Prospect Info: All-Purpose 2024 Draft Thread & Celebrini discussion (also the 14th pick and whatever else is draft related)

Who should the Sharks draft #1?


  • Total voters
    98
  • This poll will close: .

Grinner

Registered User
May 31, 2022
1,744
1,325
In general yes, but if the top 15 is chaos, imagine what the team boards look like after that.

If there's no consensus, there's no "reach." First round could look very different than the Internet scouting enthusiasts (like myself) think it will.
The concept of reaching has always been a subjective one.

I much rather package up the 2 2nd rounders to move up for the draftees in a certain range than reach for the same guy at 14
 

Star Platinum

Registered User
May 11, 2024
90
157
In general yes, but if the top 15 is chaos, imagine what the team boards look like after that.

If there's no consensus, there's no "reach." First round could look very different than the Internet scouting enthusiasts (like myself) think it will.
Reaching would be going in the draft wanting to draft a #1 defenseman, having all the guys you think have a legitimate shot at being that guy go before your pick, and then you take the next best defenseman because that's the slot you want to fill instead of just taking whoever you think is the best player regardless of position. To me, that's what taking Jiricek at #14 would be.
 

pappaf2

Registered User
Feb 24, 2009
2,002
684
Bay Area, CA
The concept of reaching has always been a subjective one.

I much rather package up the 2 2nd rounders to move up for the draftees in a certain range than reach for the same guy at 14
Yes! If the sharks could get MBN at 14 and package the 2nd round picks to move into the late teens or so to grab one of those d men that would be great
 

Grinner

Registered User
May 31, 2022
1,744
1,325
Yes! If the sharks could get MBN at 14 and package the 2nd round picks to move into the late teens or so to grab one of those d men that would be great
That would be ideal to me.
But, it doesn't have to be MBN. Perhaps it's Yamerchuk. Or a Catton who drops.
If the Sharks are so Gung ho on a prospect that would be considered a reach, then let them trade down
 

timorous me

Gristled Veteran
Apr 14, 2010
1,923
2,998
Reaching would be going in the draft wanting to draft a #1 defenseman, having all the guys you think have a legitimate shot at being that guy go before your pick, and then you take the next best defenseman because that's the slot you want to fill instead of just taking whoever you think is the best player regardless of position. To me, that's what taking Jiricek at #14 would be.
This presupposes that the Sharks' board would have Jiricek ranked lower than the others. There's been this notion that there are these six defensemen and then a second tier, but that, of course, isn't set in stone. Back in November, after all, Pronman and the Bobfather had Jiricek ranked #8 overall. With the knee injury basically robbing him of a chance to impress after that, he's been passed by several others--but not because of his own performance.

If he does go at 14 (or higher), it tells me that the medicals on his knee are positive--something we don't really have any info on. Definitely a risk. I certainly wouldn't oppose anyone complaining about the Sharks taking him at 14, but I think he could be an example of how these rankings are just educated guesses and vulnerable to shifts because of all sorts of factors.

Does anyone know what his knee injury was, btw? I haven't seen specifics anywhere, just that it required surgery.
 

timorous me

Gristled Veteran
Apr 14, 2010
1,923
2,998
I should add that I'm not necessarily advocating for Jiricek. I just don't think he should be written off at 14 as a reach or future flop or anything. It's not the same thing, but it's similar to how Musty fell when he missed time (and then wasn't himself) after getting mono in his draft year.

Same thing goes for Solberg, who's having his coming out party now, but because he was ranked lower throughout this year, his ascension may be capped at the mid-teens. I might actually be more interested in him at 14 (I'd be surprised at this point if he falls into the 20s, which hurts my plan of trading 33 and 42 for a third 1st to take Solberg there).

Solberg's ascension for this draft might be capped in the teens, but the real trick is trying to project beyond that. If it continues, in a year will he be talked about as a top 10 or top five talent? So while at the moment he might feel like a reach, that's not a guarantee he will still be in a year or three or five.

As an amusing side note, I was rooting around for some early 2023 prospect rankings and found Pronman's from June of 2022. In it, Halttunen was ranked at 6, while Carlsson was 15 and Smith 17. Funny how these things go.
 

Star Platinum

Registered User
May 11, 2024
90
157
This presupposes that the Sharks' board would have Jiricek ranked lower than the others.
A knee injury is not to be taken lightly. But mostly my post is about me not liking to take a guy coming back from a serious injury if the talent is close, I watched Jiricek's highlights and I think Buium, Dickinson, Parekh, and Yakemchuk look clearly better to me than Jiricek. I haven't watched the forwards cause I've mostly been interested in how good the defensemen looked and there are certain qualities I value more in offensive defensemen and I was interested to see how good these kids looked. The only forward I looked at was Eiserman just because I wanted to see what it was that turned people off on him. But I stopped playing fantasy GM long ago when I realized that I'm never going to know as much about prospects in any sport as someone who does it for their job, so it's just for my interest only. Whoever the Sharks end up picking, I'll just hope that it works out.

I should add that I'm not necessarily advocating for Jiricek. I just don't think he should be written off at 14 as a reach or future flop or anything. It's not the same thing, but it's similar to how Musty fell when he missed time (and then wasn't himself) after getting mono in his draft year.
My feeling is that there are probably forwards there that are a better bet than Jiricek to become top half of your team type of players. It is encouraging though that Grier's last draft seems to be doing as well as they are after so many years of Shark picks flaming out. These kids look like they have a genuine chance to be NHL players (and in the case of Smith, potentially very good).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

Hodge

Registered User
Apr 27, 2021
5,529
6,565
Reaching would be going in the draft wanting to draft a #1 defenseman, having all the guys you think have a legitimate shot at being that guy go before your pick, and then you take the next best defenseman because that's the slot you want to fill instead of just taking whoever you think is the best player regardless of position. To me, that's what taking Jiricek at #14 would be.
Jiricek was a consensus top 10 pick before he got injured. How is that a reach at 14?
 

Star Platinum

Registered User
May 11, 2024
90
157
Jiricek was a consensus top 10 pick before he got injured. How is that a reach at 14?
First because having watched him, I don't think he's as impressive as the other defensemen and doesn't belong with that group at all. And second, because the injury is a rather important factor when weighing whether to take him vs other guys that are healthy. Is he even going to be healthy for the combine?

Here's a pretty comprehensive 30 minute video talking just about him. Prepare to hear the adjectives "erratic" and "inconsistent" a lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

Hodge

Registered User
Apr 27, 2021
5,529
6,565
First because having watched him, I don't think he's as impressive as the other defensemen and doesn't belong with that group at all. And second, because the injury is a rather important factor when weighing whether to take him vs other guys that are healthy. Is he even going to be healthy for the combine?

Here's a pretty comprehensive 30 minute video talking just about him. Prepare to hear the adjectives "erratic" and "inconsistent" a lot.

Jiricek isn't even 18 yet but has been playing in one of the top professional leagues in the world for parts of 2 seasons. Dickinson, Parekh and Yakemchuk are playing against children. You can't make a one to one comparison just by how they look on their respective club teams.

It seems like the only reasons Jiricek is considered a reach are because of the knee injury (which is a legit concern) and the fact he didn't score many points in a pro league (irrelevant).
 

Star Platinum

Registered User
May 11, 2024
90
157
Jiricek isn't even 18 yet but has been playing in one of the top professional leagues in the world for parts of 2 seasons. Dickinson, Parekh and Yakemchuk are playing against children. You can't make a one to one comparison just by how they look on their respective club teams.

It seems like the only reasons Jiricek is considered a reach are because of the knee injury (which is a legit concern) and the fact he didn't score many points in a pro league (irrelevant).
I never once mentioned points. That's you projecting. My conclusion came from watching him play and my best uninformed guess as to what his skills look like. I don't pretend that I have the ability to discern that stuff in the way that an accomplished talent scout can. I'm just a fan expressing an opinion.
 

Hodge

Registered User
Apr 27, 2021
5,529
6,565
I never once mentioned points. That's you projecting. My conclusion came from watching him play and my best uninformed guess as to what his skills look like. I don't pretend that I have the ability to discern that stuff in the way that an accomplished talent scout can. I'm just a fan expressing an opinion.
Just saying, he was a consensus top 10 pick prior to the season. Not just by internet scouts either - he was 8th on Bob McKenzie's preseason list. So was Jiricek really so awful in those 19 games he played that he no longer deserves even top 20 consideration? Because that's what you're implying by calling him a reach at 14.

The injury risk is almost a parallel consideration IMO. Either our medical team determines it is unlikely to be a chronic issue, in which case Jiricek is a perfectly reasonable pick at 14. Or if not he's DND.
 

spintops

Registered User
Sep 13, 2013
1,653
867
Just saying, he was a consensus top 10 pick prior to the season. Not just by internet scouts either - he was 8th on Bob McKenzie's preseason list. So was Jiricek really so awful in those 19 games he played that he no longer deserves even top 20 consideration? Because that's what you're implying by calling him a reach at 14.

The injury risk is almost a parallel consideration IMO. Either our medical team determines it is unlikely to be a chronic issue, in which case Jiricek is a perfectly reasonable pick at 14. Or if not he's DND.
Preseason lists are sort of projections on guys taking the next step though right? Like Eiserman was the #2 pick going in, but he never took that next step and is falling down draft boards (who knows - maybe he still goes high). Jiricek was ranked 8 based on his age in a pro league, assuming he would take a step forward. Sadly he only played 19 "mediocre" games so he didn't really show that step.

>> If sharks love him I'm not against the pick
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

Hodge

Registered User
Apr 27, 2021
5,529
6,565
Preseason lists are sort of projections on guys taking the next step though right? Like Eiserman was the #2 pick going in, but he never took that next step and is falling down draft boards (who knows - maybe he still goes high). Jiricek was ranked 8 based on his age in a pro league, assuming he would take a step forward. Sadly he only played 19 "mediocre" games so he didn't really show that step.

>> If sharks love him I'm not against the pick
For sure but the difference is Eiserman actually did play a full season and failed to show growth. Jiricek not only lost half the season to injury but was in a unique situation to begin with as a 17 year old defenseman in a pro league getting minimal minutes.

It's really tough to know how to evaluate him but I completely agree that if the Sharks like him enough to take him 14th I trust them. "Reach" is not the right word regardless.
 

timorous me

Gristled Veteran
Apr 14, 2010
1,923
2,998
For sure but the difference is Eiserman actually did play a full season and failed to show growth. Jiricek not only lost half the season to injury but was in a unique situation to begin with as a 17 year old defenseman in a pro league getting minimal minutes.

It's really tough to know how to evaluate him but I completely agree that if the Sharks like him enough to take him 14th I trust them. "Reach" is not the right word regardless.
It really depends on the knee injury, too. Are we talking ACL? MCL? Meniscus? He had to have surgery, we know that, which isn't great to hear, but in terms of the structural integrity of the knee I'm pretty sure these all carry different levels of future negative value.

My thinking is that you obviously want to pick a player you like in the teens, but you also by that point are probably looking for guys who might be more like true-talent top-10 picks. I'm not sure if Jiricek can be that type at 14, but he's certainly worth investigating.

There was some useful discussion on his draft thread from some folks who know the Czech league who described the team Jiricek plays for and basically how the very weak forward group caused real challenges in every zone for Jiricek. Hard to know how, exactly, to weigh that experience, but either way it needs to be put into some kind of context.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

Star Platinum

Registered User
May 11, 2024
90
157

Not confirmed but seems like the rumor is that Celebrini is leaving BU. I think most of us expected as much but still interesting to see it may have been already decided.
spongebob-squarepants-begging.gif
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad