2025 NHL Draft: Lose a ton for Porter Martone

[matt trick]

Martone is my fourth favorite prospect, but he’d be awesome for us. Schaefer’s the best D prospect since Dahlin, but Misa, Hagens, and Martone will all be considered top 10 prospects in the league. Given the option of one of those four or any drafted player who hasn’t played NHl games, I think I’d only be tempted by Demidov, Buium, and Levshunov.

Martone would be a ridiculous compliment to Eklund and Celebrini.

 

[karltonian]

So in short, our team just needs more high end talent and any high end talent would be very useful.

 

[Juxtaposer]

As I read everything you wrote about Martone don’t we already have that player in Musty. If I were to remove the name I would think you are describing Musty’s game.

Martone is quite a bit better than Musty. I know my tirade made it seem like I don't like Martone, but that's not true at all. His offensive zone play is as good as anyone in the whole draft and I think he's the best playmaker and the best finisher within five feet of the net. He can make good defensive plays when he's locked in, he's just very inconsistent with it.

I think he would be a really nice complement to Eklund and Celebrini stylistically and has a first-line level of talent. If we do pick 4th, then we have our long-term first line locked in, which isn't nothing. He's a great prospect. He just isn't the Tkachuk that some people around here seem to think he is. Matthew Tkachuk has long been one of my favorite players in the NHL. Martone would have to develop quite a bit to become that type of player, but he does have the physical frame to do it. I would say that right now, Martone has a similar style of play in the offensive zone, in that he is a great playmaker, has incredibly soft hands in tight, and can be a good net-front presence. But where he falls short is that he doesn't have Tkachuk's defensive or physical game, and doesn't quite have the pace you'd want to see.

1. Schaefer--completes the core with a future Norris-contending defenseman.
2. Misa--pair him with Smith for an excellent and complete 2nd line to alleviate pressure from Celebrini.
3. Hagens--you'd have to figure out what to do with Smith, but having a 1-2 punch of Celebrini-Hagens is a Cup-caliber duo.
4. Martone--great complement to Celebrini and Eklund, but forces us to rely on current prospects stepping up more than any other option.

 

[coooldude]

Martone is quite a bit better than Musty. I know my tirade made it seem like I don't like Martone, but that's not true at all. His offensive zone play is as good as anyone in the whole draft and I think he's the best playmaker and the best finisher within five feet of the net. He can make good defensive plays when he's locked in, he's just very inconsistent with it.

I think he would be a really nice complement to Eklund and Celebrini stylistically and has a first-line level of talent. If we do pick 4th, then we have our long-term first line locked in, which isn't nothing. He's a great prospect. He just isn't the Tkachuk that some people around here seem to think he is. Matthew Tkachuk has long been one of my favorite players in the NHL. Martone would have to develop quite a bit to become that type of player, but he does have the physical frame to do it. I would say that right now, Martone has a similar style of play in the offensive zone, in that he is a great playmaker, has incredibly soft hands in tight, and can be a good net-front presence. But where he falls short is that he doesn't have Tkachuk's defensive or physical game, and doesn't quite have the pace you'd want to see.

1. Schaefer--completes the core with a future Norris-contending defenseman.
2. Misa--pair him with Smith for an excellent and complete 2nd line to alleviate pressure from Celebrini.
3. Hagens--you'd have to figure out what to do with Smith, but having a 1-2 punch of Celebrini-Hagens is a Cup-caliber duo.
4. Martone--great complement to Celebrini and Eklund, but forces us to rely on current prospects stepping up more than any other option.

It's baffling to me how ranking prospects for fit with SJ somehow makes people want to all-or-nothing the whole thing. We pick top 4, we're coming out with a huge piece, probably the second-best piece in the whole system. Just because someone prefers Misa/Hagens over Martone or visa versa doesn't mean that the other player is dogshit/bust. Really don't get it.

We somehow miraculously pick 5-10, we're coming out with a prospect just below Smith and at/above Dickinson in importance, imho.

 

[Juxtaposer]

It's baffling to me how ranking prospects for fit with SJ somehow makes people want to all-or-nothing the whole thing. We pick top 4, we're coming out with a huge piece, probably the second-best piece in the whole system. Just because someone prefers Misa/Hagens over Martone or visa versa doesn't mean that the other player is dogshit/bust. Really don't get it.

We somehow miraculously pick 5-10, we're coming out with a prospect just below Smith and at/above Dickinson in importance, imho.

It's just passion. Easier to make an argument when you aren't conceding points to the opponent.

I wouldn't be mad if we did end up taking Martone at #2 or #3. I just don't think it would be the right pick. What defines the Sharks' system right now outside of Celebrini is "took a good guy but not the best guy". Eklund over Clarke/Guenther, Smith over Michkov, Dickinson over Buium. Eklund/Smith/Dickinson is a great group of young players and I was not/am not mad about any of the individual selections. But it could be Clarke/Michkov/Buium, which is undeniably a better group of young players. I want to take the best guy this time, not just a good guy.

 

[The Nemesis]

It's baffling to me how ranking prospects for fit with SJ somehow makes people want to all-or-nothing the whole thing. We pick top 4, we're coming out with a huge piece, probably the second-best piece in the whole system. Just because someone prefers Misa/Hagens over Martone or visa versa doesn't mean that the other player is dogshit/bust. Really don't get it.

We somehow miraculously pick 5-10, we're coming out with a prospect just below Smith and at/above Dickinson in importance, imho.

For me I'd want to be top 3 because Martone strikes me as the low-floor guy of the group.

Of course that doesn't address that Grier and company would probably be high on Martone because hockey guys love big, tough potential power forwards even if they are riskier, upside bets.