Speculation: 2022-23 Sharks Roster Discussion Part 1

[themelkman]

It’s a little fascinating reading both Kunin and Lindblom’s scouting reports. First of all, both overcame some kind of disease (Diabetes, Cancer), secondly, both showed a bunch of promise and then for whatever reason had bad seasons. They both are skilled and smart players, both are talked about like they can really be something at the NHL level and haven’t quite gotten there yet.

They’re both big gambles, obviously, and ultimately they may suck, but I am curious what a bunch of ice time/change of scenery will do for both.

I just hope they dont get unlimited ice time if they dont play well. If rookies outplay them they deserve the time

 

[Jargon]

I just hope they dont get unlimited ice time if they dont play well. If rookies outplay them they deserve the time

Agreed.

 

[Shark Finn]

I just hope they dont get unlimited ice time if they dont play well. If rookies outplay them they deserve the time

Some old timer coach will make sure rookies get no chance even if deserved.

 

[Jargon]

Some old timer coach will make sure rookies get no chance even if deserved.

They’ve said “development” 100x this off-season so it does feel like the focus is on letting the kids play. I just think they’re going to have to be lights out in the AHL before they get that chance.

It’s likely a response to 3 years of us throwing half-ready rookies into the lineup and watching many of them struggle with an obvious need for more development at a lower level (Leonard, Gregor in his first season, etc.)

 

[OrrNumber4]

Some old timer coach will make sure rookies get no chance even if deserved.

Name a Sharks player who was stifled by a lack of playing time...

 

[timorous me]

They’ve said “development” 100x this off-season so it does feel like the focus is on letting the kids play. I just think they’re going to have to be lights out in the AHL before they get that chance.

It’s likely a response to 3 years of us throwing half-ready rookies into the lineup and watching many of them struggle with an obvious need for more development at a lower level (Leonard, Gregor in his first season, etc.)

I feel like it's inevitable that someone like Grier with so little experience is going to make some questionable moves, if not outright mistakes, in his first year or two on the job. But I think a lot of those could be forgiven if he's serious about development the way he's said he is.

If he can get some sharp coaches and development staff in place to work with the Barracuda and younger prospects and find ways to elevate their levels? That would be a huge win, a huge step in the right direction for this franchise.

 

[STL Shark]

No I thought Grier would give our young guys a chance and not hand out overpaid contracts to shitty players. Sturm is no better than Reedy. Benning is no better than Meloche. Lindblom is no better than Balcers. ALL of them are signed for way too much and way too long. Lorentz is no better than Chmelevski. Kunin is no better than
Gregor. Grier has signed a pile of shit to block our young guys.

This is the crap that NHL scouts have bemoaned about the Sharks organization for years (don't believe me then read Sheng's articles on the signings). Our young guys are not that good. They're a bulk of fringe NHLers. If you really think that Sturm is no better than Reedy as you say, do you think that the Avs would have traded Tyson Jost for Reedy straight up like they did for Sturm? Do you think teams like Colorado even know that a guy like Scott Reedy exists? I personally don't and I doubt that anyone else in hockey does either so this infatuation with "our young guys" is frankly silly.

How many times in the past however many years have we seen guys like Melker, Sorensen, Sheppard, etc. that we had on our NHL roster for years flounder out of the league at like age 30 because nobody else wants them and our organization overvalued their own internal depth players too much? People want the new GM to come in and run the organization the same way as the last one did in the final 2-3 years of his tenure (the worst of his storied/remarkable career with SJ). If you took the bulk of the internal options that you mentioned above and put them on the open market, there's a good chance that none of them have a spot as a lineup regular in the NHL next season. Balcers MIGHT have a spot with the Panthers next year due to Duclair's injury, but if not for that he's borderline healthy scratch or going through waivers again.

 

[Hodge]

From Sheng's latest:

NICO STURM​

Scout #2: Energy third-line center or maybe a fourth. He skates well, responsible, reliable 200-foot player. Uses his reach to make plays in the offensive zone, has a knack for forcing turnovers. Didn’t see a lot of offense from him, but good in board battles, puck protection, and is a willing shot blocker. Pace has improved since joining Colorado.

MATT BENNING​

Scout #1: Useful No. 5-6 defenseman. I like his compete. His give-a-shit meter was good. Always works. He wasn’t necessarily the best, most skilled guy, but I think he’s a good, quick puckmover. Just get the puck to the forwards, just defend and compete. I thought he protected the front of the net.

You can’t have enough of those damn guys. They make your team hard to play against.

Scout #3: Good term and AAV and he can consistently be a No. 5-6 that coaches will like. Benning can do what Dillon, Murray, and Simek have done at times, solidify the PK and the lower pairings.

MARKUS NUTIVAARA​

Scout #1: Not big, but smart, steady defenseman. Decent mobility, good puckmover. A solid bottom-pairing option. Not exciting, but good compete. Net front coverage is questionable, you have to pair him with the right guy.

STEVEN LORENTZ​

Scout #2: He’s an everyday NHL player, I think he can be a solid 9-through-11 forward. He’s big, but an excellent skater, plays with consistent power and energy. Simple game, hard-working, not very creative.

So professional NHL scouts and analytics models agree that all four of these players, especially Sturm and Benning, are useful legit contributors signed to reasonable contracts. On the other hand @SJSharks72 thinks they're worse than Reedy and Meloche. Not sure who to trust here.

 

[Gecklund]

From Sheng's latest:



So professional NHL scouts and analytics models agree that all four of these players, especially Sturm and Benning, are useful legit contributors signed to reasonable contracts. On the other hand @SJSharks72 thinks they're worse than Reedy and Meloche. Not sure who to trust here.

Lol bud get a life. You never agree with Sheng except when it suits your argument. f*** off with this shit. I have no idea how you aren’t banned yet with your constant trolling.

 

[LadyStanley]

Doubtful Sharks land any of these guys

 

[mogambomoroo]

It's simple, Grier brought those guys to change the culture, add new faces on the roster, and keep young guys battling for spots in the big club (like it should be) Also trading Burns, changes the culture and our leaders Couture, Hertl and Karlsson have to show even more of their leadership on and off the ice.

At first I was like why get those 4 players, but now I'm leaning towards it's great to see what happens. We know the results from last year roster.

Eklund and Bordeleau will fight for spots, and nothing is guaranteed. Lindblom will be hungry for 2nd line minutes, Kunin and Sturm want to be 3rd line at least and Lorentz will be a 4th liner. Nutivaara and Benning will be anywhere between #4-#7 d-men.

 

[themelkman]

Lol bud get a life. You never agree with Sheng except when it suits your argument. f*** off with this shit. I have no idea how you aren’t banned yet with your constant trolling.

I like Sheng but his scouts say this stuff about useless guys every year. I think they honest just tell him what the org wants him to report.

I remember all of his scouts loved us bringing in Dalton Prout, a guy who could barely skate and didn’t belong at this level at all.

I really like the idea of asking scouts but it seems they are so frequently wrong that I feel they aren’t really being truthful in reports.

 

[STL Shark]

It's simple, Grier brought those guys to change the culture, add new faces on the roster, and keep young guys battling for spots in the big club (like it should be) Also trading Burns, changes the culture and our leaders Couture, Hertl and Karlsson have to show even more of their leadership on and off the ice.

At first I was like why get those 4 players, but now I'm leaning towards it's great to see what happens. We know the results from last year roster.

Eklund and Bordeleau will fight for spots, and nothing is guaranteed. Lindblom will be hungry for 2nd line minutes, Kunin and Sturm want to be 3rd line at least and Lorentz will be a 4th liner. Nutivaara and Benning will be anywhere between #4-#7 d-men.

I think the bottom of the lineup is in good shape now. Potentially close to playoff caliber depending if we get positive regression from either of Lindblom/Kunin. Same goes for the bottom pairing on defense. Issues with this roster are that the 2nd line is a mess as is the 2nd D-Pairing.

Have a decent enough top pairing with Ferraro-Karlsson and a decent enough bottom pairing likely to be Vlasic-Benning. I would prefer a Nutivara-Benning bottom pairing, but given there are not really other RD options for the 2nd pairing I think Nutivara probably slots in there with a Knyzhov or someone like that which will be a disaster most likely (or even worse they bring Vlasic up to the 2nd pair).

Given the cap limitations, I am not sure how you go about getting better in the upper middle half of the lineup, but that is what Grier's job over the next 12-14 months will likely be focused on as 2023-24 is likely the preferred time period for the organization to try and start being more competitive in the playoff hunt. Could be internal options from the Eklund, Bordeleau, Robins, Coe, Guschin, and Weisblatt group that earn a spot or it could be via trade/UFA next offseason. However you go about it, 2nd line and 2nd pairing are the weaknesses that need addressed to be decent to good again.

 

[STL Shark]

I like Sheng but his scouts say this stuff about useless guys every year. I think they honest just tell him what the org wants him to report.

I remember all of his scouts loved us bringing in Dalton Prout, a guy who could barely skate and didn’t belong at this level at all

If they just spouted what the org wanted, they wouldn't be trashing the like of Chmelevski, Dahlen, etc. like they do. Think that's a fallacy.

Re: Prout, no way to tell if the scouts were entirely wrong or not given he played 2 games before concussion issues ended his hockey career. Not saying it was likely that he turned into a good/great player, but organization could or could not have hit on something as a bottom pairing guy that we will never know because the opportunity never came about due to extenuating circumstances.

 

[LadyStanley]

Good luck, John

 

[Gecklund]

I like Sheng but his scouts say this stuff about useless guys every year. I think they honest just tell him what the org wants him to report.

I remember all of his scouts loved us bringing in Dalton Prout, a guy who could barely skate and didn’t belong at this level at all.

I really like the idea of asking scouts but it seems they are so frequently wrong that I feel they aren’t really being truthful in reports.

Yeah I mean that was kind of the issue with all of our reporters. In order to stay in the org’s good graces, they have to report what the org wants them to. I have a feeling these scouts are Sharks scouts or he picks and chooses which reports he puts out to shine a positive light on the Sharks. I mean just look at the bullshit reports Hodge posted:

Sturm has never played above fourth line except in time of injury. The report mentions a positive in the offensive end but then in the next sentence says doesn’t see much in the offensive end so which is it?

Benning has never played above a 6 level but now he’s a 5-6? He does what a guy we already has does? Like why do we need more? He’s not skilled but he cares is literally all that report says. I’ll take the 0.3M less and 3 year shorter contract for a guy that does the god damn same thing!

Nutivaara is right but I’ve been saying this all along. Same with Lorentz. Not creative but works hard. EXACT same thing I said with all the young guys except they have a bit of creativity. But NO trust what Sheng says when he said the exact same thing as me just more positive. God damn Hodge is a troll.

 

[themelkman]

Yeah I mean that was kind of the issue with all of our reporters. In order to stay in the org’s good graces, they have to report what the org wants them to. I have a feeling these scouts are Sharks scouts or he picks and chooses which reports he puts out to shine a positive light on the Sharks. I mean just look at the bullshit reports Hodge posted:

Sturm has never played above fourth line except in time of injury. The report mentions a positive in the offensive end but then in the next sentence says doesn’t see much in the offensive end so which is it?

Benning has never played above a 6 level but now he’s a 5-6? He does what a guy we already has does? Like why do we need more? He’s not skilled but he cares is literally all that report says. I’ll take the 0.3M less and 3 year shorter contract for a guy that does the god damn same thing!

Nutivaara is right but I’ve been saying this all along. Same with Lorentz. Not creative but works hard. EXACT same thing I said with all the young guys except they have a bit of creativity. But NO trust what Sheng says when he said the exact same thing as me just more positive. God damn Hodge is a troll.

Nevermind the fact that the scout says Sturm blossomed in Colorado despite the fact that he was scratched most of the playoffs in favour of Cogliano who we know was very meh last year

If they just spouted what the org wanted, they wouldn't be trashing the like of Chmelevski, Dahlen, etc. like they do. Think that's a fallacy.

Re: Prout, no way to tell if the scouts were entirely wrong or not given he played 2 games before concussion issues ended his hockey career. Not saying it was likely that he turned into a good/great player, but organization could or could not have hit on something as a bottom pairing guy that we will never know because the opportunity never came about due to extenuating circumstances.

That was just one example I remember but there’s plenty of others. They almost always like the new moves and most of our moves over the years are bad.

 

[Hodge]

So when Sheng quotes scouts who provide negative reports about Sharks players like Dahlen, Balcers, Chmelevski, Reedy, etc. they are clearly scouts from rival organizations who are trying to torpedo the trade value of these immensely talented players.

But when he quotes scouts who say positive things about established depth players the Sharks bring in from other clubs, who have strong underlying analytical profiles as well, they are paid stooges for if not outright employed by the Sharks organization.

I think I'm starting to get it now.

 

[Gecklund]

So when Sheng quotes scouts who provide negative reports about Sharks players like Dahlen, Balcers, Chmelevski, Reedy, etc. they are clearly scouts from rival organizations who are trying to torpedo the trade value of these immensely talented players.

But when he quotes scouts who say positive things about established depth players the Sharks bring in from other clubs, who have strong underlying analytical profiles as well, they are paid stooges for if not outright employed by the Sharks organization.

I think I'm starting to get it now.

Yep just using your tactics against you. god damn man you are a circus act.

 

[PacificOceanPotion]

Sturm has all of the prerequisites to be a very effective 3C with scoring upside. He has size, plays with pace and a penchant for creating or being in on scoring chances. He’s responsible defensively as well. Between him and Reedy being better long term scoring options, I think I’m leaning toward Reedy. Reedy possesses those same prerequisites but Reedy has displayed much more of a scorers touch in the AHL and now NHL. He’s also younger. I think Reedy and Sturm on that 3rd line would be very tough to play against for opposing teams.

 

[Herschel]

I like Sheng but his scouts say this stuff about useless guys every year. I think they honest just tell him what the org wants him to report.

I remember all of his scouts loved us bringing in Dalton Prout, a guy who could barely skate and didn’t belong at this level at all.

I really like the idea of asking scouts but it seems they are so frequently wrong that I feel they aren’t really being truthful in reports.

Or when they said that Bonino isn't a 3rd line C anymore and they would shift him the wing.

 

[Hodge]

Or when they said that Bonino isn't a 3rd line C anymore and they would shift him the wing.

Which was 100% spot on, just like when Sheng quoted scouts who said Donato was a defensive liability who lacked competitiveness and that Adin Hill is a marginal NHL goalie with no starter potential.

 

[STL Shark]

Sturm has all of the prerequisites to be a very effective 3C with scoring upside. He has size, plays with pace and a penchant for creating or being in on scoring chances. He’s responsible defensively as well. Between him and Reedy being better long term scoring options, I think I’m leaning toward Reedy. Reedy possesses those same prerequisites but Reedy has displayed much more of a scorers touch in the AHL and now NHL. He’s also younger. I think Reedy and Sturm on that 3rd line would be very tough to play against for opposing teams.

Long-term, I would love to have Bordeleau or someone else surpass Sturm. I think he's an ideal 4C on a good 4th line. I would love to have a 4th line that could be deployed like the Blues did against the Sharks in the 2019 WCF with Barbashev, Sundqvist, and Steen. I remember that line starting most games against the Sharks best line and doing a good job rather than having to be sheltered and hidden like it seems our 4th line has been deployed for the bulk of our history.

 

[Hodge]

Long-term, I would love to have Bordeleau or someone else surpass Sturm. I think he's an ideal 4C on a good 4th line. I would love to have a 4th line that could be deployed like the Blues did against the Sharks in the 2019 WCF with Barbashev, Sundqvist, and Steen. I remember that line starting most games against the Sharks best line and doing a good job rather than having to be sheltered and hidden like it seems our 4th line has been deployed for the bulk of our history.

In the span of two weeks Mike Grier has acquired more useful depth players than Doug Wilson did in 20 years.

 

[STL Shark]

In the span of two weeks Mike Grier has acquired more useful depth players than Doug Wilson did in 20 years.

I think that's a bit hyperbolic, but it does seem like he's more intent on going out and solidifying the bottom of the roster for cheap in the offseason rather than waiting until the TDL and having to overpay for depth with assets when the internal options are floundering a bit and not ready for the bright lights of the playoffs.

That said, key will be what he does over the next 18 months to address the top half of the lineup. Role players seem to be in place, but role players only work whenever they're in the appropriate role rather than thrust up too high in the lineup because of other roster shortcomings.