I see it as Askarov is our Fleury, Smith = Malkin and Celebrini = Crosby (the hope anyways)
Ryan Whitney was an ok pick in a very weak draft. I hope whomever we end up with in this upcoming draft is far better than Ryan Whitney.
Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion
- Thread starter WTFetus
- Start date
Ryan Whitney was an ok pick in a very weak draft. I hope whomever we end up with in this upcoming draft is far better than Ryan Whitney.
- Jul 25, 2007
- 4,568
- 5,663
Ryan Whitney was before MAF. You may have meant "Jordan Staal" who would be our 2025 draft pick equivalent.
I, personally, don't think Smith is a Malkin-caliber talent and only 5-10 hockey players ever have been a Crosby caliber so it's unrealistic to expect that of Celebrini. Therefore, I don't agree with you that if we pick top 3 this year, and also top 3 in 2026, that it means that either Smith or Celebrini are busts.
I've said it before and I'll say it again -- I expect us to pick top 3 this year and top 5 next year, and I also think we need those high draft shots on goal to build a true core of a contender.
JoeThorntonsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
When you take a look at the teams that have won recently and where they got their 1D, this really isn’t the case. Some have an elite guy they got through the lottery (Hedman, Makar) and others had a less than elite guy that they didn’t draft (Forsling, Pietrangelo).
- Jul 25, 2007
- 4,568
- 5,663
Although Pietrangelo is ALSO an example of drafting your #1D, for the Blues.
Picking top 3 is different than picking 2 more Celebrinis (which i took as meaning picking first overall). If that's the case we'd have to "win" one lotto and outright finish dead last again. I don't see that happening personally and I would be really disappointed if we're still picking bottom 3 in 2 years.
Isn't it though in how it applies to the Sharks? Three of those four were high draft picks. Pietrangelo went to Vegas through free agency when we have notable issues luring free agents our way. Forsling is a complete outlier. Something that is certainly possible but is extremely unlikely. I don't think we can replicate a 24 year old that spent the previous year in the AHL being put on waivers and turning immediately into a #3 and soon into a sort of #1. For the Sharks, the best odds of us getting that top defenseman will remain the draft and we will probably continue to suck because the options outside of that are so few and far between.
Jargon
Registered User
My hope is that Grier, having taken care of goalie and with a trove of offensive prospects, is now focusing heavily on finding high-caliber D to trade for. I think Dickinson and Muhk can, at their best, be a #2 and #3 defenseman (or #3/#4). Ferraro is also likely a #4 on a good team. I'm hopeful that one or two of Cagnoni, LSW, Furlong, Thompson, etc. etc., can fill out some of the other holes on D (god, are they all LDs?! That's wild).
So, I actually think, potentially, in the next couple of years, we can fill out a pretty good defensive corp with our prospects/free agency. It's even possible to maybe just run 6 really strong guys with no one necessarily being that top #1 star but with each pairing being able to play solid D and move the puck.
Of course, if Grier somehow manages to swing a trade and get us a #1Dman in the next year (I don't even know who that would be), it would certainly speed things along.
I'm actually hopeful that the Sharks will be more competitive sooner than we think (I mean like, make-the-playoffs competitive, not compete for the Cup or anything).
So, I actually think, potentially, in the next couple of years, we can fill out a pretty good defensive corp with our prospects/free agency. It's even possible to maybe just run 6 really strong guys with no one necessarily being that top #1 star but with each pairing being able to play solid D and move the puck.
Of course, if Grier somehow manages to swing a trade and get us a #1Dman in the next year (I don't even know who that would be), it would certainly speed things along.
I'm actually hopeful that the Sharks will be more competitive sooner than we think (I mean like, make-the-playoffs competitive, not compete for the Cup or anything).
JoeThorntonsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
We acquired 3 defensemen better than Forsling or Pietrangelo through trade in a 10-year span. Forsling himself may have been a fluke but it’s pretty reasonable to expect us to be able to acquire an equal or superior defenseman outside of drafting them ourselves in the top-5. Hell, it wouldn’t be unreasonable for Dickinson to turn out better than Forsling.
knu
Registered User
weastern bias
worst team in the league
The sharks havent drafted a true #1 D in their entire franchise history, I would argue, and they dont have to draft one now. Why? TRADE and UFA! Number 1 D dont come around too much, but when they do, you jump on it.
DW did this with Boyle. he did this with Burns. He added Blake thru UFA. paul martin too. Added Dillon through trade but resigned as UFA.
Of course drafting a Quinn Hughes or a Cale Makar is ideal, but its not necessary. You do have to build much of your D through the draft (like we did with Carle, Vlasic, Ehrhoff, ferraro, Bruan, demers, Demelo, and other mid pair type guys), but a deft GM can snipe top D when they hit the market.
This is why I think the sharks can be much closer to competing for real. Cagnoni and thompson looked good. Mukh might too. We have some good young D to build around. We obviously have a bunch of good young forwards to build around too. Grier just have to sharply deploy cap space on solid top 4 D and top 6 forwards, and trade some of the depth prospects and future draft capital for top pairing D.
DW did this with Boyle. he did this with Burns. He added Blake thru UFA. paul martin too. Added Dillon through trade but resigned as UFA.
Of course drafting a Quinn Hughes or a Cale Makar is ideal, but its not necessary. You do have to build much of your D through the draft (like we did with Carle, Vlasic, Ehrhoff, ferraro, Bruan, demers, Demelo, and other mid pair type guys), but a deft GM can snipe top D when they hit the market.
This is why I think the sharks can be much closer to competing for real. Cagnoni and thompson looked good. Mukh might too. We have some good young D to build around. We obviously have a bunch of good young forwards to build around too. Grier just have to sharply deploy cap space on solid top 4 D and top 6 forwards, and trade some of the depth prospects and future draft capital for top pairing D.
Possibly but I think it's a lot different acquiring those types of players when you're competing as opposed to when you're rebuilding. It's getting harder with trade clauses being more prevalent to snag that sort of player. We basically have to target RFA status players that are questionable as top guys because if the team that has them believes they are, they won't be available to us.
Anomie2029
Registered User
I agree with most of what you say, except this. Ferraro, at his best, would be a bottom pairing guy.
- Jun 23, 2020
- 5,957
- 8,613
It's possible Ferraro is a #6 guy. So far all we know for sure is he is a terrible top 4 D.
Jargon
Registered User
I’d like to see what he can do on a team where he’s the 4th best defenseman with time and responsibility reflecting that before I make that call. He’s constantly told to play way over his head which makes him look worse than I think he is.
Anomie2029
Registered User
I will never fault Ferraro's effort. He cares and he is always going 100%. The problem is his hockey IQ and fundamentals are really poor. A significant amount of that is awful development by the Sharks by overplaying him when he was paired with Burns, etc.
- Jun 23, 2020
- 5,957
- 8,613
His physical skills are also not exceptional - he's not a good passer, shooter, entry denier, crease clearer, or board battle winner - he is mobile and willing to play physically, but just doesn't do anything useful with the puck at all.
He needs to be paired with a decent puckmover who is himself physical and can beat forecheckers, allowing Ferraro to be the weaker partner functioning as an outlet for pressure. Unfortunately, anyone with those skills is a top 4, and Ferraro is just hopelessly mismatched against top six talent (because he doesn't do anything useful with the puck and isn't smart enough to know what to do without it), so you have to find some magical 3RD who belongs in your top four, and for any team like that, Ferraro is too expensive to justify.
Really, I think he's doomed moving from bad team to bad team once his contract here ends (at least I hope so), because he's just not good enough to be useful on an actually good team, but he can eat minutes and give good interviews for a bad team.
Alaskanice
Registered User
He's an awesome person and leader and a terrible defenseman. As I've said before, he's Kris Russell.
weastern bias
worst team in the league
You also said the 2024 Sharks had a chance to win the Stanley Cup like a month into the season
Alaskanice
Registered User
If he was a terrible defenseman, he wouldn’t be starting his 6 th season in the best league on Earth.
His track record supersedes your opinion of him.
Kris Russell was also a terrible defenseman and played in the league for a decently long time, hence the comparison
Alaskanice
Registered User
The biggest comparison between the two is their shot-blocking ability. Both are known for it. Makes both quite valuable to teams.
- Jul 25, 2007
- 4,568
- 5,663
Every NHLer is a hockey god compared to regular humans or even good hockey players.
That's not why we're on this message board, or at least not many of us.
If people say someone is terrible, I generally understand them to mean "terrible in relation to other NHLers." The bigger problem on HFB is that people project prospects to their ceiling, then get disappointed when they "bust" into merely hockey demi-gods in the AHL, or people shamelessly attack players as awful trash that they were obsessing over just a few years prior, before we had the reality of the NHL set in.
As it pertains to Ferraro, he's not terrible, but he definitely was bad compared to his peers last year. Maybe he has a solid role on a better team, maybe not, it's all speculation. On our team, we need him to play in a top pairing or second pairing role, and last year he struggled. Hopefully this year he'll be better but it's unlikely he'll all of a sudden become a completely different player.
That's not why we're on this message board, or at least not many of us.
If people say someone is terrible, I generally understand them to mean "terrible in relation to other NHLers." The bigger problem on HFB is that people project prospects to their ceiling, then get disappointed when they "bust" into merely hockey demi-gods in the AHL, or people shamelessly attack players as awful trash that they were obsessing over just a few years prior, before we had the reality of the NHL set in.
As it pertains to Ferraro, he's not terrible, but he definitely was bad compared to his peers last year. Maybe he has a solid role on a better team, maybe not, it's all speculation. On our team, we need him to play in a top pairing or second pairing role, and last year he struggled. Hopefully this year he'll be better but it's unlikely he'll all of a sudden become a completely different player.
