedantry, sure, we were really competitive when Obama was president, so I guess this team is good, actually

 

[Pinkfloyd]

The last time the San Jose Sharks played a playoff game none of us had ever heard of Covid

I think that is a long enough track record of sustained failure to look at this team as being in a long term rut, but if we need to devolve into pedantry, sure, we were really competitive when Obama was president, so I guess this team is good, actually

I don’t mind assessing the Sharks as perennial losers right now but a kid can be a part of that and grow. You just have to make strides in the right direction and part of that is integrating young players as you rebuild. Colorado didn’t keep all the youth off the team until they felt the team was ready to compete. I’m not too hung up on this point for the upcoming season because a lot of what we acquired was to get out of a longer deal but I just don’t see how keeping players down like Eklund and Gushchin when they will improve in the NHL with better odds of improving their value over cooked players like Hoffman or players with no value long term or short term to the team like Labanc.

 

[landshark]

I don’t mind assessing the Sharks as perennial losers right now but a kid can be a part of that and grow. You just have to make strides in the right direction and part of that is integrating young players as you rebuild. Colorado didn’t keep all the youth off the team until they felt the team was ready to compete. I’m not too hung up on this point for the upcoming season because a lot of what we acquired was to get out of a longer deal but I just don’t see how keeping players down like Eklund and Gushchin when they will improve in the NHL with better odds of improving their value over cooked players like Hoffman or players with no value long term or short term to the team like Labanc.

Maybe it's GMMG's plan to bench those vets as soon as Eklund (coming off shoulder surgery) and Goose perform at a certain level so they can feel like they earned a spot instead of being gifted a spot because the Sharks don't have any real depth at forward? Perhaps the front office thinks that will instill more self confidence in the rookies, and also make them feel like they need to maintain a certain level of play to keep the spot once they earn it.

If they don't earn the playing time then the replacement level-ish vets either increase their trade value and get shipped off or the Sharks get another high pick in the draft this year, maybe even both, all things considered. It's not likely, I realize that, but that's the only real reason I can come up with keeping the those two in the AHL any longer.

 

[OrrNumber4]

You know it's the off-season when the debates veer into semantic pedantry...

 

[Mattb124]

From Google:

"lasting or existing for a long or apparently infinite time; enduring or continually recurring."

Infinite would obviously be hyperbolic, but what about that is an incorrect assessment of a team that hasn't sniffed the playoffs for 4 years and won't again for a 5th?

I stand by my assessment

You offer a definition and then pick and chose which parts of it you agree with to support your hot take? That is some next level “I must win this argument on the internet no matter what” $#!+.

 

[weastern bias]

You offer a definition and then pick and chose which parts of it you agree with to support your hot take? That is some next level “I must win this argument on the internet no matter what” $#!+.

It literally says "long or apparently infinite time"

Zero hockey teams have existed for an infinite amount of time, I'm not the person who brought the term into discussion, so the use of the term perennial is obviously hyperbolic to some degree, but continue with the pendantry if you wish, I guess it's a hot take to say the Sharks are really bad and that I don't want to rush prospects into a losing environment

I don’t mind assessing the Sharks as perennial losers right now but a kid can be a part of that and grow. You just have to make strides in the right direction and part of that is integrating young players as you rebuild. Colorado didn’t keep all the youth off the team until they felt the team was ready to compete. I’m not too hung up on this point for the upcoming season because a lot of what we acquired was to get out of a longer deal but I just don’t see how keeping players down like Eklund and Gushchin when they will improve in the NHL with better odds of improving their value over cooked players like Hoffman or players with no value long term or short term to the team like Labanc.

We just disagree on how toxic of a situation the current Sharks are for developing prospects

If we won the lottery I wouldn't have these concerns about a prospect on the level of a Bedard, but Eklund still hast truly proven he's an NHL player and he's the best prospect who has a shot at the roster, I'd rather incubate him away from all the losing so he can graduate with other prospects so we're not throwing the weight of the world on his shoulders

 

[timorous me]

Maybe it's GMMG's plan to bench those vets as soon as Eklund (coming off shoulder surgery) and Goose perform at a certain level so they can feel like they earned a spot instead of being gifted a spot because the Sharks don't have any real depth at forward? Perhaps the front office thinks that will instill more self confidence in the rookies, and also make them feel like they need to maintain a certain level of play to keep the spot once they earn it.

