HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

DW looking for another winger

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-06-2013, 11:35 PM
  #226
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 19,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by magic school bus View Post
He's Russian. I knew Wilson wouldn't be interested.
Which coincidentally happens to be the same reason Darryl Sutter wouldn't play him...

Clowe Me is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 12:35 AM
  #227
Hatrick Marleau
Nikolay GOALdobin
 
Hatrick Marleau's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: With JR
Posts: 4,308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeedingFrenzy View Post
The only rational reason to still be playing Murray is he's being "showcased". Letting other GM's see he is healthy. Thats my take at this point. Murray and Clowe both gone by 3/1/13.
If they wanted to showcase Murray, they should put him on the bench. At least there he can't lower his value anymore.

Hatrick Marleau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 12:59 AM
  #228
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,800
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
That is only for the expedited compliance buyouts that occurred just before the season started. This doesn't apply to the next two off-seasons for those not using it on an expedited player.
My understanding is that is true of all the allowed compliance buyouts in the CBA. Can you prove otherwise?


Last edited by hockeyball: 02-07-2013 at 01:04 AM.
hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 01:03 AM
  #229
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
My understanding is that is true of all the allowed buyouts in the CBA. Can you prove otherwise?
Can't really prove it either way. I'm sorta leaning with PF here though. The article you linked said

Quote:
There are very specific conditions for the expedited compliance buyouts:

-It can only be only on a player who has a cap hit of $3 million or more.
Could just be reaching here, but I don't think they'd mention it if it were true for all buy-outs. They specifically mentioned it for the expedited ones.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 01:06 AM
  #230
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,800
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Can't really prove it either way. I'm sorta leaning with PF here though. The article you linked said



Could just be reaching here, but I don't think they'd mention it if it were true for all buy-outs. They specifically mentioned it for the expedited ones.
I'm certainly not sure, and I can't find anything about it in the CBA at all for some reason, I must be missing it.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 01:08 AM
  #231
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I'm certainly not sure, and I can't find anything about it in the CBA at all for some reason, I must be missing it.
All I can find is from the NHL Website saying

Quote:
COMPLIANCE RULES

Will Clubs have an opportunity to make off-season adjustments to their rosters to come into compliance with the new CBA rules?

Yes. Clubs will have a one-time opportunity, during a six-day period, to exercise buy-outs of existing player contracts. Amounts paid to players pursuant to these compliance buy-outs will not be counted against a club's upper limit or the League-wide players' share. Clubs that choose to exercise compliance buy-outs must pay the buy-out amount over the remaining term of the contract.
They don't mention anything about a minimum cap-hit. Based on all the info and the way they worded it for the expedited buy-out, I'm leaning towards PF on this. But who knows, they'll probably clarify it when the time comes.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 01:21 AM
  #232
RainbowDash
20% Cooler
 
RainbowDash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Equestria
Posts: 2,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubbs View Post
1.85 million is a financial burden with the new salary cap. As of now, he's not productive enough to be a quality third liner, so what you're paying for is a glorified PKing fourth liner who is invisible during even strength. For three more years after this season. Those type of players will be cheap and plentiful in the offseason.
Good players for the bottom 6 are certainly not plentiful, sir. Not only that, but we have A LOT of trouble signing the best available in the FA market. We can't just sign no one, and we can't just gamble on some Woosta call up to learn to PK on the job.

The only time we've ever had success at signing bottom 6 players has been when they have fell on our laps. Malthora and Gomez.

RainbowDash is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 01:30 AM
  #233
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainbowDash View Post
Good players for the bottom 6 are certainly not plentiful, sir. Not only that, but we have A LOT of trouble signing the best available in the FA market. We can't just sign no one, and we can't just gamble on some Woosta call up to learn to PK on the job.
Desjardins, Wingels, Sheppard, and Galiardi are all pretty solid bottom-6 players. There are also a few players in Worcester that could do a respectable job, certainly no worse than Burish, and they'd be cheaper. Next training camp, Stalberg, Hamilton, McCarthy, Pelech, Oleksuk, and maybe Kearns (if they re-sign him) could all be battling for those open positions.
Filling up the bottom-6 is not a problem for the Sharks.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 02:00 AM
  #234
RainbowDash
20% Cooler
 
RainbowDash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Equestria
Posts: 2,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Desjardins, Wingels, Sheppard, and Galiardi are all pretty solid bottom-6 players. There are also a few players in Worcester that could do a respectable job, certainly no worse than Burish, and they'd be cheaper. Next training camp, Stalberg, Hamilton, McCarthy, Pelech, Oleksuk, and maybe Kearns (if they re-sign him) could all be battling for those open positions.
Filling up the bottom-6 is not a problem for the Sharks.
Key word is COULD, not WILL

In other words, taking a gamble. They absolutely could do worse than Burish. They absolutely could have nights where they **** the bed.


