Clinched

RFA	YEARS	CAP HIT
Thrun, Henry	1	$950,000
Studnicka, Jack	2	$800,000
Emberson, Ty	2	$1,025,000
Kunin, Luke	3	$1,750,000

UFA	YEARS	CAP HIT
Duclair, Anthony	4	$4,000,000
Cooley, Devin	2	$775,000
Lorentz, Steven	2	$775,000

CREATED	YEARS	CAP HIT
Celebrini, Macklin	3	$950,000
Buium, Zeev	3	$950,000
Letourneau, Dean	3	$950,000

ROSTER SIZE	SALARY CAP	CAP HIT	OVERAGES	BONUSES	CAP SPACE
23	$87,700,000	$81,083,810	$0	$1,307,500	$6,616,190

Left Wing	Centre	Right Wing
Duclair, Anthony $4,000,000$4,000,000 LW, RW UFA	Granlund, Mikael $5,000,000$5,000,000 C, RW UFA - 1	Zetterlund, Fabian $1,450,000$1,450,000 RW RFA - 1
Eklund, William $863,333$863,333 ($850,000$850K) LW RFA - 2	Celebrini, Macklin $950,000$950,000	Johansen, Ryan $4,000,000$4,000,000 C, RW UFA - 1
Gushchin, Daniil $828,333$828,333 ($57,500$58K) LW RFA - 1	Copp, Andrew $5,625,000$5,625,000 C, LW, RW M-NTC UFA - 3	Kostin, Klim $2,000,000$2,000,000 LW, RW RFA - 1
Goodrow, Barclay $3,641,667$3,641,667 C, LW M-NTC UFA - 3	Studnicka, Jack $800,000$800,000 RW, C RFA	Kunin, Luke $1,750,000$1,750,000 RW, C RFA

Left Defense	Right Defense	Goaltender
Ferraro, Mario $3,250,000$3,250,000 LD UFA - 2	Emberson, Ty $1,025,000$1,025,000 RD RFA	Blackwood, Mackenzie $2,350,000$2,350,000 G UFA - 1
Mukhamadullin, Shakir $894,167$894,167 ($400,000$400K) LD RFA - 1	Rutta, Jan $2,750,000$2,750,000 LD/RD UFA - 1	Grubauer, Philipp $5,900,000$5,900,000 G M-NTC UFA - 3
Thrun, Henry $950,000$950,000 LD RFA	Benning, Matthew $1,250,000$1,250,000 RD UFA - 2

Scratches	Injured Reserve (IR)	Long Term IR (LTIR)
Lorentz, Steven $775,000$775,000 C, LW, RW UFA	Couture, Logan $8,000,000$8,000,000 C M-NTC UFA - 3
Smith, Givani $800,000$800,000 LW, RW UFA - 1	Weber, Shea $7,857,143$7,857,143 RD UFA - 2
Vlasic, Marc-Édouard $7,000,000$7,000,000 LD/RD M-NTC UFA - 2

Apr. 14 at 12:50 p.m.

#26

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: RazorSeider53

It doesn't check out value wise. You can keep telling yourself that 8 for 14 is the same as 11 for 27 though.

Little tip on your pick value charts. Several of the people who made those charts used to grade the high end picks in the 10s or even hundreds of value. They moved to decimal grading because when people figured out that the charts are terribly inaccurate, being off by 4.2 points sounds a hell of a lot better than being off by 42 points.

I hate to tell about how statistics work, but models get better over time (generally). So, the readjusting of value doesnt mean the whole model is worthless, it just means if you have found a better way to account the variability of a given variable you should adjust, if you didn’t it would be unscientific.

Of course you cant use statistical modeling on its own to determine the value of these picks as it changes depending on organizational needs, and player preferences vs who is available which are difficult to account for. However as a basis for determining how often picks produce NHLers and standardizing that across years you can get an indication of a draft picks likelihood to produce an NHLer which is what the points system is telling you. I think the sharks yotes trade was with .5 of the values assigned with these tables. Finally how you apply these charts will also influence their ‘accuracy’. For example in last years draft there was a clear divide between the top 4 picks and the rest in terms of value, whereas this one is Celebrini then a group of 8ish players around the same tier followed be a group of 10-12 in the same ish tier. So this draft appears to be a draft where if you dont get your guy in a given tier, there isn’t necessarily a sharp decline in quality with every pick.

You also left off the value added with other pieces of the deals to suit your own argument which is fine. But 8 for 14+33 is very close to 11 for 27+34+41 or whatever the picks were.

Apr. 14 at 12:52 p.m.