If they don't earn the playing time then the replacement level-ish vets either increase their trade value and get shipped off or the Sharks get another high pick in the draft this year, maybe even both, all things considered. It's not likely, I realize that, but that's the only real reason I can come up with keeping the those two in the AHL any longer.

When you break down this approach it's really not exactly unreasonable, even if it's less fun for us as fans who would enjoy watching our kids play even if they suffer in the process (though maybe that feeling lasts only so long before the worm turns and we feel bad for them dealing with that).

1. On a practical level, acquiring these overpriced, past-their-prime vets was just necessary for doing business, so we're sort of stuck with them,

2. Playing these vets *could* net assets coming back in return if they play well enough (no guarantee but a decent shot to take), and

3. You protect these kids and make them earn their spots. You play too many kids and put too much pressure on them and, as we've seen before, it can have a detrimental effect on their development. As Filip Zadina admitted the other day, "It’s tough for a young rookie to come to a team under rebuilding like Detroit was then."

My hope is simply that Grier isn't too slow to cut bait with vets if they clearly aren't cutting it (because obviously in that case we'll get nothing of value in return for them, so what's the point?) and that he won't be too slow to find roster spots for kids if they're clearly showing they're ready to do their learning at the NHL level.

In a lot of ways we're still in the honeymoon period with this new front office; we're going to learn a lot more about our feelings about them and how they manage this weird, bad roster throughout the next season.

 

[TheBeard]

It literally says "long or apparently infinite time"

Zero hockey teams have existed for an infinite amount of time, I'm not the person who brought the term into discussion, so the use of the term perennial is obviously hyperbolic to some degree, but continue with the pendantry if you wish, I guess it's a hot take to say the Sharks are really bad and that I don't want to rush prospects into a losing environment

We just disagree on how toxic of a situation the current Sharks are for developing prospects

If we won the lottery I wouldn't have these concerns about a prospect on the level of a Bedard, but Eklund still hast truly proven he's an NHL player and he's the best prospect who has a shot at the roster, I'd rather incubate him away from all the losing so he can graduate with other prospects so we're not throwing the weight of the world on his shoulders

Some of the best players now suffered through some pretty awful stretches early in their career. Jack Hughes immediately come to mind. Good players get drafted to bad teams but you can’t incubate them forever.

 

[PacificOceanPotion]

Who cares!!! We’ve had a sustained history of winning. We’ve been losing lately. Based on the past 2 drafts and the moves MG has made, he’s committed to winning and getting back to the playoffs. I don’t think we’re as far off as it looks. Live in the now until then.

 

[weastern bias]

Some of the best players now suffered through some pretty awful stretches early in their career. Jack Hughes immediately come to mind. Good players get drafted to bad teams but you can’t incubate them forever.

We don't have a prospect on the level of Jack Hughes in our system

Truly transcendent talents will find a way to emerge even in disadvantageous circumstances, but the best prospects we have in our organization need tender care with their development, we don't have anyone who can shoulder the burden of carrying a franchise to relevance

We need a crop of young players who can graduate together so they can lessen the pressure on one another, once Smith leaves school he, along with our 2024 1st, Eklund, hopefully Bordeleau and Mukhamadullin, and maybe one other prospect who exceeds expectations can all join the team together so there isn't one guy aged 18-22 who the entire fanbase is desperately hoping will save us

If Eklund wins the job this year so be it, I'm not advocating for artificially holding players back from playing in the league if their performance earnestly merits a spot on the roster, but I wouldn't gift him a spot if he's a borderline NHL talent who just so happens to be better than Givani Smith right now, because that's not the caliber of player we're trying to build him to become

 

[landshark]

We don't have a prospect on the level of Jack Hughes in our system

Truly transcendent talents will find a way to emerge even in disadvantageous circumstances, but the best prospects we have in our organization need tender care with their development, we don't have anyone who can shoulder the burden of carrying a franchise to relevance

We need a crop of young players who can graduate together so they can lessen the pressure on one another, once Smith leaves school he, along with our 2024 1st, Eklund, hopefully Bordeleau and Mukhamadullin, and maybe one other prospect who exceeds expectations can all join the team together so there isn't one guy aged 18-22 who the entire fanbase is desperately hoping will save us

If Eklund wins the job this year so be it, I'm not advocating for artificially holding players back from playing in the league if their performance earnestly merits a spot on the roster, but I wouldn't gift him a spot if he's a borderline NHL talent who just so happens to be better than Givani Smith right now, because that's not the caliber of player we're trying to build him to become

Was supposed to be Bedard, but as you know HAWKS WIN!!

Last 19 year old to make the Sharks was Vlasic?

 

[Lebanezer]

Was supposed to be Bedard, but as you know HAWKS WIN!!

Last 19 year old to make the Sharks was Vlasic?

Hertl was 19 for the first month of his rookie season.

 

[landshark]

Hertl was 19 for the first month of his rookie season.

Damn, I looked up Patty but didn't think to look up Hertl. Good call.

 

[Lebanezer]

Damn, I looked up Patty but didn't think to look up Hertl. Good call.

Eklund was 19 when he played 9 games the year he was drafted. I assume you meant someone playing an entire season. Eklund didn't even occur to me until just now though.

 

[DG93]

Who cares!!! We’ve had a sustained history of winning. We’ve been losing lately. Based on the past 2 drafts and the moves MG has made, he’s committed to winning and getting back to the playoffs. I don’t think we’re as far off as it looks. Live in the now until then.

This team is pretty far off at this moment, but Grier seems to be doing the right things and is being patient. He's trying to get a fun/young team together, hopefully in about 3 years, and that is a good thing imo. Give Smith, Musty, Muk, Eklund, and the 2024/2025 top-3 picks plenty of time to develop and don't rush prospects.

 

[landshark]

Eklund was 19 when he played 9 games the year he was drafted. I assume you meant someone playing an entire season. Eklund didn't even occur to me until just now though.

Yah, I mean break camp and stay for the season. Or at least more than half and ending the season up with the big club. Contract slid for Eklund so I didn't think about him either.

 

[exchequer]

2. Playing these vets *could* net assets coming back in return if they play well enough (no guarantee but a decent shot to take), and

Or the team around them is so bad that their trade value plummets (did anyone have adin hill winning a stanley cup AND extended at almost $6m per? (yes yes, we all know he's not worth that much)

 

[tiburon12]

Or the team around them is so bad that their trade value plummets (did anyone have adin hill winning a stanley cup AND extended at almost $6m per? (yes yes, we all know he's not worth that much)

my mindset is that if we get anything for those vets, that's a bonus. If not, whatever. The flat cap has screwed the sharks rebuild up so much, this is just another example.

 

[TheBeard]

I’m gonna step away from here until the season starts. Some of y’all are just way too doomsayers for me.

See y’all in a month or so.

 

[karltonian]

Hertl was 19 for the first month of his rookie season.

How quickly we forget the Teenage Mutant Ninja Hertl

 

[Hodge]

What a fantastic trade. When Grier was first hired he couldn't have paid other teams to take this bum and his awful contract off our hands. Now we end up with either the 13th or 14th overall pick in the 2024 draft plus Granlund who can either be flipped for more picks or stay on as a veteran leader for the young guys. And we only had to retain $1.5M/year to make it happen. Master class.

 

[Barrie22]

What a fantastic trade. When Grier was first hired he couldn't have paid other teams to take this bum and his awful contract off our hands. Now we end up with either the 13th or 14th overall pick in the 2024 draft plus Granlund who can either be flipped for more picks or stay on as a veteran leader for the young guys. And we only had to retain $1.5M/year to make it happen. Master class.

Or still next years 1st round pick (unprotected)