Speculation: Summer 2018 Roster Discussion Part IV
- Thread starter rangerssharks414
- Start date
- Status
Beethovens 10th
du bist ein ungeduldiges Eichhörnchen!
Man, missing out on Tavares has broken my patience. Now there's nearly 3 more months and we're staring down the barrel of going into the next season with the same roster, expecting different results. It's like shitty deja vu. I've got a gif for being a modern Sharks fan...
tiburon12
Registered User
- Jul 18, 2009
- 4,650
- 4,463
Given TBL just finagled another great deal under the assumption that the AAV is lower due to no state tax, do you guys think the league will ever step in and apply something (i have no suggestions or ideas) to level the field? It's a huge advantage
seroes
Registered User
No. The owners don't want that because they would end up having to pay more money to get over the floor or pay for talent if they are in a high tax area. The players likely wouldn't even try to fight for something like in negotiations.
tiburon12
Registered User
- Jul 18, 2009
- 4,650
- 4,463
Yea i can't think of any scenario that would mitigate this issue, but it really is an unfair advantage. Obviously it's overcome-able, but very frustrating
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
why do people keep saying it's the same? kane has never played with thornton yet and IMO that pairing could bring fireworks. thornton has not played with a scorer of kane's caliber for a while.
TomasHertlsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
What? Thornton spends almost all of his ifr time with Pavelski and a large chunk of it with Burns as well. Burns and Pavelski are scorers of a much higher caliber than Kane. In a down year for both, Burns and Pavelski scored significantly more than Kane’s career high. Pavelski at 33 is a better scorer than Kane ever has been and ever will be.
The only real x-factor here is Thornton, who was playing very well before his injury. If he somehow returns and gives us one last season at elite superstar #1C level, like he did in 2015-2016, then maybe we have a chance.
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
Disagree. Without Thornton I don't think pavelski is much above a 30 goal scorer, he is a better overall player thus far in his career, but he is not a physically gifted sniper like Kane. He is an incredibly hard working, smart player that scores all kinds of dirty/shifty/tip goals. Kane on the other hand is a laser shot. It'll be a disappointment to me if Kane isn't well into the 30s goals with a decent Thornton; with a few years ago Thornton he at least scores at least what Pavelski did. But Kane does it as a natural winger, a shoot to score guy and not much of a playmaker at all; all he really does is score when he's not banging bodies.
Burns might be the better comparison and yeah that's the last time Thornton played with a guy like that and they stomped the league.
Either way though, unless you are expecting Thornton to be literally nothing, both Thornton and Kane playing is something that did not ever happen yet and is at least something to look forward to.
TomasHertlsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
Regarding Kane, he’s not going to be well into the 30s. He’s not a good power play goal scorer at all and even the McDavids and Matthews of the NHL don’t score much more than 30 goals at ES. I’m more than happy with Kane if he can score 25 goals at ES and chip in 5 more on the PP/PK, though.
I’m excited to see them play together but honestly I think that Kane-Thornton-Pavelski will be inferior to 2016’s Hertl-Thornton-Pavelski and even this year’s Meier-Thornton-Pavelski.
tiburon12
Registered User
- Jul 18, 2009
- 4,650
- 4,463
Agree with the first, but that's not an indictment of Kane's play, but rather a deterioration of Pavs and Jumbo
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 15,800
- 5,060
In addition to what others have said about the failed logic, tanking is merely the most guaranteed way to get those superstars...low draft picks, that is. But that doesn't mean you can only get your superstars that way, even though in recent history (with the cap creating more contenders and limiting free agency) that might seem to be the case. Don't ignore that many of the cup winners did certain transactions that were outliers. Anaheim acquired Niedermayer by free agency and Pronger via trade. Detroit was obviously built with several superstars drafted well after the top-5 in the draft. Pittsburgh drafted Letang late (though I'm not sure he is/was a franchise-caliber defenseman), signed Gonchar in free agency, and in recent years got preternatural performances from players like Kessel. Chicago nabbed Keith in the second round. Boston signed Chara in free agency, got Bergeron (again, not sure if he was franchise-caliber) in the 2nd round (even if it was an incredibly strong draft), and signed Tim Thomas out of Europe. LA drafted Kopitar @11 and Quick in the third round, I think. Washington smartly drafted Kuznetsov, Carlson, and Holtby.
