SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

jamnjon

Member Since
Jan. 15, 2017
Favourite Team
San Jose Sharks
Forum Posts
334
Posts per Day
0.1
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 2 at 5:09 p.m.
Thread: Who says no
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PLDGEY</b></div><div>Wait, how did Ottawa get the PIT 1st?</div></div>

This is a scenario where Ottawa wins the lottery. The Sharks have the PIT 1st so they'd be giving the PIT 1st along with pick 2 to trade up to 1 for Macklin.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>sharcuda22</b></div><div>I would say I would rather have Levshunov and Helenius than just celebrini. While we certainly need another elite forward in pool a #1D is arguably a bigger need for us because we would have Musty Smith XXXX
Eklund Helenius XXXX
Bordeleau Bystedt Halttunen
Guschin Edstrom Robins
Muk Levshunov
Furlong Havelid
Cagoni Polkhamp</div></div>

That's incredibly optimistic. I'm excited about several of our prospects but if 5 of them in our system now succeed I'd be ecstatic and you're discussing pretty much all of them succeeding.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 31 at 9:07 p.m.
Thread: wings
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>RazorSeider53</b></div><div>I was gonna agree... And then I saw that they're 100% full on retained salary slots next year. Oof.

What the **** was Grier thinking with that Hertl trade?!</div></div>

Probably that it was an opportunity to get some decent assets for a player who seemed to want out (he was going to be 'talking about his future' in the offseason and SJHN editor/podcast guy Sheng Peng at several points when discussing that fact throughout the season suggested he believed Hertl would want to move on after the season) and wouldn't have been great by the time the team is ready to compete. Yes, he gave up the last retention slot, but if he had the slot to use at this year's deadline maybe he gets an extra 4th, and at next year's deadline he probably doesn't get more than a 3rd's worth of additional value on a trade for using the retention slot. I don't know what Hertl might've gotten without retention but he likely loses more than a 3rd and a 4th worth of value by not retaining on that deal. Also, if he uses the cap space properly taking on bad short term deals it could have a lot more value than a retention slot.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 29 at 2:23 p.m.
Thread: Offseason moves
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>DFinn91</b></div><div>Sharks don’t have any retention slots left.</div></div>

Sharks potentially accept the trade if a 3rd team could be involved with the Sharks giving the other team a pick to take on the retention (maybe VGK's 4th or TBL's 3rd). Alternatively they could take on a bad contract to offset things. I'm not sure who specifically (I don't think they'd take Reaves since it's through the end of the 25-26 season). Maybe it could be a 3-way deal where the Sharks take Justin Holl and the Wings retain 50% of Granlund since it's less than Holl's salary and expires after this year.

I personally don't want to see Granlund go, especially with Couture's future up in the air and our center depth being nonexistent, but if a 1st is coming back it could be worth it.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 24 at 4:26 p.m.
Thread: Using the cap space
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>palhal</b></div><div>Players that are owed 21m....just don't retire.</div></div>

While I don't think he retires, he could be sent to Robidas Island.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Letsgosharks</b></div><div>To the Ottawa fans, I think he misvalued how much of a diff 6OA is to 12OA lol</div></div>

I know it wasn't you, but the Athletic's pick value chart has 6OA as worth 7.6GSAx and 12OA as 5.5 GSAx. The gap of 2.1GSAx is equal to pick 40, though the team trading up often overpays to do so.

A much closer value would be NJD's 2024 2nd and Pitt's 2024 1st (assuming it's 12th) for pick 6, though I suspect the Sharks would need to throw something else in...and that's only if Ottawa for some reason wants to make the trade.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 24 at 3:51 p.m.
Thread: San Jose Remake
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Viqsi</b></div><div>Um. You literally don't have the assets to get a return like that from the Jackets. Like, there is literally nothing San Jose has or can offer that would make that viable. You could add Will Smith and William Eklund and still be told "no".
</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Viqsi</b></div><div>As anticipated, the Jackets trade has been edited:


It's technically an improvement in that we've moved on from "literally impossible" to a mere "that's not good enough". The Jackets do not need depth wingers, and even if we did that package isn't good enough for a top-5 pick.</div></div>

The inclusion of Barabanov makes zero impact on the trade as well. He's a pending UFA and I don't think after this year he's re-signing with any team near the bottom of the standings unless he can't get any other offers (which could reasonably happen considering his play this year, but it's unlikely he'll do it without testing free agency to see what's out there).

