Prospect Info: HFSJ '22 Draft: Michael Fisher (D) - St. Mark's/USHS (Ma) (Round 3, 76th overall)

Herschel

Registered User
Dec 8, 2009
1,391
445
Makes sense because the Sharks are known to be one of the best team at developing players. :sarcasm:

I get your point, however, recent AHL moves suggest this is now a major organizational focus and one that they are investing in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

PacificOceanPotion

Registered User
Jun 19, 2009
6,191
5,018
I picked him and Lund in multiple mock draft sims. So far, this has been a major success getting Lund, Havelid and now Fisher. Good job boys
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

PacificOceanPotion

Registered User
Jun 19, 2009
6,191
5,018
I'm curious to see how Lund does in college. Wish we got someone else in Round 1 tho
I’m okay with Bystedt. A lot of people griping and complaining but I trust the scouts and DW jr. If he develops into a beast, everyone will look back and have to eat crow. Every players a gamble. Might as well pick someone who has the ceiling to develop into a real stud in 2-3 years and collect multiple assets as well.
 

hohosaregood

Banned
Sep 1, 2011
32,654
13,117
I’m okay with Bystedt. A lot of people griping and complaining but I trust the scouts and DW jr. If he develops into a beast, everyone will look back and have to eat crow. Every players a gamble. Might as well pick someone who has the ceiling to develop into a real stud in 2-3 years and collect multiple assets as well.
It's really going to come down to if any one of the picks available at 11 end up being better than the combo of Bystedt, Lund, and Havelid. But even then, it doesn't feel like they maximized value on these picks.
 

Herschel

Registered User
Dec 8, 2009
1,391
445
It's really going to come down to if any one of the picks available at 11 end up being better than the combo of Bystedt, Lund, and Havelid. But even then, it doesn't feel like they maximized value on these picks.

This is a highly flawed way of doing the analysis and almost guarantees that the Sharks made the incorrect move since you comparing the best outcome from 16 picks.

A better comparison would be to look at whomever the Sharks would have taken at 11, although we will never know who that would have been, and compare him to Bystedt, Lund, and Havelid combined.

I could also get behind the idea of looking at the players picked between 11 and 27 and then if a handful of them end up being better than Bystedt, Lund and Havelid combined call it a terrible move.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
71,100
14,708
Folsom
This is a highly flawed way of doing the analysis and almost guarantees that the Sharks made the incorrect move since you comparing the best outcome from 16 picks.

A better comparison would be to look at whomever the Sharks would have taken at 11, although we will never know who that would have been, and compare him to Bystedt, Lund, and Havelid combined.

I could also get behind the idea of looking at the players picked between 11 and 27 and then if a handful of them end up being better than Bystedt, Lund and Havelid combined call it a terrible move.
Since you can never know who they would have taken at 11, you have to cast the wide net and compare it to everyone between 11 and 27 and compare it to the three they got. Even in a situation where they passed up on a single better player, if two of the three hit as solid NHL players, it's a good move. The pick value in the trade is good value but it's a matter of what you do with it.
 

DG93

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
4,703
2,851
San Jose
Well thats actually awesome looking for a 3rd rounder. 17% chance at being a star is no joke
Seems like the Sharks nailed the defensemen picks in the 2nd/3rd rounds in terms of upside when the probabilities of getting good players from there aren't very high. I'm a lot more disappointed in the first two picks despite them being considered "projects." This team isn't going anywhere for at least 3 years so the long-term development doesn't really matter, especially since Grier seems to be committed to building an actual development program instead of just John McCarthy and Sommer half-assing things (that comment was pretty concerning and explains their brutal track record the last decade). I'm just not a huge fan of taking projects that sounds like future middle-6 centers, I'd rather risk it on a higher upside "project" who might actually do more.
 

Hockeyville USA

Registered User
Dec 30, 2023
3,204
2,912
Central Ohio

Leaving Northeastern to play an overage season in the BCHL.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Sandisfan

Patty Ice

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
14,379
4,397
Not California

Leaving Northeastern to play an overage season in the BCHL.

It was reported over a month ago.

Injuries derailed his career but I'm cheering him on despite what I see as a step back. Maybe it's necessary, he is still young to salvage a career.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan and DG93

Hockeyville USA

Registered User
Dec 30, 2023
3,204
2,912
Central Ohio
It was reported over a month ago.

Injuries derailed his career but I'm cheering him on despite what I see as a step back. Maybe it's necessary, he is still young to salvage a career.
It was always a bigger gamble than I'd be willing to take, as there was no USHL sample size to judge him on against better quality competition. Injuries did hamper his development, no doubt
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad