Prospect Info: All-Purpose 2024 Draft Thread & Celebrini discussion (also the 14th pick and whatever else is draft related)

[Cas]

Wonder who announces the pick

Some lucky Junior Shark.

 

[Grinner]

I know you prefer MBN or Sennecke at 14. Personally, I rather we get one of the top 5 D instead. So are most people split on it then?

Next year is another draft. Another draft where the Sharks have two 1st rounders
They can certainly use one or both to try and land a 1D.

 

[spintops]

If one of the top 4 D falls and you can move up using 42 I would probably do it. I wouldn't give up 33 unless it gets you Buium. Take BPA with more swings/lottery tickets. It's not like the prospects we have are such sure things we won't need wingers/etc

 

[Shark Finn]

Some lucky Junior Shark.

Celebrini himself will be invited to announce that the Sharks are picking him.

 

[TealManV]

If it were around 7-10 instead of 14, I'd see a potential deal as a fan of both sides. Not sure the Sharks have the expendable assets to move 14 to 5.

Guys like Bystedt won't be valued highly by the Habs and would be more highly valued to the Habs. Muk doesn't make sense for either side.

I just don't see a realistic trade.

What about taking on Gallagher and/or Anderson to balance the scales?

 

[Hodge]

I'm so relieved we don't have to decide between Demidov, Silayev, Levshunov, etc. at 2 or 3. Who the hell knows with any of those guys. Like Demidov looks fun but he's literally only played in a horrible league.

 

[Jargon]

I'm so relieved we don't have to decide between Demidov, Silayev, Levshunov, etc. at 2 or 3. Who the hell knows with any of those guys. Like Demidov looks fun but he's literally only played in a horrible league.

Same. All those guys sound really fun and a fill a need but they all have a “but…” attached to them.

And man, since I finally had a chance to really dive into Celebrini highlights… holy shit, he’s not just great, he’s electric to watch. We’ve never had a player with his skillset before (Joe will have a better career likely and was obviously amazing to watch too, but that mix of speed and dangles and shot…)

 

[Saskatoon]

I'm so relieved we don't have to decide between Demidov, Silayev, Levshunov, etc. at 2 or 3. Who the hell knows with any of those guys. Like Demidov looks fun but he's literally only played in a horrible league.

Someone is definitely going to look like a fool in the top 5 down the road

 

[CanadienShark]

What about taking on Gallagher and/or Anderson to balance the scales?

For me, no chance. Habs don't need the space.

 

[one2gamble]

Not into the Sharks picking people with knee damage

 

[OversKy]

Next year is another draft. Another draft where the Sharks have two 1st rounders
They can certainly use one or both to try and land a 1D.

Any thoughts on next years defence class?

 

[Lebanezer]

Just take BPA. Drafting for need usually means you reach on someone

 

[TheBeard]

I'm so relieved we don't have to decide between Demidov, Silayev, Levshunov, etc. at 2 or 3. Who the hell knows with any of those guys. Like Demidov looks fun but he's literally only played in a horrible league.

You and Grier both lol. Grier gets a pass this year regardless how Macklin pans out. He could flat out bust Daigle style and no one would fault Grier for picking him.

Just take BPA. Drafting for need usually means you reach on someone

God, it's hard to justify picking another C at 14. We have the ammo to move up for OUR BPA at a position in need.

 

[Lebanezer]

God, it's hard to justify picking another C at 14. We have the ammo to move up for OUR BPA at a position in need.

Absolutely, if they can realistically move up and get a future stud Dman you can do that. If we’re staying at 14, I see no reason to reach. It’s not outside the realm of possibility that drafting another high end forward, even if it’s a center at 14 could mean the future top 6 is effectively in place.

Eklund-Celebrini-Zetterlund/#14
Musty-Smith-Halttunen/#14/Gushchin

Obviously those guys all have to work out, but not the worst thing to have a lot of options for those spots, that can also be used in a trade for D if necessary.

 

[Juxtaposer]

In order of preference for what we do with #14:

1. Use #33 to trade up for Buium or Dickinson (or Levshunov if he somehow falls)
2. Use #14 to trade up for Yakemchuk (or Silayev/Parekh if they fall past 10, which is unlikely but never say never)
3. Stay at #14 and pick the BPA, which I think is likely to be RW Brandsegg-Nygard
4. Reach for Jiricek or some other that belongs in the 20’s

 

[sharski]

Draft BPA based on your own internal board (without pulling a Riihijärvi)
Trade from a position of strength
???
Profit

 

[TheBeard]

Absolutely, if they can realistically move up and get a future stud Dman you can do that. If we’re staying at 14, I see no reason to reach. It’s not outside the realm of possibility that drafting another high end forward, even if it’s a center at 14 could mean the future top 6 is effectively in place.

Eklund-Celebrini-Zetterlund/#14
Musty-Smith-Halttunen/#14/Gushchin

Obviously those guys all have to work out, but not the worst thing to have a lot of options for those spots, that can also be used in a trade for D if necessary.

Imagine packaging the Pitts and NJ picks into Buium. Essentially Grier would have traded EK and Timo for Granlund, Musty, Zeem and Shakir. Two top 4 D-men, a top 6 forward and a top line C.

 

[Lebanezer]

Imagine packaging the Pitts and NJ picks into Buium. Essentially Grier would have traded EK and Timo for Granlund, Musty, Zeem and Shakir. Two top 4 D-men, a top 6 forward and a top line C.

Pretty good. And again, I'm not against doing that at all. Moving up for a top end D or drafting the best forward available at 14 are both good outcomes.

 

[Lebanezer]

In order of preference for what we do with #14:

1. Use #33 to trade up for Buium or Dickinson (or Levshunov if he somehow falls)
2. Use #14 to trade up for Yakemchuk (or Silayev/Parekh if they fall past 10, which is unlikely but never say never)
3. Stay at #14 and pick the BPA, which I think is likely to be RW Brandsegg-Nygard
4. Reach for Jiricek or some other that belongs in the 20’s

I hope it's only one of the first 3 options.

If we stay at 14, I'd like to use 33 on Cole Hutson.

 

[Juxtaposer]

I hope it's only one of the first 3 options.

Right, I would be happy with any of the first three options, and actively Mad at the last.

 

[Harbessix]

Grier will draft Eiserman at 14 and Hutson at 33. Macklin will return for another year at BU and the Terriers will have Celebrini, Eiserman, Hutson and Svoboda. Grier will be beside himself.

 

[GRANdSharks]

I think the ideal scenario would be one of the top 5 d man falls to New Jersey at 10 and we're able to jump buffalo but they could very well go in the top 10 based on how the board falls. I'm not a huge fan of yakemchuck I prefer freij and elick so another option could be taking bpa at 14 and trading up 33 and 42 for another first to grab a d man from the next tier

 

[Hodge]

You and Grier both lol. Grier gets a pass this year regardless how Macklin pans out. He could flat out bust Daigle style and no one would fault Grier for picking him.


God, it's hard to justify picking another C at 14. We have the ammo to move up for OUR BPA at a position in need.

Why is it hard to justify picking another C? We could just move Smith to RW which he's probably better suited for anyway. Or move the center we pick at 14 (likely Catton or Lindstrom) to wing.

Gotta go BPA no matter what. If we were a team like Anaheim that's several years ahead in their rebuild and already has a treasure trove of forward prospects then maybe you lean towards a defenseman. We're not in that position yet.

 

[Juxtaposer]

You can never have enough centers. Even with Celebrini and Smith in the system, if Lindstrom or Catton fell to 14 you take them no question (Lindstrom can definitely play wing and I think Catton is a wing at the NHL level anyway). Even Helenius, I’d take unless MBN/Sennecke were there too.

 

[TheBeard]

Why is it hard to justify picking another C? We could just move Smith to RW which he's probably better suited for anyway. Or move the center we pick at 14 (likely Catton or Lindstrom) to wing.

Gotta go BPA no matter what. If we were a team like Anaheim that's several years ahead in their rebuild and already has a treasure trove of forward prospects then maybe you lean towards a defenseman. We're not in that position yet.

Because by 14 there's gonna be a plethora of subjective BPA. There's not gonna be a clear obvious BPA there (I haven't seen any mocks where Lindstrom falls out of the top 8 and only 1 or so where Catton does). Frankly, I'd prefer not to go Catton because I don't want to go and get yet another undersized forward. Currently, only Musty, Bysted and Edstrom are our only prospects over 6 feet (and that includes Macklin). Eklund, Bordeleau, Gush, Zetterlund, Smith are all 5'11 and under. It's not a huge deal, just a preference.

You can never have enough centers. Even with Celebrini and Smith in the system, if Lindstrom or Catton fell to 14 you take them no question (Lindstrom can definitely play wing and I think Catton is a wing at the NHL level anyway). Even Helenius, I’d take unless MBN/Sennecke were there too.

I see zero chance in Lindstrom or Catton falling out of the top ten. If we can nab them at 14 then fine. Not my first choice. But if it's someone like Helenius then I'd rather go elsewhere.