Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[OrrNumber4]

Wasn't Dan Boyle the de facto #1 D on a cup winning team? And then didn't he perform as a league leading D for the bulk of his time in teal, including during peak prime of that core 09-11? https://x.com/JFreshHockey/status/1423846278811856897?s=20

I'm not sure how one could draw the conclusion that cup-winning #1 D Dan Boyle was not a SC-contending foundational piece

Boyle was the #1 defenseman in Tampa, but those teams had 3 superstars (in net and two up front). If the Sharks get Jiricek, would they then be necessarily committing to getting their superstars elsewhere?

 

[Cas]

I think we should be extremely skeptical of using one team as our data point to evaluate the requirements for one specific and extremely difficult goal.

I don't think the Sharks' inability to win a cup with Dan Boyle as 1D says anything other than that winning a cup is ludicrously, insanely difficult. Reading anything more into it is just too much.

 

[DG93]

PIT's 1st, our 2nd, Bordeleau, Haltunnen and Kahkonen for Jiricek, Gudbranson and Merzlikins

I think that's the only way we get him...taking on cap dumps to make up for quality of the return. If Gudbranson won't waive, I'd try replacing Bordeleau with Bystedt to increase value.

 

[OrrNumber4]

I think we should be extremely skeptical of using one team as our data point to evaluate the requirements for one specific and extremely difficult goal.

I don't think the Sharks' inability to win a cup with Dan Boyle as 1D says anything other than that winning a cup is ludicrously, insanely difficult. Reading anything more into it is just too much.

Look at it another way, then. Take all the SC-winners in the modern era, and look at the #1 defenseman on that team. Where would a developed Jiricek rank (as a percentile)? I'd wager that Boyle would be very low on the list.

 

[Cas]

Look at it another way, then. Take all the SC-winners in the modern era, and look at the #1 defenseman on that team. Where would a developed Jiricek rank (as a percentile)? I'd wager that Boyle would be very low on the list.

I think the problem with that analysis is that you don't have a control group.

Take all teams in the modern era, and rank all defensemen on those teams, and then look for correlations between Cup winners and quality of defensemen.

I suspect the correlation is positive but somewhat weaker than you might expect, due to the potentially very high impacts of coaching, general depth, and random chance.

 

[timorous me]

Look at it another way, then. Take all the SC-winners in the modern era, and look at the #1 defenseman on that team. Where would a developed Jiricek rank (as a percentile)? I'd wager that Boyle would be very low on the list.

But as it pertains to Jiriceck, there's no reason to think Grier would just sit back and contentedly think that's as good as he could do, is it? (I mean, it might be, but especially if you're talking about a roster with lots of cap space potentially in a few years, there very well could be opportunity to build a defense stronger than what was around Boyle. And safe to say Grier sees the game and roster building differently than Wilson did.)

 

[tiburon12]

Boyle was the #1 defenseman in Tampa, but those teams had 3 superstars (in net and two up front). If the Sharks get Jiricek, would they then be necessarily committing to getting their superstars elsewhere?

I don't know enough about Jiricek to say anything about him, I'm just more puzzled at the Boyle comp, especially since Boyle was a proven #1 on a winning team and Jiricek has played 40 career games on a broken franchise.

Aside, i see your greater point and feel the same (but mostly because, as mentioned, i know little about Jiricek).

 

[Hangemhigh]

I mean, he did a pretty good job in LA...

He was going to be fired before he got Sutter to save his dumbass.

 

[OrrNumber4]

I suspect the correlation is positive but somewhat weaker than you might expect, due to the potentially very high impacts of coaching, general depth, and random chance.

You suspect it's a positive correlation? I suppose you also suspect that the Earth isn't flat?

Let me be crystal clear: the impacts of coaching, depth, and random chance are dwarfed by the underlying talent on the team. Bad teams cannot luck their way to cups...hell, even good teams can't. do this. You need to be a great team or at the very least be a very, very good team.

I can summarize the data for you: If you want to win a cup, then you better have 2-3 outright superstars on your team, ideally in different positions; this is not sufficient as nothing guarantees a cup, but it is almost always necessary. Otherwise, your chances of winning a cup are incredibly low.

But as it pertains to Jiriceck, there's no reason to think Grier would just sit back and contentedly think that's as good as he could do, is it? (I mean, it might be, but especially if you're talking about a roster with lots of cap space potentially in a few years, there very well could be opportunity to build a defense stronger than what was around Boyle. And safe to say Grier sees the game and roster building differently than Wilson did.)

That's fair, but it would depend on the price he is paying. If Smith can be a foundational piece and he is traded for Jiricek, then Jiricek better be someone who can be a foundational piece as well.

Of course, Jiricek isn't a mature talent yet so there's a lot of room to "hope". But, if you don't think he has that superstar potential, then unless he can be had on the cheap, it doesn't make sense to trade for him.

 

[Cas]

I can summarize the data for you: If you want to win a cup, then you better have 2-3 outright superstars on your team, ideally in different positions; this is not sufficient as nothing guarantees a cup, but it is almost always necessary. Otherwise, your chances of winning a cup are incredibly low.

So what are your chances of winning a cup with the best defenseman in the league, as opposed to the #5 defenseman in the league? I'm sure they're better, but not by that much.

 

[OrrNumber4]

So what are your chances of winning a cup with the best defenseman in the league, as opposed to the #5 defenseman in the league? I'm sure they're better, but not by that much.

Since the first lockout, here are the teams (OTTOMH) that didn't have a Norris-quality d-man on their team:

1996 Avalanche (Ozolinsh/Foote)
2004 Lightning (Boyle)
2006 Hurricanes (F. Kaberle)
2009 (barely, with Gonchar/Letang) and 2017 Penguins (Schultz)
2019 Blues (Pietrangelo, again borderline)
2023 VGK (Pietrangelo)

The Avalanche had Roy, Forsberg, and Sakic
The Lightning had Khabibulin, St. Louis, and Richards
The Hurricanes had Eric Staal and Cam Ward
The Penguins had Crosby, Malkin, arguably Gonchar, and later Kessel
The Blues had O'Reilly
The VGK had Stone, Eichel, and, arguably, Adin Hill given his performance in the playoffs and this year.

You can go back even further, and since WW2, only the 73-75 Flyers and the 1993 Canadiens don't have a Norris-quality defenseman.

So if you want to win without a Norris-quality defenseman, you better have superstars elsewhere.

 

[jMoneyBrah]

So, if the Sharks trade for Jiricek, they'd effectively be labeling him as the DOTF. If he hits his ceiling, will he be good enough? Will he be more of a true superstar defenseman, or "just" a #1 kind of guy?

In many ways, acquiring Dan Boyle for a relative bargain was a bad deal because it meant that the defense wasn't on a SC-contending foundation.

The Sharks, long ago, made a trade. It sorta, maybe, if you squint, could be made to resemble this potential trade. Because they’re similar, we can all safely assume all that comes after will also be similar.

Boyle was the #1 defenseman in Tampa, but those teams had 3 superstars (in net and two up front). If the Sharks get Jiricek, would they then be necessarily committing to getting their superstars elsewhere?

Grier, having finally made the splash of his tenure, landing his white whale, will then declare all has been accomplished; “we’ve got Jiricek, Secondary Smith, and“ Grier stated, pausing to review the annotated papers on the pulpit “surely all the pieces we will ever need; I’d like to thank our pro and amateur scouting staffs now, in advance, on their good work getting everything needed for a perennial championship team. Even though myself and the staff will be vacationing from here on out, job surely completed, we will take special pride in knowing the foundation we’ve laid today was the first and final step to the dynasty all are now certain is destined for us. I’d take questions now, but I can see from looking around room there are none; as we all know it is just a foregone conclusion”

 

[coooldude]

He was going to be fired before he got Sutter to save his dumbass.

GM constructs team that has promise but isn't winning, hires coach he hired before with success, that coach gets the team to win their first SCF and then wins another one in another two seasons.

Where's the part where Lombardi didn't succeed?

 

[mogambomoroo]

I would personally wait until the draft lottery has been determined and then probably offer Smith for Jiricek If Sharks is guaranteed a chance to draft Celebrini with #1 overall.
That would be a better way to make sure you have future in 1C and 1D category.

If some other team makes a better deal before that, then so be it.

 

[gaucholoco3]

I would personally wait until the draft lottery has been determined and then probably offer Smith for Jiricek If Sharks is guaranteed a chance to draft Celebrini with #1 overall.
That would be a better way to make sure you have future in 1C and 1D category.

If some other team makes a better deal before that, then so be it.

It does make sense to wait since they are likely to draft a D if not winning the lottery, but if he is available now you make that trade unless they think Smith is a true #1.

It is hard to know what the blue jackets are looking for, picks or immediate contributors. If it’s picks then even the Sharks 1st (top 1 protected might be enough). I would rather have Jiricek than any non Celebrini pick in this draft.

 

[one2gamble]

Why is Jiricek less of a risk than Smith?

 

[Juxtaposer]

Why is Jiricek less of a risk than Smith?

It’s not that Jiricek is less of a risk than Smith but rather than 1) Jiricek’s upside is higher and 2) a Jiricek that doesn’t hit his upside is more valuable than a Smith that doesn’t hit his upside.

 

[Hodge]

It’s not that Jiricek is less of a risk than Smith but rather than 1) Jiricek’s upside is higher and 2) a Jiricek that doesn’t hit his upside is more valuable than a Smith that doesn’t hit his upside.

Jiricek also put up incredible numbers for an 18 year old defenseman in the AHL. He's absolutely less of a risk than Smith.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Jiricek also put up incredible numbers for an 18 year old defenseman in the AHL. He's absolutely less of a risk than Smith.

That’s sort of what I was getting at with the second comment there. Essentially saying that Jiricek’s floor is much higher.

 

[hotcabbagesoup]

I'm just partial to dmen because Im a beer leafue dman.

Get Jiricek
Sign Dillon
Sign Demelo
Strip C from Couture and gove to Dillon
Play 2F-3D lineup
Play Mukh, Thrun, Jiricek, Dillon, Demelo, Oak

It would be the new thing in the NHL and ot would put us ahead!!

 

[Pavelski2112]

You suspect it's a positive correlation? I suppose you also suspect that the Earth isn't flat?

Let me be crystal clear: the impacts of coaching, depth, and random chance are dwarfed by the underlying talent on the team. Bad teams cannot luck their way to cups...hell, even good teams can't. do this. You need to be a great team or at the very least be a very, very good team.

I can summarize the data for you: If you want to win a cup, then you better have 2-3 outright superstars on your team, ideally in different positions; this is not sufficient as nothing guarantees a cup, but it is almost always necessary. Otherwise, your chances of winning a cup are incredibly low.


That's fair, but it would depend on the price he is paying. If Smith can be a foundational piece and he is traded for Jiricek, then Jiricek better be someone who can be a foundational piece as well.

Of course, Jiricek isn't a mature talent yet so there's a lot of room to "hope". But, if you don't think he has that superstar potential, then unless he can be had on the cheap, it doesn't make sense to trade for him.

Good teams can absolutely luck themselves to Cup wins, just look at the 2019 Blues

 

[OrrNumber4]

Good teams can absolutely luck themselves to Cup wins, just look at the 2019 Blues

I would classify the Blues as a very good team; didn't they have the best record in the league from December?

Even if I were to grant you that the Blues were just a good team, that's just one team out of 50+.

 

[hohosaregood]

Good teams can absolutely luck themselves to Cup wins, just look at the 2019 Blues

A lot of playoff luck is just getting through the playoffs without major injuries. Like how different would the last SCF have gone if Tkachuk's shoulder wasn't completely f***ed up or how our 2019 run would have gone if Karlsson hadn't completely torn his groin or hadn't had multiple players get concussions against the Blues. Maybe they just weren't good playoff performers who were clutch enough to not get injured. Who knows.

 

[Pavelski2112]

A lot of playoff luck is just getting through the playoffs without major injuries. Like how different would the last SCF have gone if Tkachuk's shoulder wasn't completely f***ed up or how our 2019 run would have gone if Karlsson hadn't completely torn his groin or hadn't had multiple players get concussions against the Blues. Maybe they just weren't good playoff performers who were clutch enough to not get injured. Who knows.

Don't forget the refs forgetting how to call literally anything after everyone started complaining about the rare playoff run where the Sharks actually started to get some luck go their way

 

[LadyStanley]

Ferraro, Duclair, Labanc