Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[coooldude]

I made a very rough tree for the granlund situation that looked something like:

Bad year for Granlund -> likely move him for peanuts, 2nd at best

Great year for Granlund AND great year for Celebrini and Smith -> hard to say, could move him for assets because we don't need him, or could look like our window is starting sooner than we thought so re-sign him for 4 years like Toffoli... His game could translate to 3rd line depth or up-and-down lineup on a good team IMHO as he gets older.

Great year for Granlund AND bad year for Smith and Celebrini -> hard to say, move him for assets most likely but could also be a decision to keep him as a mentor/shelter for the kids for another few transition years. Moving a top 6 F just pushes the rebuild back until we sign another one or the kids establish themselves.

Mediocre year for Granlund AND great year for Celebrini and Smith -> trade him, hopefully for a late 1st and target fallers or one more D

Mediocre year for everyone -> probably trade him but again depends on how much you want to shelter the youth and how the other F youth are developing in the system.

 

[Hodge]

It depends on how close Trethaway or Hensler is to Schaefer by draft time.

You need to remember at the start of last year, Hensler was ranked above Schaefer. Rankings bounce a lot based on a single tournament or playoff series just before the draft. For all we know, Hensler could be back to projected 2nd-3rd overall again by year end like he was last year or Trethaway could rise like Beckett Senneke
Schaefer could drop like Cole Eiserman, who was universally thought of as 2nd overall starting last year.

It's nice to have guys to watch, but we shouldn't be falling in lust for any of them yet

Sure, my point was just that if Schaefer remains the top defensive prospect and we have a chance to draft him it would be silly not to just because he's left handed.

 

[wickedwitch]

Sure, my point was just that if Schaefer remains the top defensive prospect and we have a chance to draft him it would be silly not to just because he's left handed.

Agreed. No team needs a 1D who is RH. They need a 1D and two RD who can play top 4. (See the Tampa model.) Worrying about handed-ness when acquiring a potential 1D is beyond stupid.

(I'm a Caps fan who lurks here because the Sharks are one of my West Coast teams. But I feel very strongly about this so I had to chime in.)

 

[coooldude]

Agreed. No team needs a 1D who is RH. They need a 1D and two RD who can play top 4. (See the Tampa model.) Worrying about handed-ness when acquiring a potential 1D is beyond stupid.

(I'm a Caps fan who lurks here because the Sharks are one of my West Coast teams. But I feel very strongly about this so I had to chime in.)

In general I agree - if Schaefer is a clear #1D and nobody else is close, and we have the chance to take him, and we don't think one of the F's is head and shoulders better... then you take him. But it also depends on context. If by the end of the year, Schaefer is seen as #1 D on the board, but Hensler had a great year too and isn't far off, maybe 1-2 slots behind, you still could choose to go with the RD over the "slightly better" prospect, especially depending on how Mukh and Dickinson are looking. There's still so much noise in development, team context matters and all the pros have over and over again debunked the idea of "BPA".

 

[weastern bias]

all the pros have over and over again debunked the idea of "BPA".

May I ask what you mean by this? I've never heard anything going against the idea of drafting for talent over fit when you're at the top of the draft order, I would be intrigued to see an argument to the contrary

Obviously every team is going to have a different evaluation when projecting the future of an 18 year old talent, so the "BPA" tag is a bit of a misnomer, but I just haven't heard an argument against selecting at the top of your draft board without regard for position

 

[Juxtaposer]

May I ask what you mean by this? I've never heard anything going against the idea of drafting for talent over fit when you're at the top of the draft order, I would be intrigued to see an argument to the contrary

Obviously every team is going to have a different evaluation when projecting the future of an 18 year old talent, so the "BPA" tag is a bit of a misnomer, but I just haven't heard an argument against selecting at the top of your draft board without regard for position

Teams have clearly shown preferences for centers and right-handed D over wingers and left-handed D at the top of the draft lately. Fantilli/Carlsson/Smith/Reinbacher over Michkov, Yakemchuk/Parekh over Dickinson/Silayev/Buium and Luchenko going so high, etc.

 

[weastern bias]

Teams have clearly shown preferences for centers and right-handed D over wingers and left-handed D at the top of the draft lately. Fantilli/Carlsson/Smith/Reinbacher over Michkov, Yakemchuk/Parekh over Dickinson/Silayev/Buium and Luchenko going so high, etc.

The RD>LD preference is true to an extent, but I think these choices are still largely occurring within a tiered structure based on the projections the teams making the selections have for the prospects in general

2021 was a few years ago now, but in that draft 3 LD went in Power (#1), Hughes (#4), and Edvinsson (#6) before the first RD in Clarke at #8

In 2024 outside of Levshunov who happened to be a RHD basically every other D in a certain tier was seen to be around the same caliber of prospect so it did go RD, RD, RD, LD, LD, LD, but all 3 of those LD went before Jiricek did at #16, so I still think this points to teams valuing projected ceiling over positional value, especially at the very top of the draft order