SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

24-25 Sharks

Créé par: redboi
Équipe: 2024-25 Sharks de San Jose
Date de création initiale: 17 avr. 2024
Publié: 17 avr. 2024
Mode - plafond salarial: Accurate/Prorated
LTIR activée: Oui
Journées à la saison: 192
Journées restantes: 192
Saison restante: 100%
Masse salariale projetée avant les jours restants Info-bulle : 52 095 833 $
Signatures de joueurs autonomes
RFAANSCAP HIT
11 500 000 $
21 000 000 $
11 000 000 $
3950 000 $
22 375 000 $
UFAANSCAP HIT
12 000 000 $
1800 000 $
1800 000 $
2800 000 $
2780 000 $
36 000 000 $
CRÉÉANSCAP HIT
Smith, Will
3950 000 $
Celebrini, Macklin
3950 000 $
Transactions
1.
SJS
  1. Choix de 1e ronde en 2024 (TOR)
TOR
  1. Benning, Matthew
  2. Granlund, Mikael
  3. Choix de 4e ronde en 2025 (WPG)
2.
SJS
  1. Choix de 1e ronde en 2024 (NJD)
  2. Choix de 3e ronde en 2024 (WPG)
NJD
  1. Choix de 1e ronde en 2024 (PIT)
  2. Choix de 2e ronde en 2024 (NJD)
3.
SJS
  1. Schmidt, Nate
  2. Choix de 1e ronde en 2026 (WPG)
WPG
4.
SJS
  1. Choix de 6e ronde en 2024 (FLA)
Rachats de contrats
Transactions impliquant une retenue de salaire
Enfoui
Repêchage1e ronde2e ronde3e ronde4e ronde5e ronde6e ronde7e ronde
2024
Logo de SJS
Logo de TOR
Logo de NJD
Logo de SJS
Logo de TBL
Logo de WPG
Logo de VGK
Logo de CHI
Logo de PIT
Logo de FLA
Logo de SJS
2025
Logo de SJS
Logo de VGK
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
Logo de NJD
2026
Logo de SJS
Logo de WPG
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2487 000 000 $67 235 000 $0 $1 307 500 $19 765 000 $
Masse salariale proratée

Formation

Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
863 333 $863 333 $ (Bonis de performance850 000 $$850K)
AG
RFA - 2
Celebrini, Macklin
950 000 $950 000 $
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
1 450 000 $1 450 000 $
AD
RFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
950 000 $950 000 $
C, AG
RFA
Smith, Will
950 000 $950 000 $
6 000 000 $6 000 000 $
AG, AD
UFA
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
AG, AD
RFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
2 375 000 $2 375 000 $
AD, C
RFA
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
828 333 $828 333 $ (Bonis de performance57 500 $$58K)
AG
RFA - 1
2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
AD
UFA
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
C
UFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
800 000 $800 000 $
AD
UFA
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
3 250 000 $3 250 000 $
DG
UFA - 2
Logo de Jets de Winnipeg
5 950 000 $5 950 000 $
DG/DD
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
2 350 000 $2 350 000 $
G
UFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
894 167 $894 167 $ (Bonis de performance400 000 $$400K)
DG
RFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
DD
RFA
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
3 400 000 $3 400 000 $
G
UFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
DG
RFA
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
1 500 000 $1 500 000 $
DD
RFA
Laissés de côtéListe des blessés (IR)Liste des blessés à long terme (LTIR)
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
2 750 000 $2 750 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
8 000 000 $8 000 000 $
C
M-NTC
UFA - 3
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
7 000 000 $7 000 000 $
DG/DD
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
800 000 $800 000 $
DG/DD
UFA
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
800 000 $800 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 1

Unités spéciales

Avantage numérique 1
Celebrini, M.
Smith, W.
Avantage numérique 2
Infériorité numérique 1
Celebrini, M.
Infériorité numérique 2

Code d'intégration

  • Pour afficher cette équipe sur un autre site Web ou blog, ajoutez ce iFrame à la page appropriée
  • Personnalisez les dimensions dans le code IFrame ci-dessous pour adapter votre site de manière appropriée. Minimum recommandé: 400px.

Texte intégré

Cliquer pour surligner
17 avr. à 18 h 31
#1
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2020
Messages: 15,838
Mentions "j'aime": 7,045
Winnipeg definitely won't move Schmidt if it costs a 1st. They'll just buy him out if need be.
RationalHockeyFan, MisstheWhalers, Jets12Kozy and 1 other person a aimé ceci.
17 avr. à 18 h 46
#2
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2022
Messages: 613
Mentions "j'aime": 275
Can't see the devils moving back the pick is either traded or used on a LD or forward that falls
17 avr. à 19 h 11
#3
sharks88
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2019
Messages: 351
Mentions "j'aime": 175
Can't see leafs doing that even though the value might be around that - 5m on Granlund isn't where their focus would be, although a cheap, cost controlled 6D like Benning could be of interest.

