Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[Juxtaposer]

The Venn diagram of people complaining about the use of block lists and people who have the unfortunate combination of being dicks and having nothing valuable or interesting to say is a circle. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[hockfan1991]

In what way are we, the worst team in the league, "already getting log jammed?"

I think you are missing the context. There is a world where you have 2 many prospects, and not enough immediate impact players. We are already seeing it, players like Goose, Bords are likely out. We dont need to add 2 late firsts and 4 second rounders to our prospect pool the next 2 years to have a few that will never make it, and hoping one or 2 will 5 years from now. They need to package some of those either to move up for a better shot at getting an impact play, or trade some assets, which i believe they should to get a young piece or vet that fits the core. The Sharks most definitely shouldnt draft 6 players right there. Its like an NFL team that has 13 picks. They never use them all to draft, couple to move up, couple for a player. There is a such thing as to cramped a prospect pool where 2nd rounders never see the light of day in this org, fizzle out and we get no value. it takes two to tango but it is good asset management to highly consider moving a couple of those picks. That was my point.

 

[hockfan1991]

You don't build a team just with prospects. The only prospects that we should be catering development around are going to be Dickinson and Misa/Schaefer. The rest of the prospect pool that have not graduated to NHLers (i.e. Bystedt, Musty, Chernyshov, etc.) are fodder for the most part. You do what you can to help them develop in the AHL, but you're not making NHL roster decisions with them in mind.

This summer is about improving the NHL team so that next year isn't another sulk fest where our young guys are mired in a miserable year of losing. Losing breeds losing. At some point, you have to start caring about winning rather than just "BuT tHe PrOsPeCts" being the focal point of your organization forever when you already have an elite franchise cornerstone 1C in Celebrini. You suck until you get that guy, and then you start building around him.

Additionally, you need real NHL players for these prospects to beat out to prove they belong rather than just inheriting a spot because nobody else is there to take it. Only youngsters that should realistically be on the opening night roster that were not full time NHLers this year are Graf and maybe Dickinson (mostly due to not being AHL eligible). Maybe one of Musty/Chernyshov breakout in camp, but they are guys that need to dominate the AHL before earning a call up to the NHL in my mind.

From there, you need a real top pairing D-Man, a pair of top 6 forwards, and a tandem starter in net. That should get us from worst team to closer to like 8th worst team and getting better.

This was my point, i said this couple months ago when everyone was plugging every good prospect we have in the lineup. Some will bust, some will be traded but even the best clubs are not all home grown. Its a fun thought but not realistic. We need to move some assets to better this team, and i see them doing that with some of this draft capital they have an excess off.

 

[Le Rosbeef]

We need to move some assets to better this team, and i see them doing that with some of this draft capital they have an excess off.

I'll call. What assets would you move, and for whom, specifically?

Or is it just speculative criticism?

 

[Star Platinum]

I just have missed those rare concessions.

The day he admitted Goodrow was no longer a good player was one of those days

 

[hockfan1991]

I'll call. What assets would you move, and for whom, specifically?

Or is it just speculative criticism?

i dont have specific player in mind.

I would move any of our draft picks, i do not want to see them use the Dallas pick other then trade it to move up, or in a package for an established player. any of our seconds(4). Any prospect not named Cherny or Dickenson. i believe Dallas/EDM first our second should be a good base, add a prospect as needed would be something that can land us a good roster player. im just not ready to move a Smith/Eklund when we have very few great nhlers. Im trying to improve the team not make lateral moves. They have the draft capital to make a couple splashes. Lets hope they do

 

[TheBeard]

i dont have specific player in mind.

I would move any of our draft picks, i do not want to see them use the Dallas pick other then trade it to move up, or in a package for an established player. any of our seconds(4). Any prospect not named Cherny or Dickenson. i believe Dallas/EDM first our second should be a good base, add a prospect as needed would be something that can land us a good roster player. im just not ready to move a Smith/Eklund when we have very few great nhlers. Im trying to improve the team not make lateral moves. They have the draft capital to make a couple splashes. Lets hope they do

I really think it depends on who you're thinking of. There are a lot of roster players, but what specific players (available or not) are you focusing on?

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I think you are missing the context. There is a world where you have 2 many prospects, and not enough immediate impact players. We are already seeing it, players like Goose, Bords are likely out. We dont need to add 2 late firsts and 4 second rounders to our prospect pool the next 2 years to have a few that will never make it, and hoping one or 2 will 5 years from now. They need to package some of those either to move up for a better shot at getting an impact play, or trade some assets, which i believe they should to get a young piece or vet that fits the core. The Sharks most definitely shouldnt draft 6 players right there. Its like an NFL team that has 13 picks. They never use them all to draft, couple to move up, couple for a player. There is a such thing as to cramped a prospect pool where 2nd rounders never see the light of day in this org, fizzle out and we get no value. it takes two to tango but it is good asset management to highly consider moving a couple of those picks. That was my point.

There is a world where you have too many prospects. The Sharks aren't exactly approaching that world. Using those picks to draft six players is not something that is likely to happen but also not something that definitely shouldn't happen. The timeframe for those picks even seeing pro action is typically two years following your draft. Our prospect pool will look dramatically different in that time to where we could definitely find six players opportunities if they need but they all won't prove that. All of Bystedt, Lund, and Havelid have room in the organization to be given a chance to develop from 2022. Musty and Halttunen will be playing out their opportunities from 2023. Do you really think when you look at next year's Sharks and Barracuda team that there wouldn't be an opening available for one more player to be given a shot when our blue line is still largely wanting in terms of talent? Goose and Bords leaving would open the door for another player to have that chance and it will likely be with Chernyshov. I think the team is now in a position where it can afford to move picks and prospects for now players as long as those players have long term team control to extract value out of but we don't have to and we have the room still to do six players in the next two drafts. We will know about the prospects we have by the time those drafted players would turn pro.

 

[Juxtaposer]

This was my point, i said this couple months ago when everyone was plugging every good prospect we have in the lineup. Some will bust, some will be traded but even the best clubs are not all home grown. Its a fun thought but not realistic. We need to move some assets to better this team, and i see them doing that with some of this draft capital they have an excess off.

100% agreed, people on HF (generally, not any single person specifically) love to prognosticate full NHL lineups exclusively built on home-grown draftees. I get the appeal, I've done it tongue-in-cheek.

But to me, anything can be traded for except franchise center. 2C is not a great hole to have either, and is difficult to trade for. So it's nice to have both of those things.

Outside of Celebrini and Smith, I see anything as moveable if it benefits the team long-term. I don't have any interest in moving 2OA, our 2026 1st, Eklund, Dickinson, Askarov, or Chernyshov, but if we got offered the right player I'd make whatever move we need to make. Any asset not on that list is fair game in terms of moving them to improve the future of this team.

More importantly, the only thing that matters right now is building the core for the next fifteen years. You make adjustments around the edges once you make the playoffs, can make a big splashy trade once you're a contender. No rush on that stuff.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

100% agreed, people on HF (generally, not any single person specifically) love to prognosticate full NHL lineups exclusively built on home-grown draftees. I get the appeal, I've done it tongue-in-cheek.

But to me, anything can be traded for except franchise center. 2C is not a great hole to have either, and is difficult to trade for. So it's nice to have both of those things.

Outside of Celebrini and Smith, I see anything as moveable if it benefits the team long-term. I don't have any interest in moving 2OA, our 2026 1st, Eklund, Dickinson, Askarov, or Chernyshov, but if we got offered the right player I'd make whatever move we need to make. Any asset not on that list is fair game in terms of moving them to improve the future of this team.

More importantly, the only thing that matters right now is building the core for the next fifteen years. You make adjustments around the edges once you make the playoffs, can make a big splashy trade once you're a contender. No rush on that stuff.

I think the change from pre-Celebrini draft to now is that we're in a spot where doing a Burns or Boyle-like trade will not hurt the rebuild as much since we've been acquiring picks and prospects that fit the timeline.

 

[OrrNumber4]

@TheBeard, I can't really say what players the Sharks should specifically target. The market is fairly opaque and all...but I'd like Dobson/Byram. There are options in UFA who could help.

I will say that over the next year, I would expect the Sharks to trade Dallas's 2025 first, Edmonton's 2026 first, and one of Musty/Chernyshov for established (young) NHLers.

Ultimately, the prospect pool only has so much space, and the Sharks are severely lacking in talented players who are young and experienced.

 

[TheBeard]

@TheBeard, I can't really say what players the Sharks should specifically target. The market is fairly opaque and all...but I'd like Dobson/Byram. There are options in UFA who could help.

I will say that over the next year, I would expect the Sharks to trade Dallas's 2025 first, Edmonton's 2026 first, and one of Musty/Chernyshov for established (young) NHLers.

Ultimately, the prospect pool only has so much space, and the Sharks are severely lacking in talented players who are young and experienced.

I mean I agree, I was just wondering who is out there that fits the timeline. I’m still a big fan of Brady Tkachuk but he’s probably way too big a fish for where we are now.

 

[Pavelski2112]

I recall you having good hockey discourse with someone (can’t remember another one of our best posters) who had the ‘opposing’ avatar. I never said anything, but I remember thinking how I thought that was cool. Bummed you had to deal with nasty message, and appreciate those demonstrating opposing viewpoints do as well.

Went to Israel twice last year (including three days before Iran’s attack) and spoke to dozens of people about their perspective. I left more enlightened yet more confused.

Thank god Trump will save the region by creating the Gaza riviera . There’s no problem he can’t make worse!

I know ON4 probably has me blocked anyway, but I do feel it necessary to make it clear that I've never sent him anything like that or pressured him in any way inappropriate of being on a hockey forum.

 

[Jargon]

100% agreed, people on HF (generally, not any single person specifically) love to prognosticate full NHL lineups exclusively built on home-grown draftees. I get the appeal, I've done it tongue-in-cheek.

But to me, anything can be traded for except franchise center. 2C is not a great hole to have either, and is difficult to trade for. So it's nice to have both of those things.

Outside of Celebrini and Smith, I see anything as moveable if it benefits the team long-term. I don't have any interest in moving 2OA, our 2026 1st, Eklund, Dickinson, Askarov, or Chernyshov, but if we got offered the right player I'd make whatever move we need to make. Any asset not on that list is fair game in terms of moving them to improve the future of this team.

More importantly, the only thing that matters right now is building the core for the next fifteen years. You make adjustments around the edges once you make the playoffs, can make a big splashy trade once you're a contender. No rush on that stuff.

Yeah, I think following a rebuild has really taught me a lot about prospects and future-casting. What I'm realizing is that it's so rare for a prospect to not just make it but be a legitimate part of the core, that sometimes it's best to trade them before they might fail. Like Musty right now is a big maybe -- there's a chance he delivers and if he does, awesome, but if we can use him to get a legit defenseman? Absolutely.

It's why I'm more hesitant to move, say, Eklund, than I am a guy like that, because Eklund HAS proved he's legit player in the NHL and while he's replaceable and I would move him for the right guy, I'd much rather keep him for now because we are in bad need of young, top 6 forwards.

 

[TheBeard]

Yeah, I think following a rebuild has really taught me a lot about prospects and future-casting. What I'm realizing is that it's so rare for a prospect to not just make it but be a legitimate part of the core, that sometimes it's best to trade them before they might fail. Like Musty right now is a big maybe -- there's a chance he delivers and if he does, awesome, but if we can use him to get a legit defenseman? Absolutely.

It's why I'm more hesitant to move, say, Eklund, than I am a guy like that, because Eklund HAS proved he's legit player in the NHL and while he's replaceable and I would move him for the right guy, I'd much rather keep him for now because we are in bad need of young, top 6 forwards.

That’s always the thing. Lotto tickets may pay out or may not. The thing about guys like Eklund is in their own way you still have to take risks through contracts. Prospects are cost controlled for years, but guys like Eklund, no matter how much they’ve shown so far, you still gotta take a chance in paying them.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Yeah, I think following a rebuild has really taught me a lot about prospects and future-casting. What I'm realizing is that it's so rare for a prospect to not just make it but be a legitimate part of the core, that sometimes it's best to trade them before they might fail. Like Musty right now is a big maybe -- there's a chance he delivers and if he does, awesome, but if we can use him to get a legit defenseman? Absolutely.

It's why I'm more hesitant to move, say, Eklund, than I am a guy like that, because Eklund HAS proved he's legit player in the NHL and while he's replaceable and I would move him for the right guy, I'd much rather keep him for now because we are in bad need of young, top 6 forwards.

Fundamentally, you have to trust in management to be able to properly evaluate prospects (or, you should call for different management). For all his flaws, DW was pretty good at "pulling the parachute" on prospects.

That’s always the thing. Lotto tickets may pay out or may not. The thing about guys like Eklund is in their own way you still have to take risks through contracts. Prospects are cost controlled for years, but guys like Eklund, no matter how much they’ve shown so far, you still gotta take a chance in paying them.

Basically, every move comes with risk.

Insert the Chinese characters for crisis.

 

[Star Platinum]

Yeah, I think following a rebuild has really taught me a lot about prospects and future-casting. What I'm realizing is that it's so rare for a prospect to not just make it but be a legitimate part of the core, that sometimes it's best to trade them before they might fail. Like Musty right now is a big maybe -- there's a chance he delivers and if he does, awesome, but if we can use him to get a legit defenseman? Absolutely.

It's why I'm more hesitant to move, say, Eklund, than I am a guy like that, because Eklund HAS proved he's legit player in the NHL and while he's replaceable and I would move him for the right guy, I'd much rather keep him for now because we are in bad need of young, top 6 forwards.

I think Musty's trade value is probably a lot lower than Chernyshov's right now, so I'd be inclined to see if he raises it back up with a decent showing in the AHL, whereas Chernyshov's value is probably as high as it's ever going to be as a prospect. I'm not real inclined to trade either, but if you believe at selling when somebody's stock is at its highest, Chernyshov probably would be the one to send.

 

[one2gamble]

I dont think this team has left the era of needing lotto tickets......

 

[Cas]

There is a world where you have too many prospects. The Sharks aren't exactly approaching that world.

This, absolutely.

Do we have too many prospects for the Barracuda next season? Not a chance. We're looking at:

Forwards Bystedt, Cardwell, Chernyshov, Halttunen, Lund, Musty, and Ostapchuk, plus older players Giles and Poturalski, maybe Graf, and maybe Bordeleau, Gushchin, Sabourin, White, Regenda, Vanroubys, and Vincent, Muldowney, or some free agents. That seems like a lot, but between promotion, injury, and so on, they probably won't wind up being the Barracuda's entire potential playoff bunch.

Defensemen Beck, Cagnoni, Carlsson, and Furlong, maybe Mukhamadullin (hopefully not), maybe Pohlkamp, Havelid, Landen, Thompson, Schuldt, or free agents, plus Frisch and a very outside chance of Laroque or Guryev. Again, seems like a lot, but the Barracuda entered this season with way too many defensemen and look how that worked out.

In goal, the Barracuda have Carriere and that guy they signed from Denver - right now, that's it.

Everyone else is either going to be a Shark or in juniors/college/Europe. Plenty of room for them all.

We really don't have too many prospects.

 

[Jargon]

This, absolutely.

Do we have too many prospects for the Barracuda next season? Not a chance. We're looking at:

Forwards Bystedt, Cardwell, Chernyshov, Halttunen, Lund, Musty, and Ostapchuk, plus older players Giles and Poturalski, maybe Graf, and maybe Bordeleau, Gushchin, Sabourin, White, Regenda, Vanroubys, and Vincent, Muldowney, or some free agents. That seems like a lot, but between promotion, injury, and so on, they probably won't wind up being the Barracuda's entire potential playoff bunch.

Defensemen Beck, Cagnoni, Carlsson, and Furlong, maybe Mukhamadullin (hopefully not), maybe Pohlkamp, Havelid, Landen, Thompson, Schuldt, or free agents, plus Frisch and a very outside chance of Laroque or Guryev. Again, seems like a lot, but the Barracuda entered this season with way too many defensemen and look how that worked out.

In goal, the Barracuda have Carriere and that guy they signed from Denver - right now, that's it.

Everyone else is either going to be a Shark or in juniors/college/Europe. Plenty of room for them all.

We really don't have too many prospects.

Agreed, this year will be a necessary infusion (with hopefully a focus on draft as many defenseman as possible) and the following should be a final high-ish infusion and then I think we should be pretty set.

 

[hockfan1991]

There is a world where you have too many prospects. The Sharks aren't exactly approaching that world. Using those picks to draft six players is not something that is likely to happen but also not something that definitely shouldn't happen. The timeframe for those picks even seeing pro action is typically two years following your draft. Our prospect pool will look dramatically different in that time to where we could definitely find six players opportunities if they need but they all won't prove that. All of Bystedt, Lund, and Havelid have room in the organization to be given a chance to develop from 2022. Musty and Halttunen will be playing out their opportunities from 2023. Do you really think when you look at next year's Sharks and Barracuda team that there wouldn't be an opening available for one more player to be given a shot when our blue line is still largely wanting in terms of talent? Goose and Bords leaving would open the door for another player to have that chance and it will likely be with Chernyshov. I think the team is now in a position where it can afford to move picks and prospects for now players as long as those players have long term team control to extract value out of but we don't have to and we have the room still to do six players in the next two drafts. We will know about the prospects we have by the time those drafted players would turn pro.

Thats my point. Once the late firsts/ 2nd rounders become something we dont see in our future neither does any other club, they have no value at that point. I just would like to take a couple/ not all, of these lotto tickets that have value now to give us an opportunity to improve the big club for now and in the future if that piece fits. its a gaurantee that some will fizzle out, just like one could succeed. I would like to give our team the best opportunity to get a forsure player.

 

[Zarzh]

Yeah, I think following a rebuild has really taught me a lot about prospects and future-casting. What I'm realizing is that it's so rare for a prospect to not just make it but be a legitimate part of the core, that sometimes it's best to trade them before they might fail. Like Musty right now is a big maybe -- there's a chance he delivers and if he does, awesome, but if we can use him to get a legit defenseman? Absolutely.

It's why I'm more hesitant to move, say, Eklund, than I am a guy like that, because Eklund HAS proved he's legit player in the NHL and while he's replaceable and I would move him for the right guy, I'd much rather keep him for now because we are in bad need of young, top 6 forwards.

Well it depends on how good you are at drafting.

It's rare for a Blake Fiddler or EJ Emery to become a core or semi-core piece but that's why you should aggressively move up in the draft because if you turn a bunch of spare parts into even a Brady Martin it becomes a huge win.

 

[OrrNumber4]

This, absolutely.

Do we have too many prospects for the Barracuda next season? Not a chance. We're looking at:

My point has been misunderstood (apparently by a blocked user, which makes sense because I block idiots and hacks). I'm not talking about the lack of space in the system overall (and that's rarely an issue nowadays), but on the pro team. You can only have so much youth/inexperience on the roster. Let's say in 2026-2027, this is the starting lineup:

Eklund-Celebrini-Toffoli
Musty-Smith-Chernyshov
Bystedt-Graf-Halttunen
Goodrow-Ostapchuk-Lund

After Toffoli and Goodrow, your most experienced forward would be Eklund with 4 seasons under his belt. That's a poor recipe for success and development...especially if you are the type who credited Granlund and Toffoli for the way they mentored Celebrini and Smith this season.

So, you must leave some spots for veterans and established NHL players. Hell, this is probably partly why Gushchin, Bordeleau, Cardwell, and Bystedt didn't get more NHL time this season.

Hence, it makes sense to trade futures for some young, talented guys who can fill the middle of the team

 

[hockfan1991]

Yeah, I think following a rebuild has really taught me a lot about prospects and future-casting. What I'm realizing is that it's so rare for a prospect to not just make it but be a legitimate part of the core, that sometimes it's best to trade them before they might fail. Like Musty right now is a big maybe -- there's a chance he delivers and if he does, awesome, but if we can use him to get a legit defenseman? Absolutely.

It's why I'm more hesitant to move, say, Eklund, than I am a guy like that, because Eklund HAS proved he's legit player in the NHL and while he's replaceable and I would move him for the right guy, I'd much rather keep him for now because we are in bad need of young, top 6 forwards.

This.. Doug Wilson was pretty good at this with roster players and draft picky. Getting rid of Ty Wishart for Dan Boyle comes to mind, i understand Carle was the centerpiece and they traded a first too. But thats why i see late first/musty/second. Musty situation is unfortunate, but sell on the high when you can

 

[matt trick]

I know ON4 probably has me blocked anyway, but I do feel it necessary to make it clear that I've never sent him anything like that or pressured him in any way inappropriate of being on a hockey forum.

I’d like to think it was none of our usual posters, and certainly have no reason to point a finger at anyone. It is likely the most complicated region in the world, and I tend to avoid getting into discussion as I have no idea what a solution would look like, so I mostly listen to try and understand from those with more knowledge or experience.

Hopefully my post made no offense.