YUPPY 2 7 10 11
Registered User
- Oct 5, 2020
- 1,261
- 1,442
Smith still have sign with the Sharks. Celebrini, we will see.If Celebrini is too good for NCAA then so is Smith.
Both will be in the NHL next year.
Smith still have sign with the Sharks. Celebrini, we will see.If Celebrini is too good for NCAA then so is Smith.
Both will be in the NHL next year.
Throw all our money at Stamkos. lolMusty is obliterating the OHL, Celebrini and Smith are dominating their league — Smith more than Celebrini (though he’s got a better team and is older.
I think them going pro helps their development, it doesn’t necessarily stunt it. That said, it would have to mean signing a few more vets to help them through it. Granlund is great. Sturm is great. We need like 3-4 more guys like them who can shelter the kids a bit. Maybe Couture actually recovers…
I get that and understand that it's not fun to watch the team lose this much. But I'm honestly way more interested in the team then I was two years ago. Three years ago we were bad without a direction. Maybe we won a few more games but I never thought we were making the playoffs and we knew we weren't even bottomed out yet. Basically waiting for a rebuild that we refused to start. No real prospects to check in on. I'm back to checking the forum daily for the first time in years.No, I haven't. I get the mindset where there's hope down the line, but that's not making watching the team this year any easier. It's not like any of these players with the exception of a couple are going to be part of the team's future. I see the sadistic enjoyment of losing, but watching a game, seeing 82 people in the stands as the team loses by 6 goals isn't my idea of enjoyment. It's like saying, " I'm enjoying eating this lettuce because it'll be good for my health in the long run."
I get that and understand that it's not fun to watch the team lose this much. But I'm honestly way more interested in the team then I was two years ago. Three years ago we were bad without a direction. Maybe we won a few more games but I never thought we were making the playoffs and we knew we weren't even bottomed out yet. Basically waiting for a rebuild that we refused to start. No real prospects to check in on. I'm back to checking the forum daily for the first time in years.
I say take what he wants on a 5 year deal and give it to him for 3 years.Throw all our money at Stamkos. lol
Much to the chagrin of many here apparentlyIf Celebrini is too good for NCAA then so is Smith.
Both will be in the NHL next year.
You know both can now be true? The team has a direction and they can get better next year. It’s not gonna derail the plan unless Grier starts trading picks and prospects for win-now players.I get that and understand that it's not fun to watch the team lose this much. But I'm honestly way more interested in the team then I was two years ago. Three years ago we were bad without a direction. Maybe we won a few more games but I never thought we were making the playoffs and we knew we weren't even bottomed out yet. Basically waiting for a rebuild that we refused to start. No real prospects to check in on. I'm back to checking the forum daily for the first time in years.
Because it isn't more fun winning 30 games a year and missing the playoffs vs winning 20 games in a year and missing the playoffs?You know both can now be true? The team has a direction and they can get better next year. It’s not gonna derail the plan unless Grier starts trading picks and prospects for win-now players.
It blows my mind that after the sacrifice we all made this year that so many would be perfectly content, no, downright elated, it seems, if Grier just keeps everyone away from the team and signs 12 Givanni Smiths just so we can hopefully get a top 4 defenseman in 2029.
Celebrini nearly kept pace with Smith's P/G in the NCAA while being 15 months younger, I don't think they're totally comparable prospectsIf Celebrini is too good for NCAA then so is Smith.
Both will be in the NHL next year.
Stamkos is bad contract waiting to happen, I want to keep that one far away from our cap ledger, I think he'll somehow be in Vegas anywayThrow all our money at Stamkos. lol
You are greatly underestimating how bad the Sharks are right now. We could improve our lineup a ton and still be a lock for a bottom-3 pick.Because it isn't more fun winning 30 games a year and missing the playoffs vs winning 20 games in a year and missing the playoffs?
Every asset and additional spot in the draft could be the difference between a successful rebuild or not.
Was it more fun missing out on a potential #1D in the 2022 draft in Mintyukov because they got an extra couple wins?
I mean they were behind the Blackhawks until like 2 weeks ago, and it's still possible to finish behind them (albeit unlikely).My predictions if they end up in the NHL next year would be 30 points for Smith (10-20, PP2, some healthy scratches) and 50 points for Celebrini. So not going to change the outcomes of that many games, but not meaningless contributions.
You are greatly underestimating how bad the Sharks are right now. We could improve our lineup a ton and still be a lock for a bottom-3 pick.
We did lose our 1C and only scoring winger so that tracks.I mean they were behind the Blackhawks until like 2 weeks ago, and it's still possible to finish behind them (albeit unlikely).
Don't really get what your point is.
My point is that even with Celebrini, Smith, and Musty on the team, we’d still be the worst team in the league.I mean they were behind the Blackhawks until like 2 weeks ago, and it's still possible to finish behind them (albeit unlikely).
Don't really get what your point is.
You also think Smith would have fewer points in the NHL than Owen Powers did his rookie year?
I was told to blame the lotto balls.Because it isn't more fun winning 30 games a year and missing the playoffs vs winning 20 games in a year and missing the playoffs?
Every asset and additional spot in the draft could be the difference between a successful rebuild or not.
Was it more fun missing out on a potential #1D in the 2022 draft in Mintyukov because they got an extra couple wins?
My predictions if they end up in the NHL next year would be 30 points for Smith (10-20, PP2, some healthy scratches) and 50 points for Celebrini. So not going to change the outcomes of that many games, but not meaningless contributions.
You are greatly underestimating how bad the Sharks are right now. We could improve our lineup a ton and still be a lock for a bottom-3 pick.
Definitely, but they'd still put up more points than your estimate.My point is that even with Celebrini, Smith, and Musty on the team, we’d still be the worst team in the league.
On one hand, I’d like to say so. On the other hand, Kent Johnson.Definitely, but they'd still put up more points than your estimate.
No reason why if Smith signs he wouldn't take Bordeleau's spot on the PP1, even at the end of this season.
Is Celebrini bigger physically than Smith? Smith is alot older and we have some concerns on his size, Yet if we are thinking they can start together is Celebrini built?
It is pretty widely held that there is generally a material difference between players who are old for their draft year versus young for their draft year, which is de facto less than 12 months, so…Only on HF is a 15 month gap considered a lot older
well another way to think of it is that 15 months is 7% of Celebrini's life.Only on HF is a 15 month gap considered a lot older
It is pretty widely held that there is generally a material difference between players who are old for their draft year versus young for their draft year, which is de facto less than 12 months, so…
Is Celebrini bigger physically than Smith? Smithis a lotwas three months older than Celebrini will be when drafted and we have some concerns on his size, Yet if we are thinking they can start together is Celebrini built?
Interestingly, there is both an extremely statistically significant correlation of birth months vs. NHL success and a meaningful boost in production the older you are for your draft year.Look, I’m not an expert here and I could be way off base (so correct me if I’m wrong), but my understanding is the young/old distinction relative to a players draft year is worthwhile to broadly understand how they may have been granted (older), or overcome headwinds to attain (younger), additional playing time and choice deployments during their development due to youth hockey’s institutional bias towards older, more developed, kids.
Essentially, an older draft may have been granted extra ice time and opportunity compounded across their youth hockey experience simply by virtue of being slightly more physically capable relative to their cohort; and an otherwise equal younger draft eligible will have had to demonstrate greater capability to have earned equal playing time.
It is not my understanding that the draft age delta of, in this case, three months between Celebrini and Smith is expected to significantly impact expectations on how they may physically mature as they enter prime playing years.
It seems ridiculous to note that Smith will have been 86 days older than Celebrini at their respective drafts when comparing and forecasting their physical development, so… (unless I’ve got this all wrong, in which case my I retroactively withdraw my snark)