Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[Star Platinum]

People, you are focusing on the wrong misses of the 2022 draft. Missing Hutson was the big one. Can you imagine having him instead of Lund or Havelid? The Sharks's core would be set!

 

[one2gamble]

None of those people move the needle much. Huston was the miss.

 

[Hodge]

You're not wrong, I'm just saying that there are good players picked between 11 and 27 that are better than Bystedt and could potentially become difference-makers. Obviously no one is tracking towards stardom.

As I said at the time of the trade down, the move is good if they select the right players and bad if they don't. Right now, it's abundantly clear that they did not. If we had Lamoureux, Casey, and Hutson, then it would have been a win.

Your favorite millennial famously traded down from the Travis Konecny pick multiple times and ended up with nada.

It would be obvious by now if any of them were actually potential difference-makers. I agree we should have drafted Lamoureux but Bystedt and Lund still have a chance to be just as impactful as him. I'd be surprised if Bystedt doesn't at least develop into a reliable 4C. Havelid was a miss but Hutson is not someone you want in your top 4 if you're a serious team.

 

[Lebanezer]

You're right, this group of players who have uniformly failed to establish themselves in the NHL 3 years after the draft are clearly destined for great things and would have accelerated our rebuild by several years. It eats away at me imagining where the Sharks would be right now if we had Ivan Miroshnichenko and his 3 career NHL goals. Stanley Cup champs by 2027 for sure, maybe even 2026?

Man, you live in your own fantasy world, no one said any of that. Some value is worth more to the rebuild than no value. It’s fairly straight forward.

 

[Hodge]

Man, you live in your own fantasy world, no one said any of that. Some value is worth more to the rebuild than no value. It’s fairly straight forward.

Bystedt has no value? You really are clueless. Even Lund still has value based on his size and college production.

 

[Lebanezer]

Bystedt has no value? You really are clueless.

You can’t even maintain a coherent conversation. You say that none of those players would make any difference to the rebuild as if they have little to no value and then you subsequently trash most of them. If they have little to no value in your eyes, neither does Bystedt since he’s performing worse than they are.

 

[Juxtaposer]

It would be obvious by now if any of them were actually potential difference-makers. I agree we should have drafted Lamoureux but Bystedt and Lund still have a chance to be just as impactful as him. I'd be surprised if Bystedt doesn't at least develop into a reliable 4C. Havelid was a miss but Hutson is not someone you want in your top 4 if you're a serious team.

My stance is that on the whole, depth players are basically interchangeable and can be acquired easily with decent pro-scouting. The exceptions are legitimately good 3C's, any RHD with decent size, and elite PPQB's. If Bystedt can become the former, then he was a great pick. If he's simply a mediocre 3C or worse, he was a waste of a pick. Meanwhile, we know that Lamoureux is an NHL RHD with great size and while I understand the concerns with Hutson at even strength, there is no denying that he is an elite PPQB and players like that are always valuable.

Lund is worthless, I genuinely don't care if he decides to become a FA. He and Havelid were huge misses, especially considering who was drafted behind them.

 

[Zarzh]

People, you are focusing on the wrong misses of the 2022 draft. Missing Hutson was the big one. Can you imagine having him instead of Lund or Havelid? The Sharks's core would be set!

If you were drafting purely on stat watching you would have Kulich, Hutson, and something else (Buchelnikov?) even after trading down, would likely pick Pettersson in the 3rd too.

 

[Hodge]

You can’t even maintain a coherent conversation. You say that none of those players would make any difference to the rebuild as if they have little to no value and then you subsequently trash most of them. If they have little to no value in your eyes, neither does Bystedt since he’s performing worse than they are.

The entire point is that the difference in value between any single one of them and Bystedt+Lund is negligible. Yes, some of them have "some value" but so does Bystedt. His size, skating and ability to play center aren't invalidated by one cold streak in the AHL.

 

[Lebanezer]

The entire point is that the difference in value between any single one of them and Bystedt+Lund is negligible. Yes, some of them have "some value" but so does Bystedt. His size, skating and ability to play center aren't invalidated by one cold streak in the AHL.

Right, but if any of them have more value than Bystedt based on their play, which several do, than they have more value to the rebuild.

 

[Hodge]

If you were drafting purely on stat watching you would have Kulich, Hutson, and something else (Buchelnikov?) even after trading down, would likely pick Pettersson in the 3rd too.

You can disingenuously hindsight quarterback every draft like this. I'm still waiting for your explanation of how the trade down has "aged like milk" when none of the guys drafted above Bystedt (except maybe Geekie) are full time NHL players. It's ultimately still too early to judge the trade's outcome.

Right, but if any of them have more value than Bystedt based on their play, which several do, than they have more value to the rebuild.

You have no idea how teams value these guys. They're all still prospects so their value is still highly dependent on the team assessing the value. Bystedt's tools and center position could easily be valued higher than smaller wingers with slightly better AHL production.

 

[Hodge]

My stance is that on the whole, depth players are basically interchangeable and can be acquired easily with decent pro-scouting. The exceptions are legitimately good 3C's, any RHD with decent size, and elite PPQB's. If Bystedt can become the former, then he was a great pick. If he's simply a mediocre 3C or worse, he was a waste of a pick. Meanwhile, we know that Lamoureux is an NHL RHD with great size and while I understand the concerns with Hutson at even strength, there is no denying that he is an elite PPQB and players like that are always valuable.

Lund is worthless, I genuinely don't care if he decides to become a FA. He and Havelid were huge misses, especially considering who was drafted behind them.

PPQBs who are unplayable 5v5 have no value in a league where you can pick up Tony DeAngelo or Erik Gustafsson off the scrap heap every year.

Lamoureux has played 15 NHL games. We don't know if he's a NHLer yet. I think he will be but there's still a world where he's a bottom pair D and Bystedt is a solid 3C.

 

[Zarzh]

You can disingenuously hindsight quarterback every draft like this. I'm still waiting for your explanation of how the trade down has "aged like milk" when none of the guys drafted above Bystedt (except maybe Geekie) are full time NHL players. It's ultimately still too early to judge the trade's outcome.


You have no idea how teams value these guys. They're all still prospects so their value is still highly dependent on the team assessing the value. Bystedt's tools and center position could easily be valued higher than smaller wingers with slightly better AHL production.

No, you can predict that any player scoring at an abnormally high pace for their league will have the better career with fairly good accuracy.

They (mostly) have significantly better production and better tools to be more flexible than Bystedt. It's aged like milk because you're hoping for a bunch of players to fail to break even in the trade. I do think it's fair to see Lund at the pro level before declaring him worthless, but the odds aren't anything close to good for him and Havelid is already a bust.

 

[Hodge]

No, you can predict that any player scoring at an abnormally high pace for their league will have the better career with fairly good accuracy.

They (mostly) have significantly better production and better tools to be more flexible than Bystedt. It's aged like milk because you're hoping for a bunch of players to fail to break even in the trade. I do think it's fair to see Lund at the pro level before declaring him worthless, but the odds aren't anything close to good for him and Havelid is already a bust.

We're not hoping for a bunch of players to fail to break even in the trade - those players are failing on their own. They've all failed to establish themselves in the NHL and it's been long enough that we can dismiss them all as potential impact players. At best, these are future depth players and given historical draft class outcomes half of them will likely bust outright.

This was the entire logic behind the trade in the first place. Based on historical draft results, you're very unlikely to get an impact player at 11th overall and you're not even guaranteed a NHLer. The three picks we acquired had a higher combined probability of producing a NHLer than the 11th pick by a significant margin. Maybe we picked the wrong prospects but the trade was objectively the correct move.

 

[Jargon]

I miss the days when this board just spoke trades into existence

Yes exactly. I do have this weird feeling (writing this for posterity) that Grier is big game hunting defensemen and there’s a surprising trade in the pipeline either at the deadline or this summer but who knows.

 

[Zarzh]

We're not hoping for a bunch of players to fail to break even in the trade - those players are failing on their own. They've all failed to establish themselves in the NHL and it's been long enough that we can dismiss them all as potential impact players. At best, these are future depth players and given historical draft class outcomes half of them will likely bust outright.

This was the entire logic behind the trade in the first place. Based on historical draft results, you're very unlikely to get an impact player at 11th overall and you're not even guaranteed a NHLer. The three picks we acquired had a higher combined probability of producing a NHLer than the 11th pick by a significant margin. Maybe we picked the wrong prospects but the trade was objectively the correct move.

The only way you can kind of argue that point is to draft purely on a modified NHLe and just spamming picks the way a contending team like Carolina does. There is some merit to the idea that a team should draft every Jiri Kulich or Artamanov but if a team has success doing that those players will be drafted higher universally.

The trade was objectively horrible and the problem with any data set advocating for trading down is it uses quantitative analysis (poorly) on a qualitative data set. It's the drafting equivalent of Dallas Eakins wanting his team to spam shots to boost possession stats.

