Prospect Info: San Jose Sharks #5 Prospect

[Gecklund]

HERE WE GO! It’s that time of the year again where we all need a little positivity to distract us from the Sharks so let’s look at the Sharks prospects!

Vote for whoever you think is the Sharks top prospect left. The whole point of this is to get different opinions and different values. Use whatever definition you want for top. If you value long term potential, NHL readiness, translatable skills, whatever it is, go for it!

As always, it’s more fun if you post why you feel your vote is the top prospect as it draws more discussion and interactivity. NO FIGHTING IN THIS THREAD.

This will stay open for 2 days. Cut off is 40 NHL games. Let me know who I should add next.

To add: Scott Reedy, Santeri Hatakka, Michael Fisher, Jake Furlong, Nick Cicek, Magnus Chrona, Ethan Cardwell

Rankings:
1. William Eklund-92.9%
2. Thomas Bordeleau-87.5%
3. Ryan Merkley-55.6%
4. Daniil Gushchin-48.3%

Click to read more...

 

[Sharksrule04]

Starting to get tough here. Torn between Lund, Bystedt and Laroque. Went Lund.

 

[Harbessix]

Started voting Coe at three, so Coe all the way here. His combination of size and skating is too intriguing if he puts it all together.

 

[timorous me]

Starting to get tough here. Torn between Lund, Bystedt and Laroque. Went Lund.

Looking at the names in the mix now feels helpful in justifying the trade of the 11th pick. Having three guys in the mix this high in our rankings tells me that bulking up our system was a pretty wise move if they weren't convinced by the star power of anyone at 11 (ymmv on that point, but it's far enough from a sure thing that I'm not going to blame anyone for that thinking).

 

[Gecklund]

Looking at the names in the mix now feels helpful in justifying the trade of the 11th pick. Having three guys in the mix this high in our rankings tells me that bulking up our system was a pretty wise move if they weren't convinced by the star power of anyone at 11 (ymmv on that point, but it's far enough from a sure thing that I'm not going to blame anyone for that thinking).

I think the biggest thing is depending on who it is at 11 they take (I wanted Lekker or Nazar but pretty much any pick except Geekie in the 11-16 range) they would have been competing for 2-3. Whereas we are now at 5 and they are only now in legitimate contention.

 

[Hodge]

I think the biggest thing is depending on who it is at 11 they take (I wanted Lekker or Nazar but pretty much any pick except Geekie in the 11-16 range) they would have been competing for 2-3. Whereas we are now at 5 and they are only now in legitimate contention.

Only because fans are still irrationally attached to prospects like Merkley and Gushchin who are very unlikely to have NHL careers.

Bystedt has objectively accomplished more and projects better than any other prospect in the system at the same age except Eklund. He should be #2 on this list.

 

[timorous me]

I think the biggest thing is depending on who it is at 11 they take (I wanted Lekker or Nazar but pretty much any pick except Geekie in the 11-16 range) they would have been competing for 2-3. Whereas we are now at 5 and they are only now in legitimate contention.

I think in terms of philosophical disagreement this is where we differ. To me, if that 11 pick is only going to be in contention for third in a system that isn't terribly strong in the first place, then it makes sense to instead get three guys who are just a slight tier below.

I would also say that it wouldn't surprise me at all if in a year's time Bystedt, Lund, and Havelid have passed everyone on the list outside of Eklund and Bordeleau, and it's possible those guys will have graduated, so we could realistically be looking at 1-3. Just look at how Lund shot up after just a brief glimpse of his goods at development camp.

I know it's easy to feel like the sky is falling for the Sharks right now, but I'm pretty happy looking at this prospect list now with these three guys added to it, happier than I have been in what feels like forever when it comes to our system.

 

[Gecklund]

I think in terms of philosophical disagreement this is where we differ. To me, if that 11 pick is only going to be in contention for third in a system that isn't terribly strong in the first place, then it makes sense to instead get three guys who are just a slight tier below.

I would also say that it wouldn't surprise me at all if in a year's time Bystedt, Lund, and Havelid have passed everyone on the list outside of Eklund and Bordeleau, and it's possible those guys will have graduated, so we could realistically be looking at 1-3. Just look at how Lund shot up after just a brief glimpse of his goods at development camp.

I know it's easy to feel like the sky is falling for the Sharks right now, but I'm pretty happy looking at this prospect list now with these three guys added to it, happier than I have been in what feels like forever when it comes to our system.

I think the biggest thing for me is that a guy like Merkley, Gushchin, etc. aren’t super strong as 3rd place prospects but Eklund and Bordeleau are good 1st and 2nd place prospects if that makes sense. If we had say Eklund, Bordeleau, Nazar as our top 3 prospects I think our pool looks a lot better instantly.

Now with all this said, I do think there was guys at both of our first two picks that could have been competing for spot 3 that we passed on.

 

[DG93]

Voted Laroque, think he'll be a legit NHL defenseman one day

 

[Sharksrule04]

Only because fans are still irrationally attached to prospects like Merkley and Gushchin who are very unlikely to have NHL careers.

Bystedt has objectively accomplished more and projects better than any other prospect in the system at the same age except Eklund. He should be #2 on this list.

Having this level of hatred for Gushchin is pretty comical. He’s a boom or bust prospect who has top line upside which is rare within our prospect pool. Does he have a high chance of achieving that? No. He does have tools though that basically no one in the Sharks system has. You’re way too focused on prospect models and stats as opposed to actually watching a player and making a decision for yourself. Most people here don’t think he will be a star but we like what we see. Really not hard to figure out.

 

[Gecklund]

Having this level of hatred for Gushchin is pretty comical. He’s a boom or bust prospect who has top line upside which is rare within our prospect pool. Does he have a high chance of achieving that? No. He does have tools though that basically no one in the Sharks system has. You’re way too focused on prospect models and stats as opposed to actually watching a player and making a decision for yourself. Most people here don’t think he will be a star but we like what we see. Really not hard to figure out.

This board becomes 1000x better with him on ignore. Just a little btw.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Having this level of hatred for Gushchin is pretty comical. He’s a boom or bust prospect who has top line upside which is rare within our prospect pool. Does he have a high chance of achieving that? No. He does have tools though that basically no one in the Sharks system has. You’re way too focused on prospect models and stats as opposed to actually watching a player and making a decision for yourself. Most people here don’t think he will be a star but we like what we see. Really not hard to figure out.

If Bystedt was one of these "safe" prospects where there's a 60-70% chance he makes the league as a third-liner, I could understand taking him over a prospect like Gushchin where there is perhaps an 80% chance he doesn't make it.

But by all accounts, Bystedt is more similar to Gushchin, except it's not his size, but his skating and physicality hiding him back.

 

[mogambomoroo]

Voted Coe based on what I've seen. Ps. Coe mic'up video from dev camp was awesome. Laroque has more potential in a long run, but I think he is my next vote.

 

[Kcoyote3]

Only because fans are still irrationally attached to prospects like Merkley and Gushchin who are very unlikely to have NHL careers.

Bystedt has objectively accomplished more and projects better than any other prospect in the system at the same age except Eklund. He should be #2 on this list.

You have no idea if Merkley or Gushchin will have NHL careers or not. Gushchin has done all he can to demonstrate his skills at the levels he has played. He is the best puck carrier aside from Eklund that the Sharks have.

 

[Hodge]

You don't have to watch Gushchin play to know that he's Jayden Halbgewachs 2.0. Players of that size don't have a chance in the NHL unless they have Johnny Gaudreau level skills which Gushchin does not.

Bystedt meanwhile is 6'4" and has not looked out of place playing against men in one of the best pro hockey leagues in the world. Much safer bet to make the NHL in some capacity.

 

[Kcoyote3]

You don't have to watch Gushchin play to know that he's Jayden Halbgewachs 2.0. Players of that size don't have a chance in the NHL unless they have Johnny Gaudreau level skills which Gushchin does not.

Bystedt meanwhile is 6'4" and has not looked out of place playing against men in one of the best pro hockey leagues in the world. Much safer bet to make the NHL in some capacity.

Bystedt being a good bet to make the NHL in some capacity does not preclude Gushchin from the same. Bystedt was also ranked higher than Gushchin. When Jayden Halgewachs was draft eligible he scored 8 points in the WHL by the way. You also don't have to be Johnny Gaudreau to make the NHL as a smaller forward. Your black/white, wrong/right, good/bad worldview has to be exhausting. You have no form of nuance in any discussion, and when you're wrong you're very wrong. Just like Barabanov turning out to be a decent hockey player, someone you said is an AHLer. You don't put up 40 points by accident.

 

[Hodge]

Bystedt being a good bet to make the NHL in some capacity does not preclude Gushchin from the same. Bystedt was also ranked higher than Gushchin. When Jayden Halgewachs was draft eligible he scored 8 points in the WHL by the way. You also don't have to be Johnny Gaudreau to make the NHL as a smaller forward. Your black/white, wrong/right, good/bad worldview has to be exhausting. You have no form of nuance in any discussion, and when you're wrong you're very wrong. Just like Barabanov turning out to be a decent hockey player, someone you said is an AHLer. You don't put up 40 points by accident.

I thought the point of this exercise was to rank prospects based on their likelihood of making an impact in the NHL. It seems obvious to me even without having watched either player play a single game that Bystedt has a far greater chance than Gushchin.

If Gushchin doesn’t hit as a 20-25 goal scorer there is no place for him in a NHL lineup. How many sub-5’10” skilled forwards are there in the league who aren’t playing at the very top of their team’s depth chart? Bystedt on the other hand could conceivably develop into a useful 3LW or 4C if he can’t become a 2C.

 

[Desert Eagle]

Just few examples with no-Gaudreau skill level players.
Jesper Bratt (5`10 180 lbs) - 73 points last sesaon.
Jonathan Marchessault (5`9 180 lbs) - 66 points.
Clayton Keller (5`10 170 lbs) - 63 points.

Just curious, did they know being 20yr old kids that they haven`t chance in the NHL? And they were thiner than now.

P.S. Gushchin listed 5`10 181 lbs per EP.

 

[CupfortheSharks]

You don't have to watch Gushchin play to know that he's Jayden Halbgewachs 2.0. Players of that size don't have a chance in the NHL unless they have Johnny Gaudreau level skills which Gushchin does not.

Bystedt meanwhile is 6'4" and has not looked out of place playing against men in one of the best pro hockey leagues in the world. Much safer bet to make the NHL in some capacity.

This explanation is too simplistic but I also think there Is a good chance that Gushchin is Halbgewachs 2.0. Gushchin isn’t going to have a better chance to stand out than the 3 on 3 scrimmage at the recent development camp and he didn’t. Lots of open ice, focus on offense, and nobody looking to hit anyone hard. I know it’s only one scrimmage but when Eklund got the puck, it was clear that his skill and vision were at a different level. To a lessor extent Bordeleau too, but Gushchin, while not bad, did not really impress. Also, there is 0 chance that he is 5’10” and 181 lbs. At his size, his skill has to be off the charts to succeed in the NHL. Just one viewing, but one viewing in absolutely ideal conditions, and he didn’t really shine.

 

[mogambomoroo]

I think with Gushchin it's about roster space. We have Hertl, Meier, Couture, Eklund, Bordeleau, Barabanov, Lindblom and Labanc (until traded hopefully) fighting/going for those top 6 spots. I think if he can totally rock the AHL, why not? He is a top 6 role guy if he would be in NHL, it's different if he manages to take it. If we had a Jumbo Joe in his third line years, he could totally be a 3rd liner too.

 

[Gecklund]

This explanation is too simplistic but I also think there Is a good chance that Gushchin is Halbgewachs 2.0. Gushchin isn’t going to have a better chance to stand out than the 3 on 3 scrimmage at the recent development camp and he didn’t. Lots of open ice, focus on offense, and nobody looking to hit anyone hard. I know it’s only one scrimmage but when Eklund got the puck, it was clear that his skill and vision were at a different level. To a lessor extent Bordeleau too, but Gushchin, while not bad, did not really impress. Also, there is 0 chance that he is 5’10” and 181 lbs. At his size, his skill has to be off the charts to succeed in the NHL. Just one viewing, but one viewing in absolutely ideal conditions, and he didn’t really shine.

Wait what? You’re basing your opinion on a prospect camp where literally every player was just there to have fun and no one really gave a shit? You could tell watching that camp that all the players were just giving 50-60% during that scrimmage.

Also Gushchin definitely stood out to me. He wasn’t given as much of the puck since he was with Eklund. But I wouldn’t even put any stock into that. This is now the second season where Jasper Weatherby looked good in those camps. Dude maxes out as a 4th line C.

 

[CupfortheSharks]

Wait what? You’re basing your opinion on a prospect camp where literally every player was just there to have fun and no one really gave a shit? You could tell watching that camp that all the players were just giving 50-60% during that scrimmage.

Also Gushchin definitely stood out to me. He wasn’t given as much of the puck since he was with Eklund. But I wouldn’t even put any stock into that. This is now the second season where Jasper Weatherby looked good in those camps. Dude maxes out as a 4th line C.

I’m basing my opinion on my one viewing of him. I‘m not keen to base my opinion on stats. Yes, it was just a scrimmage, and I’m not trying to make it more than that, but it was a scrimmage with the entire Sharks management team watching. The kids were not going 50% with Mike and company watching intently.

 

[Patty Ice]

You don't have to watch Gushchin play to know that he's Jayden Halbgewachs 2.0. Players of that size don't have a chance in the NHL unless they have Johnny Gaudreau level skills which Gushchin does not.

Bystedt meanwhile is 6'4" and has not looked out of place playing against men in one of the best pro hockey leagues in the world. Much safer bet to make the NHL in some capacity.

Riihijarvi is number 3 on his prospect list FWIW.

 

[Juxtaposer]

My year-long Gannon Laroque agenda is finally paying off.

 

[PacificOceanPotion]

Based on the sample size I saw during the development camp relative to the spot he was selected. Not sure how it’s not Lund. I really like Laroque but Lund seems like a more up to date pick for this spot on the list.