Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[STL Shark]

I think these projections are based on the assumption that Mack and Smith are going to be "sheltered" on the 2nd and 3rd lines respectively for their first season. 40 points is well within the expected totals for a decent 3rd liner.

I don't think they will nor should they probably play 20 mins a night like Bedard did (especially Smith). For me, I'd like to see Macklin in the 16-18 min range, Smith in the 14-16, and then use the veterans that you signed to play real minutes as well in the bottom 6. Not a lot of utility bringing in Goodrow, Dellandrea, Wennberg, etc. to play the 4th line for 10 mins and the 3rd line for 12 so you can run the top 2 lines for 20 mins a night.

I think we have a luxury of a deep forward lineup now (albeit lacking top end guys) that should allow Warsofksy to basically roll the lines at ES with Celebrini/Smith getting more OZ time than Wennberg/Sturm/Goodrow, but not really a huge ES minutes discrepancy. Give Smith/Macklin a ton of PP time and get Macklin some secondary PK time.

 

[Jargon]

ugh so awful, RIP Johnny Hockey.

 

[Bizz]

Someone needs to get the shitbag Tim Peel off Twitter. He was a bad ref yet somehow an even worse human.

It ended up being true after all. Usually these kinds of things are not to be disclosed by law enforcement until the victim's families have been notified (especially to some rando on twitter), which is why I and the main board mods were skeptical of it.

Sadly it happens. I remember when the news about Paul Walker came out like 5 minutes after it happened.

 

[TheBeard]

It ended up being true after all. Usually these kinds of things are not to be disclosed by law enforcement until the victim's families have been notified, which is why I and the main board mods were skeptical of it.

Tim is still an awful human. It wasn’t his place to share that news and not only that he spelt his name wrong twice. Just someone who loves the limelight for all the wrong reasons.

 

[Celly4Celebrini]

Tim is still an awful human. It wasn’t his place to share that news and not only that he spelt his name wrong twice. Just someone who loves the limelight for all the wrong reasons.

he wasnt the first one to share it. By the time he tweeted it, there were a few others who had already tried to break the news.

 

[TheBeard]

he wasnt the first one to share it. By the time he tweeted it, there were a few others who had already tried to break the news.

He was the biggest name and the first to "confirm" it. Again, Tim has a history of just being in the news for the wrong reasons. It's not just a pattern it's who he is.

 

[PattyLafontaine]

You weren’t here for the years of the Hawks teams beating up on the Sharks led by 2 teenagers? Or see Crosby and Malkin doing the same out East? Both won their first cups at 21, I think, but that was not the first year they made the playoffs…

Which two teenagers would those be? 22-year old Kane and Toews? Or you talking about 21-year old Crosby and 22 year old Malkin?

Celebrini is 18 and Smith is 19 and neither is as good as Crosby.

 

[Star Platinum]

It's been debunked. Thread on the Main board has already been deleted.

https://media.nhl.com/public/news/18255

 

[Bizz]

https://media.nhl.com/public/news/18255

Speculation: - 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

I think these projections are based on the assumption that Mack and Smith are going to be "sheltered" on the 2nd and 3rd lines respectively for their first season. 40 points is well within the expected totals for a decent 3rd liner. I don't think they will nor should they probably play 20 mins...

forums.hfboards.com

 

[Sharksfan66]

Which two teenagers would those be? 22-year old Kane and Toews? Or you talking about 21-year old Crosby and 22 year old Malkin?

Celebrini is 18 and Smith is 19 and neither is as good as Crosby.

No, as I said, I was talking about the seasons before they won their cups.

Crosby was 19 when he led the Penguins to the playoffs, McDavid too (turned 20 mid-season, as will Smith). Toews, you're right, he was 20 but Kane was 19. Now for the most interesting one: Matthews was 18 and Marner was 19 when they led the Leafs from last place to playoffs. I wonder if there's any relevance there....

