I generally agree but I will say I do like the players that should be available a decent amount more at this spot.
Confirmed with Link: Sharks acquire pick 11 for 14+42
- Thread starter Lebanezer
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here
I generally agree but I will say I do like the players that should be available a decent amount more at this spot.
I wouldn't be surprised if he traded 11 up with next year's 2nd (mid 30's) to get into the 7th or 8th slot.
edit: probably means they're also out on McGroarty.
edit: probably means they're also out on McGroarty.
Last edited:
If the goal is to get a punchers chance at a franchise 1D its a little different and then the plan B could just be to take Eiserman
TheBigDrunkPanda
Registered User
- Oct 19, 2021
- 912
- 900
matt trick
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2007
- 9,930
- 1,672
So who's the Griersiest pick after Celebrini? I got to think his next tier is
2. Levshunov-
3. Lidstrom
4. Dickinson
5. Silayev
(and maybe Demidov who will be gone)
7. Buium- he's a winner.
8. Iginla- competitive
9.
10.
11.
Sennecke, Helenius, Yakemchuk, Parekh, Catton
Eiserman
So if 42 gets us from 14 to 11, 33s got to get us 7/8, right? Does 53 get us to 8/9?
Think my rankings are:
1. Celebrini- franchise C
2. Levshunov- top pairing d
3. Lidstrom- Power 6 center
4. Buium- top 2/4 d-man with elite offensive ability
5. Demidov- Elite winger
6. Dickinson- 2-4 d-man
7. Silayev (our own Chara-Bergeron?)- 2-4 d-man
8. Sennecke- High-end winger with size
9. Iginla- High end winger
10. Parekh- Boom/bust d-man
11. Yakemchuk- Boom/bust d-man
12. Catton- Small high-end winger
13. Helenius- Safe do it all middle six center
(gap)
Eiserman could be the best winger (likely after Demidov anyway), but feel much more comfortable with 1-9 being top of the line-up guys, and Parekh and Yakemchuk fill a critical postion.
2. Levshunov-
3. Lidstrom
4. Dickinson
5. Silayev
(and maybe Demidov who will be gone)
7. Buium- he's a winner.
8. Iginla- competitive
9.
10.
11.
Sennecke, Helenius, Yakemchuk, Parekh, Catton
Eiserman
So if 42 gets us from 14 to 11, 33s got to get us 7/8, right? Does 53 get us to 8/9?
Think my rankings are:
1. Celebrini- franchise C
2. Levshunov- top pairing d
3. Lidstrom- Power 6 center
4. Buium- top 2/4 d-man with elite offensive ability
5. Demidov- Elite winger
6. Dickinson- 2-4 d-man
7. Silayev (our own Chara-Bergeron?)- 2-4 d-man
8. Sennecke- High-end winger with size
9. Iginla- High end winger
10. Parekh- Boom/bust d-man
11. Yakemchuk- Boom/bust d-man
12. Catton- Small high-end winger
13. Helenius- Safe do it all middle six center
(gap)
Eiserman could be the best winger (likely after Demidov anyway), but feel much more comfortable with 1-9 being top of the line-up guys, and Parekh and Yakemchuk fill a critical postion.
Wedontneedroads
Registered User
I'll take 6, but Mike may be looking to move a forward considering he's been accumulating a ton of bottom 6 guys in the last week.
I wonder if Zetterlund is on the block?
GRANdSharks
Registered User
- Mar 14, 2018
- 99
- 144
Obviously value wise an overpay but assuming we're targeting a D this gives us a good shot at one of the top 6 or a guy like sennecke Iginla or Catton falls I like it, a much better range then we had at 14 and we still have 4 picks in top 60 as we did a couple days ago. Heres hoping NHL GMs are stupid and we somehow get buium or Parekh
- Jul 25, 2007
- 3,726
- 3,608
For the analytics wonks, here's a thread contradicting the trade value charts.
Sennecke range is pretty wild. I rate the HF boards NJ Devil draft folks highly and based on their assessment (and the public scouting reports) I like the other 12 better.
See their fantastic draft primer for their pick (#10): Prospect Info: - Primer for 10th Overall by Devils HFBoards Scouts
STL Shark
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2013
- 4,240
- 5,151
And that's why guys like that are not in NHL front offices. It's not just a paper exercise. If it were, then the oodles of smart people in the sport would have figured it out by now and draft mistakes wouldn't happen.A decent analysis by that poster reveals that it's not, by the numbers, a great idea to trade up. It's basically a coin flip whether you get "your guy" and whether your guy outperforms his draft spot.
Look, I personally like this move, but if you're into analytics, there's an argument we should have let the draft come to us. Easy to say from the sidelines!
We were equipped with extra ammunition to where it for sure makes sense to move up to increase your odds and get your guy. If we only had a singular 1st and 2nd rounder, this is assuredly not a deal that I am making. When equipped with 1st overall and 3 2nd rounders, it is a very good move regardless of what the "hockey is played on paper" folks will say.
The twitter account in question beat the Kevin Labanc is actually good drum for years because of the analytics (something that even my younger self talked myself into when I started and ended my analysis with the analytics). However, the longer the sport is played in the technological age, the more teams seem to be coming back to realizing that a lot of the same stuff still matters now as it did 20 years ago and analytics can still lie to your face.
themelkman
Always Delivers
Tell him to get healthy we need him on the ice
Patty Ice
Registered User
I'd say they are absolutely worth trading up for. They have their faults as does Eiserman but, like him, they have huge ceilings that exceed the other 4 defensemen. Not to mention that they both provide skills severely lacking on the team and in the pool.
Not saying that this isn't a move to lock up Eiserman. I think that is just as probable. This is a move to take out 3 teams that are just as likely eyeing the player or players Grier and co. covets.
TheBigDrunkPanda
Registered User
- Oct 19, 2021
- 912
- 900
I wouldn’t cry that hard over 6th it gets them a solid D prospect.
I hope zetts is not on the trade block, when the first 2 lines finally fill out he’d be an absolute beast in the 3rd line.
Grier is just a big time numbers guy and thought having these draft picks match would look cool
I agree, I love him, but to get you gotta give and Ottawa probably looking for immediately help at reasonable pricing. I do wonder if a cap dump is in the works for them as well. Norris maybe comes back? Chabot?
Alaskanice
Registered User
It’s been said over and over, this draft is all over the board after Celebrini. Being at 11 gives us a better chance to bring in a top line player.
cheechoo
˗ˋˏ ♡ ˎˊ˗ Tomas Hertl #48 ˗ˋˏ ♡ ˎˊ˗
I've looked at 250,000 mocks and at this point have a comfortable idea who typically falls to ~12-15 a grasp of what to expect for our second first.
I have no base level of the status quo at 11. No idea who's typically considered a faller in that range (with a standard deviation of about a pick).
This is exciting though. I generally felt that at 14 we were like juuuust a pick or two away from that definitive second group after Macklin. We should comfortably get a really nice prospect here, or be in shooting range to move up to secure our guy if need be.
I have no base level of the status quo at 11. No idea who's typically considered a faller in that range (with a standard deviation of about a pick).
This is exciting though. I generally felt that at 14 we were like juuuust a pick or two away from that definitive second group after Macklin. We should comfortably get a really nice prospect here, or be in shooting range to move up to secure our guy if need be.
matt trick
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2007
- 9,930
- 1,672
Spot on. At 14 maybe Grier get's his 10-14th favorite guy at 11 maybe he gets his 5-8th favorite. Doesn't mean that he'll pick the right guy (realistically if he gets the best or second best among the next five picks, he's done well). Doesn't mean there wasn't more value staying at 14, or that guy drafted at 42 wouldn't have been the second best guy we got in the draft.
However, I love that this either moves us into a higher tier or gives us more options within a given tier. Either way, it's a risk I fully support taking!
Alaskanice
Registered User
timorous me
Gristled Veteran
- Apr 14, 2010
- 2,015
- 3,241
Exactly. I remember taking issue with this guy back in the day because oftentimes his analytics failed to take into account some pretty important contextual issues, and it seems like that's still the case.
Obviously the jury is still out on whether or not this jump up will be worthwhile, but it's not like the Sharks are picking in a vacuum. The need for D is pretty serious and if this gets them one of the top six guys, I like it, because even if the lower-end of those six are flawed in potentially problematic ways, it's a chance worth taking considering the draft board, the fact that the Sharks are already guaranteed a 1C in this draft, and their prospect pool + current NHL roster.
Analytics are only as useful as how they're explained/deployed, and simply put, not everyone is very good at both ends of that job.
TealManV
A man has said
Insightful article about the Sens on The Athletic yesterday. (Paywall)
“Staios says teams are constantly phoning him to inquire about the availability of the No. 7 selection.
“There’s lots of interest in the pick,” says Staios.
While it’s virtually impossible to envision a scenario where Staios ships that pick off for immediate roster help, he did concede he is open to the idea of trading down a couple of spots.
“The answer is yes — depending on what the return is and who the players is that is sitting at that pick,” said Staios. “You always have to be looking at opportunities to add to our group. And if the fit is right, then we would move on it. I don’t make deals, just to make deals. I’ll be patient. And if the right opportunity comes, we’ll move on it.”
Ian Mendes seemed to be pretty tapped in there.
It also sounds like Staios is looking for a quality 4C and vet leadership. He also asked about a buyout for Hamonic, which Staios said wasn’t in the cards for them.
But I wonder if 11 + 53 + Sturm would get it done for 7? Maybe offer to take back Hamonic for buyout purposes if needed.
That is all dependent on who is available at 7, too.
rideaucrusher21
Registered User
realistically, hoping for Parekh after this move. He was available at 11 in Pronman’s last mock. Would be an awesome haul in the 1st with Celebrini and parekh.
STL Shark
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2013
- 4,240
- 5,151
I won't say that I buy that it's a huge move up the board that will be franchise altering most likely, but it's a move that I am overall fine with. Like we're projecting a huge drop off in this draft that I don't believe will occur because it never does.
It's maybe harder to select the right guy later in the first round, but there will assuredly be a right guy there that we will look back and think "how did they fall" like there is every year. No matter the strength or weakness of a draft on draft day, they almost all have a way of being about the same in totality 10 years down the road. It's just less obvious who the best pick is at 18 than it usually is at 10.
