I don’t think I would do that for a wing even if Martone is that good but that is an option. I do think that Smith in the 2025 class is right there with Hagens as an option for #1 overall.
My best reply to you is that I guess that most on here weren’t around then as you and I were.You guys are so pessimistic
The 92-93 Sharks literally set the record for most losses in a season with a 17 game losing streak along the way. Then they made the playoffs the next season and even beat Yzerman’s Red Wings in round 1.
They pulled off a similar turnaround from 96-97 to 97-98. And for those saying that’s ancient history, the leafs just did this after drafting 1OA for Matthews.
I’ve pointed this out a few times this summer and still haven’t heard a reasonable response for why the Sharks can’t do it again.
Note: I’m not saying it’s a guarantee they’ll make the playoffs (not by a long shot) but the prevailing wisdom on here seems to be that it’s a foregone conclusion that they will not make the playoffs this year or next year, and I genuinely don’t get why we all go along with this.
I had started typing out a response to an earlier argument for the "93-94" argument, but never finished. Here are the things that have to happen for you to believe this turnaround is possible:You guys are so pessimistic
The 92-93 Sharks literally set the record for most losses in a season with a 17 game losing streak along the way. Then they made the playoffs the next season and even beat Yzerman’s Red Wings in round 1.
They pulled off a similar turnaround from 96-97 to 97-98. And for those saying that’s ancient history, the leafs just did this after drafting 1OA for Matthews.
I’ve pointed this out a few times this summer and still haven’t heard a reasonable response for why the Sharks can’t do it again.
Note: I’m not saying it’s a guarantee they’ll make the playoffs (not by a long shot) but the prevailing wisdom on here seems to be that it’s a foregone conclusion that they will not make the playoffs this year or next year, and I genuinely don’t get why we all go along with this.
for picks and 35yo Sergei Makarov who had a resurgence as our top scorer, plus we waiver claimed Igor Larionov. There is absolutely no comparable for these two, unless both Smith and Celebrini have historic rookie seasonsI went to I think ~35-40 of the home games that season. Was amazing watching Gretz tie Howe's 801. A surprising amount of fans on these boards were around then.
Good times. That season. And many more through Doug Wilson’s tenure.I had started typing out a response to an earlier argument for the "93-94" argument, but never finished. Here are the things that have to happen for you to believe this turnaround is possible:
In short, we need everything to go right. Sure, it's possible, like the Kraken being good or the VGK surprising everyone in season 1. But the biggest flaw in the plan, as has been pointed out over and over, is our defense is super thin and we need all three of Walman, Mukh, and e.g. Thompson or Ceci to have a 0.5ppg seasons to match the 94 Sharks.
- We gave up Pronger
- Sandis Ozolinsh and Ray Whitney were 2nd year players that had huge breakouts -- maybe Eklund can be Ray or he can be Falloon, but we don't have a Sandis comparable unless Mukh just explodes.
- Tom Pederson's breakout would be like if Thompson had a big breakout this year. Possible, not likely.
- We need Askarov (or Blackwood) to pull an Irbe immediately
- Walman needs to pull a Jeff Norton
- Baker and Errey could conceivably be Wennberg and one of our other free agent signings... Toffoli needs to play the Todd Elik (shock waiver wire pickup!) role as a scorer.
- We'd have to pick up a nearly point-per-game player like Ulf Dahlen at the trade deadline
The Pinholes Graham that someone posted a few weeks back is a great 1hr long summary that was a fun watch, no matter what you think.
I went to I think ~35-40 of the home games that season. Was amazing watching Gretz tie Howe's 801. A surprising amount of fans on these boards were around then.
It isn’t really even debatable whether the top pick is more valuable than a good but not elite RHD that’s about to get paid $9 million a year for 8 years. As someone that talks about empty calorie production with other players (a point I agree with), curious why the obsession with Dobson when he still is pretty poor in his own end and is going to get paid for points when he’s not really a winning player to date.
I figured given your profile pic that at least you were around back thenI had started typing out a response to an earlier argument for the "93-94" argument, but never finished. Here are the things that have to happen for you to believe this turnaround is possible:
In short, we need everything to go right. Sure, it's possible, like the Kraken being good or the VGK surprising everyone in season 1. But the biggest flaw in the plan, as has been pointed out over and over, is our defense is super thin and we need all three of Walman, Mukh, and e.g. Thompson or Ceci to have a 0.5ppg seasons to match the 94 Sharks.
- We gave up Pronger
- Sandis Ozolinsh and Ray Whitney were 2nd year players that had huge breakouts -- maybe Eklund can be Ray or he can be Falloon, but we don't have a Sandis comparable unless Mukh just explodes.
- Tom Pederson's breakout would be like if Thompson had a big breakout this year. Possible, not likely.
- We need Askarov (or Blackwood) to pull an Irbe immediately
- Walman needs to pull a Jeff Norton
- Baker and Errey could conceivably be Wennberg and one of our other free agent signings... Toffoli needs to play the Todd Elik (shock waiver wire pickup!) role as a scorer.
- We'd have to pick up a nearly point-per-game player like Ulf Dahlen at the trade deadline
The Pinholes Graham that someone posted a few weeks back is a great 1hr long summary that was a fun watch, no matter what you think.
I went to I think ~35-40 of the home games that season. Was amazing watching Gretz tie Howe's 801. A surprising amount of fans on these boards were around then.
