Prospect Info: At 19th Overall the Sharks Select Josh Norris

[DrFeelgood]

I can't imagine how bad it would be if the team kept raising prices like they have been while a tank began to emerge.

Sharks need to get out from under their abysmal TV deal before they can think about keeping ticket prices the same or even reducing them

I'm fine with the Norris pick myself, it's a safe pick and I don't really think there's anything wrong with that. I just think it goes against the HFBoards hivemind that likes to think being a GM is like it is in video games.

 

[Sideshow Raheem]

Sharks need to get out from under their abysmal TV deal before they can think about keeping ticket prices the same or even reducing them

I'm fine with the Norris pick myself, it's a safe pick and I don't really think there's anything wrong with that. I just think it goes against the HFBoards hivemind that likes to think being a GM is like it is in video games.

You don't see anything wrong with the fact that we have no one in the pipeline who realistically projects as a first-line forward when our two best forwards are 38 years old? Enjoy watching a future team of third liners I guess.

 

[DrFeelgood]

You don't see anything wrong with the fact that we have no one in the pipeline who realistically projects as a first-line forward when our two best forwards are 38 years old? Enjoy watching a future team of third liners I guess.

Hertl is only 23, Couture is 28, Pavelski 32, Hansen 31, Boedker 27 (hopefully he gets his **** together), Donskoi 25. That's not a bad core of young to middle aged guys.

Are they superstars? Arguments can be made for Couture, Pavelski and potentially Hertl. I'm not convinced any of the guys we didn't pick today were sure fire superstars either and there definitely wasn't any generational talent to be had.

 

[Sideshow Raheem]

Hertl is only 23, Couture is 28, Pavelski 32, Hansen 31, Boedker 27 (hopefully he gets his **** together), Donskoi 25. That's not a bad core of young to middle aged guys.

Are they superstars? Arguments can be made for Couture, Pavelski and potentially Hertl. I'm not convinced any of the guys we didn't pick today were sure fire superstars either and there definitely wasn't any generational talent to be had.

I'm sorry, a "core" whose best player is Couture and which includes the likes of Jannik Hansen and Mikkel Boedker is not one you can build a successful team around. Kailer Yamamoto is just one of the players available at 19 who has a much, much higher ceiling than Norris. If we had consistently picked the highest-ceiling, boom-or-bust player in each draft (Mantha over Mueller in 2013, Barzal over Meier in 2015, etc.) odds are good we'd at least have one future star to build around. Right now there's absolutely nobody in the prospect pool who anyone can say with a straight face has star potential.

I just can't for the life of me understand what the point of picking someone like Norris, especially in the first round (but really at all, in any round) is. Great, you're maybe getting a well-rounded third line center. You know how easy it is to find that type of player in free agency, via trade or even on the waiver wire? Extremely easy. It's next to impossible to find a legitimate, cost-controlled first-line talent through any of those avenues. That's what the draft is for and it should be the only thing the draft is for. Just take the player who has the highest chance of becoming a top line forward or top pairing defenseman. You won't hit every time but A) you only need to hit a couple times in an extended span to have a core worth building around and B) even if you "hit" more often on guys who become depth players, it doesn't matter because you could have just easily signed a player like that in free agency.

The draft shouldn't be the place to accumulate good depth players. It should be the place to find high-end talent because that can't be obtained anywhere else in the current NHL.

 

[hohosaregood]

You don't see anything wrong with the fact that we have no one in the pipeline who realistically projects as a first-line forward when our two best forwards are 38 years old? Enjoy watching a future team of third liners I guess.

Not really anything you can do about it. You got like 3 choices: keep watching the Sharks as they suck and thus keep DW in a job, stop watching the Sharks and the loss of profits lead to Hasso firing DW and/or selling the Sharks, or make it so DW/Burke has an unfortunate debilitating accident DW that forces organizational changes.

 

[Shark Finn]

There's not enough outrage about this pick here so he's gonna bust out.

 

[hohosaregood]

There's not enough outrage about this pick here so he's gonna bust out.

I dunno, seems like there's a few of really really angry people.

 

[Shark Finn]

I dunno, seems like there's a few of really really angry people.

Quantity, not quality. A few are always unhappy.

 

[hohosaregood]

You know what's pretty interesting is that Norris isn't particularly swole or ripped for a guy who crushed the combine.

 

[Le Rosbeef]

I came to the thread just to see the toys being thrown out, like this part of the board does better than most.

Love how critical people are of an 18 year old kid that most of us have never met, or seen play beyond selected video clips or just read about.

Welcome to the Sharks, Josh.