Doug Wilson, to his credit, has done that several times with his acquisitions of Thornton, Burns, and hopefully Martin Jones. So perhaps he can make that great trade or signing and get the Sharks that missing piece. It is just that until he can actually do it, the Sharks aren't contenders.
Doug Wilson, to his credit, has done that several times with his acquisitions of Thornton, Burns, and hopefully Martin Jones. So perhaps he can make that great trade or signing and get the Sharks that missing piece. It is just that until he can actually do it, the Sharks aren't contenders.
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
AgentCooper
Registered User
Moving this over from the DeMelo thread.
The problem with the Goldobin trade wasn't that we moved him, but that we moved a former 1st round pick who still looked like he had a chance to put it together for a 3rd/4th line rental.
jMoneyBrah
Registered User
I’d also add that the Sharks under DeBoer have managed to overachieve in the playoffs. I’m not 100% sold that we can count on that, but each of the last two years he has taken the roster further than where they should go on paper.
IMO, if you’d have told me at the beginning of last season the Sharks would lose Thornton and gain a Kane - and ask me if they’d get to the second round I’d have said “not likely”. And the cup finals the previous year was a very impressive overachievement as well.
Going into this season I’d say the top 6 are well positioned to compete with any team (provided Thornton is at least a reasonable facsimile of his normal self).
Kane - Thornton - Pavelski
Hertl/Cooch - Cooch/Hertl - Donskoi
I’m also totally fine with the top 2 pairings on D (as unfashionable as that is).
To me, what will ultimately make the difference is if DeBoer will be able to find any magic down the lineup. If Leblanc is able to take significant step in 5v5 play and Tierney is able to make a small step in development - that line (with Meier) could be a sleeper great third line.
* as an aside that’s why I’m personally open to bringing in a MaxPac or Skinner (depending on cost, and especially if it doesn’t cost us Lebanc). I’d love to see one of those two with Tierney, and Meier (shoot first mentality) on the off wing.
And if *cough* DeBoer is able to maximize his third pairing *cough - Heed - cough* that roster should easily be a playoff team - and then you just go from there.
If DeBoer is able to do piece together a fourth line of significance, depending on what the Sharks have in their recent Euro signings, a further developed Goodrow, and some of the interesting prospects (Balcers, Gambrell, Ch, Ch) then that could be an additional weapon.
This is a long way of saying that it may be possible for DeBoer to craft a defensively conservative approach, with a four line attack, as is his MO, that can marchup with any team in a 7 game series.
As much as I like Meier and Hertl, Kane is a better goal scorer than either of them at the points you mention. Maybe Meier becomes better but as of now it's not even close. Kane has a heavy shot. When you watch his highlights there a ton of goals that trickle thru the goalie. These are shots that the goalie actually almost stopped but were so hard they squeezed thru. No idea if he will actually play with Thornton but Kane will lead the Sharks in goals next season while he's in the lineup.
This gif brings me hope... That one day we will break through with the same rosterMan, missing out on Tavares has broken my patience. Now there's nearly 3 more months and we're staring down the barrel of going into the next season with the same roster, expecting different results. It's like ****ty deja vu. I've got a gif for being a modern Sharks fan...
LadyStanley
Registered User
Want to talk about "leveling the field" WRT tax impacts on NHL contracts? Head to BOH. It's a perennial discussion point.
But unlikely the NHL or NHLPA will do anything.
It's more something that agents work with to present offers to their clients. (And CPAs who do players' taxes as they have to pay taxes wherever they play games.)
But unlikely the NHL or NHLPA will do anything.
It's more something that agents work with to present offers to their clients. (And CPAs who do players' taxes as they have to pay taxes wherever they play games.)
Kane will get somewhere between 25 and 30 goals if he stays healthy. If he does that and consistently brings his effort and physicality like he normally does then I will be satisfied with his output. Expecting 35 goals is likely unrealistic given how he plays and what he's good at and what he's not good at. Even with Kane-Thornton-Pavelski being new, it would be surprising if Thornton and Pavelski change their game even a little bit to accommodate Kane's presence. Thornton is still going to have the same tendencies that he's always had which is to look for and find Pavs in a scoring area or Burns at the point. Kane very likely will not be the focal point of that line and get a lot of pucks sent his way in comparison. He's going to have to clean up the garbage around the front of the net to get his goals and I don't expect that line to stay together on an extended basis. Kane in a lot of ways will be a square peg in a round hole.
STL Shark
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2013
- 3,965
- 4,612
Thornton lines have always thrived having a good skating F1 that gets in on the forecheck and can cycle the puck (Burns, Hertl, etc.) That is pretty much exactly what Kane does well. I don't think that will be an issue so long as Kane can slow his game down as he won't be able to use his speed as much playing with guys like Thornton and Pavs. Getting a guy like Duchene (in a package centered around Tierney) would be nice for Kane though as a Kane-Duchene-Donskoi line could really play a nice fast pace game.
Kane doesn't cycle the puck well and generally the F1's on Thornton's line don't produce as much either.
Hansen was not acquired to be a 3rd/4th liner, that was not how he was utilized by VAN (2nd liner), and he was not a rental, so not sure the basis for your criticism of the trade makes sense.
The trade ended up being a bust because Deboer apparently soured on Hansen, but excluding the benefit of hindsight I think the rationale was sound.
I didn't think Goldobin had what it took to pull it together as an NHLer then and he has done nothing but reaffirm my suspicions since, so it had the potential to be a "something for nothing" trade.
Maladroit
Registered User
Goldobin scored at a 17-goal, 30-point pace (including multiple highlight reel goals against elite defensemen) in very limited minutes for Vancouver this year as a 22 year old. Not sure how that "reaffirms your suspicion" that he doesn't have what it takes to play in the NHL.
I'm a fan of most of Doug Wilson's moves over the past three years but Goldobin for Hansen was a horrible trade. It's pretty clear Wilson was fooled into thinking Hansen was a legit top six forward because he shot 19% in the 2015-16 season.
hockeyball
Registered User
- Nov 10, 2007
- 21,552
- 886
I dunno if 'horrible' is really an appropriate word here. Trading Ehrhoff for literally nothing was horrible. Trading Bonino for Huskins and Moen was pretty horrible. Trading a struggling prospect who will likely never amount to anything for a struggling utility player who didn't work out is maybe not what I would call a great trade, but it isn't exactly significant either.
My point being, who cares?
The trade was doomed from the start. They had given up on Goldobin way too quickly and thus his value to them was not much. The idea that Goldobin has done nothing but reaffirm your suspicions is more like confirmation bias than anything else. He produces at a third line level in the NHL and has played more NHL games since then so he's objectively done more to put it together in the NHL since being moved. But the big reason why it was doomed from the start was Hansen himself. For whatever reason, Doug Wilson bought into a guy that had only played about a month's worth of games since coming back from a pretty big injury and didn't do much in that time scoring 1 goal and 3 assists in the 10 games since returning from injury. For a guy that was being given 2nd line and over kind of ice time, that was awful but DW traded for him anyway. Since the trade, Goldobin has scored 17 points in 50 games compared to Hansen's 21 points in 61 games. Goldobin has been given less ice time to produce at the same level. Difference is that Goldobin probably has a future somewhere in the NHL. Hansen doesn't. It was a short-sighted trade then and it's been proven to be a short-sighted trade now no matter what happens to Goldobin moving forward. The only saving grace is that Goldobin wasn't some high pick that we needed to have succeed. He has a specific set of talents that could've been dynamic in the NHL if he was developed correctly. The Sharks and Goldobin couldn't make it work for him here. Vancouver may have all but moved on from him as well but someone in the NHL will give him a shot to stick.
Maladroit
Registered User
Bonino for Huskins and Moen really only looks bad in hindsight. There was no reason to believe Bonino would become a NHLer at the time of the trade. There were plenty of reasons to think Goldobin would be when he was dealt though and, again, he scored at a 30 point pace playing extremely limited minutes as a 22 year old on the worst team in the league this year. Writing him off entirely right now is foolish. Wilson overvalued Hansen due to a fluke SH% year that he unsurprisingly was never able to repeat. Even if they were dead set on moving on from Goldobin, trading him for someone like Hansen is just dumb. An asset like Goldobin should fetch considerably more value in a deal.
- Status