Also in regards to the players mentioned
Stalberg and Hamilton are not ready for the NHL yet. Especially not Freddie.
We've sampled McCarthy before in the NHL before, he didn't stand out.

Pelech and Oleksuk are BIG UNKNOWNS at this point

Also, these guys need to compete for a roster spot, we can't just have it open. Training camp is well after FA opening day.

RainbowDash is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 02:35 AM
  #235
Tkachuk4MVP
23 Years of Fail
 
Tkachuk4MVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 9,428
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatrick Marleau View Post
If they wanted to showcase Murray, they should put him on the bench. At least there he can't lower his value anymore.


Was thinking the same thing.

Tkachuk4MVP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 09:38 AM
  #236
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 33,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
All I can find is from the NHL Website saying



They don't mention anything about a minimum cap-hit. Based on all the info and the way they worded it for the expedited buy-out, I'm leaning towards PF on this. But who knows, they'll probably clarify it when the time comes.
The NHLPA has the terms of understanding up that mentions the amnesty buyouts without any such restrictions.

http://cdn.agilitycms.com/nhlpacom/P...ms-1-10-13.pdf

Quote:
Originally Posted by RainbowDash View Post
Key word is COULD, not WILL

In other words, taking a gamble. They absolutely could do worse than Burish. They absolutely could have nights where they **** the bed.


Also in regards to the players mentioned
Stalberg and Hamilton are not ready for the NHL yet. Especially not Freddie.
We've sampled McCarthy before in the NHL before, he didn't stand out.

Pelech and Oleksuk are BIG UNKNOWNS at this point

Also, these guys need to compete for a roster spot, we can't just have it open. Training camp is well after FA opening day.
With the crunch that will come next season going from the current 70.2 mil to 64.3 mil, they will have to take some chances on young players and the bottom pairing, bottom six forwards, and goalie are the easiest places to take those chances in general. Before any buyouts, the Sharks have 53.7 mil invested with 9 or 10 spots to fill. They will have Irwin, Petrecki, Demers, Desjardins, Sheppard, and Galiardi that will all be RFA's. Out of their UFA's, only Greiss would seem reasonable to re-sign. I don't think Gomez will come back at a similar rate. I don't think Clowe, Handzus, or Murray will come back at a reduced rate. Demers will probably need two mil. The others are probably going to get small raises at best. Probably 6.5 mil for all the RFA's and Greiss all together.

That means there is about 4 million free to cover the remaining two or three spots but what is lost that has the most impact theoretically is Ryane Clowe's 2nd line spot. Four million and capping out is not going to be enough to go out and sign someone. They could trade someone from the blue line still but again, you're taking a chance on someone in the lineup. And if cutting Burish is too much for you, trading anyone else or losing Clowe to free agency is going to be a bitter pill to swallow.

And if it's not Burish that you use it on, you're looking at Antti Niemi, Brad Stuart, Martin Havlat, or Patrick Marleau. Stuart and Marleau are certainly stretches. Havlat is as well considering this is a guy that DW had been after since he started as GM.

Point is, they will have to take a chance somewhere to be compliant next year. Bottom six forwards is the safest place to do that, imo.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 09:56 AM
  #237
bullslugg
HFBoards Sponsor
 
bullslugg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Cali central valley
Posts: 298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 19sharks19 View Post
True and I do agree but, I don't see D.W. moving him just yet. I agree with you though, I would like Murray thought of as our 7th D and no more ahead of the younger D but, I truly think the Todd and D.W. see it differently, as we can see. That is why I hope D.W. looks at Clowe soon, before his value just drops to below zero.

To add, some way or another, dispose of Burish, in any deal. None can say he has any value even remotely close to 1.8!!
8th

bullslugg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 10:30 AM
  #238
do0glas
Registered User
 
do0glas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,393
vCash: 500
Murray really is a beast on the PK. Hopefully that is bringing his value up.

I would see what gali can do on thorntons wing, while shopping clowe and Murray, when clowe was on the first line, I'm guessing their possession numbers went way down. So, the same might happen with TJ. Marleau is a pretty key F1. Either way, we need to see our options

do0glas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 12:06 PM
  #239
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by do0glas View Post
Murray really is a beast on the PK. Hopefully that is bringing his value up.

I would see what gali can do on thorntons wing, while shopping clowe and Murray, when clowe was on the first line, I'm guessing their possession numbers went way down. So, the same might happen with TJ. Marleau is a pretty key F1. Either way, we need to see our options
I'd like to try Galiardi on the first line as well.
Galiardi - Thornton - Pavelski
Marleau - Couture - Havlat (I liked that line a lot when they played together).

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullslugg View Post
8th
I'd like that as well. In the perfect world, Murray would act as a "7th" so Irwin could get play time in Worcester. Then if one of the D got injured, Irwin would be called up and Murray would stay as the 7th.
That's not practical though.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 12:17 PM
  #240
19sharks19
Registered User
 
19sharks19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: T.O. to S.J. & back
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
I'd like to try Galiardi on the first line as well.
Galiardi - Thornton - Pavelski
Marleau - Couture - Havlat (I liked that line a lot when they played together).
That is a really good point. It is definitely worth the try. He has been a bust with everybody else so, what if big and little Joe's can bring the "cheechoo" out of him!!

19sharks19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 01:42 PM
  #241
sjshrky27
Registered User
 
sjshrky27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,640
vCash: 500
Rumor is that Kessel might be available.

Clowe, Murray, and draft pick, or too much???

sjshrky27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 01:48 PM
  #242
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjshrky27 View Post
Rumor is that Kessel might be available.

Clowe, Murray, and draft pick, or too much???
If Kessel is moved, they'll want quality back.
Unless I'm missing the sarcasm here.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 01:50 PM
  #243
Arrch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NorCal
Country: United States
Posts: 4,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjshrky27 View Post
Clowe, Murray, and draft pick, or too much???
No way that gets you even close to Kessel. Kessel would be a terrible fit for us anyway:

Koala: Ok, so when the opposing team gains possession, you need to backcheck.
Kessel: I'm sorry, do what now?


I think Kessel for Schneider+ would be the best option for the Leafs.

Arrch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 01:58 PM
  #244
DuckEatinShark
GET ALL THE PPs!!!!
 
DuckEatinShark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Jose
Posts: 5,462
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjshrky27 View Post
Rumor is that Kessel might be available.

Clowe, Murray, and draft pick, or too much???
So the team's best, young goal scorer for an aging 2nd/3rd liner, an aging #6-7 D, both of whom are UFA, and a pick?

Yeah, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say Toronto laughs at us.

DuckEatinShark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 02:05 PM
  #245
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,800
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjshrky27 View Post
Rumor is that Kessel might be available.

Clowe, Murray, and draft pick, or too much???
Rather get O'Reilly. We can't really afford Kessel, would mean shipping out one of our big contracts next year, probably Boyle.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 02:06 PM
  #246
Kitten Mittons
Registered User
 
Kitten Mittons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: San Francisco
Country: Armenia
Posts: 47,632
vCash: 500
Sign and call up Tarasov. He'll score 50 in the remaining games.

Kitten Mittons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 02:20 PM
  #247
sjshrky27
Registered User
 
sjshrky27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,640
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckEatinShark View Post
So the team's best, young goal scorer for an aging 2nd/3rd liner, an aging #6-7 D, both of whom are UFA, and a pick?

Yeah, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say Toronto laughs at us.
I tried to be sneaky. But isnt Toronto rumor mill always saying they want Clowe? Maybe they will fall for it

sjshrky27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 02:26 PM
  #248
19sharks19
Registered User
 
19sharks19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: T.O. to S.J. & back
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Rather get O'Reilly. We can't really afford Kessel, would mean shipping out one of our big contracts next year, probably Boyle.
True. They've been talking about it for the past day and a half here in the media and, the talk is around a 1st and a young D at the minimal. On Boyle, I am betting he will be the one gone next season anyway, win or lose. D.W. will have to find some savings and with the development of some of the younger D, he may have confidence in moving Boyle before another of the big contracts. But I also agree, would like to take a pitch at O'Reilly; brings a more complete game and at lesser dollars. Although, Kessel would look amazing beside big Joe.

19sharks19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 04:35 PM
  #249
Mafoofoo
:facepalm:
 
Mafoofoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 13,161
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjshrky27 View Post
Rumor is that Kessel might be available.

Clowe, Murray, and draft pick, or too much???
Burke isn't in charge anymore.

Mafoofoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 06:31 PM
  #250
sharks51
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 8
vCash: 500
+1 on O'Reilly. He'd look really good with couture and we could finally get rid of clowe. Maybe a 3 team deal with one of the teams that wants Clowe. Something around demers/braun, 1st and whatever we can get back in a clowe deal.

Wouldn't mind taking back Seto either if its cheap enough. Overpaid/underproducing so he might come cheap. Not sure if there were off ice/maturity issues with him but he does have the forecheck/cycle game to compliment our lineup.

sharks51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:23 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.