Shark Bait gone for Heatley; Heatley gone, Shark talk

SpezDispenser wrote:

Blazer wrote:can someone please explain to me why we need another average D man? unless we are getting a top 15 D in the league i really do not see the point in stunning the growth of our young guys by giving more minutes to another average defender.

That's why I wouldn't mind getting Michalek and Clowe (if it's possible) and actually giving up one of Picard or Lee.

Personally I would be disappointed in Michalek and Clowe for Heatley plus Picard or Lee. I am sure we are losing there.

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

TeamRenzo wrote:I thought that this trade was done to begin to clear up cap space so they could aquire Heatley.

I don't see why this move nixes the Heatley to SJ deal. If it does Dany has all but run out of options.

Garrioch is waaaaaaaaaaay off on this article, from start to finish. It's really as simple as that. Nothing new there.

As I said before, this move on SJ's part is either a final step towards finalizing the roster (i.e., they'll just fill in the rest of the roster with minor leaguers and/or role players) OR it will be pivotal to landing Heatley. It could be a precursor to either, really.

Anyway, if there's a deal to be made between OTT and SJ, I think it will look something like this:

Heatley + Picard or Schubert (about $8.3 mil)

for

Michalek/Clowe + Cheechoo + pick and/or prospect (about $6.7-7.3 mil)

SJ adds a needed D, and only adds $1-1.5 mil to their cap. They're left with 9 forwards, 6 D, and 2 goalies, and about $2 mil in cap space ($3.2 mil if they use the bonus cushion). They re-sign some of their RFA kids (Mitchell, Staubitz, Fox) for cheap and/or sign a role players for the league minimum and insert them in the lineup. Even if they spend $2 mil on those three players, they can still have almost $1.3 mil in cap space if they use the bonus cushion to shelter them from the costs of the bonuses they have to pay out this year ($1.24 mil owed to Blake, McGinn, and Setoguchi).

OTT, meanwhile, drops about $1-1.5 mil in cap space (which we have to do), clears an unneeded D off the books, adds a top six-er in Michalek/Clowe to help replace Heatley, 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. ]

SpezDispenser wrote:What San Jose has to do is acquire enough players in this deal to fill out their roster- cheap players, like Lee, Schubert (who can play both positions), Bass, Picard, Regin, J.Smith (not so cheap) etc., and then they have to ensure that they're ending up giving up a couple of mid tiered contracts (4 million) to get Heatley, like Michalek and Clowe for example.

Does it make the Sharks better? Not really, but they're shaking Dung up and their PP is crazy.

SJ might trade one or the other, but they're not going to trade both.

spader wrote:I would LOVE it if we could somehow get Setoguchi. I really hope BM can find a way to make that happen.

Don't want to squash your dreams, but....

The last players in the world SJ is thinking about moving right now are good, young, cheap players. I.e., Setoguchi and Pavelski. Given their financial issues, they simply can't afford to give up bargain players like those guys.

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.

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.

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.

Rooney, Robby> do you think BM wants to start training camp with DH in the fold, or do you think he'll do a deal even if the immediate return is less than 'optimal'?

PS Heatley was looking decidedly chummy with Jumbo Joe during the Red-White game.

davetherave wrote:Rooney, Robby> do you think BM wants to start training camp with DH in the fold, or do you think he'll do a deal even if the immediate return is less than 'optimal'?

PS Heatley was looking decidedly chummy with Jumbo Joe during the Red-White game.

I'm saying it's about 80/20 that Heatley gets moved before training camp. Yeah, it's a number I just pulled out of my Donkey -- but I just don't see how we can possibly start the season with Heatley in the lineup. The potential for a season-long and season-destroying distraction is just way too big, and BM can't afford another season like that.

We're not getting full value on Heatley no matter what, full stop. The leaking of the trade request insured that. I think we'll end up with 1-2 pieces that we're really excited about, and 1-2 pieces that we're not so excited about. BM will get the best deal he can for us, but that doesn't mean it's going to be a slam-dunk victory. It's going to be a compromise no matter what.

If we can get Michalek + Cheechoo + Couture/1st for Heatley + Schubert, I think we should do it. Not an ideal return, but probably the best we're going to get considering all the variables (the trade request leak, the lack of interest, teams' lack of space for him, Heatley's NMC, and so on).

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.

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

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.

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......

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.

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.

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?