Now, of course Celebrini/Smith aren't Crosby, as you say. But that wasn't my point. My point was that in the modern NHL, high skill teenagers can and do lead teams to be competitive. Whether or not Celebrini/Smith will is of course to be seen, but there is certainly precedence for it.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Just curious, but why so low in your projections?

Both WELL outscored the likes of Keller, Berniers, and Cooley in the NCAA and those guys put up 65, 57, and 44 respectively as rookies.

I’d be pretty disappointed if Smith only got 40.

19 year old Leo Carlsson scored 29 points in 55 games and 19 year old Adam Fantilli scored 27 in 49 games. It's incredibly hard to put up a lot of points as a teenager in the NHL unless you're riding shotgun with a star in his prime on a good team (like Hertl with Thornton). Bedard is the exception, not the rule.

 

[hockfan1991]

If he plays all 82 (or very close to it) then I think 50ish is a good number. I don't think he's going to cheat defense for offense and get deployed in an offense only role like Bedard did this year. Beniers would be a solid comp for rookie scoring, but skeptical because he was a full 2 years older than Celebrini (and also just bigger frame overall as a young player).

I'd imagine he will miss some games as he adjusts to the rigorous NHL schedule, and also playing against men. Hope he can get 70 or so games as a rookie with Smith probably getting less as I think he will get some press box time to learn from above occasionally when the rookie wall is pushing against him.

20-30-50 would be a good year for Macklin. Could see him get to 55-60 if our PP performs well, but unsure on that currently. Think 50-55 from Macklin and 35-40 from Smith would be huge for the long-term prospectus of the Sharks. Sets them up for big jumps in Year 2 and gives Grier some freedom/comfort to invest some more assets to keep building around them.I disagree

If he plays all 82 (or very close to it) then I think 50ish is a good number. I don't think he's going to cheat defense for offense and get deployed in an offense only role like Bedard did this year. Beniers would be a solid comp for rookie scoring, but skeptical because he was a full 2 years older than Celebrini (and also just bigger frame overall as a young player).

I'd imagine he will miss some games as he adjusts to the rigorous NHL schedule, and also playing against men. Hope he can get 70 or so games as a rookie with Smith probably getting less as I think he will get some press box time to learn from above occasionally when the rookie wall is pushing against him.

20-30-50 would be a good year for Macklin. Could see him get to 55-60 if our PP performs well, but unsure on that currently. Think 50-55 from Macklin and 35-40 from Smith would be huge for the long-term prospectus of the Sharks. Sets them up for big jumps in Year 2 and gives Grier some freedom/comfort to invest some more assets to keep building around them.

I disagree Beniers might be 2 inches taller, but he is still a beanstock at 178 and 20lbs less then Macklin. Macklin has an nhl ready frame. If you have seen Beniers out of pads 178 is generous. His biceps might be the size as my forearm and i am comparable in height and weight.

 

[hohosaregood]

19 year old Leo Carlsson scored 29 points in 55 games and 19 year old Adam Fantilli scored 27 in 49 games. It's incredibly hard to put up a lot of points as a teenager in the NHL unless you're riding shotgun with a star in his prime on a good team (like Hertl with Thornton). Bedard is the exception, not the rule.

I agree in principal but to be fair to Fantilli, a skate laceration could happen to anybody. Wouldn't say he got banged up in the way you'd normally expect teenagers to get banged up.

 

[Juxtaposer]

I agree in principal but to be fair to Fantilli, a skate laceration could happen to anybody. Wouldn't say he got banged up in the way you'd normally expect teenagers to get banged up.

Right, but even when he was healthy he scored at a 45 point pace.

 

[Bizz]

Joe Thornton scored like 7 points his rookie season. We all know how that turned out.