 

[Zarzh]

I'm sorry, a "core" whose best player is Couture and which includes the likes of Jannik Hansen and Mikkel Boedker is not one you can build a successful team around. Kailer Yamamoto is just one of the players available at 19 who has a much, much higher ceiling than Norris. If we had consistently picked the highest-ceiling, boom-or-bust player in each draft (Mantha over Mueller in 2013, Barzal over Meier in 2015, etc.) odds are good we'd at least have one future star to build around. Right now there's absolutely nobody in the prospect pool who anyone can say with a straight face has star potential.

I just can't for the life of me understand what the point of picking someone like Norris, especially in the first round (but really at all, in any round) is. Great, you're maybe getting a well-rounded third line center. You know how easy it is to find that type of player in free agency, via trade or even on the waiver wire? Extremely easy. It's next to impossible to find a legitimate, cost-controlled first-line talent through any of those avenues. That's what the draft is for and it should be the only thing the draft is for. Just take the player who has the highest chance of becoming a top line forward or top pairing defenseman. You won't hit every time but A) you only need to hit a couple times in an extended span to have a core worth building around and B) even if you "hit" more often on guys who become depth players, it doesn't matter because you could have just easily signed a player like that in free agency.

The draft shouldn't be the place to accumulate good depth players. It should be the place to find high-end talent because that can't be obtained anywhere else in the current NHL.

Barzal and Yamamoto aren't good foundation picks for a team. Yamamoto is fine for the Oilers because they need cheap complimentary scoring with McDavid, which he can hopefully provide. Barzal is an AAAA superstar, or at his best a #2C you're constantly trying to upgrade (ie Riberio), or who you'll always be able to acquire fairly cheaply. Barzal would need a miracle to become a star. Mantha probably would have been a nice complimentary piece.

Meier has potential to be an extremely valuable player because of his unique skillset. If he becomes a top 6 forward he's a core piece, and the type of player you win with when surrounded by elite talent and can't acquire unless you draft. And no, you aren't likely to get cup-contender center-piece level talent at #9.

The point in picking Norris, is you think he could be JT Miller/Dylan Larkin or a plethora of other useful players. You aren't trading for a top 6 forward with his skillset, you're only drafting one.

The problem is that by drafting the top ranked forward/defenseman every year, you're never winning a cup (without lucking into McDavid/Crosby) and you'll be irrelevant for decades. You'll miss almost all the Pastrnaks, Hertls, Kucherovs and so on. You don't build a winner that way, without tanking AND getting lucky. You're almost never building a skilled core without multiple top 5 picks, and it's nearly impossible without multiple lottery picks.

 

[Machinehead]

"Norris (6-foot, 188 pounds), who will attend the University of Michigan next season, was among the most impressive performers in the fitness testing at the NHL Scouting Combine, finishing first in five tests, including peak power output on the Wingate bike test. A two-way forward with a left-handed shot, Norris likes to take the puck to the net and has a good compete level."

So, he's got the strongest legs in the draft.

And he's American, so, Trumplestiltzken wont deport him.

I kid you not, we were legit worried about Mika Zibanejad last season

Anyway, I don't know what to make of this.

I'm a serial overreactor to draft picks. Next Gretzky or literally the worst thing any GM has ever done. No middle ground.

With Norris, I got nothing. I'm just sitting here like "ok..."

Maybe that's good

My only real gripe is that Josh Norris is totally a baseball name, not a hockey name.

 

[LadyStanley]

Yeah, just one or two (NOT)

 

[Evil Janney]

Every year...

Every 1st round pick...

I did the same **** every year. Then I realized I should stick to my day job. I'm not a scout. I'm not a coach. I'm not a player. I know jack **** about talent assessment regarding young hockey players.

 

[Juxtaposer]

I dunno how you can say that. Sharks sucked that year but they weren't that far from the 7th overall and, quite frankly, the team has the potential to play even worse.

7th overall isn't exactly bottoming out... and you can still feel the impact the 2015 season had on the franchise. Not even a Cup finals run has brought it back to where it was in the early 2010's.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

You don't see anything wrong with the fact that we have no one in the pipeline who realistically projects as a first-line forward when our two best forwards are 38 years old? Enjoy watching a future team of third liners I guess.

Never knew Couture and Pavs are 38. They look good!

 

[Shark Finn]

Yeah, just one or two (NOT)

They really do like the color blue.

 

[alex716]

Not even Top 10 in VO2.

Should have went with Yamamoto. Atleast we'll get to see him a lot in Edmonton. I think that team is a better fit for him.

 

[Debrincat93]

great player, you guys will enjoy this. He might not be a first liner but he will be a damn good 2-3rd liner who can help do the things that it takes to win.

 

[LadyStanley]

https://www.nhl.com/sharks/news/sha...erall-selection-in-2017-nhl-draft/c-290096436
Sharks blurb

http://thehockeywriters.com/2017-nhl-draft-sharks-pick-josh-norris-19-overall/
https://www.fearthefin.com/2017/6/23/15866808/joshua-norris-was-a-low-risk-pick-and-thats-okay
http://www.nbcsports.com/video/2017-nhl-draft-san-jose-sharks-select-josh-norris-no-19-pick

http://www.usahockey.com/news_article/show/807041?referrer_id=752796
USA Hockey: 6 Americans taken in first round

 

[Sideshow Raheem]

Barzal and Yamamoto aren't good foundation picks for a team. Yamamoto is fine for the Oilers because they need cheap complimentary scoring with McDavid, which he can hopefully provide. Barzal is an AAAA superstar, or at his best a #2C you're constantly trying to upgrade (ie Riberio), or who you'll always be able to acquire fairly cheaply. Barzal would need a miracle to become a star. Mantha probably would have been a nice complimentary piece.

Meier has potential to be an extremely valuable player because of his unique skillset. If he becomes a top 6 forward he's a core piece, and the type of player you win with when surrounded by elite talent and can't acquire unless you draft. And no, you aren't likely to get cup-contender center-piece level talent at #9.

The point in picking Norris, is you think he could be JT Miller/Dylan Larkin or a plethora of other useful players. You aren't trading for a top 6 forward with his skillset, you're only drafting one.

The problem is that by drafting the top ranked forward/defenseman every year, you're never winning a cup (without lucking into McDavid/Crosby) and you'll be irrelevant for decades. You'll miss almost all the Pastrnaks, Hertls, Kucherovs and so on. You don't build a winner that way, without tanking AND getting lucky. You're almost never building a skilled core without multiple top 5 picks, and it's nearly impossible without multiple lottery picks.

This is all absolute nonsense. Barzal scored 1.3 points per game in his draft year playing through injuries and with zero help in terms of other forward talent on Seattle. He increased to 1.5 points per game in his draft+1 year and nearly 2 points per game this season. He is completely on track to be a star based on historical comparables who have scored at those insane levels, even more so when you consider he's been largely bereft of high-end teammates and has still been able to accomplish what he has.

Meanwhile Timo's junior career was spent riding shotgun with Nikolaj Ehlers and Francis Perron, two of the best QMJHLers in recent memory. The very fact you're admitting it's entirely up in the air as to whether he can even become a top 6 forward says everything you need to know about how awful a pick he was at 9th overall. Yes, you can't expect to get a franchise player at that slot. But you should be able to draft a first liner if you're even halfway competent especially in a draft as good as the 2015 one was. Barzal, Kyle Connor and Mikko Rantanen are all tracking to be first liners and it was obvious to anyone who took more than a cursory glance at their draft year performances at the time they were good bets to do so.

In what universe would picking the most highly skilled forward cause you to miss the Pastrnaks and Kucherovs? That's the most ludicrous thing you've said in this entire post. Pastrnak and Kucherov's draft-year scoring numbers in their respective leagues were off the charts. I never said to go with the Central Scouting rankings or whatever, those are mostly filled with the same stupid biases NHL GMs have. A purely statistics-based prospect model that takes into account a player's scoring, league, age and size to determine his likelihood of NHL success is extremely easy to make and will outperform a team's scouts every time.

At the very least that line of thinking - (league-adjusted) scoring and age are the most important attributes in prospect evaluation - needs to be prominent if a team has any hope of finding high-end talent especially with the later picks the Sharks generally have. Instead they're drafting guys based on combine results, character and "scoring goals in big moments" which is one of the many idiotic things Wilson praised Norris for last night.

 

[magic school bus]

I guess I'm the only one that likes the pick.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

I guess I'm the only one that likes the pick.

Norris? He is a good prospect for sure. But I am not sure he has the high-end of the other players that were available at 19.

I think we just give it time and see how he pans out.

 

[Sideshow Raheem]

Again, at least we didn't pass on an obvious star this time. I like Yamamoto but he was one of the oldest first-time eligible players in the draft so his numbers should be viewed with some skepticism. Hopefully Norris can develop like Dylan Larkin. They had similar draft-year numbers in the USNTDP but Larkin likely got much less ice time playing behind Eichel.

 

[magic school bus]

Norris? He is a good prospect for sure. But I am not sure he has the high-end of the other players that were available at 19.

I think we just give it time and see how he pans out.

Sure, I would've liked Tolvanen but in a not great draft this is a solid pick.