#27

RazorSeider53

Joined: Mar. 2024

Posts: 732

Likes: 313

Quoting: sharcuda22

I hate to tell about how statistics work, but models get better over time (generally). So, the readjusting of value doesnt mean the whole model is worthless, it just means if you have found a better way to account the variability of a given variable you should adjust, if you didn’t it would be unscientific.

Of course you cant use statistical modeling on its own to determine the value of these picks as it changes depending on organizational needs, and player preferences vs who is available which are difficult to account for. However as a basis for determining how often picks produce NHLers and standardizing that across years you can get an indication of a draft picks likelihood to produce an NHLer which is what the points system is telling you. I think the sharks yotes trade was with .5 of the values assigned with these tables. Finally how you apply these charts will also influence their ‘accuracy’. For example in last years draft there was a clear divide between the top 4 picks and the rest in terms of value, whereas this one is Celebrini then a group of 8ish players around the same tier followed be a group of 10-12 in the same ish tier. So this draft appears to be a draft where if you dont get your guy in a given tier, there isn’t necessarily a sharp decline in quality with every pick.

You also left off the value added with other pieces of the deals to suit your own argument which is fine. But 8 for 14+33 is very close to 11 for 27+34+41 or whatever the picks were.

I hate to tell you how trades work, but a 2nd doesn't get you from 14 to 8.

Read that a couple times and maybe it'll sink in.

Apr. 14 at 12:53 p.m.

#28

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: Lancebmx

I wouldn't say quite yet. We need a few more prospects to actually make it first. We only have 2.5 of Yzerman's picks on the team, that is not enough. Edvinsson is the 0.5 cause hes still fresh on the team. Once we get guys like Danielson, Kasper, Wallinder and Cossa on the team, then we could look at being buyers. But until we know what we got, we should be patient still. Doesn't mean we can't try to improve the team but being "ultra aggressive" likely isn't the best approach.

Makes sense! Hopefully edvinsson can give seider a bit of a break in terms of responsibility too, I think he’s so excellent. Is there any of those guys who might make the team next year?

Apr. 14 at 12:58 p.m.

#29

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: RazorSeider53

I hate to tell you how trades work, but a 2nd doesn't get you from 14 to 8.

Read that a couple times and maybe it'll sink in.

It definitely could if you had the right partner. Sharks 2nd is 33rd, which is comparable to a late first, unless you think there is a large talent difference between 32 and 33 in this years draft which I do not see. I agree that in general a second doesnt get you from 14 to 8-11 but 33rd or 34th could definitely do the trick.

Apr. 14 at 1:01 p.m.

#30

Lancebmx

Joined: Oct. 2020

Posts: 10,555

Likes: 8,194

Quoting: sharcuda22

Makes sense! Hopefully edvinsson can give seider a bit of a break in terms of responsibility too, I think he’s so excellent. Is there any of those guys who might make the team next year?

I could see one of Kasper or Danielson, I don't think both do. Danielson looked great in preseason last year, many felt like he should have got an extended look. He is also eligible to play in the AHL so I expect he starts there. Wallinder likely another year in AHL. Albert Johansson has a realistic shot of being on the team, he seems ready and also loses his waiver eligibility. Cossa I could see one more year as a starter in Grand Rapids. He had similar numbers to Wallstedt and Askarov for most of the year, not sure where they all ended at.

sharcuda22 liked this.

Apr. 14 at 1:03 p.m.

#31

RazorSeider53

Joined: Mar. 2024

Posts: 732

Likes: 313

Quoting: sharcuda22

It definitely could if you had the right partner. Sharks 2nd is 33rd, which is comparable to a late first, unless you think there is a large talent difference between 32 and 33 in this years draft which I do not see. I agree that in general a second doesnt get you from 14 to 8-11 but 33rd or 34th could definitely do the trick.

It literally. Doesn't. Happen.

Last pick swap in the Top 10 was 16 years ago. NYI did it twice. The second was 7 for 9 and they picked up a 2nd out of it. To drop 2 spots.

Apr. 14 at 1:07 p.m.

#32

Lancebmx

Joined: Oct. 2020

Posts: 10,555

Likes: 8,194

Quoting: sharcuda22

It definitely could if you had the right partner. Sharks 2nd is 33rd, which is comparable to a late first, unless you think there is a large talent difference between 32 and 33 in this years draft which I do not see. I agree that in general a second doesnt get you from 14 to 8-11 but 33rd or 34th could definitely do the trick.