 

[Sharksfan66]

19 year old Leo Carlsson scored 29 points in 55 games and 19 year old Adam Fantilli scored 27 in 49 games. It's incredibly hard to put up a lot of points as a teenager in the NHL unless you're riding shotgun with a star in his prime on a good team (like Hertl with Thornton). Bedard is the exception, not the rule.

But everyone expected Carlsson's adjustment to the NA game to take time. That's different. Aadam Fantilli is a better comparable, but even he was on pace for 45 points before he got injured.

Are you expecting an injury? Because if not, I just took a look at the top 5 picks from the last 10 drafts and it sure seems if they're going to amount to anything as a scorer, they'll get at least 40 points in their rookie season with some rare exceptions. Check it out:

Scored 40+:
Reinhart, McDavid (PPG until injury), PLD, B Tkachuk, McTavish, Johnson, Cooley

Scored 50+:
Eichel, Hischier, Raymond, Beniers

Scored 60+:
Marner, Matthews, Laine, Pettersson, Bedard

Scored < 40:
Draisaitl, Bennett, Dal Colle, Strome, Puljujarvi, Patrick, Svechnikov, Kotkaniemi, Hayton, Hughes, Kakko, Dach, Turcotte, Lafreniere, Byfield, Stutzle, Slafkovsky, Carlsson, Fantilli

TBD: Wright, Gauthier, Smith

Of that <40 list, only 3 have become legit top line scorers (Draisaitl, Hughes, Stutzle). I'd expect at least 3 of Byfield, Slafkovsky, Carlsson, and Fantilli to get there given a few more seasons, but let's say they all do. That's still just 7 players getting <40 points vs 16 getting over 40 points! Do you see why I'm so confused at the prevailing wisdom around here for Celebrini/Smith?

TLDR; Bedard is closer to the rule than the exception, especially when you consider that the exceptions are almost always European players adjusting to the NA game.

Edit: forgot to count Slafkovsky. Updated to reflect him too.

 

[PattyLafontaine]

No, as I said, I was talking about the seasons before they won their cups.

Crosby was 19 when he led the Penguins to the playoffs, McDavid too (turned 20 mid-season, as will Smith). Toews, you're right, he was 20 but Kane was 19. Now for the most interesting one: Matthews was 18 and Marner was 19 when they led the Leafs from last place to playoffs. I wonder if there's any relevance there....

Now, of course Celebrini/Smith aren't Crosby, as you say. But that wasn't my point. My point was that in the modern NHL, high skill teenagers can and do lead teams to be competitive. Whether or not Celebrini/Smith will is of course to be seen, but there is certainly precedence for it.

This team had 47 points last year. IT's much improved but that improvement could be 25 points and they 'd still be a bottom 5 team.. If you areexpecting Celebrini to be Crosby or McDavid or even Matthews it's not happening.

 

[coooldude]

But everyone expected Carlsson's adjustment to the NA game to take time. That's different. Aadam Fantilli is a better comparable, but even he was on pace for 45 points before he got injured.

Are you expecting an injury? Because if not, I just took a look at the top 5 picks from the last 10 drafts and it sure seems if they're going to amount to anything as a scorer, they'll get at least 40 points in their rookie season with some rare exceptions. Check it out:

Scored 40+:
Reinhart, McDavid (PPG until injury), PLD, B Tkachuk, McTavish, Johnson, Cooley

Scored 50+:
Eichel, Hischier, Raymond, Beniers

Scored 60+:
Marner, Matthews, Laine, Pettersson, Bedard

Scored < 40:
Draisaitl, Bennett, Dal Colle, Strome, Puljujarvi, Patrick, Svechnikov, Kotkaniemi, Hayton, Hughes, Kakko, Dach, Turcotte, Lafreniere, Byfield, Stutzle, Slafkovsky, Carlsson, Fantilli

TBD: Wright, Gauthier, Smith

Of that <40 list, only 3 have become legit top line scorers (Draisaitl, Hughes, Stutzle). I'd expect at least 3 of Byfield, Slafkovsky, Carlsson, and Fantilli to get there given a few more seasons, but let's say they all do. That's still just 7 players getting <40 points vs 16 getting over 40 points! Do you see why I'm so confused at the prevailing wisdom around here for Celebrini/Smith?