 

[Juxtaposer]

PPQBs who are unplayable 5v5 have no value in a league where you can pick up Tony DeAngelo or Erik Gustafsson off the scrap heap every year.

Lamoureux has played 15 NHL games. We don't know if he's a NHLer yet. I think he will be but there's still a world where he's a bottom pair D and Bystedt is a solid 3C.

Except Hutson isn't unplayable at even strength. Don't be stupid. And he's a much, much, much better PPQB at age 21 than the two guys you mentioned will ever be. I'm talking cream of the crop PPQBs, not "guy who is on PP1 and puts up points".

If Lamoureux is a bottom pairing defenseman and Bystedt is merely a "solid" 3C, then I still take Lamoureux. The only valuable 3Cs are ones that are very good 3Cs and are capable of doing spot duty as 2C in case of injury. Alex Wennberg, if he weren't overpaid, would be an example of that.

 

[Lebanezer]

You have no idea how teams value these guys. They're all still prospects so their value is still highly dependent on the team assessing the value. Bystedt's tools and center position could easily be valued higher than smaller wingers with slightly better AHL production.

While he does have a projectable frame, Bystedt needs to produce and develop at a relatively commensurate rate to maintain his value vs. the other players. Right now he's being outproduced by a fair amount and his value is sliding while many of them are maintaining or increasing their value.

 

[Hodge]

While he does have a projectable frame, Bystedt needs to produce and develop at a relatively commensurate rate to maintain his value vs. the other players. Right now he's being outproduced by a fair amount and his value is sliding while many of them are maintaining or increasing their value.

Bystedt scored 24 points in his first 32 AHL games. His value is not sliding because of one cold streak especially since offense was never the primary source of his value to begin with.

 

[TheBeard]

Bystedt scored 24 points in his first 32 AHL games. His value is not sliding because of one cold streak especially since offense was never the primary source of his value to begin with.

I'm ambivalent with him. I guess he's still got a future, but I've rarely watched him play and said to myself, "man, this guy's got something special." I think whatever he ends up becoming wouldn't be a role that difficult to fill in free agency.

 

[Lebanezer]

Bystedt scored 24 points in his first 32 AHL games. His value is not sliding because of one cold streak especially since offense was never the primary source of his value to begin with.

As you always like to point out, it’s not just about points. As @TheBeard said, he’s not showing much at all with his play.

 

[ThorNton Apologist]

You must be joking. That smurf is nowhere near as good of a prospect as Dickinson.

I mean Mateychuk is almost PPG in the AHL. Dickinson has been lighting up a high scoring league on by far the best team against kids, most of which will never even play AAA level hockey

 

[one2gamble]

Is put bys in the NHL for a week for fun. I doubt he will look any different.

 

[Kcoyote3]

You can disingenuously hindsight quarterback every draft like this. I'm still waiting for your explanation of how the trade down has "aged like milk" when none of the guys drafted above Bystedt (except maybe Geekie) are full time NHL players. It's ultimately still too early to judge the trade's outcome.


You have no idea how teams value these guys. They're all still prospects so their value is still highly dependent on the team assessing the value. Bystedt's tools and center position could easily be valued higher than smaller wingers with slightly better AHL production.

Many on this board, myself included, said at the time of the picks being made that we would have picked Kulich, Hutson, Casey, etc. I even picked Hutson with the Sharks first 2nd rounder thinking he would be gone by their second 2nd rounder...and he was still there. The idea of the trade was great in my mind because of guys like them falling so much. That being said we needed to hit on one of our picks and we haven't really. Bystedt still could develop into a 3C and there's value there IMO. I don't see how anyone wouldn't want the leading point getter for all rookies...as a defenseman... to be on the team though given the state of our defense. Bad faith smurf arguments aside that is.

 

[hohosaregood]

Many on this board, myself included, said at the time of the picks being made that we would have picked Kulich, Hutson, Casey, etc. I even picked Hutson with the Sharks first 2nd rounder thinking he would be gone by their second 2nd rounder...and he was still there. The idea of the trade was great in my mind because of guys like them falling so much. That being said we needed to hit on one of our picks and we haven't really. Bystedt still could develop into a 3C and there's value there IMO. I don't see how anyone wouldn't want the leading point getter for all rookies...as a defenseman... to be on the team though given the state of our defense. Bad faith smurf arguments aside that is.

I wonder who Grier would've picked if he had Morehouse and his own staff in place at that draft.