It was the OV line, Larionov,Makarov, Garpenlov along with Ozolinsh and Norton. They played as a 5 man unit and wouldn’t give the puck up for no reason. Add in Todd Elik, Jamie Baker and Bob Errey. Adding Arturs Irbe’s rise and we caught Detroit and Toronto off guard. We had very little reason to rise above but we did.I figured given your profile pic that at least you were around back then
To be fair, I was a kid just getting into hockey for the 93-94 run, so I don't remember the details, but just looking at the #s, I don't see how Makarov's resurgence was any more impactful than Granlund's was last year. Is it really so hard to imagine he reproduces that?
Rather than going line by line on a team I only remember a few key players from, I'll just point out that was 1 of 3 examples I gave. The 97-98 Sharks have spooky resonance with this team -- fueled by a new head coach (same as the 93-94 team), two top picks from the last 2 drafts up front, a new goalie acquisition on the backend...I would bet if you went line by line the 24-25 Sharks match up to that team pretty well.
Then there's the 2016-17 Leafs. Even though it's another team, this may be the one most worth reflecting on, since this is our post-lockout example that shows this still happens in the modern NHL, so I'll go line by line on this one.
For a review, here's the team that went from 1OA to the playoffs in a single season:
Milan Michalek – Nazem Kadri – Leo Komarov
van Riemsdyk – Tyler Bozak – Mitch Marner
Zach Hyman – Auston Matthews – William Nylander
Matt Martin – Peter Holland – Connor Brown
Martin Marincin – Morgan Rielly
Jake Gardiner – Connor Carrick
Matt Hunwick – Nikita Zaitsev
Frederik Andersen
Jhonas Enroth
The way I see it (and I'll try to be conservative in my expectations of our guys here):
Now, I'm not going to pretend I remember that D outside of a couple of guys, but safe to say that's where Toronto was clearly ahead of us. On the other hand, I'd take our goaltending over Toronto's. So that just leaves it down to a question of if Celibrini and Smith can match the combined output of Matthews and Marner.
- Couture = Michalek
- Granlund = Kadri
- Zetterlund > Komarov
- Toffoli = JVR
- Wennberg < Bozak
- Grundstrom = Hyman
- Eklund = Nylander
- Goodrow/Delandria/Kunin = Martin
- Sturm > Holland
- Bordeledeau = Brown
I know it's not a guarantee but it doesn't seem unreasonable to think they could get close. I'm personally expecting to see at least one of them hit 60 points, and this is where I feel like I'm taking crazy pills because it seems like no one else really expects that. But then I look at Eichel's rookie season on that God awful Sabers teams and I see what a Hobey Baker winner can do. Or Keller's rookie season for what a guy like Smith can do and I just think it's strange we all seem closed off to the possibility we could see our guys do the same.
TLDR; have a little hope! We cheer for a sport where teams can and do have huge turnarounds from one year to the next.
That first playoff run was a special one. I loved watching Larionov and Makarov pass the puck and control possession.
The 1st overall pick is far from a guarantee of an elite player. Slafkovsky, Power, Lafreniere, Hischier, Ekblad, Yakupov, RNH...that's like half the guys drafted 1st overall in the past decade or so and they would all have been worth trading for a 25-year-old #1 defenseman.
Some of these are not like the rest. Yakupov feels like he should be on a separate list. Slaf was electric coming back from injury last year. Power is a dman and those take longer to develop. Laf had a great playoffs and was pretty good last year. Nico is still a selke caliber 1C. Ekblad is still a top pairing D. RNH just scored 100 points.
It's too early to trade any top prospect or pick for an established NHLer 25 or older. We need to see what we have first and then we'll know organizational need going forward.
Personally I think Dobson is a 1D that is still an RFA. I’d trade anything that’s not Celebrini or Askarov for him. Number 1 RHD are much more difficult to get than really anything else we have other than those 2 guys.
Maybe you acquire certain players no matter what the state of your franchise, but Im not sure...
Yeah definitely I agree that neither guys are or will be on the market. But I think the price was lower for Askarov because he asked out and is not proven. I mean the guy has only played 3 games in the NHL. Jack Campbell (albeit had a bit worse stats in the AHL and was a bit more up and down) was considered a top goaltending prospect and the next big thing in goal at one point, look at how he turned out. Fucale, Blackwood, probably others I’m forgetting but all those guys were considered top goaltending prospects that didn’t work out. If a younger top pair (or ever top 4) D comes available I think you jump at it no matter where your team is at.
Hedman was drafted a year after Stamkos
Banking on drafting a Hedman or Makar is a high-risk strategy. If it happens, great, but I don't feel comfortable staking our chances to win on such an unlikely scenario.
Bringing up the devils and there way of rebuilding is not the way to go.
I can get behind making aggressive acquisitions on the blue line, we NEED to bolster the back end more than any other part of the active roster if we're going to be back in the playoffs any time soon
We need to get more than a little lucky to end up with a defense prospect like Makar who was one of the best defensemen in the world by his D+3 season. Unless that happens, we're probably looking at a ~5 year development period for a defenseman to go from prospect to top pair. At that point Celebrini will already be at least 24 and we would have wasted the opportunity to win on his ELC/Askarov's cheap extension.
I hate to break it to you, we're not winning on Celebrini's ELC, there is literally no path to a championship in the next 3 years with the assets in this organization, that's why extending him long term on July 1st 2026 at a reasonable cap hit is so important
