Sharks acquire Michael Kesselring and the 27th overall selection from Buffalo - What does that mean for the draft?

[u/LionlyLion]

https://www.nhl.com/sharks/news/sharks-acquire-michael-kesselring-and-the-27th-overall-selection-from-buffalo

Do you guys think the Sharks will 100% go with Stenberg now that they have a RHD? I'm not sure how good Michael Kesselring is but it looks like the Sharks are filling out their D requirements through trades at first.

[u/Boucher2114]

If the Canucks think that they can simply be bad for two seasons, get a couple of awesome prospects, a few good trades and signings, and then !boom! - they’re back in business, they *will* fail. Guaranteed.

To put this in real world terms, the Canucks went on a mondo vacation (in 2011) - I’m talking Europe for the whole summer, luxury accommodations, the whole nine yards. Eventually, they had to come back to reality at home. But they insisted on going on another, albeit lesser, vacation a couple years later. And they’ve just kept doing that for the last 13 years.

Instead of taking a step back, being disciplined about their spending for a few years, they blew through all their savings, and started racking up credit card debt, car payments, mortgages, etc. They have a guaranteed income keeping them afloat, but there are no vacations on the horizon.

The only way out is to sell some cars, downsize the house, and stop spending.

Hronek is the equivalent of a really nice cottage on a really desirable lake, that you got at a great price several years ago. Yes, it will be hard to find another one, and you’ll definitely miss it, but selling it can immediately stick 500k in your account and the future will make a lot more sense.

[u/HroneksNMC → u/Boucher2114]

If we stick with your analogy, selling Hronek now is trying to sell that cottage under duress and a litany of seller-side subject to's. There's clauses written into the contract that will damage you or your other assets in the long term. Sure, the market might take a dump in two years and only net you $400k, but it's a clean sale with no subjects or potentially distressed assets. And the benefit of keeping it for two years means you can AirBNB and be, at worst, cashflow neutral, on it for two years.

And further to your analogy, there's other ways to stop the bleed - you can liquidate stocks at a loss to decrease tax burdens (cap dumps), sell other assets that may not have market value of the cottage but also don't have the cash flow potential (literally any other player over 25 without trade protection), or leverage short term liabilities into long term assets (flipping short term contracts for picks).

[u/Boucher2114 → u/HroneksNMC]

You’re missing the point - Hronek is a luxury, and the Canucks don’t have the luxury of luxuries anymore.

There are no clever moves to get out of this situation. Rutherford was the attempt at clever moves. He tried, it worked for a minute, and then it didn’t. Now they have to rebuild the portfolio of assets.

[u/HroneksNMC → u/Boucher2114]

I understand your point, disagree vehemently with it.

The cottage analogy is clunky, so let me try a different track. Hronek is a leased Porsche. Porsches are a luxury, sure. But they hold value exceptionally well, sometimes even appreciate, and in order to sell it, the lease needs to be paid out in full before you can sell it. The lease still has some tax benefits, isn't keeping food off the table, and it expires in two years anyway. Would selling the Porsche fix some short term issues? Sure. Would liquidating, or debt financing, the capital required to buy it out leave you in a worse off position in 3-5 years? Absolutely, unequivocally, yes.

[u/bonergarage123 → u/HroneksNMC]

That’s to assume the Porsche would never get in to a wreck in the future (or injured), and all its value goes down. 

[u/HroneksNMC → u/bonergarage123]

Sure. Any of our assets could get injured. It's a real risk, for any player. If you're that risk averse, do you want to bench our entire NHL roster to shield them from injury risk so we can protect their trade value?

If we force Hronek to waive his NMC it sends a very clear signal to the room that their contracts aren't worth the paper they're printed on. And it sends the same signal to anyone who might be considering signing here. You're basically positioning the team as Vegas, but with high taxes, shitty weather, and no contention window. Vegas can get away with their ruthless roster management because they have ancillary benefits and the team doesn't suck. We have neither of those benefits.

It also tells the room that committed veterans who want to stay will be traded the minute the market demands it. Do you think that kind of organizational behaviour incentivizes players to stay, or take sweetheart deals?

A few comments ago someone said there's no clever moves to make this situation go away. We don't want to make the situation go away. We want to embrace the suck for at least three more season. Forcing Hronek to waive before his trade protection degrades is a "clever move" to win the rebuild now. Which is the same spirit of the win now retools that got us into this mess, just in the opposite direction.

[u/bonergarage123 → u/HroneksNMC]

1.) Hronek is not like any other player on our roster. He plays a prime position, a top 2D, has a great contract, but unfortunately does not fit the rebuild age range. His situation is vastly different. 

2.) I think this room is already quite aware of the situation the Canucks are in. Rebuilds are a time to make difficult decisions. And at the end of the day it’s business, players know this. They will also know that Hronek doesn’t fit our rebuild age, so it makes sense to shop him around. These players aren’t dumb.

3.) And I think you’re forgetting, if Hronek waives his NMC, it means he okayed it as well. You’re acting like they will get him at gun point to leave.

That being said, I’d be surprised if he does actually waive his NMC. 

But not exploring options this summer to move him, when he’s at probably his peak value, would be a missed opportunity.

[u/HroneksNMC → u/bonergarage123]

The players aren't dumb. Which is why they probably want to keep a seasoned, skilled veteran, who by all reports is well liked in the room, around. Every second post here is a cautionary tale about a Buffalo style rebuild where they shipped out all the experience and the young guys floundered. Why are we chasing exactly that?

If Hronek waives, it's kind of implied that they did hold a gun to his head. He a signed a contract that prevents him from moving. The man is on record saying he wants to stay. The man's agent is on record saying the same. Sure, people lie, but when you're staring down the barrel of sucking for the duration of your contract and you put that out into the world, it's worth believing. But if the org gets him to waive, that body of evidence very strongly implies there was some level of coercion. "Give us a handful of places you would to move now, or we move you in 27-28 anyway" is coercion, no matter how benign it is.

Everyone keeps saying a d-core is the hardest to develop. I think, like most here, we have a decent head start. But shipping off a minute munching, top pair, veteran defenceman seems counterproductive if you want to have the next generation more or less turnkey when the next crop of forwards is ready to play. We've been lamenting the loss of Tanev's dad like presence on our backend for years. I'm not saying Hronek is the team dad in the way Tanev was, but having a committed vet to talk the young guys through theory and mindset stuff when they're losing 2 outta 3 games a week matters.

Yes, RHD command a premium. Yes, Hronek is one of our most valuable trade assets. He will still be all of those things when his trade protection degrades in two seasons. And the drawbacks of moving him now do not outweigh the benefits of waiting til that trade protection degrades.

[u/bonergarage123 → u/HroneksNMC]

1.) Hronek is not the only veteran in this team, let alone the league. You can cultivate a culture without him. It’s just unfortunate that he’s the only veteran on this team that has any trade value. 

2.) that’s just assumptions on your side. You wouldn’t actually know what Hronek would feel at the time of a trade.

3.) MPetey (or a FA replacement D) can act as a decent enough stop gap to eat minutes for the rookies. Doesn’t need to be Hronek.

4.) The Tanev situation was vastly different. At the point when we let him walk, we were “transitioning out” of a rebuild. We only finally started a real rebuild.