TLDR; Bedard is closer to the rule than the exception, especially when you consider that the exceptions are almost always European players adjusting to the NA game.

Edit: forgot to count Slafkovsky. Updated to reflect him too.

I read all this and I say to myself "I don't know how you can see all those exciting names in the <40ppg and think that it's a guarantee that Smith/Celebrini are guaranteed to score >40."

We've revamped last year's squad, but last year's squad was one of the worst 5 teams in 40 years. And the defense was revamped the least, meaning we still may struggle to get out of our own end more than we'd like. If names like Carlsson, Fantilli, Draisatl, Hughes, Dach, Lafreniere, Byfield, Stutzle, Slafkovsky (none of whom are busts btw, all of whom on track to be impact players at the least) all scored <40, why would we at all consider that to be an unexpected outcome?

Of course (of course!!!) Celebrini could score 60 and Smith could score 65 and either or both could be in the Calder convo. But that's where I'd draw the lines, probably... 60-65 is a top 10% outcome, below 40 is a bottom 10% outcome, and 45-55 is about expected. Smith, probably the same because he scores points and he won't be getting the top line matches.

Which is why I personally say -- if they look like they're getting better, and they score 40, that's a great year in my book. Playing the long game here -- I want to win a cup in 5-10 years, I don't really care if they win the Calder, although it's awesome if it happens.

 

[Sharksfan66]

I read all this and I say to myself "I don't know how you can see all those exciting names in the <40ppg and think that it's a guarantee that Smith/Celebrini are guaranteed to score >40."

We've revamped last year's squad, but last year's squad was one of the worst 5 teams in 40 years. And the defense was revamped the least, meaning we still may struggle to get out of our own end more than we'd like. If names like Carlsson, Fantilli, Draisatl, Hughes, Dach, Lafreniere, Byfield, Stutzle, Slafkovsky (none of whom are busts btw, all of whom on track to be impact players at the least) all scored <40, why would we at all consider that to be an unexpected outcome?

Of course (of course!!!) Celebrini could score 60 and Smith could score 65 and either or both could be in the Calder convo. But that's where I'd draw the lines, probably... 60-65 is a top 10% outcome, below 40 is a bottom 10% outcome, and 45-55 is about expected. Smith, probably the same because he scores points and he won't be getting the top line matches.

Which is why I personally say -- if they look like they're getting better, and they score 40, that's a great year in my book. Playing the long game here -- I want to win a cup in 5-10 years, I don't really care if they win the Calder, although it's awesome if it happens.

It kind of feels like you didn’t read what I was saying. Of course names like you listed are exciting (save Dach & Lafreniere), but the majority of the <40 list are not.

And since Celebrini/Smith aren’t big forwards (who notoriously take longer) or adjusting to the NA game, I would say Hughes is the only true comparable in that category (remember, Fantili was on pace for 45 before a freak injury). Now, could they have a Hughes level season? Sure, but that would by definition be the exception not the rule. That’s what that long list was meant to demonstrate. High end picks tend to do better as rookies than most of you are expecting Celebrini/Smith will.

 

[coooldude]

It kind of feels like you didn’t read what I was saying. Of course names like you listed are exciting (save Dach & Lafreniere), but the majority of the <40 list are not.

And since Celebrini/Smith aren’t big forwards (who notoriously take longer) or adjusting to the NA game, I would say Hughes is the only true comparable in that category (remember, Fantili was on pace for 45 before a freak injury). Now, could they have a Hughes level season? Sure, but that would by definition be the exception not the rule. That’s what that long list was meant to demonstrate. High end picks tend to do better as rookies than most of you are expecting Celebrini/Smith will.

