Speculation: Summer 2018 Roster Discussion Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.

Maladroit

Registered User
May 9, 2018
980
437
Berkeley, CA
You may be right but I sincerely doubt that the arbitrators will take that into consideration. Tierney has had 2 seasons (14-15 and 17-18) where he has produced at 0.5PPG and 2 seasons (15-16 and 16-17) where we has produced close to 0.25 PPG. His career PPG is 0.37.

There have been comparisions to Danault who got a contract for little over 3M AAV and has a career average of 0.4 PPG. I am not going to be shocked at all if Tierney gets awarded close to 3M AAV.

Arbitrators can't take projected future performance into account but I'm sure if this actually does go to arbitration the Sharks' main arguments will revolve around Tierney's empty net goals, SH%, on-ice SH% and the overwhelming unsustainability of his output from last season.
 

Fistfullofbeer

Moderator
May 9, 2011
30,429
9,102
Whidbey Island, WA
Arbitrators can't take projected future performance into account but I'm sure if this actually does go to arbitration the Sharks' main arguments will revolve around Tierney's empty net goals, SH%, on-ice SH% and the overwhelming unsustainability of his output from last season.

I guess we will find out soon enough. I think anything over 2.5M AAV is going to be too much for Tierney. But honestly, even if its 3M, is 0.5M more worth getting upset about? Now, if he gets 3.5M or so, I honestly think you re-sign him and trade him (or try to anyway).
 

FeedingFrenzy

Registered User
Oct 26, 2009
2,125
100
You see it as a fluke. I see it as a 24yo center with two capable wingers on his line for the first time in his career. I guess only time will tell, but atleast I can see where you’re coming from.




Bickells contract was 6% of the cap, 4 years, and he was like 27yo. On top of that, he started having major health issues by the end of the first year of that contract. If it weren’t for the latter issue, he could have been traded much more easily.

Tierney would have to get paid 4.8mil this year to get an equal contract. That would be absurd. He’s 24yo, scored more points then Bickell ever did, and outside of unforeseen health issues would not be hard to trade at 3mil.

Anisimov if signed for the same cap % today would get 4.8mil as well, a hairs breath away from the type of contracts you said teams should hoard. Yet you now want to call it bloated. Quite hypocritical if you ask me.

On top of that Panarin got traded, while already signed, to the EXACT same cap hit as Saad who they traded him for. He was not traded for cap reasons.

Seabrook was a bad bet, you are right, yet YOU are the one advocating for signing “stars” to lucrative contracts. So are you going to pretend some team has a crystal ball, and knows which of their “stars” won’t fizzle out well before their contract is up?

Chicago ran into cap problems entirely because of Toews and Kane’s contracts. Further compounded by infinite length contracts to guys like Keith and Seabrook, and don’t forget Hossa, who they miraculously were able to get rid of his hit, or they’d be even further up ****s creek.

Chicago did EXACTLY what you want to do, sign all their stars to big contracts, then fill the team with ELCs like Panarin, TT, and lesser players. It got them two cups, and now they’re horrible. If you want to get some cups, maybe that’s the best way, but if you miss, it’s cap hell for a while, hope that’s ok with you too.





I’m not arguing Suomela CANT be as good or better than Tierney, I’m saying we don’t know that he will be. What he did in some other League is swell, but means jack until he actually plays in the NHL.

I even said in another post that I would have been fine gambling on him at 3c if we got Tavares. We didn’t. So I’ll hedge my bet, by signing a 3rd line center I already know can play there, and if Suomela breaks into the lineup, and proceeds to make Tierney irrelevant trade his ass.

Lmao at “massively” overrating Tierney. The way you make it sound I’m calling Tierney a first line center. Labanc and Meier scored less points then Tierney, and get anointed first line players, or the 2nd best playmaker on the team, but I call Tierney a 3c and I’m massively overrating him. Seems legit.
The Tierney hate makes me sick... He busts his ass, and keeps improving. Sure let's nickle and dime him. I think he hits 50 this year. Solid 3C who keeps getting better.
 

Maladroit

Registered User
May 9, 2018
980
437
Berkeley, CA
I guess we will find out soon enough. I think anything over 2.5M AAV is going to be too much for Tierney. But honestly, even if its 3M, is 0.5M more worth getting upset about? Now, if he gets 3.5M or so, I honestly think you re-sign him and trade him (or try to anyway).

For me it all comes down to term. I don't really care what he makes on a one-year deal. But he probably wants more security than that and the Sharks shouldn't be the team to give it to him imo. Not when Suomela can likely step in and do a better job as the 3C for less than a million bucks on a one-year deal.
 

Fistfullofbeer

Moderator
May 9, 2011
30,429
9,102
Whidbey Island, WA
For me it all comes down to term. I don't really care what he makes on a one-year deal. But he probably wants more security than that and the Sharks shouldn't be the team to give it to him imo. Not when Suomela can likely step in and do a better job as the 3C for less than a million bucks on a one-year deal.

Expecting Suomela to step in right away into the 3C role without him having played a single game in the NHL is a little too hopeful. I think Tierney could be a really good 3C for us and even be deserving of the 3M/year had he shown consistency with his play.

I do agree with you though about the concern with his term, you give Tierney no more than a year if he is to get more than 3M. Would be ok with 5M spread out over 2 years or 7M over 3. I do think we are being a little too hard on Tierney though. He has shown flashes of being a real good 3C. One that could be a solid piece for a SC contending team. He just needs to get more consistent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dicdonya

Maladroit

Registered User
May 9, 2018
980
437
Berkeley, CA
Expecting Suomela to step in right away into the 3C role without him having played a single game in the NHL is a little too hopeful. I think Tierney could be a really good 3C for us and even be deserving of the 3M/year had he shown consistency with his play.

I do agree with you though about the concern with his term, you give Tierney no more than a year if he is to get more than 3M. Would be ok with 5M spread out over 2 years or 7M over 3. I do think we are being a little too hard on Tierney though. He has shown flashes of being a real good 3C. One that could be a solid piece for a SC contending team. He just needs to get more consistent.

Personally I haven't really seen him play at a Stanley Cup 3C level. To me he's just an incredibly passive player in the offensive and defensive zones and that's a huge reason why his advanced stats always suck. He never challenges the opposition for possession when he's defending and on offense he plays like he's scared of the puck, rarely showing the patience to hold onto it for that extra half-second or second in order to let space open up for an optimal play. Sometimes it works out where it leads to a quick pass that catches the opposing defense off guard and creates a nice goal but that's a rare occurrence. I do think he's a useful player in the neutral zone though, he's good at carrying the puck through there but he seems to panic as soon as he crosses the blue line.

He's also been completely useless in the playoffs for his entire career. I don't understand the love from this fanbase for a player like that. If he was European and stinking it up in the playoffs like he has - and while playing the incredibly passive style that he does, lacking any semblance of intensity - I suspect there might be a different attitude towards him. Tierney, Karlsson and DeMelo are the three players on this roster who just don't bring anything to the table that you can't easily replace or improve upon with a cheaper option imo.
 

rangerssharks414

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
32,311
1,648
Long Island, NY
Expecting Suomela to step in right away into the 3C role without him having played a single game in the NHL is a little too hopeful. I think Tierney could be a really good 3C for us and even be deserving of the 3M/year had he shown consistency with his play.

I do agree with you though about the concern with his term, you give Tierney no more than a year if he is to get more than 3M. Would be ok with 5M spread out over 2 years or 7M over 3. I do think we are being a little too hard on Tierney though. He has shown flashes of being a real good 3C. One that could be a solid piece for a SC contending team. He just needs to get more consistent.

I don't think giving him a multi-year deal is a wise move. I do think that an "overpayment" is fine on a one year deal, but giving him a multi-year deal with a cap hit close or at $2.5M is a mistake in my opinion.
 

Fistfullofbeer

Moderator
May 9, 2011
30,429
9,102
Whidbey Island, WA
I don't think giving him a multi-year deal is a wise move. I do think that an "overpayment" is fine on a one year deal, but giving him a multi-year deal with a cap hit close or at $2.5M is a mistake in my opinion.

Curious why you think that? Do you expect him to get complacent and see his prodution drop off? 3 years may be a little too much term but I won't be mad if he gets 5M total over 2 years.
 

Maladroit

Registered User
May 9, 2018
980
437
Berkeley, CA
So you didn't watch the year they went to the Cup?

You mean the year he was manhandled by Malkin and Bonino in the Final? A huge reason we lost that series, apart from the Hertl injury, is that our forward depth and third line in particular didn't even remotely measure up to theirs and Tierney was a huge part of that shortcoming. He had one good game in that entire run up to the Final, Game 6 against Nashville which we lost. It's not his fault we lost that game but the reality is he only contributed to a single win that entire spring by scoring in Game 5 against LA.

He has three points (all assists) in 16 career playoff games since that year. Gotta love that kind of production from a "third line center."
 

Gecklund

Registered User
Jul 17, 2012
25,461
12,084
California
You mean the year he was manhandled by Malkin and Bonino in the Final? A huge reason we lost that series, apart from the Hertl injury, is that our forward depth and third line in particular didn't even remotely measure up to theirs and Tierney was a huge part of that shortcoming. He had one good game in that entire run up to the Final, Game 6 against Nashville which we lost. It's not his fault we lost that game but the reality is he only contributed to a single win that entire spring by scoring in Game 5 against LA.

He has three points (all assists) in 16 career playoff games since that year. Gotta love that kind of production from a "third line center."
It was more of getting manhandled by Malkin and Kessel. Besides who wouldn't? Even Thornton/Couture would struggle with that.
 

LA Shark

Hello Darkness My Old Freind
Feb 18, 2017
3,576
2,573
Southern California
We have cap space and no alternative at 3c. Even if he does get 3-3.5 mil, why trade him this year? Keep him for 1 year when we have the cap space and no backup plan for 3c, then trade him next year.

I'm pretty much in the middle on Tierney, I think hes a useful 3c, but also replaceable. But to bash on him cause he couldn't hang with Malkin or the HBK line seems unfair. Malkin is a top 10 player in the world and the HBK line was the best 3rd line in hockey that year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dicdonya

Maladroit

Registered User
May 9, 2018
980
437
Berkeley, CA
It was more of getting manhandled by Malkin and Kessel. Besides who wouldn't? Even Thornton/Couture would struggle with that.

I'm not saying Tierney needs to outplay Malkin, that would be ridiculous. I lay that at DeBoer's feet for not simply moving Marleau back to center so we'd have Thornton, Couture and Marleau on separate lines to counter their Crosby/Malkin/Kessel distribution. My point is that Tierney is not a guy you can rely on as a third line center if you have legitimate Cup aspirations - he's bad defensively and he has a history of not producing in the playoffs. Lars Eller scored 17 points in Washington's run this year. Tierney will never ever do something like that. Hell he might not even score 17 points in the entire regular season next year if he misses 10-15 games.
 

Maladroit

Registered User
May 9, 2018
980
437
Berkeley, CA
We have cap space and no alternative at 3c. Even if he does get 3-3.5 mil, why trade him this year? Keep him for 1 year when we have the cap space and no backup plan for 3c, then trade him next year.

I'm pretty much in the middle on Tierney, I think hes a useful 3c, but also replaceable. But to bash on him cause he couldn't hang with Malkin or the HBK line seems unfair. Malkin is a top 10 player in the world and the HBK line was the best 3rd line in hockey that year.

The issue is that if he turns back into a 20 point center, which I would argue is the most likely outcome, no one is trading for two additional years of that at $3-3.5mil per. I'm fine paying Tierney anything on a one-year deal but there's too much risk in signing him for longer than that. It's obvious the front office feels the same way or else he'd be signed by now.
 

Fistfullofbeer

Moderator
May 9, 2011
30,429
9,102
Whidbey Island, WA
The issue is that if he turns back into a 20 point center, which I would argue is the most likely outcome, no one is trading for two additional years of that at $3-3.5mil per. I'm fine paying Tierney anything on a one-year deal but there's too much risk in signing him for longer than that. It's obvious the front office feels the same way or else he'd be signed by now.

I think Tierney ends up being more of a 30 point center than anything else. But overall, I agree that giving him a multi-year contract makes little sense. I would seriously want to trade him right now (even if we get him for 3M) as his value is on the up. Re-sign him for a year deal or 2 year deal and trade him before his value plummets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maladroit

Alaskanice

Registered User
Sep 23, 2009
6,307
6,732
1 1/2 hours away
I'm not saying Tierney needs to outplay Malkin, that would be ridiculous. I lay that at DeBoer's feet for not simply moving Marleau back to center so we'd have Thornton, Couture and Marleau on separate lines to counter their Crosby/Malkin/Kessel distribution. My point is that Tierney is not a guy you can rely on as a third line center if you have legitimate Cup aspirations - he's bad defensively and he has a history of not producing in the playoffs. Lars Eller scored 17 points in Washington's run this year. Tierney will never ever do something like that. Hell he might not even score 17 points in the entire regular season next year if he misses 10-15 games.

Maladroit,
Can you please stop making statements such as “never” or “won’t “ when talking about a players future?
It removes credibility to your posts and it probably gets some fans upset.
You absolutely have no certainty in your foresight. One cannot know what will happen. William Karlsson is all one has to say.
 

LA Shark

Hello Darkness My Old Freind
Feb 18, 2017
3,576
2,573
Southern California
How is Karlsson's contract a big deal now?
Ya. Is he overpaid? Sure. Was the term too long? You bet. But is he a detriment to the team? I dont think so. Hes a 2 mil cap hit when we probably wont use all the cap anyways. Also he could be traded away for nothing if we really need the cap space. Melker is a solid 4th liner and good PKer. Hes fine making 2 mil for that until we need that cap space. And if we do, dump him for nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dicdonya

Maladroit

Registered User
May 9, 2018
980
437
Berkeley, CA
How is Karlsson's contract a big deal now?

He's a 13th forward (and not even a good one) making $2 million for two more seasons. It might not be an issue right at this very moment given our cap situation but it absolutely would have been a headache if we had landed Tavares, and will be a headache in the future if we're able to land a similar caliber star. You do not want to get into a situation where you're committed to Tierney, Karlsson and Dillon for $8.5 million/year for multiple seasons if you're going big game hunting. Those deals add up.
 

LA Shark

Hello Darkness My Old Freind
Feb 18, 2017
3,576
2,573
Southern California
He's a 13th forward (and not even a good one) making $2 million for two more seasons. It might not be an issue right at this very moment given our cap situation but it absolutely would have been a headache if we had landed Tavares, and will be a headache in the future if we're able to land a similar caliber star. You do not want to get into a situation where you're committed to Tierney, Karlsson and Dillon for $8.5 million/year for multiple seasons if you're going big game hunting. Those deals add up.
Some team would be willing to give a 6th round pick for him. Problem solved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dicdonya

Maladroit

Registered User
May 9, 2018
980
437
Berkeley, CA
Some team would be willing to give a 6th round pick for him. Problem solved.

I could be wrong, and there are some very dumb GMs in this league, but I don't see why anyone would trade for a 13th forward at $2mil when they could sign the same player for half as much or less in free agency. At least not without sending a similar contract the other way which defeats the purpose.
 

LA Shark

Hello Darkness My Old Freind
Feb 18, 2017
3,576
2,573
Southern California
I could be wrong, and there are some very dumb GMs in this league, but I don't see why anyone would trade for a 13th forward at $2mil when they could sign the same player for half as much or less in free agency. At least not without sending a similar contract the other way which defeats the purpose.
Cmon, Melker is not a 13th forward. He gets top 9 mins occasionally on this team, which is my real problem with him, but I think hes a perfect 4th line player. Can give you 20 points on the 4th line, a good pker, and a coaches type player who is fearless blocking shots and taking hits.

I think a 4th line this year of Karlsson- Soumela-Sorenson could be one of the best 4th lines in the league. But if Karlsson's 2 mil is the difference in us acquiring a big piece, I have no doubt DW will find a way to move him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dicdonya

TomasHertlsRooster

Don’t say eye test when you mean points
May 14, 2012
33,361
25,423
Fremont, CA
Yeah. While I think Seabrook had a bad season prior to the one where he signed his contract, I think most people expected Toews/Kane/Keith to hold up longer than they did. Although I guess once you adjust for all the playoff games they have played, every player is 3-4 years older than their listed birthdate!

Regarding the Sharks, this seems like it was just the worst offseason they could have had. They went all in signing Tavares...and weren't able to do it. So, now they have this halfway-there roster with no path to finishing it. Might have been the season for another refresh/reset.

By the way...has anyone mentioned how ridiculous it is that DW hired his son (and now promoted him)? That's nepotism at its finest. Bad culture for an organization!

Regarding this off-season, I remember a little while back, Juxtaposer mentioned that she felt like she couldn’t be mad at DW, because he is doing what he can, but I don’t agree with that. Had he inherited the team on the day of the draft, I would entirely understand not being mad about what he did between July 1st and now. I actually agree that his moves in that time frame have been fine and agree with Maladroit that the worst possible off-season would have been one where we signed players JVR and Bozak after missing out on Tavares.

However, I am absolutely furious at him, because of the contracts he signed Kane, Vlasic, Jones, Couture, and Burns to. He backed himself into a wall where he is trying to still contend with a team that clearly is not what it once was. These moves were awful because they pretty much ensure that the team will not be able to undergo a “re-build/re-fresh/re-set” or whatever you want to call it any time soon. He basically built a (questionable) core around a star #1C that he planned on potentially acquiring, and signed that core long term to contracts where the only reasonable expectation is that they will be good now, and bad later; similar to the Paul Martin and Joel Ward contracts. Except these contracts carry much larger, more serious implications if these players only perform and age as reasonably expected. And, on top of that, these contracts are only worth it in the very short term if the team has a #1C that they can reasonably rely on to perform at that level; they absolutely don’t and so these contracts just look more and more awful.

In closing, I am absolutely furious with DW. He spent over $35M over the next 6 years on Kane, Vlasic, Couture, Jones, and Burns. 5 players who are all going to be in their 30s for the majority of those contracts, which have NTCs that make them seriously difficult to move. On top of that, none of those guys outside of Burns, who was 32 at the start of his 8 year contract, are anywhere near franchise level superstars, and Kane is the only one who hadn’t notably declined from his best season this year. (Couture is debatable as well).

Right now, with the Sharks being unable to acquire Tavares, right now would absolutely be the time for a “re-set/re-fresh”. We have some solid young pieces that we can use as building blocks to surround some elite franchise talent, but we are totally missing that elite franchise talent for now and the future. Our best course of action would have been to sign Vlasic, Burns, and Jones to much shorter term contracts with higher AAV, trade them (and Couture) with salary retained, not re-sign Kane, and re-fresh. This team absolutely isn’t a contender right now and outside of the unlikely scenario in which they acquire an Erik Karlsson, John Tavares, Tyler Seguin level player, they won’t be that contender in the future. They’ll be a fringe playoff team built around Kane, Couture, Vlasic, Burns, and Jones.

DW spent all of that money and all of those assets to build a team that would possibly be a contender if and only if Tavares signed with us in UFA. He should have only done that if he was certain that it was very likely Tavares would sign here. Given the fact that we offered Tavares $2M per year more than any other team, and we still didn’t even come down to his final 2 teams, DW quite obviously planned poorly for this situation.

We talked about DWJr. in a few other threads. I can entirely understand the complaints with nepotism and the bad culture it creates, but after watching that “shaping the Sharks” video, I believe he could be a strong head scout. He was the driving force behind the Merkley pick and so I am definitely a fan of his outlook and philosophy. But I can also understand why one would be unhappy about the nepotism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad