Shark Bait gone for Heatley; Heatley gone, Shark talk

Hockeyhero22000 wrote:But Dave you may not realize despite peoples rumblings Shubert is also a very excellent 4th liner who incase of injury during a game can switch back to D... I like shubie but last year he was more concerned about trying to get on d full time. this year he seemed more acceptable to get any role be it forward or defense he is a hard working guy i would like to see him get full time worksome where if he cannot get in ottawa

HH>no disrespect to Christoph, but 'excellent' is an overstatement, no?

You remember last year BM was offering him around and there were no takers. Schubie was also quoted as saying he wasn't happy with how he was being used.

Again, not being negative, but given the state of things in the league, IMHO if Chris was a UFA he probably would be back in Europe at this point.

My question was, why would Doug Wilson want him in SJ--when he's clearly stated he wants to bring new talent up to play D along with Boyle, Blake, et al.

davetherave wrote:Rooney> you think Doug Wilson, having been the fine d-man he was, and wanting to give his young talent a shot (Joslin, Petrecki) would consider Schubert?

See David Pollak's column on the subject:
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/sharks/2009/08/28/deal-with-vancouver-paves-way-for-future-deals-training-camp-competition/

“The priority is that this is a reflection really of where our young players are,” the GM said, adding that the evaluation was based not only on “where they were in Worcester, but also in our development camp.”

Wilson identified four players – Derek Joslin, Jason Demers, Mike Moore and Nick Petrecki – who are expected to be battling it out in training camp for a spot on the San Jose roster.

Even without Ehrhoff and Lukowich, Wilson said, the Sharks have a “very mature” defense with Dan Boyle, Rob Blake, Douglas Murray, Kent Huskins and even the younger Marc-Edouard Vlasic.

“Integrating one of your younger defensemen is what happens around the league,” Wilson said. And he compared the makeup of the prospects he mentioned — “a high compete factor, an edge” — to that of Joe Pavelski and Mitchell, forwards who made a smooth transition into the NHL.

Curious to know your take on this.

Petrecki and Moore probably won't make this team because of their cap hits (both over $1 mil). Demers and Joslin have a chance, I guess, but I don't know if any GM worth his salt is going to want to go into the season without a little insurance on them. A guy like Picard or Schubert for 6th/7thD, to spell off that rookie, is just what the doctor ordered. Schubert's dual eligibility makes a nice fit in that sense, too -- if he's not playing D, he can play on the 4th line.

As for Wilson's statement, you have to take it with a grain of salt, DTR. No GM ever likes admitting that they're in a position of weakness. If they did, other GMs and even UFAs would try to take advantage of the situation.

I believe SJ will give ice time to one of Joslin or Demers -- maybe even one of Petrecki or Moore later in the season, too. But, no, I don't think they'll start the season without at least one extra D with NHL experience.

Rooney>fair enough.

But I added Mitchell, Staubitz, Joslin and Petrecki using CapGeek and the Sharks still come out on the positive side of the ledger.

What's your logic on this one?

111519 wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

111519 wrote:

Just so I know, are you including McGinn, and Greiss in your addition? Since neither one have ever played an NHL game, and are hardly guaranteed to be on the roster once the puck drops, I was using the number 15 as players who were NHL ready; lots of people on this site like to look up stats on CapGeek and come back here like an authority.
Thanks, but my original comment stands-15 PLAYERS with roughly 5 million to spend. also 4 lines of 3 (12), 3 lines of defence (6) 1 goalie, and 1 backup goalie plus one spare player equals 21. That is the minimum most NHL teams go on a road trip with......

Haha, whatever bud. Barring a major overhaul, McGinn and Greiss are on that team as of right now. Economics and common sense demand it.

I think if Heatley goes to SJ, McGinn is in the package coming the other way.

I'd say it's more likely to be Couture, to be honest. McGinn is ready now, having played half the season with SJ last year, and he's pretty cheap; Couture, by contrast, hasn't got that NHL experience and makes 3 times the league minimum. Given their financial situation, SJ needs all the players like McGinn (and Setoguchi and Pavelski) that they can muster.

davetherave wrote:Rooney>fair enough.

But I added Mitchell, Staubitz, Joslin and Petrecki using CapGeek and the Sharks still come out on the positive side of the ledger.

What's your logic on this one?

Ummm... they want Heatley?

rooneypoo wrote:

davetherave wrote:Rooney>fair enough.

But I added Mitchell, Staubitz, Joslin and Petrecki using CapGeek and the Sharks still come out on the positive side of the ledger.

What's your logic on this one?

Ummm... they want Heatley?

I guess we'll see sooner or later...

rooneypoo wrote:

111519 wrote:San Jose has 15 players signed and 5 million left to spend.You need at least 21 players meaning they have 5 million to sign 6 players. adding heatley puts them over the cap with 5 players need to sign. the ONLY way heatley ends up in SJ is if a third team steps in to take some of the higher priced players on SJ ( cheechoo, Boyle) and returns prospects back.

For example:

To LA:
Boyle
Kelly

To SJ:
Heatley
Picard
Schubert
Richardson

To Ottawa:
Frolov
Schenn
SJ first

Wow, where to begin with this one...

First, let's get the basic facts right: SJ has 17 players signed right now. They need 2 forwards and 1 D, as teams only need 20 (not 21) players on their roster. They have $4.3 mi in cap space (with bonus cushion), or $3.1 mil in cap space (without bonus cushion). If they were to sign 3 players at league minimum, SJ would have about $1.5 mil in cap space (without using the bonus cushion). That's just about where they want to be.

Second, if there were to acquire Heatley, it's not like SJ wouldn't be sending salary the other way (to OTT). Who knows what other players we might send along with Heatley, too -- SJ could use cheap role players (Schubert, Donovan) or a cheap D (Schubert, Picard). So, we can't just categorically say "trading Heatley to SJ isn't possible because it puts them over the cap" without knowing we we're sending and what we're taking back.

Finally, SJ is absolutely NOT trading Boyle. They spent way too many years looking for him, and they love what he brings. He may well be their new captain, in fact.

Agreed with everything. Just a point to clarify though: Yes, teams only NEED 20 players for a roster, typically 12F, 6D, 2G. Teams typically carry and travel with at least one to two more than that, in case of injury. The portions of these salaries must be accounted for as well. Yes a team could get away with 20, but most don't take the chance especially on a road trip. There usually 1-2 players in the press box on any given night.

But, if they won't give up Michalek and Clowe, then I don't see a deal now. Vlasic? I doubt they give him up now, even if we give them Lee or Picard, so what can they give? Couture? I don't know if we'll be that strong with only Michalek playing NHL hockey for us this year. We'll take a major hit in the offence department.

SpezDispenser wrote:But, if they won't give up Michalek and Clowe, then I don't see a deal now. Vlasic? I doubt they give him up now, even if we give them Lee or Picard, so what can they give? Couture? I don't know if we'll be that strong with only Michalek playing NHL hockey for us this year. We'll take a major hit in the offence department.

Dude, read back a few posts. I think it likely that the deal, if it happens, will be something like Michalek + Cheechoo +prospect/pick (Couture or 1st). Something like that.

It makes a lot of sense. It's not the greatest deal for us, but we get a real good player now (Michalek) plus a good piece for later (Couture or 1st). Cheechoo is the price of doing business given the situation we're in -- and, frankly, there have been players as bad or worse mentioned in Heatley deals (Zherdev, Roszival, Penner).

It probably would have been Michalek + Ehrhoff(+?), but SJ couldn't find anyone willing to give up anything of value whatsoever for Cheechoo.

Yeah, that's my fear though. Cheechoo, Couture and Michalek seems to me like settling a bit. Our offence would still take a hit, unless Cheechoo got out of his nasty cold streak. Seems a risk, not sure it's one we need to take. On the other hand, it seems almost impossible that we enter training camp with Heatley, so you might be right when you say 'our situation'.

SpezDispenser wrote:Yeah, that's my fear though. Cheechoo, Couture and Michalek seems to me like settling a bit. Our offence would still take a hit, unless Cheechoo got out of his nasty cold streak. Seems a risk, not sure it's one we need to take. On the other hand, it seems almost impossible that we enter training camp with Heatley, so you might be right when you say 'our situation'.

I'm really wondering about all th hate-n for Cheechoo (not you specifically, SD). He is a former 50 goal scorer (as is Heatley). Didn't he get injured and then lost his spot alongside Thornton? If he took Heatley's place alongside Spezza (arguably a better passer than Thornton) could he not score 50 again? It's not like he stopped trying, o that the league figured him out. He started playing with inferior linemates.

Kovalev can get 30 goals playing on the second line (that's 5 better than what we could hope for from Vermette), and Cheechoo could certainly get within 5 of what Heatley did last year -- that takes us to last year (assuming no-one drops off). Now add Michalek on that second line, and you still have Foligno and Shannon to play on the the third line.

That's balanced scoring, isn't it?

Cheechoo-Spezza-Alfredsson
Michalek-Fisher-Kovalev
Foligno-Kelly-Shannon

SpezDispenser wrote:Yeah, that's my fear though. Cheechoo, Couture and Michalek seems to me like settling a bit. Our offence would still take a hit, unless Cheechoo got out of his nasty cold streak. Seems a risk, not sure it's one we need to take. On the other hand, it seems almost impossible that we enter training camp with Heatley, so you might be right when you say 'our situation'.

I think that's as close as we've ever going to get, considering the situation. Heatley determines where he goes, in the end. The teams chasing him know this, and they know whether or not Heatley wants to play for them. That puts us in a pretty impossible situation in terms of getting 'fair value' back.

rooneypoo wrote:

RobbyJ wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:... gets a rather crappy contract in Cheechoo (but the Penner precedent is there), and re-stocks the prospect cupboards some more (Couture + 2nd?).

It's not the ideal scenario, or the trade I would have wanted or expected back in June, but there you have it.

[All numbers and calculations done through CapGeek, of course. ]

Rooney,

The difference is that Penner is one of Murray's guys. He signed him and I believe he was someone Murray WANTED in return, as opposed to Cheechoo.

I could live with Cheechoo if it meant Michalek + Couture were coming with him.

If Cheechoo rebounds, fantastic. If he flounders, you put him on the 3rd line and he will at least work his Donkey off for you on a checking line -- and then, if you can't trade him or lose him via waivers before July 1, 2010, then you buy him out ($1 mil, 2 years).

It's not perfect, but it might be the best deal that we can get (and get Heatley to agree to). And I just don't see how we can have Heatley on this team this year. He was soooo unapologetic about the whole thing. He's clearly done here in OTT, whatever he or the Sens organization might be saying to the contrary.

Not a fan of the trade - not. at. all. I would much rather bring back Heatley and risk all that can go wrong

Just to clarify: Are you sure about the buy out numbers? I'm 90% sure any player over the age of 26 doesn't have the "1/3 over twice the length" buyout option. If we were to buy him out in the final year of his deal, I'm fairly certain it would be a 2M buyout for one year.

wprager wrote:
I'm really wondering about all th hate-n for Cheechoo (not you specifically, SD). He is a former 50 goal scorer (as is Heatley). Didn't he get injured and then lost his spot alongside Thornton? If he took Heatley's place alongside Spezza (arguably a better passer than Thornton) could he not score 50 again? It's not like he stopped trying, o that the league figured him out. He started playing with inferior linemates.

Kovalev can get 30 goals playing on the second line (that's 5 better than what we could hope for from Vermette), and Cheechoo could certainly get within 5 of what Heatley did last year -- that takes us to last year (assuming no-one drops off). Now add Michalek on that second line, and you still have Foligno and Shannon to play on the the third line.

That's balanced scoring, isn't it?

Cheechoo-Spezza-Alfredsson
Michalek-Fisher-Kovalev
Foligno-Kelly-Shannon

I really wonder about Cheechoo now. Last summer I thought he could have been a steal if acquired, but watching him play now is frustrating. It appears he still has the tools, but he's so inconsistent. A change of scenery would do him a world of good and I was all over this until now...I don't know if he can rebound from this last season. There was talk that he had a crappy first half last season because he was recovering from hernia surgeries, but then he sucked the last half as well. Is he okay? Is he permanently injured? Or does he need a change of scenery and a top line spot with Spezza?

I understand and somewhat like the risk involved with this kind of player, but for Dany Heatley? Michalek is nice, the centerpiece of course, Couture is progressing decently, but not a top prospect right now. If we're taking back that big a risk in Cheechoo, I would absolutely want a 1st or another prospect personally.

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:Yeah, that's my fear though. Cheechoo, Couture and Michalek seems to me like settling a bit. Our offence would still take a hit, unless Cheechoo got out of his nasty cold streak. Seems a risk, not sure it's one we need to take. On the other hand, it seems almost impossible that we enter training camp with Heatley, so you might be right when you say 'our situation'.

I think that's as close as we've ever going to get, considering the situation. Heatley determines where he goes, in the end. The teams chasing him know this, and they know whether or not Heatley wants to play for them. That puts us in a pretty impossible situation in terms of getting 'fair value' back.

I agree with this. We aren't getting the ideal package we'd like. Not before the deadline this season, or even the draft, and I severely doubt Heatley is around that long in Ottawa.

Since Heatley's confessional, I've had a long look at Cheechoo. I was against bringing him in before, but I've since warmed to him considerably.

In Ottawa, He'd probably have a better chance to play a bigger role than in SJ. People talk about his dropoff in stats, but he's been relegated to a 3rd line role for most of the season. His work ethic is outstanding by all accounts, and that's something you can never have enough of. His salary is not incredibly ugly and under the right circumstances could put up numbers at a decent rate. I broke down the numbers after Heatley's press conference and if (and it's a large if admittedly), we got Cheechoo back to 70% of his 56 goal season, that's the same amount of goals as Heatley had last year. And he's got a much better attitude and work ethic than Heatley. Going to a new team you'd have to think he'd go balls to the wall to impress the management and coaching staff. Even if Cheechoo doesn't pan out offensively, we already know he's
going to play hard in whatever role he's given as Dr. Poo pointed out.

If you add Michalek who's got ridiculous speed (think Gaborik) and nice hands, I think that's 60 goals with our current line up easily along with Cheechoo. Couture becomes a nice big, familiar cherry on top. Hell, for me right now, I'd take Michalek and Cheechoo right now, no questions asked. No, it's not ideal. But we are in a less than ideal situation.

put me down for michalek, cheechoo, and couture as well, that michalek is going to be a 30 goal scorer for a number of years, if cheechoo could toss in 20, great. couture is a very good prospect and we could end up winning this trade. besides, it's just over with heatley, it has to be.

It's possible Hemlock talked me into it there. :^^^^:

Why do we think Cheechoo's and Michalek's numbers are going to go up moving here from one of the best offensive teams in the league and probably the best play-maker in the game?

EDIT: I also don't see it being as simple as adding 60 goals to our line-up. If we're banking that players improve, you're subtracting 50 goals from Heatley, plus the goals he'd influence as a play-maker, plus the goals that would have derived from the player who would have taken Michalek/Cheechoo's spot.