Speculation: Summer 2018 Roster Discussion Part III

[CanadienShark]

Because they're still, at best, the third best team in their division. They're unlikely to make it out of the first round.

Also saying they "added 65 goals and 200 points" is meaningless nonsense. This stuff isn't additive in hockey. The relevant question is how much did they improve by replacing Stastny (for 3/4ths of the season), Berglund, Sobotka and Brodziak with O'Reilly, Perron, Fabbri and Bozak. Quite a bit for sure but the difference between those two groups of players isn't 200 goals. It's more like 20 goals.

I agree with most of what you said, but he did say 200 points and 65 goals.

 

[The Ice Hockey Dude]

I have had a feeling that we end up with Patches. I don't think he will cost that much as a rental.

Yep. Hes a winger, we know he'll be great in the locker room as he's their captain (leader!), he can blend in in San Jose compaired to the visibility in montreal, and we are a legit contender. Good plan B from jt91. If we like him and he does well we can extend him.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

STL is never going to be a premier destination in UFA markets. So the chances of any of those three you mentioned coming there is zero as you said. So I fail to see why it’s a bad thing to go make their team better in other ways full well knowing you’ll never be a contender for a Karlsson, Seguin, etc. You can’t just do nothing holding out for something that’s never happening.

The moves they’ve made took a very lethargic fan base two weeks ago and breathed some life into them. That will make the team a lot of money (not insignificant) and once you get in the playoffs you never know. This team is already better than their WCF team from 2016. All you can do is make the team as good as possible and see where it leads.

Once you get into the playoffs, you do know that you can’t win unless you have legit elite superstars on your roster and St. Louis has none.

People say “once you get into the playoffs you never know”, but this sport is so much closer to basketball than we like to admit. There have been 5 Stanley Cup winners in the past 10 years. They all had superstars who were easily top-5 in their position in the NHL when they won. Chicago had Toews, Kane, Keith. Los Angeles had Kopitar, Doughty, and Quick. Pittsburgh had Crosby, Malkin, Kessel, and Letang. Bergeron had Chara/Bergeron/Thomas. Washington had Ovechkin, Kuznetsov, and Holtby. Every single one of those players is better than every single player on St. Louis with maybe the exception of Letang/Kessel against Pietrangelo.

If every Cup winner over the past 10 years has had 3 players that would be the best player on STL, then why on earth do you think that anything can happen when they get to the playoffs? Maybe re-phrase it as “anything can happen, except St. Louis winning a Stanley Cup.”

Who cares if their new team is better than the team that made the WCF? Their team that made the WCF was lucky to eek out two game 7s against two superior teams and then they got absolutely curb stomped by the Sharks who didn’t even win the SCF.

 

[The Ice Hockey Dude]

Snip

 

[STL Shark]

Once you get into the playoffs, you do know that you can’t win unless you have legit elite superstars on your roster and St. Louis has none.

People say “once you get into the playoffs you never know”, but this sport is so much closer to basketball than we like to admit. There have been 5 Stanley Cup winners in the past 10 years. They all had superstars who were easily top-5 in their position in the NHL when they won. Chicago had Toews, Kane, Keith. Los Angeles had Kopitar, Doughty, and Quick. Pittsburgh had Crosby, Malkin, Kessel, and Letang. Washington had Ovechkin, Kuznetsov, and Holtby. Every single one of those players is better than every single player on St. Louis with maybe the exception of Letang/Kessel against Pietrangelo.

If every Cup winner over the past 10 years has had 3 players that would be the best player on STL, then why on earth do you think that anything can happen when they get to the playoffs? Maybe re-phrase it as “anything can happen, except St. Louis winning a Stanley Cup.”

Who cares if their new team is better than the team that made the WCF? Their team that made the WCF was lucky to eek out two game 7s against two superior teams and then they got absolutely curb stomped by the Sharks who didn’t even win the SCF.

Yep. You’re right. They should really just fold the franchise up and say it was a good run and quit. Same for the Sharks and every team not named TB, Toronto, Pittsburgh, and Washington. Hell, let’s just disband the entire Western Conference sans Edmonton because no one else has multiple superstars on their team.

Edit: You’re also really calling Pietrangelo their best player? Wow. Tarasenko is a legit superstar.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

Once you get into the playoffs, you do know that you can’t win unless you have legit elite superstars on your roster and St. Louis has none.

People say “once you get into the playoffs you never know”, but this sport is so much closer to basketball than we like to admit. There have been 5 Stanley Cup winners in the past 10 years. They all had superstars who were easily top-5 in their position in the NHL when they won. Chicago had Toews, Kane, Keith. Los Angeles had Kopitar, Doughty, and Quick. Pittsburgh had Crosby, Malkin, Kessel, and Letang. Bergeron had Chara/Bergeron/Thomas. Washington had Ovechkin, Kuznetsov, and Holtby. Every single one of those players is better than every single player on St. Louis with maybe the exception of Letang/Kessel against Pietrangelo.

If every Cup winner over the past 10 years has had 3 players that would be the best player on STL, then why on earth do you think that anything can happen when they get to the playoffs? Maybe re-phrase it as “anything can happen, except St. Louis winning a Stanley Cup.”

Who cares if their new team is better than the team that made the WCF? Their team that made the WCF was lucky to eek out two game 7s against two superior teams and then they got absolutely curb stomped by the Sharks who didn’t even win the SCF.

I would argue that Tarasenko is a superstar. Pietrangelo is a borderline-elite D-man. I think having a superstar definitely helps but landing one is easier said than done. You do what you can to improve the team. That being said, I am on the same page as you. Blues have a better team today than they did last playoffs. But at this time, it is hard to proclaim them a SC favorite .. or even close to one.

 

[The Ice Hockey Dude]

Doug won’t trade for Pacioretty until Panarin and Karlsson have moved.

I do not belive that. While im sure DW is kicking the tires on these two, why not take paches for less w/o the competition.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Yep. You’re right. They should really just fold the franchise up and say it was a good run and quit. Same for the Sharks and every team not named TB, Toronto, Pittsburgh, and Washington. Hell, let’s just disband the entire Western Conference sans Edmonton because no one else has multiple superstars on their team.

Yeah, teams should just fold the franchise. Because you know, tanking totally isn’t an option.

9 of the last 10 Stanley Cup winners had two seasons where they were bottom-5 in the NHL, and they drafted superstars with picks acquired in those seasons that are better than anybody on St. Louis’ roster. 6 of the last 10 Conn Smythe winners were top-5 picks. 4 of the last 6 were first overall picks.

I don’t know what to tell you. Maybe you think making the playoffs and winning a round is good enough. I don’t. The Sharks made the playoffs and won a round this year and personally, I’m furious about their performance this season. They lost to a f***ing expansion team on home ice. That’s not good enough. Who cares if they won a round? They lost. They didn’t win the Cup.

 

[Maladroit]

I agree with most of what you said, but he did say 200 points and 65 goals.

Sure but the implication with "they added 200 points" is that they've somehow added 200 goals of value when that's clearly inaccurate.

The Blues made good moves and improved their team. They're still clearly behind Winnipeg and Nashville in my eyes but the playoffs are such a crapshoot that it's not the worst idea for a team in their position to roll the dice and see what happens, especially since they didn't have to mortgage their future to add these players.

But those moves wouldn't have made sense for the Sharks. We already have plenty of ROR/Bozak/Perron calibre players. What we don't have is a Tarasenko-level elite talent. DW went all in to try and land the only one available and unfortunately missed out. I'd still rather be the Sharks than the Blues right now since we have a much better goalie and, crucially, are in the worst division in the league instead of the strongest which is a huge benefit under the NHL's idiotic playoff format.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

I do not belive that. While im sure DW is kicking the tires on these two, why not take paches for less w/o the competition.

I have a feeling that both Karlsson and Panarin are not going to re-sign with us and would be pure rentals if we land them. Would I love to have those two? Absolutely. But not without an extension (or agreement) in place given how much either of those would cost.

I think landing Patches would definitely be cheaper. Could alternatively target Skinner as well. Things have been really quiet elsewhere because of the Karlsson talk.

 

[Jaleel619]

We just got Evander Kane. We just went after the biggest FA to hit the market in 10 years and were very close, SJ did nothing? in 15 we got Jones, Martin, and Ward + DeBoer. Year after that we got Boedker and Schlemko. Seems unrealistic to expect big moves every off season, and it's not even over yet.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Sure but the implication with "they added 200 points" is that they've somehow added 200 goals of value when that's clearly inaccurate.

The Blues made good moves and improved their team. They're still clearly behind Winnipeg and Nashville in my eyes but the playoffs are such a crapshoot that it's not the worst idea for a team in their position to roll the dice and see what happens, especially since they didn't have to mortgage their future to add these players.

But those moves wouldn't have made sense for the Sharks. We already have plenty of ROR/Bozak/Perron calibre players. What we don't have is a Tarasenko-level elite talent. DW went all in to try and land the only one available and unfortunately missed out. I'd still rather be the Sharks than the Blues right now since we have a much better goalie and, crucially, are in the worst division in the league instead of the strongest which is a huge benefit under the NHL's idiotic playoff format.

Honestly, Pavelski might fall off a cliff soon, but he is absolutely Tarasenko level. Over the past 3 seasons, Tarasenko has 3 more points than Pavelski.

Also, Burns is a much more elite level talent than anybody on St. Louis.

 

[STL Shark]

Yeah, teams should just fold the franchise. Because you know, tanking totally isn’t an option.

9 of the last 10 Stanley Cup winners had two seasons where they were bottom-5 in the NHL, and they drafted superstars with picks acquired in those seasons that are better than anybody on St. Louis’ roster. 6 of the last 10 Conn Smythe winners were top-5 picks. 4 of the last 6 were first overall picks.

I don’t know what to tell you. Maybe you think making the playoffs and winning a round is good enough. I don’t. The Sharks made the playoffs and won a round this year and personally, I’m furious about their performance this season. They lost to a ****ing expansion team on home ice. That’s not good enough. Who cares if they won a round? They lost. They didn’t win the Cup.

You also clearly have zero business acumen. Tanking means zero money. And when you’re a small market team you need butts in seats. It also means no guarantee of anything. Hell Buffalo and Carolina have been tanking for almost a decade now and have nothing to show for it. Edmonton tanked for longer and had oodles of top 5 picks and have one playoff series win in over a decade.

So while having high draft picks helps, it is no guarantee and when the rest of the roster is primed for a run like SJ or STL with guys in their prime, you have no choice but to keep taking chances and consistently being a playoff team and hope that you catch a few breaks and can make a run. Especially when all of the acquisitions don’t prohibit anything in the future like STL did this offseason.

 

[Maladroit]

Honestly, Pavelski might fall off a cliff soon, but he is absolutely Tarasenko level. Over the past 3 seasons, Tarasenko has 3 more points than Pavelski.

Also, Burns is a much more elite level talent than anybody on St. Louis.

Come on dude you can't be serious comparing Pavelski to Tarasenko. Tarasenko drives absolutely every facet of the offense when he's on the ice. Pavelski hangs out in the slot and tips in Burns shots or capitalizes on Jumbo's passes. Not taking anything away from that but he doesn't singlehandedly generate offense the way Tarasenko does. Burns has elite talent but he gives up at one end of the ice pretty much everything he creates at the other. Jumbo is the only player on the Sharks in the elite conversation and at 39 following two knee injuries that conversation is probably over.

 

[STL Shark]

Honestly, Pavelski might fall off a cliff soon, but he is absolutely Tarasenko level. Over the past 3 seasons, Tarasenko has 3 more points than Pavelski.

Also, Burns is a much more elite level talent than anybody on St. Louis.

Pavelski played with a HOF center while Tarasenko played with Stastny/Lehtera and now Schenn. Pavs rode shotgun with elite players while Tarasenko drove the bus. Again, I hate the Blues and Pavs is my favorite player but they aren’t at the same level. Pavs is very good but Tarasenko is elite and a threat every time he touches the puck.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Come on dude you can't be serious comparing Pavelski to Tarasenko. Tarasenko drives absolutely every facet of the offense when he's on the ice. Pavelski hangs out in the slot and tips in Burns shots or capitalizes on Jumbo's passes. Not taking anything away from that but he doesn't singlehandedly generate offense the way Tarasenko does. Burns has elite talent but he gives up at one end of the ice pretty much everything he creates at the other. Jumbo is the only player on the Sharks in the elite conversation and at 39 following two knee injuries that conversation is probably over.

I’m not saying that Pavelski is better than Tarasenko right now, but it’s close enough to where Tarasenko isn’t mystical elite talent that we don’t have.

Burns was the 2nd best player in the NHL behind Connor McDavid in the 2016-2017 regular season and he was the best player in the NHL in the playoffs in the 2016 playoffs.

Pavelski played with a HOF center while Tarasenko played with Stastny/Lehtera and now Schenn. Pavs rode shotgun with elite players while Tarasenko drove the bus. Again, I hate the Blues and Pavs is my favorite player but they aren’t at the same level. Pavs is very good but Tarasenko is elite and a threat every time he touches the puck.

Pavelski had 32 points in 35 games without Joe Thornton. That’s a 75 point pace, which would be a career best for Tarasenko.

Pavelski’s 2015-2016 season is the best that either of them had over the past 3 years, but Pavelski definitely fell off in 2016-2017 while Tarasenko was just as good. Tarasenko fell off this year while Pavelski maintained. Tarasenko isn’t the elite talent that we lack until he proves that this year was a fluke.

 

[spintops]

Even if the argument "you have to tank to get a franchise center " is true. We aren't tanking, it's just not ever going to happen (look at the long term contracts). Why do we have the exact same argument every off-season? We should be debating what RD we can add to replace demelo, or who we can trade Tierney for lol

 

[Maladroit]

I’m not saying that Pavelski is better than Tarasenko right now, but it’s close enough to where Tarasenko isn’t mystical elite talent that we don’t have.

Burns was the 2nd best player in the NHL behind Connor McDavid in the 2016-2017 regular season and he was the best player in the NHL in the playoffs in the 2016 playoffs.

No it's not. It's not close at all. Pavelski's production is almost entirely a result of Thornton and Burns. Tarasenko has played with mediocre centers his entire career in St. Louis but still manages to create an incredible amount of offense with basically no help.

Burns was amazing for the entirety of the 2016 calendar year, no argument from me there. Before that, and since then, he's been a liability. He's a maddening player with tons of talent but a negative hockey IQ. Since he was turned back into a defenseman at the start of the 2014-15 season the Sharks have scored 290 goals and given up 296 with Burns on the ice at even strength (this is excluding all empty netters/extra attacker goals). In the same timeframe they've scored 400 goals and given up 373 with him off the ice. Burns never plays difficult defensive minutes. He gets plenty of ice time with the team's best players. And yet we're still much better at outscoring the opposition when he isn't playing.

Goal-based stats have their limitations but over a four-year span that's a huge red flag to me. How much value is Burns really providing to the team when we're literally better off without him on the ice? If you look at any other elite defenseman their teams are way better at outscoring the opposition when they're on the ice vs. on the bench. Burns is an elite talent in the offensive zone, no doubt, but I have a hard time considering him an elite player overall given how much of a detriment he is in the other two zones.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Justin Braun for Brock Nelson anyone?

Isles fans constantly complain about this guy. No thanks.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

You also clearly have zero business acumen. Tanking means zero money. And when you’re a small market team you need butts in seats. It also means no guarantee of anything. Hell Buffalo and Carolina have been tanking for almost a decade now and have nothing to show for it. Edmonton tanked for longer and had oodles of top 5 picks and have one playoff series win in over a decade.

So while having high draft picks helps, it is no guarantee and when the rest of the roster is primed for a run like SJ or STL with guys in their prime, you have no choice but to keep taking chances and consistently being a playoff team and hope that you catch a few breaks and can make a run. Especially when all of the acquisitions don’t prohibit anything in the future like STL did this offseason.

Get the f*** out of here with the personal attacks. I’m a business major at San Jose State University and a Technical Marketing Intern at a thriving local solar company, but that doesn’t matter; business acumen is absolutely not a requirement for a forum about hockey. I’m here to talk about hockey and how teams win hockey games and championships; not how gluttonously rich billionaires like Hasso Plattner can make marginally more money. There’s a businsss of hockey forum if you want to try and condescend people about their business accumen over there.

9 of the last 10 Stanley Cup Champions tanked. The one that didn’t was carried by the greatest goaltending performance of all time from a journeyman who had been relegated to backup the year prior. 9 of those 10 teams had two straight years of being one of the 5 worst teams in the NHL and they all drafted franchise superstars, better than any player on our roster, with those top-5 picks.

Carolina literally had back to back top 5 picks in Andrew Ladd and Eric Staal and they literally won a Cup with those players. But that’s not even relevant; no failed tank team is, because for the last time: tanking is not a guarantee of success; not tanking is a guarantee of failure, outside of seriously unpredictable circumstances that cannot be sustainably replicated. You point to Edmonton and Buffalo’s failures in their tank; I point to every single NHL team that didn’t tank in the past 10 years, put together a strong team “the right way”, and lost to a stacked tank team. I actually have a much bigger list of teams to point at: SJS, NYR, STL, PHI, NJD, DET (this decade), VAN,

Also, just for some quick business, cause I can’t help myself; I do love business: San Jose has declined pretty steeply in average attendance by percentage since 2009. Over the past 3 seasons, we have made the playoffs. Yet we have ranked 22nd (95.4%), 16th (99.7%), and 17th (98.9%) in attendance. In 08-09, 09-10, and 10-11, we ranked 9th (100%), 6th (100.4%), and 5th (100.4%). Our years upon years of being a mediocre good (mediocre amongst teams that are good - sort of like STL) team have left our fan base very jaded, and they are slowly diminishing. Although it doesn’t take any sort of numbers to tell you that Sharks fans are losing their passion, and that the fan base clearly isn’t what it used to be.

Meanwhile, Chicago, LA, and Pittsburgh - the famous 3-headed tank monster - have all been top-10 in attendance since all 3 got their first Cup. And before you mention the “size of their markets” as reason for this - as if San Jose isn’t literally a top-10 most populated city in America and the Sharks aren’t the only big 4 sport in San Jose - all 3 of those teams had terrible attendance numbers in the years they tanked and got their superstar(s) and were near the bottom of the NHL. They came out of it just fine and are now posting great attendance numbers; better than we ever have. You make a lot more money when you win a Stanley Cup than you lose from a couple of years of tanking. So, your business argument is a major L. You’re the one with no business acumen if you think that the only way to win a f***ing Stanley Cup is a bad business model.

 

[Lebanezer]

I do not belive that. While im sure DW is kicking the tires on these two, why not take paches for less w/o the competition.

The Sharks shouldn’t acquire Pacioretty under any circumstances unless they have no interest in re-signing him. As a pure rental for close to nothing then fine. He wants Kane’s contract and he’s about to turn 30. The Sharks can’t afford to pay another non difference maker upwards up 7 million dollars. Panarin and Karlsson have both youth and ability on Pacioretty. Doug needs to do everything he can to improve the team for both now and the future. If he exhausts those avenues and it doesn’t work out, then consider Pacioretty as a rental. Other then that, I don’t think he’s worth it. I’d rather get Skinner if the Sharks are not getting Panarin or Karlsson.

 

[rangerssharks414]

Re: St. Louis, I do think they got better. I still don't think they can make a run deep into the playoffs, but they did get better. I see them about equal to the Sharks right now in terms of their current state... good enough to make the playoffs, but they won't go very far. They do play in the same division as the two best point total teams from last year, so who knows.

And re: attendance, I do think the fanbase is bored. They need some kind of spark to get interested again (I'm talking about in general.). Tavares would have done that. Karlsson would do that. I'm not saying to sell the farm just to try to win the fanbase back, but I do think the fanbase is "bored"* with the team.

*I'm talking about the casual fan.

 

[hohosaregood]

My problem with tanking is when do you decide your tank bid for the cup has failed. Let's say you do the tank and get back in about 4 years later and you have a competent team but it turns out you're a moderate playoff contender and regular 1st round finish. Do you keep going with that young playoff team that isn't going far and unlikely to or do you blow it up again for round 2?

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

My problem with tanking is when do you decide your tank bid for the cup has failed. Let's say you do the tank and get back in about 4 years later and you have a competent team but it turns out you're a moderate playoff contender and regular 1st round finish. Do you keep going with that young playoff team that isn't going far and unlikely to or do you blow it up again for round 2?

Good question.

You don’t stop until you’re certain you’ve acquired at least one franchise player and at least one other star. At that point, you keep re-tooling your team around your franchise players but never tank again once your core is built.

Buffalo has Eichel/Dahlin. If Dahlin becomes the elite superstar franchise #1D that he is widely projected to, Buffalo has a strong enough set of franchise superstars to win for the next 10 years while Eichel and Dahlin are in their primes. They don’t need to tank for superstars because they already have them. If they continue to fail, and pick up more Mittelstadt, Reinhart, and Nylander type players along the way, it’s hardly the end of the world.

 

[Gilligans Island]

Re: St. Louis, I do think they got better. I still don't think they can make a run deep into the playoffs, but they did get better. I see them about equal to the Sharks right now in terms of their current state... good enough to make the playoffs, but they won't go very far. They do play in the same division as the two best point total teams from last year, so who knows.

And re: attendance, I do think the fanbase is bored. They need some kind of spark to get interested again (I'm talking about in general.). Tavares would have done that. Karlsson would do that. I'm not saying to sell the farm just to try to win the fanbase back, but I do think the fanbase is "bored"* with the team.

*I'm talking about the casual fan.

Trouble is, in the overall Bay Area pro sports market, the Warriors are also a factor and taking nearly all these casual fans. It'd be one thing if it was the MLB or NFL but NBA/NHL overlap each other in terms of # of games and months.

The Hawks and Kings didn't/haven't faced stiff competition for the casual fan during their reigns, and the Pens are the only game in town during the winter months.

I don't disagree with Rooster's view as extreme as it is. It's fraught with risk but is it any more so than our Sun Tzu Death by a Thousand Cuts approach we're on the path to now? Hard to say. In any case, it's moot now since DW's re-upped w/ Vlasic, Couture, Kane, Burns and Jones for the long haul. It's the path we're on until Hasso shakes things up or DW gets fired.