I'm sorry it feels that way, but I did read what you were saying. You were saying a lot of thoughtful things but the effect was to throw out examples we didn't like and keep examples we did. At a high level without cherrypicking, I see:

• 19 players <40pts
• 7 players 40-49
• 4 players 50-59
• 5 players 60+

Every one of those players was drafted top 5, which meant every one of those players was highly regarded in their draft year, to state the obvious. And yet 19 of them scored <40 and 16 scored >40.

And yes, I for one (and I think others) expect that they will miss games -- missing games counts. I'm not talking about what ppg they're going to hit, I'm talking total points. So Fantilli on track for 45 doesn't change my thinking -- what counts is that he scored <40.

Even if you say "well, Celebrini is different" -- OK, let's cherrypick two amazing players. McDavid and Hughes didn't score 50. Yeah, McDavid was on a ppg pace, but ... he didn't score 50. It's quite possible that they won't score 50 and if they don't, it won't necessarily be a bad thing.

 

[Sharksfan66]

I'm sorry it feels that way, but I did read what you were saying. You were saying a lot of thoughtful things but the effect was to throw out examples we didn't like and keep examples we did. At a high level without cherrypicking, I see:

• 19 players <40pts
• 7 players 40-49
• 4 players 50-59
• 5 players 60+

Every one of those players was drafted top 5, which meant every one of those players was highly regarded in their draft year, to state the obvious. And yet 19 of them scored <40 and 16 scored >40.

And yes, I for one (and I think others) expect that they will miss games -- missing games counts. I'm not talking about what ppg they're going to hit, I'm talking total points. So Fantilli on track for 45 doesn't change my thinking -- what counts is that he scored <40.

Even if you say "well, Celebrini is different" -- OK, let's cherrypick two amazing players. McDavid and Hughes didn't score 50. Yeah, McDavid was on a ppg pace, but ... he didn't score 50. It's quite possible that they won't score 50 and if they don't, it won't necessarily be a bad thing.

Hmm...it sure seems we are talking past each other. Let me try to stick with the numbers you have here.

You point out there are a ton of top 5 rookies who scored less than 40 pts their rookie year. I agree. My whole point has been that the majority of those players never became the kinds of players we are hoping Celebrini/Smith will become. So if Celebrini/Smith fail to crack 40, I will be really disappointed.

Would you be happy if we got a Lafreniere/Bennett out of Celebrini/Smith? How about a Kappo/Hayton? I can't imagine you would be. And that's my point.

Top 5 picks that fail to crack 40 points their rookie year rarely go on to be the kinds of difference makers we need Celebrini/Smith to be. Even if you include all of Draisaitl, Hughes, Stutzle, Byfield, Slafkovsky, Carlsson for the sake of argument, that's still only 6 of 18 players in the <40 pts level .who make it. 6 out of 18* To a lesser extend, I'd argue about even the tier that cracks 40 but can't crack 50 their rookie year (though the jury is still out on the later examples).

I wonder if my whacky optimism about the Sharks having a chance to make the playoffs is muddying the waters here. To be totally clear, I don't have that idea in mind at all right now. Like you, my main priority is long term success and seeing this team finally win a cup, I don't care as much about the results of this one upcoming season. But in light of all this data, I don't know how you can come to the conclusion that Celebrini/Smith not cracking 40 points would be a massive disappointment, because unless they are one of the lucky few who buck the larger trends of this group, that would all but guarantee we never see a cup with them as our best players. And I know none of us want that. So I guess this is my way of saying, if you want to see a cup, cheer for these 2 to break 40, ideally 50 this season. Statistically speaking, that will be the best indicator that we are on the right track.

* I refuse to include Fantilli here, because as has been pointed out, he only missed the mark due to a freak injury, its not like he got banged up, so I took him out of both sides of the equation to be fair).

 

[Juxtaposer]

But everyone expected Carlsson's adjustment to the NA game to take time. That's different. Aadam Fantilli is a better comparable, but even he was on pace for 45 points before he got injured.

Are you expecting an injury? Because if not, I just took a look at the top 5 picks from the last 10 drafts and it sure seems if they're going to amount to anything as a scorer, they'll get at least 40 points in their rookie season with some rare exceptions. Check it out:

Scored 40+:
Reinhart, McDavid (PPG until injury), PLD, B Tkachuk, McTavish, Johnson, Cooley

Scored 50+:
Eichel, Hischier, Raymond, Beniers

Scored 60+:
Marner, Matthews, Laine, Pettersson, Bedard

Scored < 40:
Draisaitl, Bennett, Dal Colle, Strome, Puljujarvi, Patrick, Svechnikov, Kotkaniemi, Hayton, Hughes, Kakko, Dach, Turcotte, Lafreniere, Byfield, Stutzle, Slafkovsky, Carlsson, Fantilli

TBD: Wright, Gauthier, Smith

Of that <40 list, only 3 have become legit top line scorers (Draisaitl, Hughes, Stutzle). I'd expect at least 3 of Byfield, Slafkovsky, Carlsson, and Fantilli to get there given a few more seasons, but let's say they all do. That's still just 7 players getting <40 points vs 16 getting over 40 points! Do you see why I'm so confused at the prevailing wisdom around here for Celebrini/Smith?

TLDR; Bedard is closer to the rule than the exception, especially when you consider that the exceptions are almost always European players adjusting to the NA game.

Edit: forgot to count Slafkovsky. Updated to reflect him too.

Fine, so if Smith gets 43 points, you'll be satisfied? He's right there in the Cooley, McTavish, Reinhart, Johnson, B. Tkachuk tier of prospects, so I don't know what more you want from him.

As far as Celebrini goes, he's a fresh 18 year old. He's not basically 19 at the beginning of the season the way Eichel and Beniers, who also jumped straight from the NCAA to the NHL, were in their rookie seasons. The NCAA to NHL is a huge jump.

As far as injuries go? Yeah. Realistically, I am expecting them to get injured. Call it a "freak accident" or not, but it's not a coincidence that all three of Bedard, Carlsson, and Fantilli had major injuries last season. Slafkovsky got injured the year before and Hughes the year before that. This is a really hard league to handle physically for teenagers.

And lastly, I think that you're underestimating how hard it is to score on this bad of a hockey team. Do you think 19 year old Mitch Marner would put up 60 points on the Sharks next season? I do not. He had a cushy-ass job on the wing of Kadri and Marleau with legitimately good defensemen like Rielly and Gardner behind him. The Sharks have an improved forward group but we still don't have a legit puck-moving defenseman or PPQB, and that's gonna hurt all our forwards' production. Call it the 'Sharks tax' or whatever, but if Celebrini and Smith were going to any other team I would feel more confident in projecting them at 60 and 50 points respectively.

 

[coooldude]

You point out there are a ton of top 5 rookies who scored less than 40 pts their rookie year. I agree. My whole point has been that the majority of those players never became the kinds of players we are hoping Celebrini/Smith will become. So if Celebrini/Smith fail to crack 40, I will be really disappointed.

But what if they're one of the 6/18ths (1/3) of prospects that are really amazing but not in their first year? Hell, even the other side of this: 33% of the 50+ point scorers you listed would be lower than Smith's ceiling and not as exciting. So even if he scores 50, what does that really tell us?

Would you be happy if we got a Lafreniere/Bennett out of Celebrini/Smith? How about a Kappo/Hayton? I can't imagine you would be. And that's my point.

Laf may still turn out to be a top line player. Smith has the risk of busting or being a slow grower into the NHL just like him or many others. And yes, players bust. Smith very well may bust. We won't know that from his first season on an improved but still weak team.

Top 5 picks that fail to crack 40 points their rookie year rarely go on to be the kinds of difference makers we need Celebrini/Smith to be. Even if you include all of Draisaitl, Hughes, Stutzle, Byfield, Slafkovsky, Carlsson for the sake of argument, that's still only 6 of 18 players in the <40 pts level .who make it. 6 out of 18* To a lesser extend, I'd argue about even the tier that cracks 40 but can't crack 50 their rookie year (though the jury is still out on the later examples).

33% all star is not "rarely" in my opinion.

* I refuse to include Fantilli here, because as has been pointed out, he only missed the mark due to a freak injury, its not like he got banged up, so I took him out of both sides of the equation to be fair).

I think Jux and I both disagree with you here. It's a contact sport. "Fluke" or wear and tear are all injury. They factor in. You can't throw it out.

It seems like we're just not going to see eye to eye here. I am fine with <40 point seasons as long as they look like they're developing and getting their feet under them. If they do better, great, and we'll see if it translates to continued development in the subsequent years. I would put money on an over/under in the low to mid 40s. Aka hard to choose under or over at, say, 43-45.

 

[Sharksfan66]

Fine, so if Smith gets 43 points, you'll be satisfied? He's right there in the Cooley, McTavish, Reinhart, Johnson, B. Tkachuk tier of prospects, so I don't know what more you want from him.

As far as Celebrini goes, he's a fresh 18 year old. He's not basically 19 at the beginning of the season the way Eichel and Beniers, who also jumped straight from the NCAA to the NHL, were in their rookie seasons. The NCAA to NHL is a huge jump.

As far as injuries go? Yeah. Realistically, I am expecting them to get injured. Call it a "freak accident" or not, but it's not a coincidence that all three of Bedard, Carlsson, and Fantilli had major injuries last season. Slafkovsky got injured the year before and Hughes the year before that. This is a really hard league to handle physically for teenagers.

And lastly, I think that you're underestimating how hard it is to score on this bad of a hockey team. Do you think 19 year old Mitch Marner would put up 60 points on the Sharks next season? I do not. He had a cushy-ass job on the wing of Kadri and Marleau with legitimately good defensemen like Rielly and Gardner behind him. The Sharks have an improved forward group but we still don't have a legit puck-moving defenseman or PPQB, and that's gonna hurt all our forwards' production. Call it the 'Sharks tax' or whatever, but if Celebrini and Smith were going to any other team I would feel more confident in projecting them at 60 and 50 points respectively.

I think you're being a little paranoid on the injury front. When's the last time a team lost 2 rookies due to injury in the same season? As long as Vegas doesn't sign Happy Gilmore, I think we'll be fine.

The PMD thing is a good point though and this helps me understand your projects a lot better. While I actually don't think its that hard to score on a bad team (hello Mikael Granlund), I hadn't thought about how the Sharks' lack of PMD would effect the forwards. The age point about Celebrini is a good one too. I keep forgetting just how young he is.

Before reading your post, I would have been happy if Smith/Celebrini each hit 50 pts and hoped for Smith to get 60 (call me crazy but his NCAA season last year really has me with high hopes). Now, I'll say I'd be thrilled with Smith hitting 50 and Celebrini hitting 40. Look at what you've done to me.

 

[Sharksfan66]

But what if they're one of the 6/18ths (1/3) of prospects that are really amazing but not in their first year? Hell, even the other side of this: 33% of the 50+ point scorers you listed would be lower than Smith's ceiling and not as exciting. So even if he scores 50, what does that really tell us?

If you're banking on him being in the third of prospects who break the trend, I think you at least have to call that what it is--wishful thinking. Now if Smith fails to hit 40, I'll be right there with you hoping against hope that he's the next Hughes. But as I said, the second you add some context and nuance, it's really 1/18, not 1/3, and those are not odds I'd like to have to bet on.

On the 40+ pt front, I'd be thrilled with Smith turning out to be as impactful as 12 of the 16 players listed there. I like those odds much better.