In addition to that, the Chicago trade is laughable. Too lazy to screenshot but it's pending UFA fringe 4th line/AHLer Justin Bailey, pending UFA fringe 4C/AHLer Ryan Carpenter, pending UFA who couldn't get NHL games on an injured/terrible Sharks squad Oskar Lindblom, and pending RFA who is starting to play decently but has limited value Filip Zadina for Chicago's 2024 and 2025 1st and 2nd.

I honestly can't take any of these trades seriously.

Why is Florida paying to dump a pending free agent?

Why is Washington giving away Carlson for free?

Morrissey was top 5 in Norris voting last year and based on the stats he's been having another good year (I haven't watched him outside of games against the Sharks this year) and Namestnikov's been good for them this year too, so why are they giving them up for a likely late 1st, a guy who hasn't done great after being traded for a 2026 5th and a prospect who was probably included for contract numbers, and a guy who was available on waivers this year (though he's been decent for the Sharks on the rare occasions he's been healthy)?

The other Jets trade isn't much better...a pending UFA goalie who was picked up for a 7th, a good AHLer in Scott Sabourin who isn't young enough to be more than the veteran guy down there who might occasionally be rewarded with a game or 2 at the NHL level, a pending RFA center who passed through waivers and wasn't able to stick on a Sharks team with 3 of its top 4 centers injured, a former 31st OA pick who was considered a reach when taken and is getting very close to being considered a bust (not quite there yet, still some interest in him hence Milwaukee wanting him to be loaned for the playoff push), and a 1st in 3 years for one of the better goalies in the league, Ehlers, and Appleton both of whom are good players (I'm getting lazy so I'm going to stop going through this).
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 22 at 1:59 a.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 14 at 7:17 p.m.
Thread: 20242025
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mm1010</b></div><div>its a revenue sharing league... how do you think the coyotes have lived past year 2.. financially the sharks are fine
also given that only about 34% of league revenue is gate revenue and majority is through broad casting and league sponsorships they are doing ok.</div></div>

I agree with most things you said, but the Sharks have a terrible local TV deal. In 2014 there was an article about the Sharks contemplating moving from San Jose because of how terrible the local TV deal was and it mentioned them getting 7M per year, and it lasting 14 more years (presumably until 2028 based on the timing of the article). By comparison, the top tier of other local NHL TV deals was 30M per year and other teams with similar fanbase sizes and market share (at the time of the article in 2014) were getting 20M. I know that's just the local deal and a lot of it comes from the league-wide deal, though.

I actually wonder if the TV deal's expiration will impact the rebuild at all with ownership wanting the team to expedite things a bit to have better viewing numbers in time for the start of negotiations.
Forum: NHLMar. 12 at 1:09 a.m.
Thread: How early would the Pens pick have to be for Dubas to choose to defer it?
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>I have the utmost confidence that no team with Sidney Crosby on it, not to mention Erik Karlsson and Kris Letang, will finish in the bottom 5, especially now that Kyle Dubas has had an entire season to evaluate the roster and has this off-season to take some steps to improve the team, so I can't see the Penguins doing <strong>worse</strong> than they have this year.</div></div>

The biggest question is about health and age...even if the players don't get injured, at some point their performance is going to fall off. It might not be next year but time is undefeated so eventually it will happen. Add to that the older they are the more likely people are to get injured and the longer it takes for recovery. Karlsson, Letang, Crosby, and Malkin haven't missed a game this season. Will they be as healthy next year?
Forum: NHLMar. 11 at 12:40 a.m.
Thread: How early would the Pens pick have to be for Dubas to choose to defer it?
The phrasing on the Karlsson trade condition is that if the Penguins' pick is in the top 10 Dubas can choose to defer the pick to 2025, not that he has to. Considering how fortunate they were with the health of their big 4 this year and the fact that the youngest of them is Karlsson who has a significant injury history and will be 34 before the season starts and the others will be 37,37, and 38, and they lost a guy who was a point per game player through 3/4 of the season this year, there's a decent chance next year they drop in the standings beyond where they are this year. If the pick is in the 8-10 range I feel like it would make sense for them to just give up this year's pick instead of waiting until next year and risking it being even earlier. On the other hand, deferring when they don't have to would be admitting they're expecting to do worse and that could be tough to do while Crosby's still there and playing well.