I think that would depend on how the draft went and which team likes which players. Speculating on that is so hard cause no one knows which players each team is targeting. If a team likes all the players between 8-14 fairly evenly then it could be an easy trade. If they feel like #8 is substantially better than what they get at around #14 then in my eyes that makes it much more difficult. I think it 100% depends on the first 7 picks, if someone they expected to go top 5 slips to 8, then how do you trade that pick? You just need 1 team to take what might be considered a reach, Arizona last year with Simashev and But is a perfect example. They liked those players so they took them even though most draft boards had them going slightly later in the draft.

sharcuda22 liked this.

Apr. 14 at 1:21 p.m.

#33

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: RazorSeider53

It literally. Doesn't. Happen.

Last pick swap in the Top 10 was 16 years ago. NYI did it twice. The second was 7 for 9 and they picked up a 2nd out of it. To drop 2 spots.

This is a theoretical ACGM, soooooo I dont really care about the past NHL trades. We all know how boring 31 NHL GM’s are, and the NHL would be a better product if more and bigger trades happened and smaller contracts were handed out. If we only posted things we were reasonably certain would happen then this particular feature wouldnt have much value.

Also this is missing a lot of context, but you seem to love to leave that out. 7 for 9+40, and 5 for 7+37+68. I also dont have context about how the draft was perceived at the time. Did the teams trading just realllllly like the players they wanted? Was there a clear top 5,8,10? Analytics have also improved considerably since 2008 and there is a bigger emphasis on development paths and patterns in today’s NHL front offices, but no clear indication how this has affected the perceived value of draft picks overtime.

So a second can move you up in the first round, and the sharks currently hold the most valuable second rounder in the draft. There is a top 1 and then IMO a clear 2-11 although the order is murky. So it will depend on who likes what guys and where ‘the murmurs’ say they’ll go. Depending on where the penguins pick lands and where Zeev might still be on the board they may not need to get to 8 or may have a more valuable pick than 14. This was just where about the current value of placement of picks ended up landing at this moment in time.

Apr. 14 at 1:22 p.m.

#34

RazorSeider53

Joined: Mar. 2024

Posts: 732

Likes: 313

Quoting: sharcuda22

This is a theoretical ACGM, soooooo I dont really care about the past NHL trades. We all know how boring 31 NHL GM’s are, and the NHL would be a better product if more and bigger trades happened and smaller contracts were handed out. If we only posted things we were reasonably certain would happen then this particular feature wouldnt have much value.

Also this is missing a lot of context, but you seem to love to leave that out. 7 for 9+40, and 5 for 7+37+68. I also dont have context about how the draft was perceived at the time. Did the teams trading just realllllly like the players they wanted? Was there a clear top 5,8,10? Analytics have also improved considerably since 2008 and there is a bigger emphasis on development paths and patterns in today’s NHL front offices, but no clear indication how this has affected the perceived value of draft picks overtime.

So a second can move you up in the first round, and the sharks currently hold the most valuable second rounder in the draft. There is a top 1 and then IMO a clear 2-11 although the order is murky. So it will depend on who likes what guys and where ‘the murmurs’ say they’ll go. Depending on where the penguins pick lands and where Zeev might still be on the board they may not need to get to 8 or may have a more valuable pick than 14. This was just where about the current value of placement of picks ended up landing at this moment in time.

"I really don't care if it makes sense!"

Apr. 14 at 1:23 p.m.

#35

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: Lancebmx

I think that would depend on how the draft went and which team likes which players. Speculating on that is so hard cause no one knows which players each team is targeting. If a team likes all the players between 8-14 fairly evenly then it could be an easy trade. If they feel like #8 is substantially better than what they get at around #14 then in my eyes that makes it much more difficult. I think it 100% depends on the first 7 picks, if someone they expected to go top 5 slips to 8, then how do you trade that pick? You just need 1 team to take what might be considered a reach, Arizona last year with Simashev and But is a perfect example. They liked those players so they took them even though most draft boards had them going slightly later in the draft.

Yes exactly this is what im trying to communicate! There is so much context that influences all of this. All i did for this was look at where the value between the pens first and our second currently landed and did that. I didn’t expect to have to explain the value of statistical analysis + how to fill in its shortfalls. But this type of theoretical move is exactly what the ACGM should be used for IMO

Apr. 14 at 1:24 p.m.

#36

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: RazorSeider53

"I really don't care if it makes sense!"

When you put quotes you aren’t supposed to change the words u silly goose. You, in essence, have just quoted yourself since those are your words not mine.

Apr. 14 at 2:05 p.m.

#37

RazorSeider53

Joined: Mar. 2024

Posts: 732

Likes: 313

Quoting: sharcuda22

When you put quotes you aren’t supposed to change the words u silly goose. You, in essence, have just quoted yourself since those are your words not mine.

When this is your best rebuttal because that’s the gist of what you said, and you know it. 😂

Apr. 14 at 2:11 p.m.

#38

buffbry

Buffbry

Joined: Aug. 2017

Posts: 8,950

Likes: 5,366

Quoting: sharcuda22

I agree with you on the value of Sturm for sure, the first is more about dumping Copp and covering the cost of Sturm. Copp has a MNTC not a no trade clause, that being said a bottom feed is prolly on his list as well as the Canadian teams. I think JGP from the islanders is another candidate.

I wasn't arguing the cost to be clear i think its actually reasonable pending say a top 10 protected pick. Since he's from Michigan, I just don't see him waiver to a rebuilding team was all I was saying, wasn't being disrespectful at all

sharcuda22 liked this.

Apr. 14 at 2:20 p.m.

#39

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: buffbry

I wasn't arguing the cost to be clear i think its actually reasonable pending say a top 10 protected pick. Since he's from Michigan, I just don't see him waiver to a rebuilding team was all I was saying, wasn't being disrespectful at all

Yeah! It was a good point, I didn’t take offense i think i just misinterpreted your wording my apologies!

buffbry liked this.

Apr. 14 at 2:22 p.m.

#40

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: RazorSeider53

When this is your best rebuttal because that’s the gist of what you said, and you know it. 😂

Uh no it wasnt. I said i dont care about what happened in the past. The NHL is completely different now from 16 years ago so it has no bearing on this topic of discussion. You interpreted “i dont really care about the past NHL trades” as i dont care what makes sense. So im still not sure what your point is -_-

Apr. 14 at 2:28 p.m.

#41

RazorSeider53

Joined: Mar. 2024

Posts: 732

Likes: 313

Quoting: sharcuda22

Uh no it wasnt. I said i dont care about what happened in the past. The NHL is completely different now from 16 years ago so it has no bearing on this topic of discussion. You interpreted “i dont really care about the past NHL trades” as i dont care what makes sense. So im still not sure what your point is -_-

You’re right, it is different. 16 years ago we got multiple pick swaps in the top 10. Today, we don’t get them at all. 😂

Do continue shoving your own foot down your throat.

Apr. 14 at 2:42 p.m.

#42

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: RazorSeider53

You’re right, it is different. 16 years ago we got multiple pick swaps in the top 10. Today, we don’t get them at all. 😂

Do continue shoving your own foot down your throat.

This is an ACGM, and this is theoretical proposal. This is not the NHL it is a made up website with a feature dedicated specifically to exploring things that may not and likely wont happen in the real world because, as armchair dm’s we have a very limited amount of information compared to the people making these decisions. I have never claimed this will happen or what the likelihood of such a trade is, only that if it were to happen the value is about right. I have also stated from the beginning this isn’t necessarily about moving 8-14 specifically, only that in this current time with these currently being the value of where the picks are currently at. We cant know how each teams value any given player in the draft which is ultimately what the movement of draft picks at the draft is about.

Additionally, just because something hasn’t happened in 16 years doesnt mean it wont happen again. I do not know why critical thinking makes you so salty, you are perhaps the silliest of geese

Apr. 14 at 2:47 p.m.

#43

RazorSeider53

Joined: Mar. 2024

Posts: 732

Likes: 313

Quoting: sharcuda22

This is an ACGM, and this is theoretical proposal. This is not the NHL it is a made up website with a feature dedicated specifically to exploring things that may not and likely wont happen in the real world because, as armchair dm’s we have a very limited amount of information compared to the people making these decisions. I have never claimed this will happen or what the likelihood of such a trade is, only that if it were to happen the value is about right. I have also stated from the beginning this isn’t necessarily about moving 8-14 specifically, only that in this current time with these currently being the value of where the picks are currently at. We cant know how each teams value any given player in the draft which is ultimately what the movement of draft picks at the draft is about.

Additionally, just because something hasn’t happened in 16 years doesnt mean it wont happen again. I do not know why critical thinking makes you so salty, you are perhaps the silliest of geese

“If it were to happen the value is about right.”

Yes, based on your pick value charts that have been proven inaccurate time and again.

Not based on actual trades, of which you can’t cite any evidence to suggest it’s even close to proper value.

Not sure how that continues to escape you.

Apr. 14 at 3:02 p.m.

#44

jamnjon

Joined: Jan. 2017

Posts: 323

Likes: 182

Surprised nobody else has commented on this, I really question the Weber trade. He's on IR and would be on LTIR if they needed the space since he's not playing again, and his actual salary is only 1M per year. Why are they paying an early 2nd and 3rd to get out of that?

Apr. 14 at 3:23 p.m.

#45

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: jamnjon

Surprised nobody else has commented on this, I really question the Weber trade. He's on IR and would be on LTIR if they needed the space since he's not playing again, and his actual salary is only 1M per year. Why are they paying an early 2nd and 3rd to get out of that?

I have no idea! I saw it on someone who made a coyotes ACGM

Apr. 14 at 3:27 p.m.

#46

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: RazorSeider53

“If it were to happen the value is about right.”

Yes, based on your pick value charts that have been proven inaccurate time and again.

Not based on actual trades, of which you can’t cite any evidence to suggest it’s even close to proper value.

Not sure how that continues to escape you.

Sharks 2021 trade that I have already mentioned. Both uses the model of trading up or down in the first round using 2nd round pick(s) and is extremely closely aligned with the athletic’s draft pick value chart. 11 - > 27 and got two early seconds to move back 16 spots, and was with in .5-1 pts of the value chart. So, not a reach to say trading back 6 instead of 16 spots = 33rd pick. Not that i am even suggesting that would be the exact trade. Not surprised you missed that given how selective your reading is.

Not sure how that continues to escape you

Apr. 14 at 3:36 p.m.

#47

RazorSeider53

Joined: Mar. 2024

Posts: 732

Likes: 313

Quoting: sharcuda22

Sharks 2021 trade that I have already mentioned. Both uses the model of trading up or down in the first round using 2nd round pick(s) and is extremely closely aligned with the athletic’s draft pick value chart. 11 - > 27 and got two early seconds to move back 16 spots, and was with in .5-1 pts of the value chart. So, not a reach to say trading back 6 instead of 16 spots = 33rd pick. Not that i am even suggesting that would be the exact trade. Not surprised you missed that given how selective your reading is.

Not sure how that continues to escape you

Sharks trade in 2021 is not remotely close to what you’re asking. Try again.

Apr. 14 at 3:38 p.m.

#48

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: RazorSeider53

Sharks trade in 2021 is not remotely close to what you’re asking. Try again.

You’re right trying to trade up into the range Zeev is projected to go (8-11) is not the same as *checks notes* trading for 11

*Edit cuz of that assist in the Natty he could go higher. Whew what a passs

Apr. 14 at 4:04 p.m.

#49

RazorSeider53

Joined: Mar. 2024

Posts: 732

Likes: 313

Quoting: sharcuda22

You’re right trying to trade up into the range Zeev is projected to go (8-11) is not the same as *checks notes* trading for 11

*Edit cuz of that assist in the Natty he could go higher. Whew what a passs

No. Trying to trade 14 for 8 is not trying to trade 27 for 11. I know numbers are hard for you, but these are not remotely close lol.

Apr. 14 at 4:15 p.m.

#50

sharcuda22

Thread Starter

sharcuda22

Joined: Apr. 2022

Posts: 1,758

Likes: 551

Quoting: RazorSeider53

No. Trying to trade 14 for 8 is not trying to trade 27 for 11. I know numbers are hard for you, but these are not remotely close lol.

If you could read, you might understand, referencing one of multiple times I’ve made this point. The point is not that it is 8 for 14. It is that we should use the pens pick plus our second to move up somewhere in the range of where Zeev will fall. That has been projected to be 8-11 ish. I referenced a model that has recently been pretty accurate, and has one of the more prominent hock stats guys in Dom behind it (2021 Sharks Coyotes trade).

And im not sure that is making the point you want it too anyways. There is a bigger bridge to be gapped between 11-27 and a larger fall off in quality (generally) than from 8-14 (generally).
Are you trying to tell me that 8 and 11 are not remotely close? Or that the gap between 14 and 8 (6) is bigger than 11 and 27 (16). Or that the gap in quality of player between 14 and 8 is larger than 27 and 11?

11 for 27,34,45 is comparable to 8 for 14 and 33. You’re moving ten less spaces up so you take off one mid second essentially, you could even add the devils second for it but that would be an overpay.

Draft	Round 1	Round 2	Round 3	Round 4	Round 5	Round 6	Round 7
2024
2025
2026

DISPLAY SETTING

BETTING ODDS

LOCALE

ARCHIVE

CBA

CALCULATORS

FANTASY HOCKEY TOOLS

TOOLS

PLAYERS

WESTERN CONFERENCE

EASTERN CONFERENCE

INTERACTIVE FEATURES

Forums/Armchair-GM

Description

Free Agent Signings

Trades

SJS

CGY

SJS

ARI

SJS

SEA

SJS

DET

SJS

PHI

SJS

NYR

Buyouts

Retained Salary Transactions

Buried

Embed Code

Text-Embed

Question:

Options: