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

[Jargon]

I seriously hope we get a D at 14 not likely. Yakemchuk would be awesome. That being said, this almost screams Eiserman lol

I’m still sorta into the idea of getting Eiserman, especially since he’s Celebrini’s bff and because we have a LOT of playmakers. It really depends who is there… I pray we can move up and grab a big, hard D.

You heard me.

 

[Munnyro]

Why isn't Kunin's cousin available in the poll?

 

[Mattb124]

Why isn't Kunin's cousin available in the poll?

Embarrassingly glaring oversight.

 

[YUPPY 2 7 10 11]

Then what about 14 for David Jiricek?

This is a make it or break it season for both TB and DG, but they both just turned 22. There's a lot of highly drafted players still toiling in the minors at 22.

Let's stay away from Adam Jiricek. He had been injured twice already.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I agree on the priority but I also think that if a Catton or whoever falls to us, he can be used as a trade chip for a young defenseman later on. But I agree that I’d do everything I can to get Buium or Parekh or that level guy here ASAP.

insofar as Granlund, I only trade him for a 1st. With Couture injured and Granlund being a fantastic mentor, I’d rather he stay here. I think he’d be a really huge help to Will Smith.

Agreed with your view on 14. Getting a 1D is our next pivotal acquisition. How to get it is anyone's guess. The draft seems the most likely for us but probably not this year. I only really have confidence in Buium being a #1.

Granlund I would consider re-signing if he has another season like last year and is willing to do something like two years but we shouldn't get too attached to him.

 

[Star Platinum]

I think we can officially stop considering Bordeleau and Gushchin prospects. They're not serious considerations for our future lineup. Zetterlund is not undersized.

If Catton turns out to be really good maybe we can trade Eklund for a defenseman. Or Catton for a defenseman. I just disagree with the idea that we need to build through the draft. The point of the draft is to maximize value accumulation then use that pool of value to fill specific roles on your NHL roster.

The point of the draft is to find a couple of stars that are the centerpiece of your team. After that, what you do with your draft picks (use them, trade them, develop some guys and then trade them to fill out holes in your team) is not a hard and fast rule.

Right now, the Sharks have so little talent that they need to accumulate as much young talent as they can and what position they play is only of secondary concern if they can't clearly distinguish one guy being better. The other thing is that they need to not do what Doug Wilson did and be stupid with the cap.

 

[tahoesharksfan]

What, only one person likes Celebrini #2?!
What am I missing?

 

[NiWa]

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

1. I would do it.
2. Using #42? Would do it for Silayev. For Yakemchuk I'd want a decent pick back (e.g low 2nd). Wouldn't do it for Parekh.
3. Fine with that decision, if we pick the right player. Brandsegg-Nygard in particular is a fantastic two-way player who could even end up as C in the NHL. Would also be happy with Sennecke. Just no Eiserman or Connelly please.
4. No. If you don't like the value for what's on the board, trade back a couple of spots.

Speaking of which, couple of questions how some players with red flags are viewed:

• Parekh: His offensive numbers are fantastic of course, but how will his game translate to the NHL? Many in-depth scouting reports see him as a huge defensive liability. He doesn't seem to have the skating to make up for it either.
• Eiserman: One-trick pony. Doesn't he belong in the 20s?

Next, what about Chernyshov? He's mocked around the 16-22 range, but some reports see a similarly fantastic two-way player that should be in contention in the Sharks range.


Lastly, if we end up keeping our seconds, has anyone seen these D? How would you rank them?

• Elick (shutdown), Freij - These seem like great value but depending on who you ask, would probably need a trade up.
• Emery, Badinka, Wallenius (two-way), Kiviharju (PMD), Mews, Brunicke - They seem to be in the late first to early second range.
• Solberg* (physical), Hutson, Skahan, Fransen, Kleber (shutdown), Shuravin (PMD) - These seem like mid to late second rounders.
• Anyone we should add here?

Update: Looks like Solberg will might go as early as mid first.

 

[OffSydes]

My sister went to BU and worked for the hockey team so I asked her if she has heard anything about Celebrini staying another year. She said that due to graduating 15+ years ago she no longer has contacts there and we all know what this means,

The Shorks and BU are both in on the rigging and the Shorks will allow him to return for another year in exchange for winning the draft.

 

[Juxtaposer]

1. I would do it.
2. Using #42? Would do it for Silayev. For Yakemchuk I'd want a decent pick back (e.g low 2nd). Wouldn't do it for Parekh.
3. Fine with that decision, if we pick the right player. Brandsegg-Nygard in particular is a fantastic two-way player who could even end up as C in the NHL. Would also be happy with Sennecke. Just no Eiserman or Connelly please.
4. No. If you don't like the value for what's on the board, trade back a couple of spots.

Speaking of which, couple of questions how some players with red flags are viewed:

• Parekh: His offensive numbers are fantastic of course, but how will his game translate to the NHL? Many in-depth scouting reports see him as a huge defensive liability. He doesn't seem to have the skating to make up for it either.
• Eiserman: One-trick pony. Doesn't he belong in the 20s?

Next, what about Chernyshov? He's mocked around the 16-22 range, but some reports see a similarly fantastic two-way player that should be in contention in the Sharks range.


Lastly, if we end up keeping our seconds, has anyone seen these D? How would you rank them?

• Elick (shutdown), Freij - These seem like great value but depending on who you ask, would probably need a trade up.
• Emery, Badinka, Wallenius (two-way), Kiviharju (PMD), Mews, Brunicke - They seem to be in the late first to early second range.
• Solberg (physical), Hutson, Skahan, Fransen, Kleber (shutdown), Shuravin (PMD) - These seem like mid to late second rounders.
• Anyone we should add here?

Yes, option two is using 14+42. Personally, I have no doubt that Parekh’s offense will translate because the way he generates offense isn’t just by dangling teenagers. Most of his offense comes from deception and creating space for his teammates. In my opinion, his offense is very pro-style, very EK65. It’s fair to question his defense and it may hold him back from ever becoming a true top-4 D, but that’s the risk you take for getting someone so offensively talented outside the top-5. What I can say is that he isn’t just another Ryan Merkley, who played an extremely juniors-style game. I feel like Parekh’s upside is a little under Karlsson and his downside is probably a journeyman who puts up 50 points in soft minutes wherever he goes but can’t hold a job anywhere for too many years consecutively, a la Erik Gustafsson or something.

 

[gaucholoco3]

My preferred Sharks draft plan.

1. Draft Celebrini and start engraving multiple cups.

Since that isn’t as interesting here is my plan for what to do with 14.

1. Move up to grab one of the top 6 D. For Levshunov I would give up both 33+42 and next years 2nd. For Buium I would give up 33+42. For Silayev and Yamachuk I would give up 33. For Dickerson and Parekh I would give up 42.
2. If all 6 D are gone by 14 target moving back to 20 and picking up 34 from Chicago. After Celebrini and the top 6 D I have: Demidov, Lindstrom, Iginla, MBN, Sennake, Eiserman, Catton, Helenius, Chernyshov, Emery, Jiricek, Greentree, Connelly. That is 20 players I would be happy to draft at 20 in roughly the order I would draft them. This would then give the Sharks 3 second round picks to stockpile D prospects or package 20+42 to move up a few spots to grab a preferred target of that list. At 20 I’m ok reaching for Jiricek although I am coming around to picking Emery over him.
3. Obviously trades involve dance partners and if no trade is available draft BPA at 14 which looks like it could be a wing to give the Sharks insane forward prospect depth.

 

[matt trick]

Top 4 d-men in minutes for the top 8:

DAL- Heisknanen (3), Lindell (74), Harley (18), Tanev
COL- Makar (4), Toews (108), Manson, Walker (Girard)
EDM- Bouchard (10), Ekholm (102), Nurse (7), Ceci
VAN- Hughes (7), Hronek (53), Zadorov, Cole (Myers, Soucey)

BOS- McaVoy (15), Lindholm (6), Carlo (37), Lohrie
CAR- Slavin (126), Burns (20), Skjei (28), Orlov (55) (Pesce- 66)
FLA- Ekblad (1), Montour (55), Forsling, Mikkola

Kind of crazy. Though the historical data may speak against, still intrigued by trading up. However, it is interesting to see that good teams aren't so reliant on top picks for d-men, but drafting your number one (with a top 15 pick) is just about imperative, unless your team resides in the Southeast (apparently). Maybe we get our guy next year, maybe we get them at 14 or a trade-up.

Aside from Dallas, each team acquired their #2 d-man, and only three (Dallas, Boston, Edm) drafted their #3.

For Vegas, I appreciate they have a bizarre model (though I think it makes sense when going for it- pay prospects/late 1sts for elite talent), but they only drafted their 6th d-man.

In summary, most important thing to do with 14 is hit on a top half of the lineup player. Not sure on the percentages, but 70% chance top 6 winger is better than a 50% top 4 d-man.

 

[Barrie22]

Top 4 d-men in minutes for the top 8:

DAL- Heisknanen (3), Lindell (74), Harley (18), Tanev
COL- Makar (4), Toews (108), Manson, Walker (Girard)
EDM- Bouchard (10), Ekholm (102), Nurse (7), Ceci
VAN- Hughes (7), Hronek (53), Zadorov, Cole (Myers, Soucey)

BOS- McaVoy (15), Lindholm (6), Carlo (37), Lohrie
CAR- Slavin (126), Burns (20), Skjei (28), Orlov (55) (Pesce- 66)
FLA- Ekblad (1), Montour (55), Forsling, Mikkola

Kind of crazy. Though the historical data may speak against, still intrigued by trading up. However, it is interesting to see that good teams aren't so reliant on top picks for d-men, but drafting your number one (with a top 15 pick) is just about imperative, unless your team resides in the Southeast (apparently). Maybe we get our guy next year, maybe we get them at 14 or a trade-up.

Aside from Dallas, each team acquired their #2 d-man, and only three (Dallas, Boston, Edm) drafted their #3.

For Vegas, I appreciate they have a bizarre model (though I think it makes sense when going for it- pay prospects/late 1sts for elite talent), but they only drafted their 6th d-man.

In summary, most important thing to do with 14 is hit on a top half of the lineup player. Not sure on the percentages, but 70% chance top 6 winger is better than a 50% top 4 d-man.

Yeah doesn't matter if it is defense, forward or goalie at 14. Just make sure you set it up for the best chance to hit.

 

[CanadienShark]

Voted not Celebrini, despite my original comment. I want Kunin.

 

[YUPPY 2 7 10 11]

All jokes aside, Mackin Celebrini has a little brother who is 12 but playing out of his mind and he is playing in the 14 year age league. I heard this kids is really good. In 5 years, he might be the 1st overall. Imagine the Sharks somehow can pick up Macklin little brother too?

 

[Jargon]

All jokes aside, Mackin Celebrini has a little brother who is 12 but playing out of his mind and he is playing in the 14 year age league. I heard this kids is really good. In 5 years, he might be the 1st overall. Imagine the Sharks somehow can pick up Macklin little brother too?

God I hope we’re not picking 1st overall in 5 years.

 

[YUPPY 2 7 10 11]

God I hope we’re not picking 1st overall in 5 years.

We've got to be creative and a bit of luck. For example, in 5 years the Sharks are doing great getting in and out of the playoffs. but in 1 of their trades, they found a partner (let's say the Boston) who is willing to let go of a unprotected 1st rounder for a NHL ready Sharks center who the Sharks the might have too many in that position. Boston end up at bottom 10th at the end of the season and win the 1st OA lottery which is not protected. Sharks pick 1st again.

 

[StreetHawk]

Given some of his comments, I'm not sure Sturm has much desire to stay in a rebuilding team. Even with Celebrini, Smith, a healthy but not great Couture, and 2-3 quality acquisitions, I'm guessing we're bottom 3-5 with Utah, Chicago, Columbus, Montreal and maybe Calgary again next year. I think Sturm will be ready to move on out at that point (or may ask out at the deadline, someone will want him). Celebrini and Smith are quite a carrot for sticking around, but how long before Sturm sees the return?

It seems odd to me to have a 4-5 year plan for our 4th line when we may not have a top 4 d-man in the organization. Now, I'm not saying Parekh, Yakemchuk, or Even Buium are sure-fire top 4 d-men, but they're decent bets.

I will say having Granlund and Sturm as your #1 and #4 center isn't the worst insulation in the world for the two kids.

SJ will be bottom 3 next season. 4th worst last season and worst this season. Probably 2 more years in the bottom 5. It was almost a 30 point gap from SJ to Mon who was 5th worst.
Guessing they will be there with Chicago who have been 6th, 3rd, and 2nd worst the past 3 seasons. Expect another bottom 5 season from them.
Anaheim, could still be bottom 3, but of the bottom 3, I think the Ducks are going to be the most active in the off-season to improve their roster as they will have 6 prospects they are banking on long term so creating a better environment for them to develop is crucuial IMO. Gauthier as a rookie, Zellweger almost a rookie, Lacombe, Mintyukov, and Carlson in year 2, MacTavish in year 3. Need more than Killorn, Fowler, and Gudas in their forward group of veterans.
Columbus, wildcard depending on the assessment of their new GM (and ownership believing in that assessment). Not sure which direction they want to go.

Montreal, not sure what they do in net and have to figure out how to integrate a bunch of prospect Dmen into their lineup and develop them. But, think they improve a bit still.
Utah, no clue what their new Owner will want the GM to do. Don't think they pick up anymore LTIR contracts to replace Little/Voracheck whose contracts expire. Have enough futures, need to begin assembling a team.
Ottawa, figure out Chyrchrun. Do they need to flip him ala DCat due to contract talks? And will Norris be healthy? They've disappointed the past 2 seasons when they seemed ready to take a step forward.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Top 4 d-men in minutes for the top 8:

DAL- Heisknanen (3), Lindell (74), Harley (18), Tanev
COL- Makar (4), Toews (108), Manson, Walker (Girard)
EDM- Bouchard (10), Ekholm (102), Nurse (7), Ceci
VAN- Hughes (7), Hronek (53), Zadorov, Cole (Myers, Soucey)

BOS- McaVoy (15), Lindholm (6), Carlo (37), Lohrie
CAR- Slavin (126), Burns (20), Skjei (28), Orlov (55) (Pesce- 66)
FLA- Ekblad (1), Montour (55), Forsling, Mikkola

Kind of crazy. Though the historical data may speak against, still intrigued by trading up. However, it is interesting to see that good teams aren't so reliant on top picks for d-men, but drafting your number one (with a top 15 pick) is just about imperative, unless your team resides in the Southeast (apparently). Maybe we get our guy next year, maybe we get them at 14 or a trade-up.

Aside from Dallas, each team acquired their #2 d-man, and only three (Dallas, Boston, Edm) drafted their #3.

For Vegas, I appreciate they have a bizarre model (though I think it makes sense when going for it- pay prospects/late 1sts for elite talent), but they only drafted their 6th d-man.

In summary, most important thing to do with 14 is hit on a top half of the lineup player. Not sure on the percentages, but 70% chance top 6 winger is better than a 50% top 4 d-man.

Thanks for gathering all these numbers… in part because it really backs up my philosophy for building a Stanley Cup-winning defense.

To summarize, other than your #1D, I think you can build the rest of a good defense corps outside of the first round, whether that’s by picks in the 2nd round and later, via trade, or as UFAs. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t nice to draft all your top-4 guys (for loyalty/cost control/culture reasons), but outside of a true #1D everything else can be acquired if you are creative and smart.

Colorado is the perfect example of this:

#1 Makar (4th overall pick)
#2 Toews (acquired via trade at a reasonable cost)
#3 Girard (3rd round pick)
#4 Manson (TDL, re-signed)
#5 Walker (TDL)

The main reason I’m interested in trading up is that, rather uniquely, I think all six of the D projected in the top-10 have legitimate #1D upside. I don’t think that many if any will hit it, but it’s a good shot to take. And if that D did pan out, it would put less pressure on the 2025 pick to be the make-or-break point of our rebuild.

I also have some questions regarding the defense position as a whole over the past 5 years. The first among them is that I question if kids are really prioritizing two-way defense anymore. We know the NHL is much higher scoring than it was ten years ago, and a big part of that is the reemergence of elite scoring talent that the NHL was lacking between Crosby and McDavid. Between those two generational guys being drafted, we had scoring titles won by mediocrity, and the best defensemen were guys like Keith, Chara, Doughty, Pronger, Niedermayer, Lidstrom, etc. The best forwards outside of Crosby/Malkin/Ovechkin were basically two-way studs like Kopitar, Bergeron, Toews, Hossa, Kesler, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, etc.

Now, the stars of the NHL are exciting, fast-paced offensive players. McDavid, Draisaitl, Matthews, Marner, Petterson, Q. Hughes, Makar, Mackinnon, J. Hughes, Pastrnak, etc. It’s been a really long time since there was a real stud two-way defenseman at the top of any draft.

I just wonder if kids are being influenced towards this style of play and not really prioritizing learning defense as much, and I’ll be curious how this affects new-age SC builds.

 

[Munnyro]

Sam Girard was via trade in the Duchene deal from Nashville (What a trade). They used that pick to get Byram -Trade Details

When they won the cup in 21-22, they had 3 defensemen they drafted - Makar, Byram, EJ.

 

[Lebanezer]

Sam Girard was via trade in the Duchene deal from Nashville (What a trade). They used that pick to get Byram -Trade Details

When they won the cup in 21-22, they had 3 defensemen they drafted - Makar, Byram, EJ.

EJ drafted 1st overall by the Blues.

 

[Jargon]

Thanks for gathering all these numbers… in part because it really backs up my philosophy for building a Stanley Cup-winning defense.

To summarize, other than your #1D, I think you can build the rest of a good defense corps outside of the first round, whether that’s by picks in the 2nd round and later, via trade, or as UFAs. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t nice to draft all your top-4 guys (for loyalty/cost control/culture reasons), but outside of a true #1D everything else can be acquired if you are creative and smart.

Colorado is the perfect example of this:

#1 Makar (4th overall pick)
#2 Toews (acquired via trade at a reasonable cost)
#3 Girard (3rd round pick)
#4 Manson (TDL, re-signed)
#5 Walker (TDL)

The main reason I’m interested in trading up is that, rather uniquely, I think all six of the D projected in the top-10 have legitimate #1D upside. I don’t think that many if any will hit it, but it’s a good shot to take. And if that D did pan out, it would put less pressure on the 2025 pick to be the make-or-break point of our rebuild.

I also have some questions regarding the defense position as a whole over the past 5 years. The first among them is that I question if kids are really prioritizing two-way defense anymore. We know the NHL is much higher scoring than it was ten years ago, and a big part of that is the reemergence of elite scoring talent that the NHL was lacking between Crosby and McDavid. Between those two generational guys being drafted, we had scoring titles won by mediocrity, and the best defensemen were guys like Keith, Chara, Doughty, Pronger, Niedermayer, Lidstrom, etc. The best forwards outside of Crosby/Malkin/Ovechkin were basically two-way studs like Kopitar, Bergeron, Toews, Hossa, Kesler, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, etc.

Now, the stars of the NHL are exciting, fast-paced offensive players. McDavid, Draisaitl, Matthews, Marner, Petterson, Q. Hughes, Makar, Mackinnon, J. Hughes, Pastrnak, etc. It’s been a really long time since there was a real stud two-way defenseman at the top of any draft.

I just wonder if kids are being influenced towards this style of play and not really prioritizing learning defense as much, and I’ll be curious how this affects new-age SC builds.

That’s an interesting point. You have to imagine that with forwards getting better and better (and defenseman more and more offensive) at some point the scale will tip the other way, defense-wise, and a guy like early Vlasic, who could shut down Crosby, etc., will become invaluable in competing against teams like the Oilers, with generational talent.

 

[Star Platinum]

Yeah doesn't matter if it is defense, forward or goalie at 14. Just make sure you set it up for the best chance to hit.

What's the bust rate on goalies drafted high in the first round? If I was pulling a guess out of my ass (which I am), I'd say forwards are probably the easiest of the three positions to project, then defensemen, and goalies last.

We've got to be creative and a bit of luck. For example, in 5 years the Sharks are doing great getting in and out of the playoffs. but in 1 of their trades, they found a partner (let's say the Boston) who is willing to let go of a unprotected 1st rounder for a NHL ready Sharks center who the Sharks the might have too many in that position. Boston end up at bottom 10th at the end of the season and win the 1st OA lottery which is not protected. Sharks pick 1st again.

 

[Munnyro]

EJ drafted 1st overall by the Blues.

Oh damn you're right. Forgot about that.

 

[Barrie22]

What's the bust rate on goalies drafted high in the first round? If I was pulling a guess out of my ass (which I am), I'd say forwards are probably the easiest of the three positions to project, then defensemen, and goalies last.

68 goalies have been drafted in round 1. 31 of them have played 200 games. 3 more over 150 games played and still playing right now. 1 more still playing at 76 games played.

So if those numbers are correct (from quanthockey), its 50% to get 200 games played out of a 1st round goalie.