2025 NHL Draft: Lose a ton for Porter Martone

[Juxtaposer]

So if the Sharks get Hagens should they just trade him? What would be a proper return?

If we ended up with 1st overall and there was a team with a pick 3-5 (or wherever the next tier drops off, won’t know that until next spring) that also had a top RHD prospect, I would consider a trade down. I don’t think it’s anything that would actually happen in real life. But if we ended up with Hagens then I think you’d at least have to explore trading either him or Smith for a high end young defender. Having both is redundant.

So... How is one supposed to pronounce Hagens?

It certainly does not rhyme with ‘baggin’. The ‘Hag’ part of the name rhymes with ‘vague’.

Neither does ‘Martone’ rhyme with ‘ton’. Both pretty awful catch-phrases if you ask me.

 

[Shark Finn]

It certainly does not rhyme with ‘baggin’. The ‘Hag’ part of the name rhymes with ‘vague’.

Neither does ‘Martone’ rhyme with ‘ton’. Both pretty awful catch-phrases if you ask me.

Only if Hagens was Danish. Coppin' Hagens would be perfect.

 

[Star Platinum]

So if the Sharks get Hagens should they just trade him? What would be a proper return?

I think if that situation happens, either Smith gets moved to wing or Smith gets moved for an upgrade elsewhere. First world problems.

 

[YUPPY 2 7 10 11]

Hey a dream lineup in 2026-2027 would be Martone-Celebrini-Toffoli, Musty-Smith-Eklund, Chernyshov-Bystedt/Edstrom-Zetterlund, Haltunnen-Edstrom/Bystedt-Goodrow I guess and a blueline of Dickinson-trade target, Mukh-Hensler, and some combination of young guys or vets (Emberson, Wallenius, Furlong, Cagnoni, Pohlkamp, Thrun, Thompson, or vet signings/FA).

Never plays out this way, but it's fun to dream lol

When are we going to focus on the goalies? Are the goalies in the crapper?

 

[Star Platinum]

So... How is one supposed to pronounce Hagens?

Based on this video, I would say......I have no effin' idea.

 

[DG93]

When are we going to focus on the goalies? Are the goalies in the crapper?

That's the last thing to address when close to contention, probably summer of 2026

 

[Star Platinum]

When are we going to focus on the goalies? Are the goalies in the crapper?

I wouldn't worry about the goalie situation too much until we have a league average or better defense in front of the goalie.

 

[StanleyCup2035]

If we ended up with 1st overall and there was a team with a pick 3-5 (or wherever the next tier drops off, won’t know that until next spring) that also had a top RHD prospect, I would consider a trade down. I don’t think it’s anything that would actually happen in real life. But if we ended up with Hagens then I think you’d at least have to explore trading either him or Smith for a high end young defender. Having both is redundant.


It certainly does not rhyme with ‘baggin’. The ‘Hag’ part of the name rhymes with ‘vague’.

Neither does ‘Martone’ rhyme with ‘ton’. Both pretty awful catch-phrases if you ask me.

True! Thankfully, you will get to rename the thread!

 

[JotAlan]

Wow, I’m gonna need you to elaborate on this one. Do you think Hagens is Crosby or do you really hate Martone?

No one is giving up on Hagens, but we’re not being greedy. We just won Celebrini and I’m satisfied with that. Hagens would be gravy, Celebrini was the centerpiece. We don’t need Hagens, so it behooves us to discuss other more probable options. Especially when Porter Martone is the exact player we need to complete our top-9 perfectly. He’s got first line skill in a 6’3” power-forward body.

If we ended up getting lucky and winning Hagens, then great. But we don’t need it.

It may even be greedy, but why not when the Sharks have always been sunk in the lotteries.
I don't think Hagens is Crosby, but I think he has an even higher ceiling than Celebrini. And if you have a chance to draft a prospect like that, you just take it. Nothing against Martone, I just don't see this super top-notch talent. For me he is overrated. And if the Sharks don't get Hagens, I'd go for a D-men

 

[Cas]

The only thing better than two legitimate top-six centers is three legitimate top-six centers.

If Hagens is BPA when we pick (top five would be the expectation), then you pick him.

 

[JotAlan]

I have not read much about Martone other than him being a winger who will go in the top 5 with size. It sounds like he is significantly better than Sennecke.

The problem with Hagens is that he is essentially redundant with Smith, as an offensively gifted C who is not expected to have the 200ft impact Celebrini does. He is also smaller than Smith.

With Celebrini and Smith not having size it does not leave much room in the lineup for another small forward in the top 6. Now Hagens would be insurance if Smith doesn’t hit but the Sharks should have an idea on that going into the draft. If you win the lottery and Hagens has that much value above Martone then you take him, but if it is close then a trade down could be huge. You could probably trade down 2-3 spots and pick up 2 1sts in the process.

For me the only thing in common between Hagens and Smith is that they are elite offensive talents, but they are completely different players. Hagens doesn't earn most of his points by cheating like Smith, and okay, Hagens won't be a 200-foot player like Celebrini, but he's already pretty good defensively for his age. And yes, size can be the problem. But it's not like Macklin is a dwarf. And I honestly don't understand why there is so much agony over size, Point-Cirelli won two Cups with Tampa, and they are exactly the same height as James and Macklin respectively. Celebrini as 1C and Hagens 2C would be insane.

 

[coooldude]

There's a ton of time left to see how Hagens-Martone-Frondell-McQueen-etc, plus Lottery shakes out. No point in going into all the hypotheticals yet. We're shaping up to be in the running for 2 great players in the ~top 25, and with any luck/karma, two lottery picks.

Going into 2024, people thought Celebrini would be a weak #1 and the draft class in general would be weak. We ended up with a strong top 10-15ish, a weak rest, and Celebrini knocking on the door of "generational." So who knows what happens?

For me, the next time to fun-speculate is after the Hlinka.

 

[one2gamble]

I think if that situation happens, either Smith gets moved to wing or Smith gets moved for an upgrade elsewhere. First world problems.

Smith > Hagens

Watch this space

 

[The McMafia]

It certainly does not rhyme with ‘baggin’. The ‘Hag’ part of the name rhymes with ‘vague’.

Neither does ‘Martone’ rhyme with ‘ton’. Both pretty awful catch-phrases if you ask me.

The first does in Bostonian. "Bayg-in" for Hey-gens". "Car keys" and "khakis" also sound the same.

Edit: Should just be "Beggin' for Hagens" now that I said the above to myself.

 

[Star Platinum]

Smith > Hagens

Watch this space

Planting the flag. I like it.

 

[tiburon12]

It's nice having Celebrini and watching how the '25 and beyond prospects play out without the worry that we NEED "player-X"

 

[hohosaregood]

That's the last thing to address when close to contention, probably summer of 2026

Seeing how goalies can take 6 years to make the NHL, it wouldn't be the craziest thing to go for Ravenbergen in the late 1st if Vegas makes the playoffs. If they miss, that puts us in a good spot for Hensler or one of the other D.

 

[mogambomoroo]

It's actually nice to be able to focus on what the Sharks do on the ice rather than only being focused on the draft. It has been quite an exhausting couple of years only embracing the tank, now they can naturally try to be better without feeling bad even if they draft high again. Not getting my hopes up with that Vegas pick yet, but it will be a nice side story for the next season.

 

[Chinaski89]

For me the only thing in common between Hagens and Smith is that they are elite offensive talents, but they are completely different players. Hagens doesn't earn most of his points by cheating like Smith, and okay, Hagens won't be a 200-foot player like Celebrini, but he's already pretty good defensively for his age. And yes, size can be the problem. But it's not like Macklin is a dwarf. And I honestly don't understand why there is so much agony over size, Point-Cirelli won two Cups with Tampa, and they are exactly the same height as James and Macklin respectively. Celebrini as 1C and Hagens 2C would be insane.

Look at New Jersey this year… their little guys were broken physically for most of the year and is why they missed the playoffs… besides Ruff being an awful coach.

 

[spintops]

I'm sure we would take Hagins if he is the slam dunk #1 and we end up with #1. I think we are just being realistic that we won't win the lottery again and being happy with still landing an elite talent.

That said I agree there is no reason to argue over it right now. The bonus of owning the Vegas pick is cheering against them even more and it mattering.

 

[JotAlan]

Smith > Hagens

Watch this space

No way lol. Hagens will be just as good, if not better offensively, and he's already better defensively even though he's a year and a half younger and less developed. I say this as a super Smith fan; but I wish the Sharks would get Hagens to move Smith to the wing.

 

[Friday]

Hagens is so smol right now too

 

[The411]

When are we going to focus on the goalies? Are the goalies in the crapper?

Josh Ravensbergen might be someone the Sharks look at for the second first round pick.

 

[jMoneyBrah]

In a thought that is way to early to feel too strongly about one way or the other; depending on how the draft rankings shake out I’d like the org to explore trading back to pick up additional firsts in future drafts under the hypothesis that one could net a couple of firsts by moving from 2OA to something like 6-7OA.

I know the prevailing wisdom is take the potential elite talent at the top of the draft, but taking a long view I think it might be beneficial to keep banking additional firsts in future drafts. It would be a way of ensuring a strong pipeline of good young players as the team is entering a competitive phase, or give additional assets to trade to add any missing pieces in future offseason or trade deadlines without completely missing out the opportunity to add 1st round talent (e.g. the Sharks could trade the additional first and keep their own)

 

[gaucholoco3]

In a thought that is way to early to feel too strongly about one way or the other; depending on how the draft rankings shake out I’d like the org to explore trading back to pick up additional firsts in future drafts under the hypothesis that one could net a couple of firsts by moving from 2OA to something like 6-7OA.

I know the prevailing wisdom is take the potential elite talent at the top of the draft, but taking a long view I think it might be beneficial to keep banking additional firsts in future drafts. It would be a way of ensuring a strong pipeline of good young players as the team is entering a competitive phase, or give additional assets to trade to add any missing pieces in future offseason or trade deadlines without completely missing out the opportunity to add 1st round talent (e.g. the Sharks could trade the additional first and keep their own)

I completely agree if a team can constantly go into the season with two 1st round picks it opens up so much potential. Keeping a strong prospect pipeline is critical to extending a window from 2-3 to 10+ years. Even looking at dealing guys like Ferraro or Zetterlund before their UFA years to accumulate picks. Carolina moving Necas is an example of a competing team moving out a useful player to keep the prospect cupboard full.

Even Eklund could be a candidate to move out at 25-26 if he is tops out as a 2nd liner.

If you always have a good stable of prospects to fill holes then non core players can be replaced with prospects. This also lets prospects cook longer and show they aren’t busts before replacing roster players.