Could see fair dump value for Schmidt being attaching a 3rd and mayyyybe another later one like a 6/7 and the Sharks would accept.
17 avr. à 19 h 13
#4
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2020
Messages: 11,233
Mentions "j'aime": 4,667
Quoting: Windjammer
Winnipeg definitely won't move Schmidt if it costs a 1st. They'll just buy him out if need be.


Yea maybe a 1st if there is a solid piece going back. But I have to agree here.
Windjammer et Mr_Canoehead a aimé ceci.
17 avr. à 19 h 14
#5
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2020
Messages: 11,233
Mentions "j'aime": 4,667
Quoting: Schuyler
Can't see the devils moving back the pick is either traded or used on a LD or forward that falls

And I don’t think this is a smart move for the sharks either!
Schuyler a aimé ceci.
17 avr. à 19 h 15
#6
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2020
Messages: 11,233
Mentions "j'aime": 4,667
Quoting: sharksdoee
Can't see leafs doing that even though the value might be around that - 5m on Granlund isn't where their focus would be, although a cheap, cost controlled 6D like Benning could be of interest.

Could see fair dump value for Schmidt being attaching a 3rd and mayyyybe another later one like a 6/7 and the Sharks would accept.


I was thinking the same thing right value, wrong team!
But to be honest having Granlund as a vet presence would be a good option to have around! Maybe a TDL type move though
17 avr. à 19 h 32
#7
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2022
Messages: 613
Mentions "j'aime": 275
Quoting: Rob32sjsharks
And I don’t think this is a smart move for the sharks either!


Ya probably not they should just fire as many top 2 round picks as they can for the next few years
Rob32sjsharks a aimé ceci.
17 avr. à 19 h 45
#8
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: nov. 2023
Messages: 83
Mentions "j'aime": 31
We are not giving up a 1st for spare parts.
17 avr. à 19 h 59
#9
Démarrer sujet
redboi
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2024
Messages: 6
Mentions "j'aime": 2
Quoting: sharksdoee
Can't see leafs doing that even though the value might be around that - 5m on Granlund isn't where their focus would be, although a cheap, cost controlled 6D like Benning could be of interest.


I’m new to CapFriendly, so didn’t know how to do this (if you even can), but I executed trade with the thought in mind that a third team would help retain 50% of Granlund’s contract and only have a 2.5 million cap hit for the leafs.
17 avr. à 20 h 9
#10
Démarrer sujet
redboi
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2024
Messages: 6
Mentions "j'aime": 2
Quoting: DeclanLovesHockey
We are not giving up a 1st for spare parts.


Far from spare parts, Leafs have parted with their first for way worse in past (albeit at the deadline)
17 avr. à 20 h 13
#11
Démarrer sujet
redboi
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2024
Messages: 6
Mentions "j'aime": 2
Modifié 17 avr. à 20 h 26
Quoting: Rob32sjsharks
And I don’t think this is a smart move for the sharks either!


My process on this was kind of a draft day situational type trade, theoretically, one of the top 6 dmen are still on the board and they jump the Sabres (who would be drafting the last of the 6) to land a top dman after snagging a forward with celebrini at 1. The devils are already stacked with talent and can see them wanting to move down and get their early 2nd back.

The sharks obviously already own their 2nd, but I can also see the sharks not wanting to part ways with either 2nd and limiting their darts thrown
Rob32sjsharks a aimé ceci.
17 avr. à 20 h 16
#12
n.1 Topias Vilen fan
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2021
Messages: 5,928
Mentions "j'aime": 2,577
Quoting: Schuyler
Can't see the devils moving back the pick is either traded or used on a LD or forward that falls


No reason to use a pick on an LD specifically, defensemen take forever to develop. My order of preference:
1. Demidov
2. Catton
3. trade for Swayman
4. trade for Saros
5. MBN or Iginla
6. trade back
7. other
17 avr. à 20 h 18
#13
Démarrer sujet
redboi
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2024
Messages: 6
Mentions "j'aime": 2
Quoting: Windjammer
Winnipeg definitely won't move Schmidt if it costs a 1st. They'll just buy him out if need be.

Fair. My thought process: The Jets could be looking to resign a bunch of their acquired UFAs as well (Monahan, Toffolli) or even another top UFA with that money. I thought we could get a first looking at the Monahan trade, trade away a piece that’s a negative asset at 6 million dollars for a 1st two years (that could have conditions) down the line. Probably a bit unrealistic tho looking back.
Mr_Canoehead a aimé ceci.
17 avr. à 20 h 40
#14
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: oct. 2019
Messages: 3,117
Mentions "j'aime": 2,294
Quoting: redboi
Fair. My thought process: The Jets could be looking to resign a bunch of their acquired UFAs as well (Monahan, Toffolli) or even another top UFA with that money. I thought we could get a first looking at the Monahan trade, trade away a piece that’s a negative asset at 6 million dollars for a 1st two years (that could have conditions) down the line. Probably a bit unrealistic tho looking back.


The way I look at it is that Schmidt has a value of -$1.1 million ($4.9 millon market value minus $6 million contract [The Athletic calcs]). Compensation for eating $1.1 million for one year would be the #68 overall pick according to PuckPedia's calculator.

I could see them trying to sign Monahan but Toffoli is probably too expensive in terms of dollars and term.
redboi a aimé ceci.
17 avr. à 20 h 57
#15
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2022
Messages: 613
Mentions "j'aime": 275
Quoting: pretzelcoatl
No reason to use a pick on an LD specifically, defensemen take forever to develop. My order of preference:
1. Demidov
2. Catton
3. trade for Swayman
4. trade for Saros
5. MBN or Iginla
6. trade back
7. other


I would be surprised if Demidov or Catton make it to 10 and I'd rather them take any one of Buium Dickinson Silayev Eiserman Yakemchuk or Parekh then Nygard or Iginla this is a pick where the devils can swing for a homerun instead of take a safe player. I'd like a swayman or saros trade with it though
17 avr. à 21 h 3
#16
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2020
Messages: 11,233
Mentions "j'aime": 4,667
Quoting: redboi
My process on this was kind of a draft day situational type trade, theoretically, one of the top 6 dmen are still on the board and they jump the Sabres (who would be drafting the last of the 6) to land a top dman after snagging a forward with celebrini at 1. The devils are already stacked with talent and can see them wanting to move down and get their early 2nd back.

The sharks obviously already own their 2nd, but I can also see the sharks not wanting to part ways with either 2nd and limiting their darts thrown


If Yakemchuk or Parekh are there at 10 this makes a ton of sense! Thanks for your insight.
redboi a aimé ceci.
17 avr. à 22 h 24
#17
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: nov. 2023
Messages: 83
Mentions "j'aime": 31
Quoting: redboi
Far from spare parts, Leafs have parted with their first for way worse in past (albeit at the deadline)


Two wrongs don't make a right lol
18 avr. à 3 h 59
#18
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: janv. 2017
Messages: 323
Mentions "j'aime": 182
Quoting: Rob32sjsharks
And I don’t think this is a smart move for the sharks either!


Purely looking at value, pick 14 would be 5.1 GSVA, pick 13 (if the Wild grab at least a point in their game) would be 5.3 GSVA, pick 10 is 6.0 GSVA, and pick 42 is 2.0 GSVA. The third rounder will be 0.5 or 0.6 GSVA. The Sharks would be giving up 7.1 to 7.3 GSVA for 6.5 or 6.6 GSVA. I looked through 18 trades where teams traded up in the 1st round and the team moving up typically paid around 10-20% extra as a sweetener. If they weren't sending back the 3rd and we were trading pick 14 it'd be a 18.33% sweetener, with the 3rd and 0.5 it's 9.23%, 3rd and 0.6 it's 7.58%. Pick 13 without the 3rd is 20%, with the 3rd at 0.5 it's 12.31%, with the 3rd at 0.6 it's 10.61%.

I suspect if the trade were to happen we wouldn't be getting the 3rd back but it really depends on how willing to move NJD is and how much we want the pick. (For reference when the Sharks traded back a few years back it was a 31.58% sweetener).
redboi a aimé ceci.
18 avr. à 10 h 26
#19
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2020
Messages: 11,233
Mentions "j'aime": 4,667
Quoting: jamnjon
Purely looking at value, pick 14 would be 5.1 GSVA, pick 13 (if the Wild grab at least a point in their game) would be 5.3 GSVA, pick 10 is 6.0 GSVA, and pick 42 is 2.0 GSVA. The third rounder will be 0.5 or 0.6 GSVA. The Sharks would be giving up 7.1 to 7.3 GSVA for 6.5 or 6.6 GSVA. I looked through 18 trades where teams traded up in the 1st round and the team moving up typically paid around 10-20% extra as a sweetener. If they weren't sending back the 3rd and we were trading pick 14 it'd be a 18.33% sweetener, with the 3rd and 0.5 it's 9.23%, 3rd and 0.6 it's 7.58%. Pick 13 without the 3rd is 20%, with the 3rd at 0.5 it's 12.31%, with the 3rd at 0.6 it's 10.61%.

I suspect if the trade were to happen we wouldn't be getting the 3rd back but it really depends on how willing to move NJD is and how much we want the pick. (For reference when the Sharks traded back a few years back it was a 31.58% sweetener).


Think if the sharks trade up it will be to jump ahead of a team in need of a RD to grab Parekh or Yakemchuk. And sharks would likely be willing to move their first and NJD or their own 2nd as a sweetener. But we will see!
redboi a aimé ceci.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage